Well, I’ve done it again. I’ve entered another writing contest, which means my bank account is $20 lighter and that I’ll receive a subscription to a journal that I’ll read later and remark upon turning the pages, “That’s it! That’s the winning poem!”
Alas… One of my M.F.A. colleagues (on staff at Willow Springs) says that if I review a batch of poems that have beens submitted and I provide reasons for it not to be accepted (or pursued further by my fellow editors), that must mean that my own verse is better.
Well, I’m not sure that it “must,” but for the time being at least, I am struck with how we rationalize by non sequiturs ad infinitum. Nothing follows nothing: good, better, best… And the grand prize goes to… Subjectivity!
Jorie Graham has loads of fascinating things to offer about the poetics we practice, the poems we write and the poems we judge to be compared and contrasted with other poems. In this regard, the poetess in charge at Harvard even has her own rule named after her own controversial evaluation of various works in the University of Georgia’s 1999 contest. The rule essentially stipulates that a judge must recuse her or himself if the poems being awarded prizes are penned by the aforementioned judge’s students.
With that contentious hullabaloo out of the way, consider what the author of the recently released collection, Place, has to say on the subject of narrative, which happens to be the pre-emptive- strike category by which prose (fiction and non-fiction) seems to hold poetry under lock and key in the literary basement. Narrative, coupled with the block-form stanza, is the idol to which nearly every student of the craft must pay homage and bow down. The only problem is–what if the stinking existence, which yawns before us like halitosis, what if the entire kit and caboodle of the space-time continuum, bears little resemblance to the storied-arc by which we’d like to float above it??? And so, Jorie Graham once told an interviewer at Lumina, the magazine affiliated Sarah Lawrence College:
Consequence in narrative is illuminating, often morally instructive, moving, and surprising. But to privilege linear, temporal constructs over all other ones is to refuse to represent, as I began by saying, way too much of ordinary human experience. Everybody dreams. Leaping and associative progress is natural to the way time passes in everyone’s life. We are just taught to distrust those sensations of time as “irrational.” This is a much larger cultural issue. There is much power in the hands of the creators of the narratives, and the master narratives, by which we “recognize” our lives. So I’d say, yes, be intimidated, if you are, by non-narrative poetry. Experience is intimidating. But don’t be distrustful—choose to trust it, go along for the ride, see if it reminds you of anything.
How bleeping gracious is that!
And don’t you dare be intimidated by the phrase, “Experience is intimidating…”
And don’t you dare feel as if Graham is patronizing you (or matronizing you)!
Far from it. What she’s doing, in her kind and gentle and intellectually-trying way, is warning you not to enter a contest that sponsored by “The Non-Profit Organization Dedicated to Story-Telling in the Digital Age.” She’s warning you.
You’ve been warned. Don’t say Jorie Graham didn’t try to get you to leap into the abyss before you caved and wrote a beginning, middle and an end.
Peace–



