How does one get to be a part of the dialogue?
Publishing. Could there be a more loaded word? It’s loaded with hopes and dreams of getting vetted by selection. Vindication leading to canonization and being part of the conversation. For my day job, I am a journalist. Journalists talk a lot about a few of these aspects — namely, selection, vetting and conversation.
How do you know what is a good source? Journalists are trained how to find them and judge their merit. If a poem is a good one, you won’t need to worry about this. You will open up to a good poem, get a burst of energy from it. (At least that is how I am describing what happens to me today.)
Next to vetting, being part of the conversation is the other key element of publishing. This is what I hunger for most–an exchange of ideas with people who aren’t just your friends, neighbors or family members. You get honest feedback from strangers who come across your work. That conversation can be immediate (blogs, Twitter, etc.) or it can come down through generations.
So how does one get to be a part of the dialogue? That is the question I am posing. The answer isn’t as obvious as it used to be. A tidal wave of change is coming!
This Post Has 19 Comments
Comments are closed.
Gene, it will be interesting to see how different these times turn out to be in the long run.
Maybe I’m mistaken in my assumption, but I’m assuming you mean that self-publishing on electronic media is one wave of the future. Be that as it may, it makes me wonder if there might not be a “Gresham’s Law” of poetry, which might say something like “bad poetry tends to drive out good” (at least in terms of momentary popularity).
For better or worse, over the long run of time, time tends to pare down, for whatever reasons, what survives in the arts in terms of what continues to be enjoyed, studied and thought of as significant, whatever that significance may be.
I came across an interesting diatribe recently by Geoffrey Hill about the current British Poet Laureate, Carol Ann Duffy. I haven’t followed the disagreements back through all the previous statements made on both sides, but apparently Ms. Duffy made some statement to the effect that poetry is a form of texting. To which Mr. Hill replied (his reply included below in an excerpt from an article in the Guardian):
Taking umbrage with an interview the laureate gave to the Guardian in September 2011 , in which she said that “the poem is a form of texting … it’s the original text”, Hill sonorously laid out his reasons for disagreeing to gathered students.
“When the laureate speaks to the Guardian columnist to the tremendous potential for a vital new poetry to be drawn from the practice of texting she is policing her patch, and when I beg her with all due respect to her high office to consider that she might be wrong, I am policing mine,” said Hill, in a lecture entitled “Poetry, Policing and Public Order”. The Oxford professor of poetry has previously described difficult poems as “the most democratic because you are doing your audience the honour of supposing they are intelligent human beings”, saying that “so much of the popular poetry of today treats people as if they were fools”.
Speaking in Oxford, he said that he “would not agree that texting is a saying of more with less, and that it in this respect works as a poem”. “As the laureate says, poetry is condensed. Text is not condensed, it is truncated,” said Hill. “What is more it is normally an affectation of brevity; to express to as 2 and you as u intensifies nothing. Texting is like the old ticker tape: highly dramatic and intense if it’s reporting the Wall Street Crash or the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour, not through any inherent virtue of the machine. Is the breaking news which runs at the foot of the screen on the BBC news channel condensed and consequently poetic? I fail to see how anyone could rationally claim that it is. Again texting is linear only. Poetry is lines in depth designed to be seen in relation or in deliberate disrelation to lines above and below.”
[end of excerpt]
Here is the link to the Guardian article quoted from above:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/jan/31/carol-ann-duffy-oxford-professory-poetry
I’m not sure this addresses any aspect of the coming change you allude to Gene. But I find myself agreeing with Mr. Hill more than not.
Larry
And next along these lines is to answer Michele…What exactly do I mean by a tidal wave of change?
Don,
I absolutely agree! Speaking personally, I have learned so much from posting here, and I get great feedback. But while you and I are talking specifically about our experiences, what about on another level, broader scope?
Larry,
There are many poets who published their own first books besides Wordsworth/Coleridge, and W. H. Auden. Wallace Stevens and William Carlos Williams come to mind. But I agree that in the past the majority of self-published poets were not taken seriously. But these are different times.
Gene
Regarding being part of the discussion: it depends on which discussion one wants to be a part of, and how involved in that discussion one wants to be.
I do believe journalism editors, whether that journalism is published in print or online, also still have a say in what constitutes a good source, in addition to the journalist/reporter who proposes a source as being a good source. Although there are independent bloggers who act as their own editors, and have broken legitimate stories from sources they accepted as being ‘good’. However, those stories are then ‘vetted’ by others for accuracy. I’m not sure that a self-published poem can be vetted in quite the same way. Two instances of poets that come to mind who self-published their first volumes are Wordsworth/Coleridge, and W. H. Auden. However, the majority of self-published poets are not taken quite so seriously as they were.
It is always gratifying to have writing, in this case poetry/haiku, accepted by a magazine/journal that one respects. And even established poets, whose work is highly respected, have had poems rejected by publications that have previously accepted their work, and later accepted subsequent work of theirs.
Regarding one aspect of Robert Wilson’s remarks: I would appreciate a clarification by him of what he means by ‘deep’. If he means ‘profound’, not every haiku need be profound to be enjoyable and interesting to read. Basho wrote several decidedly unprofound haiku, and I’ve never had the impression that he thought any less of these than of his more ‘profound’ haiku, at least his haiku that we take as being profound today. However, if Mr. Wilson means by ‘deep’ the opposite of ‘trivial’, then I agree with that. Trivial haiku are generally not enjoyable to read, except perhaps by people whose imaginations are limited by formulaic expression of formulaic responses to things. Or to put it another way, as I heard a poet say recently, regarding the motive behind the Imagist movement in early 20th-century English-language poetry, the Imagists were attempting to avoid “stock phrases for received ideas.”
Larry
An interesting comment, Lee. I’m not even going to address stylistic differences in Japanese haiku, since I don’t know enough about it, although there are hints in various English-language sources. Also, in Japanese haiku, there are ‘schools’, even currently, and members of haiku ‘schools’ are expected to write haiku in the style of their ‘school’ of haiku.
In English-language haiku, there are no ‘schools’ that I am aware of, except maybe ‘old school’ and everything else. However, I do think that English-language haikuists can distinguish themselves to a certain extent by favoring particular subject matter, and by some stylistic components, such as vocabulary, and the employment of various elements of English-language prosody.
However, you talk about ‘creativity’ and there being little space for it in writing haiku. I disagree with that. Truly creative people have the ability to see things from a distinct perspective, however small that distinctness may be, and the best are able to express that distinctness. In this matter, context is very important. Do all of the following frogs sound alike?
Saigyou no you ni suwatte naku kawazu
The frog
Sitting and singing
Like Saigyo.
–Issa, trans. Blyth
haru wa naku natsu no kawazu wa hoe ni keri
In spring, frogs sing;
In summer,
They bark.
–Onitsura, trans. Blyth
hashi wa aru hito ni shizumaru kawazu kana
Someone passed over the bridge,
And all the frogs
Were quiet.
–Ryouto, trans. Blyth
hi wa hi kure yo yo wa yo ake yo to naku kawazu
By day, “Darken day,”
By night, “Brighten into light,”
Chant the frogs.
–Buson, trans. Blyth
oshioute naku to kikoyuru kawazu kana
From their croaking,
The frogs sound as if
Elbowing one another.
–Hokushi, trans. Blyth
ta wo urite itodo nerarenu kawazu kana
After selling the field,
All the more I could not sleep,—
The voices of the frogs.
–Hokushi, trans. Blyth
sono koe de hitotsu odore yo naku kawazu
With that voice,
Give us a little dance,
Croaking frog.
–Issa, trans. Blyth
matsu-kaze wo uchikoshite kiku kawazu kana
Above the noise
Of the gale in the pine-trees,
The voices of the frogs.
–Jousou, trans. Blyth
tatazumeba touku mo kikoyu kawazu kana
Standing still,—
The voices of the frogs
Heard also in the distance.
–Buson, trans. Blyth
waga iyo ya kawazu shote kara oi wo naku
Round my hut,
From the first,
The frogs sang of old age.
–Issa, trans. Blyth
And finally, although not about frogs:
sen no mushi naku ippiki no kuruinaki
among thousands
of singing insects, one
singing out of tune
–Takajo, trans. Ueda
Larry
An interesting comment, Lee. I’m not even going to address stylistic differences in Japanese haiku, since I don’t know enough about it, although there are hints in various English-language sources. Also, in Japanese haiku, there are ‘schools’, even currently, and members of haiku ‘schools’ are expected to write haiku in the style of their ‘school’ of haiku.
In English-language haiku, there are no ‘schools’ that I am aware of, except maybe ‘old school’ and everything else. However, I do think that English-language haikuists can distinguish themselves to a certain extent by favoring particular subject matter, and by
Becoming a member of a forum is one of the very best ways of getting to know fellow poets, editors and publishers. In time, through trial and error, your poetry will improve – right along with your expanding friendships. Your voice will be read/heard. You will soon find yourself “part of the dialogue”.
best,
Don
new voices? every haiku sounds like every other haiku be they traditional
or experimental. there’s very little space for creativity in writing haiku. not
much different than sitting pond side. every frog sounds like every other frog.
Alan, I just reread your comment and appreciate what you say about new voices, whether from new or established writers. The new voice could also be writing what we know we are gifted to write — but better. As you say, “creating a body of work.”
One aspect of blogging that frees me to grow is the informal nature of the genre. I see new blogs all the time that are simply someone making a commitment to practice their art–and let others see their progress. I know this happens in journals and books too, over time.
Thanks, Ellen
Hi Peter, and others,
I’m reading the comments, as I hope others are too.
Yes, the pressure in ‘mainstream’ poetry is quite different. In fact, it’s not enough to be widely published and known, in poetry circles. Often a non-self-published collection is vital to have entered the scene, and get good reviews, and be offered an anthology editorship too.
Also, with many mainstream poets who teach, having a book out actually puts them in the next pay bracket, if teaching at universities, and makes a huge different to finances in order to write more.
I wouldn’t say that some quarters of the haiku writing world are free from certain publishing pressures, but I don’t need a haiku writer to have a book out to value their work. But others work differently.
I’m always looking out for new writers in the haiku genre(s) and don’t pay as much attention to what some call the fourth line (the author’s name).
To be frank, I see the fourth line as the blank space, and the fifth line as the author’s name and I’m equally excited to see someone not yet known, writing haiku that captures my eye as a reader and as an editor.
But there are pressures re publication, but you won’t get that from me. 🙂
I’m more interested in the writer, new or established, creating a body of work, not for effect, but creating a new voice.
Alan
I was just having the conversation about publishing poetry with another poet the other day. She is not a haiku poet but a relatively new free-verse poet trying to navigate the proper guidelines to see her poems make it into one of the many fine journals. I told her that one of the refreshing aspects I have discovered about the haiku community is that the pressure to publish is not there. Unlike the traditional Western poets of so many MFA programs and writers’ conference attendees. In some ways, we were having two different conversations about “getting our poems out there.”
Mention that you’re a poet and people ask: are you published? Add that you’re a haiku poet and their expression is one of near pity, if not confusion. I found that with that dismissal comes the freedom to express myself. Since no one’s really paying attention anyway, I can say whatever comes to mind. A poem about a pinwheel is as valid as one of Dickinson’s meditation on a meadow. In some ways haiku has allowed me to give permission to myself. In the high-pressure, ego-centered poetry ranks in which I found myself (mostly through my 20s) haiku came along and said “at ease.”
This sense of everyday familiarity is reinforced by the many social media outlets there are today. I am not a Facebooker but Twitter is appealing as a poet for the surprising number of top-quality writers publishing their poems via 140 characters. If you’re a haiku poet and you want to reach people–tweet. Or to begin with listen-in. Hear what people are singing about. And discern the real poem from the not-quite-there-yet poem.
Merrill brings up a good point about what lasts. True expression affects people on a visceral level. An emotional level. I believe good writing attracts its own attention. Its own following.
How do you get to be part of the dialogue? We’re all in the circle. Speak up and let your voice be heard. No one else can say what it is you have to say. Even if they wanted to. And I may be talking to myself here, by way of a reminder.
I’ve been rereading Madeleine L’Engle. It took a long time for “Wrinkle In Time” to find its publisher. She had times of despair but she couldn’t not write. I remember my mother saying to me when I was young, “If you’re a writer, you’ll write.” Staying creative is part of health for me as I grow older now.
I’m grateful for the people who understand how to get our poems to people who value them. That could be someone who just spent the day plowing a field here in Wisconsin, and/or someone in a big city. Every path is unique and changes too in every life, at least in my experience.
Thank you, Merrill, for sharing more about John and what lasts. Another good question, Gene. Good dialogue right here…Ellen
I guess I don’t write to be published. I write to express something to share with others and the dialogue begins there. I write to understand something and the dialogue may not come out as a direct interface with what I have written but in my interactions with others in other ways. I have a multifacited life. Each group has a different language so to speak. My art serves as part of the dialogue with each of these groups and intergroup understanding. Haiku has been helpful in all this…keeping things simple.
You know, I’ve recently been cleaning out my old shed. In that shed was a collection of the many ribbons John had won at so very many shows. His paintings were a joy to behold. He passed away in 1999 over a decade ago at the ripe old age of 93. So some of those ribbons were very old as well. He belonged to many prestigeouls clubs and I have many happy memories of meeting some very important people in the art world. Well, as I was sweeping out the shed I found that those ribbons had disintigrated for the most part of many were lying on the floor almost dust. John’s accomplishments were not in the ribbons… they were in the lives he touched.
(1) Re: “I am hoping that haiku can solve its identity crisis and become deep enough to rise above its Meiji reconstruction-like morass and gain the attention it deserves outside of Japan.”
There you go again, Robert D. Wilson. Like your stark, unsupported criticisms of Henderson, Blyth, and Yasuda in the “What if” conversation below, you have let loose another stern rebuke without exposition.
(2) Re: “Haiku selected for online publication is more often than not, a political animal, controlled by the good old boys and girls, who can be very vindictive. Prove me wrong.”
Who are these people, and what would it take to prove you wrong?
My question is, What does the reader gain from such abrupt indictments?
You are a fine, well-known poet yourself, and I would welcome and be educated by a serious discussion of those people, times, and haiku to which you refer, here and elsewhere.
Most haiku poets are self published. There is nothing wrong with this. I have done the same in the past. Haiku selected for online publication is more often than not, a political animal, controlled by the good old boys and girls, who can be very vindictive. Prove me wrong. Randy Brooks once told me that an English language haiku book selling 300 copies, is considered a best seller. Too much of what is published is seen through the eyes of a small close knit network, and not by the Ameican public who knows nothing about the HSA or the online journals and blogs, since haiku is not a popular genre in mainstream America. I am hoping that haiku can solve its identity crisis and become deep enough to rise above its Meiji reconstruction-like morass and gain the attention it deserves outside of Japan.
Robin Williams once said that the value of being on top comes in the form of who you get to run with. Robin Williams got to the top, so the people in his circle are also at the top. That improves his game. Williams gets feedback from people like Steve Martin…I wasn’t thinking about that when I wrote this…but it seems to pertain…
Hmm…I’m most curious about Gene’s final comment , “A tidal wave of change is coming!”
Could you elaborate, Gene?
Ive always felt that any social space could be compared to high school. You figure out who the cool kids are. The ones that matter to you. And that’s who you watch. Who you tag along with, sit with, join on a road trip, help out, be there for, share a sandwich with.
In the macroworld (high school being a microcosm) of modern times that’s who you follow on twitter, support at their events, figure out what you have in common, befriend. It takes some effort if you’re not actually compatible. But if you are, friendship is welcomed. Your invitation to dinner won’t look like stalking, and they’ll be happy to publish your poem in an upcoming edition, or share a reading with you, or tell their friends about yours, or write the intro to your book.