8 Comments
User's avatar
Peter Johnson's avatar

Chris: Always good to hear from you, and I'm glad you haven't abandoned me. When you get a chance, send me a headshot or image of your new book for your post which will be up in the summer.

Expand full comment
Sally Ashton's avatar

Terrific rumination/explication, not to be confused with a prose poem! As a writer who floats across boundaries of short forms but knows where each piece stands, and as an editor of a prose poem journal who parses submissions often tendered (it seems) by authors hoping to see what sticks, and screens for submissions that fit our proscription of "prose poem," I inhabit this world almost daily. The conundrum. So I appreciate your illumination. A lot. I probably would still teach "Lights" as lyric essay as I typically have, but will have some deeper insights into why it blurs boundaries even more than I'd appreciated. Which also illuminates the forever subjective nature of classification.

The writing that succeeds best has a clear authorial intent vs casting one's literary bread upon the editorial waters....gets a bit soggy....

Would love a fireside chat. This comes close. Thanks~

Expand full comment
Peter Johnson's avatar

Sally. A very eloquent response to my post. Yes, you are still in the trenches.

The problem is far more complicated than I had space for. As I reread the piece, I realized I was really attacking inauthenticity in the poetry world, which I find is the natural extension of the narcissism that pervades our culture. There will never really be definitive distinctions between genres, which accounts for all the fun. Think of Baudelaire's Paris Spleen. Half the pieces would be considered flash fiction today or the short narrative nonfiction of a Parisian flaneur. But once Baudelaire calls his book petite poems in prose, once he mentions how all the pieces, though able to stand alone, work best when taken together, we must approach Paris Spleen as a book of prose poem.

I do hope we meet up some time to go into this.

Expand full comment
Thomas Molitor's avatar

Peter: I find it interesting to note what Helen Vendler said in her Poems, Poets, Poetry book, which I think addresses an argument for classification: Appendix 5. On Lyric Subgenres:

"This is a summary of the kinds of poems that lyric poets return to most frequently. It is convenient to be able to name a poem by its kind, because you can then compare it to others of the same kind."

Vendler values "convenience" in classifying poems by "its kind."

The musical equivalent might be comparing songs only sung in

the same key?

Expand full comment
Peter Johnson's avatar

Great quote and analysis, and, coincidentally, I picked up a used copy of Vendler's book DICKINSON, where she goes through a ton of poems, offering short analyses. Didn't even know it existed. It's a gem.

Expand full comment
Thomas Molitor's avatar

I enjoyed your essay, Peter, and I dare say you have

just thrown a lit match into a box of fireworks.

Your argument that genre matters in the reception

of a work is true in all fields of creative endeavors

such as music.

When someone mentions "shoegaze" or "bossa nova,"

they're conveying a set of sonic expectations, emotional

qualities, and historical associations in just a few words.

Linguistic shorthand facilitates a shared vocabulary.

Take Spotify, for example. Streaming algorithms rely

heavily on genre tags to connect audiences with music

they're likely to enjoy.

Thanks for the introduction to Stuart Dybek.

Expand full comment
Peter Johnson's avatar

A truly excellent response. Loved the way you applied the reasoning to other mediums. Bravo!

Expand full comment
Christopher G Kennedy's avatar

I’ve been enjoying these pieces. Love Stuart’s work.

Expand full comment