We must be careful to not get too attached to our work... except, we must be close to our art.  An air of disinterest doesn't produce wonderful stories or poems.  So, right there, is contradiction.  We need to be hot with inspirational passion and cold while editing/submitting.

Thick skin is required for rejection/criticism, but emotional connectivity is vital to capture intricacy in the human experience.  We are told we must have both, be both, simultaneously.

We are the creative types... who also have to sell our work (and sometimes ourselves, as people).  Less time is spent on marketing anyone who doesn't already HAVE a platform.  We're not supposed to let money interfere and just WRITE.  No conflicting signals there!

Follow the writing rules... until breaking them... makes... sense?
Everyone, I believe, starts more on one side of the conundrum teeter-totter than the other.  A really sensitive person can adjust, in time, to criticism.  A person better at selling can be more successful than a more creative person because he/she will keep pursuing opportunities the other won't.  We can balance out, somewhat.
We reach past the parts we stumble over simply because no other option exists if we truly desire this "writing life".

In what ways do you have to "reach" in your writing?  What contradictions about writing aggravate you?


  1. Money is the root of all distraction. Objectivity is essential for good analysis, but it's difficult to be objective with what we love.

    Tossing It Out

    1. So true on the objectivity sentiment. I suppose that's why writers claim critique groups and beta readers are essential.

      Money is a distraction but, for the writers who have to work two jobs to support their families, the need to profit is never-ending.
      In fact, that kind of brings me this Tuesday's post.

      Thanks for stopping by!