The power of music on poetic inspiration

Last night I attended a concert in Portland, Maine. Straight No Chaser, a ten-man a cappella group, was delightful, fresh, funny, accomplished. Throughout the concert, I was itching to write. I did not write however, made myself just enjoy the music. This is not the first time I've experienced this kind of an urgent need to whip out a notebook and pen during a concert. Last year (or maybe year before last) I was at a concert of the Portland Symphony and actually did a first draft of a poem during the concert.

Why is it, I ask myself, that music is so inspiring to me as a writer? Why is it that I get such a strong urge to write at these times? I think the answer is rhythm. As a formally-trained poet (yes, rhyme, meter, form!) I feel the beats in poems I read, and seem to find a natural rhythm as I write. I am tapping it out in my head as I compose. Hmm, as I write that last sentence, it occurs to me that what I do is compose poems rather than write them. OMG, I am a composer! LOL

Seriously though, I am interested in that being the way I approach and describe my writing. It makes more sense to me that what I do is composing. "Writing" seems more like transcribing to me. Oh I have heard many "poets" say that they feel as if they are indeed taking down words that "come to them" from some mysterious source. (eye roll)

I'm not saying that there is never any of that raw inspiration, the interruption of life by the "muse." What I am saying is that composing poetry is more than that. We have responsibility not only for the words, but also for how they appear on the page, in what order, with what emphasis, and strengthened to their most perfect selves in combination with others. It is the revision, the deep revision, that separates writing from composing. Placement of food on a plate to its most appealing presentation is called composing the plate. So too ought we describe the revision part of the poem as composing.

But, I digress a bit here. I started out speaking about the influence of music on poetry composition. When I am listening to a piece of music, no matter which piece really, I feel something in my body. That feeling wants to go somewhere, to make a reply. If I were a dancer, my body would want to move itself around to reply. I am a writer, not a dancer. So my body's reply is in words.

There's another way music is involved in my poetic life. When I'm stuck, or in a rut with my poetic practice, I turn to music for help out of the inertia. I wish I could say how many times I've blasted Pink Floyd in order to change the mood, kick start myself. (I listen to "The Wall" when in a deep cave of inertia). I also listen to Talking Heads' "Burning Down the House" for a swift kick in the doldrums. At other times, when I simply want to up the ante in my writing, I might listen to something more soothing, something classical or R & B. I have favorites in nearly every genre. I listened a LOT to Oldies from the 60s when working on the new manuscript, The Boyfriend Project. I listened to Gregorian chant, old hymns, and monastic music when writing Psalms From the Commons: invocations for everyday life.

The bottom line here is, for me, a deep connection to music and composing poetry. I leave you with this: where in YOUR LIFE do you find music that inspires or fuels your writing? Is there a favorite piece of music that gets to you in such a way as to turn on or up your writing? Or perhaps some sounds in nature provide that music. My natural world music is the sound of the ocean (especially a stormy ocean) and the rustling of wind through grass and treetops.

Let's chat about this. Please feel free to post a poem that was inspired or instigated by YOUR music.

On Veterans Day

Wagering the Future

In deep Ardennes snow, with an idea

of a better future, growing boys

in men's uniforms waged war.

No games in the backyard, no plastic

army men, this was the Real McCoy.

War is a bet on the margin;

no guarantee of a big payoff, a win

not always a win. When the call comes

the wagers are placed, the ante

always bigger than expected.

So it was for us, not yet born

when our fathers marched off to war.

The margin bet has been called:

time to pay up, or to collect the prize.

For some, the usurer knocks at the door.

from Daughter of the Ardennes Forest, Main Street Rag, 2007

On this Veterans Day, I dedicate (again) my poems of war and PTSD to my father, Pvt. Charles J. Willette. I honor his service and suffering and stop to recall on his behalf how things were in the Battle of the Bulge, and how they have gotten for young men of war today. We should all remember so others will not forget.

Using the Em Dash (long dash)

Using the Em dash (long dash)

Em dashes — called this because they resemble the width of the character m — are used for emphasis or interruption. They can be used on their own or in pairs to offset a word or phrase. Note these examples:

Many people have trouble deciding on which diet to follow — one which emphasizes carb control and exercise or one which emphasize calorie control.

Many people have trouble choosing a life partner — one who is physically appealing or one whose values are appealing — because they have little sense of what makes a relationship work.

The double hyphen (--) is sometimes used instead of the em dash. This is often the case for people who do not know how to create an em dash using their word processing program. One should determine how to do this and not use the double hyphen as it looks amateurish.

Using the long dash, the em dash, is some what a personal choice but there are considerations to be made before using it. In the case of poetry, the decision to use the em dash is perhaps more important than in prose. Of course any formal writing ought to have fewer odd bits of punctuation than any informal writing. One thing that web writing has wrought is a casualness over issues of punctuation. This is a dangerous trap for serious literary writers of all genres. Avoiding dashes, semicolons, and ellipses is best unless the writer is adept at punctuation and has a specific purpose for using these somewhat renegade forms.

Here are some suggestions for considering whether or not to use the em dash in your writing:

1. Dashes are not to be used commonly. If your paper or poems have multiple dashes, make sure to check them over and see whether they were used correctly and appropriately or not. Dashes most definitely ought to be used SPARINGLY.

2. Rule of thumb: If you have a dash where a comma would work, use the comma, for pete's sake, use the comma!

3. If you use a dash toward the end of a sentence, do not put an ending dash right before the period. In poetry, do not use a dash before any other punctuation or just after any other punctuation. You may wish to end a line with the em dash, but if a comma will do, use the comma!

4. One should not replace commas being used for an appositive with dashes. Simply because it’s an interruption, doesn’t mean a dash belongs there. Emily Dickinson used dashes in most surprising ways; it became “her style” in a sense. Most of us do not use dashes to highlight a personal style. We use them because we are tentative about other punctuation. (NOTE: some poets use the ellipsis profusely for the same reason.)

5. Use dashes instead of parentheses when the note you are making is more connected to the initial sentence, as parentheses usually indicate a more separate or personal thought. Use dashes, instead of commas, when the note breaks up the flow of a sentence, as commas are typically used for an item that fits in more.

6. When using a dash in terms of explanations or listings, i.e. in a formal paper, it is recommended to rearrange the sentence so that a colon could be used instead. This is especially true in poetry. Dashes tend to interrupt the sentence (line), which is not the desired tone of a formal paper or formal verse. In poetry, the interruption is best done with white space or commas.

7. Most commonly, a dash connects an independent clause with another, with a separate or interrupting thought plus a conjunction like or, but, yet, as, for, and after the second dash.

8. The dash works somewhat like parentheses or commas, but it is used where stronger punctuation is needed. It is used to connect an independent clause with the 'interrupting' thought:

1. Independent clause — thought — independent clause.
2. Independent clause — thought.

9. Using dashes in poetry makes a visual difference for the reader. It is a “stopper” which makes the reader pause for a longer time than a comma or even a parenthesis. Ask ourself if you want the reader focused so hard on the phrase or material within the dashes that he/she stops to ponder that at the possible expense of the rest of the line or stanza.

For me, a long dash is a punctuation mark of last resort in most cases. I almost NEVER use them in pairs. I admit to a certain bias (see #9 above) and avoid the appearance of arbitrariness or lack of understanding of punctuation. When asked to explain this stance, I have to stop and think from a grammatical point of view just why. I am so used to avoidance of this piece of punctuation that it is as normal as breathing to me. But hopefully you will have gained a bit of insight here as I waded through serious explanations.

Time changes, or does it?

Early last evening I went around changing clocks: watches, microwave, stove, table clock, alarm clock. I didn't change my electronics since those would change themselves. How is that? What big switch in the ether zaps all our computers with the correct (?) time at the given moment? Does time really go back or forward in one fell swoop?

I hate time change days. It is artificial. It was a plan devised for an agrarian society to aid in harvesting crops and planting seasons. I don't feel any different in the morning one way or another. I don't experience gaining or losing an hour of sleep. Of course that may be due to the fact that I don't sleep like most people, with a set bedtime or rising hour. I never have been that kind of a sleeper. I am fond of the long afternoon nap and the late night writing session. I am not an early "getter-upper" by any means.

Native culture does not operate on linear time. That is another "issue" for me. I don't see time as a "from here to there" thing at all. This view (circular and concurrent) makes it hard for me sometimes. It is hard to fit myself into a calendar world. I do well with it only because I force myself. Being "retired" is somewhat of a help in that I don't have to show up to a job on a specific day and at a specific time. I can ebb and flow. I like ebbing. I like flowing.

Having said that, certain dates are on my mind, like birthdays and holidays and special anniversary dates. Again, I think this is because I have fairly well assimilated to that kind of living. But I really FEEL time easing or gaining strength with the seasons. Imagine how hard it was for me living in the CA desert where the seasons were vague things, marked by subtle changes rather than first or last snow, leaves changing and falling, birds arriving or departing, trees falling asleep or waking. It was awful in many ways and I felt discombobulated most of the time. I am grateful for the seasons and my whole body feel more at peace with the natural world in charge.

I have a photo of myself (my feet) straddling the "time line" at Greenwich. It is one of my favorite photos of me: proof to me that I can be everywhere at once. Freaky and fun. I like crossing the International Date Line, the Continental Divide. I'd love to cross the Equator (minus the hazing rituals). Time. Place. Fascinating.

How does this play into my writing? It creates a volume of sensory experiences that figure heavily into topic and approach. I have written much more (and more successfully) since coming home to native ground where nature is active in my body and my psyche. I am attuned to temperature changes and weather and environs. I have more energy for writing here. I feel more free to express what I see, hear, and feel of my surroundings. I am in sync with my space and place. Ahhh, feels so good.

Robert Frost did not want to be known as a "nature poet" (or so it is rumored). I am happy if someone describes me thusly. Nature, place. That is my thing. But maybe a time poet too. I am interested in what happens when. I like to consider the changes that take place in people and places over the curve of the circle of time. I like to write about those changes.

So tell me, followers and readers, what about time in your life and in your writing??? And did you feel the falling back that supposedly happened in the middle of the "night" as proscribed by the Timekeeper?

Editing and proofing dilemmas

There is quite a bit of disquiet over what constitutes "editing" these days. Authors send in manuscripts and publishers publish. But who looks at the manuscript before it goes out? What kind of a look does a manuscript get (or need) before it is deemed "ready" for publication?

I think that editing is a murky area for many authors who confuse it with proofing. These are not necessarily the same animal. Here is a bit of my take on the differences:

Proofing:

The proofer is looking for typos, maladjusted lines, margins, grammar, spelling errors, punctuation gaffs, and all the technical aspects of a poem, story, or essay/article.

Editing:

An editor is more concerned with deeper issues in a manuscript or essay or poem:

Compilations

Manuscript arc (how do the bits fit together to make a whole?)

Determining if all materials are relevant to theme or arc or if some need to be left out

Order of items in manuscript

What, if any, re-writes are needed for pieces in manuscript

appropriate use of materials

choosing and organizing pieces for an anthology or journal

accepting or rejecting materials submitted to a journal or publication

checking sources/attributions of quoted or cited materials (nonfiction)

formatting of manuscript; making it clean for presentation

publication quality/worthiness (this is a very tricky area, not for the faint of heart!)

These are just some of the many things an editor does to determine manuscript readiness. The relationship between author/poet and editor once was a very personal one, but over time, and due to the sheer volume of materials being published, it has gotten to a different place. Contemporary editors are more technical directors of a manuscript and less of hand-holders, nudgers, and encouragers. I believe in the old way to some extent. Of course there is a difference in "editing" a manuscript for an individual author/poet who is submitting it elsewhere and working on putting together an issue of a journal or magazine. When I work with individuals who want to submit their work "out there" to potential publishers, I prefer the one-on-one approach wherein I work to help the author determine quality of materials to be sent out, to organize materials, and to develop an arc that might jell the manuscript into a cohesive whole. I have spent a long time at this and have a process in place that seems to work well. I want to work WITH an author, not just accept or reject willy-nilly because of my own personal tastes. for my literary journal, Pulse, I often send encouraging notes or suggestions to authors whose work I am rejecting. I think this is a helpful thing, encouraging to the author/poet who does want her/his work to be good.

I also firmly believe we are not the best editors or proofers of our own work. We tend to gloss right over the same errors no matter how many times we comb the manuscript for boo-boos in punctuation, spelling, etc. And we also miss crucial errors in the content and flow of our own work in terms of the narrative, characters, story arc. We need another set of dedicated eyes. This kind of "look" is what editing does for an author.

Having said that, an author needs to be willing to pay actual money for those services. Having your friend do it is fine if that person has editing skills, but ... And if your friend is an editor, pay him or her. If you were a dentist, would you be expected to give free root canals to your friends? You can possibly work out a discount with your editor-friend of course, a kind of "professional courtesy" discount. Go for it if you want to do so. Your friend will still be your friend even if you ask for this.

It used to be that many publishing houses have in-house editors who freelanced. I'm sure that is still happening. You can look for editorial services in most literary marketplace books and listings. Poets and Writers has some ads for these. There are freelance editors out there who offer this kind of service for a variety of fees, some higher than others. It is good to be able to know who is available. Often this comes by word of mouth as well as through conventional sources. Ask around. See who is available to edit OR proof your work once you determine that you want to start sending things out in a serious way. Does every poem need an editor? No. But if you are sending loads of poems out and NONE is getting published, you might look at a writing coach. That is a whole other topic.

First "snow"

Well, all huff and puff and no measurable snow here. Went to church this morning to find it was canceled due to weather! Perplexing to say the least. But that led to a nice "breakfast at the Brass Compass" (the title of my 2nd book). Now I am supposed to be preparing for my reading this afternoon and pretty much think that no one will attend. It's just icky out: windy, cold, wet.

So what is to be said poetically about weather anyway? Does it inspire us to write or slow down the creative juices and clog the veins of creativity? For me, the nastier the weather, the warmer I feel about my writing. I love the nuances in nasty weather, from the shifting sleet against the windows to the abject silence of a deep snowfall. There is just something about the lack of sunshine that makes me feel cozy and soft. Cozy and soft are great places for me in terms of inspiration. And then there is the danger of wicked wicked wind. What's not to love about that kind of writing?

There are some wonderful "weather" poems we can turn to for inspiration. Richard Wilbur's great one, First Snow in Alsace, is about weather and of course SO much more. If you haven't read this one, I suggest you find it. When you do, you will find that there is so much more than weather. I'd love to have a conversation about this poem and any other so-called weather poems. Seems like the time is right.

up and thinking

Here are two things I'd rather not be right now: up and thinking. Ugh. Slept earlier this evening when I wanted to be awake and now I am up when I'd rather be sleeping. Just one more proof the world is upside down.

While waiting to get tired again, or for the melatonin to kick in, I decide to write something. Not to finish the unfinished blog of the other day which can wait, but a little bit about what it is like to not be writing.

I have not written a word (poetry or prose) for a week now. Feels a bit like that popcorn kernel that gets stuck in the back of the throat. There is something THERE but I can't quite get to it by coughing or scratching my tongue against it. It is irritating and I am overly focused on it. Nothing. I want to write. Really, I have ideas for poems or beginnings of poems, but nothing nothing nothing.

I'm going to guess it is some kind of instinctive rest period. I have been so prolific for a while now that my brain is objecting, rejecting my zeal and verve. It wants to grow a few new cells or something, maybe re-coat a couple nerve bundles or cook up some connective juices. I feel how tired my brain is and yet I want to make it work harder. I am a cruel mistress of my brain.

I go through this same thing every once in a while, a thing which is not Writer's Block. It is a brain strike, cells lined up in protest against the work I shovel at them. What to do?

I think I will try reading. Oh sure, I do that all the time. But I think I will indulge and read FICTION. Fiction reading is my vacation. Not a complete vacation mind you because I usually find myself making notes for poems as I read. But it is a break, a movement to an island in my brain where there are no stanzas, rhymes, line breaks, metaphor choices to make. It is a sunny beach and I will lie on it with a cool drink with one of those little umbrellas in it. I will make myself something wonderful of this break from poetry.

Or maybe I will sleep some more. I could declare a day of rest and stay in bed. Oh wait, I can't seem to stay asleep right now. Bah! On the other hand I might just browse through some web sites and see about submitting a few poems somewhere. NO! RESIST! REST!

Reading it is then. The Night Circus and We Animals seem like good choices. Both are started already and I can just pick up where I left off. Good idea. (Brain is nodding approval, but suggesting sleep...) OK I answer, so if you want me to sleep, YOU can make that happen. Shut off the light in the sleep center and let me go back to bed!

In college, this would be the time to go make some eggs and toast. But I'm not in college now and the idea of cleaning the kitchen at this hour is not appealing. So, back to bed I go to wait for sleep.

Up and thinking. Bah!

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.