Christian Griffen (xenopulse) ([info]chgriffen) wrote in [info]sfandf_writers,

The Process of Novel Rejection

I looked back today at Teresa Nielsen Hayden's blog entry about her rejection process, aptly named Slushkiller, as I'm sending out my three chapters plus synopsis today (though not to her). I think her post is pertinent to all of us who submit our work, and I assume some of you haven't seen it yet. So here's the important part:

"Herewith, the rough breakdown of manuscript characteristics, from most to least obvious rejections:

1. Author is functionally illiterate.

2. Author has submitted some variety of literature we don't publish: poetry, religious revelation, political rant, illustrated fanfic, etc.

3. Author has a serious neurochemical disorder, puts all important words into capital letters, and would type out to the margins if MSWord would let him.

4. Author is on bad terms with the Muse of Language. Parts of speech are not what they should be. Confusion-of-motion problems inadvertently generate hideous images. Words are supplanted by their similar-sounding cousins: towed the line, deep-seeded, dire straights, nearly penultimate, incentiary, reeking havoc, hare's breath escape, plaintiff melody, viscous/vicious, causal/casual, clamoured to her feet, a shutter went through her body, his body went ridged, empirical storm troopers, ex-patriot Englishmen, et cetera.

5. Author can write basic sentences, but not string them together in any way that adds up to paragraphs.

6. Author has a moderate neurochemical disorder and can't tell when he or she has changed the subject. This greatly facilitates composition, but is hard on comprehension.

7. Author can write passable paragraphs, and has a sufficiently functional plot that readers would notice if you shuffled the chapters into a different order. However, the story and the manner of its telling are alike hackneyed, dull, and pointless.

(At this point, you have eliminated 60-75% of your submissions. Almost all the reading-and-thinking time will be spent on the remaining fraction.)

8. It's nice that the author is working on his/her problems, but the process would be better served by seeing a shrink than by writing novels.

9. Nobody but the author is ever going to care about this dull, flaccid, underperforming book.

10. The book has an engaging plot. Trouble is, it's not the author's, and everybody's already seen that movie/read that book/collected that comic.

(You have now eliminated 95-99% of the submissions.)

11. Someone could publish this book, but we don't see why it should be us.

12. Author is talented, but has written the wrong book.

13. It's a good book, but the house isn't going to get behind it, so if you buy it, it'll just get lost in the shuffle.

14. Buy this book."

FYI, Teresa is a prominent editor and her husband, Patrick, is the lead editor at Tor for Sci-Fi and Fantasy. Their blog, Making Light, is not just intersting to writers but also a haven of sanity in these dark times of our political history =). Crossposting this here and there.

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Comments allowed for members only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

  • 19 comments

[info]coyotecult

April 20 2006, 17:27:21 UTC 6 years ago

I loved that post from them. I also really liked their one against extended copyright.

[info]chgriffen

April 20 2006, 17:28:13 UTC 6 years ago

Yeah. Their whole blog is a tome of awesome.

[info]mmaresca

April 20 2006, 17:30:26 UTC 6 years ago

I'm reasonably sure my work will at least make it to #9 without difficulty. It's 9-13 where I get into trouble.

[info]chgriffen

April 20 2006, 20:37:20 UTC 6 years ago

I think I've got 9 and 10 covered, but I might be deluding myself... :)

[info]mmaresca

April 20 2006, 20:42:15 UTC 6 years ago

I'd really like to think I've got 9 and 10 covered as well... but, yeah. Might be self-delusion.

[info]haplesshero3939

April 21 2006, 02:44:50 UTC 6 years ago

12 and 13 happen more often to most competend writers. (It sounds like most of us are...)

[info]haplesshero3939

April 21 2006, 02:46:26 UTC 6 years ago

Ah, alas, my spelling and grammar are ran a mock and the typing on the keyboard is wrecking with bad scentches.

(*I meant competent*)

[info]db_writer

April 20 2006, 18:15:25 UTC 6 years ago

That's a great post! I will pass it on to all of my readers (okay, my wife). I figure most of us here on LJ fall in to the 11-14 range.

Thanks for posting this.

db

[info]chgriffen

April 20 2006, 20:38:31 UTC 6 years ago

You'd think so, but I've seen plenty of people on LJ who post snippets of their writing who didn't have grammar or spelling down.

[info]chgriffen

April 20 2006, 20:38:56 UTC 6 years ago

(And yeah, my wife is the only person to have read the whole manuscript at this point, too :)

[info]haplesshero3939

April 21 2006, 02:41:26 UTC 6 years ago

I HOPE I do. (I THINK I do. But that's pushing the envolope on modesty here.)

[info]stina_leicht

April 20 2006, 20:11:57 UTC 6 years ago

good stuff to fuel further nightmares and paranoia.

er... did i type that out loud? :)

i'll definitely check out the blog. thanks for posting.

[info]chgriffen

April 20 2006, 20:39:40 UTC 6 years ago

No problem. And it's always good to know what the standards are, even if 99% of the people don't meet them...

[info]stina_leicht

April 20 2006, 21:19:07 UTC 6 years ago

and it's always good to know what the standards are....

sure it is. important even. i'm all about that. too bad the last few standards are subjective, but that's okay. if writing were easy, everyone would do it.

*forehead smack* oh, wait, everyone with a computer does do it whether they should or not. oops. lol.

wow, i'm in snarky mode today. i'll try to tone it down. really. normally i'm not this cantankerous. i'm just frustrated with my current situation. who hasn't been?

[info]chgriffen

April 20 2006, 22:08:22 UTC 6 years ago

I know what you mean.

The good news: I heard on several occasions that only 3% of people who set out to write a novel actually finish it. Out of those, at least 95% get cut because of the first 10 standards up there. That leaves, uh, 0.15% of wannabe writers to compete with, for us who finish a decent manuscript.

And the subjective standards, one hopes, will be overcome by submitting your work to one place after another...

[info]haplesshero3939

April 21 2006, 02:36:31 UTC 6 years ago

That isn't necessarily true. Lots of people I know wouldn't write unless their grade depended on it, which it usually does.

[info]alphasunrise

April 20 2006, 20:27:30 UTC 6 years ago

Thanks for the pointer. I used to read Making Light a lot more often, but alas, the political stuff is about totally opposite of my own thoughts on the matter and rapidly heading further away.

But the writing stuff ... now that's the best anywhere.

[info]chgriffen

April 20 2006, 20:41:00 UTC 6 years ago

Well, I won't debate you on politics here. I've found that most writers tend to be on the liberal to pinko commie pigs spectrum (the latter being me).

[info]haplesshero3939

April 21 2006, 02:35:22 UTC 6 years ago

HA! I don't count for the top...erm....seven? The ones about "neurochemical disorders..."?
Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Facebook Twitter More login options
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…