Monday, June 07, 2010
What Is That Thing
Remember in the days of print submissions, when you could tell whether a letter was an acceptance or a rejection by how thin or thick it was? Acceptances were always so thin. And now you can tell whether an email is an acceptance or a rejection by whether it's 2KB or 6KB. How I love the little Signifiers, how I want them all in bed with me like a row of tiny teddies, all wearing tiny t-shirts that say BEAR.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Mostly, but not always, so. The longest, most effusive response I had recently, one which praised my poems as "awesome*," was so inscrutable, I didn't know it was a rejection slip till the last line.
*I was hurt that they left out "irrefragable" and "uncrapulous."
Our friend, the Wemster, said he had so many rejections at one point, he used them like packing popcorn at Xmas time.
How you doing, Trish? And for that matter, RHE.
J
I don't want editors to use words like awesome, I think. Is that fair? I want them to use words like Plangent or Necessary.
I am excellent, Whimsy! I'm glad you're back to your blog, I'm loving your recent mini-proems.
I haven't sent out a paper submission in about a year, and received all my rejections for that last batch, yet I still look in my mailbox for SASE's with poem acceptances in them. Will I be like this forever?
I'm like that still! I wait like a dog for the mailman.
Post a Comment