Yes, Miracles & Mortifications was a complete shift for me. My first book, though I'm fond of it relies heavily on early influences, but with Miracles I needed an improvisational style that allowed me to juxtapose, move quickly, and play with language (sometimes making up words), so I let it rip, and then went back revised each prose poem at least 40 times. It was an exhilarating experience.
Peter: your ‘Cornell’ methodology, though I’d never considered that likening. Is just right. Sometimes, when stalled, I will start reading something - no matter what- and jotting down ten words that catch my eye: then the poem consists of putting them together to make some sort of unpredicted whole. Great read here!
Thanks, Syd. Sometimes poets believe that improvisation equals randomness and incoherency, not realizing that it's often the beginning of a poem, and that it's very friendly to poetic sensibilities like mine. We are now in the age of political talk poetry which values "statement" over invention. How that for a dumb speech.
It would be interesting to see if you could somehow work this into a class assignment for one of your philosophy classes. It was a revelation for my students to experience this process.
Yes, Miracles & Mortifications was a complete shift for me. My first book, though I'm fond of it relies heavily on early influences, but with Miracles I needed an improvisational style that allowed me to juxtapose, move quickly, and play with language (sometimes making up words), so I let it rip, and then went back revised each prose poem at least 40 times. It was an exhilarating experience.
"...then went back revised each prose poem at least 40 times."
and here I thought it was a booster shot
of *surrealist automatism.*
Peter: your ‘Cornell’ methodology, though I’d never considered that likening. Is just right. Sometimes, when stalled, I will start reading something - no matter what- and jotting down ten words that catch my eye: then the poem consists of putting them together to make some sort of unpredicted whole. Great read here!
Thanks, Syd. Sometimes poets believe that improvisation equals randomness and incoherency, not realizing that it's often the beginning of a poem, and that it's very friendly to poetic sensibilities like mine. We are now in the age of political talk poetry which values "statement" over invention. How that for a dumb speech.
Not dumb, that’s how.
I wonder if my collecting books at used book stores count. Never know what I'll find and how the day fits together.
But this sounds like a fun project to do to break out of the routine and give one's self a break. Thanks for sharing.
Jeff:
It would be interesting to see if you could somehow work this into a class assignment for one of your philosophy classes. It was a revelation for my students to experience this process.
Yes, I was thinking the same thing! Glad to hear your students found it to be good.
poets are roadside magpies / collecting all that glitters.
Tom: I think you'll enjoy next week's post on minimalism. You certainly have a talent for it.
Thanks, Peter. I look forward to your post.
Separately, I am reading "While the Undertaker Sleeps"
and I am struck by the stylistic shift from "Pretty Happy"
to "Miracles & Mortifications." Both of course carry
your sardonic/ surrealist / dada voice but Pretty Happy!
poems feel like softer narrative surrealism and Miracles
feels like full-throttle surrealism every sentence.
Curious to know your stylistic intentions in approaching
each collection. Thanks!