What market was it?
After receiving yet another form rejection on a story that I thought was fairly strong, I needed some cheering up, so I went to:
http://www.jlake.com/2009/01/24/writing-how-many-rejections-have-you-had
Given that there's quite a few writers on this board with pro-sales, I'm curious as to how many rejections it took to make that breakthrough for some of our more accomplished authors. If you managed to write a hugo-winning short story with a first story written in your primary school holidays, please feel free to ignore this post.
Nick
How many rejections on a single novel do people typically go through before finding something, for example? Or, how many rejections before you abandon a novel and start anew?
Persistence is very important in this pursuit, whatever your goals are.
http://therejectedauthor.blogspot.com
http://theconstantauthor.blogspot.com
According to http://www.writingclasses.com/InformationPages/index.php/PageID/341 these are the rejection stats for some well-known novels.
Dune by Frank Herbert – 13 rejections
Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone – 14 rejections
Auntie Mame by Patrick Dennis – 17 rejections
Jonathan Livingston Seagull Richard Bach – 18 rejections
A Wrinkle in Time by Madeline L’Engle – 29 rejections
Carrie by Stephen King – over 30 rejections
Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell – 38 rejections
A Time to Kill by John Grisham – 45 rejections
Louis L’Amour, author of over 100 western novels – over 300 rejections before publishing his first book
John Creasy, author of 564 mystery novels – 743 rejections before publishing his first book
Ray Bradbury, author of over 100 science fiction novels and stories – around 800 rejections before selling his first story
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited March 24, 2009).]
In total to date I have received 29 acceptances and 202 rejections, which means I sell about 1 in 8 stories. I believe this is a little above average (1 in 10 is often quoted). However if I break the figures down to pro rate sales vs pro rate submissions, the percentage is much worse - I think it's in the region of 3% instead of 12.5%.
Pro writers get rejectons all the time. You just don't hear about it. Jay Lake (cited above) mentioned a year or so ago in response to a question I asked that he sold about 1 in 4 submissions, but that was including solicited submissions 9for anthologies, etc) - if he just looked at unsolicited subs his rate than was about 1 in 7. Not so far from mine, though of course he has a far higher proportion of pro sales than I do.
You will always get rejections. Over time, however, your rejections should be of the "close, but not quite" "it's not quite right forus, please try again" "i look forward to more of your work" type. When all your rejections are looking like that, then you know you can write, and all you need to do is find the right market for the right story.
Coming up on thirty-four years...no sales.
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited March 24, 2009).]
DISCLAIMER: Results not typical.
What market was it?
Thanks for replying. Part of my reason for posting this was to give people the idea that the first (hundred) rejections isn't reason to give up. Mind you, you've stuffed up that one with your first submission/acceptance ;-)
Is there any stage where you thought you were finally "getting" it in terms of consistently hitting the minimum benchmark of "it's not quite right for us"? What do you think you did to hit that benchmark?
Nick
Bick - my point was that even if you are lucky enough to sell a pro story right off... that won't mean you stop gettign rejections. You'll get hundreds (assuming you submit hundreds of times) and you'll keep getting them.
I've reached th stage where some of the top-end semi-pro markets buy my work, others (and one pro market) might buy but will more likley reject while telling me how lovely the story is. Other pro markets, though, I still get standard form rejections. So although I've improved I am still not at the level I need to be.
What I did to improve was simple. I wrote, and I had my work critiqued, and I critiqued other people's work in turn. I have learned by doing all of these things, and would have learned less without doing any one of them. AAnd while the "first 13" here at Hatrack is useful, critiquing full stories is something I would strongly advise. I learned huge amounts about pacing, about scene transitions, about plot and structure, about dialogue... about everything, really, from looking at what other writers regard as their fully fledged stories, and seeing what worked (for me and others) and what didin't.
I hope I'm still learning, because if I'm not... I'm not going to get any better. And I am certainly not good enough.
I understand rejection is a constant companion of the writer and it's pretty clear from reading Jay Lake's blog (as well as my knowledge of local professional authors). Feel free to ignore the little dissertion below, I guess it's directed at everybody rather than you specifically. And Dero, I don't understand your post ;-)
My question was more about realisations that authors have about their own work they had along the way. For example, it took me a certain amount of time to realise that a lot of my protagonists were simply not sympathetic or likeable (and it still hasn't quite worked itself out in practice). Critiques were negative, but it took me a while to work out *what* the problem was because some critiques didn't always say that the negative protagonist was an issue, they just knew that something was wrong with the story.
In contrast, the realisation about overusing passive phrasing came in a snap after one critique. Simple to see for a third party and simple to illustrate. I guess I'm interested in how authors have learned about their own weaknesses and how they "saw the light" on any of their fatal flaws.
Regards,
Nick
[This message has been edited by Nick T (edited March 25, 2009).]
quote:
I guess I'm interested in how authors have learned about their own weaknesses and how they "saw the light" on any of their fatal flaws.
I don't think they do, or, rather, I don't think we do. Not consistently.
There are always going to be flaws in any work. Authors either find readers willing to overlook them, or they mask/fix the flaws well enough in the beginning to get published.
I also think a good editor has a LOT to do with an author's success, too; helping the author overcome deficiencies, pointing out the flaws...
I think the more successful an author is, the more apt the author is to not worry about the flaws. But that may be a whole 'nother discussion.
[This message has been edited by rich (edited March 25, 2009).]
"Rejection letter (Chinese economic journal)
We have read your manuscript with boundless delight. If we were to publish your paper, it would be impossible for us to publish any work of lower standard. And as it is unthinkable that in the next thousand years we shall see its equal, we are, to our regret, compelled to return your divine composition, and to beg you a thousand times to overlook our short sight and timidity."
http://www.umich.edu/~psycours/360/lec_10/tsld006.htm