One of the hardest things about being an emerging writer is receiving the dreaded rejection letter. But why do we call them “rejection letters”? And is that really what they are?
As writers, we obviously have a good grasp of language – in particular, how to choose a certain word or words to serve a specific function in our writing. So I’d like to challenge the term “rejection letter” and even re-name it to be more accurate. I came up with three replacements:
The Not-the-Right-Fit Letter
Too many beginning writers send out a manuscript to publishers or agents without fully researching their current needs, preferences, and even submission guidelines. One of the most common reasons for a refusal to publish or represent is that the manuscript is not a match to their needs. So do yourself a favour, and read the books championed by each publisher or agent you submit to. You will have greater success if you correctly target your manuscript.
The Perfect-Your-Craft Letter
Sometimes, a close reading of a manuscript shows that the writer has more to learn before his or her work is ready for publication. This doesn’t mean that you’re a failure; simply that you’re still learning the craft. Read the writing of authors you admire to discover new techniques, take a course with an experienced and supportive author, and/or start a writing group to exchange feedback on your works-in-progress. Learning more about the craft will get you closer to your goals.
The Manuscript-Sent-Out-Too-Soon Letter
A manuscript that is almost ready is not ready enough. How will a publisher or agent know what you’re capable of writing if you’re not presenting your very best work? Get feedback on your work-in-progress before you send it out, and rewrite until the prose is beyond polished. It will take many drafts to produce a polished manuscript, but it will give you a much better chance of getting the result you want.
***
Okay, so my new terms may not be as catchy as “rejection letter,” but they are more accurate and they’re not as discouraging. They imply that writers who receive one of these letters don’t need to give up, wallow in despair, or throw out a manuscript. But they may need to further research their market, perfect their craft, and/or revise, revise, revise.
The only way forward to publication is to take the next step, continuing to write and re-write with increasing knowledge of the craft and a clear vision of the marketplace.
Your piece still takes the view point that somehow the writer herself is at fault. What about a company whose sales weren’t good last season, none of their books made the prize list, so this year they’re going to be way more conservative and say no to everyone who isn’t a huge name draw. Or their list is full for the next four years and they don’t even have room for Margaret Atwood. It’s not always about us. Keep submitting might be the best advice in this regard. Perhaps even self publish if you have the energy.
Good point, Sylvia. I was concentrating on the steps that a writer could take to further a manuscript. However, if a manuscript is fully ready to go, perhaps we need a new category: The Keep-Submitting Letter.
Interesting that on the same day I read your blog, I came across this post about how Daniel Day Lewis sent Steven Spielberg a “rejection letter” stating he was not interested in the part of Lincoln. Obviously, we all know things changed. The post shows the rejection letter, and talks about how Spielberg reacted to the letter. Spielberg really wanted DDL, and the rejection letter spurred him to take action. It goes to show how we can all learn from feedback.
http://kathytemean.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/rejection-is-everywhere/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+WritingAndIllustrating+%28Writing+and+Illustrating%29&utm_content=Yahoo%21+Mail
Thanks for sharing the link, Urve. It’s interesting how Spielberg’s rejection letter spurred him to action. It’s a great message.