At last, a reply to one of my submissions.
It's a rejection, but rather than being miffed or upset I'm actually quite delighted! It's a letter from Chapman, Scotland's quality literary magazine. I knew I was being extremely optimistic when I sent my poems in to Chapman, but where's the harm in aiming high! I got a lovely letter back from the editor, Joy Hendry, saying that my poems had reached the 'final selection'.
The letter says: "I very much like these poems, and enjoyed reading them. You have real poetic talent. There's a lovely sense of the music of words, of rhythm and a sense of form and focus. Descriptively, these are first rate".
So what's the problem? The letter goes on to say "I'm looking for that extra 'something', a 'third dimension' of meaning, reference and relevance, which is largely missing here".
I can't disagree, what she points out has always been my weakness in writing. The question now is how to work on those areas in my poems, suggestions anyone? She also says that if I do any work on the poems I submitted she'd be happy to look at them again.
Of course I am disappointed not to get them published, but such a lovely rejection letter certainly softens the blow.