Summary

The author, writing under a pseudonym, rejected their own story for their publication "Dad-Bods" after realizing it did not meet the submission guidelines and quality standards they had set for themselves.

Abstract

The author, who runs a publication called "Dad-Bods" under the pseudonym "Charles Roast," recently faced the challenging task of reviewing their own submission. Despite initially believing their article to be exceptional, featuring a mix of emotions and a captivating format, they critically evaluated it and found several issues. These included an unrelated cover image, an ineffective title and subtitle, structural and grammatical problems in the opening paragraph, and an excessive word count exceeding the recommended length for reader engagement on Medium. Recognizing these flaws, the author, as the editor, rejected the piece, acknowledging the need for improvement and adherence to publication standards. The experience has led to self-reflection and a commitment to learning and growth in their writing craft.

Opinions

The author has a high opinion of their work initially, which is later tempered by editorial scrutiny.
There is a recognition that the initial excitement about the article's quality was misplaced due to personal bias.
The author values constructive criticism, even when it is self-administered, as a means to improve writing skills.
The author believes in the importance of following submission guidelines and maintaining high-quality content for their publication.
Despite the setback, the author expresses gratitude for the learning opportunity and is determined to continue honing their writing abilities.

I hate the editor of my own publication

I Recently Rejected My Own Story for My Own Publication

How’s that for quality control?

Photo by Marlon Schmeiski on Pexels Free Images

I have recently “started” my own publication called Dad-Bods. I have “started” in quotes because, even though I have it mostly built and it is published, there are glitches I cannot figure out, like how to get views and fans, how to. . .never mind. Topic for another story. I am NOT trying to get you to visit my publication! But, you know, feel free. . .

In case you cannot tell from my name, I am not real. I mean my name is not real. It is a psuedononymously common cover name for my secret identity, or vice versa. I write under both names, my real one and this one. Why? I do not know. I can’t seem to get curated under either name.

Recently, I wrote a fantastic piece filled with humor, sorrow, defeat, victory, love lost and found, birth and death, and beginnings and endings, then beginning again. It was beautifully formatted, bright pictures, great title and subtitle. Oh, you should have seen it. It was wondrous!

I knew that piece would be published no matter which publication I submitted to. I even considered just submitting it to Medium. There was no doubt they would curate it and put it in every publication they had. I would break records with views, reads, fans, and money made.

Instead, I decided that it was the PERFECT article for my new publication, Dad-Bods. It had everything I wanted from other writers who may someday submit to Dad-Bods. Unfortunately, it was all in one story.

So, I submitted it to Dad-Bods, using my real identity, and immediately went to my Charles Roast email, waiting for the submission to come in so I could glance over it and immediately publish it. This was it! My big break.

When it finally arrived, I knew I had to be patient and responsible, and review it like I would any other submission, so I did. I looked at it with an editor’s eyes, even though I am still trying on the editor identity.

I froze.

I realized almost immediately the picture under the title didn’t relate to the story. It was the first one I saw on Pexels that I liked, and I never bothered to look for others. First necessary fix.

Next, the title and subtitle. Crap! How does it catch the reader’s attention? It didn’t. I thought it was funny and catchy, but looking at it like an editor. . .nope. it barely related to the story. Second fix.

Next, the first paragraph. I read it, and reread it. It didn’t set the road map I wanted it to, but thought it did when I wrote it. I had to fix the structure and grammar. I mixed past and present tense too often. And other mistakes.

Last one. Word count. Over 3000 words. Well, that just won’t do. Every “How to. . .” article I have read on Medium says the attention span of readers on Medium is only around 3–5 minutes, and MAYBE 750–1000 words.

Reality strikes, and bites me in the ass. I jumped the gun (or shark, depending on perspective). I thought for sure I had it. But I was blinded by my high opinion of myself. And, honestly, I just wrote until I stopped so I could keep the ideas flowing. I only re-read it a few times and made some minor corrections. I loved it. Chuck didn’t.

So, I, er, I mean Chuck, did the only thing he could do. He rejected it for publication. He sent me an email and didn’t even send notes. “Sorry, this article is not ready for publication. Please review submission guidelines for both Dad-Bods and Medium. Please resubmit it when it is ready and we will review it again.”

I had to talk myself off the ledge after this one. I haven’t rejected myself often in life, but this one? This one hurt. And it hurt because Chuck was right. And I am Chuck. And it was not ready.

So, I set it aside to let it marinate for a while, and will come back to it later.

But in the meantime, I will keep up the struggle and continue to learn. Hopefully, constructive criticism from readers will continue to flow. It won’t hurt my feelings, like this one did. It is a necessary part of learning how to write better.

And I want to write better. And greater.

Thank you, Chuck, for your tough love.