Tuesday, March 04, 2008
So much for tonight's plans
A cursory glance outside reveals that it's snowed about 5-6 inches here since early this morning. The storm has already canceled my trip to the gym, and it's about to cancel my drive to WashU to see Michael Palmer give a craft lecture. I'd like to go, but not that much.
Instead, since I have a little extra time, I'm going to answer the interview questions from Very Like a Whale since I'm not participating this time around.
1. Describe your publishing trajectory. (Where did it start? Where is it now? How long have you been at it?)
It started with me sending out metrical poems I wrote as an undergraduate and off and on for a few years thereafter (I've been writing all my life, poetry since undergrad, serious published creative writing for about 5 years now). Some poems went to journals that were way out of my league (and sometimes not even interested in that sort of metrical poetry). Others went to small, metrical-interested journals that published me. Over the years, I've migrated away from the metrical/rhyming (though I still return) and from narrative/descriptive (though I still try to incorporate those as well), and the journals I send work to and get published in have changed accordingly. A few more prominent journals have even seen fit to publish me. Right now, my publishing trajectory is on "Try to get the first book published." Has been for about a year, will continue to be for ___.
2. What would you do differently if you had to start all over again?
Publishing-wise, I wouldn't send out to marginal places due to overdeveloped desire for publication, as I did in the early days. Some pretty mediocre poems got published that way, and some decent poems ended up in pretty mediocre company. I'm much better now about only sending to places where I really want to be. I know people who maintain superb acceptance rates by sending to every little, easily impressed place in creation, but it does nothing for me at this point.
3. Why did you start seeking publication? Why do you continue?
The groupies, mainly. And the fame, of course. But seriously, I want to entertain (or whatever word you want to substitute) people with my writing, and I want them to remember that I'm the one doing it. That answers both questions.
4. Does your relationship with your work change after it is published and if so, how? How does the concept of publication affect your writing in general?
Once it's published, I can stop worrying about it quite so much, which is nice. I still edit poems after publication, though. I think I've mentioned previously that at least half of my current manuscript is poems that have been changed post-publication. I have no answer for the second question--it doesn't concern me a whole lot. My standards are almost always going to be higher than median editorial standards for publication.
5. Talk about putting a chapbook together. How have you done it in the past, how would you do it differently now? Why are chapbooks a good thing or not a good thing?
My chapbooks are almost-miscellanies where I try to have all the same "type" of poem (not the same theme or the same form or something restrictive like that, just a general similarity of style/voice/whatever). For example, my chapbook forthcoming from Scantily Clad Press is mostly what I call my "weird" poems (not a pejorative term in any way). I don't tie them up more tightly than that because chapbooks in general don't do much for me, "theme" chapbooks even less. Chapbooks in general are a nice cheap way to get your poetry out there, and are a good idea for micropresses with shoestring budgets and poets who haven't established themselves with full length books yet, but after that they seem slight.
6. What’s your advice to someone putting together a full-length poetry manuscript for the first time? Share your thoughts on the importance (or not) of narrative arc in poetry manuscripts.
Any advice I have on full-length manuscripts should probably be ignored, given my lack of success thus far with my own. Narrative arc is utterly unnecessary in poetry manuscripts, though of course you can use it too if you see fit. I like manuscripts tied together loosely like the chapbooks I mention above, where I can dip in on any page and read a poem or two, and they're recognizably of a piece, but I don't have to read the whole collection, and I'm not guaranteed to get a poem on some narrowly focused topic like "Every poem is a playing card!" or "All these people have diseases named after them!"
7. Do you personally market your publications? If so, why and how, and do you enjoy it? If not, why not?
Yes, I get my name out there quite a bit. You're reading one of the ways right now. I also network with a lot of people. If you want people to read your work, you'd better fucking make sure they know they can. I don't love it, except the parts of blogging that involve making fun of things, and the parts of networking that involve hanging out and talking shop with poet friends, but I don't dislike it either. The other stuff mostly is neither wonderful nor appalling, though I've certainly seen other people doing things I consider appalling. (Like the guy at the AWP Book Fair who walked around repeatedly introducing himself thusly: "Hi, I'm ____, the ____ Editor for ____ Review.") (Or the people who send submissions to Anti- that don't feature things we ask for in our guidelines but that do feature a page of advertising copy and a link to their website and where you can buy their book.)
8. Complete the following sentences: Big-name poetry publishers are…..
...not something I have any experience with, but places that publish far too much based on lifetime achievement and name recognition versus current ability (or, even more annoying, based on whose pet you are and where you interned and where in New York City you live).
9. Small- and micro-presses are…
...a mixed bag. Do your research on them as carefully as you do on journals. Some of them are astonishing in the quality of books and support they provide. Some of them are unethical, shoddy, and/or downright embarrassing.
10. Describe the ideal relationship with a publisher and the relationship with a publisher from hell.
The good publisher works with you. The publisher from hell works around, over, and without you. Or accepts your work, then vanishes into the ether for 2+ years.
Instead, since I have a little extra time, I'm going to answer the interview questions from Very Like a Whale since I'm not participating this time around.
1. Describe your publishing trajectory. (Where did it start? Where is it now? How long have you been at it?)
It started with me sending out metrical poems I wrote as an undergraduate and off and on for a few years thereafter (I've been writing all my life, poetry since undergrad, serious published creative writing for about 5 years now). Some poems went to journals that were way out of my league (and sometimes not even interested in that sort of metrical poetry). Others went to small, metrical-interested journals that published me. Over the years, I've migrated away from the metrical/rhyming (though I still return) and from narrative/descriptive (though I still try to incorporate those as well), and the journals I send work to and get published in have changed accordingly. A few more prominent journals have even seen fit to publish me. Right now, my publishing trajectory is on "Try to get the first book published." Has been for about a year, will continue to be for ___.
2. What would you do differently if you had to start all over again?
Publishing-wise, I wouldn't send out to marginal places due to overdeveloped desire for publication, as I did in the early days. Some pretty mediocre poems got published that way, and some decent poems ended up in pretty mediocre company. I'm much better now about only sending to places where I really want to be. I know people who maintain superb acceptance rates by sending to every little, easily impressed place in creation, but it does nothing for me at this point.
3. Why did you start seeking publication? Why do you continue?
The groupies, mainly. And the fame, of course. But seriously, I want to entertain (or whatever word you want to substitute) people with my writing, and I want them to remember that I'm the one doing it. That answers both questions.
4. Does your relationship with your work change after it is published and if so, how? How does the concept of publication affect your writing in general?
Once it's published, I can stop worrying about it quite so much, which is nice. I still edit poems after publication, though. I think I've mentioned previously that at least half of my current manuscript is poems that have been changed post-publication. I have no answer for the second question--it doesn't concern me a whole lot. My standards are almost always going to be higher than median editorial standards for publication.
5. Talk about putting a chapbook together. How have you done it in the past, how would you do it differently now? Why are chapbooks a good thing or not a good thing?
My chapbooks are almost-miscellanies where I try to have all the same "type" of poem (not the same theme or the same form or something restrictive like that, just a general similarity of style/voice/whatever). For example, my chapbook forthcoming from Scantily Clad Press is mostly what I call my "weird" poems (not a pejorative term in any way). I don't tie them up more tightly than that because chapbooks in general don't do much for me, "theme" chapbooks even less. Chapbooks in general are a nice cheap way to get your poetry out there, and are a good idea for micropresses with shoestring budgets and poets who haven't established themselves with full length books yet, but after that they seem slight.
6. What’s your advice to someone putting together a full-length poetry manuscript for the first time? Share your thoughts on the importance (or not) of narrative arc in poetry manuscripts.
Any advice I have on full-length manuscripts should probably be ignored, given my lack of success thus far with my own. Narrative arc is utterly unnecessary in poetry manuscripts, though of course you can use it too if you see fit. I like manuscripts tied together loosely like the chapbooks I mention above, where I can dip in on any page and read a poem or two, and they're recognizably of a piece, but I don't have to read the whole collection, and I'm not guaranteed to get a poem on some narrowly focused topic like "Every poem is a playing card!" or "All these people have diseases named after them!"
7. Do you personally market your publications? If so, why and how, and do you enjoy it? If not, why not?
Yes, I get my name out there quite a bit. You're reading one of the ways right now. I also network with a lot of people. If you want people to read your work, you'd better fucking make sure they know they can. I don't love it, except the parts of blogging that involve making fun of things, and the parts of networking that involve hanging out and talking shop with poet friends, but I don't dislike it either. The other stuff mostly is neither wonderful nor appalling, though I've certainly seen other people doing things I consider appalling. (Like the guy at the AWP Book Fair who walked around repeatedly introducing himself thusly: "Hi, I'm ____, the ____ Editor for ____ Review.") (Or the people who send submissions to Anti- that don't feature things we ask for in our guidelines but that do feature a page of advertising copy and a link to their website and where you can buy their book.)
8. Complete the following sentences: Big-name poetry publishers are…..
...not something I have any experience with, but places that publish far too much based on lifetime achievement and name recognition versus current ability (or, even more annoying, based on whose pet you are and where you interned and where in New York City you live).
9. Small- and micro-presses are…
...a mixed bag. Do your research on them as carefully as you do on journals. Some of them are astonishing in the quality of books and support they provide. Some of them are unethical, shoddy, and/or downright embarrassing.
10. Describe the ideal relationship with a publisher and the relationship with a publisher from hell.
The good publisher works with you. The publisher from hell works around, over, and without you. Or accepts your work, then vanishes into the ether for 2+ years.
