"Waxing Hot", Poetics Dialogue: Amy King (NYC, USA) & Adam Fieled (Philly, USA)
AK: Memorable Net moments: "Net epiphanies"— I can’t recall the first poet I discovered online, but I do remember one of my first great finds: Matthea Harvey’s two poems on La Petite Zine (http://www.lapetitezine.org/MattheaHarvey.htm) nearly sent me out of my mind. I still think fondly of Chairman Mao trying to land his “heli-car”. I suppose the epiphany, entered in the shape of that encounter, contrasts with then buying her first book, Pity the Bathtub Its Forced Embrace of the Human Form (wonderful title), and being less than thrilled – how could the traditionally less-than-legitimate online poems “rock my world” far more than an entire printed book of authentic contemporary verse?! That question, at this point, is rhetorical for most folks. Incidentally, I strongly recommend Sad Little Breathing Machine if you like Harvey’s LPZ poems.
Before and since then, I use the net to research poets I come across in “off-line” life to decide if I want to purchase their books. I also regularly surf online journals, magazines, and blogs to find new-to-me talent and remarkable poems – I suppose, as they say, since poets read poets, we simply can’t afford to buy the latest and greatest print journals on our salaries. Though it’s nice to hold a book in hand, I find it cheaper to print poems I like from online sources and carry those pages with me. Often these “printed finds” invoke the added pleasure of leaving the room with an exciting and unexpected gift, guilt free. Now and then, I leave standout internet poems on café tables or subway benches just to feel like I’m doing my part to spread the word (I’m sure I’m not alone here). One does not so readily abandon a recently-acquired ten dollar journal as a gift, no matter how thrilling the contents within or adamantly the desire to share compels.
I have made countless friends, inspired by people’s strategic use of the Internet to promote poetry, poets, community and all its perks – you among them.
AF: Thanks! I’ve had so many “Net epiphanies” over the last year that it’s hard to know where to start. Being in “JACKET” was the obvious starting point, but I’ve told that story before. At some point, I became obsessed with UK poetry & poets. I discovered a bunch of great UK poets all in a row: Todd Swift, Chris McCabe, Andrew Duncan, a few others; then interviewed them & published them in PFS Post. The whole process took about two months, & I recall being on cloud nine the entire time. It just so happens that Swifty, McCabe & Duncan all have books that are US-available (McCabe & Duncan on Salt), so I was able to get the books to match the poems I found online. I am, admittedly, an Anglophile; the UK is a “dream-land” for me; so interacting in a meaningful way with UK artists was & is a dream come true. That having been said, I’m surprised (& disappointed) that there isn’t more “back & forth” between US & UK poets; a lot of “pride & prejudice” playing into that, I’m sure. For me, becoming involved in the UK scene (mostly through Todd & Chris) has been “epiphanic”, indeed.
Another great “Net-find” that has blossomed into an interesting semi-partnership is Diana Magallon, who I first saw on Peter Philpott’s “Great Works” (www.greatworks.org.uk). I was knocked sideways by the inventive, quirky, spare-without-being-skeletal quality of her poems. I decided at some point that I wanted to get in touch with her. I don’t remember where I found her e-mail address but I did, & sent her a nice e-mail, to which she quickly responded. Since then, we’ve been in very regular contact. She’s been “curating” visual artists for me to publish on PFS Post; the first one being Italy’s Claudio Parentela. I’ve learned through corresponding with Diana that “virtual working partnerships” are a viable possibility. Later, I learned this same lesson with & from Lars Palm. We’ve just finished a chapbook length manuscript, & developing it was another “Net epiphany”. The first “Waxing Hot”, done with Chicago native Steve Halle, was an epiphany; hopefully, this one will be too!
AK: About “non-epiphanic” poetry readings-- my feeling is that, overall, the “performative” aspect of poetry readings isn’t weighed heavily enough to match the times. Don’t get me wrong: the tradition, in its basest form, simply states the poet read his or her work to an audience— easy enough. But these are trying times, and this century’s population grows more insatiable and consumer savvy with each passing year. We want to be titillated and/or influenced in a “walk-away-and-remember-that-line-or-image” way. Even more reductive: we want to be entertained. The poet’s presence sometimes satisfies, if said poet’s reputation precedes and said audience is properly invested in the work. Alas.
Mostly though, our live reading audiences are small because we rely on the “standard”, and the standard pretty much only “works” for those in the know. And even then, listening to poems read aloud doesn’t always move me the way the poem did from the page. I suppose that makes me sound like an impatient or demanding (or even shallow) listener, but I suspect I’m not alone.
Personally, I attend readings to find out something about the poet, and hopefully, enjoy discovering the auditory effect via the poetry’s vocal delivery (“flux de bouche”, baby!). I suppose I’m looking to learn a little of what makes that poet tick and write the poems he or she writes and maybe even catch a glimpse of the genius present in his/her presence. I like performance banter, in spite of more sophisticated connoisseurs complaining that it detracts from the poetry; I soak up conscious attempts to perform, however amateurish or polished; I enjoy chatting with or eavesdropping on the poet after a reading, etc. Perhaps my approach is sociological; but why else listen to a poet read poems you’ve already read if not to discover something about their character or hear the nuanced delivery of their poems or get a tiny sense of what that poet’s made of or moved by?
I guess that’s the long way of rambling around a simple observation that some readings are boring while others are more interesting because poets recognize the dramatic nature of doing a reading: “Here is the persona I am enacting for you vis-a-vis my poetry.” I won’t venture a percentage of readings that work or don’t – I’ve never done a formal or informal tally, and I’d be a hypocrite if I didn’t include myself in the less successful percentage. My performances aren’t always so noteworthy, though I’m working on it.
One more thing, I think part of the “Flarf” debates, though mostly focused on the merits, methods, and origins of Flarf, should primarily consider this performative cause (campaign?), if they haven’t already (I can’t keep up). Many Flarf poems don’t thrill or inspire or even titillate on the page. What really brings them to life are the poets reading them, or rather, performing them. The reason Flarf is even on my radar is because of the effort of poets to animate their poems in live readings and the online passion with which they defend their Flarf-y constructs. I realize they are manipulating pop culture fodder and general public sentiment on a whole other level, but not one that will make masterpieces (of course, qualifier: I am *so* generally speaking). Many of these poems, as time will tell, won’t float with the cream in a decade or two. Maybe they aren’t meant to, a debate I leave in other hands. But moreover, folks will fondly recall so-and-so’s performance at the Flarf festival or what-have-you, and that is worthy of discussion in my tiny opinion.
Finally, multi-media is always an answer insofar as it is one more medium to be explored and used. Many poets already do so expertly. Born Magazine immediately comes to mind as a pleasing example of the animated visual wedded with words. Laurie Anderson also uses multi-media to promote her music and ideology, which might seem dull or didactic otherwise. Unfortunately, poets, myself very much included, don’t have time or the patience to learn how to use the various programs and machines. But if multi-media might be an answer, I ask you, Adam, what then is the question?
AF: Well, the question is (or seems to be), how can poets develop performance techniques that will reduce the “snooze” factor? I’ve been taking a break from readings (after years of doing them all the time) because I’ve noticed that when I attend readings, almost invariably my attention drifts away. I can’t pay attention to the nuances of poems just from hearing them read (especially as they are often read, in a “weather report” drone). It seemed hypocritical to put people through the mild “ordeal” that I struggle through at readings, so I’ve just cut off that part of my literary life (though am I going to wind up doing some readings this year, willy-nilly). Mind you, there are exceptions—I saw Jeffrey Ethan Lee read at Robin’s Books in December, & it was quite mind-blowing. He has a long poem called Identity Papers, which recounts a violent incident he lived through in Brooklyn in the early 90s. In spare, viscerally exciting language, he tells a straight narrative, shot through with metaphors & traditional poetic imagery. It’s a dynamite combination, & Lee being a compelling reader with ample “stage magnetism” helps too. Still, that kind of reading is hard to come by, especially because so much post-avant poetry eschews narrative structure. For abstract work, L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E work, etc., there’s nothing for the listener to hold onto, no thread to move him or her from one place to another. That’s why good Centrist stuff often works better at readings than post-avant stuff; as “rote” as the “epiphanic I” is, at least we can tell what’s going on, make sense of the poem. Experimental stuff, sans any narrative thread, feels like vapor clouds passing through the air, nothing solid. That’s always my cue to doze off, catch a few winks.
I, personally, think multi-media may be the answer. When I was doing my Philly Free School shows, I worked with poet/photographer Jeremy Eric Tenenbaum, who likes to combine performance poetry & visuals in odd ways. Jeremy’s performances were very hit-or-miss, but when they worked, they were completely idiosyncratic & worthwhile. Jeremy would recite poetry to a pre-arranged video, often snippets of old movies or cut-ups from different commercials & other “kitsch” sources. In this way, he gave the audience something to look at (eyes get starved at poetry readings too, of course), & also listen to. Sometimes the video stuff would make sense with the poem being read, sometimes not; but oftentimes, I liked the “nonsensical” moments better. It took me into a kind of post-Dada trance, & in fact the whole vibe Jeremy was exploring could be called “Duchampian”; the videos were being presented as “ready-mades” to go along with the poems.
I think the whole idea of a poet-with-a-notebook-or-folder standing before a crowd is obsolete, more or less. It’s terminally uninteresting 75% of the time. Good readers know who they are; but most poets (I’ve found) are not particularly good readers. I think it would be funny if BPC were to pass a “multi-media law”; poets must “go multi-media” or be booted from the stage. It would save everyone a lot of boredom, agita, & time.
AK: As to where post-avant might be going; one thing I’ve noticed about younger poets is that they seem to be taking more risks and are writing a wide range of varying poetries. I don’t see any particular trend that everyone is practicing. One can point out pockets that deal with overtly political themes or language play that is political with a little “p” in a pinch, but no, there is no trend or theme that younger poets, as a group, are developing or pursuing.
Younger poets’ work runs a broad gamut that evidences a permission I suspect might be atypical to young poets of the past. Maybe I’m not giving our mainstream poets much credit, but I imagine the old methods for learning to write would entail emulating poets in the conventional fashion until one finds “one’s voice.” Today’s young poets, I think, are taking greater risks than their predecessors, perhaps because they aren’t concerned with cultivating an identifiable voice so that they might publish with the big press houses anymore. Of course, my own view of this phenomenon may be limited in scope vis-a-vis the poets I read on average – small presses proliferate these days and are resuscitating the world of poetry.
One benefit of these varying poetries means a greater awareness of poetry’s possibilities, which debunks the general myth that poetry exists to make the world a prettier, aesthetically pleasing place. I suppose that last sentence only notes the “Hallmarkization” of traditional poetry, but when I step outside of my social circle, I encounter, more often than not, this limited mentality. Young poets will eventually fill the work place and share their assorted poems with non-poets, thus broadening the concept of poetry at a grassroots level. As mentioned earlier, the integration of poetry with other technologies will also augment that appeal.
AF: I take all these points. I think the “small press” vs. “large press” question is interesting, for a number of reasons. Because poetry books sell in such miniscule quantities, is there really much difference? This leads me to the conclusion that poetry books have become, on some level, “empty signifiers”. The “action” must be somewhere else: online, at readings, or anywhere poetry is brought into a living, vital conversation. This might even be in an academic setting; I had a great experience at Penn, probably because poetry is clearly & demonstrably valued there. The “press” question also feeds into various “status myths” that are losing their potency. Publication in book form or in “elite” print journals used to be a fairly reliable success barometer—I think this is changing rapidly. Then, this might be a bit of sour grapes—I haven’t published a book yet. Perhaps when that happens I’ll “see the light” & not find poetry books to be more or less empty signifiers anymore.
As to what younger poets are writing; it seems that our generation is more experimental, “hotter”, more “live-wired” than previous generations. The young poets that are more “active”, who “put themselves out there”, seem to be mostly “avant-oriented”; the big print journals are still dominated by the Centrist Old Guard, whereas the bigger online journals (Jacket, Nth Position, Cordite, Word for Word) are pretty much evenly split between new voices & older ones. I’ve also noticed that “avant” has a broader contextual meaning than it used to; it encompasses a vast array of styles & approaches, from Language-y stuff to neo-formalist to minimalist to just plain demented. Shampoo would be a good place to get an “index” on younger poets going. Everything I’ve mentioned is pretty much right there.
