OCR Text |
Show I REJECTED MANUSCRIPTS- Aa Editor TolU Why So 'Many Mafaalaa Coatrlbatlnaa ara Ksturnad. There is not much encouragement for men aud women who desire to win fame and fortune by contributing to the monthly magazines in the conversation conver-sation which the writer of this article has had with the editor of one of the widely circulated monthlies published iu this city. It will be remembered that the voluntary contributor has a wonderfully small chance of gettiav a hearing unless he offers something of remarkable merit or originality. The editor of a magazine or newspaper is supposed to keep his finger continually continual-ly on the pulso of what ho calls his audience, aud to know what they will like and be eager to read better than anybody else. Jt is doubtless true that he sometimes makes mistakes, but on the whole the chances are strongly in favor of his being right. To come, however, to what the editor ed-itor in question said, "you nsk what opportunity an unknown writer has of securing the acceptance of any article that he may offer to us," is the way he begau. "Well, I suppose the best answer an-swer would be that it depends upon the article itself. Most of the articles submitted to us do not repay the trouble of reading, but out of a great mass of chaff we do occasionally net a grain or two of wheat. It is" tiresome tire-some and profitless gleaning, though, as a whole. Just look at the situation we are in. If writers would only stop to consider it, they would see more clearly than they often do why what they offer is so frequently 'unavailable.' 'unavaila-ble.' I know it is the fashion to laugh at this word, but the fact is that it expresses ex-presses the exact truth in very manv cases. A thing may be good in itself, but yet not suitahlo for our columns. We never go into mourning because a mauuscript which we have rejected is accepted somewhere else, and it is easily possible that the fact our rejection re-jection of it might not have inllueueed the other editor iu the least if the author au-thor had been frank enough to let it be known. But it is hardly necessary to say that authors do not have that habit. 'Not available' tits the case better than any other expression that I know of, and, though the rejected may demur at it, I am confident that editors ill coutiuuo to use it. "I asked you a moment ago to lcok at tho situation iu which wo editors find ourselves; aud from oue magazine maga-zine office it is easy to know all. ('e print twelve numbers iu each year. In each number wo print on au average say twelve or fifteen articles or so. Now, how many manuscripts do you suppose are offered to us in the course of a year? Something over 4,000. If we chose to make up the entire magazine maga-zine from year's beginning to year's end out of the voluntary contributions we should still perforce have to reject 3,800 or 3,900 articles. There is no escape from this arithmetic as every would-be contributor can see for himself. "Everybody knows, or ought to know if she undertakes to write for the mag. azine, that of the contributions which are written in pursuance of contracts made with the editor, that they are arranged ar-ranged for long in advance "and that he majority are furnished by men who are skilled writers or recognized authorities in some field of activity. Supposo that we tiud ourselves able to use oue voluntary contribution in each number; that would be a large proportion, propor-tion, but how stands it then with the voluntary contributors? On the basis, as I figure it, about one-third of 1 per cent of the manuscript offered would be used; but as a matter of fact the magazino does not coutaiu, on the average, one unsolicited article in every issue. One-fourth of 1 per cent would perhaps pretty accurately represent repre-sent the number of voluntary contributions contri-butions that are accepted. Any one familiar with the law of chances can figure out the probabilities in his own case when he sends an article. Always remember, however, what I said at tho beginning of our conversation. Much depends on the article itself. If it possesses pos-sesses special merit of any Bort, the writer may be pretty certain that it will be found out. "Nothing delights the heart of an editor so much as to make a valuable fiud such a one, for instance, as the Atlantic Monthly made when the woman who chose to call herself her-self Charles Egbert Craddock began to write for it. "Do you wonder, then, that I said it hardly pays us for the time aud trouble of handling the large number of manuscripts man-uscripts which we receive? Fortunately Fortunate-ly the great majority of them do not have to be read in full. A page or two, or a few pages at the furthest, are suf-licent suf-licent in most cases. Authors sometimes some-times try to 'catch the editor' by pasting past-ing the pages together or by trying some other trick so as todetermiue, in case he gets his manuscript back, whether it has been read or not.. Such devices are useless, even stupid. Editors Ed-itors read every manuscript sufficiently sufficient-ly to know what its quality is, whether it requires the reading of one or a hundred pages. I believe this is conscientiously con-scientiously done in every office. But do aspirins writers ever ask themselves what right they have to impose im-pose such a burden on defenseless editors? edi-tors? I think it would be an excellent thing for magazine editors to enter into in-to an agreement not to read any manuscripts man-uscripts that are not typewritten; and if I could have my own way I would insist on charging" an entrance fee for every manuscript so much per thousand thou-sand words. That would tend appreciably ap-preciably to lessen the labors of editors, who get no sympathy, while I am convinced con-vinced that a good deal is wasted on ambitious but unsuccessful literary aspi ra nts." iV. Y. Tribune, |