By HD Silversmith
Rather later in the day than I had intended (because, well, first I had to sleep in, and then I had to take a nap -- it's been a genuinely exhausting week), I've settled down to Day 1 of revising my article-in-progress (AIP).
And I'm "hmph"-ing my way through it.
Which is to say, I'm snarking at the editorial feedback I received on the article back in October. And it's ridiculous on my part, because two of the three reviews are uniformly positive, and the third isn't all that negative -- it simply objected to certain elements that are actually reasonably easy to address, rework, reframe, or eliminate.
Yet here I sit, huffing and puffing indignantly at the third reader's comments -- or at least the ones that seem condescending to me: "Quite simply, I expect those working with film to draw upon appropriate sources." This, in regards to a comment I made about a user's remark on imbd.com -- which I cited not as an authoritative source, mind you, but as symptomatic of popular response to a given film.
But, um, why let myself get so hot and bothered about that comment? Either I need to make the point of including that user's remark more clearly, or I need to delete it. What I don't need to do is get defensive, because, whoa, life's too short, and the piece is too good to let some minor quibbling get in the way of its publication.
And that's where I achieved my victory moment of the day -- i.e., in realizing that yes, the basic article is good. It can be improved, and that's what I'm doing. But by hook or by crook it's going back out the door next Friday and back into the arms of the editorial board -- which recommended I resubmit it.
Golly, though ... I feel like taking another nap! ;) Having an ego -- even an underdeveloped one like mine -- is so exhausting!
