I am pleased to disclose that three of my poems--including the Billy Collins rant extensively workshopped here--kick off the recent second issue of Bill Carlson's Iambs and Trochees. Many other of OUR poets are represented there, but I'm not going to mention them because I want you to check the journal out.
Although we have added some formal-friendly e-journals in the past few years, the small number of likeminded print journals has dwindled. The only recent start up I know of is this one, and it's a well edited mix of the usual suspects and rising stars. I think we all need ventures like this one to survive, so check it out at www.iambsandtrochees.com. By the way, Bill is talented, prompt and polite--a joy to work with. |
Well,I'm having trouble getting to the website, so you can email Bill at carwill@prodigy.net or write him at 6801 19th Ave 5H, Brooklyn NY 11204.
|
The I&A site is best reached via Internet Explorer.
|
Well, the link works if you don't attach a period to it:
www.iambsandtrochees.com However, went to the site and Yargh! No way to turn off the murky "charming" piano music short of turning off my speakers. Kevin |
[quote]Originally posted by Michael Juster:
"Although we have added some formal-friendly e-journals in the past few years, the small number of likeminded print journals has dwindled." Mike, of the couple thousand print journals out there, are you saying that most of them are seeking non-formal work? I've been under the impression that most first-rate literary journals are delighted to find good, formal work. I don't question the "dwindling." That's economic. But I think that we have an edge at most good journals when we present formal work, especially if the piece demonstrates the confident use of, or the gentle bending of a received form. Bob |
Bob: I couldn't disagree more. Many of the top journals don't take formal verse at all, most others take it sparingly, and those who take it sparingly usually want the big name. It took me nearly a decade to break into a few "mainstream" places, and most everyone here who has had success in formal journals feels similarly, I would bet.
|
Just some statistics on what Mike
said: "Poet's Market" lists, oh, I don't know--about 1700 markets (magazines?) for verse. Each year, I go through the new edition and count the number of markets that say something like: "Absolutely no rhyme!" "We hate meter!" "No goddamned rhyme." "You'd better be Yeats himself or the second coming if you write in meter or rhyme." Etc., etc. Some of them are absolutely scathing. This year it was up around 70 journals. And those are just the ones that specifically come out and admit they won't publish meter. Add in those who won't admit it but almost never print metrical work and then make your own estimate. Yes, I know--"Poetry" and "Paris Review" may print 2 metrical pieces per issue, but that's still what--2 or 3 % ? |
Probably true with rhyme... But you can slip blank verse past practically anyone. Most anti-form editors wouldn't know unrhymed iambic pentameter if it bit them on the assonance.
|
Len, If you had to write a paragraph on why publications say "no rhyme, no meter" etc, what would you write? In order to say no (or yes) to something there must be a reason they have in their minds. There only thing I've ever thought of as to why formal poetry is not wanted so much is because when it goes off center it goes off center fast, and makes crashing noises, and editors get tired of the noise. Also, are editors really interested in the art or are they interested in subscriptions? Formalists are fewer in number. Is formalism simply seen as old-fashioned, something from the 1800's? TJ |
Tom, I believe it is as Alicia says:
either ignorance (they wouldn't recommend meter if it had a parking ticket on it) or else the by now ancient prejudices that spawned modernism: the 19th century was being written off for its didacticism, sentimentality, bombast, etc., and since (as Tim Steele points out) these qualities were showing up in metrical and rhymed poems, the modernists thought it might be a good idea to throw out all infants and bathing receptacles at once. But what do meter and rhyme have to do with sentimentality or didacticism? These are qualities eminently available to free verse or prose. What slightly puzzles me is the ferocity and vehemence of those who hate meter and rhyme. I sense that they want cutting-edge, "transgressive," avant garde, corrosive, ugly, violent, stuff that makes people respond--something I also suspect they think people won't do to meter and rhyme. They think if the poem isn't the equivalent of screaming vomit (a good title for one of these sorts of journals?) it isn't "real" or "authentic." Sigh. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:30 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.