Learned Optimism in Action: Disputing “Rejection = Why Bother?”

One of the helpful aspects of The Irrepressible Writer workshops is the ability to see and hear other writers in the group learn to dispute their ‘pessimistic explanatory style‘. This post will bring part of that experience to you.

WARNING: It’s a long post (under 1000 words), but if I split it up into multiple posts, it won’t have the same impact. It’s the first of numerous “Learned Optimism in Action” posts to come that will provide experiential material for learning how to dispute your negative self-talk, or pessimistic explanatory style.

You can print out the dispute guidelines here, grab a blank piece of lined paper, and work along with Lila and me.

Lila, a poet, described feeling “writers block”. Her mood had been less than upbeat, and she’d been having trouble sitting down to write.

I asked Lila to fill in “A” on the dispute sheet (created by writing “A” on your blank notebook paper, or emailing me for your own copy!) symbolizing “adversity” and record the event or events that led to her mood and inability to work productively.

She wrote:

A: I submitted to a lot of literary journals last year, and all my poems were rejected.

That’s it – no frills, no extras, just the exact event that triggered the problem.

Then I asked Lila to complete “B” and write the exact words she said to herself about the event (her “belief”).

She wrote:

B: I thought my work was really good. My critique group told me it was ready. We were all obviously wrong. I sent it out to so many places. It must not be good at all, or I would have gotten an acceptance somewhere. My work is not as good as I thought it was.

I asked her to read these words out loud, in order to clearly determine “C”, the next category on the dispute sheet – the “consequences” of her belief.

When Lila read them out loud, she and every individual in the workshop could feel the impact. For most, it was a heaviness in the chest and a distinct awareness of the beginning of a depressed mood.

Go ahead. You read them out loud, too. How does it feel?

Right. Ugh.

So Lila filled in C: I’m intensely discouraged. I’ve worked so hard, and now I’m wondering what it was all for. Why do I bother? I thought I would be published by now, and at this point, I don’t even feel like working. I’m getting depressed.

A crucial issue, and invaluable contribution of cognitive and positive psychology to the science of human emotion, is that this pessimistic explanatory style (a term popularized by Martin Seligman in LEARNED OPTIMISM) creates negative emotion.

Changing the language can change the emotion.

But how to do that? There are a number of ways to ‘dispute’.

Using facts is a reliable way, and that’s what we did here.

Of course, Lila thought her negative statement was true. But let’s explore:

Look at Lila’s B statement again:

I thought my work was really good. My critique group told me it was ready. We were all obviously wrong. I sent it out to so many places. It must not be good at all, or I would have gotten an acceptance somewhere. My work is not as good as I thought it was.

Here were some of my questions:

• How many poems comprise “my work”?
• What does “really good” mean to you?
• Are the other writers in your critique group experienced poets?
• What does “by now” mean?
• How many is “so many”?
• Were you familiar with the work in the journals you submitted to?

Martin Seligman speaks about the “vocabulary” of pessimistic explanatory style, and we can see some of the characteristics of that vocabulary here. The phrases are global and vague.

As Lila answered the questions, we could see her face change. She began to realize that her negativity was not fact-based. Here is her dispute in action:

“I’m talking about four or five poems that I’d worked on for about a year. I do feel that they’re well-done, but honestly, all of my critique partners are at the same level as I am, so perhaps their judgment is not the final word. And I sent the poems to about ten literary journals. I was familiar with some of them, but not all.”

NOTE HOW IMPORTANT FACTS ARE HERE!

Here was the initial statement:

I submitted to a lot of literary journals last year, and all my poems were rejected.

Here are the FACTS of her dispute:

• I submitted a few poems to a few of the many literary journals that exist, and I was not even familiar with some of those I sent to. That in itself limits the possibility of acceptance.
• Ten submissions is not “a lot” in the publishing world.
• I may decide to have a consult with a more experienced poet to see whether in fact my poems are ready for submission, or need further work.
• One year is not a long time in the publishing world, and I shouldn’t use this time period as if it’s proof that I’ll never be published.

As Lila spoke these new words out loud, her mood changed. In fact, the whole mood around the table lifted.

She completed the “E” section of the dispute sheet, symbolizing “energization”: “I do feel energized. Excited to go back to work. Optimistic about the possibilities – I was just thinking incorrectly.”

The power that human thought has over human emotion is neither magical nor mysterious, yet to me, still amazing.

If you don’t have them, you can learn the skills to “change your mind and [change] your life” (Martin Seligman, LEARNED OPTIMISM).

What are the words you use to yourself that feel so true – but may not be, after all?

(all photos by Carol Coven Grannick)

More from Carol Grannick

• Three Things You Need to Become a More Resilient Writer
• How to Dispute Pessimistic Thinking
• Jealous Much? THIRD in a series to help you turn jealousy into inspiration
• Rejection Dejection: Not Ready to Rebound?
• Clean Your Closet – It Might Be Good for Writer’s Block!