Scavella - who writes the best sevenlings – has been busy.
And is making me think about what I’m doing.
I got more or less serious about studying and writing poetry just about two and a half years ago. My first publication - submitted on a monumental dare to myself - came in November 2006 (thanks, Shit Creek Review!) Subsequent submissions were made cautiously, in great trepidation and greater angst. Fourteen months later, I have a total of 22 pieces either published or accepted for publication. (Full list here.) I’ve tried to submit only to places I will always be happy to claim as a publication credit, and I think I’ve succeeded.
Rejections were never any surprise. Acceptances always were. Which remains true today. But the paradigm has shifted over the last year or so, and so therefore has the quality of the surprise. At the beginning, the rejection of a piece signaled to me a flaw in the piece, and it was dashing for that reason. Now – after having a number of pieces rejected several times before going on to find good homes – I find I am dashed by rejection more as evidence of failure to connect, than as evidence of a flawed piece. And, conversely, delighted by acceptance as evidence of successful connection, rather than of a perfect piece.
And, now, confused about just what a “flawed” piece is. Or a “perfect” one.
I don’t think either is what I used to think it is.
Like this:
Like Loading...