Thursday, June 02, 2005

another quiz, from Radical Druid via Jonathan Mayhew. there's a value in saying things aloud. also in hitting on questions I haven't thunk on much.

1. Do you write with the intent of submitting (and getting published)? Is that your primary objective in writing poetry (publishing to print media, or online journals, or other outlets [i.e., contests, prizes, etc.])?

mostly I do not write with publication in mind. I know I can 'publish' anything online, on my blog or website or to a listserv. I put publish in quotes as a nod towards those who don't think that is publication, screw them. my R/ckets & S/ntries blog was written expressly for publication. I wrote it on the blog, as the blog. I assumed an audience by doing so.

2. If submittal/publishing is not your primary objective, is there another outlet (regular public poetry readings, religious liturgy, slams, literary cameraderie/competition) for which you tend to write?

no.

3. Do you write poetry for other reasons (i.e., personal confessional, celebration of special events, academic requirement, etc.)? How much of what you write is for these "personal" uses, as opposed to ultimately for "audience" consumption?

this can get twisty. I don't write confessionally but the writing often comes out of emotional places, in a cathartic way. there are times when I need to write. I know people will want to puncture that balloon but it is true. I have been envious of Stephen Vincent for writing directly about his father's death, whereas I could not do so, not in poetry. I do not want to dictate the event, but there are times of honour and depth that are worthy of trying to write for. Shelley got hit by Keats' death and, not that they were great friends, wrote Adonais. which, of course, is mostly about Shelley.

4. In any case, what percentage of your "audience" is other poets, versus non-poets?

my poetry has been appreciated by non-poets, but it seems like few non-poets seek out poetry. assuming I know what a poet is.

5. As relates to audience, what is the level at which you seek to connect with them (i.e., artistic, intellectual, emotional, political, spiritual, etc.), once you have them identified? Does "connecting" to your audience even matter?

I'd be happy to connect on any level. but I haven't identified that audience. and I'd have to be a lot more clever to think I could produce a connection. seems like, an effort to connect would mean to produce recognizable forms, codes that the audience 'gets'. there can be value in that but poetry's full charge seems to come from an experience that feels unique. I use the word seem to indicate my dismay.

6. As you explore those different aspects of yourself through your poetry, does that change your audience, make it larger or smaller, alienate it, etc.?

writing poetry doesn't feel like a self-exploration. at any rate, I don't have much sense of the audience.

7. What percentage of the "audience" for your poetry would you consider your friends or even acquaintances, if any?

I guess most people who know my work know it thru its appearance on my blogs or on listservs, so there is that sort of acquaintanceship.

8. In terms of well-crafted, do you think that craft (that is, skill of the poet in whatever genre or form they have chosen) is typically the criteria used in determining what is or is not published in the above? Or is it more likely to be what is considered "good" poetry by academia and its associated publishing press?

not sure what 'in the above' means here, tho I like the phrase as stand alone. this question is confused. I guess all them criteria apply but I don't know the percentage.

9. What is more important to you as a poet, assuming that you can only pick at most two of the following: that you be widely read, widely known, widely admired, widely quoted, or well-paid?

well-paid certainly is a more firm conception than the others. all those widelys sound attractive, but half a sec of consideration produces so what. I suppose, tho, that enough of those widelys would lead to well-paid, best of all worlds. barely and widely.

No comments: