Feeds:
Posts
Comments

News Injection

I’m off sick today and can do very little beyond being a passive participant in existence. Here’s a couple items for you.

News Sandwich Spread

I’ve got ten minutes to lunch and so thought I’d post a couple items.

Gravity’s Plumb Line by Ross Leckie
Year: 2005
Publisher: Gaspereau Press
Province: Nova Scotia

                                    The forsythia
       by the corner of the veranda doesn’t
go down. It rockets up in a golden sting
       of flowers careening into holiday
fireworks. The forget-me-nots and heal-all
       don’t go down that dirt road.
I would prefer not to go down that dirt road

-from “That Dirt Road”

Gravity's Plumb Line (Gaspereau Press, 2005)

When I completed my undergrad I ended up out of work for a brief period (surely no surprise to anyone whose major was English). After a purgatory in which my mother assured me there were better things I should be doing, I landed a job working for a Coles bookstore in a local mall. With some extra time on my hands when not working, and a desire to feed my curiosity and growing appreciation of poetry, I enrolled in a writing workshop course with Mary Dalton at Memorial University. At some point during the winter (I can not recall the specifics), I ended up at an event where the guest reader was Ross Leckie, who was at this time promoting his brand new release.

Before that winter I was not at all familiar with Leckie’s work, but having heard the man read I was taken with the book, in particular the crisp imagery and logistic thought patterns strung throughout. The connections made between the natural world and that of man are tightly woven. In “Apples” there is something ethereal about life that sprouts around the speaker, but there is also something intensely human in the need to set boundaries for shape and being that aid in our understanding:

The ones still hanging from the trees

are in a freeze of falling. A firmament
is deduced by one plucked and polished
on your sleeve. In its glint the curvature

of umbered sky and clouds that stretch
into glowing nebulae. You sense its
gravity by weighing it in your hand.

This attention to detail, the specifics of image, even the dissection of image into smaller segments for our digestion is found throughout Gravity’s Plumb Line and is truly a treat for the reader. In taking this stance in his writing, Leckie produces rhythms that run throughout much of the book and function as a unifying structure beyond individual rhythms found within the poems themselves. I very much appreciated this approach to poetic expression and, like any good student of poetry, began to apply it to my own work in the weeks that followed in an attempt to see how it might work best for me.

What I remember of Leckie’s time at the event was his reading of the work: for a soft-spoken man he certainly can deliver. I remember being caught by his reading of “The Ice Bird”: the pauses made, the intonation of his voice, how urgent the poem seemed not just because of the writing, but how he chose to present it. I remember later that evening, sitting around a table at Giovanni’s having pizza and a pint, discussing his thoughts on the performance of the poem as a way of complementing the written work, in a way amplifying its impact while forging a new creature through verbal interpretation. A wonderful opportunity for any young poet.

I wanted to include this book in my list of favourite poetry titles of the decade because it represents for me a time in my own development as a writer when engaged discourse about writing with other writers was new to me. It was new, but something necessary and exciting: to hear what drew other writers to specific poems and authors, to hear their thoughts on the internal workings of texts, the publishing industry, the compiling of poems into a manuscript. The engagement I felt with Leckie’s poems was comparable to what I felt towards poetry as a whole with its rhythms, sound patterns and the presentation of these to the listener through the vocal medium. Readings are an integral part of fully experiencing poetry, both from one’s own perspective and that of the reader.

It seems that poet and editor Paul Vermeersch has been following the reviewing fiasco and has decided to throw his own opinion into the hat. Thus far his argument seems to engage more with the nature of criticism and the actual text of a book than the person of the author or reviewer. When a review strays from this he sees it as lacking in good critical practice. Vermeersch’s take on the idea of authorial intent is much as I see it: not about getting in the writer’s head (which is inevitably impossible), but assessing the work’s message, meaning, and purpose as presented in the text itself. The intent of a well written work should be discernable and supported by the writer’s craft, style, technique, and creativity. How these are used, or misused, can be assessed, not what magical series of thoughts (what s/he was “trying to do”) had circled in the author’s head at the time of writing.

Poetry is more than mere building blocks; it’s communication, and all communication has a purpose, which to say it has intent. In critical discourse, engaging with “intent” has more to do with understanding how the poetry works within its given mode, understanding how a text has been assembled and reading it with an eye towards understanding its purpose, its message, and its content. For example, one would not (should not) measure a poem by E.E. Cummings with the same material yardstick one would use to measure a poem by Robert Frost, or whichever two dissimilar poets you might choose. The two poets have a different ethos, a different project, a different way of communicating, a different “intent” that is expressly manifest in their work.

Anyway, quite a good post that I recommend you read if you haven’t yet seen it. You can find the entire post here.

Nature of Criticism

I’ve been getting wrapped up in this issue of reviewing and criticism lately. It’s a big debate right now in the Canadian poetry scene and one that, due to the various levels of disagreement and animosity, needs to be discussed. I’ve posted on another blog, in some limited way, my own opinions on reviewing and have tried to avoid slipping off the issue and into the gutter-talk on the side. Some people I’ve read have managed this while others have not.

My good friend Jake Mooney has been following from the sidelines as well. He’s become quite concerned about these talks, not so much for the people involved, but what it’s doing to criticism in the Canadian sphere. He’s posted what’s almost a plea to those involved hoping that however this polarization in the writing world is resolved (if that’s even possible) it be done in a professional way. The debating has, at times, sunken into the pits of insult and nastiness, which to my mind negates the arguments of those involved. How can these sides be taken seriously if they throw all decorum out the window?

Jake’s post is likely to ruffle some feathers on all sides, but it’s coming from a well intentioned place, that of fair and progressive criticism. I for one can’t fault him for that.

Older Posts »