Publication discussion

[Vistaldust]

I would like to start a thread here to see if there are those who have been published, wish to get published, and how your journey has been.....if you care to share. I'll start.....a year ago I sent a bunch of poems to different publications, and I was rejected by all but one - A little booklet called Conceit magazine....no pay of course. I realize those poems all sucked, even the one that was printed.

[rowens]

Most poetry does suck. At least a great deal of it. Published or not published.

[Vistaldust]

Then I know I am truly a poet.

[Leanne]

Realising you suck is the first step on the road to not sucking

The appearance of myriad ezines and small publications, not to mention vanity presses like Poetry.com, have done poetry a great disservice. In a time when it's cheap and easy to publish your own poems or "do struggling poets a favour" by publishing their poems to your own creation for no reward except bragging rights, it makes poetry seem similarly cheap and easy. Market saturation means there's a lot to sort through before finding something that's truly worth reading -- and most people don't have the time to do that sorting, or the inclination.

If publishing something is your ultimate goal, there are several very fine journals -- some print, some electronic -- with good reputations for publishing high quality poetry. To maintain their reputations, obviously their standards are very high and not everything will be suitable even if it's excellent, because they also have preferences. Poetry is human and so are poets, after all.

I regularly read journals such as Able Muse, qarrtisiluni, Danse Macabre, Drunk Monkeys and occasionally the Loch Raven Review. I read The New Yorker if I want to know what's in fashion for the very pretentious this month These are all worth trying (with the exception of The New Yorker, which smart poets know is only there to please Billy Collins), but not before you have purged all your poetry of bad habits: cliche, over-abstraction, poorly constructed rhyme and meter, hackneyed phrases etc (not your poetry specifically, by the way, that's the generic 'your'!). Learn as much as you can about what's already been written so that when you do submit, you stand out from the crowd. Editors are easily bored and hate to read the same poem over and over again, even if it's been written by different authors using different words. Subscribe to journals, support poetry, read, read, read.

And workshop. In a good workshop, not a praise generator.

[rowens]

Everything can't be good. And there's a lot of it.

[Leanne]

Good is relative. Very bad can be very, very good

[rowens]

I don't think about being good or bad any more. Or of anyone else's poetry being good or bad. I know when it works and when it doesn't. For me.

But I think a lot of people's poetry is bad within their own standards. They just try to hide that they know, and that seems to work too.

[Leanne]

I don't try to hide it. It infuriates me when other people pretend they can't see.

Nothing I write is good, but using the relative scale, it's better than the last bad.

[Vistaldust]

Leanne, thank you for taking the time to contribute. I will check out the publications you mentioned. I have read a lot of poems in the New Yorker and some of that stuff seems so abstract that I don't know how to even begin to interpret it. I found a website called 'Shmoop'. It helps interpret difficult popular poems. I want to be able to interpret poetry without help, eventually, but I need to start somewhere. I have the poem, Howl, by Ginsberg. I put it down rather quickly until I came upon this site. Once it explained his style, it quickly became readable. Do you read classic poetry to help with your writing, or do you think it can trap a writer into habits that affect writing for publication?

[rowens]

I just notice that lots of famous poems these days, and in other days, are good because they were advertised that way, and built up in stature for us.

[Leanne]

Classic poetry is essential -- as long as you remember that it's about the essence of the poem and the ideas, not emulating the language. Rather than trapping a writer, it can actually help you to develop your own voice as you think about things in ways you had never before considered. Would you paint but deny yourself the viewing of Da Vinci?

---

I just notice that lots of famous poems these days, and in other days, are good because they were advertised that way, and built up in stature for us.

They are indeed -- and if we disagree, we are shot down for not enjoying them. I have found that Americans can't handle me disliking their straitlaced goddess Ms Dickinson, for example

[Vistaldust]

Great point!

[rowens]

I haven't read much literary criticism lately, other than what's on here. But in the '90s, I read all the criticism books in the libraries that I could find. The early 20th century critics and before. They could trick you into liking stuff.

[billy]

I would like to start a thread here to see if there are those who have been published, wish to get published, and how your journey has been.....if you care to share. I'll start.....a year ago I sent a bunch of poems to different publications, and I was rejected by all but one - A little booklet called Conceit magazine....no pay of course. I realize those poems all sucked, even the one that was printed.

you're lucky, most don't realise that their poetry often sucks.
most of mine sucks, i had two poem published in an ezine and on cd, they weren't great but they weren't too bad, beside them i'm lucky if i've wrote two or three poems that don't suck. poets work in the art of suck.

milo did a thread on self publishing here's some ins and outs while i'd only advise genuinely good poets or poets who'd like to give the family a gift go this route, it is a great idea for your poetry storage, Just don't brag about it if you use it for such

---

Leanne, thank you for taking the time to contribute. I will check out the publications you mentioned. I have read a lot of poems in the New Yorker and some of that stuff seems so abstract that I don't know how to even begin to interpret it. I found a website called 'Shmoop'. It helps interpret difficult popular poems. I want to be able to interpret poetry without help, eventually, but I need to start somewhere. I have the poem, Howl, by Ginsberg. I put it down rather quickly until I came upon this site. Once it explained his style, it quickly became readable. Do you read classic poetry to help with your writing, or do you think it can trap a writer into habits that affect writing for publication?

read any and all poetry and as much of it as you can. sadly i can't put suff on the site that's 50 year old or younger, apart from an odd poem or two but we do have load of work by earlier poets in voice and text. just try and interpret what you can and mull over what you can't but not for too long.

---

I haven't read much literary criticism lately, other than what's on here. But in the '90s, I read all the criticism books in the libraries that I could find. The early 20th century critics and before. They could trick you into liking stuff.

even a site like this can trick people that way. specially if we become friends with people here. all we can do and try and stand back and look at the poem as if it has no ties to anyone we actually know. feedback like poetry is something we should be discerning about, we get a really pleasant piece of feedback and sometimes feel we should reciprocate.

[Brownlie]

I would like to start a thread here to see if there are those who have been published, wish to get published, and how your journey has been.....if you care to share. I'll start.....a year ago I sent a bunch of poems to different publications, and I was rejected by all but one - A little booklet called Conceit magazine....no pay of course. I realize those poems all sucked, even the one that was printed.

you're lucky, most don't realise that their poetry often sucks.
most of mine sucks, i had two poem published in an ezine and on cd, they weren't great but they weren't too bad, beside them i'm lucky if i've wrote two or three poems that don't suck. poets work in the art of suck.

milo did a thread on self publishing here's some ins and outs while i'd only advise genuinely good poets or poets who'd like to give the family a gift go this route, it is a great idea for your poetry storage, Just don't brag about it if you use it for such

---

Leanne, thank you for taking the time to contribute. I will check out the publications you mentioned. I have read a lot of poems in the New Yorker and some of that stuff seems so abstract that I don't know how to even begin to interpret it. I found a website called 'Shmoop'. It helps interpret difficult popular poems. I want to be able to interpret poetry without help, eventually, but I need to start somewhere. I have the poem, Howl, by Ginsberg. I put it down rather quickly until I came upon this site. Once it explained his style, it quickly became readable. Do you read classic poetry to help with your writing, or do you think it can trap a writer into habits that affect writing for publication?

read any and all poetry and as much of it as you can. sadly i can't put suff on the site that's 50 year old or younger, apart from an odd poem or two but we do have load of work by earlier poets in voice and text. just try and interpret what you can and mull over what you can't but not for too long.

---

I haven't read much literary criticism lately, other than what's on here. But in the '90s, I read all the criticism books in the libraries that I could find. The early 20th century critics and before. They could trick you into liking stuff.

even a site like this can trick people that way. specially if we become friends with people here. all we can do and try and stand back and look at the poem as if it has no ties to anyone we actually know. feedback like poetry is something we should be discerning about, we get a really pleasant piece of feedback and sometimes feel we should reciprocate.

I'm drunk on Saturday night so this post counts for nothing but I know you've seen some hardship Billy, and that could become great writing!

[Leanne]

I'm drunk on Saturday night so this post counts for nothing but I know you've seen some hardship Billy, and that could become great writing!

You're right, this post counts for nothing -- if hardship were the only prerequisite for great writing, then all poetry would be written by serial killers or catamites in wartorn sub-Saharan nations.

[R.C. KITCHENS]

I'm drunk on Saturday night so this post counts for nothing but I know you've seen some hardship Billy, and that could become great writing!

You're right, this post counts for nothing -- if hardship were the only prerequisite for great writing, then all poetry would be written by serial killers or catamites in wartorn sub-Saharan nations.

Some wicked poetry to say the least would come from them.

I think you got to write a bunch of shit poetry just to write one good poem.
Then, if you get published, you have to contend with all the electronic world to just get noticed. I think most people have too
many outlets of entertainment to really take time to read poetry.
Back in the 1900's you could become famous throughout the lands
I assume. Now, you'd be lucky to get published and have a few hundred people notice it.

Still has to be an achievement to be published, any body use a poem they workshop here and get it published?

[Leanne]

I wouldn't even consider submitting a poem for publication unless it had been workshopped -- and here is the best place I've found to do it.

[R.C. KITCHENS]

I wouldn't even consider submitting a poem for publication unless it had been workshopped -- and here is the best place I've found to do it.

Yes I agree. You don't really get fluffed up and have your ass
kissed at the Pig Pen. It's critical help.

[Leanne]

Unless you're billy -- the fluffing is the only reason he's here.

But he's old and he needs the support.