Sorry to disappoint, but this is not about Sarah Palin.
In their long ago Spring 2008 issue, The Kenyon Review published a lovely rumination on rejection letters.
Many magazines lean on a form letter, a printed note, a card, and I study them happily. The New Yorker, under the gentle and peculiar William Shawn, sent a gentle yellow slip of paper with the magazine’s logo and a couple of gentle sentences saying, gently, no. Under the brisker Robert Gottlieb, the magazine sent a similar note, this one courteously mentioning the “evident quality” of your submission even as the submission is declined. Harper’s and the Atlantic lean on the traditional Thank You But; Grand Street, among other sniffy literary quarterlies, icily declines to read your submission if it has not been solicited; the Sun responds some months later with a long friendly note from the editor in which he mentions that he is not accepting your piece even as he vigorously commends the writing of it; the Nation thanks you for thinking of the Nation; and the Virginia Quarterly Review sends, or used to send, a lovely engraved card, which is worth the price of rejection.
Enjoy.


Recent Comments
-
Coatney smith on
Chicago police respect public’s right to record
(1)
-
Wertman smith on
David Simon, creator of The Wire and Treme, on the Times-Picayune cuts
(16)
-
fdasfdsa on
Evolved for exhibitionism?
(1)
-
fdasfdsa on
The private-equity problem with Romney and GS Technologies
(1)
-
fdasfdsa on
When a 'birther' story comes knocking
(1)
-
fdasfdsa on
The Kickstarter Chronicles
(1)
-
Jon Ber on
Murdoch may sell his British papers
(2)
-
Dan A. on
Darts and Laurels
(2)
More