Last Friday at a workshop, I wrote a poem from the prompt, What is Home? My response went way beyond warm tea and apple pie into the grief, fear and horror I felt after hearing about ICE infiltrating a Chicago apartment complex in the middle of the night, dragging people out of their beds and zip-tying children. As I often do in my poems, I combined these bigger events with moments from my life: flashbacks to my own home as a child, a grief ritual I’d participated in the previous day on Yom Kippur, and a precious innocent moment with my three-year-old grandchild, who, so far, has been sheltered from the onslaught of anxiety-provoking news stories that further threaten the tottering foundations of the country we call home.
I thought the poem was good. Quite honestly, I was smitten with it, as I often am when I feel I’ve been able to use poetry to expel what’s deep inside me in an artful, not-too-didactic, and not-too-ego-driven way. So, even though I generally like to let first drafts sit for a while so I can revise them more objectively, I decided to send the poem to Rattle, which publishes a new poem every week that responds to that week’s current events.
Problem was, the deadline was that night, Friday, at midnight. And I had commitments most of the rest of the afternoon and evening.
10:00 pm is not my ideal writing time. But that was when I got home on Friday night. So I forced myself to sit at the computer and consider the poem, doing what I generally do in revision: cutting out things that didn’t need to be there, condensing lines, considering each verb and each noun image, determining if there were places I could use more metaphors, making language choices to improve the sound and rhythm of each line. As I worked, I felt even more in love with the poem, even as its flaws began to peek through. But, I reminded myself, justifying my crush-like state, if I only sent out poems that I thought were unflawed, I’d never send out anything at all.
At 11:15 pm I decided I was too tired to do anything else to the poem, so I sent it.
I knew that no matter how polished or unpolished the poem was, the chances of it being chosen were pretty slim. Rattle gets hundreds of poems each week for this feature and they publish *one* of them–sometimes two. Nevertheless, on Saturday, the day they respond to all of those who’ve submitted that week, I kept checking my email. Even as I told myself it was unlikely they were going to take the poem, my little fantasy brain couldn’t quite click off. What if they do take it? Wouldn’t that be amazing? While I knew this wasn’t a perfect poem, I still thought it was an important poem, with something crucial that needed to be said–or, at least, something I felt was vital to say.
At about 5:30 pm on Saturday, just as I was getting into my car after a hike that featured a visit to my favorite “best friend” beech tree I checked my phone. There was the rejection–a form one I’d received several times before, kind, as always, reminding submitters of the number of poems received and encouraging people to try again.
I wasn’t crushed. Hard, even, to be disappointed with a result I totally expected. Oh well, I thought, as I backed out of the parking lot and headed onto the road. But I know that for many, a rejection can feel far more more devastating–and even worse if you’ve let yourself fall too deeply in love with your own work.
Later, I looked at the poem again. It still felt relevant and important, but it wasn’t the most amazing poem I’d ever written. As the glow of the poem-crush began to dim, I realized that with a little time and distance, and feedback from my poetry group, I could do more with this poem. And while it was kind of fun to work myself up into a frenzied, deadline-induced revision session, sometimes impatience is really my enemy–like when I can’t even wait for the tea water to boil and end up with an unsatisfying lukewarm cup.
And as with the the other deep loves in my life, things usually get better once the crush phase wears off and I begin to see and appreciate people–and poems–for who and what they are.
Subscribe at https://ddinafriedman.substack.com

This morning, I’ve taken another step in returning to normalcy, writing with some of my favorite pals in the Forbes Library Zoom Group, where my friend and colleague, 

Oh well, I’ll tackle that issue later. First, I’ll have to think about the reframing. I’ll keep the current version, just in case, but in general, I like revision, which I think of as re-visiting, rather than correcting something that was previously wrong. I’ve recently discovered that in my piano life, as I re-visit pieces I struggled so hard with four years ago, like Beethoven’s Pathetique, I have a lot more facility in bringing them back. Frequent practicing has made my fingers stronger and more flexible, and I can focus less on the notes and more on the shadings of a piece, how I want to express it, which gets to the soul of the creative process–especially as I’ve learned to let go of the expectation that I’ll play every note and every rhythm perfectly and without bumps.