"Thanks for the rejection!"

(Annals of an Editor, #78)

The subject of this blog post is not ironic or rueful. We actually do receive many notes of thanks from authors who, after having their submissions rejected by Clarion, find that they are nonetheless grateful that our editors took the time to reply thoughtfully to their work. Not everyone receives a page-long note, but anyone who specifically asks for feedback on their writing or for an account for our reason of rejection, gets exactly that. We'll talk about other venues they might wish to submit to, if their work is simply out of our scope; we'll mention other authors whom their writing reminds us of, and encourage them to seek them out; and we'll share whatever several points of technical feedback felt salient enough to pass along.

Here are a few messages we've received this year, from authors who took our rejection of their work in a very positive way.

• Message from RD: "Thanks so much for your remarks. You are one of the VERY FEW who makes this effort, and from the void of bottomless submission piles it is both useful and appreciated. Again, many thanks."
• Message from WC: "Thanks for the feedback on my story. I look forward to using your thoughtful input in revising and, hopefully, improving it. Once again, I really appreciate your time and consideration."
• Message from GC: "I sincerely thank you for this kind rejection letter and the very helpful encouragement. I've reread my story and believe your readers are astute. I've re-worked the piece to rein-back the complexity of the language and create more consistent syntax. Thank you again for reading and taking the time to comment so specifically on my work. I hope to submit other stories to you in the future."
• Message from AM: "I appreciate your comments and thank you for them. At some point I'll try you again with deeper characters and language."
• Message from AK: "As a poet who has received many rejection letters, I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for your encouraging, positive, constructive response. It truly means so much to me. I will take your suggestions into account with all of my future work. Also, I'll remain hopeful that I may one day re-submit to your publication and then receive a response about publication! Again, thank you for your very thoughtful response. I know how many submissions you must receive, and your time is much appreciated."

All those sound like our rejection process is winning us new friends, not making new enemies.

* * *

Our Clarion editors don't send out discursive, collegial rejection letters just to have something to brag about on the blog. We find that when people understand that our (unpaid) readers paid close and careful attention to their work, they feel valued. When they see that our decisions are made in a context of broad understanding of and appreciation for the contemporary field of small press publishing -- its diversity, its personalities, its opportunities and pit-falls -- they feel Clarion is a hive of knowledgeable operators. And when they see that a rejection isn't the end of their relationship with Clarion, but just the next step in an ongoing correspondence, they're so much more likely to look for our email updates, to follow us on social media, and to recommend our magazine to their fellow readers and writers.

Kindness, in short, is good business. Of course, we'd likely wish to make generosity, acumen and kindness our guidelines, even if it were NOT good business, but its fortunate for us and our goals that our temperamental inclinations happen to align with professional best practices. And we count ourselves generally fortunate that our editorial structure happens to allow for this kind of long-form feedback; not every lit mag out there can find the time to engage so deeply as we do.