Decisions

If I was an editor, I wouldn’t want to explain my decision to a writer if I rejected their work. Somehow, I get why editors generally do this. A decision may fit the editor’s criteria for rejecting a piece, but a decision can also be quite subtle and lucid rather than fully defined. There’s just this sense that a piece is not quite right. So, the editor passes on it after due consideration and an explanation should not be forthcoming from a subtle sense of uncertainty over a piece. How could you define it? So, writers should be assured that sometimes there are not explanations for rejecting a piece — the feeling just wasn’t right. Anyone should be able to ascertain this through their own decisions over selecting or rejecting things where, sometimes, the feeling is the basis for the decision and it just didn’t feel right. I know I do.

Don’t look back?

They tell you to never look back. It just stifles the present. In writing, it makes one think of the negative points of one’s writing. I wish I had done it better one moans. However, I do not mind looking back at what I have written in the past if just for the curiosity of rediscovering how my older work sounded.

Continue reading “Don’t look back?”

Editing or posting

There’s satisfaction in knowing that the writing piece one has done is the best possible work one could have done, and with a conscientious editor, who fills in the flawed parts with a deft touch. However, in my experience, some editors or admin staff of online publications don’t really edit, but they are what some call, posters, in that they post the piece without editing it. If this is the case, the pressure is on the writer, quite unfairly, to produce the quality edit that an editor would have.