first thanks to all the spammers

who have been my faithful followers and commenters these last long months. love you guys.
second, i am confused by the idea of an audience. or at least, distracted by it.
example: the first agent (nicely) rejected my novel.
do I now spend my microbial amount of writing time tracking down other agents who might like to see it and reject it too?
I will, happily. But when then does any actual writing take place?
Let's review:
did I write it to publish it? no.
did I write it give a voice to the character and to tell her story because it needs to be told? yes.
do I think it's any good? yes.
am I in any position to judge? no.

you can see how the idea of an audience (seeking one) is distracting from the act and intentions of writing. do I spend the little time I have writing or working to get what I have written published? the answer is naturally yes. all of above. take yer chisel and knock out time to do both.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

If not to publish it, why then send it to a publisher? One of your earlier entries here considers the idea of respect- that is, on behalf of publishers- to communicate suggestions back to submitting authors even if the intention is, for varying reasons, not to invest in their work. If, however, the writer's mission going in to the process is strictly "to give voice to these characters", is it not then accomplished by way of completion in and of itself (I would love, by the way, to read your thoughts on e-publishing)? For what it's worth I've been following your blog for well over two years, if timidly (I commented here as I began at that time to research my own poetry collection and novel, both to be submitted no later than this coming summer; I also read your lovely and succinct poem for 'The Rose And Thorn' publication, merely days after you announced it!). Back then you WANTED to publish, and so it was. Perhaps a return to that younger (naive? idealistic?) self is of the order, wouldn't you say?

Xo xo-