Every so often someone e-mails me with one of the great questions in any writer’s life, “How could you reject my story after saying you liked it?”
The answer to this question comes from Dena Harris, a writer who recently spent a day as an editor. As she writes, the hardest part about dealing with submissions was to separate “the very good from just the good.”
While Dena writes about submissions to a speculative fiction magazine, what she says also applies to all fiction publications. It is easy to separate the horrible and excellent stories out of any submission pile. The hard part comes when one sorts the very good from the merely good. Add into that decisions on if a story can be saved through editorial intervention–and if a story is worth the time of said intervention–and you begin to get an idea of why an editor could like a story and still reject it.
Update on 2-16-06:
I failed to mention that I first read Dena’s post on Side-Show Freaks, a blog by Edmund Schubert, the editor of Orson Scott Card’s Intergalactic Medicine Show. Unfortunately, Schubert has had some backlash over the posting, which is a true shame. I saw the post as an educational tool for writers, enabling people to learn about the submission process so their next submission will have an even better chance of being published.
Yes, there is humor in the post, but sometimes humor is the best way to describe and handle life. As someone who has read through tons of slush piles in his day, what Dena is describing is the truth of the slush pile. Yes, editors laugh over extremely bad submissions. But editors also live for the thrill of finding that one diamond in the pile of coal. Such is the duality of life. I should also note that a close read of the post will show that the editors are finding a number of diamonds in that slush pile–and that such finds are what drive them to endure reading through more short stories in a single day than most people read all year.
So I’d suggest people refrain from being offended by the post and instead see it as insight into how the editorial process works.
COMMENTS
Comments policy: storySouth invites comments from its readers. The comment period for postings in this forum will last for one week. We will publish one comment per reader, with exceptions in special circumstances. The editors will respond to comments, if appropriate, after the comment period is over.
Great post – it really resonated with me as an editor. Yes, separating the “good” from the “very good” – that’s the challenge.
Read Posts By Category
2005 comments
2006 comments
2007 comments
2008 comments
Alabama
Comments from Jason Sanford
On History
Story of the Week
books
LINKS
Related Concerns
Blackbird
DIAGRAM
H_NGM_N
Obsessive Consumption
Octopus
Oxford American
storySouth
Thicket
Typo
jakeadamyork.com
jasonsanford.com
Blogs by storySouth contributors
American Aquarium Drinker
Emerging Writers Network
Incertus (Amy Letter)
Maud Newton
Moorish Girl
Muse of Fire
The Unquiet Grave
Other Blogs of Note
32 Poems / Deborah Ager
Acephalous
Almost I Rushed Home…
Avoiding the Muse
Bad With Titles
Bemsha Swing
Bitch, PhD
Cahiers de Corey
Can of Corn
Central Repository
Shanna Compton
Ecritures Bleus
Equanimity
Geneva Convention Violations
HG Poetics
Home-Schooled by a Cackling Jackal
Ironic Points of Light
Jane Dark’s Sugar High
Jewishyirishy
Jim Behrle
Leaves of Grass
Limetree
Little Red’s Recovery Room
The Lovely Arc
Mike Snider’s…
My Life by Lyn Hejinian
Never Mind the Beasts
Odalisqued
One Million Footnotes
Poesy Galore
Poetry Blog
Poetry Hut
Poetry Postcard Project
Print Culture
Reli(e)able Signs
Riverfall
Ron Silliman’s Blog
A Slant Truth
She Likes to Push Words Together
Steve’s House of Love
Sturgeon’s Law
The Suburban Ecstasies
Sweat
Think By Feeling
This Is All Your Fault
Three Shots to the Heart
Tympan
Utter Wonder
Whimsy Speaks
Wooster Collective
Readers
Arts and Letters Daily
Movable Type 3.2