I received a couple of invitations last month, for 3rd Muse to be a co-sponsor of a poetry contest. Someone also suggested a little while ago that a poetry contest might be something I should consider running as part of 3rd Muse, whether as a one-off thing or on a regular basis. I have rather strong feelings about "contests of art", and after last month's invitations caused me once again to ponder the issue, (I must admit the added exposure stood as a temptation) I thought it might make a good topic for this editorial.

How can you have a "fair" contest between sides which cannot be put on a level playing field? Which cannot be judged side by side through application of some kind of uniform criteria? And the real question for me is not really "how", but "why"? Here's an example: could you judge the winner of a painting contest where the finalists included, say, Picasso, Rembrandt, Michaelangelo, Van Gogh, Klimt, and Schiele? More importantly, would the fact that one of those was chosen as the winner be meaningful in any way?

It might be an exaggeration to say that the profusion of contests, which seem to spring up everywhere, in all of the arts, and seem to receive so much attention and lauding from participants, organizers and lookers-on alike, seriously frightens me. But not by much. At the very least, it makes me feel decidedly uncomfortable, and somewhat melancholy. I hate to think that for some artists "winning" such a contest serves as a shortcut; I am frightened to think that such shortcuts may become, (are becoming) a "necessity" - a vital part of an artist's road to success. Because, it isn't fair. And again, more importantly, because the whole thing is a deception (as well as self-deception), and means nothing at all.

One argument against the above which pops to mind, is the question of how is selecting poems for publication, different from a "contest"? Is it essentially not the same thing? I guess one thing that separates it for me personally, is the simple distinction of not looking for "the best". Certain lines are drawn, yes, but there is a large margin for poets to "make it". There are no limits as to how many may be accepted (at least not in 3rd Muse). If I receive 20 good poems by 20 different poets in one month, all 20 will go into that month's issue. In other words, if I do happen to find Picasso, Rembrandt, Michaelangelo, Van Gogh, Klimt, and Schiele on my hands, I may feel free to publish them all, instead of sweating over the ridiculous task of picking "the one". I think most publications (if not all) share that distinction to some degree.

One other thing, by the way, you'll never see in 3rd Muse is a "Featured Poet". Again, my reasoning goes along the same lines - the only "decision" I feel the need to make as an editor, is whether a poem is good enough to be included. I see no need, and certainly do not wish to, attribute distinction beyond that. Otherwise, it feels essentially like saying, well, everyone in this issue deserves to be there, but this one guy deserves it a little bit more. Just doesn't quite sit right, does it?

For anyone who is interested in the print edition of 3rd Muse Poetry Journal, the July issue (Issue 2) is now out. Please see the Print Issue page for information on subscriptions or single issue orders, as well as to view the cover and list of poets included.

Enjoy this month's issue.

Mark Melton
Editor,
3rd Muse Poetry Journal