Category Archives: Poetry

Early American Pastoral

Two American Scenes

FA review tag

Pamphlets like Thomas Paine’s Common Sense sparked the American Revolution, so it’s fitting that a pamphlet should rekindle our sense of patriotism. The second issue of the New Directions Poetry Pamphlet series features a diptych of American poems unearthed and reassembled by Lydia Davis and Eliot Weinberger.

Davis offers a retelling of the diary of Sidney Brooks, her great-great-great uncle, who lived in the village of Harwich on Cape Cod in the early 1800s. With its anthropological attention to the landscape and its people, Davis’s poem could serve as an origin myth for America.

Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Eliot Weinberger, Hooray Fiction!, John Wesley Powell, Lydia Davis, New Directions, New Directions Poetry Pamphlets, Poetry

In Defense of Richard Blanco’s Inauguration Poem

For poetry, an art form that debatably peaked many years ago, any opportunity to assume center stage is a tremendous blessing. One of these opportunities presented itself this past Monday at the second inauguration of President Barack Obama. With the omnipresent reach of live news coverage, poet Richard Blanco graced televisions and computer screens all over the globe. Americans with varying levels of exposure to poetry listened as Blanco read his poem “One Today.” On my television, the cameras cut away from Blanco to the national mall, alternating between close-ups of audience members. One of these short glimpses captured a man leaning against a railing, engrossed by something on his smart phone, while others leaned around him straining for a view of the poet on the podium. Conversely, the cameras cut away during a poignant part of Blanco’s poem to a wide-eyed older woman as a tear carved a warm path down her hardened cheek. She nodded at Blanco’s references to struggles and inequalities with the type of self-assurance that is earned from a life well lived. Her reaction was the most beautiful thing I saw all day. More beautiful than the first family. More beautiful than the crowd shot of a sea of American flags waving from the Capitol all the way to the Lincoln Memorial. More beautiful than the President and Chief Justice saying all the right words and not needing a do-over this time. And, dare I say, more beautiful than Beyoncé. In camera work that some might describe as manipulative, I did not see artificial sincerity; no, I saw poetry in motion. Continue reading

2 Comments

Filed under Poetry, Richard Blanco, Second Inaugural

The New Neurotic

Ben Lerner, the young poet and novelist who’s getting rave reviews almost everywhere, is neurotic. Or at least his persona is. And he’s neurotic in a somewhat original way. Which is remarkable, since The New York Times recently declared that all the neurotics are gone.

A neurotic is someone who suffers from a perceived disconnect with the world and becomes anxious and over-analytical as a result—Woody Allen is the classic example. Ben Lerner is similar in all respects but one. He suffers from a perceived disconnect with himself.

In his poetry collection, Angle of Yaw, Lerner finds a profound and chilling way to redefine phobias.

A person is phobic, that is, mentally imbalanced, when his fears fail to cancel out his other fears. The healthy, too, are terrified of heights, but equally terrified of depths, as terrified of dark as light, open spaces as closed. The phobic are overbold, not overly apprehensive, and must be conditioned to fear the opposite of what they fear. The difficulty of such a treatment lies in finding the counterbalancing terror. What is the opposite of a marketplace? A prime number? Blood? A spider?

In his novel, Leaving the Atocha Station, he describes the internal schism that causes his neurosis, and links it to his perspective as a writer.

But my research had taught me that the tissue of contradictions that was my personality was itself, at best, a poem, where “poem” is understood as referring to a failure of language to be equal to the possibilities it figures; only then could my fraudulence be a project and not merely a pathology; only then could my distance from myself be redescribed as critical, aesthetic, as opposed to a side effect of what experts might call my substance problem.

And in his New Yorker story, “The Golden Vanity,” he adds another layer of self-analysis and self-doubt, musing neurotically on the popular reception of his neurotic novel, and even defining his neurosis explicitly.

Since late the previous spring, when he’d published his novel to unexpected praise, the women his friends attempted to set him up with had invariably read his book, or had at least glanced, in advance of their meeting, at those preview pages available online at Amazon. This meant that instead of the conventional conversations about work, favorite neighborhoods, and so on, he’d likely be asked what parts of the book were autobiographical. Even if these questions weren’t posed explicitly, he could see, or thought he saw, his interlocutor testing whatever he said and did against the text. And because his narrator was characterized above all by his anxiety regarding the disconnect between his internal experience and his social self-presentation, the more intensely the author worried about distinguishing himself from the narrator the more he felt he had become him.

In each case Lerner is worried about “the disconnect between his internal experience and his social self-presentation.” Other writers have tackled this subject before. But Lerner approaches it like a true neurotic–with meticulous clarity, a skittish intellectualism, and clinical overtones. And he’s not socially neurotic like Woody Allen, who constantly worried about his place in the world; he’s internally or existentially neurotic, exploring a fundamental disconnect in himself and his perspective.

It may be time for the Times to issue a retraction.

- Brian Hurley

Leave a Comment

Filed under Ben Lerner, Hooray Fiction!, Poetry, Woody Allen

W. S. Merlin

A real wizard with words.

.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Poetry

Random Awesomeness

Tao Lin’s new poems are… I don’t know… awesome, I guess?

– In the same way that this is a sentence,

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

this

Turkey turkey Turkey turkey badger badger Turkey turkey.

and this

Cardinal fish cardinal fish fish fish cardinal fish.

are also sentences.

.

Leave a Comment

Filed under "Non-fiction", Poetry, Tao Lin

Are stories getting shorter?

I don’t have a scientific study to back this up, but I remember when a short story was 10,000 to 20,000 words. Then it was 5,000 words if you were slacking. Then it was 1,500 words for everyone but the staff of The Paris Review. Now it’s anything over 500 words, because at 500 words it turns into a short-short. (Yes, we had to invent a category called the short-short.)

If stories are getting shorter, then… why?

Possible answers:

– Because in spite of all doomsaying about the death of various literary forms, this is a boom time for prose. Even people who don’t think of themselves as creative types are composing emails and Facebook profiles and text messages with the speed and sloppiness of a college kid pulling an all-nighter. For those who are more self-conscious in their literary endeavors, the way to stand out is to create something short and precise and lovingly edited.

– Because the market is putting pressure on length. Paper is expensive, relative to the audience for short fiction, and online magazines are reluctant to publish long stories that might exhaust a reader’s eyes.

– Because we’re lashing out against the qualities that made the “literary lions” of the mid-twentieth century so famous. They were prolific, verbose, panoramic, and gutsy. Today we’re all about being tentative, ambivalent, defensive, and oblique. (This is a riff on a theme by Katie Roiphe.)

– Because the best prose is being written by poets.

Other ideas?

.

1 Comment

Filed under Bad Fiction, Hooray Fiction!, Poetry

WE LOVE THIS WRITER: Eileen Myles

Eileen Myles

After dissing the entire book industry as a machine of mediocrity, there’s really only one person we can talk about next. Eileen Myles is so adamantly and happily removed from the Knopfs and the Kakutanis of the world, it’s sometimes hard to believe she’s for real. She’s primarily known as a poet, but you could also call her an art critic, a novelist, a lesbian, a librettist, a post-punk icon, and a walking-talking tribute to New York City.

Eileen’s new book is also her first collection of criticism, and it goes by the unlikely title of The Importance of Being Iceland: Travel Essays on Art. Some of these essays—which explore things like dogs, Allen Ginsberg, Icelandic epic poetry, the time Eileen lived in a homeless person’s box on Madison and 73rd, and flossing—could easily be transcripts of conversations with Eileen. She used to teach us fiction, and she would listen intently and nod along as we complained about some trivial hardship in our writing process, and then she’d sort of grab us by the wrist (verbally) and, disregarding whatever we had just been talking about, race us through a tangent about wildfires, or mnemonic devices in ancient Greek oratory. To Eileen’s surprise as much as ours, it would end up being exactly what we needed to hear.

A good place to start reading Eileen Myles, if you haven’t already, is her novel Cool For You, but it would be almost criminal not to mention the anthology of lesbian writing she edited, called The New Fuck You, which is possibly the greatest title we’ve ever heard.

.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Hooray Fiction!, Poetry, We Love This [Person]

The Poets of the Future are Just Fucking with the New Yorker

minority_report031

Early in her New Yorker profile of Matthew and Michael Dickman—two young poets from Oregon who happen to be identical twins—Rebecca Mead quotes one of their detractors, who says: “The Dickman twins have put their life story, not their poetry, front and center, and have made that the reason you should find them interesting.” But in the very next sentence Mead disagrees: “In fact, the Dickman twins have made efforts to resist the pairing of their work.” She explains that Michael Dickman’s poetry was accepted for publication by Copper Canyon Press, and it’s merely an accident that his twin brother Matthew is published by the same people. (Matthew won a poetry prize that included a book contract with distribution by Copper Canyon.) Her argument that the Dickman brothers are loath to exploit the rare circumstance of their birth actually makes them look more suspicious.

Halfway through the profile, Mead lets slip that the Dickman brothers—whose poetry, she argues, is very working class, marked by “the rough neighborhood of their youth, with its violent fathers, beleaguered mothers, and reckless, neglected kids”—are related to Sharon Olds, a successful contemporary poet. “Michael and Matthew have strived to avoid taking nepotistic advantage of their relation to Olds, and have preferred to conceal it,” says Mead. They can’t have been striving too hard, if their secret is now being printed in a magazine with a circulation of just over one million. But Mead helps them appear humble by burying this fact partway through the article, in an aside about their family life.

Once, Matthew Dickman approached a geriatric (and famously lecherous) Allen Ginsberg after a poetry reading with the line, “I can’t promise you anything, but would you like to meet my twin brother?” They proceeded to Ginsberg’s hotel room, where Matthew, who is apparently straight, allowed the godhead of Beat poetry to kiss him on the mouth for 15 minutes. Is this an example of how rapturously the Dickman brothers love poetry and its greatest practitioners, or an example of a young man trying to score points with a more established figure, by whatever means necessary? Mead offers the encounter simply as proof that the Dickman brothers “know how to surround themselves with people who have enormous hearts and generosity and are enthusiastic about art and literature and music.”

The thrill that runs through Mead’s profile is a creeping suspicion that the author has no idea she is being manipulated by two ambitious, savvy young poets. Each time Mead argues that the Dickman brothers are utterly guileless—and she argues it frequently—she seems to prove the opposite. But the most persuasive evidence that the poets are manipulating the journalist is the fact that this profile exists at all. When was the last time an up-and-coming poet—someone without the fascinating subplot of an identical twin—was profiled in The New Yorker?

It should be rather clear that people who hire a talent agent and flirt with acting careers—the Dickman brothers played minor roles in Minority Report, starring Tom Cruise, directed by Steven Spielberg (photo above)—are keenly aware of their roles as performers, and the importance of self-promotion. But Mead doesn’t investigate along these lines. She quotes Michael, who characterizes the brothers’ acting careers as nothing more than a hobby. “Whenever we weren’t actually shooting, we would be in our trailers, reading Ted Hughes, and then we would leave and take cabs to bookstores and spend our per diem on poetry.” So it was just a happy accident they made every effort to cast themselves, as identical twins, in an $80 million movie?

In spite of all this, Matthew and Michael appear to be good poets. Their lines quoted in the profile are spare, vulnerable, and unsettling. It’s hard not to be glad when a major magazine presents a serious profile of young poets. And it’s downright reassuring to hear the Dickman brothers praise their favorite contemporary writers: Anne Sexton, Sylvia Plath, Louise Glück, Philip Levine, and Charles Bukowski. There are young people in America who care about poetry! And they’re pretty good at writing it! That revelation is worth an article in itself.

But instead we get a New Yorker writer who’s in denial about her subjects. Mead keeps insisting the Dickman brothers are poets of the old school, working-class dreamers who pulled themselves out of the rough streets in order to make their fresh voices heard. Her profile runs aground on all the questions she neglects to ask.

Charming, unassuming, media-savvy, mentor-kissing, self-exploiting, and seriously good at writing poetry, Matthew and Michael Dickman might be a glimpse of the future of the fine arts.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Close Reading, Poetry, Suck It New Yorker