Cutbank Rejection
Received a rejection from Cutbank last week, I think Thursday, which was a response to a submission I sent on September 5, 2005. (I seem to remember not hearing from them at all about a submission sent aprox five years ago.) Should I do the math here? I guess 18 months isn't such a long time. Almost every poet I know has a story about a submission or two that didn't get responded to at all--even after a query. And of course, I bear Cutbank no malice. I suspect they're doing their best with what they have. Most of them are grad students as I recall. However, I do think an 18 month turnover time does lend some irony to both the phrase "current needs" and the phrase "in the future."
Funny, too, that I keep sending to them, no?
posted by Anonymous at 10:50 PM
4 Comments:
it looks like the gestation period for an elephant is about 18 months. (the site i looked at said 17-24 months). maybe that factoid can help you put the Cutbank rejection in perspective. maybe not....
Nancy, you make me laugh. I don't think I've ever considered response time in the light of gestation.
Hey, did I tell that I got accepted, that I'm going to participate in the version of the NWP summer institute here in FC? Now I have to think of a burning question about teaching writing that I want to solve. I'm actually getting excited to do it.
Any pointers?
jack--
i'm glad your doing a summer institute. nwp has saved my sanity countless times. burning questions.....so many.
you'll probably find that the teachers you will work with have written much less than you have.
you could maybe use the summer institute time to read george hillocks, jr's new book...."Narrative Writing."
Maybe they really agonized over the decision. You or John Ashbery, You or Tony Hoagland. Sorry.
Post a Comment
<< Home