I recently read a rather unpleasant comment to a blog post about self-publishing. The gist of the comment was if a publisher will not publish your work then it is not good enough to publish so don’t. Apart from the tone was very rude and condescending I thought the post showed his ignorance about how publishing worked.
I’m sure we have all read the articles about how great authors had numerous rejections, some being told to give up writing. The truth of the matter is, like the rest of us a publisher is human with their own prejudices and preferences then are not the arbiter of what is good or worthy they are simply looking for commercial. Even then they are taking an educated guess on what will sell. I don’t like romance novels as a rule however there is no denying their popularity. Even the author of 50 shades of Grey would never claim it to be a literary master piece but there is no denying its commercial success.
I have read than most publishing houses have quotas of books they can take in a year. Rejection by a publisher could simply mean bad timing.
Personally I think a good test if a book is good enough to publish is; would another person gain enjoyment from it. A while ago I bought a series of four fantasy fiction books that were self-published. I thought they were awful I was a little cross with myself wasting all that time reading them. I went on to good reads thinking I might write my first review on them and I saw some very positive reviews of the books that several people had obviously enjoyed reading. So who I am to say they are rubbish?
If you think someone will enjoy what you have written then go ahead and publish!