The fit of a poem

Further to my previous post, it's also worth bearing in mind that rejection/acceptance isn't as black and white as it may seem. Magazine editors will often choose a poem because it fits in well with others that have already been selected for a certain issue. On the other hand, of course, a poem might miss out because it doesn't work alongside previously chosen pieces.

This question of fit is also relevant in terms of the transition from magazine to collection. There are occasions when a poem that appeared in a top journal just doesn't pay its way in the context of a full-length manuscript. In an opposing sense, meanwhile, certain pieces are destined never to be accepted for stand-alone publication but turn out to be crucial to the flow of a book. They bounce off and enrich the poems around them.

Of course, all the above is easy in theory and difficult to judge on a case-by-case basis. I think many poets can recall having agonised over a poem's possible worth!

The usefulness of rejection

Rejection can be immensely useful. Apart from teaching us anger management and giving us an excuse to redecorate that spot where the coffee mug somehow smashed, it's a filter and a warning, dropping a hint that our work might not be ready, indicating which poems might not be on the money, encouraging us to graft once more. Those mights, of course, are due to the vagaries of taste, as mentioned elsewhere on this blog!

In fact, I feel that renowned poets run the risk of never having this chance. Certain editors are keen to have a famous name adorning their mag, so they are liable to take work even if it's not 100% convincing.

In this context, I was interested the other day to read an interview with American poet, Matthew Siegel, in which he discussed his prize-winning collection, Blood Work, which had previously been a runner-up elsewhere in a different form. Here's his view on that process:

“I thank my lucky stars that they didn’t take that book,” he said. “I mean, it’s a great prize — I would have been thrilled to win it — but the book wasn’t ready. And it’s so much better now."

Siegel is also very interesting on his countless magazine rejections. You can read the full piece here.

Roy Marshall and The Sun Bathers

I met Roy Marshall for the first time at a HappenStance reading back in 2011. Maria Taylor introduced me to him and mentioned he was one of the winners of the Crystal Clear Creators pamphlet competition. We shared a couple of beers that night and I was immediately struck by his terrific passion for poetry. At that stage, he'd just started a blog and had also got a few initial acceptances from small magazines.

Roy Marshall published the pamphlet, titled Gopagilla, not long afterwards, and I gave it an excellent review here on Rogue Strands, mentioning that "Gopagilla is a satisfying and poetically coherent first pamphlet. It delivers a lot and promises even more. I very much look forward to reading more of Roy Marshall's poetry in the future."  However, he didn't stop there. Let's fast-forward four years. Not only has he won several prizes for individual poems and had acceptances from many of the U.K.'s leading magazines, but he's also published a full-length collection, titled The Sun Bathers, with Shoestring Press.

And then this last week came the best part: The Sun Bathers has been shortlisted for the Michael Murphy Memorial Prize alongside books from major players such as Bloodaxe. This is terrific news, not just for Marshall but for other late starters, for those that have taken alternative routes, for small publishers who believe in a poet and back their work to the hilt.

In short, congratulations, Roy! Oh, and while I'm about it, I very much recommend a visit to that afore-mentioned blog. It's packed with poetic tales, interviews and original verse. What's more, I've suddenly realised it's somehow still not on my Blog List to the right of this poet. Time to put that right...

Writer and poet

When I first joined Twitter at the beginning of this year, I was immediately struck by the way people try to describe themselves in a few words. One term that crops up on a regular basis is "writer and poet". Well, I'm sorry, but this just sounds wrong! A poet is a writer. The latter is the generic term in which we'd include the former. Of course, I'm being slightly pedantic: I know full well that users mean they write prose as well as poetry, but my question is why they phrase their description in such a way.

One possibility is that I'm over-interpreting things, and the explanation is simply that Twitter lends itself to abbreviation. On the other hand, I do have the feeling that people sometimes view verse as a separate entity to be kept apart from all other writing. As Twitter shows, even poets themselves can end up falling into this trap.

D.A. Prince wins the East Midlands Book Award

I was delighted to learn last week that D.A. Prince had won the East Midland Book Award for Common Ground (HappenStance, 2014).

My delight was down to a number of factors: the book is excellent (you might recall I gave it a very positive review on Rogue Strands a few months ago), and the win is also a boost for HappenStance. However, perhaps the key point for me is that this collection is perhaps the type of work that should find wide recognition and doesn't tend to be given as much as it deserves. As discussed in my above-mentioned review, D.A. Prince writes a poetry of the almost-unnoticed accumulation of emotional impact, building imperceptibly towards unexpected ramifications.

In other words,  the winning text in this case wasn't packed with flashy fireworks and showy posturing, nor was the collection a debut written by a bright young thing who's been mentored by a famous name. In this case, the winner simply wrote a terrific book of verse. Congratulations, Davina!