# Publishers rejected classics in disguise **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [October 5, 2014, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486 "2014-10-05T21:33:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/41 "2014-10-08T00:15:34Z")
> [@GreasyJack](#): > > Plus the original edition didn’t have the color spark plug diagnostic sheet or information on California models. Or the distributor diagrams. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/42 "2014-10-08T00:25:20Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > auto manual I have a new favorite oxymoron. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/43 "2014-10-08T00:47:18Z")
This thing is pretty ridiculous on it’s face. As others have said, few of the rejections have any reasoning so you can’t say the reviewer was stupid or totally figured it out nor is there any guarantee that a “classic” is going to sell a lot about of copies. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/44 "2014-10-08T00:53:52Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I have a new favorite oxymoron. Chilton published manuals on auto repair, for each year and model. They even had wiring diagrams, although they ceased that, probably because someone wanted to make money. I do not know if they still publish automobile repair manuals or not. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/45 "2014-10-08T01:27:05Z")
One of the more painful whooshes I’ve seen around here, that was. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/46 "2014-10-08T01:30:50Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > One of the more painful whooshes I’ve seen around here, that was. One should never assume honesty on the SDMB. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Don\_Simus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@Don\_Simus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Don_Simus)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/47 "2014-10-08T02:08:01Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > [20 Brilliant Authors Whose Work Was Initially Rejected](http://www.buzzfeed.com/stmartinspress/20-brilliant-authors-whose-work-was-initially-reje-7rut) A quite eclectic list. Includes a diary of a child. Are the rest of the book on the level that a child could have written? Another author from that list is [hard to tell from machine translation](http://reverent.org/sounds_like_faulkner.html). ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/48 "2014-10-08T02:14:19Z")
> [@Don\_Simus](#): > > A quite eclectic list. Includes a diary of a child. Are the rest of the book on the level that a child could have written? For those following along at home, that’s _The Diary of Anne Frank_ he’s talking about there. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/49 "2014-10-08T02:47:42Z")
With the perfection of the internet, you don’t actually need a publisher to succeed. > **[Creative Jobs :: Careers for Graphic Designers, Copywriters, Social Media...](https://www.mediabistro.com/)** > > Explore creative careers in graphic design, copywriting, social media, marketing, communications, video. Post your creative job today and reach the best talent in media, advertising, and publishing. ---
**Author:** ![Don\_Simus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@Don\_Simus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Don_Simus)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/50 "2014-10-08T02:57:57Z")
> [@Penfeather](#): > > What lists like that have to leave out, though, because it’s impossible to document, is the far greater percentage of execrable rubbish which was also rejected because it genuinely wasn’t publishable. It’s the Colombus Solecism: “they called Colombus crazy, and Colombus was right\*; they call me crazy, therefore I must be right too.” What it leaves out is that they called a lot more crazy people crazy too. How do you know it, if it is not documented? It could well be that there were a lot of books of the same quality that were rejected and never became famous. How do you know that the books on the list are really great? Is it an axiom? If not, how can you prove it? They have been rejected by the publishers. In random reading tests people can’t tell them from unknown authors. Do you have any proof at all that they are great? Any proof whatsoever? ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/51 "2014-10-08T11:44:06Z")
> [@Don\_Simus](#): > > Of course there are people who say that Rothko is wonderful. However scientific research shows that they can’t tell him from an clumsy work of a bored scientist. This is pretty much clear by now. An interesting new twist is that: I suspect that there are very very few people (may be nobody at all) who can ride that trail, the video of which I had posted, and also admire Rothko. Because of course appreciating art is all about science. 😉 As for your expert trail - :facepalm: I have no idea what you hope to achieve by your threads, and your arguments are tiresome and circular. I am out of here. ---
**Author:** ![notquitekarpov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/71c47a/32.png) [@notquitekarpov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notquitekarpov)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/52 "2014-10-08T13:09:39Z")
He can suggest the “new twist” but we’ll tell him whether they are interesting or not. ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/53 "2014-10-08T13:40:33Z")
> [@Don\_Simus](#): > > How do you know it, if it is not documented? It could well be that there were a lot of books of the same quality that were rejected and never became famous. > > How do you know that the books on the list are really great? Is it an axiom? If not, how can you prove it? They have been rejected by the publishers. In random reading tests people can’t tell them from unknown authors. Do you have any proof at all that they are great? Any proof whatsoever? There is no doubt in my mind that books of rapturous beauty languish in slush piles only to find their way to the recycle bin. By all means, get a job at a publishing house and rescue those mistreated works of art. That publishers reject a manuscript really doesn’t mean anything about the quality of the work itself. It means they’re not interested. There are any number of factors and reasons that may go into their rejection and they’ll be the first to tell you they’ve rejected any number of books and kicked themselves later when that book or a similar enough one went bananas on the best seller list. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/54 "2014-10-08T14:17:41Z")
> [@Penfeather](#): > > What lists like that have to leave out, though, because it’s impossible to document, is the far greater percentage of execrable rubbish which was also rejected because it genuinely wasn’t publishable. It’s the Colombus Solecism: “they called Colombus crazy, and Colombus was right\*; they call me crazy, therefore I must be right too.” What it leaves out is that they called a lot more crazy people crazy too. > > \*Yeah, I know. This: [QUOTE=Carl Sagan] But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Maserschmidt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/maserschmidt/32/18829_2.png) [@Maserschmidt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maserschmidt)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/55 "2014-10-08T16:29:50Z")
> [@WordMan](#): > > I have no idea what you hope to achieve by your threads, and your arguments are tiresome and circular. I am out of here. Well, if you google his user name, one thing you might learn is that he posts a lot in different forums, making the same arguments, with links to his website. So one could form an admittedly non-expert opinion of what he hopes to achieve. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/56 "2014-10-08T16:37:44Z")
> [@Maserschmidt](#): > > Well, if you google his user name, one thing you might learn is that he posts a lot in different forums, making the same arguments, with links to his website. So one could form an admittedly non-expert opinion of what he hopes to achieve. Hmm, that’s not okay. I will check in with mods on this, but suspect they have already looked into it. Either way, **Don Simus** , good luck spinning your wheels. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2014, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486/57 "2014-10-08T16:51:11Z")
> [@Maserschmidt](#): > > Well, if you google his user name, one thing you might learn is that he posts a lot in different forums, making the same arguments, with links to his website. So one could form an admittedly non-expert opinion of what he hopes to achieve. > [@WordMan](#): > > Hmm, that’s not okay. I will check in with mods on this, but suspect they have already looked into it. > > Either way, **Don Simus** , good luck spinning your wheels. :smack: We don’t always prohibit this kind of thing, but between the repeated links to his own site and the way **Don Simus** ’ threads almost always focus on the same subject and cover the exact same ground, I’m going to close this. Try posting about some other topics, **Don Simus**. If anyone wants this thread re-opened, let me know and I’ll consider it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/publishers-rejected-classics-in-disguise/700486.md?page=2)