Yikes! I Was Rejected For Not Meeting A Publication's Standards. And I Don't Think They Were Talking Writing Quality.

Remember the post I did here a couple of weeks ago on Anne Lamott's writing advice regarding shitty first drafts? Yeah? Weeellll, I revised it and submitted it to a publication on the Medium platform that focuses on writing. It was rejected because "This does not meet the publication's quality standards. Review our rules for next time."

The issue, I believe, was the word "shitty."

Now, I did read the rules before submitting, and I did see "Submissions must be family-friendly. We reserve the right to reject offensive or inappropriate articles." I took this seriously enough that I did some rewriting so I could remove as many "shitties" from the text as possible.

Original cover. I remember it.

I knew I was taking a risk. But Bird by Bird, the book in which Lamott writes about shitty first drafts, is thirty-years-old. The concept has been discussed among writers for that long. I thought it was possible that it was so well-known that the name for it would not be considered shocking in writing circles and that a publication that publishes writing about writing would be interested in this. Also, I used the book's original cover as my illustration to try to make clear that I had some support for my essay.

I was wrong. And also a little bit arrogant.

I Broke the Most Basic Rule for Submitting Writing

The most basic rule for submitting writing is:

• Read the editor's/agent's guidelines and follow them.
• You know better than the editors/agents? Sure, you do. Follow their guidelines, anyway.

We sometimes hear stories about writers who broke this rule and became wildly successful in spite of it. But you don't hear them often, do you?  That's because they are very rare.

• Read the editor's/agent's guidelines and follow them.

I Am a Little Embarrassed About This

Not because I used "shitty" in this particular context. As I said, it's been discussed in writer circles for decades. The Brevity Blog used "shitty first drafts" in a title just last month. Also, I'm not embarrassed about intentionally breaking a rule and losing a big opportunity. I was published at this particular publication once before and only made $1.76. At Medium, you're paid by the reader and by how much time those readers spend reading your work. What I ought to be embarrassed about is how few readers I attracted there last time. My point being, though hope springs eternal, I wasn't expecting a big payday that I'd lost by intentionally ignoring the editor's guideline.

No, I'm embarrassed because I tried to work around the guideline at all. Just a bit unprofessional, Gail.

Not that embarrassed, though, since I got a blog post out of the experience.