A topic on rejections over at the Rumor Mill prompted me to post the following:

As a writer and an editor, I have come to realize that the editorial selection process is very subjective. Just because a story is rejected does not mean that it is not a good story or that it will never find a home. It just means that the story will not be published in that particular market. When I receive a rejection, I simply send my story (or poem) off to a new market. If it just will not sell, I look it over to see if some editing will help, and, if not, I put it in an electronic folder and forget about it.

As for form rejections, I use one for Lone Star Stories that I can alter as needed to indicate how well received a particular story or poem was. Most of the time, I reject stories for subjective reasons, so why go into great detail? In fact, if I did not use a form rejection, I would be unable to keep my average response time to one day. I am an editor, not a critiquer. If a writer wants a critique, they should join a strong critique group or attend a reputable workshop.

Why waste emotional energy on rejections when you can be channeling that energy into your next writing project?

Oh, and, if you go visit the topic, read Lon Prater's clever and amusing post right below my entry.