Poetic Asides with Robert Lee Brewer - Poets Helping Poets

Poetry Twittering Tuesdays

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 23:35:54 GMT

We had our 2nd weekly poetry conversation on Twitter today. Find it by searching for #poettues at Twitter.com.

Here are some of the highlights today:

I started off by asking: So, what's everyone's goals as a poet? Trying to get published? Write better poems? Notice the world around you? Something else?

Then, I added that, "For me, I've just always liked playing around with patterns and combinations, whether it involves numbers or letters," and, "Writing poetry is also a way of entertaining myself. Like making up music videos in my head or singing songs about whatever."

@Janet45 said, "There's something spiritual about poetry for me, a way of connecting with stillness, of going inside. It can be playful too."

@rebunting said, "Goals: fame & fortune! But really, I'm not going to lie - publication is a goal. Definitely," as well as, "Writing poetry also is a way of reducing the boil of soup in my head to a slow simmer."

@nivermoore said, "I like playing around with sounds, finding the right vowels in the right words to convey the feeling/image/subject."

And many more poets shared their goals. In this way, we all began to talking with each other and branching out into various directions.

For instance, I was really into making T-shirts today: "We should make T-shirts that read: Yes, Publication!" and "That's the next T-shirt idea: Serious la-la-la-la-la," which'll make sense in a moment, because...

We talked about making writing stick and making it important. My quote: "I love sinking into the writing, but I also love skipping along and singing la-la-la-la-la. Combine both, and I'm hooked."

Strategies for overcoming writer's block were tossed around, including listening to music, mind-mapping, reading, etc. @renkath had some great Tweets throughout the poetic discussion, but I especially liked this one: "I put myself under too much pressure and am hypercritical. That kills the muse. Then she starts to stink up the house."

Poetic forms were shared and discussed with @auntieflamingo introducing me to Scifaiku. Check out www.scifaiku.com.

We talked about how the valuation of poetry and writing has ruined (or contributed to the ruination) several relationships and marriages. We recommended poems, poets, journals, contests, writing groups, revision tips, and so much more. It's really a blast, and we do it basically as long as everyone's willing to talk shop. So, feel free to show up next week and talk poetry at Twitter.

Use and/or search for the hashtag #poettues, and if you're not following me on Twitter yet, I go by the handle: @robertleebrewer

Wednesday Poetry Prompts: 065

Wed, 07 Oct 2009 18:58:30 GMT

We had a fun poetry discussion on Twitter yesterday. It went so well that I think we'll continue meeting on Tuesdays. If you want to find what was said, just go to Twitter and search for #poettues. Today's prompt was actually inspired during the conversation (thanks to @martinjason and @ronbaker).

For today's prompt, I want you to write a poem about finding something that doesn't belong where it is. The examples from the discussion were to find a collection of Pablo Neruda poetry in the children's section of a library with the counter-example of finding a children's book in the poetry section. Pure chaos! (By the way, I don't know if I belong on Twitter or not, but you can find me at @robertleebrewer).

Here's my attempt for the day:

"Note found beneath the wiper blade"

This is your last chance. If you don't
come to me today and confess
you were wrong, I'm on the first plane
back to Hawaii. If you won't
have me, the volcano gods will.

*****

Looking for more poetry-related information?

For poetic forms, CLICK HERE
For interviews with poets, CLICK HERE
For the free monthly Poet’s Market newsletter, CLICK HERE
For discounted poetry references, CLICK HERE
For poetry listings on WritersMarket.com, CLICK HERE
For 2010 Poet's Market, CLICK HERE

Poetry Tuesdays on Twitter!

Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:36:37 GMT

Let's start assembling on Tuesdays at Twitter to discuss poetry. I'll probably roll onto the site around 10 or so in the morning ATL time, but y'all can get started before or after that.

If you're not a follower on Twitter, find me at @robertleebrewer.

If you don't have a Twitter account, it's free and only takes a minute or so.

We'll use the hashtag, #poettues on all of our Tweets. That means, you can use the search box on the right-hand side of the page to search on "poettues" to see the conversation as it's happening.

I figure we'll try this out throughout October. If it catches on, we'll continue doing Poetry Tuesdays every week into infinity. If it doesn't, we'll always have October of 2009.

*****

Looking for more poetry-related information?

For poetic forms, CLICK HERE
For interviews with poets, CLICK HERE
For the free monthly Poet’s Market newsletter, CLICK HERE
For discounted poetry references, CLICK HERE
For poetry listings on WritersMarket.com, CLICK HERE
For 2010 Poet's Market, CLICK HERE

Poets Helping Poets: What comes first? Poem or collection?

Sun, 15 Mar 2009 15:41:03 GMT

I've received differing answers from poets over the past year about what comes first when putting a collection together. Do they settle on a theme and write poems to fit the theme? Or do they write individual poems and then try to fit them together? Some poets say they do it one way; some the other; some do both (also known as the By-Any-Means-Necessary Method).

Anyway, I asked the Poetic Asides group on Facebook, and once again, so many great answers piled in that I couldn't use them all.

*****

I worry about the book element after the poems are written. Assembling poems for a collection means trying to get a thread running through them that helps them to connect to each other, or lean on other for meaning and content.

Of course, it's easier if you have sequences of poems: their running order is easier to organise, because they have a cohering quality that allows them to stand alone. But you still have the problem of what you put beforehand and what comes afterwards - because the outside poems have to be able to stand up to those sequences: not be overshadowed by the strength of the coherance of that sequence.

Barbara Smith

*****

I have done both. Generally I just write and then something evolves.

David Fraser

*****

Ordering the Storm is a collection of essays by respectable poets on that very topic. I recommend people check it out. Everyone tells you to front load and back load to wow the judges in contests and that's what I did with my first book. When I learned the book was invited to be in the VQR Poetry Series and no longer needed to pass the screen test, I reorganized the first half drastically. Now the poems form a progression and, I'd like to believe, the voice and narrative thread each together collectively.

Allen Braden

*****

My first collection, You Beckon, was put together from the poems written over an extended period of time. So the poems dictated the collection. It was amazing how once the process began it seemed to take on a life all its own and every poem seemed to find its exact perfect spot.

Peggy Eldridge-Love

*****

Charles Olson once told Ed Dorn something like, “If you study one thing deeply, you will learn everything.” Some of the premises being that everything is connected and that extreme concentration will enable you to think as the subject thinks. Dorn followed Olson’s advice and ended up with the great collection of poems called Gunslinger.

I learned about studying one thing before I knew of Olson telling that to Dorn. After I read what Olson told Dorn, I followed the advice more passionately. But for me it’s a bit different. Yes, I can see the interconnectedness of things, and the focus of studying one thing presents an amazing clarity of a sustained thinking process. But for me, as I said, it’s a bit different. For me, it’s about sustaining energy and imagination.

I’ve seven collections of poetry, three of which are published and one is forthcoming. They are all tightly themed. And that is because I stuck to the topic. The topic, for me, creates the energy to write. The topic continually stimulates my imagination. The topic is the muse. And I chase the muse whenever and wherever I can until I’m tired. In this last book, it was about 80 poems over a year until I was tired. I imagine I will pick it up again, because the content does seem endless.

But here’s the point: the theme/topic is the sustenance of my writing. And once it is gone, so is the writing.

Plus, I’m stubborn. While composing this most recent book, I wouldn’t write any poems that didn’t relate to the topic. The same is true of the other books. I wouldn’t veer. One book revolved around cosmology and particle physics and took about four or five years to write. One book fed off the energies of a Lorca poem for about five years. One book fed off a self-created writing assignment for about a month, and then revisions. One lasted for about a half year as I created a world where time moves backwards. One lasted about three or four years as I created a new mythology. One lasted about a year as I was proclaiming love. And this last one lasted about year, though really nineteen or twenty, and I still think there is another five years in it.

So, yeah. I compose by theme. Theme motivates, focuses, and stimulates me. Theme creates visions. Theme is the thing that let’s me confront the big issues, like love, death, and time, but indirectly, which is the only way one can confront those big topics today.

Theme gives me purpose.

Tom Holmes

*****

For me, the idea of a collection comes from a small selection of poems already written -- poems which, when looking back on them (ie to find places to submit them to etc) have a similar voice or touch on complementary themes. My poetry play, "Dreams of May," very much developed from the realization that I had created a character via my poems. But now, I am working on a collection that is more theme driven, and although it is starting from some previously written and published poems, it is continuing with new ones I am writing with that theme in mind. Otherwise, I suppose the answer to your question is "yes, all of the above"

Sue Guiney

*****

I have a chapbook (published) and two full size manuscripts. I put them all together with poems I had written already. It's the following my passion approach.

I'm keeping this email short. I don't know how people decide what they are going to write about and then create a book. Lots of poets do this, but I have to write what comes and then after I have a few hundred poems see what it looks like and begin to put it together. As I send out my current manuscripts I revise and continually rework poems. I am now getting edit feedback, new eyes to look at my two full size manuscripts in process, to see if I can edit them to a better book. I'd like my next publication to be a full size, but I also have chapbook sizes circulating. One chapbook was recently a finalist but didn't quite make it.

Julene Tripp Weaver

*****

Generally I write poems one at a time and later see how I can arrange them. But in all honesty, I find assembling a collection much harder than writing a poem, primarily because I feel there’s a contradiction between something being a "collection" and expecting to find in it a necessary sequence. This need for sequence or cohesion seems to be a variation on the insistence for narrative, which I don't really have an interest in. So I find myself torn between a cohesion so obvious it borders on monotony and a cohesion so subtle I can't imagine anyone else perceiving it. At this point I tend to throw up my hands and say, they are related because they all came from the same mind, it's inescapable. They're like a series of stepping stones; their relationship is simply that they all happen to be in the same river.

Two poets come to mind pondering this topic: Richard Wilbur and Louise Gluck. I remember Wilbur being asked how he assembled his collections and he said, essentially, that he didn't give it much thought. It was a collection. I envied his insouciance, since now, it seems, publishers expect thematic progression in poetry collections. To that end, Louise Gluck's collection, "Wild Iris," which won the Pulitzer, always struck me as great in its thematic cohesion, in its progressive development, but weak in its individual poems. I remember thinking after reading it, I would rather my individual poems be great though my collection lacked thematic cohesion.

Michael T. Young

*****

I've had two collections - one pamphlet and one full. In both cases I arranged the poems after they had been written. I didn't have an idea of how the final collections would look as I didn't know that they would be published. I'm still writing about whatever presents itself.

Maggie Sawkins

*****

I do both really. I have a couple of themes I like to write about, but I also write one-offs that have nothing to do with anything!

Paul De La Plante

*****

I do it both ways. That's the short answer.

Pris Campbell

*****

Ever since I began to really consciously develop my own poetics I have written with the design of the complete book in mind. Perhaps this is a Mallarme influence. For Mallarme, there is only one cosmic book, and each book is merely a reading or commentary on "the one true text"... and which, I imagine, is written in an ideal language (something like Benjamin's Messianic language perhaps, and hence, ultimately a language we no longer understand). I wrote a book length poem over a period of ten years, and then for the past ten years have written books usually composed of two or more long hybrid sequences.

Eric Selland

*****

It really does depend on the muse I think. For example, I'm currently finishing one manuscript and editing two that were done all at once on the same theme. As one thought led into the next so did each poem BUT I'm also editing four other manuscripts that are collections on a theme scattered across years (up to a decade). If the theme is one, I'm more inclined to I obviously write more of it than any other and will do that one in succession more readily (and the same goes for if the theme is a certain format ie sonnet, free verse, prose, etc).

Ronda Wicks Eller

*****

It is quite difficult to explain. I work mostly from a feeling, almost never from an idea. I say that I am always writing the same and endless poem. I meet the poems once written. What prevails is the intuition. There are exceptions: I once worked as a title or subject, with some success or not. I remember a book from the letters of Rimbaud in Africa. This project survived two or three poems that I included in a book.

Carlos Barbarito

*****

Both. Sometimes one way, sometimes the other, and sometimes both at the same time. Right now I'm working in a fully conceptualized project, but the last one had a coherent section that took up about a third of the book, with the rest taken from work done over the same two years.

Christopher Flynn

*****

I make collections after I've written the poems. To start out with an idea about a collection would shape my creative process differently than allowing myself to write each day with whatever is in front of me that prompts a poetic response (and I do write every morning, so this is not a discipline question). This way, I find that threads in my work that surprise me and keep me interested. This is not to say that I would be opposed to trying it the other way around in the future.

Kathleen Cassen Mickelson

*****

I do it both ways, depending on how the poems come to me. I am but the slave of the muse!

Jeffrey Spahr-Summers

*****

I've only done one chap/collection called Book of Aliases. I wanted to get readership on my old poems so I went through my blog archives and picked what I thought were some of the best and strongest. I had a huge amount of them and they were all over the place in terms of themes. As I was trying to sort them into piles I realized that one of the interesting things I had been considering in my writing was the idea that we all are constantly shifting from one presentation of ourselves to another -- something similar to having several aliases. Once I had that as a concept for a collection, I was able to pick 57 of my older poems that could be grouped under that theme and the book became easy to assemble.

Russell Ragsdale

*****

Most of the poetry I write tends to be the quirky, offbeat, humorous kind. After a number of my pieces were published in journals, I started working with an idea about how I'd like to organize them and finally did it in my first poetry book (and first book, too) Mugging for the Camera. I found it was a lot easier to work with a central theme of an idea, even if it was kind of loosely based.

RJ Clarken

*****

I look to see what I've been writing for the last 2 years, decide whether it's a subject or a tone or what, and then include and exclude to make a unified whole.

Then I throw all the poems on the floor, arrange them into three piles or sections, and arrange the poems within the sections. I have never written a poem FOR a collection, but I know many fine poets who do.

I'm talking about collections of individual poems, of course. My three book-length verse narratives have stories to organize them.

Penelope Scambly Schott

Poets Helping Poets: Breaking through a writing slump

Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:51:22 GMT

Last Friday, I tossed out a question to the members of the Poetic Asides group on Facebook: How do you break through a writing slump?

Whether it's been days, weeks, months, or even years, we've all been through dry spots. Well, as I learned from the response, most of us have anyway.

In my own case, I find that reading new (to me) voices is what helps the most. Though listening to the news or going for a run, both usually work as well.

The response was so massive that I had to be selective with the answers, but here's what some of the poets wrote:

*****

For some reason, I find if I have a few even modest successes, sometimes that spooks me and makes it hard for me to believe I'll ever write anything worthwhile again. After a number of false starts, I find myself going back to some old reliable pump primers, as I've come to think of them.

Actually, someone on the Poetic Asides site led me to the Poet's Companion, by Kim Addonizio and Dorianne Laux, and I've found the exercises in there invaluable. I also love Natalie Goldberg's, Writing Down the Bones and this year she released The Essential Writer's Notebook--another gem of inspirational prompts to kick my rear-end.

For me, your prompts are also a great source of creative energy--a way for me to know I'm committed to writing poetry at least once a week, without having to dream up a topic.

And last, but not least, I try to take at least one writing course a year, just to make my mind travel along different tracks.

S.E. Ingraham

*****

Here are two strategies that work for me:

1. Go to a reading--any kind of reading, poetry or prose. The minute a reading begins, I feel that I'm being drawn "into the zone," into a community of writers that helps me reconnect with my own creativity. It's as if my writer's mind steps into line, comes into focus, re-invents and re-establishes itself.

2. Go for a long hike--in a natural setting, away from the house, the computer, the daily grind. As I walk, and gradually relax, the rhythm of unrestricted movement enables me to reconnect with the natural cadence of my poetic sensibility.

Ruth Nolan

*****

It works for me when I have people around me. Therefore, I am longing for the spring so that I can go out and sit in a nice park, with trees and flowers and hear people walking by.

Staffan in Sweden

*****

I used to believe in writing slumps and writer's blocks. But I don't anymore, because if you can challenge yourself to the simple task of writing something every day, say at least 500-600 characters (but more is better) or 125-175 words minimum (again, more is better). You could further challenge and commit yourself to either send it to a friend or friends every day for a minimum of 3 months, no matter how bad or terrible you think it is. A little exercise like this will prove that you CAN write whenever you like, and that on some level you are choosing not to. It's an important thing to realize that your talents and skills are yours and not on loan or borrowed or given to you by something else--there is no fickle muse that comes to or abandons you.

J.P. Dancing Bear

*****

I write book reviews for various online and print mags, so finding time to write my own stuff is hard. When I try to balance reviewing, family, my money jobs and my own pieces, I find that writer's block doesn't exist for me anymore. Because the reviews are on a deadline and I want to continue to be paid, I have to force myself to be a professional and write even when I don't feel like writing. Normally, when I am 5-10 minutes into the piece it starts to flow.

The reviewing and journalism has put my own writing in perspective and has made me realize, that if you're a writer, you write. Because my time is limited, I take the time that I'm given to work on my own stuff as a gift. If I have an hour or so, I apply Cory Doctorow's 20-minute method. For example, I know realistically that I do not have large chunks of time to write my novel. I give myself 25-30 minutes to write a chunk. I literally set my PDA alarm to go off in 20 minutes. The time goes by so fast, and when the alarm goes off I am usually in a white hot writing frenzy and I stop in the middle and I cannot wait to go back to it the next day.

I apply this technique to all my writing: play-writing, short stories, and even poetry. When you have finite time to write, you learn to inspire yourself. The book reviewing also teaches me to have more perspective about my own stuff. I discover quickly what works and what does not work.

My advice: Write like there is no tomorrow, because there isn't. Don't worry too much about revision or research, that's later. Get that intial draft down and write your butt off.

Lee Gooden

*****

I generally make it a practice to write some random line on a blank page. Even something that may be picked up from the newspaper lying beside me or an ad.

Then I just write around that line. Something fitting or even something equally random...

Poddar Kushal

*****

1) If it's a long slump, I remind myself, "This is input time." I actually believe this to be true, as I have noticed that's the way of it. You think nothing's happening, but when writing does return, it's made some kind of quantum leap to a new level. In a long slump, I usually have to wait for it to return spontaneously in its own good time.

2) It's strange, but (in a briefer slump) what works for me is to start playing with form, rather than seeking ideas.

Rosemary Nissen-Wade

*****

My top tip: Just write for ten minutes without pausing, editing, crossing-out. Write 'I don't know what to write' and keep writing... Write 'I feel stuck' and keep writing. After ten minutes stop and circle five random words in your piece of writing--or even better, ask someone to circle them for you. Take these words and use them to begin writing for five minutes. Then circle four words and write, then three... and so on.. until you have just one word...

Very often it is our focus on the product of writing--Is it good enough? What will it be like as a finished piece?--that stops us from writing. By learning to enjoy writing as a process, you can keep writing and writing.

Sophie Nicholls

*****

I have a job that can be pretty high-pressure and involve long hours. During these busy cycles at work, I find myself feeling completely drained during my non-work times, which I usually reserve for writing. I feel like I have nothing left over; that all of the emotion, imagination and passion has been sapped out of me. In short, I feel like a walking drone. Last summer, I went on "real vacation" for the first time in years, and I came back incredibly stimulated, refreshed and inspired. But I can't do that very often. So I've developed some ways to help keep me going during the down times, when there is no vacation in sight:

1. I wait to write until I know I have several hours at a stretch to sit down and sink into "the zone." This helps keep the pressure off. I simply give myself permission not to start something new on weeknights, after I've worked a ten or twelve hour day. If I do anything, I just do minor revisions on works in progress. Or, I just crash in front of the TV and forget about it. I've actually gotten incredible inspiration from little snippets of things I've seen while zoned out in front of the tube. Vampire squids, for example.

2. During my several-hour writing stretch, I take a journal and I "speed-write" one poem on each page. I give myself permission to be absolutely awful in every way. I heap on the cliches. I write whatever comes into my head. I don't revise. I number the poems and consider them complete. Then I go back through in an hour or two and "mine" for a line, a thought, an idea, or image that I want to work with, and I begin writing the "real poem" from that. I choose one or two at time to work on and give myself a week to complete each one. The completion timeline keeps me accountable and helps make me feel like I'm being productive.

3. I have also started trying to practice what I call, "Poets' Eyes." This is a way of going through my day in an observant, open manner. It's almost like bringing a veil down over my "normal" eyes in order to open up more awareness. As much as possible, I try listening to everything and see everything as a potential poem; it's a way of being open; of being willing to extract beauty or meaning from the banal, the annoying, the stressful, the just plain stupid. If I can even do this for five minutes at a time a few times a day, I can usually find something interesting to add to my "treasure box" of ideas I want to work with.

Kristen McHenry

*****

When I can't write, I read, read, read, and read some more; sometimes I reread novels or short stories. Sometimes I read song lyrics hoping one word or phrase will spark something.

Melissa McEwen

*****

I really do feel a daily exercise loosens my brains, and if I get five poems out of thirty that can be worked into something interesting, I'll be pleased.

Shann Palmer

*****

I'm much more conscientious about my writing when I'm NOT writing than when I am, so I usually try to shift my focus away from that internal, absent impetus into something different, enjoyable, or productive. This usually means a new haircut, delightfully awful genre fiction, and editing. If that doesn't work, I create projects for myself, like painting, developing a mix tape, or creating a little Great(ness) anthology of my favorite poems from my favorite poets. When you're stuck in a writing slump, it's easy to focus on that missing creativity energy within you without realizing it's an entirely false paradigm. It's more likely that energy’s still in you, it's just moved somewhere else in you. Find it again and reign it in, or just go with it for a while, it might be leading you somewhere unexpected.

Todd Dillard

*****

I go for a walk out in nature to unblock when stumped on a scene or dried up. Walking along a trail means no noises other than those of the birds, nothing to cloud the mind. That quiet lends to thinking and all I have to do is let the scene play through my mind while walking. Usually, I get better ideas than the ones I already had.

The unfortunate part is that frequently I don't remember when I get home! As a help, I started carrying a pen and some folded papers in a pocket then would stop to jot things down. Oddly, the more I jotted down, the more it flowed in my head.

Not only does walking help with the writing, it feeds more oxygen to the brain. Good no matter what...

Lynn Steen

*****

I recently accompanied my husband to a doctor's appointment, where I picked up National Geographic to scan so I could avoid watching Regis & Kelly. I normally don't read that magazine, but I found a totally huge amount of inspiration in the pages. I wrote notes for an hour and came away with probably 10-15 poem ideas from that experience alone. I was so excited. In the past, I've told my writing group to do that (pick up a magazine or art book you normally wouldn't look at), but I guess I should have been taking my own advice.

Kimberlee Titus Gerstmann

*****

Keep a small stack of poetry books in the bathroom, then when you are in there giving the kids a bath (or doing other things!), you can read, and be filled with inspiration to write as soon as they are in bed.

Caili Wilk

*****

It's hard to believe I used to write two or three poems a day. Now it's more like a dozen a year. Perhaps I've grown more discriminating. I'm sure a lot of those earlier poems suck!

A couple of ideas for breaking through. You've got to read a lot, broad and deep. Find a poet you enjoy and let them inspire you.

If you are absolutely stuck, try a copy change poem. Take a poem you love and put the idea into your own words.

Or try a found poem. Take lines from the paper, magazine, or lines you've overheard, and make a poem out of them. It's a start. Sometimes the result is damn good!

David Blaine

*****

Whenever I find myself in a slump with my writing, I do three things: read, ponder, riff. It's really that simple. The hard part to know is that a writer must, when shaking off that dust, read only the very kinds of literature that made him or her want to write in the first place. There are certain "go to" writers I use that will always create new work for me. But I have to read that which causes a visceral jolt in my psyche. And enjoy that reading. It's only through the enjoyment and experiencing of that reading that I start to feel my love for literature eat through the layers of despondency or boredom or responsibility. Sometimes, I'll read work by them that's new to me and read until I hit a particularly evocative line or idea, drop the book, and go write a poem or story.

When I write, then, I don't stay in the fear envelope; I give myself complete permission to write over and past it. I once heard a girl in a creative writing workshop make a comment about a piece of someone's work that had to do with whether it could be assessed as "good enough" to be canon--my response: Bullshit! That fear and expectation has to go. Writing is a muscle best kept warm. You don't have to write every piece with the idea (lofty, over-extending) that you want your every penned effort to be canon-worthy. You write because you love it, often because you have to, and because it lights you up, your brain, your idealism, your goals or agendas regarding humanity. So, that's my solution. Read, ponder, riff. It's a lucky charm. For me, it works every time.

Heather Fowler

*****

Play.

Amy Cunningham

*****

If you have your own ideas on this subject, please share them in the comments below.

Poets Helping Poets: What Makes a Great Chapbook?

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:34:51 GMT

In anticipation of the November PAD Challenge (which starts Saturday!), I threw out the above question to members of the Poetic Asides group on FaceBook: What makes a great chapbook?

Here's what some of them had to say:

An interesting mix of poems on the same theme, not always by the same writer but with visable threads which tie each piece together or take the reader on a journey, turning the page again and again.

Sue Forde

*****

I think that a great chapbook is written around a theme and its variations. That theme might be the subject, the place, the people in the poem, a primary metaphor.

The variations might even involve different forms, different rhythms--a different sense of momentum.

And the whole chapbook builds on an emotional arc (it may even build along a narrative arc, if that fits the theme).

Granted, neither of my chapbooks reflects that thinking, although parts of them do. But this is the way I'm writing and developing chapbooks now.

Joannie Stangeland

*****

A chapbook is a universe, and the poet is the solar designer. The planets and moons, no matter how far out, need to follow their own laws of gravity. From the quark to the gravitational force, it needs to make sense to the poet or editor, even if it remains a mystery for the audience.

Jesse Loren

*****

Consistency of vision: a motiff, a strong extended metaphor. Kinda like making a kick ass mix tape.

Scott Whitaker

*****

Here are some thoughts:

1.) Excellent writing, whether for poetry or prose; 2.) a good editor who knows how to place individual pieces together which work in harmony and add cohesiveness to the project; 3.) having an understanding the audience of the chapbook and knowing whether the intent is to entertain, inform, enlighten and/or give some cause for pause.

It helps to have a nice cover too, to initially attract an audience, but the work has to stand on its own once the cover is opened.

Rj Clarken

*****

A great chapbook: when the poems taken as a whole allow the book to function as the final poem of the collection. I think I'm plagarizing Robert Frost here.

Charlie Cote

*****

I think with a chapbook you should either go the route of trying for as much variety as possible, to show your full range. The danger with this can be the tendency towards being uneven.

The other option is to go the total opposite and have a unifying theme, build it so it is more like a concept album with each poem exploring facets of a larger idea. This runs the risk of going in the total opposite and having everything too samey.

I think sort the framework out and then kind of forget about it and just concentrate on the individual poems.

Paul Grimsley

*****

After having read dozens of chapbooks, and sent out numerous versions of chapbook manuscripts, some as sort of a variety pack, and some ordered so that there was a definitive narrative arc, I have determined that what works best and what most editors (and readers) seem to be looking for are collections that focus on a single theme.

Because they're small, they are easily read in one sitting, so a series of linked poems -- sonnets that explore the complicated relationship with the body, an abecedarian where each poem interrogates a single letter, a series of ekphrastic poems -- is a great way to go.

My chapbook Small Fruit Songs is a series of poems written on a single theme in a single form: fruit-related prose poems. Once I had the concept in place, I wrote the whole thing in under a week, and the first publisher I sent it to accepted it within just a couple of days.

Cati Porter

*****

A chapbook is an opportunity to focus, and every good chapbook I've read had a clear theme or stance, typically with an arc of development. As a small press publisher, I find that thematic development and careful arrangement is what makes a manuscript submission rise above, as opposed to the seemingly random compilation of a selection of one's poems.

In journalism, feature articles (as opposed to hard news) often hang on a "news peg," or something that connects the feature to current events in everyday life. It's a hook, and functions just like the musical hook in a pop song. As long as it remains intelligent and avoids excess gimmickry, I think the concept of chapbook should do the same.

Nancy Pagh won the 2008 Floating Bridge Press chapbook contest with her collection After, with each poem being written "after" a particular poet. Each spread starts with the epigraph on a left-hand page, with the poem on the right, so the idea is abundantly clear. That's the hook, the concept. In a way, it's like an invented bucket (or drawer) that readers can categorize the book into, thus making the book more accessible. The real substance is deeper, of course, and in Nancy's case it's the emotional sway that underpins the poems in their darkness and fearless grit.

The art of chapbooks, of course, is the limitless pursuit of different ways to create an original theme, a hook, a stance, finding the right balance between intrigue and challenge while avoiding facile or cliched gimmickry. A good chapbook not only has solid poems, but often has an idea behind their assembly that makes me wonder "Why didn't I think of that!"

Michael Dylan Welch

*****

A great chapbook excerpts the general aesthetic of the author, while allowing a little leeway for them to explore either something new, like style or form, or topical that might not fill a book. I would argue it's not a "teaser" or a "taste," rather, a chapbook is a complete and individual, shorter work that may appear, in whole or in parts, in a larger body of work later.

Todd Dillard

*****

I've just become Co-director of Flarestack Poets, a new incarnation of Flarestack Publishing which has a reputation for producing some of the best chapbooks (or pamphlets as we tend to call them in the UK) in Britain. Here's the statement we put together that explains what we think makes a great chapbook:

We're looking for poetry that dares outside current trends, even against the grain... collections that aren't bus queues or greatest hits albums from poets who are forging their own linguistic connections with the root-ball of experience.

Jacqui Rowe

*****

Content (especially poems or prose pieces that work together to form a whole) coupled with design. A chapbook should feel good in the palm of your hand, should look good sitting on the edge of your desk.

Corey Mesler

*****

This is an interesting question since I will soon be judging a chapbook contest for Rosemetal Press. I'm interested in reading your summary post to get some insights.

The challenge I faced in putting together my own chapbook manuscript (I Call This Flirting, Flume Press 04) was fighting against the brevity of the form. My first stabs at ordering the short-shorts (it's flash fiction, not poetry) made the book read like running water. You just zipped right through with no stopping points. In this way, the early drafts seemed neutral as a whole. I was trying too hard to make it "flow." It didn't work.

I decided to break it up into sections--putting in resting points as it were. The section break pages each quote a made-up fortune cookie fortune... The sections are thematic but not obviously so. After I did this, the chapbook seemed longer and fuller. I also frontloaded it with the most powerful work (in my opinion, of course) leading the chapbook.

Unlike a novel or a full-length collection of poetry or stories, I think with a chapbook you have less time to build momentum. So your challenge is to artificially create the kind of depth a reader experiences with a longer work. A chapbook invites an all-in-one-sitting reading so I guess that ups the reader expectation in a way...

When I love a chapbook, there's a kind of resonance and completion when I hit the last page. It makes me want to look the whole little book over again, amazed that it's so short but seems long. I want to think about it, and then pick and choose favorites as I reread--not in order--the second time.

Sherrie Flick

*****

A great chapbook, to me, connects in some kind of way. It doesn't have to be a theme, but something weaves them together. Maybe it can be a chapbook about, say, a relative, and all the poems mention that relative and it can be titled after that relative. Also, chapbooks should be short (like 10-20 pages) and consist of the BEST poems, no fillers. Not poems that can't stand on their own.

Melissa McEwen

*****

Stature: If it has the stature of a book, it is a great chapbook.

Sally Evans

Poets Helping Poets: Self-publishing and poetry?

Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:23:25 GMT

Recently, I asked members of my Poetic Asides group on Facebook to give me their take on the relationship of self-publishing and poetry. The response was so overwhelming that I couldn't include everything (and I apologize if your take was not included--or had to be edited), but I did get a lot.

If you feel like adding your own voice to the discussion, just leave a comment below.

Here's some of the great feedback:

As long as a person understands the differences between self-publishing and traditional publishing, and understands the pros and the cons, ie, the additional work involved for the poet, the responsiblity for self-promoting which needs to accompany the self-publishing, and choses the press with care, I believe there is nothing wrong with self-publishing. There is a history in literature of great poets having things to say and yet not having a publisher recognize them until after their death. For example, Emily Dickinson remained largely unpublished for the duration her life, yet still took the time to create booklets of her own poems, gathering them into groups, and hand sewing them together. If a writer feels that there is validity in their work and is willing to stand by it there is nothing wrong with chosing to self-publish even if it is only to feel a sense of completion so they may move on, to the next project.

Julia Ann Unruh

*****

Didn't Robert Creeley self-pub 10 chapbooks before he'd made any name for himself? It's a good idea, I think. If anything, the good ones serve as a sort of calling card, and it's a cheap enough route one could break even on sales well before selling out of a run.

Scott DeKatch

*****

With so few publishing houses and extended waiting periods, I think self-publishing might be a good option for many. Getting a good editor before publishing, however, might be a good idea. I'm all for it!

Helen Zisimatos

*****

Next to targeted non-fiction, I think poetry is the most logical work for self-publishing, especially for those who actively pursue readings, whether featured, open mics or poetry slams. The market for poetry in bookstores is miniscule, and the majority of presses aren't going to print more than 1,000 copies -- more likely 500 -- and have little wherewithal to actually promote them, so a self-published poet is going to have to do all of the legwork any way. Why not take on the easily calculated risks of production -- small initial print run + POD = minimal upfront cash layout -- and keep 100% of any profits made on hard-earned sales?

More thoughts on marketing here: http://loudpoet.com/2008/07/11/thrillerfest-buzz-your-book/

Guy LeCharles Gonzalez

*****

It all depends on what you want to do with your work and where you are as a writer. If you're just starting out and want something to sell/give away at readings and open mics, then make you own chapbook. If you want to be published by other people, self-publishing can be problematic, as many places won't accept previously published work.

The best route is to publish yourself within the context of publishing other people: ie, feature your work in the first issue of a journal or chapbook press, but then focus on other people.

Hugh Behm-Steinberg

*****

With Print-on-Demand so easy, relatively, self-publishing makes sense in some situations, outside the academic world. My husband and I spent a summer taking photographs of Langston Hughes sites in Lawrence and researching his boyhood years 1902-1915 in our hometown. We did not assume this to be a definitive scholarly book, but rather a chance to document information before it was lost. We self published the book, and to our deliglht, some scholars have made use of it. If we had rewritten it and worked with an academic press, it would have take 3-5 years!

I encourage writers of poetry to work within their communities, and when their work begins to overflow their town and region, then submit works to national markets. Self-published anthologies of regional work can be self published to good purpose.

Denise Low, Poet Laureate of Kansas (2007-2009)

*****

I've been hosting poetry in Las Vegas since 1999 and am fairly well-published in various journals, magazines, etc. Many of my friends have pressured me to produce a chapbook, but I have an odd stubborness about it. I feel as though if I self-publish, it's not legitimate; it's vain. Others would argue differently, but I don't think my work is valid unless someone else recognizes its publish-worthiness.

Danna Jae Nordin

*****

It seems there's a double standard out there among various media when it comes to self-publishing. For instance, why is it acceptable--and laudable, even--for bands to release their own albums and filmmakers to release their own films, but it's looked down upon for a writer to release their own work? This is especially the case in academic circles.

Some of my favorite reads were self-published: Al Burian's "Burn Collector," Aaron Cometbus's "Cometbus," among others. While there is a stigma attached to self-publishing outside of the underground, that doesn't inherently make the work good or bad, because the content is what counts.

Jason Jordan

*****

There is only one commercially legitimate way to self-publish your work and that is to learn the Book Arts (Binding, Macrotypography, etc.) and bind the books yourself. If you self-publish using one of the many 'services' for that purpose your work will still hold no water with publishers whatsoever. If you start your own small press, learn the trade, and establish an actual record of sales in differing demographics, then publishers will look at you in a legitamized light.

Drew Wiberg

*****

If there is no other way to get your stuff out, I don't see anything wrong with it. It might just be a way to be recognized as, after all, a lot of publishers don't seem to read. And even if they do, they want quick money, not quality.

Monique Caddy

*****

I teach undergraduates and at near the end of the course they have to memorize a poem and make a bookmark, broadside or chapbook of the poet they studied during the semester. They come up with the most beautiful and innovative broadsides I've ever seen using materials anyone can buy cheaply or scrounge up from around the house. I bring in examples from prior classes to show them how inexpensive it can be to get a poem out into the world. These aren't their own poems, but clearly that could be the next step.

With the economy closing in on us, poetry, an already marginalized, under-represented market (because there is not now and never was a big market for poetry books) will see a drop in sales. Barnes and Noble has already removed all poetry books from their shelves in an effort to cut back. They will re-order, but only titles that sell extremely well--Billy Collins, Mary Oliver, Sharon Olds, and major award winners. This leaves little room for the little guy or gal. So, in my mind, self-publishing, as well as self-distribution, may just be the wave of the future for poetry.

Small Presses may also find themselves going under during these tough economic times which means fewer contests, fewer venues for publication. Even poetry journals will surely stumble under the weight of the inflated dollar. As a result, we may see a surge in online publications. It's so cheap to make a broadside, a chapbook or even a full-length collection on computer. Something to note, even the Pushcart Prize is now accepting online publications for their yearly prize, and so these journals are becoming more accepted as legitimate. I think self-publication, as a result, is also finding and will continue to acquire more legitimacy.

This doesn't mean that there will be more good poetry out there. That's one of the legitimate gripes about self-publication. Just as anyone who fiddles with car engines and then decides to put up a sign and open shop is not necessarily a good mechanic. Just as there are good doctors and not so good doctors. The same holds true for those who write, maybe more so. But hey, there's already a glut of bad poetry on the market, legitimate prize-winning poetry.

The rush to publication is a problem with American poets who tend to view product above process, who seek recognition at the expense of excellence, who are self-satisfied rather than self-critical, and the worst, who spend more time writing and trying to get published than they spend reading and studying great poetry.

So, my advice, is to find people who are both strong advocates AND strong critics of your work and ask them: Am I ready to publish? Rule of thumb: You should have been working seriously at your craft for at least 10 years before you consider book publication. You should have at least 20 or 30 good magazine publications under your belt, along with a wealth of rejections. You should attend workshops, conferences, programs if money allows to garner feedback on your work. All the same holds true for self-publication. If you decide to self-publish, the rules haven't changed, just the venue.

We all know Walt Whitman believed enough in his work to self-publish and we're glad he did. He also rewrote and revised furiously. With self-publication--the time and expense of it--maybe more poets will think twice before flinging their poems out into the wine-dark sea.

Dorianne Laux

*****

I have never self-published but I did have contracts with two subsidy publishers...against both of whom I wound up in class action lawsuits. One publisher and her husband went to jail for cheating authors out of their money and not delivering on their promises. Those associations left a decidedly bad taste in my mouth and my pocketbook minus thousands of dollars.

That said, the first publisher did print thousands of my books (not the 10K as contracted though). I was able to parlay those books into a good career for myself (primarily on the web). Now, 60 small-press published books later, I can look back at that time as a learning experience. It taught me patience and humility. I have also tried to counsel newbie authors but I've found that's generally a waste of time. They are going to do what they are going to do and if what you suggest doesn't mesh with what they've decided to believe, you are wasting breath and effort. Some people can't be helped. They have to learn the hard way.

Would I self-publish? No, I don't believe I would. I would try every e-book route available first and use self-publishing as an absolute last resort. Would I subsidy publish again, suggest other writers do it? HELL, NO! The reason why is simple: at least with self-publishing you have some say in how and when and why you spend your money. With subsidy/vanity, you do not. You are at the mercy of just how honest that publisher is or isn't. There are too many reputable e-publishers out here who will look at your work and if it isn't good enough for them, chances are it won't be good enough for readers to buy. If even the poorest e-pub won't contract your work, it just might not be as great as you believe it to be. If you publish anyway and then place it before reviewers, be prepared to have a new one reamed for you.

Then there is the monetary to consider. For every $1.00 I make on my print books, I make $100.00 on downloads. The reason is simple: distribution via the internet. There is less overhead for the publisher and the royalty percentages are far greater than trying to get the books into brick and mortar stores. Your book never goes out of print and a reader can get it in the middle of the night during a snow storm while sitting in their jammies. That's a good incentive for some buyers. Most small pubs have very low prices on downloads but the NY boys are getting into the market with the inception of the Kindle et al and the prices are being traditionally hiked up to what the cost of a mass market paperback would be. That's highway robbery but hey! Anything the traffic will allow, eh?

As for poetry: I have been in a couple of anthologies and as a rule they just don't sell. I love poetry. I read poetry but I don't buy books of poetry. I can't see self-published poetry books fairing much better than those put out by publishers. In this day and age, people are moving away from the calmer, gentler forms of entertainment. We are not producing new generations of readers but rather generations of Xbox clones. That's a shame for there is so much solace in a well-crafted poem.

Charlee Compo

*****

On principle I'm against self-publishing, because it means skipping an important phase of a writer's work, i.e. submitting it to the appreciation of professional and expert readers. But there's the other side of the medal: most readers aren't interested in poetry, poetry books don't sell, and publishers generally don't invest their money in producing books without a financial return, so it's difficult for a poet to get published by a third part. The best way to work as a poet is, as we know well, submitting to specialized reviews or taking part in literary competitions.

This said, getting published rather than self-publishing doesn't mean more readers. If you're lucky, 100 will read what you write, maybe 15 will like it, and 5 will understand it.

Is self-publishing a good thing? Ezra Pound self-published his first book, and many great Italian poets did the same. Probably they had no other choice, but time is the best judge.

Valeria Di Clemente

Pescara, Italy

*****

There was a time when I would have said that self-publishing was a relatively harmless route. Now I would discourage any serious poet who asked me. My reasons? Glad you asked.

A. The ease with which it can now be done has really diminished the currency for all poets. I suppose vanity presses have always existed but now anybody can go to KINKOS and publish their own chapbook quickly and inexpensively. So in effect, being published proves next to nothing. Anyone can call themselves a poet and anyone can be published.

B. I regret having self-published some chapbooks because, despite the sense of self- accomplishment, and actually BECAUSE of it, I suspect I was less motivated to perfect my skills and hone my craft, instead of waiting till I was good enough to earn acceptance from an objective third part. I suppose a possible exception would be that if you'd been trying for a long time, and published in a lot of fairly prestigious journals, and a couple of TRUTHFUL, OBJECTIVE writers validated the value of your work, self-publishing might be OK.

C. A surprising number of presses holding first book and chapbook contests have made it clear that those who self-publish are not eligible. So according to those standards, you could create a chapbook and give 10 copies to friends at Christmas and they would not want you to enter.

Seems REALLY harsh but there it is. You would know even if they didn't.

Christopher Soden

*****

I would never self-publish a regular book of any kind (as opposed to a chapbook). Even if you opt for one of the companies that charges for set-up, then prints on demand, the expense is significant and the price you have to charge buyers for each book is much larger than if someone else with a press publishes it. A ibig issue, too, is marketing. Even poets who read regularly have a difficult time selling any quantiy of books. Poetry books, especially, are a difficult sell, unless the publisher has an agreement to sell to libraries, certain bookstores, or colleges.

I would self-publish a chapbook since I have a program that prints in book form. With a laser printer that goes on forever, the cost would be minimal. I say that I WOULD, but haven't done so. I've been fortunate enough to have offers for my first three chaps.

Pris Campbell

*****

One thing to consider is that some publications will not even consider running a review of anything that could be considered self-published. I heard from a man this week who had published a book of fiction, but (he says) the publishers put little effort into publicizing his book. He said he had decent sales without publicitiy, so he bought back the rights to the book and the remaining copies. He was then told that doing so, technically, made his a self-published book now, therefore ineligible for "serious attention."

My experience in publishing poetry is slim, but I would think one should pursue all the avenues for publishing first.

Nancy Posey

*****

I think small chaps are a great thing, when you have enough to sacrifice some. This is mainly a poet-to-poet world, so small inexpensive bait is a good thing. The quality and originality still has to be high, since this is a "showcase". The small chaps I really like have quirks and thoughts unique to that poet, so I try to do that also. It's a souvenir. A size mailable in a #10 envelope and a token price (free, or send back stamps in a bag?) is fun.

Jim Knowles

*****

Self-publishing is like a very large business card or portfolio. It's self-promotion which is personal-scale. You can participate in the gift economy to exchange small print-run (or photocopier-run) works without a big cost out lay. If you go thru a print on demand company, the overhead is still low.

One of the drawbacks is that if it is only you promoting you, the distribution networks and the onus to spread the material is all on your shoulders. If you work cooperatively with a group, channels can be shared. There's more credibility if a group says you are good than if you alone say you are worth the time to read. If you are published in magazines and thru other people's networks you are less in control of what goes to print but your works can be accessed by more people.

The other main drawback is that by self-publishing you may set the bar too low. You may (or might now) rush to publish before the work is polished enough. An editor or more experience or more time sitting with the work could give room for improvement. The gating of going through someone else can hold you in a purgatory that is useful for more refining time.

Pearl Pirie

*****

I, and several other poets I know, have self-published chapbooks. I think that self-publishing works perfectly for chapbook-sized collections. It allows the poet to gather his/her work in one place, or follow one theme without the need to fill 90 or so pages. It allows the writer also to dip his/her foot into the world of "merchandising" your art--seeing what it feels like to have a larger number of readers looking specifically at your work--without having to submit to the intricacies of having someone else publish you.

And, don't underestimate the psychological value of having a collection of work "published"--ie in book form, bound, ready to hand out or sell to anyone who will have it. It all helps you to take yourself and your work more seriously. So I believe it is a great first step on the road to publication.

Of course, it is not a substitute for being published by an outside publisher, someone who doesn't already love you. That not only has even greater psychological implications, but also catapults you into a community of writers who have also been published by that publisher.

I have found this to be one of the greatest results of all of being published by bluechrome over here in the UK. But self-publishing, especially for poets, is a great first step.

Sue Guiney

Where is poetry happening? Part II

Sat, 11 Oct 2008 03:33:38 GMT

On September 22, I posted about a few sites that have poetry calendars in some prominent areas--mainly as a result of looking for events in my new home of Atlanta, Georgia. And many poets chimed in with other sites, in addition to my very, very short list.

Collected together, here are those for the U.S.:

Atlanta, Georgia http://www.poetryatlanta.blogspot.com
New York City http://www.poetz.com/calendar
Chicago http://chicagopoetry.com
Southern California http://www.poetix.net/calendar.htm
Las Vegas www.localendar.com/public/VegasPoetry
Texas http://texaspoetryevents.info/
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania http://www.poetz.com/pittsburgh/index.htm
Boston, Massachusetts http://www.poetz.com/boston/
Western Massachusetts and Connecticut www.poetrynewscalendar.com
North Carolina http://ncpoetlaureate.blogspot.com/
New Jersey http://old.pccc.edu/poetry/
New Jersey, Part 2 http://njpoetspoetry.blogspot.com/
Minnesota www.minnesotapoetry.com
Kansas City (Kansas and Missouri) http://www.newletters.org/eventsReading.asp
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania http://freecal.brownbearsw.com/PhillyPoetry

Here are ones from outside the States:

Dublin, Ireland: http://www.poetryireland.ie/whats-on/
Western Ireland http://theroadlesstraveledireland.com
Ottawa, Canada http://www.bywords.ca
Toronto, Canada http://www.patchysquirrel.ca/
Alberta, Canada http://www.strollofpoets.com/index.php

Also, Poets & Writers also has a great literary events calendar at http://pw.org/calendar/ns

*****

I'd like to thank Pearl, Danna Jae, Paige, Margaret B, Margaret Fieland, Lori, Nancy Posey, Bruce Niedt, Anthony, Fiona, Michelle H, Chris, Ashraf Osman, and anyone else I might've forgotten.

*****

If you'd like to add any other areas, add them in the comments, and maybe there'll be a part III eventually. >

Poets Helping Poets: Software for Poets?

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:05:36 GMT

Recently, I asked for some feedback on possible software for poets at the request of a poet friend of mine. Personally, I still write poems out with a pen on paper before copying them over into Composition Notebooks. It's super lo-tech, but it's a system that works for me.

Here's what other poets had to say on the subject of software:

"I have used verseperfect in the past. Find it here http://www.bryantmcgill.co>m/Free_Rhyming_Dictionary/."

--John Nixon

*****

"Are poets not writers? Assuming your reader was referring to WD's software article in the Jul/Aug issue, there were several programs mentioned of use to poets, including Word Menu and Bullfighter (probably best for performace poets!), plus any of the submission tracking programs. Poets could presumably even make creative use of the programs focused on plot and character development, and the voice recognition software might be helpful for the overly page-bound scribes out there.

"http://www.writersdigest.c>om/article/the-2008-wd-gui>de-to-software-for-writers>/

"If they're looking for software that will actually help them write a good poem, though, there thankfully is no such beast. Imagine the books of celebrity poetry flooding the shelves if there were?"

--Guy LeCharles Gonzalez

*****

"In response, this here is a fun bit of web-related poetry writing software:

"http://www.gpeters.com/aut>o/autotype.php

"'tis a google poetry machine/robot/thing and can produce amusing, even occasionally helpful results."

--Nathan Hamilton

*****

"Well, there's RACTER - the poem-writing program Christian Bok describes in his essay 'The Piecemeal Bard Is Deconstructed,' which you can find here: http://www.ubu.com/papers/>object/03_bok.pdf

"Don't know that it's commercially available, though, I must say."

--John Moore Williams

*****

"Though they're not specifically aimed at poets per se, it strikes me that the hypertext possibilities of Storyspace and HTML accord much more closely with poetry's nonlinear, allusive impulses than with narrative.

"You might also check out http://epc.buffalo.edu/e-p>oetry/.

"Also, Fashionable Noise: On Digital Poetics by Brian Kim Stefans discusses software he developed to generate random text with a poetry-like texture; an example of a long poem thus produced is included."

--Theo Hussein Hummer

*****

"I've used rhyming software before that poet Andrew Hudgins passed down to me. My computer crashed, though, and so I no longer have that software, but I'm sure there are plenty of good versions."

--Heather Kirn

*****

"I've been wanting to create a post about this, and I probably still will--but in the meantime, here's what I use: OneNote. It's part of Microsoft Office (and it's included in the Student and Teacher edition) which sounds like marketing--but then, I worked on the initial help for the very first version, so of course I'm biased.

"Why is OneNote cool? Because of the way it's organized. You set up Notebooks, Sections, and Pages. For poetry, I'll either start a section for a project (especially in the early phases, when I'm just capturing as many ideas and images as I can) or I'll set up a section for an individual poem. Then, I create a separate page for each draft. That way, if I cut everything out and decide I need it back, I just click one of the page tabs. I also have a section for free writes, and a general section where I might keep lists of places to send to or ideas for future poems.

"OneNote has fantastic Search, so if I remember some odd phrase that I typed six months ago, I can find it. The built-in flags are another way to save snippets for later. And there are possibilities I haven't explored yet, like using the Send to Word command to get poems ready for submitting or tracking contest deadlines in OneNote and using the task integration in Outlook to send myself reminders.

"This isn't software to help me become a better writer--it won't suggest verbs or slash adjectives (although it does have dictionary and thesaurus tools). But it's an organizational tool so that I can spend less time hunting and more time creating."

--Joannie Stangeland

Poets Helping Poets: Poetry Websites of Interest

Tue, 29 Jul 2008 18:07:52 GMT

Way back in June I asked poets to share their favorite poetry-related websites, and I found myself buried under recommendations. So many of the sites were great, but I tried to be hard-nosed about which ones I included on this list, because I know you're all very busy people who can't go checking out every single cool site on the Internet.

So here are some of the top poetry-related sites:

Ones that do everything:

www.poetryfoundation.org The site for the Poetry Foundation, publisher of Poetry magazine, is packed with information and tools.

So is the one run by the Academy of American Poets at www.poets.org.

And finally, David Graham is doing a phenomenal job with his online Poetry Library.

For poets outside the U.S.:

The U.K. has its own poetry library at www.poetrylibrary.org.uk.

Canadian poets may find www.arcpoetry.ca/portage helpful.

For poetry-related news and happenings:

Check out Ron Silliman's blog at http://ronsilliman.blogspot.com.

Or go to www.poetryhut.com/wordpress.

For poetry performed:

You can visit the official site of Poetry Slam, Inc., at www.poetryslam.com, where among other things there is a poetry slam finder. Very cool.

At the Penn Sound site (http://writing.upenn.edu/pennsound), there are links to poetry recordings.

And finally for your daily poetry fix:

There's Verse Daily at www.versedaily.org,

and Garrison Keillor's Writer's Almanac (http://writersalmanac.publicradio.org).

Plus, a few commenters have already pointed out that I missed Poetry Daily at www.poetrydaily.org. (Thanks for paying attention!)

*****

I'd like to thank Nancy Posey, Carol (?), Russell Ragsdale, David Graham, Sue Guiney, J.P. Dancing Bear, Bill Abbott, and several others for sharing these sites and more. If you really like another site that I've not included, feel free to throw in the comments below. The more the merrier!

New Poetic Form: The Roundabout

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:25:59 GMT

Our Poetic Asides inaugural Poet Laureate, Sara Diane Doyle, has been busy-busy-busy this summer working with teen writers. But not too busy to share with her fellow Poetic Asides crew a new poetic form she developed with one of her students, David Edwards. Since Sara knows the form best, I'll let her explain the form to you in her own words.

*****

A few months ago I began exploring various poetic forms. With each form I tried, I would post my attempt on a forum for teen writers, where I am a mentor. One of the teens, David Edwards, got interested in forms, especially the “created” forms. He asked if anyone could invent a form and I said “sure!” Then, he got the crazy idea that we should create a form together.

To start, we wanted to throw in every poetic element that we really liked. David came up with the meter and feet and I added in the repeating line. We came up with the rhyme scheme and length together. The result is a form we call the Roundabout. In this form, the rhyme scheme comes full circle while offering repetition of one line in each rhyme set.

The Roundabout is a four stanza poem, with each stanza consisting of 5 lines. The poem is written in iambic and the lines have 4 feet, 3 feet, 2 feet, 2 feet and 3 feet respectively. The rhyme scheme is abccb/bcddc/cdaad/dabba. Roundabouts can be on any subject.

Several of the writers on our forum have written Roundabouts and have had a blast." We would love for other poets to give it a try! Here are some examples to get you started.

Crash

by David Edwards

Around around the carousel

across the circles face

we cry we shout

we crash about

across the circles face

and ever always breakneck pace

by this unending route

and twists and turns

and breaks and burns

by this unending route

of ever always in and out

the yearling quickly learns

to run and yell

at ocean’s swell

the yearling quickly learns

to run and leap and then he earns

but he will never tell

there’s not a chase

that wins the race

but he will never tell.

When Spring Trips ‘Round

by Sara Diane Doyle

When wildflowers bloom once more

and raindrops touch the earth,

the faeries come

to start the hum

and raindrops touch the earth!

Come join the song, the dance the mirth!

Enjoy the juicy plum.

beneath the sun

'til day is done-

enjoy the juicy plum!

The clouds let out the beating drum-

rejoice with us as one.

Our joy we pour

for pain we bore-

rejoice with us as one.

Of gleeful hope, the snow knows none,

but speaks of faeries lore,

of magic birth,

the greatest worth

but speaks of faeries lore.

Poets Helping Poets: On Handling Bio Notes

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:22:52 GMT

Over on Facebook, I have a personal account with a bunch of poetry friends, as well as a Poetic Asides group with a lot of members. So yesterday I asked the published poets who are members to share a little bit of advice on writing those tricky little bio notes that poets are often asked to include with their poetry submissions to poetry journals and magazines.

The response was overwhelming. I'm just now digging out of all the great advice. Here's what some of them had to share:

*****

I generally strive for a 50- to 75-word bio, featuring only the most recent and relevant info about my writing life. I list the three publications of which I'm proudest first, then two or three accolades (awards, residencies, honors). If appropriate, I tailor the bio for the publication in which it will appear. For example, if it has a regional focus, I'm likely to mention my previous publications in that region. If there's room, I'll also reference my graduate degree in poetry and the poetry-related community service I do. As my career evolves, I revisit and update my bio regularly so that it represents the best of my writing life each time it appears.

Sage Cohen

*****

The length of a bio can walk a very fine line. As a reader of journals I'm not too interested in work where the bio is only "so and so lives in Atlanta ". I want to know a little something about the poet but at the same time I don't want to be lulled to boredom by reading an overly verbose bio with dozens of credits listed. I use the same approach, mentioning my background very briefly (maybe a word about my novels) and mentioning a few journals where my work has appeared if I mention any at all.

David LaBounty

*****

Typically in my bio I give the title of my book and then list only three journals, or four at the most, where my poems have been published. When I read a bio that lists a whole string of journals, regardless of whether there are other credits included, it makes me suspect that the poet is feeling insecure--in the same way that a poet who writes past the ending of a poem doesn't trust the reader. I prefer a bio that is selective. This is the time to put your best out there, not every little indication that someone likes your work.

Susan Meyers

*****

I do exactly what the editor asks. If he asks for three sentences, I send three sentences. I do not send six and suggest that the editor edit as he likes. Chances are he won't like that at all! If the request for a bio is vague, I check the journal for examples. I never send an exceedingly long bio as I'm turned off by them, especially when they're very braggy. I include usually no more than three journals where my work has appeared. I never use numbers. I find it a complete turn-off when I read a bio that says something like, "So and so has published 502 poems in 138 journals." Bean counting is unattractive and amateurish. I never include information about pets, one, because I don't have any, and two, because I never am interested in pet information in other people's bios. I include my book titles, some journals, what I do for work, maybe where I live, any significant prizes. And those are the things I'm interested in when I read other poets' bios.

Diane Lockward

*****

The formula: [academic accomplishments (MFA/PhD, Grants/Awards)] + [3 or less previous publishing credits (if this bothers you, tack "and elsewhere" on the end)] + [books published or to be published and/or writerly positions, such as "Nonfiction Editor"] = satisfactory bio.

Todd Dillard

*****

Sometimes the obvious must be stated: follow the press or publication's guidelines if they are available, and select information that may be of particular interest to the publisher, such as work in journals with compatible styles or thematic interest. Beyond that, select the information that is most likely to make the reader stop and give your manuscript a close look rather than skim through. A small number of relevant items suggests the tip of the iceberg, while including too much sounds desperate. If you do feel it necessary to include a large number of items, invite the editor to select those that are most relevant for contributors' notes rather than expect everything to be included.

J.D. Smith

*****

Remember that bios are not written in first person, and create a few single sentence and a short paragraph bios to keep on file, making sure to match the tone of the bio with the publication. If your collection of poems about death makes it into a serious anthology, don't use phrases like "loves the feeling of mud squishing between his toes" or "spends her free time singing karaoke on free beer night".

If it's a lighter-hearted publication, have a little fun with your bio without losing focus of what a bio is for - to let the reader know a little bit about who you are, what you do, and why you are significant enough to need a bio.

Lisa Abeyta

*****

Less is more. A bio note is not a resume.

Aaron Fagan

*****

If the editor of the magazine does not provide guidelines, I usually keep it to three sentences, including one that illustrates whether I have been published previously and where. I usually begin the bio with my name, where I am from, and a bit about my educational background. The second sentence is usually something quirky about myself, and the final sentence is where I have been published.

Serena M. Agusto-Cox

*****

First of all, it's important see what guidelines the journal may set on length and/or type of content and follow those precisely. I always mix my bio with some (and the operative word is 'some') of my publishing credits as well as personal comments. It's important to show that you've published, if you have, and yet let the editor know a little of your human side, as well. It should go without saying that you should check your bio for spelling and punctuation before sending it.

Pris Campbell

*****

Keep it short and definitely within any word or character limit (for example, keep it much shorter than this paragraph). Mention only the publications in which your work has appeared most recently (unless you've previously published in the publication for which you're submitting the bio; then, it's nice to acknowledge that). If you've published books or worked on projects that are important to you, put those near the beginning. Keep personal details to a minimum.

Okay, now here are the caveats: Some people write extremely clever and very personal off-the-wall bios. They are entertaining if written well. Try to see what other bios people have written for that publication to determine whether that's a good direction. And if you don't think you can write that kind of a bio well (I don't think I can), consider sticking with the more plain Jane variety.

Joannie Stangeland

*****

In my experience, you have to know your audience. For example, for some journals, I use the opening "Brian Spears is not related to the singer, but he does have a teenaged daughter named Brittany . He hopes she will forgive him one day." storySouth used that bit, but I didn't include it when I was published in The Southern Review. I sent it to Measure, and the editors cut it, but I sent it to them because I knew them from grad school, and I figured I could get away with it.

My basic structure includes this information: recent publications, awards, and what I'm doing now. I expand it depending on the journal I'm sending to, and how adventurous I perceive them to be. Hope that helps.

Brian Spears

*****

There has to be something interesting; a hook in that bio that grabs them as much as what you have written would. Think of your bio as yet more branding for what you are trying to sell. It has to be interesting.

Natalie Williams

*****

Do not under any circumstances tally up your publications and give a total. I have read bio notes stating that the poet has published over 200 poems in over 50 magazines, or over 1000 poems, or whatever. I once read a bio note stating that the poet had only 360 poems to go before hitting 5000 poems published. Seriously. Don't do that.

Jessy Randall

*****

My advice is mostly from working as copy editor for Alaska Quarterly Review for three years. I was sometimes assigned the task of cutting author bios down to the size and content we were looking for; I think it does depend from journal to journal. We did not publish information about where a person worked, as a rule. We did publish awards and previous publications. It usually read like this, "So and so's collection X is forthcoming from such and such press, and her poems have appeared in X', Y, and Z. Her poem Y' won the Pushcart Prize in 1998." If there were more than a few sentences' worth of publications, we might trim it down, choosing the highest-profile accomplishments, so yes, short and sweet is good. If you've been published in 50 journals, best to say, "So and so has been published in more than 49 literary journals, including X, Y, and Z." If someone hadn't been published before, we wrote, "This is so and so's first appearance in a national literary journal."

Erin Wilcox

*****

Always best to look at a recent back issue of the journal to see what sort of tone the editors like (cutesy or serious). As an editor, I really don't like overlong bios (and why give me extra work to do? Edit yer own bio!) -- fifty words is fine. Think of the bio as an opportunity for other people to connect to you: places where they can find you or your work. Never lie.

That said, I like adding an element of subtle perversity, like only listing journals that have a number in their title, or are one word or syllable long.

Hugh Behm-Steinberg

*****

I have a standard bio that includes a couple major publishing credits, my editing work, and what I do to earn a living. I then add information relevant to the specific poems: if I'm sending poems about Japan , for instance, I will mention the time I spent living in Japan .

Elizabeth Kate Switaj

*****

Pick only the most important two or three accomplishments and mention those. Also, try to tailor your bio to fit the audience of the journal or mag in which your work appears. Try to write it in such a way that you highlight what you have in common with that audience or that you establish yourself as unique among the voices there.

Allen Taylor

*****

There's nothing I hate more than a bio that looks like all the other bios. The way some of them read, I imagine there's no person behind it -- only a walking mound of awards and journals, held together by the stickiness of critical acclaim.

The bio itself can be poetry. Be creative. Use a metaphor, or at very least a bit of symbolism.

Jason Mashak