Ignoring Being Ignored
When clients don’t respond, don’t take it personally
You’ve read the writers guidelines or asked how the company prefers to deal with writers. After creating a pitch so perfect that the organization should use it as a model of what to do, you send it off. A week passes, then two, then a month, three, and … nothing. Not a single blessed word.Every writer knows what goes through you at such a moment: rage, indignation, depression, self-pity, and the certain knowledge that you are a victim of cruel indifference. You want to pick up the phone and scream or dash off a nasty message. How dare they ignore you! After the time you spent writing the query or introductory letter. You’ve spent time and possibly even time that won’t come back, and can’t even get the courtesy of a reply.
Go ahead and let that howling inner voice shout – for about 30 seconds. And then … just … get … over … it. This is business.
Any time you deal with people as a writer (or an accountant or plumber or electrician, for that matter), you learn that the world is full of callous and indifferent people. Not all are like that, but many are. This happens to absolutely every writer, even big names. But one of the biggest differences I see between amateurs and true pros is the ability to separate writing from business.
Yes, you’re right. Common courtesy would suggest that at least a brief answer was in order. Like its cousin, common sense, courteousness is hardly customary. More often than not you’ll assume that clients must have astronomical star quality, because they are such black holes.
Nevertheless, it’s business. That means it isn’t and can’t be personal. This is a systematic attempt for you to gain some things that you want, not a touchstone for your ego. To keep it properly impersonal, set the right attitude. No matter how rude someone is, you must brush it off. When you think of it, to set your self value on the reaction of people you’ve never met is pretty silly.
More crucially, being ignored is unimportant. Are you writing to be famous and admired? (There are more efficient ways of achieving this.) Or do you wish to write things of worth that might help people? This isn’t a rhetorical question. Getting better known certainly means a greater chance of getting work published, but even then it’s using notoriety as a means to an end, and not the end itself. When the ego predominates, the quality of the word receeds.
To some degree, both answers are in each of us, and in one situation after another we all must choose between them, because at their essence they are incompatible. If you pick the former, then nothing really will make you happy. Trying to make art serve you never works and ultimately is always a disappointment.
On the other hand, if you pick the latter, then your duty is to your work and not your bruised feelings. The more of your energy you pour into anger, the less you have to be productive. To let yourself slide off into fury and stay there is not to justifiably react to an insult, but to actively cause harm to yourself and that work, which should be greater than you.
You best do justice to the higher cause of what you try to achieve by treating such problems as business – ironic, as creative people widely distain business as a base activity. After you’ve contacted a client, put on your business hat and don’t react. Use your imagination to remove the indignation. Unfeeling and uncaring oafs might populate a given organization – or some overwhelmed staff person could have lost your letter. Someone might have accidentally dropped your query into the “already answered” pile. People might be massively overworked and embarrassed. Emails might be going into a spam filter. (This is far more common than you might think.) Lash out and your action might be unfair and burn a bridge in a world that is small, and where people talk.
Even when – not if – someone clearly ignores you, gnash your teeth briefly if you must, and then forget it. Consider the value of the information you now have. A company that would treat writers as unworthy of a response is unlikely to treat you with respect should someone there ask you to take an assignment. Anyway, you can still get your answer. Wait the amount of time the organization requests, give it a couple of more weeks, and then contact it and politely and pleasantly ask where things are. If the representatives say they need more time, be gracious and agree – and ask when you should contact them again. Being pleasant and upbeat, you put them into a position of feeling an obligation of courtesy, and being persistent, they cannot hide.
Will you still feel irritated from time to time? Of course; you’re human. But as you practice this approach, you’ll find that it bothers you less each occasion, and by taking your ego out of the way, you can make better decisions of how to move your plays forward.



6 Comments:
This post comes at the perfect time for me, with a few too many queries unanswered, and I thought for sure when I sent them that I'd get an instant yes!
An instant "yes" is ideal. A not-so-instant "yes" is great. Being ignored IS irritating -- even if intellectually understandable. So many of us now submit queries by E-mail (preferrred by most publications), and I wonder how difficult or time-consuming it could possibly be even for a busy editor to hit Reply and type in, "No thanks" or "Not for us right now" or "the magazine is folding after the next issue" or "Try us again in 6 months" or "Get lost." Something.
Karen: There's actually a benefit to not getting an instant yes. The more you have out there, the more serendipitous replies you can get. Hmm, I think I just stumbled onto another blog topic...
Claire, yes, it's irritating, but that's getting wrapped up in how someone "should" have treated you, which is damaging. You can't teach a water buffalo to use a napkin, so it's a waste of time to get upset when it makes a terrible dinner companion.
Were you reading my mind today? Or was it yesterday? Last week? You do make me feel better (I think!) and Claire expressed what I would if she hadn't already.
Throw us a bone, with meat or without, but just throw it.
This reality of freelancing really does bother me...grrrrr. But as one writer on a recent press trip said: "I'm aggressive. Really aggressive." Maybe I'm just a wimp...but I don't really think so, as I can be quite persistent when hungry.
Every editor I work with has a different rhythm, and that is fine with me. I have been in this business for 30 years and one thing I learned early on was to surrender trying to control editors. Some respond immediately, some respond only when they are interested, some file away stuff and may respond months later, others throw stuff they don't want away right then (even if they might want it six months later).
My job is to know what a response (or non-response) means.
Absolutely you must understand an editor's rhythm - and also understand how much you want a given assignment. I've had some come in after, literally, six months or longer trying to sell specific editors on them, because I thought I had the right match of idea, audience, and editor. I did ... but sometimes it takes the editors a while to realize that.
Post a Comment
<< Home