Diction and Drama

I've been "off blog" for a few days due to prepping for the writing workshop that took place last Saturday. We also had company over the holiday weekend. All in all a very busy time!

What's on my mind today is words (and how, you're probably asking, is this different from any other day?).

I am specifically thinking about diction in poetry. What word fits? What is exactly the right word to convey what the poem wants to say? OK, you are probably scratching your head right now and wondering how the poem can want something... believe me, every poem wants something, or several somethings. Great and proper diction is one of these things.

I see many many poems every week, sent to me for Pulse my online literary zine. What's usually wrong with poems I reject is that they contain flat, inappropriate , or overly amped-up diction. Poems that are filled with cliché abound. Some poems are "thesauri-poems," obviously constructed by poets who use the thesaurus as their diction machine. While these poems are more interesting than those with obvious cliché, they are often heavy-handed, with "big words" that don't do much for the musicality or nuance of the poem. I can tell that the poets who do this have very little going on in the world of vocabulary building and are unaware of how to use sound devices to electrify the choices they make. While some readers may be fascinated by the words chosen, the words themselves are not at all in the normal usage of the poet... and it shows. This kind of writing is posturing and showing off. It rarely produces much in terms of adding to the poem's levels of meaning. In fact, it is my experience that this kind of showmanship flattens out the poems by making them more about words and less about meaning. Where is the clean, clear, fresh diction here? Rarely will such a thick word as "plethora" fit into a poem without the poem seeming to be stiff and academic, an exercise in dictionary-itis.

So what's a poet to do about word choice? How is one going to increase her/his vocabulary other than to try out new and unusual words? And without experimentation in diction, won't the poet fall into the trap of writing the same basic poem over and over? I view diction as my key to the magic of poetry. Words are my friends. I spend loads of time figuring out what word(s) need and want to be where in a poem. In revision, it is diction that gains my time and attention. I don't worry so much about content as about HOW to express that content.

Let's approach our concerns about diction with a bit of basic info on line endings (just to show how important word choice is there). It is, in this poet's opinion, critical to know how to create great endings for lines, crisp line breaks, and to use words that move the poem along from line to line, stanza to stanza. I know there are poets out there who think it is good to use what I call "throwaway words" at line ends: prepositions, conjunctions, etc. As an editor and reader, I spot these like little neon flares, and they distract immediately. Generally, I do not think "of" or "and" at the end of a line does anything other than break up syntax. UGH. When I get poems with these bits at the ends of lines, I judge the poet as not well-schooled in the details of writing. Amateurish is my immediate reaction. There is so much more the poet might have done to make the lines move. So much more.

We will begin by looking at some kinds of endings that may influence your word choices, which will most definitely influence the tone and direction of the poem.

1. Emotional to Physical change:

Transform emotion to the physical by choosing a word at the end of the line that connects to both realms:

He left me in tears, and I went down

to the cellar to bait the mouse traps.

There is plenty of natural drama here as the line moves from a simple statement of grief to another stance on the part of the "speaker" of the poem, a hint at vengefulness or a movement to a symbolic act against the "he" who left.

2. Grammatical shift

Look at making end words do double duty, nouns that transform into verbs, nouns that become adjectives as the next line unfolds:

She feels blue

velvet fabric her mother sewed

It is easy to see the shift here from a feeling to the adjectival description of cloth. This certainly creates a dramatic shift from line one to line two.

3. Synesthetic shift

Look to make use of the senses as a way to move the line along, shifting from one sense to another

The wind blew loud (sound)

whispers that traced (touch)

her face with dread.

Bells rang

in the hallway, pounding

my ears like hammers.

4. Ambiguous shift

When a poet can get the reader to think she/he is understanding one way and then turn that understanding over at the next line, it adds another level of meaning. This is a powerful tool of diction.

She felt his hands

were his best feature, a touch

of lineage from carpenters

five hundred years behind him.

She made salsa

her dance of choice.

5. Metaphorical shift

Breaking the line so as to delay the appearance of the metaphor:

He brought five yellow roses, kissed her

heart with his kindness.

She was mired in quicksand

of obsession over him.

6. Fusing syntax to create a shift or movement:

They buried Leon and Mary

cried all day.

Although these are a few ways to look at the diction of your line endings, there are other considerations. If you have made the decision to enjamb lines, the choice of end words is critical to the movement of one line into the next. In this case, ask whether a strong concrete image might be the way to create this movement or whether a strong verb might work instead. Look at the following examples:

1. Image ending

This is my ship, my sails

furled, the air dead, the moon

paused in her wandering.

2. Verb ending

This is my ship, floated

on a silent sea, blocked

from passage.

Both endings have the power to push the lines along, to create tension. Look at how this same scenario stalls when throwaway words inhabit the ends of lines:

This is my ship, a mess of

wood that won't move off

the bar to sail the night sky.

You might say that having of and off at the ends of lines 1 and 2 makes the reader want to find out the rest of the prepositional phrase. But that is a weak way to progress a poem's meaning and may be seen as rendering the line just a broken bit of prose.

If your choice is not to enjamb a particular set of lines, instead to use end-stopped lines, then consider the end words to be places for great drama. Notice that some of the choices are not strong images but rather strong adjectives or adverbs. After reading these, try changing the lines to enjambed ones and see how there is more or less power engendered by the use of punctuation at ends of lines. It is always your choice, but a choice that should be a conscious one.

He wants his prayers to work. Desperately.

Crying out to his God, swallowing his pride.

He puts his hands out and shouts.

She calls herself a failure. A loser. Her life broken.

Glass.

Take one pill for every ailment.

Swallow your anger.

The lines above as enjambed lines:

he wants his prayers

to work, desperately

crying out to his God,

swallowing his pride.

She calls herself

a failure, a loser.

Her life broken

glass.

Take one pill. For every ailment

swallow your anger.

How are these different, the same? Which seem to have more power to push the lines along? Try a few yourself.

Which is stronger in terms of melopoetics (rhythm and sonic effect)? In free verse we must rely upon these devices to carry the lines and stanzas along. In formal poetry, we can rely upon the structure of the poem and its rhyme scheme to do this. So endings become the free versifier's best friends, and diction is ultra-important to carry endings and create the mood and tone of the poem. Line endings and the diction therein are conscious choices the poet makes.

You cannot rely upon a thesaurus to supply good crisp diction for your poems. You must build your vocabulary so that the line ends do not seem contrived. When the thesaurus method is utilized, some words may seem out of place with the tone of the rest of the poem. One of the reasons I balk when I see "big words" in poems is that often the rest of the words are not of the same caliber. It (the big word) seems not to have earned its place in the poem. My advice is this: keep building a vocabulary of MEANING not just of WORDS. Then you will become instinctive in your choices. Certain words like to be together. Others are interlopers. Keep your diction clean and fresh. Make the words you choose work hard but don't put them in jobs they cannot handle.

Remember that you create the best drama in your poems by way of surprise not contrivance. Fresh eggs always taste better than chemically engineered ones.

Breathe

Breathe!

Today's blog will not "strain the brain" as my classmates used to say. I want to talk about Dylan. I have a few favorite songs: Man in the Long Black Coat probably tops my list along with Rainy Day Women #12 and 35, Hurricane, Hard Rain's Gonna Fall, and Times They are A-Changin' to name just a few.

I have listened to Dylan for over 50 years now and his music (see list above) is one of my mainstays when I write (That and Pink Floyd's The Wall and Talking Heads' Burning Down the House). We are fortunate here in Rockland to have WERU radio which plays Dylan on Friday mornings. It is nice be among other Dylan admirers. But what do they do when listening to his music? I write (or dance sometimes). Are there people out there in radio land who whip up amazing pastries while listening? Create art collages? What? I am really curious about this.

I just read an article in the London Guardian newspaper that Dylan is short-listed for the Nobel in Literature. His odds of winning just went from 100/1 to an amazing 10/1. He is up against some pretty heavy-duty poets, including Tomas Transtromer. I vote for Dylan!

I might say here that Bob Dylan is not my only "muse" for writing. I'd add in Dylan Thomas (my two Dylans!). I find both of these amazing poets to be a source of inspiration, both for style and work ethic. Both have created unforgettable poetry. I can look to it for a way "in" to my own thinking, for a boost to my own voice.

A bit ago (a few years ago) I decided to write a poem in homage to these two giants. I post it here for your enjoyment. It is a montage of them and a tribute to poets everywhere. I think you will recognize (or find familiar) the elements that refer to them.

My Dylans

after Bob and Thomas

I’ve been ten thousand miles too,

to hell and back in your hard rain,

been screaming into the good night

a few times and wrote it down like you

just to keep from throwing it all away.

My hands were blazing, my face to the hard

light of my own rainy days, smoking

late but freed still from an obscure childhood.

Been wounded, been down the road

a few times and wrote it down. I needed to

look at your tweed face, your hair

billowed like some fuckin’ angel. Look at me

here with a hard rain fallin’ on my bare head, few

colors shining, ten thousand silver moments ringing.

You knew the grave before it opened.

Times change, time stays toxic. Too full

of blood to taste the way out, too much dust

to see where I’m going. Formed of sand, I too

will trickle away, one grain at a time, and change

is the curse that’s been cast; first let me be last.

Well that is, as they say, it. I've got nothing more for you today. Time to turn on a little Dylan and write. Hell, it's not even Friday!

Independent Judgment and the Poetry Workshop

Continuing on from the previous blog:

Enlightenment is man's [woman's] emergence from self-imposed nomage. Nomage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This homage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! "Have the courage to use your own understanding" is therefore the motto of the enlightenment.

— Emmanuel Kant, "What is Enlightenment?"

This interesting notion can be applied directly to the workshop group. It can be used to determine whether or not all members of the group are autonomous and engaged. What is in play here [Kant quote] is the basic difference between fact and opinion and the notion that all participants [of workshop] have something useful to add to the mix.

Some people want to spend time in a workshop determining facts and dismissing opinion. Is this poem really about a car ? (fact-based judgment) or is it about the person-in-the-poem's search for himself? (one kind of opinion-based judgment) When literalness takes over nuance, the workshop deteriorates. It becomes or stays boring for those who wish to progress in skill as poets or who wish to gain a deeper understanding of poetry. Judgment based upon material in the text (poem) is multi-faceted and can lead to a real exchange of ideas and strategies for revision. Judgment based upon literalness is useful only insofar as it asks questions of the text to determine verisimilitude of some details (i.e. if a poem is discussing AIDS and a time frame is present before the discovery of AIDS, or if a particular setting is inaccurate ... either of these would be a problem for the poem). Such fact-based explorations of a poem are therefore useful to make the poem fit into its own framework. However, nuance-based analyses of a poem delve deeper into the kernel, the center of the poem's reason for being. It is this nuance-based sharing that propels the group forward into helpful opining.

It is often the case that the opinions of unschooled participants' opinions are seen as less important than those of schooled participants. This is not a helpful stance for a group. If on the other hand, all participants' opinions are considered valid, and respected, and given a high level of consideration, all participants will keep striving to learn more about the art and about how to converse about the art in ways that are helpful to all.

So what of the participant who is dug in to a purely fact-based analysis? Turning to the Socratic Method, a group leader can elicit more nuance-based opinions and ideas and gently guide this participant along the road to more helpful and informative discussion. This happens when everyone is fully engaged and listening actively and willing to respond by way of open-ended querying. If a person is locked in to fact-based analysis, any one of the participants or the facilitator can jump in and propose a question or idea that may open up the fact-based participant's thinking to a more nuanced position. One of the beauties of Socratic Dialogue is that it opens up discussion and makes everyone feel heard. Making participants aware of opposing or other opinions and strategies is helpful. This is a case of expression under larger, holistic insights. In other words, what happens is the appearance of a wide range of thinking. Intuition, social skill, and creativity are hallmarks of this kind of expression. The criterion for a helpful comment or expression is social in nature, i.e. asking oneself "is this [comment, opinion] helping someone else to understand?" Judgment requires use of both hemispheres of the brain, the cognitive and the intuitive being engaged actively. The idea of asking questions of a poem might be that no one answer is sought, but rather a plethora of possibilities. This encourages autonomy in all participating in a workshop and fosters a sense of trust. The sense of "right" or "wrong" is, for the most part, not a function of the group or workshop unless for a detail that might fit into the verisimilitude issue or when discussing details of form. For example, is there a form being used and does it have any, all, or none of the precepts applied to that form?

Just as emphasis on content-driven transmission of ideas is prevalent in most traditional educational settings, so too is it in many seminars or workshops. Also a problem is the notion held by some that judgment cannot be cultivated, but rather is taught to a select few (professorial lecture methodology). The person "in charge" vs. the person who facilitates. On the professorial side of things, it is thought that the only person qualified to supply "facts" and "methods" is the person at the front of the room. In Socratic Practice, however, there is no one at the front of the room. The room is equivalent, validity of opinion and engagement being assumed of and for all participants. The "leadership" may in fact shift from one participant to another, or may be one person who acts as official facilitator while not taking an official role or position. That facilitator acts as timekeeper to keep the discussion moving along, and perhaps as "practice-keeper" to keep the group on track with Socratic practice. Socratic workshop style can be a bit disconcerting at first for traditional thinkers. However, if participants let go of their long-held assumptions, the workshop can become satisfying on new levels. Independent judgments based upon open-endedness will become a platform for helpful discussion. The result is likely to be a better range of ideas for the poet(s) in revision.

Rather than rightness or wrongness , participants in workshop might aim for the giving of opinion or advice cloaked in a question or musing out loud: "I see that most of these stanzas contain the word "bereft" and wonder if the poet is using some kind of repetend here or if perhaps she/he is just overly fond of the word." The poet whose poem is being analyzed has the solitary task to look at and hear these statements and questions and determine the answers based upon a dedication to revision later, outside of the group. It is appropriate of course, as in any Socratic Discussion, that the poet feel free to respond when it is her/his turn to speak. Clarification is the desire here. It is not a defense of position, rather it is another form of inquiry wherein the poet asks participants for further information or suggestion or where she/he simply thanks the others for their thoughtful attention to her/his work.

It is worth noting here that a Socratic workshop is not simply freewheeling. There is a need for structure and a plan for conducting the workshop, timekeeping and scheduling for instance. It may be helpful for example to have a critique sheet of sorts, one with sets of ideas and questions to serve as a guide for looking at the poems, with some basic ideas of poetry, with definitions, etc. This is particularly helpful for those participants who have not been schooled in the technical details of poetry writing, but who have been or are writing "from the gut" rather than from expertise in prosody. But with such a guide, it may be seductive to fall back into old ways of discussion, by merely listing "flaws" in prosody and condemning poems that reach beyond the bounds of traditional prosody. Workshops would be wise to exercise care that the discussion style stays open-ended and inclusive. Room should be made for the experimental while adhering to basic rules of poetry. It is important for participants to stay clear of nomage and to remain open to others' ideas and suggestions. Once mutual trust is established in the group, effort must be made to maintain it. The Socratic workshop depends upon this mutuality.

Perhaps the best result of applying Socratic principles to workshop is the acquisition of skills and abilities. Unlike the more traditional method of reliance upon a single voice of "authority," once participants begin to discuss in a critical way on their own, with a sense of mutuality, there develops an empowerment in each. Because each has a stake in how the discussion progresses, a responsibility for the material, a sense of movement beyond literalness emerges. No longer is there a lack of critical judgment, but rather there is a surge of critical judgment based upon skill sets and personal responsibility. Judgments are made thoughtfully and consciously and upon a basis of accuracy (using the skill set developed for discussion of poetry). It will take a period of consistent practice to see this discussion/analysis method gain ground in a group. Thus is is wise to keep a group stable in membership. However, if Socratic principle is in effect over time, new members of the group will likely acclimate quickly by example.

Finally, because there is a relinquishment of a singular intellectual authority replaced by mutual intellectual authority, there are but two restraints at play: text and reason. It is not a matter of every evaluation (of a poem) being "right," but of every text having layers of "correct" interpretation, brought out by the thoughtful, reasoning attention to detail of each member of the workshop. Of course a three line poem is not a sonnet. Of course a 14 line poem is not a haiku. Participants of Socratic workshops are constrained by the patterns and conventions of prosody, but insofar as they behave Socratically, there is room for a wide range of text-based interpretations. They are free to interpret as they see fit so long as they are able to point to the text (poem) for support. If Socratic Practice is used in a workshop, the group has a great chance of satisfaction and success, more so than a group where there are members who do not take active roles in the dynamic and the discussion. It is all about empowerment and integrity.

A Community of Learning... or why we can use Socratic Principle in Writing Groups

Seminars [workshops] are conversations about ideas... they are conversations in which people compare their judgments with each other in the search to improve their judgments... begin with the very ordinary, extremely human impulse to talk and to compare judgments.

— "The Relationship Between Seminar (Socratic)

and Ordinary Conversation," The Habit of Thought, Strong, p. 67

Obviously I am still thinking about writing groups and the dynamic of writing groups. Is there an approach that leads to deeper understanding here? I think so. Seminars (which I will henceforth refer to as "workshops") are conversations. We bring forth a poem or other piece of writing for analysis according to some ideas of what a poem is. Each member of the workshop brings an individual skill set to the conversation. What we presuppose is 1. that each skill set adds to the conversation 2. that each member of the workshop is open to improving his/her skill set, and 3. that each member of the workshop is open to improving his/her work based upon the conversation and discussion around the poems.

Strong defines the conversations as centering around the good, the true, and the beautiful. He says that there are such elements in most natural conversations: "do you think it is good for people to cheat on their taxes?" "Whom do you believe, the newspaper or the pastor of your church?" "wasn't that disgusting?"

In workshop, these elements take the form of analysis of the poems. We want to look at whether or not the poem achieves some kind of truth and follows some kind of natural speech or syntax. We hope there is a level of truth in the poem (is it believable even if not literally true in its elements). We hope to see beautifulness of arrangement, musicality, flow, diction, etc. The danger in the application of these principles is that of hyper-judgment, of qualifying the poem based upon the banal concept of "good enough" "better than" or "superior to." This trap is spotted frequently in comments such as "it (this poem) is wonderful" (you may insert any superlative adjective here) By merely asserting wonderfulness, absent any quantifiers (e.g. has wonderful musicality in the ____ stanza as evidenced by the use of assonance and line length), the poet whose poem is being critiqued loses out on some opportunities to improve both the poem and his/her skill set for critiquing.

Additionally, there is the trap of truth. As discussed in yesterday's blog, there is literal truth and the suggestion of universality. In poetry, much of what makes for human connection (reader to poem to poet) is the latter. We WANT to connect, to feel included, to feel heard or seen. But the trap in workshop is that we each bring our own interpretation of truth to the table. It might work well to agree that truth will be examined from both perspectives and comments made (arguments posed) based upon such agreement. If we converse overly long on whether the poem's character is the poet herself/himself or whether the kitchen is green or the dog is named Buttercup, we lose an opportunity to get at the levels of meaning in the poem that are beneath the surface details. If we beat the details to death, absent layers of meaning, we cannot help the poet much in revision. If we, as participants, bring weakened perceptions of literalness and suggestion to the table, we ourselves avoid the possibility of metaphor, conceit, and stylistic interpretation. Everyone loses.

Finally, there is the trap of identification of beauty. Yes, that "eye of the beholder" thing is in play somewhat. We all accept that. For example, what I may find lacking in beauty in a particular dog's face another person may see as adorable and beautiful. This is why we do not all own the same breed of dog. In poetry, however, we move beyond the "I like this very much" or "I don't like this at all" to a more informed sense of beauty (or lack of beauty). We begin with a basic attraction (on the gut level) to a particular poem or kind of poem. Some readers find nothing more lovely than a sonnet, while some find sonnets to be contrived, old-fashioned, or boring. Human nature is at work here. But our notions of the beautiful can be argued, altered, tweaked by application of understanding how a poem is made and by recognition of the various elements present or absent in a poem, no matter the form or lack of form. This speaks in large part to skill set acquisition and to trust within the workshop. When members of a workshop are open to learning new elements and to broadening their skill sets in so doing, this sets in motion a dynamism in the workshop wherein beauty is complex and reachable.

Having a gut reaction to a poem is not either the only or the worst position from which to open conversation about the beauty of a poem. It is reasonable to begin from the point of feeling when discussing a poem. "How does this poem make me feel?" is an appropriate place to begin. The trap therein however is using cognitive description for emotional exercise. Keeping the terminology emotional here is key. The poem makes me feel.... sad, confused, angry, joyful, contemplative, annoyed, etc. No explanation is needed for a feeling; it just is. However if we leave the poem on its emotional level alone, the poet is not able to understand HOW to create that feeling in another poem, or how to go deeper in that one. What skills can the revising poet glean from this stance by her/his peers? It behooves the group to take the next step, to move into elemental possibilities for the poem being discussed. Are there language (diction) possibilities here? Is there judgment on a particular usage? We must look at whether certain words evoke reactions we might want from our readers, or the converse. For example, what reaction and interpretation differences might one expect from choosing words like bedspread vs. coverlet or sip vs. gulp or shit vs. manure? The choice of words clearly can alter the feeling in a poem. But if there is no skill set for discussion of diction, how can the poet be helped? It is not enough to say "I don't like the word shit." That a person doesn't like a particular word is of little help, but why the person believes another word might work better in a particular poem is valid and helpful. "I think that the word shit takes away from the rest of the poem which uses softer language" is more helpful to the poet whose task is to make this poem his/her best work. In terms of diction, there are latinate (soft) sounds and anglo-saxonate (hard) sounds. It is helpful to know this and for the members of the workshop to feel confident enough in assessment of a poem to recognize tone and be able to suggest revisions in diction to match that tone. Tone and diction are two critical choices in creating beautifulness (or lack thereof which may be the poet's intent as in certain schools of poetic thought... more later perhaps). If beautiful poetry is to be written, there is need for the skill set to discuss and analyze tone and diction among other aspects. This is easily accomplished Socratically by way of workshop. It is helpful to remember, however, that this is an ongoing process and one not to be hurried. It requires intellectual honesty and openness.

It is important, in all Socratic discussions, to understand at the fore, that we all bring opinions to the table. As such, their validity (having persuasive relevance) may not be in question if the opinions are based upon evidence found in the text being examined. All conversation over a poem centers on valid opinion being freely offered, valid insofar as it is supported by elements of the poem itself and supported by the skill set of the group. Where this falls off the cliff is when the opinions are based only on gut or a dug-in stance by the member holding them. It is appropriate for the poet whose work is being discussed to reject such opinions as invalid, to discount these in revision. However, valid opinion is a useful tool for the revising poet. This is not to say that the suggestions made from these valid opinions must be used. However, it follows that if they are indeed valid, looking at the suggestions and considering them is wise. Still, the poet has the ultimate decision-making power over the revision process and result.

A word about not knowing is perhaps in order here. Not all opinions are intellectually helpful. Some opinions are just bombast or posturing. Usually this occurs when there is a lacking of skill set for full participation in a discussion, a feeling of "less than" by one or more members of the group. It might be helpful then for the group to consider what could happen if one or more of its members admitted not knowing how to speak about a poem or elements in a poem. This admission, intellectually authentic, can be helpful on a number of levels. First, it sets a tone of honesty in the group. If one is able to admit lack of knowledge, one can acquire that knowledge. Secondly, admission of lack of knowledge shows the person and group to be intellectually curious and mature. It is the jejune approach to "fake it" while hoping for knowledge to seep in by osmosis. It is however a common practice in groups, owing to the shyness or timidity or some members. Hopefully this stance will begin to disappear over time as the timid person acclimates to the group. This all centers around the notion that mere talk cannot progress to real conversation absent at least one person who can transmit knowledge. The dynamic of the group will likely shift as knowledge possession shifts from person to person. One member may have knowledge of form poetry for example, but be deficient in patterns of diction which is the expertise of another member of the group. In a dynamic workshop this is mostly the case. One need not hold an MFA in poetry to be in possession of a knowledge set. However, it may behoove the group to seek out knowledge skill in areas where he or she feels deficient or wants an increase in skills.

It is admirable at a most basic level that people are willing to subject themselves and their writing to the workshop process. This first step speaks to the need we poets have to improve our skills and ultimately our work. I hear poets of a certain level of achievement say they no longer "need" to be part of a writing workshop or group. I wonder if a certain arrogance might be at play there. I wonder how they became able to look objectively at their own writing. For me, I need the feedback. I need the conversation. I need to be able to contribute to both.

Intellectual integrity in friendships and groups

In personal relationships, there is no more valuable ability than knowing ourselves and others, and acknowledging what we don't know about ourselves and others. A marriage or friendship in which the parties believe that they possess more truth or goodness than they actually do is not a relationship which will flourish. Intellectual integrity in relationships is a matter of accurately understanding our real limitations. Improvements in character must be based on a realistic assessment of our current character.

— The Habit of Thought, Michael Strong (p. 86)

I am interested in intellectual integrity for a long time now. I often wonder about this facet of character in myself and in others. We have so much bickering back and forth over who is right and who is wrong as if this is the only thing that matters: being more right and less wrong than others. Where is the middle ground where we find that we are all just struggling to figure out who we are and what is our level of engagement in the process of understanding self and others?

When I am in a poetry workshop, not teaching it but as participant, I wonder about the level of expertise the leader holds, what the rest of the group brings in terms of expertise, and how I might contribute. I approach the group with a certain excitement that there might be something new I will experience, some kernel of information or an idea that will inform my own writing later. When I am TEACHING or LEADING a workshop, I bring that same kind of excitement, knowing that not only will I (hopefully) give out some of what I know or have experienced, but that most likely I will LEARN something valuable from those who are in attendance. It is this kind of flow of ideas and experience that makes the workshop experience viable for people of diverse experience. It is why we are able to be in a workshop with mixed levels of expertise and not feel that we are either better or worse at it than others.

It boils down to intellectual integrity for me. We speak about the idea of "truth" in writing and it gets muddy right away. What is this notion of truth when looked upon from the platform of writing? I speak about the truth in poems as being one of two kinds: big T truth or little t truth. And we have to think too about validity vs. literalness. I will digress into a few words about integrity in writing for a moment here:

Big T truth:

This, for me is not the same as literalness. It is the search for something universal that can be recognized by most others. It does not matter whether, for example, a person in the poem is real. It matters whether the experience or activity of the person is common to others or can be validated as common human experience. It doesn't matter if the cup on the table is green or if it is really a cup on a real table. What matters is the essence of "cupness" and the human experience of what the cup and its color or its location represent. Is the narrative in which a green cup rests on a table valid, is it showing some human situation that others can identify as real for them? It doesn't matter to me (should it?) if the person in the poem is a real person. When I read a poem should I expect that the experience represented in that poem actually happened or that it is the poet's experience or that it is REPRESENTATIVE of real experience? Indeed does what I read (or write) SIGNIFY or IDENTIFY reality? I think that this is a case of universality vs. self. It ought to follow that when a poet writes, he/she is writing out of human need and observation. Details can be illuminators and highlighters insofar as they make a poem more accessible to its readers. Details make us identify on a personal level. Embodiment is a great asset to poetry, more so than to prose. Readers of poetry will "get in and stay in" a poem based upon personal identification with the material, specifically its concrete details. An oak is more easily identified with than a generic tree. But perhaps it doesn't matter if the tree about which the poem speaks is an actual oak. Maybe it is a sumac. Poetic license allows the poet to plant whatever specific tree the poem needs, needs by way of locale, syllable, rhyme, sound, etc. In other words, if this poem is a sonnet, and there is need for a rhymer for "back," then sumac would be a reasonable tree choice. UNLESS the setting is somewhere the sumac does not grow. It is intellectually sound for the poet to make these choices for us readers. It is stylistic integrity as well as bowing down to Truth.

Little "t" truth:

This kind of truth conforms more to literalness. Nonfiction writing is often thought of as a bastion for this kind of truth. We want to know that the accident written about in the paper is real, that the injuries described really happened to the actual person in the accident. There is no philosophy involved here, no nuance of feeling or expression needed to REPORT. In fact we are likely to send off letters decrying the lies told in new articles. If we read that 12 children were lost in the woods on a field trip and that Mr. So-and-So just left them there while he went off to a bar, we expect that this is accurate info. We are rightly appalled at Mr. So-and-So and want him fired. But if the news report gets his name wrong, we are outraged at the wrong person. Literalness needs to be in place for the sake of making correct assessments of actual situations and taking appropriate actions. A lack of integrity therein can wreak havoc all around. We want to KNOW that nonfiction (including journalism) is not something lacking in factual information.

But what of little t truths in poetry? Can they be useful? Of course. But the danger lies in readers thinking that every event, every bit of action, every description in a poem is as it is written exactly and that the poet herself or himself has had that EXACT experience. I have read poems in public that are Big T truths and there was someone in the audience who came up later and asked about my experience (Oh I am sorry your father was a drinker). These folks are living in the literal truth realm, not recognizing that the poet is commenting on a human condition or situation rather than exposing a personal reality. If the poet is really adept at representing life with all of its beauty and warts, the poems will seem to be actual real events that the poet has experienced personally. Poetry can be both nonfiction and fiction. It is art, an interpretation of people, places, events through an artistic lens.

These are considerations every poet must face when writing, and when reading to the public. Some give a little disclaimer that what the audience will hear is not necessarily the experience of the poet. I don't do that. I let the poems speak whatever Truth or truth they contain.

But I need to get back to my leading quote here now and speak about intellectual integrity among humans, within friendships and other close relationships.

Recently one of our poetry group members quit the group because he did not like the comments I'd made on one of his poems. (I was commenting based upon little t truths vs. Big T truths) He threw quite the little hissy fit over it and quit. He accused me of "always being right" and of being "dogmatic" in my comments on poems (especially on his poem). He PRESUMED a lack of intellectual integrity on my part.

He decided after re-thinking the whole thing that he would not quit the group. Meanwhile, behind the scenes, we were working on clarifying the procedure for critique to make SURE there was intellectual integrity built in, that people were all of like mind as to what might make for a valid and helpful basis for all critiques. He did not know we were working on this clarification.

In the meantime, he decided to read my blog posts. He came across the one wherein I mentioned his quitting (FYI, I did not name him, but used an initial). He took personal offense and has quit again. During his quitting, coming back, quitting again before coming back, he did not approach me directly one-on-one to work out our differences or to come to a place where we could coexist peacefully. All of his anger etc. has gone on behind the scenes with the leader of our group funneling the information to the group in absence of the angry person. This goes to the idea of intellectual integrity among people. Would it have worked for him to have spoken to me directly with his feelings and concerns? Does he see himself as out of the loop there, preferring to quit and convey his messages through a third party? Is he afraid of confrontation? Does he see himself as either better than me or less than me in some way? Does he feel we are somehow in competition? I am at a loss to understand this. I do know that I see him as a peer. I value his feedback and give mine to him in the spirit of any normal critique. It baffles me. What really grates on my last nerve is the idea that there is on either side a lack of intellectual integrity or even the appearance of this lacking.

I understand that all comments are not favorable on any given day. I know that all comments, given out of a spirit of cooperation and trust are valid. They can be helpful in the revision process. I take comments made on MY poems as a treasure trove of possibilities for later work on the particular poem. I GIVE comments in that same spirit. I hope that things I see (or don't see) in someone's poem will serve as information and inspiration for my fellow poets. Isn't that why we become part of a critique group? We want feedback. But are we giving that in the framework of intellectual integrity? I think so for the most part. I expect that all comments made on my poems come from a sincere place on the parts of the critiquing poets. They want my poem to be successful. They have this as the genuine motive. I ASSUME this. It is how I approach anyone's poems. So why get defensive and quarrelsome? Does it help this person or the rest of us in the group to quit?

At this point I have decided that where there is no actual relationship (as evidenced by a lack of intellectual integrity), I must move away from the person who fails to confront directly to benefit the parties or the group.

I am satisfied that the rest of the group is practicing intellectual integrity and will survive this crisis of understanding and commitment.

UNH in the rain

So I arrived at the location specified on the directions, and no one was there (I was mucho late due to traffic). I called and emailed the professor who had invited me. No such luck. Now I am at the hotel. I am totally glad the room reservation was not a problem!

When I was MUCH younger, I'd have panicked or gotten upset. I feel strangely calm.

I have homemade donuts in the car, purchased on the way down at Moody's Diner. It's looking like that might be dinner. The only eateries nearby are pizza and pizza. (I guess that is standard university fare). This is Rush Week at UNH. So, imagine all the young rush candidates roaming about, parties galore. When I arrived at the hotel, so did a group of bridesmaids and a bride, all carrying their gowns. Tomorrow will be a big day I'm thinking.

Mazel Tov to the happy couple.

I do not despair. There is no use getting all in a bunch over this. My big issue is not dinner. It is how to find the conference in the morning. Hmmmm. I'm sure I will hear from folks by then. Did I mention I have the WORST sense of direction? Yes. True. But I have my GPS thingie with me. So given an actual address, I can find my way. Good news is I am prepared for tomorrow.

Maybe I will just relax and wait for a call. It's been over an hour and a half since I called and emailed. I'm thinking they will be asking "where do ya think Carol is?" pretty soon. They WILL notice I am missing.... right?

BRB... making donut run to the vehicle.

mmmm good donut. fry bread would be better, or a steak... but ya go with what is available! will limit to one... I promise.

Making tea now and getting into jammies.

Prompt

I am being organized today. I am planning my work for the TEK Conference at UNH this weekend. I've gathered sample poems to read to the workshop participants, my own books are ready to go into the car for possible sale, and I have a writing prompt ready for the participants.

But I look around at my office and see that I am not ahead of the game. I have stacks still needing to be weeded or filed. These litter the floor which needs sweeping, vaccing. I look at my desk and see more that I need to organize or file or remove permanently. There is a stack of books that ought to be on the shelves, a bag of books to take to the local book-trade-credit thing (hello hello Books). There is more dust in this room than is probably healthy.

I am in over my head apparently. (Am I? Do the stacks seem to be growing on their own?) Not sure.

But there is some large measure of comfort in my clutter. This is my "stuff." These piles represent my work, my reading, my ideas and plans. They represent my tax year, my accomplishments and failures. They manage to somewhat define my days and my existence as a writer.

I have a 2 foot mermaid on the wall opposite my desk. She seems content. But I notice she is directly looking at the clock with a rather wry smile on her face. Hmmm. Time to what.....?

It's raining. I love the peace and comfort of rainy days. They make feel like writing. But I needed to avoid that this morning in favor of the prompt, the plan, the prep. I will write again. Just not at this moment. I will suppress the urge to write, to play with the words I woke to in my head. I wrote them down, no chance now but they wait for me in my notebook. Later. Maybe when I get to my hotel. As for my office floor... my desk... they will wait too.

Back to writing....

There are two plumbers in my barn and cellar this morning. I love these guys. Mike is the brother of my next door neighbor and he has done a lot of work for us. Brad is one of the guys I called "The Basement Boys" back in 2006 when we were full on into getting the furnace and pipes up to best working order as the kitchen was being redone. These guys are geniuses. Just talking to them makes me happy. (I could use a little happy today... see earlier post).

While they pound away at the latest project (moving the washer and dryer), I am pounding away at my newest manuscript, The Boyfriend Project. I have enough poems. I need an arc. I am still not convinced a chronological arc is the way to go. Seems a bit boring to me. And if I am bored....

What I think is that I will start with the "crush years" as a kind of prologue. Then I could move into a more braided approach, weaving the deep connections boyfriend experiences with poems that comment about love and relationship. I think this is way more interesting. Feel free to weigh in here!

Because this manuscript breaks a bit of new ground, I am pretty free to float some philosophical poems about love relationships into the poems about actual boyfriends or written TO actual boyfriends, mine or otherwise. I like this idea. I read all the poems again this morning, making a few editorial tweaks, opting to alter some lines or to revisit a couple line breaks. Sigh. Thought I was done with that. Maybe I will fly the whole group to my writers group again. When indeed is a poem really DONE?

One of my favorites of the poems is one called No Boyfriends. It starts out humorously and ends with a bit of a twinge. I worry about doing this generally as the poem can fall on its ass with a thud, a reductive or sappy thud. I am pretty sure this poem doesn't do that. I did try it out on a Jr. High girl at a reading and she was totally thumbs-up on it. It is a poem about jr high boyfriends, so I'm thinking it is good as is.

One of the big dangers in writing books or even individual poems or stories is that our readers can misinterpret the "voice" of the thing, can think that each "memory" or "story" belongs to the poet. I get discouraged at this phenomenon. Occasionally, at a reading, I will use a disclaimer. Then afterwards, I ask: "Why do I do that? Why do I care if the readers/listeners think it is all ABOUT me?"

The reality is that poets and other writers pour themselves into their writing. There is often sensitive, raw, or even drastic material put forth on the page. And we live in a rather literal world right now. What bothers me is that. I want to yell at the top of my lungs: THIS IS CREATIVE WRITING!!! Most novelists or short story writers don't have this problem. People seem to see that it is fiction (except for those who thought/think The DaVinci Code is "real." Memoir writers have the problem in reverse: if they fictionalize anything in a memoir, there is a cry to lop off their lying heads. I want to scream THIS IS NOT THE EVENING NEWS, PEOPLE. Oh, but then the evening news is likely to contain made-up material. And we swallow THAT as literal too. It is dizzying.

We pretty much exist in a world of fuzz and vaseline here. The lines are so blurry as to obscure any kind of veritas. I think I'd be a bit happier if we assumed a baseline of disbelief. Let every written piece be suspect. Let all our readers assume we are making it up. We are. Oh, now calm yourselves... of COURSE we write from truth (with the small t) and want to have ourselves and our readers arrive at Truth (with the big T) from the feelings and flavors of our writings. We want to lead our readers into familiar territory with an unfamiliar take on it, to into unfamiliar territory with a familiar feeling coming from it. We want to keep them reading. Above all this.

I for one am ready for any or all of my readers to believe what they want to about the voice(s) in my new work. It will not change me, my life, my past to have them think what they think. What I do want is for them to recall old loves, to relish themselves as loving beings. So, I pound away. The plumbers pound away. In the end it is all good work.

Death in Georgia

I am utterly shocked at the Georgia Board of Parole and Pardons. Their decision not to stay the execution of Troy Davis is a stunning one, given all the evidence that the original evidence was tainted. It is a shame that we (USA) call ourselves civilized all the while injecting, electrocuting, etc so many of our citizens. We are at the top of nations which kill their own citizens in retribution in the world. Civilized? I think not. Non one was asking them to PARDON him, only to not KILL him and to take another look at the process and evidence of his original trial. What would have been the harm in that. Is it not better to explore the new facts than to jam a needle in his arm? (and don't get me started on how they will do it, given that the approved drugs for so doing are not available).

The death penalty is a barbaric way to dispense "justice" and not at all a deterrent to murder (no proof exists of deterrence). We get a little crazy with the notion that seeing one person fried or poisoned will keep someone else from committing murder. And I am absolutely amazed by certain people who claim to respect life, to actually fight for the life of an unborn child, and who turn around and celebrate or sanction the death penalty. If their claim (for babies) is that only God can decide whether someone is alive or not, then what happens when that someone does something we abhor? OK to kill that person and not leave the decision to God? And when Governor Perry of Texas BRAGS about the death penalty and gets applause (!) for the number of people he has "legally" killed, we are all diminished by that. It is wild west mentality, not a civilized approach to a carceral issue.

OK, lest you think I am not outraged at the horror of murder... I am. I think those who commit these high crimes ought to be kept away from society, that society has an inherent right to protection from them. But to kill them ourselves is not right. Not our right.

So, Troy Davis will die. If he is not guilty, the blood shed tonight will be on the hands of every citizen who failed to speak out. If he is guilty, then justice was still not served. Our motives and our methods are as big a part of the mix as our intentions.

writing in form... oh yes you can

So, here's the thing: without a firmly poured and seasoned foundation, your darned house might just fall down. It's the same with poetry. If you want to break out of form, you must know it, have time in the trenches with it, understand HOW to break it. The "rules" for writing in form help with the framework of any kind of a poem — except perhaps the language poets' work, which does not rely upon rules. I think (no, I BELIEVE), that poetry with formal underskirting is more easily understood by readers because it has a reliability to it that makes it accessible.

I see loads of poems where the poet has no idea at all how rhyme and meter work. I see singsongy rhymes that relegate the poems to predictability, sap, or sentimentality. I see poems where, no matter what, the rhymes end every other line, no matter if the rhymes don't add a thing fresh to the ideas of the poem. I see SO many poets writing to the rhyme, using a dictionary or thesaurus to chart the course of their poems. (yes, these "thesauri-poems" are obvious). I see poems that have no meaning beyond the surface ideas. I see poems with lines that struggle or that falter in length, strength, and music. I see writing that has no music whatsoever, but is simply prose that is chopped into lines and stanzas and called a poem. Oh say it isn't so! We are smarter readers than to fall for these as being universal. Why is it that Whitman, Frost, Keats, and others are still read today? Indeed, because of the firmly poured foundations they used for writing. Many contemporary poets, such as Kay Ryan and David Mason, BH Fairchild, Dorianne Laux, and others, are making use of formalism in their writing no matter how much or little is recognizable in their poems. We remember and admire their poems BECAUSE of the musicality and fresh use of formal strategies.

I am often asked about writing in form, in fact sometimes criticized for doing so by those who think free verse is "modern" or more contemporary, and that form is passé. I had one professor who called writing in form "making it old." The truth is, I write in free verse most of the time, but with a metrical, formal underpinning. It is perhaps why many critics have called my poems "lyrical, musical, smooth, flowing." I am certain that having a firm formalist training and aesthetic, I am in tune with form as I write any kind of poem. It is like the hidden heartbeat underneath the poems I write. I can spot it immediately in others' poems.

It is not that the poets without formal training are bad poets. Not at all. But they are disadvantaged a bit in terms of possibility by their lack of knowledge of some wonderful tools to use in their work. Knowing about feminine endings vs. masculine endings is one thing that often eludes the non-formalist. Knowing about a volta or turn or hinge in a poem, knowing how to make a poem slow down or speed up via line length, knowing how to make rhyme subtle by slanting it, internalizing it — all of these are gifts of grace for the poet that might be available if only the poet had at least STUDIED formal poetry.

And there is a kind of joy that comes from tackling form and finding that a pantoum or a sonnet is not so difficult to at least try. I used to eschew writing sonnets. I was stubborn in my resistance to this form because it seemed so HARD. I came to my senses. I now rather enjoy the form, and definitely enjoy BREAKING or TWEAKiNG the form. I even invented a way to write a sonnet (my broken form is the perfect reversing sonnet).

I now enjoy writing all kinds of forms, will try just about any (recent resistance to Terza Rima now conquered and overcome!). The basis for my willingness to write in form is of course that the elements of form can be used in any kind of poetry I write. I can incorporate elements of a sonnet (the volta for example) into a free verse poem and thus add an element of surprise smoothly into a poem without its seeming jarring or inappropriate. I have the knowledge of the volta and it is now a part of my toolbox for writing. Same is true for meter. I know that iambs and trochees are a part of natural speech. I can vary this for effect by using spondees or anapests. I don't have to be writing form to use these. And knowledge of form makes my use of them both appropriate and timely. I enjoy the heroic couplet. Do I have to be writing an ode to use this? Not at all. I can use a few well-placed heroic couplets for dramatic effect. Or to emphasize something special in a narrative poem, such as dialogue.

My point in all of this is that it seems like a good idea to study formal poetry, that which we grew up hearing from our relatives who memorized poetry and recited it. I think we all need to consider the foundation poured and standing under our poems. Is it shaky? Could it use some reinforcement?

I am NOT suggesting we all take to writing sonnets or ghazals or odes. But why not see if some of the techniques therein are worth incorporating into our poems? It can't hurt to expand ourselves and our repertoires. And remember: once you have mastered a form, you can take it apart at the seams and refashion it for your own use! Go on, do it! Yes... you CAN!

re-gifting

Have you ever done this? Have you ever received a present that was just not "you" and passed it on? I got re-gifted by my sister last year on my birthday. She sent a pair of PJs "from Pajamagram" that was clearly not sent from Pajamagram. Part of the package they always send was missing (the sachet), AND inside the box was a card that read, Merry Christmas, Love Joyce (not my sister's name and not Christmas). I found out the truth when I called Pajamagram to exchange the pjs for a pair I preferred (I do not wear flannel). They had no record at all of my sister ordering from them (they keep records for returns purposes). Anyway, I secretly call my sister Joyce now when I'm in a mood. Is that bad? I choose to laugh rather than to fuss that my sister did not choose a present just for me.

I digress. My point here is to talk about passing things on to others when no longer needed, or when received and not wanted for one reason or another. I think that re-gifting is fine as long as one says: "I got this as a gift and it seemed more like something YOU would enjoy." I do this IN ADDITION to something I chose personally for that person, not INSTEAD of choosing something for him/her. Of course passing on treasures is another way of re-gifting. I have from time to time sent pieces of my jewelry to my daughters. I love that they have and wear and love them as I once did.

What does this have to do with poetry? Nothing much. But the idea of re-gifting is intriguing and might make for a fun poetry prompt. Can you integrate this sad/funny incident into a poem? I think I will try. Of COURSE I will dedicate it as "for Joyce"

This little thing and other little things

I'm ensconced at a window table at Rock City Cafe, listening to the happy clink of cups and glasses, the chatter of our remaining tourists, and not just a few of the locals who are braving downtown again. Soon I'll be heading down to Bath for a reading at the Chocolate Church. I've never been there, but notice it every time I cross over the Bath Bridge in one direction or the other. It's a little thing, this glance. But like so many other little things, there is something comforting about it. I've decided that today will officially be the Day of Little Things. Here is my early list (a work in progress and in NO special order):

1. My Verizon MiFi device that makes it possible to be connected even in my car (no I am NOT blogging while driving!)

2. Being "known" by the staff at the Brass Compass and at Rock City and Hello Hello Books.

3. The smile of the lady at the next table as she talks excitedly with friends

4. The tenderness of the young mother across from me who is smooching her baby girl behind the ear (this really makes me homesick for my girls at that age though)

5. Cool sheets when I slide into bed

6. Cool breezes over my head at night (those soon to end when the windows of winter are shut)

7. The way my husband's hand looks as he rests it on his cheek while sleeping (oh baby, that one REALLY gets to me!)

8. The sparkle of my lavender crystal on the rear view mirror in my car

9. The ability to read, write, and think (maybe these are BIG things?)

10. Chocolate brownies with walnuts

11. My "girl" friends who write poetry.

12. sparkle-y nail polish

So my little things list is growing. I think that really small things, most of them intangible, are perhaps the big things after all. I do know that if they were to disappear, or if I were to disappear, they'd be missed.

critique groups can be the flaming bag of dog doo-doo on your front porch

I am in a snit today. I admit it. I am in one hell of a big snit. Of course later, when I am working on my new manuscript, I will be "snit-less" and maybe even laugh at my morning snit. Well, maybe not laugh.

What is on my mind is the issue of critiquing "on the fly" in groups. Recently, G, a member of a group I've been attending for 4 years or so, got his jockey shorts in a wedge over comments made about a poem (not his, but he didn't like that critique either). He got very defensive and accusatory. He raised his voice thusly. He has now quit the group in a huff (not unlike my snit). Sigh. This has raised my blood pressure (taking a pill right now). I'm assessing what has gotten me so sudsed up. I am pretty sure it is not due to this person's opinion, but rather the rudeness. It could be something else. Sigh again.

This brings me to question the function of critique groups. I have been part of many of these, as a student, as a leader, as a teacher. In graduate school they were often quite daunting, you know that please everyone, especially the teacher/leader kind of thing. But mostly it was a feeling of self-criticism that got the adrenaline flowing. At any rate, these groups can get dicey. I have friends and colleagues who went to Iowa's MFA who said the critiques there were nothing short of brutal. I'm not up for that, personally don't think that style is particularly helpful to anyone.

But what about the "outside world" of critique/writing groups? Why do we even go to them? I've decided (for myself only) that they fill a few important functions:

1. feedback from others whose opinions I trust (big word there: TRUST)

2. support (emotional and poetical)

3. other pairs of eyes on the details of my poems

4. helpful suggestions (which I am free to use or not)

5. camaraderie (this writing thing can get pretty lonely)

6. the chance to talk about poetry and share ideas for and about writing projects

But there is danger ahead.... a group can be clicking along well, with an ease of attitude and a spirit of cooperation, and suddenly go straight into the ditch. What happens? Why does it happen? Is there a way to predict or prevent the derailing of a group? If I knew the answer to that, I'd....

Critique groups can be your soft place to land or a bag of flaming dog doo-doo left on your front porch.

What I do know is that there are things that can be done to make writing/critique groups have a good chance of sustaining themselves over the long term. There are also a few things that can be done to ward off the apocalyptic shadow that hangs overhead. These are choices, suggestions.

1. keep the group small (6-8 perhaps)

2. realize that everyone comes to critique with personal expectations (seek to find out what these are)

3. decide HOW critiques will be done (written on the poems outside of the meeting and then discussed? done verbally "on the fly" at the meetings with comments written on the poem and handed back to the poet immediately? done by way of a printed critique sheet outside of the meeting, a kind of flow chart with check boxes.?)

4. decide whether to allow the poet to interrupt with comments or explanation (NO, I beg, NO!) or whether the poet will remain silent until all comments have been given.

5. check with each poet or not as to what he/she wants to hear from participants (such as "please consider diction only when looking at this poem" or I want to hear from the group if this poem is too "talky")

6. keep the group small ( big emphasis here)

7. agree that all critique is being given with a genuine interest in giving the poet suggestions for the revision process (here is the trust thing again)

8. have a group where each member respects the opinions and capabilities of each other member of the group (again a TRUST issue).

I think that one thing that sometimes happens is that a group is unbalanced in ability to know how to critique, what to look at in a poem and how to express that. So again, keeping the group consistent is key. This is not to say one should be in a group that is homogeneous in ability. Not at all. We tend to both find the lowest common denominator and seek to raise to the level that the bar is set. I'm a big believer in the raise the bar theory. I want to be stretched.

Personally, I HATE critiques on the fly. It is tough to be expected to figure out a poem at first reading. I think we do not honor the poem or the poet if this is all we do. But we go to these kinds of groups all the time. It is the easiest way to conduct a critique: see the poem, comment, move on.

I prefer to have the poems to look at long and deeply without the poet sitting right there waiting to hear comments. Microwave critiques I call these. I prefer the slow-cooker version. I want fine details examined. I am counting on this attention to detail when I begin the rigorous process of revision. I think we'd all like to think our TRUSTED colleagues would give that to the process, knowing they will get the same attention paid to their poems.

One person I know who was in a group with me once said she did not like the idea of "homework" after she left a session. OK. But this was not good for me. It meant that she might come up with a critique that sits on the surface of what could be discovered with more time. So, her suggestions became not as valid for me when I heard them. Yes, the on-the-fly critique is fine for some. This is what I mean about finding a style for your group. Do you prefer this? Do you want more? It is quite possible you prefer a combination of the two. The point here is to configure the group dynamic to suit the NEED and PREFERENCE of the members. This is more easily accomplished in a small group of 6-8 members. No one person ought to dominate the decision to configure the dynamic. And if your group goes in a direction that doesn't serve you, find or start another group.

This begs the question of how long one ought to stay in the same group... another time

So, good-bye to G and his huff. And hopefully good-bye to my snit. My pill is kicking in now and I am feeling like eggs and toast might finish the remedy.

Science and Deception

I found this quote today from Albert Einstein:

Science is nothing but what we call common sense. Since the purpose is to understand the world as it really is, and not to persuade anybody of anything in particular, there is no place in science for deception, especially unconscious self-deception. The scientist cannot get away with fooling himself. Because all that will happen at the end of the process if you fail to detect your errors is that your aeroplane will not fly. The laws of nature, you see, cannot be deceived. So there is a strong underlying ethical principle woven into the very fabric of the scientific process — something which is all too often overlooked. Would it not be wonderful if the same were true in certain other fields of human activity?

— taken from the chapter on intellectual integrity in The Habit of Thought by Michael Strong

So I'm thinking that there have to be some politicians out there whose aeroplane will not fly. Denying science is a dangerous plan. We can look to those houses of cards which fell (they always fall) because basic building principles were not followed (such as use the proper foundation, use the right and appropriate materials, etc) and we see that Congress right now is acting penny-wise and pound-foolish. In their obsession to reward those who make nothing, create no jobs, fund no projects that make jobs, they are content to sit while the country burns. After all, they are paid good money to deny science, to deny problems, to create sound-bite scenarios that support them and their cronies. We are in the grip of fools whose aeroplanes are spewing smoke from the tail. They think a massive deception, loudly wrought, will keep the damned thing aloft. Again, science will win. Climate change, massive infrastructure decline, crumbling economic gravitas, all fixable. But denying and decrying is the smoke on the horizon here. SOMEONE needs to do something.

So what is the job of the poet in all of this?

We have no money to lobby. We only have our words and our art. We are the twin sister/brother to science. Time for us to speak out. We need to give voice to the climate, honor the bridge, wail against the wall of power until it comes down.

I'd say the time is now for a few good poets to speak up.

Star is just ...

So here I am with the sounds of the ocean all around me (360 degrees). Despite a bad stomach thing last night, I am in rare form. I feel so generative here. And yet all the intensity doesn't make me tired. It must be the air, the lighthouse beam swinging past the window, or the clear mind I seem to get here. Coming to Star Island each September is just ... so magical.

Today we were prompted to write a poem about our mothers' kitchens, without actually BEING part of the poem. There needs to be a female relative who enters the kitchen, an oven, something green, something dead. As I tell you this, I realize there is no oven in the poem I've written. Sigh.

But that is what revision's for after all. We are also to bring in some "found object" tomorrow. I have not found anything. Sigh. I wonder about the spider web I discovered on the porch railing this morning. I can't bring it in, but I do have a picture I took of it. I will make it count.

Have I told you about my new portable hot spot? It is so amazing to be able to put this little device on the table and connect wirelessly to the internet, even 10 miles out to sea. I am a bit of a technology diva. I love making use of (practical use of) these new things. It makes life easier all around. But I remember when the biggest boost in tech was the transistor radio. I remember when cell phones were "car phones" that plugged in and resembled a brick with an antenna. I date myself here.

On another note, my middle daughter is turning 40 tomorrow. How is THAT even possible? In what universe? I may write something about her. Why not? I'm on a roll.

So my roomie is sleeping and I ought to switch off the light. It would be so easy just to jump on Facebook for a quick look...

and while I'm otherwise engaged

So it's off to Start Island for a few days, leaving my husband to stoke the home fires and miss me. I hope to be able to blog a bit while there (I have a personal hotspot so I can stay connected). BUT... while I am otherwise engaged, I throw down a challenge prompt (borrowed from another writer)

If you’re not scientific, find a periodic table of elements. Pick a metal (gold, bronze, zinc, lithium, silver, tin) or a gas (helium, krypton), and and write about it for 10 minutes. Likewise, if you’re not musical, pick an instrument you’ve always wanted to play (piano, oboe, accordion, tuba), and write about it for 10 minutes. If you're not a legal professional, pick a legal term and write about it. If you don’t know the right words and terms, make them up. Write with authority. Have fun with it. Try to get 20-28 lines of sustained writing... or do a sonnet or a pantoum or a villanelle. The point is to write. I'd LOVE to see you post some bit of writing from this prompt here on my blog. Just click on "comments" and add it there.

I will do this exercise too, but later.

Enjoy this rainy Thursday and keep writing!

School starts and projects

I have gone on blithely for years not at all thinking about the first day of school. My kids have been out of school for longer than I care to admit. (OK, since 1992). Heck, I have grandchildren in college (3 of them). But now I am on the local school board. The first week was a nightmare of bussing messes. Some people are distressed that the combining of two high schools has "violated" them in terms of the memorabilia from their past achievements at the old high schools. Really. I am not making this up, folks. A man stood up at our last board meeting and said that when he walked through the "renewed" high school, he felt "as violated as ever in my life." While I do understand his pride in accomplishments of himself and his kids who also attended there and while I also understand that change is hard for some people, I must say if this is the most violated he has ever felt or been, he has a pretty charmed life, a very blessed life. So what do we do for people who are sad about the trophy case and the banners and the mascots? We must be sensitive and empathetic and kind. That is number one. But we must also encourage them to realize that change can be good too. Who hasn't felt the pang of seeing someone else live in and/or modify the house where they grew up? Who hasn't seen their old playground or the blueberry fields behind their childhood home turned into a parking lots? Who hasn't seen their old high school become something else? It is how the world works. We cannot un-ring bells and we cannot turn back time. We are in the midst of a political arena wherein some folks want to do exactly that (get bread prices down to 10 cents a loaf, roll back our thinking to Leave-It-To-Beaver days when life was in deed a whole lot simpler). But this is not the 50s. Not even those glorious 60s where everything seemed like one big sit-in. Where the office of President was respected and honored even if we didn't like the guy. Sigh.

At this point, I can only keep on being respectful of the poor man who was violated by lack of a trophy case and his son's name painted on a wall at the former high school, and stand firmly on my political soap box and decry those who disparage the president because he is black. I can only shine a positive light wherever I go in order to perhaps give HOPE and KINDNESS to others. It costs us nothing to be kind. A smile spent brings back a million good vibes for the smiler and the "smilee." This is my project: smiling GENUINELY at at least five people a day who don't expect my smile. It might have a BIG impact. It will not create anything by which someone could feel "violated." Not a bad human project, eh?

Oh of course I always have a writing project or two underway. I am busy packing for my yearly junket to Star Island for Writers in the Round. I have a couple projects I will take along to work on while I soak up all that sea air. I can hardly wait to get there. I feel really good to have mailed off my manuscript, Native Moons, Native Days this week. Fingers crossed on that one. I have two manuscripts off into the literary ether right now. But of course I am not twiddling my thumbs. Have The Boyfriend Project manuscript to finish and the novel in early stages. I have all the poems done for TBFP and only a smattering of work on the novel (including I have no title for it and this is hanging me up a bit). So I will look at the arc of TBFP and attempt to organize the poems into manuscript format while I am on Star. I hope to come home with that DONE and with one more chapter of the novel written. Did I mention this is a writing workshop? So in the midst of the two projects, I will be writing new poems. See why I am jazzed to be going?

Well, guess this does it for me this morning. I was up WAY too early (4AM) after going to bed WAY too early (8PM) so I expect my day is going to be a nutty one in terms of energy. Better take my vitamins!!!

What projects are YOU undertaking right now? Are you jazzed by some upcoming event? Do tell.

Porch Blog

The storm has passed, and passed us by largely unscathed. I worry about my friends in Vermont who are pretty soggy and floaty right now. We took more precautions than were needed, but better over-prepared... This morning we returned the porch to the porch and I am now sitting in a pale blue rocker with my laptop and a ginger ale. I feel lucky to have the time and space to do this as so many are mopping up and checking the damage and their insurance policies.

So what is on my mind today? I am of course thinking about the trip out to the Isles of Shoals on the 8th. A poet friend, Eileen, is going along this time and I am happy for her to have that first Star Experience. It is a magical place. I am looking forward to the project I've set for myself (to finish The Boyfriend Project manuscript and to work on poems for the novel I am doing ... VERY SLOWLY doing) OK so you're scratching your heads now and thinking how come I need poems for a novel... did you THINK I'd write a novel without a poet in it??? Really, people?

One thing I learned today came from a person who teaches memoir... have you heard anything about an "immersion memoir" in any of your circles? I'd never heard of this at all until today. It is apparently where one immerses in another's landscape or adventure or life and revisits by way of memoir. I had a HUGE epiphany that this is exactly what my manuscript The Boyfriend Project is, an immersion memoir in verse! Now I need to revisit the manuscript with that idea in mind and see where it stands.

So today my porch project is to

1. decide on 3 narrative poems to send to Naugatuck River Review's contest and actually get them into the mail

2. decide on and print 10 copies of a poem to be workshopped at my poetry group tomorrow

3. send off my manuscript (Native Moons, Native Days) to Bowman Books

It's a little after noon... what are my chances? I want to go downtown to the coffee shop too... hmmmm. I REALLY want to go to the beach.... hmmmmmm.

But I have to give the porch its due and stay put. I can work from here and not have to find a parking place, a table, deal with tourists, etc. Sexy husband not distracting me right now... I'm on a roll.

Coffee Shop Workin'

Ok, so I get distracted. It's also easy to think how nice it might feel to crawl back under the covers for a long nap. What to do?

The best thing would be to become more doggedly disciplined. But wait... I'm an artist. Thinking on this for a long time, I have come up with a few strategies for gaining discipline. One of them is working in the coffee shop. I can somehow manage to stay on task there. No phones, no soft beds, no one needing me for anything, no distracting sexy husband.

I do have a very nice office set up at home and I love working there. But when I get into a "mode" of easy distraction I just have to come here to Rock City Café and hunker down. That brings me to today. I've been here since about 1030 this morning, bed at home unmade, planning for battening down for Hurricane Irene left to later, sexy husband on the golf course. And voilá, progress. 90% done on a manuscript preparation that needs to happen today! Even a little work done on a poem that has had me flummoxed for a week.

It occurs to me I may have a parking ticket. I may have exceeded the limit on how long one may park in a single spot. Grrr. Guess I'll have to take my undisciplined self home.

I Should be "doing" something

It's quiet here this morning and there are so many little things needing to be done I could spend the whole day at them. But here I sit at the blogomachine writing about writing and reading. I've been thinking a bit about Nathaniel Hawthorne (Hathorn) lately and have decided it is about time to dig back into The House of the Seven Gables, my favorite of his novels. Of course EVERYONE ends up reading The Scarlet Letter, and teachers love to teach this too as it has so much in terms of moral rectitude and the "gone astray, but innocent enough and wronged." I taught this book myself when I was still doing that kind of thing (along with the typicals: Animal Farm, Fahrenheit 451, etc etc). But overall, I prefer House to Letter any day.

Hathorn considered himself to be a romance writer, or a writer of allegory. His tales were always drenched in the supernatural. But in truth he wrote from his own somewhat checkered family history in Salem, Mass. where he fought against the heavy mantle of his Puritan background. The Scarlet Letter (1850) and The House of the Seven Gables (1851) both deal with secrets, sin, shame, and of course revenge. Both deal with curses and witchery or at least suspected, insinuated, witchery. It was the cause celebre of its day. Hathorn was eager to expunge his own family's penchant for the heavily psychic past they experienced, and his novels do that need great justice. He did this with great aplomb through his well-drawn characters and his well-appointed (even when dingy or dilapidated) edifices.

Hathorn had a way with words, a manner of speaking the lives of his characters so that they were not just sympathetic and acceptable, but so a reader wanted to be in those moments with them, to either cheer them on or wag an accusing finger at them. He also had a way of laying out a community so that it might happen that you ended up walking down those cobbled streets in a dream, feel like you could inhabit the houses yourself. That is what happened to me when I first read House back in, oh maybe, 6th grade. I was fascinated by the idea of cottage industry once I'd read the description of the shop where threads were sold, the infamous house on Pyncheon Street. Some call this a gothic novel. In terms of what we now think of as a "gothic" novel, I wouldn't exactly agree although certainly there are gothic (dark) elements to be sure. Yes, the Pyncheon family is cursed due to its lying, cheating, murderous ways. Yes, the house is to be sold off to pay the debts. Yes, the upstart Judge Jaffrey Pyncheon is summoned to the house to stave off this sale, to accuse the innocent Clifford of murdering the patriarch, and furthermore, the family is living under Maule's Curse ( a strange man allegedly murdered by someone in the Pyncheon family long ago) and a "hidden gold in the house" story has flourished over the history of the family and the house. The plot thickens mightily and although Clifford's off to prison for the murder, the house ends up in the legal care of his fiancé, Hepzibah. She kicks Jaffrey out of the house (way to go, Hepzibah!) and settles in for the long haul. Fast forward two decades (or not, as Hathorn never told a story quickly if he could elongate it) and the house is a mess (as it should be in gothic terms) and the old place is being used as a business (again, you have to love the cottage industry thing here!). Hepzibah's endearingly pretty cousin Phoebe and a mysterious boarder, Matthew Holgrave, arrive on the scene. Clifford is released from prison to strange rumors about him. Clifford has some notions on how to get even with the evil brother who sent him to prison and for how to end Maule's Curse and set the family and the house to rights.

I guess there is something appealing to me in a kind of visceral way about this novel, I can feel myself wandering about the house, can almost smell its old smells and hear the creak of the floors under my feet. It may be why my dream was always to live in an old house... a dream that was realized in 2006. I love my old creaky house and its ghosts. I am happy to co-exist with them in such a happy relationship. I guess they know I am glad they have stayed. But I digress. Back to Hathorn and his House. I got to visit it (It is the Turner Mansion in Salem, Mass) and was enthralled immediately. I wanted to live in THAT house. I would love to tuck myself up in one of the rooms and WRITE in that house. I think that places (houses included) are some of the most important stimuli we have as writers. This was certainly true for Hathorn and his ilk. It was all about places and their effects on people. The intertwining of construct and humanity was undeniable. Of course, place is an important feature in The Scarlet Letter too. The town was the underlying character in that novel. Similarly, this many-gabled home is the featured character of The House of the Seven Gables. It breathes its secrets, oozes intrigue, creaks its dangerousness, on nearly every page, and in the human characters' ways of behaving or misbehaving.

So, upshot here is that I am about to get back to The House of the Seven Gables. I downloaded it free to my iPad. I long ago lost my original hard-covered copy with the etchings of the shoppe, the house itself, the Pyncheons. I scour archival bookshops for just the right copy to tuck away here on my very contemporary shelves. I have a secret wish that my grandchildren would read this great novel of the 17th Century. Sigh. Will they? So far, 4 of them are pretty well grown and have not. But they are young men... does that make a difference?

Oh, and did I mention that I am a DISTANT descendant of Hathorn, via his wife Sophia's blood line? There's that.

The Boyfriend Project

Disclaimer: I am happily married for over 30 years. Would not change that. Love my hubby.

Now that I have put in my disclaimer:

I have been working on a writing project (and a human project) since one of my old beaux from high school passed away in 2005. I'd just moved home to Maine and heard he had lung cancer and not that long to live. I arranged to go see him. He and I enjoyed an afternoon of reminiscing although he was very weak. I got a chance to meet his wonderful wife of nearly 40 years too. As I drove away, I thought that it it would be a good idea to track down as many of the "boyfriends" I'd had over the span of my life (from Kindergarten crushes to serious "loves" and others I'd simply dated a bit or who were boys my friends had seriously dated). Being a poet, it naturally came to the notion of writing poems about this journey. So The Boyfriend Project was born.

I'm now close to finished with the writing part. I have one more "boy" to find... the boy who was my crush at age 7 and 8. He and I made our First Communion together (I have a photo which might be a nice cover). He is the final stitch in the fabric of the work. I'd like to find him, see how he is after all these years (over 50!) I haven't had much luck so far, but will keep trying. One boyfriend, the one who "taught" me how to kiss, passed away long before I could get in touch with him. He married a girl one class below me in high school and I understand they had a wonderful marriage. I feel good about that and sad for her losing him so young.

I made a few decisions during the writing that are "artistic" ones, most specifically to smooth together some boyfriends into a kind of composite boyfriend. Poetic license is a good thing. It protects identities and incidents get better explained or presented. But the essence, the spirit of the boyfriends is intact. I have also taken poetic license with incidents in the poems, and using "generic" incidents that were not my own experience. Some were experiences of girls and boys I knew well. This is done all the time, though many people thing everything a poet writes about happened TO the poet. Not so, not so.

I made a decision early on to include boyfriends in college and beyond ( I really didn't date that much in high school), to include a poem comparing my first husband to my "real" husband, and to end the manuscript with a poem written specifically for my husband, one I like to read at the end of readings. I've written the dedication page, NOT naming names but giving some background for the manuscript's existence.

These decisions helped greatly to flesh out the manuscript, to give it enough material to BE a whole manuscript.

People in my writing group have really gotten on board with this project, eagerly reading the poems as they have unfolded and giving me great critical advice on them. I have come to realize these wonderful woman have become my sounding board, "editors," and advisors.

So, now I have a poem or two left to write, and it is time to begin the arduous part: determining the order of the poems (not necessarily chronology, but maybe). I also need to decide where to send it. Hmmmm. Any ideas?