Long time no post Been busy writing. But I've hit a wall. Got my first ever rejection; a handwritten note (from Gollancz' open submissions event). I'm not sure I understand their advice. Especially one key line. Here it is: "Dear Theodore, Thanks for sending us FOR WANT OF A WORLD, and we're sorry it took so long to respond. Your submission made it to the third (final) round. Unfortunately we didn't think it quite what we're looking for. You write well though, so don't give up! Rat was an interesting character, the scenes were well-constructed and the story has potential. Where it stumbled a little was in the lack of interior observation. It read like a cinematic transcript, describing everything but lacking the insight into what's going on that is the particular power of writing. If you focus on adding this observational element to your writing I think you definitely have a lot of potential. Good luck!" I don't really know what to do with this information. The Google isn't helping me understand what they're getting at. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated, thank you. T.
I'm a bit confused. I went searching for a post of mine that I thought might be relevant to this question, and I discovered that that post was my answer to this question, in December of last year. My post is at: https://www.writingforums.org/threads/need-advice-on-interiorobservation-and-insight.155660/#post-1620712 If it doesn't make sense, I can expand.
Is he not saying - that for you to succeed - 'Rat steered left at the traffic lights, and pulled into the parking lot...' requires 'Rat steered left at the traffic lights. Who was this mysterious girl who had called his number? He pulled into the parking lot...'
