How to use this Page

After reading about so many rejected famous authors, I thought you might draw enough inspiration to keep writing and illustrating and continue to submit after reading this post.

REJECTED:

Author Dick Wimmer passed away on May 18, 2011, at 74 years old. He received 160+ rejections over 25 years! He spent a quarter of a century being told “no.”

He could have quit after 20 years, or 150 rejections, and no one would have blamed him. But he kept submitting. Maybe he had his own list of famous author rejection letters to keep him going!

Finally, his novel Irish Wine (Mercury House, 1989) was published to positive reviews. The New York Times called it a “taut, finely written, exhaustingly exuberant first novel.”

REJECTED:

Dr. Seuss got rejection letters, too. Here is one:
“too different from other juveniles on the market to warrant its selling.”

Here’s a rejection letter for THE DIARY OF ANNE FRANK:
“The girl doesn’t, it seems to me, have a special perception or feeling which would lift that book above the ‘curiosity’ level.”

Madeleine L”Engle’s A WRINKLE IN TIME was turned down 29 times.

Jerry Spinelli was rejected for 15 years, before getting his first book contract for SPACE STATION SEVENTH GRADE.

THE TALE OF PETER RABBIT was turned down so many times, Beatrix Potter initially self-published it.

Rudyard Kipling received this: “I’m sorry, Mr. Kipling, but you just don’t know how to use the English language.” Editor of the San Francisco Examiner.

H.G. Wells had to endure the indignity of a rejection when he submitted his manuscript, “The War of the Worlds” that said, “An endless nightmare. I do not believe it would “take”…I think the verdict would be ‘Oh don’t read that horrid book’.”

And when he tried to market “The Time Machine,” it was said, “It is not interesting enough for the general reader and not thorough enough for the scientific reader.”

Here is a rejection letter for Harry Potter:
30 June 1997

Dear Mr./Mrs./Ms./Miss J.K. Rowling:

At this time, we must decline your submission of HARRY POTTER AND THE PHILOSOPHER’S STONE. Unfortunately, the manuscript reeks of being completed on a manual typewriter. For heaven’s sake, it is 1997. Do you own a computer?

The second major problem with this manuscript is its sheer length. Who do you think you are, Charles Dickens? We don’t pay by the word here. Plus, how do you expect parents to muddle through 309 pages to explain the characters, plot, subplots and themes to their children? What if the child has to do a book report on this thing? Can you imagine how long the CliffsNotes would have to be? Also, if parents and children spent time actually perusing the book together, the hours they would be stuck in the same room would be agonizing. Bringing families together is not something you would like to have on your conscience, I guarantee it.

In addition, the subject matter of HARRY POTTER AND THE PHILOSOPHER’S STONE leaves a bit to be desired. Why would children want to read about a dorky, bespectacled tween’s experiences with the world of wizards and magic? And what about the lightning bolt on the main character’s forehead? What does it mean? How did