Did you know that Seattle has an official Poet Populist, elected by
internet vote? Did you know that Seattle’s newly crowned Poet Populist,
and the ninth person to be elected to the role, is named Mike Hickey?
Now that you know, do you care?
Here is the mission statement for the program:
The goal of the Poet Populist program is to promote the practice of
Art and Democracy, and to promote the literary arts and local arts
organizations to a general audience citywide.
On Friday, November 14, about 40 people gathered at Richard Hugo
House to watch the closing ceremonies of this year’s Poet Populist
competition, in which the top four vote getters read their work. Hickey
received a $500 check and read several celebratory poems, including one
about a door that doesn’t close properly (the introduction to the poem
was longer than the poem itself) and a prose poem about Sarah Palin
winning the presidency and becoming stricken with tarantism, a disease
caused by spider bite whose primary symptom is a compulsion to
dance.
I know mocking someone who reads poetry aloud is rather like
actively searching for someone with a weird sexual fetish—the
ardent desire to dress up like a pony, say, and then be groomed by a
member of the opposite sex—and then publicly mocking that person
for trying to fulfill his or her desire in a discreet fashion. Poetry
readers generally keep their compulsion to read poetry to the safe
confines of poetry readings, and to seek them out and poke fun at them
would be the most shameful kind of heartlessness.
But the Poet Populist program actively involves us all in this very
quest. Besides the fact that Hickey will be reading at events around
town this year as the voice of the people, the competition inspires
poets to carpet bomb their friends, and complete strangers, with
pleading e-mails for their vote. The following excerpt from a
self-promoting e-mail, which everyone at The Stranger received
from poet-in-the-running Arne Pihl on the morning of November 4, when
we all had a very different election in mind, is an example of the
delusion the Poet Populist competition inspires:
I’m pissed off. I want my language back. I want the letters R-E-D to
contain ripe fruit, blood and sunsets, and blue to make me think of
certain skies, the sea, remember the eyes of a bartender who used to
work in Wallingford, instead of signifying divisive bullshit… I want
freedom to be more than an obscure sound bite. I want it to pour from
lips until all of us, every one of us, is really, truly free. Poetry.
It’s our most beautiful weapon.
Listen: I don’t doubt that Nick Licata and Bob Redmond, the
masterminds behind the Poet Populist competition, have the best
interests of Seattle poetry at heart. Redmond programs the literary
events at Bumbershoot, bringing authors to town who would never
ordinarily get here. And thanks to Licata, every Seattle City Council
meeting now begins with the reading of a poem, which is a beautiful and
thoughtful gesture, a bow to the ornate and functionally useless before
the work of practicality begins. Having a strong poetry scene in
Seattle is, to my mind, valuable, and lord knows I haven’t done enough
to support Seattle poetry in the pages of this paper.
But here’s the thing: Public poetry is almost always very bad. Think
of Poetry on Buses, a program that consistently produces the worst
poetry any of us have ever read. Consider “Held,” by Ray Baldwin:
“Biscuit, my duckling. Lamb/whose wooly coat I comb./My own.
Nubbin,/button, seed of my leaving, you shine/pinkly, meant for my hand
to cup./Clean-licked foal, tadpole,/a push against my pull/and still/I
try to spread my fingers wide/enough to let you go.” The tiny amount of
space permitted each poem, and the bland quality of the work that is
invariably chosen, leads to a kind of tragic visual chatter that local
poet and novelist Doug Nufer describes as “snatches from one loud side
of a cell-phone conversation you can’t escape, or a bit of some
headline you misread over the shoulder of someone sitting a few rows in
front of you.”
Probably a part of the reason why so many people believe they are
good poets and deserving of public attention has to do with the fact
that they mostly deal in spoken-word poetry, which is a medium that
forgives shallow work. Very few spoken-word pieces are anything more
than a succession of images: One line, which might have some sort of
clever wordplay, has very little to do with the line before it or the
line after. No ideas are developed; nothing’s earned. Karen Finneyfrock
is a rare example of a slam poet who writes excellent poetry; for every
one of her, there are a thousand people who should be ashamed to share
their work with others.
At the Poet Populist reading, Elizabeth Austen read a short poem
about a relationship that was gorgeous and complete: “I reach for my
yellow sweater/It bursts into flame,” she read at the beginning of the
poem, and the imagery paid out winningly with the last line, “All the
old imperatives curl in the lingering heat.” But the second-place
winner of the competition, Ananda Selah Osel, destroyed all the good
will Austen earned by reading exactly the sort of drivel that keeps
people away from poetry. His poem “Black Overcoat One-Way People,”
about how men and women who work in offices downtown are conformists
(“Time wasters… the paper-faced horde… most people you pass on the
street have nothing to do with the truth… man has become what man is
never meant to be…”), is the kind of self-entitled Henry Rollins
fuck-the-system bullshit that automatically makes everyone tired of
angry young men and their viciously thin poetry. And his second-place
finish—over Elizabeth Austen!—means his dreadful work has
an implicit endorsement from the city.
These two Seattle programs, which are intended to bring poetry to
the people, are conceptually flawed. Poetry, by its very definition, is
a difficult thing to write and to comprehend. You’re not intended to
whistle through a book of poetry as though it were a paperback mystery
novel; you’re supposed to take your time with it. Both the Poetry on
Buses and Poet Populist programs are founded in a noble idea: Everyone
in this city would be a little bit improved by having regular contact
with poetry.
That’s only true if the work is good. The money for both of
Seattle’s poetry programs would be much better spent by actually
distributing good poetry throughout the city. Imagine metal plaques at
bus stops and on the backs of seats on public transit with full-length
poems by Nufer and Finneyfrock and Austen—or by better-known
Seattle poets, like Heather McHugh and Sherman Alexie—inscribed
on them. Imagine the city buying ad space in local publications to
publish poems written by the dozens of residents of Seattle who are
actively producing good work.
Redmond, in his introduction to the reading, said, “Our artists
should be beholden to their audiences.” That is not true. We are all of
us—artists and audiences alike—beholden to good work.
Nobody wins when your goal is to simply support poetry as a medium. The
point of any city program shouldn’t be to hold a popularity contest or
celebrate mediocrity simply because it exists. The idea should be to
hold up the best Seattle has to offer and let us all admire it, let us
step back and say, “How about that?” 
Mr. Redmond: I am also impressed at your thoughtful reply to this article and you make some great points. But come ON! There’s no way you can think most of the Poetry on Buses is even decent.
I think Poetry on Buses would be an amazing idea if there were some bar of entry to ensure that only reasonably interesting or insightful poetry made the grade. What happens instead is that hundreds (thousands?) of people who already *think* they hate poetry because the only poetry they have ever been exposed to is schlocky self-important crap are forcibly exposed to inexcusably bad poetry that only serves to reinforce all of their negative preconceptions. This works AGAINST the goal of fostering public appreciation for poetry.
Paul, I disagree that poetry should be difficult to write or read in order to be “good.” The truth is that if you have the soul of a poet, words and images cascade from your experiences effortlessly. There is hard work, to be sure, but mostly in the discipline of harnessing and improving what comes naturally. Like any artist, a true poet is one who can’t help but write poetry.
This is not to say that there is no benefit in sponsoring programs that use poetry as a tool for worthy goals like empowerment, therapy, and community building. I’m sure poetry can be an invaluable tool for all of these things. But when the goal is community outreach? Well, then it’s in your own self-interest to make sure you only post stuff that’s good.
a rose is a rose is a rose is a rose…
-gertrude stein-
a stone is a stein is a rock is a boulder is a pebble.”
_ernest hemmingway_
a turd is a shit is a swirling heap of dung is mass doo doo pile of bad poetry and saxophones playing music to your nightmares while pouncing leprachauns drink the rest of your booze and the hangover in the morning can’t be quelled while evil bus poets scribble feces as a verb,noun and synonym for “the stranger” -kind-of-day.
-zan, rad dyke “bad” poet
a turd is a turd is a turd
…and apologies to Matt Hickey, whose name I stuck in there in the place of Mike Hickey. It is late. I am tired. I am sorry.
Mr. Redmond-
I’m not a poet, nor do I take too much of an interest in poetry, but god damn are you butthurt.
1. If local arts organizations nominated A.I. as a great movie, does that make it so? Who cares if 2500 people voted for crap? It’s still crap.
2. Yes, Constant and the Stranger could have done more for these poets! It’s definitely their fault that your show sucked and that the people who should be helping promote good poets (you) aren’t! Way to pass the blame!
3. Public anything is almost always bad. It has to appeal to more people, more people are available to show their work thus more bad people will show… it’s just sort of logical. Example: you’re in a neighborhood, and you’re trying to decide what to paint the houses. Most people have different opinions and it’s difficult to decide. It seems that your solution would be to paint all of the houses beige. Then most people are unhappy except the two idiots who love beige which is a shitty color. So what do you do? Tell those idiots to fuck off and make something beautiful with the help of a designer (critic). Jesus.
4. Guys! History! What something was hundreds of years ago totally means the same thing it does today! Seriously, nothing ever changes! And if it did it doesn’t matter cause those classical guys mean more than anything today so like… they’re still relevant? I don’t know where I’m going with this, you guys. Also, two examples make the rule, didn’t you know? If it’s easy for one person to do something it’s easy for all of us to. (That was me summing up what you said.)
5. You talk a lot. You seem to think that means something. Please see number 2.
6. I mostly agree with you here.
7. You just can’t come to terms with your baby project maybe not being that great? It was indeed noble for you to try, but I agree with Constant in saying that the way public poetry is now, it’s… not really working. Better luck next year!
8. That’s not the goal of the program but it’s certainly the outcome.
“You could have had a big impact on the election and education of the general public about how we are (or are not?) important to the perception/ reception/ rejection/ appreciation of art.” Man that would have been great, eh? That election… it could have changed people’s lives. ;_;
In conclusion: Just get over it. You’re defending this poetry not because it’s good (it’s not) but because you just don’t want to be wrong. Accept, move on, get better, learn from your mistakes.
It’s funny, I’ve actually had direct experiences with all three of the poets you mentioned: I took a class with Austen at the Hugo House, one with Hickey at the Experimental College, and a few years back Osel published a couple of my poems on his website. Austen, in my view, is the most sophisticated of the bunch, and incredibly knowledgeable about poetry. But Hickey knows his stuff too: he studied at the University of Washington and Arizona, and has been writing for years. My feeling is that the two poets are simply coming from different perspectives. Mike very much wants to broaden the readership of poetry; I’m not sure that’s so much a priority for Elizabeth. In which case, the position of poet populist seems uniquely suited for a poet like Hickey.
As for Osel, I think “viciously thin” about sums him up.
what a fascinating discussion (save the silly rants). Paul Constant wrote an interesting criticism of the *idea* of a populist poet and the *process* of selecting one, while also making true and indisputable comments that 99% (or whatever) of everything is crap. Mr. Redmond had a well thought out and well written response, which Mr. Constant published.
I would put the discussion in this context. The discussion we are having right now, about poetry, is more thought than is given poetry in all but two or three other american cities.
I would never say I am an expert on poetry. I would say that I’ve read more poetry (and especially poetry by people that are alive today) than 99% of the population. And I have provided substantial financial support to small literary magazines that publish substantial amounts of poetry. Though I don’t agree with Mr. Constant on everything, I think it’s remarkable that there are posts *every day* about books and readings in SLOG. I think it’s remarkable that Mr. Constant promotes readings by “good” poets (his plug for John Witte’s readings this summer come to mind).
—
A public poet? Let’s just say we are very fortunate right now to have a very, very good poet (Kay Ryan) succeed a pretty good poet (Charles Simic) as our national Poet. Her work is easy to read, intelligible, and devastating, with ripples that echo for weeks and months. She was not selected by an internet vote, and it is, i’m sure, an accident that she made it through whatever process is used to select the national Poet.
—
How about when this is over, everyone chill the fuck out and go buy two books of poetry – one for yourself, and one to give someone else as a gift.
Oh, I think it’s unfair to say the Stranger critics are uniformly unfair. And it’s certainly unfair to paint Mr. Constant with that brush. He is very often laudatory, enthusiastic, and (as demonstrated by his habit of publishing SLOG HAPPY reviews of books) open to letting other folks promote their opinions.
Bumper sticker seen this morning
Criticism: It’s not for the weak
It’s interesting to say that a good public poetry program would work like Bumbershoot, with knowledgeable people screening the poets and presenting them to the public. I’m relatively sure that the foremost consideration when booking bands for a festival is draw — how many people can reasonably be expected to attend a performance. There’s a basic dollars-and-cents bottom line there that I’m not sure is really present with poetry.
Paul: The Stranger’s books section has improved tremendously since you started editing it. I can’t believe you got people this worked up about poetry! Keep up the good work.
Karen Finneyfrock’s work saves my life… I am so excited by the her new stuff. Fucking christ almighty…
If you haven’t yet – check out her book “Welcome to the Butterfly House”… her poem “yes” is one of my favorite poems of all time.
Mr. Constant
Do you ever feel that you have gotten in over your head? That 90% of your audience is smarter than you are? Yeah. I have the same feeling.
Maybe it’s time to let somebody else take over. We could have an internet vote to decide.
What do you think of that?
Up front: I’m a policy kid, not an arts kid.
For me, this piece was really about one thing: the effectiveness of a public program. Paul’s concern over the quality of the program is predicated on the idea that the program either is, or could be, effective. That is, the Poet Populist program could “promote the literary arts and local arts organizations to a general audience city-wide.” If the Poet Populist is incapable of reaching a general audience, then who cares who holds the title?
Paul seems to believe that a “good” Poet Populist would reach a greater audience. He is approaching this position, though, based theory (as is Bob Redmond, frankly). I would like to see some data.
Paul should have contacted local poetry teachers, merchants, and editors to see if they think the Poet Populist program has brought more people into the poetry community. This seems to be Paul’s ultimate goal – bringing people into the poetry community.
Bob’s goal – a wider exposure for poetry within the general community – seems impossible to address intelligently. A telephone survey, perhaps? Who has read, heard, or considered a piece of modern poetry this week?
Or perhaps I misread entirely. Perhaps Paul wishes to honor those who have brought poetry to the general community and Bob wants to give a hand up to those who might.
Regardless, the entire discussion reads as genuinely nice people talking past each other.
People are very upset over Paul Constant’s critique. I suggest they write a poem that will prove him wrong.
Since Mr. Constant has an obvious hard-on for me I suppose that I’m expected to respond. First, let me just say that I agree with much (not all) of Paul’s criticism. I agree that spoken-word tends to forgive shallow poetry (writing) because it allows the poetry to hide behind the veil of the performance; although, this alone does not condemn spoken- word is an art form.
On the other hand, Paul’s statement that “poetry, by its very definition, is a difficult thing…to comprehend” is as absurdly overreaching as it is imprecise. This notion alone illustrates Mr. Constant’s extraordinarily narrow view of what, in his mind, poetry should be or is, and, further illuminates Paul’s manifestly limited knowledge about contemporary literature. In other words, poetry does not need to be esoteric to be “good” as Paul Constant so directly claims.
But, the truth is that Mr. Constant is entitled to his opinion and to his principles, as we all are. My work has received exceptional reviews from multiple poetry critics which, given Paul’s review, is a telling sign of the diversity that exists among people who read and enjoy poetry. So, I’ll assume (for the sake of whatever) that Mr. Constant’s vicious criticism of my work in particular (as a “type” or a “kind” of poetry) is entirely rooted in his constricted perception of what poetry should be; after all, what else could it possibly be rooted in.
With the above said, it might be useful to point out, that in the human tradition of self-affirmation Constant has confirmed his own hypothesis with his few confirmations but has ignored the overwhelming amount of disconfirmations. For this reason, the article reads more like a narrow and callous conversion manual to a certain type of poetry than an honest critique by a well meaning and educated student of poetry. I could’ve made the argument more plausible in my sleep. Just my OPINION.
Oh, nunya @ 64, you’re so cute. I’m not putting my job up to an internet vote. First, it’s my job and I kind of need it. Second, the next books editor would no doubt be praised by you until they didn’t like something you liked. Third, the comments have been nowhere near all negative. And even if they were all negative, I’d still be books editor and you wouldn’t. You’re all precious when you get huffy and ridiculous and righteously indignant, though.
Right on, Mr. Osel. And may I congratulate you for doing so well without even being on the ballot.
However you feel about this article, at least it’s gotten people talking about poetry. I think good points have been made on all sides.
This seems like a great place for me to mention a poetry book I’m putting together. The deadline was actually yesterday, but since so many people are discussing poetry here, I’ll extend it one more week for anyone who is interested.
Jacob Brooke Press is accepting submissions for a poetry collection. All poems must be about or related to Capitol Hill, Seattle. Capitol Hill need not be the focus, but it must be somehow included.
Please send no more than 3 poems of 50 lines or less each to SdotBarker@gmail.com. Include the word “submission” in your subject line and include a brief bio in the body of the e-mail. We’d rather know who you are than where you’ve been published.
Payment will be two contributor’s copies.
Thanks!
the worst thing about the article is your headline reads, “why does Seattle promote dumb, bad poetry?” then you go on to focus on two amateur opportunities for the citizens to participate in. that is a contradiction and a slap in the face to academia and fledglings alike. i don’t know Redmond or you but i do love poetry. you hurt people about something you don’t know much about…and 2500 people participating in a vote…well maybe that is a lot of friends supporting friends. one person contacted the whole, important staff of the stranger about voting in the poet populist? how very inconvenient for big important people like you.
yes we all rocked the vote for obama, and some of us worked that day too. some of us sent money to defeat prop.8 in california. it might just be that anytime thousands of americans can attempt some art or call friends to support a little show at a coffee house, we don’t need some (mostly white guys in ivory towers) shooting our joy from their easy chairs. watch what you write constant. do you really want to destroy people’s creativity, even if it is “a few good lines” and then the poor schlub has to go to the office or back to a lousy job? maybe attempts to get people writing anything is better than getting drunk and criticising the world or only watching tv.
yes paul look at books and advise or whatever it is you think you do… but right now learn a lesson and don’t pretend you are a 100 percent right on this. give up that privilege a little bit. not all “high art” is good either. it was just applauded by the right critic, i suppose, or a rich person liked it, or a bunch of well moneyed friends promoted it… so when a grass roots thing gets a little bigger, the stranger,(which hates poetry and lost most of its good writers over the years), finally notices, they hire someone with the party line to say, “oh how amateur”. big whoop!
at least try to focus and have the title match the content. write before the second tumbler of whatever it is the stranger staff found on sale. by the way, we do read the weekly and they don’t tend to warrant as much ire because they have better writers. they are not forty and fifty year olds with teenage angst, like y’all. we will read you every week because it is like watching george W. when he thinks he’s right. how deep can your foot go? keep explainng. also the stranger should stick to reviewing their advertisers venues of really bad poetry set to worse music so you can pretend you are friends and get really drunk. that never happens. i don’t go to stranger sanctioned events either. all you do is get drunk and pretend you are somebody… i love the “last days” and the horoscope as regular features. i anonymous is amusing at times. my opinion of your paper is it is great bird cage liner. don’t take it too personally Paul, the stranger has sucked for years. i finally pulled my advertising after 16 years. i couldn’t let such hateful ill informed messages receive another dollar from me. We don’t need to read the new column,(i rarely do, it’s soooo dumb and bad), we can just watch you parody yourself over and over again. this is gonna be fun!!!!
do things
if you worry about everything you write being good, then don’t write.
if you think everything painting shoud be devine, don’t be a painter.
if you demand excellence in everything you do,
you will suffocate from fear.
if all crops failed, a farmer would no
longer plow.
there are enough bumper crops to make up
for the weaker yield.
how many times did Einstein crumble a paper?
do you suppose Rembrandt loved everything he did?
to deny your contribution to the world is to live a half life.
to hell with being the best at anything-
do things to find that rare moment,
when the masterpiece is in the doing, not the result.
Paul Constant was dead on in his initial piece, and Mr. Redmond’s rejoinder only made his position worse. I have to admit, that when I first read about the “Poet Populist,” my first reaction was, “Not more of this crap.” Anyone who follows the arts in any real way hears this sort of self-absorbed argument all the time, and its especially rabid when it comes to poetry.
Let’s face facts: Most art isn’t very profitable, even popular art like rock music or hiphop. Then when you get to things like visual art or poetry, it’s virtually impossible to make a living doing it. A good playwright can’t make a living at it; typically they have to write bad movies or t.v. to pay the bills. A successful literary novel (i.e., the publisher will pick up a second book from you) is expected to sell around 5,000 copies. But for some reason, there are lots and lots of people making this stuff with a big old chip on their shoulders who are convinced that the problem is that their work isn’t making it to the masses and that there should be some “fix” for this.
And attendant to this line of thought is a resentment against what they see as the problem in their own art form. This really got revved up in poetry circles a couple years ago, when John Barr–the wealthy president of the Poetry Foundation, which itself received a $100 million-plus endowment from an Eli Lily a few years back–wrote a piece lambasting the poetry “establishment” of today for exhausting the potential of its forms, protecting itself through tenured posts at universities, and opposing the brave new world of poetry that he, apparently, intended to let loose upon America.
“The need for something new is evident,” he wrote in 2006. “Contemporary poetry’s striking absence from the public dialogues of our day, from the high school classroom, from bookstores, and from mainstream media, is evidence of a people in whose mind poetry is missing and unmissed.”
And so what is the Poetry Foundation doing with all that money? Why, paying to print poetry in newspapers (according to Feb. 2007 article in The New Yorker), just one more way these new, populist rebels are putting poetry in our faces and circumventing the old, elitists holding back the popular wave from their lairs in the Ivory Tower.
And so we have Ted Kooser’s syndicated column, with “poems on comforting American themes (neighbors, chores, raking)” at the national level, while locally we have poetry on buses for the masses to have their say, and poetry slams and spoken word for poets who wanna be a little more rock-and-roll (and try to make a little money at the door), and American Poet Idol elections on the Internet to reward the sort of poetry the People like with $500 and publicity. And what is a “poet,” anyway? More people know Bob Dylan’s words than Dylan Thomas’s, so let’s just open this up to singer-songwriters and rappers, because that’s the popular music the kids are all listening to today and hey, we need to be democratic about everything.
Yet still, after all this, it’s not enough! Dare to call bus poetry insufferable crap you can’t stand to read? You’re elitist! Call the poetry this massive democratic experiment is promoting simplistic, even pandering to the lowest common denominator? Well, they respond, who are you to say that poetry has to be challenging?
And so we wind up with this pathetic, dumbed-down, t.v. version of poetry, replete with all the stupid human tricks and reality show competitions that keep the vast majority of Americans eating this slop out of the trough week after week. And in all of this, have we ever managed to get a poem by Wislawa Szymborska up on a bus? Have you even seen Osip Mandelstam or Pablo Neruda poems on billboards in Seattle? Has Milosz’s “Campo dei Fiori” been thrown down in the heat of a poetry slam, Hughes’s “Advertisement for the Waldorf-Astoria” set to a beat? Hell, let’s leave aside the icons and Nobel Prize winners: Go pick up a copy of Tin House and find out what all of this populist poetry outreach is doing for a single one of the writers in that journal.
The answer is nothing. Everyone’s been so busy assuming that “the people” just need to be exposed to the right sort of poetry and then bam!, poetry’s back in. It’ll be a real part of the cultural and political discourse, people will pay attention to it again, people will start buying it again. And then the world will be right.
The problem with their entire misguided race to the bottom of the poetry barrel is that it’s become the lie of consolation for dozens of second- and third-rate poets convinced that anyone besides themselves is to blame for their lack of success, or at least their empty bank accounts. It’s the desperate excuse offered by people convinced that they had something really important to say and are ticked off that every critic, talking head, politician, and t.v. host hasn’t bothered to bring up their brilliant pearl of lyrical wisdom. In short, it’s the product of people with unrealistic expectations.
And don’t take this to mean that I’m against efforts to promote poetry: there are many great ways to do so, from child literacy programs through prizes, awards, and sure, making it publicly available some how. No, what really bothers me is that the people I’m complaining baout here–and yes, the Poet Populist crew is included–are all making a really harsh judgment about the work of many talented writers today: that poetry’s in its death throes and needs to be saved; that salvation means taking poetry to the masses, and making more poetry the masses like; and finally that poets’ poetry is elitist, and that we need to thing outside the proverbial box and start including lyricists in poetry competitions. Again, not to hate–I like Blue Scholars–but the idea that Geologic, who can sell out moderately-sized clubs here in town, could have collected a $500 prize meant to support poetry seems completely backwards to me. I think these organizations need to re-think how they operate, and maybe consider offering support to artists who actually go against the grain, whose work is (or could be) important but isn never going to cross into the mainstream, and reward the courage and talent of those artists instead of pretending that with enough effort, we can create a generation of Shel Silversteins that everyone will love, read, and talk about.
The term, “Poet Populist,” suggest a person who represents the masses, not someone who represents those who define good taste. However, Paul Constant exposes himself as just another person with an opinion–not necessarily an educated, sensitive arbiter–who attempts to define bad taste, by what is not his taste. Of all the things you could criticize in this sad world (war, prejudice, violence, hunger, addiction, and rampant apathy), why poetry? Leave the poets alone and pick on someone bigger (Bush, Cheney, Rupert Murdock, the military gov’t in Myanmar).
paul it must be neat that your friends came to your rescue today, monday couldn’t come soon enough)? (mostly white guys that follow the arts, and think money is what makes art valid, hmmm). well
i don’t ride the bus much and i have no part in the populist thing, but rescuing constant with art knowledge is impressive. have a drink with paul, console him a little, rub his footsie wootsies guys…
plenty of people in this town love and support poetry that you have never heard of, don’t know and have plenty of money other ways. i don’t know who you are referring to who wants a big revival in poetry. For most of us it is a way of life, thinking and knowing. we know that it never went away. go get drunk with one of the bands who play bad music and masking bad poetry.(hello i love you, can you tel me your name, hello i love you can i jump in your game?) go ahead, take savages advice, get drunk, keep telling yourself you are smart and above all, right and all knowing about what is good art and what is bad. do you think in black and white, straight and gay too? hmmm, that’s so interesting. where can i get a degree that tells me i know better than everyone else? gee pauly, you do have friends, you do!
Amen, Jeremy M Barker. But do you really want to see Pablo Neruda on a billboard? Call me selfish, but I like to maintain the illusion (because it’s not as though no one’s ever heard of Pablo Neruda) that the really good stuff is a little bit just for me. So to some extent I think of the bus poetry and billboard poetry and other happy-crap poetry blather as a smokescreen to keep away people who don’t really care.
Mr. Constant,
I am precious. I hug myself to sleep every night.
I am cute. I was voted Best Looking Poet in Seattle by all my girlfriends.
I have researched this thing you call a ‘job’. I concede that you do indeed need a job. But how about a different one? You are not good at this one.
I may have issues with the next books editor. Isn’t that the point?
It appears from your articles that you are not beholden to writing logically. And you are not beholden to your readers since if all the comments were negative, you wouldn’t care.
To what are you beholden? I am pretty sure it is your paycheck. But I will give you a chance to prove me wrong. And please reply in 4 sentences or less. Your paragraphs bore me to tears.
Paul–
Pretty interesting dialogue overall. Thanks again for your part in it–I second some of the SLOGgers’ opinions that you have brought welcome attention to literary arts in this city. Here are a couple things that I hope you will consider:
On voters: You didn’t mention the election during the 6 weeks it was happening, and now criticize the program for not getting more of the general public’s attention. That’s pretty disingenuous, seeing as how you help regulate information to the public. (For the record, the election did devote funds to advertising to help get beyond the friend-circles of voters. But we also rely on news outlets to cover news. If you’re interested enough in the program to cover it after the fact, you could also have shared the news that the election was on without “getting involved.”)
On Fascism: I did not mean to be incendiary but to raise earnestly this question: who is the “group of experts” who gets to pick good art for everyone? And who picks those people? Or put another way: how should the public be involved, and how do we measure that? Is there any measure of the public’s active claim to something other than dollars?
On Football: I don’t purport to say that the best poet is the winner of Poet Populist election any more than I agree that the BCS can generate the best college football team (hello, Texas!). The BCS system can’t be perfect, but that doesn’t stop there from being a champion. The Poet Populist program is all about establishing relationships and involving people so that the whole presentation of poetry can be improved, and so that we do hold up good work to the public (friends and converts both). You’re right: 2,500 people is miniscule, compared to votes on American Idol. On the other hand, it’s a lot–you can win a primary election for Seattle City Council with less than 16,000 votes (and Joe Szwaja spent $43,000 in 2007 to get there, and I’ll bet he asked his friends to vote for him!).
Here’s an idea: As others have commented, you deserve kudos for writing book news and opinions. Describing good art in an article, though, is not the same as presenting work, which you also recommend. So how about publishing some poetry? Perhaps the Stranger could publish a poem every week (trying to keep a straight face here…) even for a short time. Can you imagine?
Invitation: to anyone who wants information about nominating someone for the next year’s Poet Populist election (in the fall), email info@poetpopulist.org. If you have an idea that has not been voiced in this thread, you can send that too.
Event (Sunday Jan 25, 2:00 pm): To everyone: Come hear the fuss for yourself: new Poet Populist Mike Hickey, last year’s office-holder Cody Walker, and special guest Jack Hirschman (San Francisco Poet Laureate), plus other poets (and poetesses) at the Central Library downtown. Drinks afterward at a place TBD where we can argue the difference between Laureates and Populists and quote Russian novelists over vodkas and furious gnawing of the ermine sleeves of our winter coats.
Howdy Nunya: I am beholden, as I said in my original piece, to good work. As are we all. If I were beholden to a paycheck, believe me, I’d be looking somewhere outside print media. I love my job and I love getting to read a whole lot and communicate about writing with lots of readers for a living, in the best book town in the United States.
But you’re the one who’s not making logical conclusions in your comments here. If you consistently don’t like my writing, I suggest you stop reading it. You’ll probably live a little longer without the stress.
Mr Constant,
You are beholden to good work, huh? First of all, that really means you are behholden to work you like. That much is clear from other’s comments. Second, it is about the most vanilla generic statement I can imagine. It is a cliche and is lacking of any meaning.
If you are not paid enough, you should look for a job outside the print medium. I love Seattle TOO! Word, dog.
I can read what I like. You should write better articles. And thanks for the medical advice. You really are a jack-of-all-trades.
Hey Bob,
I did mention the events for the lead-up to the Poetry Populist election in the Readings Calendar, which is where every event that is sent to me gets mentioned. Any more space than that is not guaranteed to anyone. I only get, at most, a page and a half a week to write about Seattle literary arts and I wanted to experience the Populist program firsthand before I wrote about it.
I would like to say that I’m glad you’re doing something and I appreciate it. The mark you have made on Seattle arts is huge and overwhelmingly positive, and I have no doubt that you are wholeheartedly dedicated to the city, its poets, and its arts.
This last Friday, inspired in part by your competition, I started something called The Seattle Poetry Chain on Slog. Every Friday at noon, I’ll run a work by a Seattle poet who will then choose the next poet (should a chosen poet decide not to participate, I’ll ask a third party to choose the next link in the chain.) And I’ll write more about poetry, too. As I admitted in my piece, it’s been a weak point of my tenure as books editor thus far.
I only have one question remaining: Why do you bristle so much at the “group of experts” choosing poetry for public spaces idea? Isn’t that what you do with Bumbershoot? Giving an organization like this a face and identity—and thusly some accountability—can often be the way to get good stuff done. I think maybe the major part of the problem is that we have wildly different ideas about internet votes and what they represent. Having received any number of wheedling e-mails from Poet Populist candidates trying to get out the vote on their own behalf before the election, I have to say: I don’t believe it’s flattering for poetry or for the arts, and it’s not indicative of anything related to quality or to merit. I think perhaps you’re just more optimistic in this regard, in that you think it’ll get out the word about Seattle Poetry, and I tend to think of it as a self-inclusive distraction of a game. You’ve seen the number of participatory voters increase–what? a hundredfold?–since you’ve started the program nine years ago, and so maybe you’re right. I think that maybe there’s a better way to go about things. And I guess that’s where we really disagree.
And I think that’s all I have to say.
Hi-ho,
Paul
Hey Bob,
I did mention the events for the lead-up to the Poetry Populist election in the Readings Calendar, which is where every event that is sent to me gets mentioned. Any more space than that is not guaranteed to anyone. I only get, at most, a page and a half a week to write about Seattle literary arts and I wanted to experience the Populist program firsthand before I wrote about it.
I would like to say that I’m glad you’re doing something and I appreciate it. The mark you have made on Seattle arts is huge and overwhelmingly positive, and I have no doubt that you are wholeheartedly dedicated to the city, its poets, and its arts.
This last Friday, inspired in part by your competition, I started something called The Seattle Poetry Chain on Slog. Every Friday at noon, I’ll run a work by a Seattle poet who will then choose the next poet (should a chosen poet decide not to participate, I’ll ask a third party to choose the next link in the chain.) And I’ll write more about poetry, too. As I admitted in my piece, it’s been a weak point of my tenure as books editor thus far.
I only have one question remaining: Why do you bristle so much at the “group of experts” choosing poetry for public spaces idea? Isn’t that what you do with Bumbershoot? Giving an organization like this a face and identity—and thusly some accountability—can often be the way to get good stuff done. I think maybe the major part of the problem is that we have wildly different ideas about internet votes and what they represent. Having received any number of wheedling e-mails from Poet Populist candidates trying to get out the vote on their own behalf before the election, I have to say: I don’t believe it’s flattering for poetry or for the arts, and it’s not indicative of anything related to quality or to merit. I think perhaps you’re just more optimistic in this regard, in that you think it’ll get out the word about Seattle Poetry, and I tend to think of it as a self-inclusive distraction of a game. You’ve seen the number of participatory voters increase–what? a hundredfold?–since you’ve started the program nine years ago, and so maybe you’re right. I think that maybe there’s a better way to go about things. And I guess that’s where we really disagree.
And I think that’s all I have to say.
Hi-ho,
Paul
Hey, cool about the Seattle Poetry Chain–that’s great, and as Eric F said, kind of groundbreaking.
As for calendar listings, it should also be noted that Jen Graves slogged Arne Pihl’s candidacy… that could have generated hundreds of votes, eh?
As for your main question, I bristle not about curating (heck, that’s my day job) but about groups of experts managing ALL public art programs as a rule. Curating has its place, and so do number of units sold, but there has to be a way for the general public to participate directly in valid artistic commentary, especially in this day and age.
I agree that we do suffer mediocrity too easily. The attempted solution offered by this program is not simply to remove the public from the process, but the reverse–to provide more engagement, more accountability, and eventually, stronger work. The election of Obama proves that we do in fact have the capacity not just to support, but to help institute, an articulate vision–perhaps we can do this with other things: art, mass transportation, ecology.
Quixotically…
Hey Paul,
Good idea with the Poetry Chain. Kudos.
I second Bob’s motion to publish a poem a week in the print version. I think this would do a lot for poetry in the city. I also think it would give the Stranger a literary credibility I’m not sure it currently has.
dear paul, wow, i had no idea this was going to go anywhere except an endless loop, but dude, thank you for the wonderful poem by nufer. i just went to the slog,(for the first time). you are right, he’s great! and thank you for sharing that with me. maybe i can let go some of my stubborn ways too.i think the dialog in these comments showed the power of words, good and bad,(very over used here)and i personally feel that a gift has been given that i least expected: poetry at the stranger!!! if i don’t like a selection, i will not villify that person. i will be happy that they are there trying their best to convey something that may go right over my head. a lot of you are really smart!!! but i’m learning, and i love poetry!
So far as I can tell Ananda Selah Osel is the only poet populist candidate who has written in to defend himself, and quite well I might add. Where is the big winner Mike Hickey in all this? His work was slammed also. How about the spoken word people? How about the rest? I’d like to see the other candidates show some balls, some guts, a little passion. If the performers had any guts they’d write in to tell the people what’s what and stop hiding from the critics. Why should Redmond and Osel have to represent for them all?
Sharon W.H.
“Poetry should be incomprehensible and incommensurable.” – Goethe
“All art is that way to some degree, but much art seems flat and lacking in courage because it neglects to be difficult.” – Michael McClure
“A poet is a time mechanic, not an embalmer.” – Jack Spicer
P.S. Red Sky Poetry Theater Reunion, Sunday, December 7 – 7P, Richard Hugo House:
Judith Roche, Charlie Burks – Features
http://www.splab.org/Reunion_Flyer3-2.pd…
to Sharon W.H.: the other poets and persons don’t write in b/c that would be taking Mr. Constant’s bait. To him, they are basically little nobodies. If they did write in, they would be mocked or ignored, much like Mr. Osel was. Who wants that?
I enjoyed the article and am happy that I stumbled on it. The only problem is that the author makes sweeping claims and doesn’t really back them up with anything substantial. Although, I think they pinned spoken-word down pretty well. I actually reviewed Ananda Selah Osel’s book “The Meter Is Running & We’re Almost Out Of Change” last year for a British literary magazine and agree with the author on some points although the criticism was very sweeping, as I said before. I received a lot of flack for my review also but it’s significantly more detailed. If anyone wants to read a fuller and more accurate deconstruction of Osel’s work I’ve posted a link to my year old review below.
Thanks,
Neil Hirsh, Word Riot Magazine
http://www.wordriot.org/template_2.php?I…
Thank you Sharon! I’d like to see the candidates give their opinion as well. You’re right nobody has any guts and everyone is probably writing under some stupid alias. I don’t think that Constant is trying to get anyone to take the bait. A discussion is a discussion and Constant has promoted a lively one. I think Redmond and Osel acknowledged that this is a debate that clearly needs to happen in their responses.
Hey Zan,
Speaking as someone who moved here in 2000 and has been reading The Stranger a lot longer than I’ve been in The Stranger, I’ve always been fond of your ads and other appearances in the paper. I still remember your righteously angry letter to the editor after a mean joke. I’m a Zan the Rad Dyke Plumber Fan is what I’m saying.
And everyone else: I don’t think that Mike Hickey has to “defend himself” here; he’s not on trial. If I had to defend myself against every attack, I’d never get anything done.
Mr. Constant,
You don’t get much done as it is.
This is what I think: I think you owe every one of the Poet Populist nominees [and winner] and everyone who ever had a poem on the bus an apology.
I have recently relocated to Seattle from NYC. I am delighted Seattle has art projects such as the Poet Populist competition. While criticizing the poetry arising from the competition can be productive, I think calling for the discontinuation of the Poet Populist competition or the poetry on buses is a wasteful destruction of art. Be patient. Let the program grow its roots and broaden its reach. Older cities have many venerable art projects that are treasured by their communities. Many of those projects went through fledgling stages when only a few hundred (or less!) community members were even passively aware of their existence and when the quality of their production was not widely appreciated.
Public artistic projects require time, but there is no doubt that their very existence has often created new avenues and forms of artistic expression. Additionally, nothing about the Poet Populist competition undermines academic, commercial or other established avenues for poetic expression. If PC’s attitude prevailed at the advent of many public artistic movements and institutions, art would have suffered many losses. The dramatic competitions of the 5th century BCE in Athens produced some work that was not appreciated by audiences and also generated controversies about whether the judging should be more popularly based or relegated to an aristocratic committee. Notwithstanding the forgettable entries and the controversies, many treasures were produced over the many years of those competitions.
It appears that all agree that at least a few fine poets have competed in this year’s Poet Populist competition. The City of Seattle chips in. 2500 people voted. These sound like modest accomplishments, but they are actually quite significant in light of the inauspicious beginnings of many institutions that New Yorkers currently hold dear. In my view, chances are very good that the Poet Populist competition, if given time, will become a widely valued institution in Seattle and will be an avenue (other than the academic or commercial) for poets in Seattle to edify as well as irritate the community. (Then some upstart will complain that it is too established and bourgeois!) – CML
soul sister
it’s like star
soul’s too close to the bone
her cutthroat world anatomy
brings me down
but I wear her big girl underpants, just the same
stroke pretty hair the color of winter snow
pee in the firmament
some strands of gold leftover for my scrapbook
in between the Steely Dan legacy, and my Preparation-H receipts
oh, if I were her
oh, if I were
(hee hee. Sorry, couldn’t help myself.)
Nunya, let it go. Move on. We all have.
At first I thought you were clever and witty for taking Mr. Constant to task regarding his imperfect article on poetry in Seattle, but now it’s become pretty apparent to myself and I’ll bet everyone else who’s reading these comments that you, sir, are nothing but a bully. And the only thing more sad and pathetic than a bully, is an internet bully. Tell me, how many times an hour do you come back to this page to see if anyone has posted anything that you can ridicule? Jesus, what a bunch of ignorant drivel.
Also, for the record Mr. Constant, it’s Huey Lewis, not Louis.
Mr. Hadem, consider this: “Karen Finneyfrock is a rare example of a slam poet who writes excellent poetry; for every one of her, there are a thousand people who should be ashamed to share their work with others.” It seems only fair that Mr. Constant stay attentive while these thousand slam poets write in to tell him he should be ashamed of his own work, or some variation on that theme. That is not going to happen. So I am doing my part to fill that need. And that is only one group he insulted. Consider how that number should be much higher.
nunya = John Bailo = Mr. Poe
dear paul & y’all, i swore i wouldn’t write back to this, but let me just respond, i hope one last time. #1) please go to the slog to see that Mr. Constant has given us a big gift. that’s right… and hear nufer give us that timely poem. that’s what this is all about… and after 95 letters, poor constant feels hammered enough, (i did plenty of it and it is called passion. i did change my name & style a couple times). he is acknowledging that he heard us. i am exhausted from it myself, (personally,this is much harder than plumbing). this is the time of year we become forgiving, charitable and help each other through the winter; we can all be bullies when we defend something we love. on monday, I imagine Mr.Constant had to talk to the boss to allow blog space, write his own column, have a life and finally do the work necessary for the poetry chain site to be on line and to get us this far inside of a week! WHEW!
#2) no one wants to get in fights on thanksgiving weekend except heterosexual evangelist republicans(the gay ones have sex), drunks, finnicky pagan artists, raging bulldykes, hams and turkeys; so if a poet in the populist group did not sign up here to be the center of the bullseye , i totally understand. i have cried a few times this weekend, november 4,5,6,7… yesterday and today. okay i’m peri-menopausal, have pms, a poet and i worked in a ditch today with fig roots and boneless brown trout… the point is: let people be who they are. that is democracy, anarchy and slackerism all rolled into one. we are messy, free and want our civil rights! believe me: poets have guts. some people are working, traveling or with their families. I think some people did write but used aliases… live and let live.
#3) we love words. Some people are Rhodes scholars and have a place here too. there are poets who sell “real change” and could use understanding also. most of us are people who hover in the middle of those positions in life, but we are writing for them too. the main thing is: be true to yourself, write for yourself and to hell what anyone thinks of your writing! write because you love it and because you have to!
#4) btw joan baez was here on monday. she was a college dropout immediately. i don’t think dylan went to school much either. some of our best writers put the world on paper as they see and feel it; as they live it and there is no formula.
#5) i read ginsberg’s “howl” again this morning. that was written the year i was born.
#6)paul and bob and others,maybe we should all meet somewhere like caffee vita over the holidays or after. i think we will see that we aren’t so different and we are onto something even greater than we could do alone or in “our” circle.
#7) reading and writing can free a person from the ghetto of their own mind. it has actually liberated people and whole nations like nothing else. viva le difference!
I grew up near Seattle but have been living in Massachusetts for the last 5 years. I am a poet, and teach creative writing at a university. I would love to move back to the Seattle area to be near my family, but the literary scene there seems terrifyingly provincial. And yes, I am aware that makes me sound like an elitist. The problem is that aside from The Beats, most Seattle poets only seem interested in reading themselves or their friends. Growing up and reading avidly through high school, I never heard of John Ashbery, John Berryman, or even St. John of the Cross. I heard a lot about Richard Hugo, though. I was under the impression that if you were writing poems, they should be a) Beat/Spoken Word or b) zen-like “deep” nature poems or c) about fading rural towns. Thank God City Lights published O’Hara’s Lunch Poems and a copy worked its way into my 11th grade hands!
I am also aware that there are some exciting things happening in Seattle, not least of which is the continued existence of Open Books. Wave Books has been publishing a lot of interesting poets, as has Copper Canyon. Bird Dog is a very good literary journal, as is Hobart, which I think isn’t based in Seattle anymore.
As for public poetry, check out the Ashbery Bridge in Minneapolis. There is a great essay about it by Eric Lorberer it in jubilat #13.
That’s all, back to my life now. Please prove me wrong, Seattle, read some Eugene Ostashevsky and some Robin Schyff. I really like the way you smell, and the Gold Rush museum.
Hey Nunya,
Enough with the wankery already. Sheesh. Back off, or write something worth reading. Quit wasting our time.