While my subs to agents wait for responses I've sent queries to a few publishers that take unagented submissions. Usually the reject comment is merely a 'not for us', 'too funny for a serious premise', 'too serious', et al. But today a publisher said they didn't have time to write even a short note to hint at why they rejected my masterpiece but recommended I engaged the editorial services of The Literary Consultancy. The implication being that after dishing out hundreds of pounds with them, their report would illuminate my errors. For once instead of responding with a polite thanks for considering my ouevre anyway, I allowed steam to power my keyboard into sending a comment that I thought it smacked of a setup for them to promote another company, whose report, would I engage them, still wouldn't enlighten me as to why my novel was rejected by themselves.
They responded to say they were not connected to TLC but that it was a reputable company. They miss the point and I say so to them. I've already paid for that novel to be copy edited and critiqued. I know full well that if I paid TLC they will come up with areas of improvement. If you put 5 editors in a room, you will get 6 different opinions. I said I would have appreciated a simple 'too much exposition' or 'characters not sufficiently crazy'. And such a comment would have taken less of their time than the batting to and fro to justify boosting the business of TLC.
I know TLC are recommended by other publishers and agents - a growing trend. And they are said to be impeccable, but at the AltFiction writers' con last weekend I received comments from several writers who were not happy with the service from TLC - analysis too vague and general to be helpful for example.
Any one else find this trend regretable?