Anatomy of a Rejection

There is often a lot of mystery to the editorial process and rarely can writers get a clear sense of why their writing is rejected. Reality dictates the necessity of form rejections, particularly when reading more than 200-300 submissions a month. In the best of all worlds, we would send a personal response to most submissions but we don’t live in that best world.

This summer, I made it a little project of mine to send detailed, personal responses to most submissions. A very kind, brave soul has allowed us to use his submission and our subsequent exchange as an example of the editorial process when a story doesn’t work for us but we’re still inclined to offer some commentary.

Here is the original version of Zack Kaplan-Moss’s short story Introducing….

In response. we wrote:

Hi Zack,

There’s a lot to like in this story. The core of your story is very solid. You’ve created very distinct characters here and I found the narrative very readable.

At the same time, the writing could use some polish. I think you could cut this story by a third and get to the real heart of things more effectively. Trust your audience a little more. Often times, you tell the audience things that they can see for themselves. I also think that the transition from Paul’s perspective to Helen’s is really awkward. There’s no sense that this shift is about to happen nor is there a clear reason why. I think the story would work more effectively if you wove her story in with his. I also think the story would be better served by cutting out a lot of the preamble before Paul starts talking about Helen. Only keep enough of that section to give us a sense of who this guy is.

Finally, you start with the notion that Paul calls himself Bronson Shineholtz but then you never follow up on the idea so I have to wonder what the purpose of that is, other than an interesting tidbit (which it is).

Thanks for sending this our way and best of luck placing it elsewhere. Send us more work in the future.

Most of the time when we send rejections we don’t hear back from writers but about a month later, Zack sent us a revised version wherein he incorporated some of our feedback. You can see that version here.

While ultimately the story still wasn’t right for PANK, we were very impressed with Zack’s receptiveness to our   feedback and the changes he made in this story.

When we saw the resubmitted story in our submission queue, we decided to ask some questions.

1. How did your story Introducing… come about?

Mostly, it was inspired by living in Chicago.

2. You revised this story significantly between drafts. You cut 800 or so words between the original and revised versions of this story. Why did you decided to revise this story? What was that process like? How did you decide which parts of the story to excise? Are there any changes you still want to make to the story?

I revised the story because I felt that it needed to be revised. The transition between voices was indeed awkward, and I felt that I could do it better. I revised also with an eye for paring it down, because this story is sort of a sketch—an impression—and as such is stronger the less I say. As I went through, I took out everything that I felt was repetitive or unnecessary.

I do think that there are changes I will still make. I’m not sure exactly what those changes are though.

3. How do you feel about receiving editorial feedback? Did you disagree with any of our comments? Did any of them make you want to punch us in the face? Open fist or closed?

I was thankful for the comments. In fact, I’ve rarely, if ever, read criticism that felt so spot on. I wouldn’t have revised it if I hadn’t agreed. In that sense, when the criticism seems incisive and intelligent, I’m all about editorial feedback.

4. As a young, unpublished writer, who or what are some of your writing influences? Why do you write?

My heroes are John Barth, Salman Rushdie, and Milan Kundera. This story reminds me that the book “My Name is Red” has also had a particularly strong influence on me.

As for why I write, that’s a bit of a large question. I’ll just say I write because it brings me joy.

5. What writing projects are you currently working on?

I am working on an epic.

6. How long have you been writing? What do you hope for from a writing career?

I have been writing seriously for approximately three years. I’ve always enjoyed writing, but it is only recently that I have started to really put any sort of disciplined time in.

The naked truth is that I dream of success. I feel some pressure to make my dreams more concrete and modest or something, but that wouldn’t be accurate. I want the world to know my name.

7. In one of our exchanges you noted that sometimes revision can make a story worse. Elaborate on that. Also, how do you know, as a writer, when a story should not be revised?

You don’t ever really know when a story should or shouldn’t be revised. One day it feels done and wonderful and the next you cringe just looking at it. One of my main obstacles with revision is that I have somewhat jerky style of narrative already, and editing often exacerbates that. I can end up with something disjointed and confused and I have no idea how to get back.

I think that, in the end, we just have to trust ourselves as readers. If we read our stories and we enjoy them, then we can trust that and leave it be. If we read them and feel nagging dissatisfaction, we should consider revision.

8. You work on an organic farm. What’s that like? What do you do there?

It’s a lot of work. There is a lot of repetitive activity, a lot of crawling around on my hands and knees, a lot of bending over. The days are long and the nights are short. That said, I also love it. It’s rewarding to plant and weed and water and see the fruits of my labors in so tangible a way.

9. In your original cover letter, you noted that you thought there were humans involved in the PANK project. (We are human, mostly!) Do you find the submission process impersonal? Why?

The submission process, as for as I’m concerned, is horrific.

Here is this thing that I have written, this intensely personal thing that I am attached to, that I want to share. But the only way to do that is to send it off to strangers who will decide its fate without ever speaking to me.

I read all this stuff about how I’m supposed to say nothing about myself other than my accomplishments, that I’m supposed to be polite and cool and never take up too much of an editor’s time. Of course editor’s are busy and read so many things, but I only sent in the one. I want to talk about it and understand what was good and what was bad. I want to take up too much of their time. The fact that I don’t get to, that I should never expect to, feels impersonal.

10. You were very kind and gracious to participate in this project. Why did you agree to allow us to discuss your rejection?

I’m not ashamed of the rejection. And I like discussion, especially when it’s discussion of me.