Matthew Zapruder on Ashbery

and a gale came and said
it is time to take all of you away
from the tops of the trees to the little houses
on little paths so startled
-from How to Continue, John Ashbery

Matthew Zapruder discusses John Ashbery's poem "How to Continue" with The Poetry Foundation.

This is one of my new favorite poems by Ashbery.

Listen to it here.

Read the complete text here.

A New Kind of Critic

Matthew Zapruder

Matthew Zapruder has written an article for The Poetry Foundation calling for a new kind of poetry critic. A critic that analyzes a poem based not on whether they like, dislike, or even fully understand a poem but instead bases their opinion on the choices the writer has made to create their work.

Read the complete piece here.

I took a workshop with the poet Dean Young at Sarah Lawrence College a couple of summers ago and one of the first things he had us do was strike out "I like" or "I don't like" from our vocabularies when talking about each others poems. That was easier said than done since our subjective gut reactions were often so ingrained in our responses.

But over time we began discussing the poems in more unfamiliar ways, including trying to understand what type of poems they were, whether they reminded us of other works, what traditions they were following, whether certain choices risked alienating a reader or if more ambiguity would add a certain je ne sais quoi. Last year I also had a workshop class with Zapruder and he challenged us to analyze poems in a similar fashion.

In high school we were taught to analyze a work of literature by looking at the plot, whether we related to the characters, and yes, if we liked or disliked it and why. And that was that. While these techniques are helpful to a certain extent, I find it immensely more interesting to also dissect a work of art in the way I was taught by Young and Zapruder.

I was shocked, then, to see how strongly people have reacted to Zapruder's piece. The comment board right now has about sixty posts and many of them are calling out for blood for what seemed to be a very earnest plea.

At one point, Zapruder uses the art world as a springboard to jump into a discussion of poetry. For myself, I find music to be another helpful tool. The word 'poetry' encompasses a multitude of genres just the way 'music' does.

In college I took a music appreciation course and learned about the finer points of different musical genres, listening to the likes of Handel's Water Music to Mozart's The Marriage of Figaro to Bernstein's West Side Story. Dissecting musical pieces helped me understand them and love them that much more.

That being said, I enjoy certain types of music more than others but I'd like to think that I'm open enough to appreciate a wide variety of styles and genres. I like Elvis just as much as I like Tom Waits. I like John Cage and Philip Glass but I also enjoy Beethoven and Hayden. I'm a fan of The Silver Jews and The Decemberists but I'm not ashamed to say I also bounce my head to tunes by Lady Gaga and Katy Perry. Patti Smith or Ella Fitzgerald? Why not both? Not all music is created equal but all these artists bring something different to the table.

The same can be said about the richness and variety of poetry. I can enjoy Gertrude Stein one day and look to Elizabeth Bishop the next. I'll look for inspiration from Russell Edson and James Tate and then I'll go to Billy Collins. I'm not saying that I love all these poets equally, I just appreciate different qualities from each of them depending on my mood.

It is simply ridiculous to say whether an epic poem is better than haiku. Or comparing a sonnet to a concrete poem, let's say, is like comparing a birthday cake to a necklace. They are all poetic genres that add to the language of poetry as a whole. Dismissing a poem just because you don't understand it or don't immediately like it is a real shame. I'm not saying we shouldn't listen to that gut feeling right away when we approach a new work of art only that sometimes it takes time for art to make a true impression.

As one can see from my own post and the comments Zapruder's piece received, people are still passionate about their poetry. Unfortunately, they are also dead set on defining what poetry should and shouldn't do. One can only hope that people keep an open mind. I know I'll try.

Visual Poetry

Did you catch the lovely visual poetry section edited by Geof Huth in the November 2008 issue of Poetry Magazine? If you missed it, you can still view it online here.

I noticed there were a few Canadians among the contributors, including derek beaulieu whose work can be found online in pax americana 9: pax americanada and in our 2nd print issue. Do check them out.

Poesy Ain't Easy

Tired of plot and pacing, prose writer Steve Almond immersed himself in the world of verse for a year thinking it would be a piece of cake only to discover that poesy ain't easy. The Poetry Foundation has an interesting essay by him that takes a look at his not-so-rosy attempt at becoming a serial beret-wearer. They also have a podcast up of Almond that's worth checking out if only to hear some of his writing samples.

From The Poetry Foundation:

In the fall of 1997, I moved to a partially renovated one-bedroom apartment in Somerville. This struck me as a fine place to lick my wounds after the glorious persecutions of grad school. I was a short story writer and a failure and a masochist and I felt certain, within a month or so of my arrival, that poetry—what I took to be its particular brand of exalted suffering—was just the thing to cure me.

I knew next to nothing about versification, but I was crazy for enjambment, a device suited to my lust for the easy gimmick. I enjoyed using terms like “good line” and “syntactical pivot.” In more hysterical moments, I imagined they might get me laid.

I was constantly composing such dreck. I set myself the task of one poem a day and stumbled around in my underpants, pooping out pale imitations of Auden and Philip Levine. I was the Dale Carnegie of poetry: dogged and well-meaning, with no sense of occasion. I was prepared to make anything into a poem, because a poem was just a suite of words designed to express how deeply empathic and observant the poet was.

More here.

Listen to Steve Almond on the Poetry Off the Shelf podcast here.

Poetry Shortcuts

The folks at The Poetry Foundation have a piece up that lists eight shortcuts on writing poetry. Funny stuff, however, now that they've divulged all our secrets, kneecaps are going to have to be broken...

From The Poetry Foundation:

1. Animals and Your Soul
If you’re like most people, baring your soul is tough, so the first thing you should do is get yourself an avatar from the animal world on which you can project your fears, your loves, and, most importantly, your festering hates. We suggest finding an outcast member of the animal kingdom to represent your soul’s voice. Perhaps start with a lemur. Say what you really want to say, but as a lemur might say it. Everyone will be all “Wow, I’ve never read a poem from a lemur’s perspective before!”

More here.

Matthea Harvey Animated Poem

There's a pretty cool animated poem by Matthea Harvey on the Poetry Foundation website from Poetry Everywhere. The poem is called "Shiver and You Have Weather".

View the video here and read the complete poem here.

Interview with Matthea Harvey

Photo by R. Casper

I attended the National Book Critics Circle Award finalists reading yesterday and was glad to have heard Matthea Harvey read a few excerpts from her amazing book, Modern Life.

I wish they would have given the readers more than five minutes to read their excerpts but I guess it's better than nothing. I wasn't familiar with the other poetry finalists, except for Mary Jo Bang, but I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that Harvey takes home the prize.

The poems that make up Modern Life are a pleasure to read and reread - for me anyway - because of the unsettling, bizarre, and often hilarious universes Harvey creates. From flowers made of ham, graffiti-spraying Griffins, a poem from the point of view of ship figureheads, a Robo-Boy, to the post-apocalyptic "Terror of the Future/The Future of Terror " abecedarian sections. Pick up a copy if can.

From The Poetry Foundation:

Matthea Harvey’s latest book, Modern Life, a finalist for the National Book Critics Circle Award, is obsessed with devastated worlds and hybrid forms of life. Her poems have always teemed with witty wordplay, but now they come with an undercurrent of trauma. In two extended abecedarian sequences, the “Terror of the Future” and “The Future of Terror,” Harvey explores the dysfunction between civilian and military populations in a stark, futuristic environment. In the “Robo-Boy” series of poems, a robot-boy struggles to define himself in human terms while confronting a brutal and confusing world.

Read Matthea Harvey interviewed by Jeannine Hall Gailey.

Visit Matthea Harvey's website here, where you can find written and audio samples of some of her poems.

Read a review of Harvey's Modern Life from The New York Times here.

Valentine's Poems

Even though love shouldn't be committed to one day of commercial celebration, for those of you who celebrate it, Happy Valentine's Day! To those who don't, have yourselves a happy day, too. Just non-valentine-y.

For those of you interested, The Poetry Foundation has set up a page that contains a wide variety of poems for all your Valentine's needs, be they romantic, erotic, funny, or for you cynics out there, breakup-themed.

Just a suggestion, check out the audio version of Billy Collins' poem "Litany" which is both romantic and coolly ironic.

Read "Litany" by Billy Collins and here's a printable version of said poem. Stick it on your fridge!

View The Poetry Foundation's Valentine's Poems.

Sylvia Plath (1932 - 1963)

Sylvia Plath, arguably one of the greatest poets of the 20th century died 45 years ago, today. Plath's story, her troubled life, and stormy relationship with fellow poet Ted Hughes sometimes overshadows the genius of her work, still, her poetry remains as powerful today as it did when she was still alive.

Recently on the Poetry Off the Shelf podcast, they took a close look at one of the last poems Plath ever wrote entitled, "Fever 103°", and we are also given the opportunity to hear her give a reading. Give it a listen, Plath's delivery is simply chilling.

Listen to Gimme Fever: Burning at a hundred and three with Sylvia Plath.

David Trinidad's Doll Collection

David Trinidad's recent pop culture infused collection, The Late Show, is both hilarious and touching. I would definitely recommend it to anyone who appreciates work by the likes of Frank O' Hara, Elaine Equi, Ron Padgett, etc.

The Poetry Foundation has an interesting interview with Trinidad, who opens up about his unique collections, particularly his Barbie collection.

Read it here.

Also check out Trinidad's heartbreaking sestina, "Playing With Dolls."

New Years Day 2008

Listen to "On New Years Day" by Marge Piercy.

Happy Holidays

It's that time of the year again, folks. Winter is officially upon us so here is some Christmas and snow related goodness courtesy of The Poetry Foundation. I want to wish you all the best for the holidays and a happy new year.

Read "Blizzard" by William Carlos Williams.

Read "December 26" by Kenn Nesbitt.

Read "December Substitute" by Kenn Nesbitt.

Listen to Christmas Memories: Podcast featuring poems by Ed Skoog and Wyatt Prunty.

Skeletons in the closet

I collect antique & rare books, as well as author's signatures but that's pretty tame. The Poetry Foundation, however, has been doing a series of interviews with poets who collect things and you'd be surprised by what you'd find in some poets' homes. For instance, Albert Goldbarth collects robots and Jeanne Marie Beaumont collects dolls. The most recent piece interviews Richard Silken and his collection of, wait for it, bones.

From The Poetry Foundation:

Most of the bones in my collection I have found; some of them have been presents. The one that looks the funniest was a present. It’s a manatee skull. It’s just a dodo of a skull, and a manatee is a dodo-looking animal. I love that. I have a Bengal tiger skull, lots of little tiny rodent bones, and skulls from owl kill—I have jars and jars of those. I have an entire cat skeleton, a whole jar of fish vertebra that are almost the same size—like poker chips—an alligator skull, a mountain lion skull, tens and tens of deer skulls, and several of the skulls from our horses. Not including the tiny ones, which would be hundreds, I have maybe 35 or 40 skulls. Some of them are hanging in the garage. The ones that are really beautiful and well cured are in the kitchen, or they’re on bookshelves. Some of them are just in boxes. I try to keep similar ones all together. I have a lot of coyote skulls and those are all together, though the lower jawbones are all mixed up. So some of them are really well taken care of and then some aren’t.

Read the full interview with Richard Silken here.

Poetry and Sax

Billy Collins riffs on the sensual sound of the saxophone: "There's something nocturnal about the sound, something literally horny..." Listen to Collins read his poem "The Invention of the Saxophone" and then listen to the poem set to music by composer Pierre Jalbert. The piece was written for alto sax, piano, and spoken voice. Enjoy!

Memory is the bad breath of time

"Memory is the bad breath of time", "Memory is the repository of the mediocre", "Is poetry, in general, more like a crayfish or a waterfall?": Listen to a serious (or perhaps not-so-serious) phone conversation between poets Tony Hoagland and Dean Young. I snatched up Young's recent collection of poetry - the oddly named Embryoyo - and have yet to sit down and really read it but if Young's conversation with Hoagland is any indication of his style, I think Embryoyo is going to be a fun and bumpy ride.

Listen to Tony Hoagland and Dean Young having a phone conversation, courtesy of The Poetry Foundation.

Does the New Yorker REALLY care about poetry?

From the New York Times:

The history of American poetry, like the history of America itself, is a story of ingenuity, sacrifice, hard work and sticking it to people when they least expect it. Whether it’s Ezra Pound dismissing his benefactor Amy Lowell as a “hippopoetess” or Yvor Winters accusing his friend Hart Crane of possessing flaws akin to a “public catastrophe,” you can count on the occasional bushwhacking in the land of what Horace called “the touchy tribe.”

The most recent such assault — and the most surprising in years — took the form of a 6,500-word article in The New Yorker last month by the poet Dana Goodyear, who is also a New Yorker editor. Goodyear’s subject was the Chicago-based Poetry Foundation, which received an unexpected (to put it mildly) bequest of roughly $200 million from Ruth Lilly in 2001. The article focuses on the Poetry Foundation’s president, John Barr, but Goodyear also takes on Poetry magazine, its founder Harriet Monroe, the Poetry Foundation Web site, legal proceedings relating to Lilly’s bequest, Ruth Lilly herself, the various objects collected by Ruth Lilly’s father (toy soldiers, gold coins), the price of real estate in Chicago and the stuff rich people wear at parties (a “crisp white shirt” or “coral lipstick,” apparently). It is a very long article...

This essay by David Orr is a great follow-up to Goodyear's New Yorker piece. Read the complete NY Times article here.

UPDATE - In case you can't read Orr's essay, it seems to be available online now only if you register as a member for the NY Times.

Poetry: A Laughing Matter

The current issue of The New Yorker has a scathing article on the Poetry Foundation by Dana Goodyear. In it, Goodyear sheds some light on the controversial creation of the Poetry Foundation, which was created after Indianapolis heiress, Ruth Lilly, gave a whopping two hundred million dollars to Poetry magazine in 2002.

John Barr, a former Wall Street executive and the current president of the Poetry Foundation, is portrayed by Goodyear as a profit-hungry executive. Portraits of several other Poetry employees are equally unflattering.

For myself, Mr. Barr's true intentions for the Poetry Foundation and for poetry in general are unknown. He could - for all I know - honestly be interested in bringing poetry to a wider audience. He could also be the "businessman poet" Goodyear makes him out to be, solely interested in poetry from a profit and marketing standpoint. I don't know. I also certainly don't condone the foundations apparent sneaky maneuvering in acquiring Mrs. Lilly's philanthropic "gift".

I am, however, bothered by Goodyear's and a number of critics' disdain for so-called "accessible poetry" which seemingly becomes synonymous with commercial poetry. It reeks of elitism. Poetry apparently shouldn't be available to the masses but only limited to a select few. Not only that but the implication is that poetry has to be "serious" and certainly not entertaining.

J.D. McClatchy, poet and editor of The Yale Review says:

"The aura of mediocrity has settled like a fog over the business of the foundation [...] Children’s poetry? Funny poetry? If those are a way for the foundation to carve a niche for itself, it’s a shallow one and too low down on the wall. It signals a lack of ambition and seriousness that may ultimately be fatal."

What's wrong with children's poetry and humorous poetry? Apparently a good poet has to be serious. Sounds a lot like the Academy Awards - countless awards have been given to less-deserving films because the actors overact, frown, cry, scream, and so on, only for amazing comedies and satires to get shunned completely. It's a travesty in Hollywood and it's a travesty in Poetry-land too.

Since it is W. H. Auden's centenary and I recently read a lot of his verse, I'd like to point out some interesting tidbits of information on our friend, Wystan. He wrote poems of great profundity, and this includes light verse, which incorporated rhythms of traditional ballads, popular songs, dirty limericks, and children's rhymes. He was aware that readers change their minds and one day they enjoy tragedy and in another comedy. In "Letter to Lord Byron", he writes, "Only on varied diet can we live./ The pious fable and the dirty story/ share in the total literary glory."

Auden is, of course, not the only poet or writer to experiment with straight-forward, accessible language, forms, and themes. What about Chaucer, Dryden, and Alexander Pope (who was the first English poet to make a living off his poetry). What of poets like William Carlos Williams, Frank O' Hara, Kenneth Koch, and Elizabeth Bishop? Read Bishop's poem "Sestina" and while it isn't necessarily humorous - I refer more to its deceptive simpleness - she can also be very funny. Aren't Charles Simic and Mark Strand sometimes funny? In terms of contemporary poetry that thrives on high/low culture and comedy, we are graced with poets like Paul Violi, David Lehman, David McGimpsey, and the surreal, McSweeney's-esque verse of James Tate. Last, but certainly not least, is the controversial and popular Billy Collins. His critics accuse his verse of being "poetry-light" and too accessible (Collins doesn't like the word accessible but rather considers his poetry hospitable) but I would be upset too if I was struggling with my works only to find out that Collins had sold, according to Goodyear's article, more than five hundred thousand books, which in terms of poetry sales is mind-boggling. Why is it that we celebrate an artist when they're struggling or relative unknowns and more often than not, bemoan them when they become popular or start making money?

I disagree wholeheartedly with the notion that accessibility equals mediocrity. Humorous or entertaining verse shouldn't be looked at like the red-headed stepchild of poetry. Pushing general readers away will only further the notion that poetry is difficult, boring, too academic, and all the rest of the negative stereotypes that all too often plague poetry. Poetry shouldn't have to hide in the fringes but should take a chance, step out into the sun - pasty skin and all - and go forth into the world and not take itself so seriously.