@kungfupannda
Okay, so the 'this isn't for us but writing is subjective' type response tends to be a form reply. Anything personalised at all is a more positive type of rejection - if a rejection can be positive - because it means they've actually taken the time to type a response, rather than just hitting whatever shortcut key inserts their form rejection text.
The writing is subjective responses, came mainly from agents not publishers. Rejections from publishers were that they didn't feel I was right for them. Ones where they saw the manuscript ranged from we just aren't passionate about it to it's too confusing. There is no one generic response to the manuscript.
If you've had mainly form replies would unfortunately suggest there's something fairly major that's not working with the novel - voice, plot, setting, character, writing style - or that it's not up to scratch yet. How many edits have you done yourself since finishing the first draft? As an absolute minimum, I do a structural edit, a line edit and a copy edit/proofread. The structural edit is the big one, where I make major changes, tidy up the plot, take out chapters, put new ones in etc. The line edit is the beautifying process, when I make sure my text flows. The copy edit and proof read is essentially checking for errors - typos grammar, wrong names, timeline not making sense etc. For a recently completed - and complicated - project there were probably around 6 full edits.
The novel I'm currently subbing took over ten years to write. I started in 2006 and finished in 2018. So I've done literally a hundred edits to it. I've also had others read it for feedback. The positive responses are those that see the whole manuscript and say it's too confusing. Like I said it's an epistolary novel written in notes and diary extracts. I have had an offer of publishing it but got ghosted by the publisher. She hasn't published anything and was just starting out so perhaps it was a lucky miss.
I think you might need to adjust your mindset/expectations of editors. Even small publishing houses are overwhelmed with submissions. They will accept only a tiny fraction of those. They're not realistically going to give someone a chance to rectify problems, firstly because they don't need to, and secondly because they simply won't have time to commit to something they're not sure they're ultimately going to buy.
I woudn't expect someone who didn't want to publish to give me editorial direction. Of course they're not going to give comprehensive feedback. My point was, if they like the book and want to publish then they'll help me to clarify whatever is confusing.
It is much rarer for an editor to provide specific feedback and ask to see a reworked version. It does sometimes happen, and if it does, you can be pretty sure you're on the right track and getting close to where you want to be.
I wouldn't expect this.
You mention thinking that the publisher would have their own editor who could give clarification on any issues. It doesn't really work like that. The people you're submitting to are the editors. You're offering to sell them something. You might feel less down about the process if you recognise it for the business transaction that it is. You're not being knocked back by someone whose job it is to scout for talent and give people opportunities - you're just not quite managing to sell your particular product to extremely critical and fussy buyers in a very saturated market.
I've been writing since the 90s and know it's a business transaction. I'm just expecting an editor to give feedback if they want to publish, nothing more.
If you're looking for someone who will work with you to get your book submission-ready, then you might want to think about submitting to more agents.
I don't get anywhere with agents, i've submitted to a handful and got nowhere with them. I get more feedback from publishers.
If you've never had any sort of detailed feedback on your project, it would certainly be worth thinking about using a literary consultancy or a freelance editor. In terms of consultancies, Cornerstones are great, as are Jericho Writers. They provide editorial reports and also scout potential talent for agents.
Thanks I'll look into those.
Your comment about the project not being easy to interpret does ring a few alarm bells, I have to say. It's fine to leave some things open to interpretation, and to make a reader work hard, but you do have to have a clear narrative thread. If it's actively confusing, readers (and editors and agents) will just close the book and move on. Given this has been raised, I would be inclined to give it some very serious thought.
I've had a mixture of feedback from readers and have given it to five people to read. There is confusion there but for most it was interesting and we had long conversations about what it meant. It is meant to be challenging but perhaps too much.
I'm actually working on other things now. This novel was finished in 2018 and i'm working on a collection of short stories and a trilogy of novellas at the moment.
Out of interest, how did the requests for full manuscripts come about? Was it the usual submission process of first three chapters and a synopsis? Or was it a query letter of some sort? If it was the former, then that's really positive in terms of writing quality and opening hook. It's a big hurdle to get over. Full requests not translating into acceptances suggest something structural or thematic being an issue, rather than basic writing style or voice. If you got a full request off the back of a letter or summary, with no actual example of writing included, then that suggests you have an interesting idea/concept, but it's harder to speculate on what the problem might be.
submissions depended on what the publisher was looking for. It could be a query letter and the first 5,000 words. The most recent one wanted the whole manuscript as he really liked the intro.
Don't give up. You say you've been doing this for a long time. That might be the case for the actual writing, but it sounds like you're actually at a very early stage in the submission process, and it may well be that you've just skipped over some crucial steps. Also, if this is your first full novel, then it is entirely possible that it will ultimately turn out to be the project that teaches you how to write and finish a novel, and how to approach the submission process, rather than the project that gets you an agent or gets published. The vast majority of published writers have unpublished manuscripts floating about. I have two. The first one had my soul poured into it and its rejection after a series of near-misses nearly broke my heart. I reread it recently and I can see exactly what made it unpublishable. I learned a lot from it, and it got me an agent, but it's a very flawed project. I still love it though, and I may do a print-on-demand copy of it one day, and put it on my shelf and stroke it lovingly from time to time.
I've been writing since the 90s and this is my second full novel. I had a lot of positive feedback for the first one. I thought this one would be the one that got published as it's a lot more marketable (Gothic/speculative)
The really positive thing about your position is that you've completed the novel and got to the point of submitting it. 99% of aspiring writers won't ever get to that stage. Most people start, realise how hard it is, and give up. Or fiddle around half-heartedly for years, without ever finishing the book, or ditching it and moving on. If you actually complete a novel, you're already in a tiny minority. Definitely keep going!
Thanks for the encouragement, I really appreciate it and appreciate you taking the time to post all that.