The first article generated some interesting discussion around the idea of collaboration and the ‘poetry reading’ as a way of connecting with audiences and breaking down the publication barrier. This brought to mind a quote by Les Murray:
“The public reading is the real hope of poetry at the moment. Far more people will come to a reading than will buy a poetry book. Gathering warm bodies for a public reading doesn’t automatically translate into more people heading to a bookstore or poring over poems on their own time. And of course, if a poem is ill-presented—as so many so often are, since a majority of poets either act as if they’re encountering their own poems for the first time, or else histrionically wring every atom of significance from them—potential book-buyers can be driven away from poems that work wonderfully on the page.”
taken from the article, The Peril of the Poetry Reading by David Groff (http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/5913)
This, as Groff points out, is at once a double edged sword, as on one hand, Murray praises the poetry reading as the real hope of poetry and on the other, outlines the risks associated with a poor reading.
In the coming weeks I will be talking with several poets who have had success both on and off the page about poetry and the spoken word and whether there is a line that separates them.
Until then, let’s consider this… if conversation is what humanises the world, is it not the responsibility of the poet to bring poetry back to the public sphere in its spoken form to increase the visibility and audibility of all manner of dissenting ideas about poetry?
I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Nice writing. Worthy of King Island cheese.
Thanks Cheesed On. Have you any further thoughts on the topic?
Are they really dissenting ideas about poetry?
In sculpture you wouldn’t dream to create anything without fully understanding your tools and materials.. likewise your concepts.. it’s like coming into a conversation halfway through and jabbering over everyone.. Which I suppose is what it is if you’ve not decided if your poems are performative or need to rest peacefully on a page..
I’m of the mind that within poetry you need to understand it in all its potential forms before you can use it properly.. Performative pieces, poems using the page as canvas.. the quiet meditative spaces of haiku..there are so many facets to poetic form.. I don’t think you can make meaning well unless you’ve explored all the ways and means at your disposal.. Spoken word is a delicious conduit with a wonderful tradition.. However, I do feel that always the audience for poetry seems to be other poets.. but then I am also pretty sure 95% of the populace are possibly poets..
The potential of online poetry to disseminate amongst the masses is my great fascination at present.. I’d love to read your thoughts on this media Graham.
A.Joy
Evening gnunn. The topic opens up many areas of discussion. I agree that conversation is what humanises our realm that we call the world and yes from this it would appear that this supposition behoves poets to read their work. As you acknowledge Murray raises arguments for both sides. His comment that poets may approach their work as if they are seeing it for the first time made me think. Is this not the space in which any potential purchaser of the written work finds themselves aftwr they have arrived home? I grant you that they have the opportunity to revisit but initial thoughts can be strong. Murray may suggest by implication that the author holds the key to the emotions and intended spaces for reader contemplation that evolved during their writing process. If so, this renders the reader, who will insert their own world into the reading, to the part of some third party imposter.What does Murray say of readings by non-authors I wonder? I am reminded of fantastic blues being covered and rendered innocuous simply by the fact that the person singing has “not been there.”
Your article also made me think of other forms of literary works. The novel for instance. Readings are either used for the sight impaired or as part of some publisher’s media push for their charges. The latter short readings of a passage here or passage there echo what Murray says. Some good, some poor. At least in my experience. Again, for myself, it is often the story behind the story that sparkes my interest. Do these readings increase sales or is it merely the effect of the public appearance?
So the question remains. Will readings increase the liklihood of sales of the written form or will the listeners merely revel in the aural reception of the authors work. Short enough to taste and appreciate but not enough to create an insatiable addiction. Do poets suffer from the relatively short form of their work with each rendition read in minutes not days. Does the listener and potential book purchaser secretly wonder “will the others be like that?
Sorry gnunn. More questions for you and other poets to consider.
Southdog
This is rich stuff you are tapping into here SS. One thing that you have certainly made me reconsider is the power of the reader and the responsibility that comes with that power. I am not sure about the audience/reader as third party imposter though. I agree that they sit outside the initial moment of creation, but quality poetry invites moments of creation by drawing the listener/reader in and developing new meaning. As for reading the works of others or poetry covers so to speak, I am firmly of the belief that if the reader has connected with the poet’s experience then it can be a way of expanding our modes of thinking and more importantly, can offer another version of the human circumstance. But the big question you raise here is do readings increase sales, or is it just public appearance. The best way for me to answer this is to speak from my own experience. We are in an age where the commercial book store/distributor will only stock/carry ‘name authors’ or books that are printed in large print runs (1000+). This excludes most poetry titles, so as someone who has taken the leap into the role of publisher, we (David Stavanger and I at Small Change Press) rely almost exclusively on sales at readings. We do however, acknowledge that the bulk of our sales are to other poets, a problem that Amanda raised in her comment. We also acknowledge that the launch of our titles is often less about the words and more about the aesthetic pleasure of the event, more akin to a musical experience than a literary one. In the end it is hard to argue that a good reading is an undeniably powerful experience, summoning only the ear and creating new meaning/connections, in the company of others. This is the power that can possess the listener to commit what Richard Howard calls, “the ultimate act of poetic integrity,” taking the poetry home. Thanks for opening up the discussion SS!
Hi Graham and Amanda!
Really enjoying this discussion! I like the idea of poetry as a method or means for reclaiming public space. And why not wider social issues too?
Perhaps it’s natural for poets of a print-culture to be a little awkward at first, when using poetry in the oral tradition it’s come from. I certainly struggle with a lot of spoken elements (pacing for one).
I think spoken word is invaluable – it turns poetry from a product (printed form) into a process, into a social event. Not to say the printed form is negative, but participating is so fun, so important, so healthy, so necessary for any art form.
Of course, forms of oral performance seem to be limited to formal events (like speeches at weddings, birthdays etc) and in these events a ‘public’ performance is limited to guests. Not like a television or radio broadcast where a political address may speaks to everyone in earshot.
So does an oral perforamnce like poetry have to go ‘underground?’
Great response Amanda. I do think there are many dissenting ideas about poetry, from outside the poetry sphere and from within – poetry belongs on the page and not the stage, poetry rhymes, there is no place for first person usage in poetry, all poetry should have political content. These are all things that I have heard stated, sometimes with intense passion over the years.
I agree that within poetry you need to understand its potential as without an understanding of this, all work (potentially) would be purposeless, lack meaning.
I also agree that most poetry readings are populated by other poets. This works on some levels, as I know I cconsidered my early attendances at readings as professional development. I would go along and soak it all up, then at home, analyse the elements that excited me, that really worked in that context. I would also question why other elements missed the mark. So in this capacity, poets attending poetry readings is essential. It is also a way to develop community, establish networks, and tap into valuable critical peer feedback. But, I agree on face value that the majority of readings are not getting poetry beyond the sphere of poets, not jumping the poetic hurdle, however, they can do this job on another level. An example of this is a reading I run in Brisbane called SpeedPoets. This event has now been running for 7 years and has become part of the cultural fabric in this city. It is a known entity and has been name checked in public art displays, received statewide newspaper column space and regular local coverage, so in that way, it is reaching into the public sphere. But I do agree, poetry readings face the problem of preaching to the converted.
Now the potential of electronic media… well that is something that I also feel passionate about and will be exploring this in another Jumping the Poetic Hurdle. Until then…
Thanks for the response Ashley. Good points raised here. I think you are totally on the money that the social element of a reading is really vital. The difficulty there is that alot of the time you don’t really get to talk during a reading, so again it comes down to making time to get together afterwards or before to really ‘talk’ (time is one of the great poetic hurdles).
But the question, does a poetry reading have to go underground is something I have given great thought. It does seem the case that poetry readings are tucked away in small bars/cafes and basement/attic type venues. I think that this is generally a necessity for regular (weekly/monthly) events, as venue owners are quite rightly driven by the dollar and are chasing bums on seats and money across the bar. That said, I do think there is alot happening to get poetry into more mainstream venues. SLAM (love it or otherwise) is one of the vehicles that is taking poetry into larger venues to a wider audience. The Australian Poetry SLAM for example held its final at the Sydney Opera House and I think any poet would love to perform in that venue, so it is happening. Up here in Queensland, the poetry festival is held in the Judith Wright Centre of Contemporary Arts which is a state of the art venue and once a year the festival hosts a gig at local music venue The Globe Theatre as part of the worldwide Love Poetry Hate Racism event. These are just a couple of ways that poetry is moving ‘above ground’ and into the brighter lights of Brisbane. I would be keen to hear what is happening in other states, cities, countries…
Graham I think that your earlier article concerning radio and the music industry has similar overtones to that raised in your comments about commercial book stores/distributors and that is the “closed market” that exists in both fields. In a sense the masses are told what to like and when and any eclectic habits are even frowned upon. This ties into what both Ashley and Amanda touch upon although in different ways. In a sense poetry does inhabit the underground. If only you were sportspeople! I find it difficult to fathom the exhaustive process that any performative arts vehicles have to go through for funding when it seems that that public and private money is thrown at individual sports and their performers.
Amanda suggests online media. So perhaps a bigger question exists. Is it about the work, the performance, and getting “it out there”? Or is is about publication and mainstream distribution? Does availability result in sales? Although an abhorrent question to be raised by someone who loves paper and pages – Is having a book at a bookstore the best way in which to reach your reader? These questions may simply arise from my naivety and are not intended to cause any afront gnunn. SS
Great questions SS. Is it about the performance and getting it out there or publication and distribution? Well for me they are hand in glove. The whole issue of publication is a constant headache, but it is something I strongly believe is a next step in the getting it out there journey. For poets and poetry, the best way to get it out there is through readings/performances at festivals, events, schools etc… Sadly, your question is having a book in a book store the best way in which to reach an audience, is answered no (well at least for me anyway). Having your book in a store, coupled with having a reading at the store is a great way to sell a few copies, but other than that, the hard truth is, people are not rushing in to book stores searching for poetry. Again, if you are a name – Malouf, Murray, Porter – the book store is vital, but outside of this circle, the book store is not the best way to reach an audience. I do still feel that there is a place for contemporary Australian poetry in book stores, but it is being squeezed out of the market. Without it on the shelves, people have little or no awareness that new works are being published outside of the yearly anthologies (Best of Australian Poems etc..). These anthologies are great touchstones for new and old readers alike, but it is almost impossible to track down original collections by the authors represented. So the anthology, which is a great way to promote new writing, almost starts to fail as the writing it is promoting is not on the shelves beside it. So it seems that for poetry, performances/readings are becoming one of the few mehods of distribution, outside of the electronic realm, and I will be looking at the electronic realm in a later post…
Hi Graham,
Wow! SLAM final at the Sydney Opera House that would be something. It would certainly be a place to raise the profile of poetry!
Same with the Love Poetry Hate Racism event and the Judith Wright Centre. That would be great. I think the time factor is a problem, scheduling? As in, lots of poets want to perform so a lot of the night is spent speaking/listening – and the discussions aren’t given a formal time slot. Though I’d bet those sorts of discussions are better in an informal mode.
“is it not the responsibility of the poet to bring poetry back to the public sphere”. Obviously I agree with you. The idea that is difficult to communicate is that this responsibility extends not only to how the poems are presented but also to how they are written. The age of self-indulgent self-expression and unrestrained experimentalism must make way for a type of poetry which acknowledges its responsibility to the reader. I think this is going to be a fundamental division in the years to come. “Don’t tell me how to write, Squires.” “Rank populism” “Dumbing down”, etc.