Learning From Rejection Letters
- Part 2 -
Now for some good news

When I first began writing I was told that, ‘I would be able to paper my room with rejection letters before I had anything accepted.’ This statement, I am pleased to announce, I have absolutely no substantiating proof for. Whether it is because rooms are larger or the letters are smaller, I don’t know, but I have never knowingly met someone so unlucky in their choice of words or publishers.

From my experience, there appear to be levels of rejection letters.

First, you have the traditional form letter:

Dear Writer,
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to view your manuscript. Unfortunately, it does not fit our current needs. We wish you luck in finding a publisher elsewhere.

Yours sincerely

These sort of rejection letters, with the impersonal wording, means that you and your manuscript were nowhere near the mark. It could have been returned for any number of reasons. Maybe you didn’t research your market well enough, maybe your writing lacks originality or isn’t of the quality they are after or maybe their desk is just so swamped with manuscripts that the editor didn’t have time to glance over your work.

Second in the list, but only slightly higher is:

Dear Miss Hope Full,
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to view your manuscript. Unfortunately, ….. it does not suit our current needs. ….. we have just published a similar piece. ….. we are not accepting manuscripts at this present time. ….. other. We wish you well with your future endeavours.

Yours sincerely

This letter rates higher in the list because the editor not only went to the trouble of including your name in the introduction but also ticked one of the preselected reasons. And, as any emerging writer will agree every scrap of insight on why work is returned is valuable.

Third is:

Dear Mr Penman,
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to view your manuscript however, after serious consideration we have chosen to return it to you.
We wish you well with your future endeavours and would be only too happy to look at any further manuscripts that you feel would suit our requirements.

Yours sincerely

These kind of rejection letters are a real pat on the back. The editor liked your work enough to think about publishing it although he finally chose against it.

His choice might have been swayed by other staff involved in the selection process, by the public’s interest level in your chosen topic or by previous experience regarding the topic’s commercial viability, either way this is a letter that should be followed up.

Hunt out, rewrite or create another piece of work that is perfect for this publisher and send it off soon, referring to this letter.

Then finally, there is:

Dear Ms Pen Smith,
We were very impressed with the manuscript you sent to us. Please phone me in regards to finding a suitable time for discussing our interest and ideas.

Yours sincerely

Well, the surprise phone call from the editor or a contract in the mail are all that beat this letter.

Correspondence from publishers can vary in style, content or format but it won’t take long for any eager beginner to notice the difference from one letter to another.

Some publishers have replaced the standard form letter with the more personal and informative ‘tick the reason’ letter.

Some publishers only include Compliment Slips with work that they return.

But regardless of the layout all rejection letters fall into one of the categories listed above.

Occasionally, you may receive a letter where a member of staff has hurriedly scribbled a personal note to you on the paper, this always notches the rejection closer to the top of the list of responses. If this happens try to follow the letter up with another suitable, well-crafted manuscript, making sure you address it to the person who took the time to write to you.

Chances are that they liked your work and will be more open than others to future submissions.

Even if a polite return letter contains nothing more than a photocopied signature, make a note of the person’s name so that in future you can address your submissions correctly.

Due to the large amount of submissions sent to any publishing house it is unreasonable to expect a personal critique of your manuscripts from an editor, unreasonable, but still frustrating. To receive this you need to contact a critiquing group and/or assessment agency.

So, when you have finally vented every scrap of annoyance out on your rejection note, uncrumple the singed remains and see what you can learn from the letter. Use it to your advantage, to help decide if your frequently returned manuscript needs a re-edit, a major overhaul or totally refiling to the back of the bottom drawer.


Return from Rejection Letters Part 2 to Rejection Letters Part 1

Go To Part 3