[Julie Steiner]

I rarely submit anything for publication, and of those rare submissions, hardly anything gets accepted. Bottom line--I can't count on contributor copies to keep me in touch with contemporary poetry.

I currently subscribe to eight print journals, all of them form-friendly. Some of these also publish the sort of free verse that tends to appeal to me (i.e., the kind that does what the formal verse I like also does--convey an experience, rather than communicate how very, very clever and cool the author is).

I also read, on a regular basis, a handful of online journals that are form-friendly.

I've disliked many poetry venues over the years. Some of these I have found disappointing because they tend to publish a lot of substandard, lackluster, predictable poems (often by the same handful of names...hmmm, friendship? backscratching?). Very occasionally, I'll bail on a venue because I find the prevailing climate there a bit too annoyingly self-righteous, either liberally or conservatively.

I buy books by authors whose work I have already encountered and enjoyed several times, either in a workshop or in a journal, OR whose books are highly recommended by others I trust.

It never ceases to amaze me how many supposedly well-known poets I've never heard of, until I encounter them in an interview in Able Muse Review or Rattle or someplace. Poetry's not a huge universe, yet we all seem confined to certain orbits. Someone who's a big noise in one set of venues or conferences may be a complete unknown in another.

Sadly, a big, national venue like Poetry--which actually has a stated mission to try to give readers an idea of what's going on across the breadth of "contemporary American poetry"--in practice only manages to represent a few types of work, which tend to be fairly close to each other. Lots of other exciting stuff may be going on, unreported, but if it's too far from its usual beat, Poetry doesn't seem to think it matters.

I try re-subscribing to Poetry every few years--i.e., with about the same frequency, and with exactly the same sense of "I really should stop avoiding this because it will be good for me" attitude, as I enroll in exercise classes. And every time, I hate it with a ferocity that scares me, and I remember why I've quit so many times. Poetry, like the exercise classes I've tried, seems designed to appeal to someone who is, as Rose's essay said, [not me]. I wish [not me] well, and will leave [not me] to do [not me]'s thing, without my financial support or allocation of limited bookshelf space.

[Janice D. Soderling]

Thanks everyone. Very interesting. FWIW I've found that by buying secondhand over the net one can get some wonderful books by wonderful poets for 65 cents plus postage or thereabouts. The libraries are being shut down you know, and their books are going for a song. And sometimes the so-called secondhand books are brand-new.

Also from my local library I've acquired a large number of international poets in translation for about the same price without postage. They don't have room for books that no one checks out, so they sell them off after a year of no activity. Needless to say, I'm in pig heaven when I come home with ten new books of poetry for ten dollars or less. I get access to many international poets I wouldn't otherwise be able to afford, and even buy English writers in translation sometimes. It is interesting to see how the translation compares with the original. I learn a lot that way.

John, I agree about James Fenton. He is marvelous. I recently bought his Title correction: Yellow Tulips : Poems 1968-2011. It is very good. I discovered his work via an essay. And I just ordered (new) the collected works of Stanley Kunitz (thanks to Wells mentioning him). I've always loved his writing and found a hardcover Collected at a reasonable price. An early Christmas present. Or something.

Thanks again, all. The door is still open, if anyone else cares to share.

[W.F. Lantry]

I suppose I should take a swing at these, just out of a warped sense of duty. And because Maryann did, and I don't want to leave her hanging out to dry. But please don't think of my answers as actual answers, or even positions. Any answers say more about the answerer than about the subject. And the questions themselves do the same. That said...

Does anyone in this room read any poetry other than their own or what appears on the Eratosphere workshops?

Yep. Quite a bit of it. And I try to go well beyond the realms of brits and yanks.

Is the poetry floating out of the publishing houses and clouds about navel fluff, or national politics, or the working class, or weighty existential queries and meditations?

I rather like "weighty existential queries and meditations." It's pretty much my stock in trade, alas, so I likely tend to seek those out. And discussions of aesthetics. I'm selfish that way: anything that can broaden my own work, or my own understanding. Anything else, like those categories you list, I tend to ignore, so I have no idea about their prevalence. I also like hot-wild-monkey-sex poems. Obviously. I wish I had a copy of John's anthology of Blue Verse. Can't afford it, dagnabbit.


Is contemporary work formal, or humorous, or spread out all over the page, a kind of connect-the-words?

I have no idea what this question means. I really don't make any distinction between formal or informal, structured or free. There are good people doing good work in all genres: we're lucky that way these days. And there are hacks and poseurs doing things in all genres as well. The distinctions we know so well are pointless, and the persecution complex so many formal poets suffer from hurts only themselves. We need to move forward.

Does it arrive from a publishing house or self-published on a cloud?

Actually, most new work arrives from the same source it has for decades: little magazines and small independent publishing houses. Anyone looking to the big five for innovation should probably look elsewhere.

Are poets channeling the old masters or assembling structures from refrigerator magnets?

Another false dichotomy. Do I learn stuff from Ovid and Martial and Attar and Du Fu? Of course. Do I get just as fascinated by twists of contemporary language? Yes, I love the music of the sensual ear.

Do poets borrow poetry at the library, or buy poetry from some source--what source?


Neither. I hate to say this, but if it's not online, I'm probably not reading it. In a choice between buying food for the boys or buying a book, the boys are going to win every time. This has cost me friends: you wouldn't believe how many messages I get from people saying "Please buy my book." I've even lost friends over it. I wish things were different, but there you are.

Do poets actively seek out new work or just routinely "like" on social media?

I'm desperate for anything new and useful. Leaves on leaves on leaves of books I've turned, and I know nothing. Finding something I can actually use is rare. There's this Mongolian poet, Mend-Ooyo Gombojav, who friended me out of the blue on facebook. I liked some of his stuff so well, I spent three hours discussing it with my lit class the next day. I love that kind of thing.

What poetry do you think gets the most reads--poetry of past or contemporary elite/recognized or the smallish poetry pal constellations?

You know what gets the most reads? The Dash. Look it up, I dare you. Then there are poets who are the equivalent of Thomas Kinkade. A few of them have been mentioned in this thread. I don't want to hurt any feelings, so I won't use their names. But if you're counting, they get way more reads than others. Not that I abhor Kinkade: I'm very, very interested in why so many people like him so much. I suspect it has something to do with Dutton's theory of beauty. When we dismiss such things, it's to our own detriment... and to the detriment of our work. Do we really enjoy sticking our noses in the air that much?

Do aspiring poets care about anyone's poetry except their own?

I don't know any aspiring poets. I know people who are producing work, and people who aren't. Most of the latter group are like me in the woodshop: I spend a lot of time getting in my own way. We carry beliefs that hold us back, even to our detriment. There's no reason people can't be producing on a daily basis. Some people believe it would be bad to do that. That's exactly the kind of belief that holds people back, that gets in their own way. Reverdy thinks we should be like trees, making leaf after leaf after leaf. There's something to be said for that. Just ask Li Po.

Thanks,

Bill

[Gregory Dowling]

Bill, and ask Keats too: "if Poetry comes not as naturally as the Leaves to a tree it had better not come at all." But examination of his manuscripts shows his leaves got carefully rearranged after their first burgeoning...

This is an interesting thread. Thanks, Janice, for starting it. I didn't know Marius Bewley was English. He certainly did most of his teaching in America. It's probably people like him who are keenest in identifying the specific qualities of national poetries. Auden was also very good at seeing what made American poetry different from British poetry.

[ross hamilton hill]

The United Kingdom includes Canada, Australia, New Zealand, all the commonwealth nations. Queen Elizabeth II rules them all and not just symbolically, in 1975 she dismissed the Australian parliament. That has to be a factor in how we view ourselves.
Can I also mention Jonathan Heimarck, was once 'Johnny Pravda' on Myspace and Diane Arthur, both now Facebook poets, Jonathan is from Minnesota, Diane is also from the US, not sure where. Both have written fine poems.

[Janice D. Soderling]

Actually that isn't correct, Ross. The United Kingdom comprises England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Don't worry, I saw an interview on Fox News with the Prime Minister of Ireland and they were confused too; couldn't understand why Ireland's currency was the Euro and not the GBP.

Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are three of the 16 Commonwealth realms. However, there are 53 countries in the Commonwealth (formerly called the British Commonwealth).

It was sloppy of me not to make clear that Canada was included in "American" poetry.

I should of course have mentioned Australia.

[W.F. Lantry]

Originally Posted by Janice D. Soderling

It was sloppy of me not to make clear that Canada was included in "American" poetry.

I know some Canadians who may not fully embrace that notion...

[Janice D. Soderling]

So do I. I also know Canadians who ask "Why does 'American' always mean the United States. We live in North America. I spent a long time wondering if I should get into the Mexico is also "North America" discussion, but decided not to. But as far as Canadian poetry is concerned, the Canadian journals and the American journals are usually included in the North American books and magazines that list places to submit too.

Anyway, if I backtrack and say that I am interested in Canadian poetry magazines too. I have a special place in my heart for them because when I was first trying to get published from Sweden, it was Canadian print journals such as Malahat Review, Event, Fiddlehead, Windsor Review who were good to me.

And of course Centrifugal Eye and Rotary Dial and other Canadian mags that no longer exist share that special place. Besides which I love Canada. One of the friendliest countries I've visited.

[John Whitworth]

I don't suppose the Irish understand about the bloody euro either. Never mind. It's on the skids. Bring back the Punt!

[Ann Drysdale]

I thought Centrifugal Eye and Rotary Dial were still going strong.

http://home.earthlink.net/~tinyviole...urnal/id5.html

http://www.pw.org/literary_magazines/the_rotary_dial

Are they not?