Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Resource for rejected novel manuscripts

+0
−0

Is there such a thing as an online repository for rejected novel manuscripts?

I think it would be a useful and educational resource -- especially to finally see examples of the so-called 'mistakes every failing writer makes' -- but I have yet to find whether such a repository even exists.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/28913. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

0 comment threads

1 answer

+1
−0

Yes, it is called Amazon Digital Services. It is where authors publish manuscripts that have been rejected by publishers, or which they have rejected themselves by not bothering to submit.

Writing is a craft and publishing is a commercial enterprise. Like other enterprises that depend on appealing to the taste of consumers, such as movies or fashion houses, or cell phone makers, it is not an exact science, but companies in these spaces do know an awful lot about what works and what doesn't. It does not mean they don't make mistakes and produce dreadful duds from time to time, nor does it mean they always know when they have a best seller on their hands, but it does mean that they know a non-starter when they see one, at least 99.99 percent of the time.

Writing is a craft and can be studied as a craft. Publishing is a business and can be studied as a business. Both the craft and the business are written about extensively. They are also both reasonably transparent so you can study them for yourself. To be certain, there are charlatans peddling bad advice, as there are in any trade, and sometimes the advice of the charlatans (promising as it does an easy road to riches) can become popular and even be received as gospel. But those who are serious about the craft and the business will not be fooled for long.

Like all industries that appeal to taste, there is the je ne se quois factor on top of the craft, and that makes some people sneer at the whole idea of craft. But the je ne se quois factor really is the icing on the cake. You may not succeed without it, and you may not be able to learn it if you don't have it, but it can only successfully operate on a sound base of craft.

Read the vast majority of self published works (or join a critique group and read people's submissions) and what you will find in almost all of it is a basic deficit of craft.

If the craft was remedied, would they become best sellers? Probably not. Even with the craft remedied, most would lack the je ne se quois factor. But in many ways there is nothing that highlights the vital role of craft then reading works where it is so obviously deficient.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads

Sign up to answer this question »