Rejection Notes – no.13 in a series

Edoardo Albert,

Thank you again for submitting to […]. We appreciate the
time and effort you put into this piece and are grateful that you trusted us with your work. Unfortunately, after much review, we have decided that “Riding the Line” is not the right fit for this anthology. You made our shortlist from more than 500 submissions and we hope you consider subbing to us in the future.

Sincerely,

Rejection Notes – no.12 in a series

This is the sort of rejection note that is almost as good as an acceptance!

Edoardo,

Thank you for offering your story to […]. We’re sorry to tell you that we will not be using it; you are free to submit it elsewhere. This story isn’t quite right for […], but holy cow — that feeling of someone at your door at night! I was queasy and breathing shallow the whole time.

Sincerely,
Assistant Editor

Rejection Notes – no.11 in a series

This rejection note is rather encouraging, as the publication concerned is really quite prestigious.

Dear Edoardo Albert:

Thank you for sending us “Plausible Deniability”. We really enjoyed this piece, but we didn’t feel it was right for […].

We hope that you will continue to send us your work.

Sincerely,

The Editors of […]

Rejection Notes – no.10 in a series

It would appear that ‘Knock Knock’ is one of those stories that doesn’t quite fit into literary categories. It’s most recent Rejection Note runs:

Dear Edoardo:

Thank you so much for submitting “Knock Knock” for our consideration, and for your interest in […]. We apologize for the delay in responding to your submission, and we are taking steps to improve our response time.

We are going to pass on this particular effort, but I hope we shall see more stories from you in the future. It’s a good story, but not the right fit for us.

Good luck in your ongoing endeavors.

Warmly,

Compare to Rejection Note no.9:

Dear Edoardo Albert:

Thank you for sending us “Knock Knock”. We really enjoyed this piece, but we didn’t feel it was right for […].

We hope that you will continue to send us your work.

Sincerely,

The Editors

How Not To Respond To Rejection

An editor friend received the below email in response to a story he had rejected.

Good sir,
Your rejection of the walls proves you are a dunderheaded ignoramus. It is the classic story, “The Yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Gilman. It is sad that you, good sir, are in charge of what is and is not approved. An editor who uses, “omg” is by far, just some crazy man within his own world who lives with cats and is overweight, got picked on a lot as a fat child and wants to play in a pretend world where he is king and queen. Please, good sir, go to college. Take American Literature and bone up on your skills, read some books on editing and volunteer for an actual magazine as proofreader before naming yourself the judge of author’s work in your fat little world. By being a dunderhead in a faux position, you are stifling people with actual talent, unlike fatheaded and fat-bellied self. A game of jealousy on your part, will only hurt your overfed belly and jiggle your neck fat as you heckle from behind a monitor which the state paid for due to your psychological disability. Waddle yourself into a brick and mortar book store and pick up a collection of American Literature and do some reading. That, is free advice from a man with a degree in the science of rocketry.

The Yellow Wallpaper by Charlotte Gilman is undoubtedly a classic. At 6,000 words it is also 4,000 words longer than the limit for my friend’s magazine. So a degree in rocketry appears to provide neither basic arithmetical skills nor graciousness in rejection (the letter writer had had one of his own stories returned previously).

Rejection Notes – no.7 in a series

Dear Edoardo Albert:

Thank you for sending us “Brothers”. We really enjoyed this piece, but we didn’t feel it was right for xxx xxxxx.

We hope that you will continue to send us your work.

Sincerely,

The Editors

(This ranks quite highly on the irritating rejection note scale – if they liked it so much, why didn’t they publish the blessed thing?)