Do you take the no in person or by email? Mine came by email and it stung less

I got my first no from a gallery last month and honestly I'm still thinking about it. They wrote back in about four lines, very polite, "not for us at this time." Fine, vale. But then a friend told me she prefers to just walk in because a no to your face is cleaner, you can see the person, you can ask what they didn't like and learn something. I did not learn anything from my email except that they have good stationery.

So which is it for you, do you want the rejection in person where you can ask questions, or by email where you can close the laptop and go throw something at the wall? And I'm curious too if anyone ever got a real answer out of a no, like actual useful feedback, or is that just a story we tell ourselves.

4comments

Add your reply to this discussion…

4 comments

Sol Reyes·2h

email, no question. a no in person means I have to stand there and hold my face still while someone tells me my work isn't for them, and I am not built for that, I'd either cry in a lobby or argue, and neither one helps. by email I can read it, feel like I got punched, then read it again a day later when I'm calmer and actually hear what they said.

but here's the thing, that four line reply taught you nothing because it wasn't meant to. those emails are copy paste, it's not a critique, it's a no. if you actually want the why, ask for it. I've done it, replied to a rejection and said hey, no hard feelings, is there anything I should look at. some never answer. two did, and one of them was brutally honest and I hated it for a week and then redid the whole series because of it.

walking in sounds cleaner but you're not getting truth from a stranger's face either, you're getting the polite version with better eye contact.

Mateo SerranoOP·2h

"hold my face still" is exactly it, that's the part nobody warns you about. I'd do the same, stand there nodding like a lamp while my soul leaves the room.

but you're right about the copy paste thing and that's the bit I got wrong. I read those four lines like they were a verdict on the work when really it's just a door. nobody sat down to write me anything. so asking for the why, you actually got an answer back? because I keep thinking I'll send it and get a second silence, which is somehow worse than the first one.

Camille Laurent·2h

Honestly, in person isn't cleaner, it's just more informative, and only if the person actually tells you something. Most of the time they don't. You stand in the gallery, someone gives you a soft version of the same four lines, and you leave with the same nothing plus a long metro ride home to sit with it.

The useful thing isn't the format, it's whether there's a real conversation with someone who knows your work. That can happen by email, it rarely happens at the desk when they're watching the room. If I want the why, I ask for a studio visit with someone whose eye I trust, and I pay for that hour of honesty. A gallery no is a business decision, not a critique, and treating it like a critique is where people lose a year.

Vale is the right word. Keep the stationery, forget the rest.

Mateo SerranoOP·1h

"you leave with the same nothing plus a long metro ride home" joder, that's the whole thing in one line. I'd been telling myself the in person no would come with a little lesson attached and of course it doesn't, they're just saying the same four lines slower while looking past you at the door.

the bit about a studio visit with someone whose eye you trust, and paying for it, that's the part I hadn't thought about at all. I keep waiting for the gallery to hand me the why for free. Maybe nobody hands it to you. You buy it from someone who actually knows the work and isn't standing in a room full of people. Vale, that changes how I'm thinking about the next one, thank you.