Feedback Deciphered

By any other name...

For those who think sequentially, feel free to consider this post a direct descendant of something I put on Strictly Writing, not so long ago, just for fun.

Rejection can be a bitter pill to take, not least because it isn't always clear what to do next. Oh, sure, you can dive into the Handbook or the Yearbook, but have you ever received a note back from an agent or publisher and wondered exactly what they're trying to say?

Grab a comforting drink and find yourself a comfy space - it's time to break the code...

1. Not one for me this time (because hell hasn't frozen over and we want to stay solvent).

2. Your work shows great promise, however. (Many of the words are spelt correctly and appear in the right order. Well done, you.)

3. Unfortunately I'm unable to give you any feedback (because it's difficult to laugh this much and type at the same time).

4. Our schedule is full for the next year (with real books). (And the year after that I'll do whatever it takes...)

5. However, I'd be interested in seeing your next book. (Go away for a year or so and try to forget about me.)

6. We have a special scheme for new authors. (Do you have any money? We could really use a sponsor.)

7. It's an unusual premise. (Your ideas scare me, or confuse me, or revolt me.)

8. Unfortunately we've recently taken on something similar (only with better ideas and better execution).

9. After careful consideration...(we let the intern decide).

10. It still needs some work. (You've cut corners and it shows.)

11. I hope you won't feel too disappointed by this letter. (I have no concept of how important this is to you.)

12. I wish you every success in finding the right agent or publisher. (Next!)

13. The story failed to come alive on the page. (I want magical pages that sing and dance.)

14. There was insufficient narrative tension and the characterisation wasn't fully realised. (I have an MA and you can't disprove my opinions.)

15. It's not our policy to reconsider previously rejected material. (You again? You may be desperate, but we're not.)

16. This is only my opinion and you may find another agent or publisher who sees your book differently. (I didn't like it - end of story. Someone else might dislike it less.)

About the author
Derek Thompson is a humorist and purveyor of words. Some people mistake that for being an embittered cynic, which is a shame. Especially if they are potential clients. However, if his brand of wit doesn't put you off and you need a writer, drop him a line - he wants to buy more shiny things.

Feedback from the slush pile

Rejection, as every published author tells us, is part and parcel of the process from the first draft to that magical copy on the book shelf. While rejections can be galling, confounding and sometimes amusing, what matters most is whether there is anything we can learn from them to improve our work or our approach.

Often, we're grateful to get a response at all and doubly delighted if there's actual feedback in there, beyond anything that commences 'Dear Writer'.

So, hot off the coffee table, here is today's rejection in all its glory. With a little added comment from me along the way.

The turnaround time was two months, which is very good. Three months tends to be the industry average but you can often wait much longer. And the covering letter thanks me for a lively manuscript. I have to say that seeing my covering letter marked with 'Slush' made me laugh out loud and didn't stop me reading further. Anyhow, here's the reader's feedback.

Standpoint, Derek Thompson
Manuscript type: Conspiracy theory come spy novel serialisation.
Set: Leeds, London, more perhaps.

Third person narrative the story appears to be told solely from Thomas Bladen's perspective.

It was fast paced and humorous, which worked well with the genre. The opening scene had plenty of action and intrigue. It was an easy read, chapters are short and the tone is light.

Seems like a very weak imitation of Ian Flemming. Though the setting is modern day there are Russians and East End criminals, which seems too reminiscent of the Cold War Era and doesn't appear convincing. The synopsis of the plot also seems a little convoluted. Miranda's character, the daughter of an East End criminal is unbelievable; it too is a bit outdated.

That said the story undoubtedly, with many changes, would have an audience and would be marketable, whether the proposed serialisation would have continued success is questionable. Nor is Standpoint on a par with other books published by us.


Ouch! If I were in a room with the reader, I'd thank them for taking the time to read my work. I might also mention that the Russian is actually Kosovan and that Ian Fleming only had one 'm' in his surname. Still, churlishness aside, there is useful detail in the half page of feedback - about the synopsis and Miranda - along with some positives about the humour and pace. I think if I'd known up front that the publisher's catalogue was already filled into 2011, I wouldn't have submitted Standpoint. But I'm glad I did because if you don't ask, you'll never know.