World Class Poetry Blog

I love inspiring people. Though that’s not why I write. It certainly isn’t why I write poetry. But I got an e-mail yesterday telling me that I’ve inspired a local bookstore owner to start a blog. It made my day.

Jim Lewin runs the local independent bookstore and curiosity shop called The York Emporium. I’ve written about it before. It seems that he had a little too much to drink on New Year’s Eve (sorry Jim) and made a New Year’s Resolution to maintain a blog. He credits me as the inspiration (now I know he was drinking!).

Bookflaps is just the kind of blog we need. Already, Jim has written some interesting blog posts:

• 50 Cents (dated Dec. 24, 2008 - get the impression I’ve been drinking?)
• Raymond Chandler
• Year 4
• The neatest thing in the shop
• We have a ghost? (People in these parts are infatuated with ghosts)
• Ian Fleming
• The Stratemeyer Syndicate

These are just the type of blog posts you’d expect from an emporium. I love Jim’s ephemeral tone about vintage trivia - literary things that matter. I’m also looking forward to more of Jim’s very interesting tidbits about the books and things he sells at the Emporium. From time to time I stumble in just to be reminded of what a book store is supposed to smell like. And when I leave, I’m hardly a short pace away before I miss it. I have a feeling that’s the way I’ll come to see Bookflaps too.

You’ll notice that I’ve added Jim’s blog to my blogroll. I hope you’ll visit often, kick back, and enjoy a good read. Just don’t lose your cigarette in the velour.

A very sweet lady who attends my church, a couple of weeks ago, asked me if I’d heard of Dana Gioia. Of course, as my regular readers know, I have. She wanted to know how I knew of him and I spent about 30 minutes filling her ear with the war between New Formalism and Postmodernism and what role Gioia plays in that battle while people like myself are in the crossfire wishing there was a respectable debate going on. I think I may have overwhelmed her with more than she could handle.

The reason she asked was because she had read an article Gioia had written in which he argued that poets are the gatekeepers (my word, not his or hers) of language and that we should preserve language, not reinvent it. I told her that, while I respect that view, I don’t agree with it.

I have a huge problem, first off, with anyone telling me what I should be doing with my mode of expression. I am what I am and you can like it or not. But even more importantly, the world is in a constant state of change. As such, culture itself is always evolving. Art and literature are not only reflections of culture, but also co-creators of it. As the culture around us changes, we must be willing to change along with it, and that change manifests itself in two ways.

1. As recorders of culture and history, poets and literary artists struggle to paint the world as it is. There may be ideals communicated in the practice and pursuit of this, but even in the most fantastic of tales and verses, you can often find hints and evidence of the cultural influences that go into an artists work. This is as it should be.
2. The other way in which culture manifests itself in literature is through the personal eyes of the artist. Writers often come up with ideas before anyone else and communicate them in such a way that they leave a mark. Readers pick up a certain phrase or borrow an idea and share it with their friends. There are countless examples of writers who have coined a phrase or injected a culture with an idea that went viral.

You could easily call these two manifestations of culture in literature as impression and expression. First, the literary artist receives an impression of the surrounding culture then writes about it. The expression resulting from this can range in form from the very creative to the technical, from obscure to plain. But the expression is the writer’s way of giving back to the culture what the culture has fed him. The culture in turn rewards the artist with acceptance and approval. Sometimes, rejection can be its own reward as communicated in this quote from Normal Mailer:

There is no greater importance in all the world like knowing you are right and that the wave of the world is wrong, yet the wave crashes upon you. (from Armies Of The Night)

Even rejection can be a form of approval for a writer.

My point is that language changes. As culture changes so do the modes of expression. This is natural. Once, man drew pictures on the walls of caves. Now we digitize nearly everything. Our cave is a worldwide network of machines, not far from the Borg. Someday, it will be something else.

I respect the idea that artists are in the business of preserving language because, in a certain sense, it is true. We can’t just go around willy-nilly changing the meanings of common words and expecting people to understand what we are saying. If we use words in a different way than what is normally accepted, there should be a good reason for it. Otherwise, it’s just gibberish.

I don’t know if that’s what Dana Gioia meant. I haven’t read the article that my friend mentioned (though I’m quite familiar with Gioia’s ideas).

All of this is to say that I recently discovered that Webster’s New World Dictionary has selected its word of the year as it does every year. This year’s word is a newly coined word and isn’t in the dictionary at all. “Overshare” is a word that could only be used in a culture such as ours that is infatuated with making the personal public. Here’s a video that gives a little insight into the choice of the word. It’s interesting to hear what college students are saying and how they express themselves in struggling with a definition for this word. It will be interesting to see just when “overshare” makes it into the dictionary and how many different definitions it will garner for itself by that time.

Who decides whether a piece of literature is good or not? Is there a committee somewhere that decides by a process of selection? Does it allow for vote by proxy? Is there a monarch or a king that raises his scepter in approbation? Perhaps all the people of the world can gather together and conduct some magnificent survey. Or should we only allow those within the profession to be among the approving voices? If you win the Pulitzer or Pushcart or you a shoe-in? Can we vote you off the island if we don’t find your style or personality agreeable? How is literature, or poetry to be exact, determined to be of value?

This question has been at the forefront of literary analysis for most of history. That we are still discussing it is a testament to the difficulty of an answer. All of us, to be sure, have our tastes, our preferences, even our prejudices. We know what we like and we know what we don’t.

Perhaps we can say there is some kind of Akashic record that tallies all the ‘yea’ votes in the hearts of lit lovers from eons back to eons forward and at the end of time we will know who has received the most tallies. But would that be fair to those in late-coming centuries? Perhaps we can divide those tallies by an appropriate time measure and record an aggregated average.

This all may seem silly, but it’s a complicated matter. How much should we make technical considerations a part of the calculation? How about creativity? Imagination? Passion?

Quantifying a subjective is about as simple as picking up a handful of water. It may be that these are all the wrong questions. Is Shakespeare better than Homer? Will Walt Whitman win the award for most unique voice in history, or should that go to Aesop? Comparisons such as these, in literature, make about as much sense as playing baseball in zero gravity. But that is not to say that judging the value of poetry is impossible. I believe it is. Though that value is not computed by ordinary means.

How To Judge The Value Of Literature

There will always be someone who doesn’t like a great work of art. One person detests Moby Dick; another reads it cover to cover once a year. Someone else swears by Dickens while his sister-in-law calls him a senseless hack. Jane Austen may be brilliant to one reader, but quite nuts to another. Literature is, at its most basic, a subjective experience. As such, its value is personal.

But what if a million readers like a particular story or poem? Does it then have more value than the work that is enjoyed by merely one hundred? Not necessarily. Suppose those one hundred readers are contemporary readers to the artist and all personal friends to the author whose first book was published just last week. But in the former case, the million readers are readers that span the sequence of centuries for a timeless and well-known classic. There is hardly a comparison there now is there?

And that brings me to my point: The value of literature, though it be subjective, is intrinsically wrapped up in time. This, of course, must rule out those works that never see the light of day. If it is unpublished and remains so then no one can judge. But it’s entirely feasible, and has been done many times, that an artist can go a lifetime without receive the accolades of contemporaries only to enjoy achievements beyond imagination in the afterlife. Immortality may be in the realm of God, or the gods, but it is accessible to man by reputation.

Though time may be the variable involved, it would be a mistake to consider that value is based on some aggregation of fans. A million fans over the course of one hundred centuries doesn’t afford any special favors opposed to one hundred thousand fans over the same time period, or one hundred thousand fans over the course of one thousand years is no better than two hundred thousand over the course of three times as long. Rather, the time value of literature may be judged by how long a particular work or artist may enjoy a fanbase at all beyond their lifetime.

Writers who achieve great fame during their lifetimes then fade into oblivion may be good cultural artists, but their achievements pale in comparison to, say, Homer or Sappho. Literature may be subjective, but it is not wholly so, for it also bears a cultural imprint as well as an epochal one. It takes considerably more talent to be understood and valued cross-culturally during one period than it does to be understood and valued by a single culture of that same time period, but it also takes more talent to be understood and valued by a variety of cultures across time. Readers today understand Shakespeare because we understand courage, honor, deceit, love, and the human passions about which he wrote. But if knowledge of a particular culture or artifact is necessary in order to understand a literary work then when that culture or artifact is no longer alive people will find it difficult to relate. And that’s why I say that work which touches upon the human condition beyond a mere time and place is to be preferred over any other. It has more value to more people in more places and more times. It is that time value in which we can trust.

I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say that most literary artists, poets included, try in some way to “write for the market.” But I think this is a sorry way to write literature. Beyond sorry. It’s inane.

While all literature is in a certain sense targeted toward a particular market - try writing science fiction toward a general market or a romantic thriller aimed at whoever chooses to pick it up and read it - I’m not talking about smart demand-side marketing. I’m talking about creative juices flowing down the open vein. In other words, the creative muse doesn’t consult the aggregated public or take opinion polls.

I’m a firm believer in supply-side literature. This is lit that the artist writes without concern for what the market wants. I’ll leave that business to the large publishing houses, who have all virtually quit publishing poetry because “there is no market for it”. In actuality, there is, but it isn’t a profitable market. And profit is king. Isn’t it?

When it comes to truly lasting literature, the market is a white ghost. As faithful as Guinevere.

Markets by definition are transient and fleeting. Therefore, the literary artist who attempts to write for the market will produce literature that is transient and fleeting. It may sell today, but will anyone be able to give it away for free when the copyright expires? Likely not.

Writing For The Market - Good Enough For Will, Good Enough For …

I don’t mean to denigrate writers who write for money. I do that. It’s called ghostwriting. Or copywriting if you don’t believe in ghosts.

Digressions aside, though, the literary artist - as opposed to the ghostwriter, copywriter, and technical writer set - must decide if he is motivated by credits and residual income or by lasting value. Do you want your creations to stand the test of time or to test the standards of the time? You can’t have both (except by brutal accident).

I’m pretty certain William Shakespeare wrote for the market. It just so happened that his market was timeless. Is yours? Unless you are George Lucas, no.

The Only Kind Of Lit That Matters

This is not a rant against commercial markets or commercial literature. I have nothing against John Grisham or Nora Roberts. Billy Collins may have found his audience, but such success cases are rare (and getting rarer). The real issue is, What kind of literature do you want to produce? Are you interested in the temporal kind or name value eternal?

Of course, even aiming at the stars could end you in the gutter. Just because you write for lasting value doesn’t mean you’ll achieve it. You could still go down in history as a skill-less hack. But I still prefer to take my chances by writing the poetry that is within me rather than studying what might be “the next great thing”. When you write the type of literature I am talking about, the supply-side kind, then you stand a chance of being just as timeless as Shakespeare, but you are paving your own path. Good literature may ride on coattails, but great literature never does.

When Augusten Burroughs put Running With Scissors to quill and scroll, he wasn’t aiming for world-class marketing status. When Hunter S. Thompson shocked the world with his marvelous ride, he wasn’t shooting for most popular of the year. He was writing the story within. The only literature that really matters in the long run is supply-side lit. All else is here today, gone tomorrow. I’ll leave the markets for the birds without a perch.

And with that, Merry Christmas from the Supply Side!

I rarely enter contests. I just think there is something degrading about bearing the soul to strangers for a fee. Because there is always a contest entrance fee.

But when I’d heard that Dorianne Laux was to judge The Smoking Poet contest - the first annual - and the entrance fee was only $5, I decided to send them three of my poems. They weren’t necessarily the ones I’d consider “my best” poems, but they were poems that I thought were closest to the type of poetry that bears some semblance of affinity with the preferences of the judge, keeping in mind that there is no perfect way to measure another person’s preferences.

Nevertheless, I was elated to have received a rejection letter from The Smoking Poet editors and a thank you for participating. I wasn’t expecting that at all. I’ve never seen a rejection letter from a contest before. But keep in mind I’m using the term “rejection letter” loosely. Tell me if you think this reads like one:

Thank you, Allen, for being part of The Smoking Poet’s First Annual Poetry Contest. The final votes have come in from our panel of judges, and although your poetry did not make it into the top four selections, we wanted you to know that we enjoyed reading your work very much. From so many, many submissions, it was difficult to choose … but we hope you will submit to us again. Watch for our regular calls for submissions and more upcoming contests.

I don’t know if any of the other non-winners received the same rejection letter, or a similar one, but I thought it was nice of them to say that they enjoyed reading my work. Congratulations to the winners of the contest, and may your best poems be set in the future:

First Prize: “Northward” by Koh Xin Tian
Second Prize: “Sock Puppet” by Malcolm R. Campbell
Third Prize: “Reunion: 30 Years Too Late” by Lana Maht Wiggins
Honorable Mention: ”Selected Love Letters I’m Still Trying to Write” Kelli Russell Agondon

By the way, I love the name The Smoking Poet for a literary journal. It speaks rebellion.

For Christmas, Artella Land is getting creative with its pricing structure. They’re giving 55% off discounts on poetry e-books, art supplies, vintage ephemera, and other creative joys. Oh boy!

In the spirit of full disclosure, this won’t be for everyone. I find some of the artwork a little disconcerting and even some of the poetry. It’s not academic by any stretch, but if you’re the crafty sort of person who is into scrapbooking and digital art then this might be your bag.

The right words to describe Artella may be flighty, spirited, and leaning toward the feminine-right brain. I don’t mean any of that as an insult; it’s just a hairy-legged observation.

The Shoppes of Artella feature hundreds, maybe more, of products for all types of people, everything from fine art to fashion and jewelry to home decor. There are also books and recordings, cards and stationery, childrens products, supplies for artisans, educational resources, e-courses, and other miscellany. Artella Land also takes submissions for poetry and runs contests (I took third place in one in 2005 while in Iraq) and publishes a magazine that is distributed alternatively in digital format and print. A very unique product. If you have craft products of your own you can even sell them on commission.

As I said, this is a bit different than what most of us with academic backgrounds would be interested in, but if you enjoy sharing your art and poetic gifts then this might just be right for you. That’s why I don’t mind recommending Artella Land.

A couple of days ago I sent an e-mail to the administrator of Alltop and suggested they include some poetry sites that I felt should be aggregated along with World Class Poetry and some others. Here is the list I sent by e-mail:

• Silliman’s Blog
• Poetry Hut
• Poetry Hound
• The New Verse News
• Paul Hoover’s Poetry Blog
• Lime Tree (K. Silem Mohammad)
• The Best American Poetry
• Harriet
• One Poet’s Notes
• Poetic Asides

I thought it was a shame that there would be a poetry aggregator somewhere and that these blogs would not be included. About three hours ago I got an e-mail from the Alltop administrator informing me that all of these sites were included and that they’d show up at Alltop within an hour. Well, they’re there now. And they are beautiful.

Regular readers of World Class Poetry Blog know I’m an advocate of using the latest technology to create and deliver poetry to the audience. A joint project between the Poetry Foundation and film students at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee called Poetry Everywhere and funded in part by an award from the National Endowment for the Arts has some of today’s top poets reading their own work on film. The renditions are mostly the poets standing a podium or sitting and reading or reciting their poems. But the effort is a high quality delivery of poetry that I believe will stand the test of time.

Some of the poets represented on video include:

• Lucille Clifton
• Charles Simic
• Sharon Olds
• Billy Collins
• Adrienne Rich
• Yusef Komunyakaa
• Stanley Kunitz
• Coleman Barks
• Marie Howe
• and Robert Hass

Special appearances have also been arranged by Walt Whitman, Robert Frost, and W.B. Yeats.

I strongly encourage you to take a look at these videos, produced by WGBH Boston and David Grubin Productions for PBS. You can find them at the PBS website. Take your time. Enjoy.

Thanks to reader Gary Fitzgerald for pointing me to a website called It’s JUST War. Read poems, watch videos, and hang out a while. Be sure to read Gary’s four poems on the Vietnam War posted on September 2, 2008. Powerful stuff.

On another note, I’m testing some new social features at World Class Poetry, this blog’s sister site. The features are limited at present, but you can sign up and await further developments. If you have a Google or Yahoo! login, or an OpenID, then you can login without registering. Also, I’ve added comment fields on all the book reviews on the site. Feel free to drop by and leave your comments on the reviews or if you’ve read the books, offer your own feedback.

Note, you can’t comment on the book review introduction page. To leave a comment you’ll have to click one of the book review links and scroll to the bottom of the page to leave a comment on the individual book reviews. Thanks! See you there.

If you’re in the mood for macabre, try The Armor Dims, my latest publication credit. This is a post-Iraq poem for me, but fits in with the theme that I’ve been working with in a work-in-progress, Rumsfeld’s Sandbox.

The bio that appears at the bottom of the poem:

Allen Taylor spent 2005 stationed in Iraq, dreaming of being back home with his wife. Upon returning to the States he promptly told Uncle Sam to go fuck himself and started his own business. He manages World Class Poetry and writes the World Class Poetry blog. He never shaves.

Other poems included in the collection have appeared in The New Verse News and a local newspaper, The Hanover Evening Sun.

And if you’d prefer the lighter side - try this one.

For a broadside of the poem “Cigar”, featured in The New Verse News in January 2008, get the World Class Poetry Toolbar.