The New Yorker Rejection LetterPosted by John Woodington on March 5th, 2010
I submitted a story to The New Yorker on December 4th of last year. Exactly three months to the day later, March 4th, 2010, I received the most current version of their standard rejection letter (email). It reads as follows:
Dear John,
We’re sorry to say that this manuscript is not right for us, in spite of its evident merit. Unfortunately, we are receiving so many submissions that it is impossible for us to reply more specifically. We thank you for the chance to consider your work.
Sincerely,
The Editors
I told them not to be so long-winded in their response but they never listen to me. I just hope the exactly-three-month rejection time isn’t some blatant indication that they never read the story in the first place. I’d rather be rejected than not considered at all.
…
In more promising news, Glimmer Train has a $2000.00 top prize in their Fiction Open competition, which is accepting submissions currently. So maybe I’ll send this New Yorker-rejected story to them.
I’m 150 pages into my edit of my novel AlieNation which is looking more and more like the title will change to either Alien Nation or The Alien Abduction Consultant, though the latter seems very bland and not-thoughtful. I’m finding that there are certain section which are far easier for me to edit than others. The most difficult sections to edit are the ones where I read through them, realize they are redonkulously horrible, and then agonize for an hour about cutting it out. After the cuts are made, however, everything feels better. Onward and upward.
May 10th, 2010 at 3:29 pm
This page popped up when I Googled the rejection I received from the New Yorker a couple days ago. I was hoping it was a more personal comment, as that appears to be how the letter is phrased, but oh well!
Do you think they do tiered rejections? Or just one letter for everybody?
May 11th, 2010 at 8:23 am
I really hope they don’t do tiered rejections, mainly because every rejection I’ve gotten from them has been the same, which makes me think my submissions are not getting very high in the “tiers”, which would cause me to shed “tears.”
August 17th, 2010 at 7:58 pm
John, here’s the letter I received from the new yorker this afternoon.
fiction, TNY
to me
show details 1:13 PM (4 hours ago)
Dear Mr. Pappas,
Interesting work, but not right for us. Thank you for giving us the chance to consider it.
Best,
The Editors
this letter is worded differently than previous ones. who knows what it’s about. I kind of enjoyed the “Interesting work” part, I just always hate the “but” part. a positive followed by a negative always makes me question the compliment.
thanks,
John Pappas
August 17th, 2010 at 10:22 pm
That to me looks like an upper tier rejection, mostly because I know I’ve never seen that one myself. I say take it as a partial victory, and send it out to The Paris Review.