Showing posts with label Jeff Hilson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jeff Hilson. Show all posts

Saturday, November 14, 2015

Fence magazine #30 (Winter/Spring 2015)




Vienna

You keep your cities
in the water. In the wood

stand islands and clearings.
You are running

with the jewel box by water.
Your dreams

provide the key. Your ocean
awaits. It waters your dreams.

Enter the thatch you old
suck-a-thumbs. Enter

the boat. Wake up. Eat
this shattering pastry,

exotic unreachable
hysterical girl.

A girl, a plan, a canal:

I’m always gratified to see the new issue of Fence magazine. The latest issue of the semi-annual poetry and fiction journal Fence is issue #30 (Winter/Spring 2015), and has so much writing in it that poems are included on the front and back cover, and the author biographies are only available through either scanning the code through your phone or writing the journal directly (which I understand, logically, but simply find annoying as a reader). Either way, it is remarkable to see a journal inventive enough to include the two poems by John Ashbery on their front and back cover instead of inside the issue, thus solving the frustration of lack of space. I really can’t think of another journal that has done such, although I know that the text of the late Vancouver poet Gerry Gilbert’s Moby Jane (Toronto ON: Coach House Press, 1987; Coach House Books, 2004) [see my review of such here] was constructed (and produced) to begin on the front cover, and end on the back cover.

One thing I’ve always appreciated about Fence is their adherence to publishing the work of any writer only once over a two year period; coupled with their strong editorial mandate, this has meant that one of Fence’s ongoing strengths is the ability to introduce even their long-standing readers to a wide variety of new writers. Some of what leapt out at me included the unapologetically open-heart cadences of Tina Brown Celona’s three poems (“now to sing / so that even you // will stop to listen / in the moonlight // we walk in / I’ve never seen such whiteness // where poetry is the only language / and the only speech we hear”), or the striking staccato of Wong May’s three poems, that include:

How could I cross you
      The only way you would go?

      You shall take my hand
& I will close my eyes,   assisted
      Or assisting
We shall step      like so,
Into the traffic.
            Thank Heaven,
You are not blind. (“Cold Heaven”)

And have you read Mary Flanagan? Oh my:

Desire is Rarely Fulfilled

The fur of gorilla is as misunderstood
As a mistaken desire

The palms that are gorilla palms
Are not of fire

The woman standing near the gorilla
Is there by accident

The stairs behind and above do not
Enable gorilla transcendence

Scratches made by the nails
Mark the rolling wine barrel

Blah blah
Blah       peril

As usual, there is far too much to discuss in detail, but the new issue includes some familiar names included as well, including Chris Martin, Carla Harryman, Bin Ramke, Joshua Ware, Seth Abramson, Andrea Actis, Ben Doller, Maureen Seaton, Jeff Hilson (I haven’t seen work from Hilson in quite a long time) and Rick Moody, as well as an extended section of Julie Carr’s remarkable “REAL LIFE: AN INSTALLATION” (a work-in-progress she discussed last year at Touch the Donkey), that includes:

%

Consider for a moment images of the divine, and the ban placed upon them. Since in what I’ll call my tradition there are no such images we depend entirely on language and the body. This means there are many songs, many prayers, some rocking, and much ritual. Children are at once glad and annoyed by this. If we were to construct an image, what would it be? A mother? A goat? A tree? Impossibly, we’d have to have all three, which would return us to something that precedes us, throw us back to fathers who never once knew we were truly theirs and so fed us reluctantly, counting our morsels. Everything we’ve forgotten how to do, any ritual unpracticed or unknown, remains like a residue on the table. Stroking the wood, we retrieve these forgotten things.


Monday, March 26, 2012

Open Letter: Negotiating the Social Bond of Poetics, eds. Nancy Gillespie and Peter Jaeger

How do literary poetics in the discourse of the university appear? Remember that for Lacan the discourse of the university exists in a hegemonic relationship with power, and is further based on the phenomenological consciousness of the autonomous ego as unified subject who knows. From this perspective, it becomes clear why so many English and Creative Writing departments focus on the type of poem which upholds the sort of unified self that is most typically represented in lyric poetry – a self which typically ruminates on a serious topic through the use of rich imagery and figurative language, and then concludes with a pithy observation. The logic of the autonomous self of the lyric dominates the popular representation of contemporary poetry as well, not only on the university English department syllabus, but also in the list of set texts for secondary schools and in the media (for example, The Guardian’s Saturday poem and virtually all of the poems published in Geist magazine or the TLS or the London Review of Books are written from the perspective of the lyric “I”). This type of self-expression finds a safe home in Creative Writing departments, which are especially friendly to the discourse of the university, because they are based on the workshop situation: where people worry about adjusting a comma here or a word there, rather than inquiring into the rationale for writing itself, or considering the relationships formed among writing, subjectivity, and power. (Peter Jaeger, “The Freudian Readymade”)
I freely admit that much of the theory presented in the new issue of Frank Davey’s Open Letter: A Canadian Journal of Writing and Theory (Fourteenth Series, Number 8, Spring 2012), subtitled “Negotiating the Social Bond of Poetics,” breezes easily over the top of my head, but there is a great deal to admire in this issue, including impressive critical and creative works by Tim Atkins, Jeff Hilson, Amy De’Ath, Sean Bonney, Jeff Derksen, Eve Watson, Carol Watts, Vanessa Place, Nicole Markotić, Andrew Levy and Peter Jaeger. Guest-edited by Nancy Gillespie and Peter Jaeger, I’m fascinated by the selection of authors, a slight shift in contributors from across the Atlantic, which I can presume comes, in large part, to expat-Canadian poet and critic Peter Jaeger. Some time ago, Jaeger studied at the University of Western Ontario, and has spent the past decade or so writing and teaching in England, engaging with a number of highly active and engaged writers, including Bonney, Hilson and Levy, while maintaining a number of his Canadian relationships. In 2000, he published the critical study ABC of Reading TRG: Steve McCaffery, bpNichol, and the Toronto Research Group through Talonbooks.
So I see you’re a teacher again. November 10th was ridiculous, we were all caught unawares. And that “we” is the same as the “we” in these poems, as against “them,” and maybe against “you,” in that a rapid collectivizing of subjectivity equally rapidly involves locked doors, barricades, self-definition through antagonism etc. If you weren’t there, you just won’t get it. But anyway, a few months later, or was it before, I can’t remember anymore, I sat down to write an essay on Rimbaud. I’d been to a talk at Marx House and was amazed that people could still only talk through all the myths: Verlaine etc nasty-assed punk bitch etc gun running, colonialism, etc. Slightly less about that last one. As if there was nothing to say about what it was in Rimbaud’s work – or in avant-garde poetry in general – that could be read as the subjective counterpart to the objective upheavals of any revolutionary moment. How could what we were experiencing, I asked myself, be delineated in such a way that we could recognize ourselves in it. the form would be monstrous. That kinda romanticism doesn’t help much either. I mean, obviously a rant against the government, even delivered via a brick through the window, is not nearly enough. I started thinking the reason the student movement failed was down to the fucking slogans. They were awful. As feeble as poems. (Sean Bonney, “Letter on Poetics”)
I’m fascinated by much of this issue for the way that it forces me to consider writing differently, yet again, from all the structures I might have previously known. It reads as such a simple thing, but a constant struggle, working to approach a work on its own merits, or even attempt to expand the borders of one’s own writing. “The Social Bond of Poetics,” by itself, could mean a great number of approaches, from the writer’s circle to activism, and the issue originally came out of a series of readings and talks run through Vancouver’s Kootenay School of Writing, as Gillespie writes in her introduction:
The initial idea for this issue developed out of a year long series of poetry readings and critical seminars that I ran, with the generous funding of the Canada Council for the Arts, and the organizing assistance of Nikki Reimer and other members of the collective at the Kootenay School of Writing in Vancouver, under the same title as this issue “Negotiating the Social Bond of Poetics.” Participants included Peter Jaeger, Steve McCaffery, David Marriott, Kaia Sand, Jules Boykoff, Rachel Zolf, Roger Farr, Jeff Derksen, Meredith Quartermain, Nicole Markotić, Clint Burnham, and Louis Cabri. Peter Jaeger was the first participant, and our continuing dialogue brought about our work on this issue. Although both of us are interested in psycho-analysis and poetics, Peter edited the poetry contributions and I edited the articles. Like the series, this issue draws on Jacques Lacan’s late work – in particular, his Seminar XVII – in order to examine the social bond of poetics and the links between Lacanian analysis and the act of writing. Seminar XVII, which as I noted above, took place in 1969, was delivered shortly after the student and social revolt of May 68, a historical moment in which Lacan was immersed. While Lacan is concerned with the limitations of the master’s discourse and the university discourse, he sees the potential of transformation in the analyst’s discourse. Although he asserts that it is necessary to make an “hysterization” of the analysand’s discourse in the process of analysis – because this is the first step towards questioning the master’s discourse – he asserts that this discourse must then be shifted to the analyst’s discourse for real change to occur (Other 33). These seemingly discouraging words can be seen as a provocation to go further, however, and to not fall into the same relationship to repetition, so does the revolutionary. As we do find in moments of Lacan’s seminars in which he suggests that a writer can hold a similar position as an analyst, and thus one would assume, also be able to shift these other discourses to enact some social change. (“Introduction: Negotiating the Social Bond of Poetics”)
One of the highlights of the issue included the work of London, England poet and activist Sean Bonney, both his “Letter on Poetics” and the magnificent concrete poems, a selection from hi “Baudelaire in English.” Other highlights include magnificent poems by Holly Pester, Britishpoet Amy De’Ath (currently studying in Vancouver), Jeff Derksen, Carol Watts and the luscious “Portraits” by Elizabeth Guthrie, as well as Vanessa Place’s “Purlo ned Letter” and Nicole Markotić’s “The Body in Pieces: Lacan and the crisis of the unified fragmentary” (which I suspect is part of a larger, ongoing critical work).
At Par s, just after dark one gusty even ng n the autumn of 18--, was enjoy ng the twofold luxury of med tat on and a meerschaum, n company w th my fr end C. Auguste Dup n, n h s l ttle back l brary, or book-closet, au tro s eme, No. 33, Rue Donot, Faubourg St. Germa n. For one hour at least we had ma nta ned a profound s lence; wh le each, to any casual observer, m ght have seemed ntently and exclus vley occup ed w th the curl ng edd es of smoke that oppressed the atmosphere of the chamber. For myself, however, was mentally d scuss ng certa n top cs wh ch had formed matter for conversat on between us at an earl er per od of the even ng; mean the affa r of the Rue Morgue, and the mystery atten ng the murder of Mar e Roget. looked upon t, therefore, as someth ng of a co nc dense, when the door of our apartment was thrown open and adm tted our old acqua ntance, Mons eur G--, the Prefect of the Par s an pol ce. (Vanessa Place, “The Puro ned Letter”)
And there is just something about the selections here of Jeff Hilson’s “Organ Music” that I think might need to be heard aloud:
why john dunstaple I hardly know you/
can I borrow your memorable face/ your
english countenance is quite quire rare/ o
constaple I have fallen for john/ john
dunstaple/ in the 1440s he is very forward/
he is finished with gloria & he is finished
with carol/ & I am finished with john
dunstaple/ o god we are all plantagenets/
a tudor is neither male nor female/ whoever
is besieging the house of carpets/nobody
painted their burgundian kitchen/ why
john dunstaple why/ because I was
in my coat of arms in the burning house
of windsor/embattled & dancetty
I left my shield in your ordinary extra
field/& I lied in the ground of eton college/
& I liked in the ground in armed corsets/
& I lied in the ground on dunstaple downs

Saturday, February 12, 2011

12 or 20 (small press) questions: Ken Edwards on Reality Street;

KEN EDWARDS’ books include the poetry collections Good Science (Roof Books, 1992), eight + six (Reality Street, 2003), No Public Language: Selected Poems 1975-95 (Shearsman Books, 2006), Bird Migration in the 21st Century (Spectacular Diseases, 2006), Songbook (Shearsman Books, 2009), the novel Futures (Reality Street, 1998) and the prose work Nostalgia for Unknown Cities (Reality Street, 2007). A book of short narratives, Down With Beauty, is in progress. He has been editor/publisher of the small press Reality Street since 1993. He is active in music as well as writing: he wrote the text for a piece by John Tilbury for piano, voice and sampled sounds, There’s something in there…, which was premiered in Leeds in 2003, and his music for Fanny Howe’s Spiral was first performed in Brighton and London in 2004. After 35 years in London, he now lives with his partner Elaine in Hastings, on the south coast of England, where he plays bass guitar with the band The Moors.

REALITY STREET was founded in 1993, as an amalgamation of Reality Studios in London and Street Editions in Cambridge. The press has been run solely by Ken Edwards since 1998, and moved from London to Hastings in 2004. It publishes contemporary innovative poetry and prose in English and in translation from other languages. More information at htttp://www.realitystreet.co.uk

1 – When did Reality Street first start? How have your original goals as a publisher shifted since you started, if at all? And what have you learned through the process?

I started Reality Studios magazine in London in 1977, and it ran for 10 years or so. Towards the end of that period, I started publishing one-off books, for example Unpolished Mirrors by Allen Fisher. Then in 1993 the press amalagmated with Wendy Mulford’s Street Editions, then based in Cambridge, to form Reality Street Editions. Wendy ceased being an active partner by the end of the decade. The press name has since been shortened to Reality Street. In all that time, the goals have been pretty much the same: to showcase new, innovative writing in the English language, and occasionally in translation from other languages. I have learned a huge amount over the years about editing, designing, producing and (wow!) selling books without compromising on innovation.

2 – What first brought you to publishing?

Frustration as a writer! It became apparent to me in my twenties that the kind of writing I was trying to do had no chance of acceptance by major publishing houses. Back in the 70s, I encountered amazingly exciting poets who were also publishers, such as Allen Fisher, Bob Cobbing and Bill Griffiths in London, and also the small press productions of Andrew Crozier, Peter Riley and Wendy Mulford in Cambridge (though I didn’t know those folks personally at the time). And I realised I could do it myself. The wonderful productions of Goliard and Fulcrum Press were beyond my capabilities at the time, but with a Roneo mimeograph machine and a lot of energy I could produce editions of a few dozen.

3 – What do you consider the role and responsibilities, if any, of small publishing?

The construction of writers’ and readers’ communities, for mutual benefit.

4 – What do you see your press doing that no one else is?

Well, I wouldn’t say no one else is doing what we’re doing, but everyone has their own way. I would say Reality Street tries to avoid being cliqueish or too strongly identified with one or other faction – a great danger particularly in the poetry world. Essentially, I try to publish writing that I enjoy reading, or that I wish I’d written, or that inspires me as a writer, and hope that others will see its value too. At present, I’m trying to stimulate, for want of a better term, experimental fiction, which is really badly served in the UK.

5 – What do you see as the most effective way to get new books out into the world?

Forget trying to get bookstores, particularly in Britain, to stock your books. It just won’t happen: the corporates have got it sewn up. But of course the most effective way to sell books these days is via the internet, either through one’s own website or via online retailers such as Amazon. And also at readings and other events such as bookfairs.

6 – How involved an editor are you? Do you dig deep into line edits, or do you prefer more of a light touch?

I’m 150% involved! But if you mean how much copy-editing do I do: well, like most small press poetry editors, I guess, I don’t generally involve myself in line-by-line editing on individual poems. Either I accept a poetry book for publication as is or I reject it. Having said that, I have made suggestions about losing whole poems or indeed adding them. Most poets I publish have a clear idea of how they want their work presented, but a few are more indeterminate, and then, if I really like their work, I’ll make strong suggestions. I have insisted on changes of title for a collection sometimes. Some poets are really bad at titles. Of course, I correct spelling and all that kind of thing when necessary.

7 – How do your books get distributed? What are your usual print runs?

Nowadays, all Reality Street books are print-on-demand (POD). This does not mean e-books or downloadable books. I only do paperback books with spines, the difference being that they exist primarily as digital files at the printer’s, with copies being printed only when they are required. So there is no longer a “print run” as such. In all other respects, they look like ordinary books. Most casual sales are fulfilment of customer orders at bookshops or online, and the wholesaler who works with our printers deals with these directly. After they have got their cut, this means the profit on each copy is very tiny, but at least there is a profit – and upfront production costs are limited, and there is no warehousing cost. Aside from that, an important element is the Reality Street Supporter scheme. Currently, about 80 people belong to this. For an annual subscription, supporters get one copy of every book the press publishes, and their names printed in the back of the books if they wish. This support, and the interest it creates, is absolutely vital to the press.

8 – How many other people are involved with editing or production? Do you work with other editors, and if so, how effective do you find it? What are the benefits, drawbacks?

It’s basically a one-man operation, except when I rope in my partner, Elaine, to help with the chores! However, I work with other editors on an ad-hoc basis: for example, with Allan Kolski Horwitz in Johannesburg on our South African anthology, Botsotso; with Jeff Hilson on The Reality Street Book of Sonnets; and with Alan Halsey on Bill Griffiths’ Collected Earlier Poems. I’m currently working with David Miller on an anthology of prose fiction by poets. Occasionally I use people as sounding boards, for example for advice on whether I should take a book on or not. I have found all these relationships fruitful and stimulating, but I don’t think I’d like to work permanently with another editor now.

9 – How has being an editor/publisher changed the way you think about your own writing?

The most important spin-off has been what I’ve learned from the poets and writers I’ve published. It’s been and continues to be an education.

10 – How do you approach the idea of publishing your own writing? Some, such as Gary Geddes when he still ran Cormorant, refused such, yet various Coach House Press’ editors had titles during their tenures as editors for the press, including Victor Coleman and bpNichol. What do you think of the arguments for or against, or do you see the whole question as irrelevant?

This is a difficult question. As I said earlier, the original impetus for becoming a publisher was largely frustration about the lack of outlets for my own writing. In some senses the press is a way of providing a context for my own writing. That’s the selfish bit. I have published three Reality Street books of my own, two of them prose books. In all cases they were books I either found difficulty placing because they didn’t fit market criteria or couldn’t get another small press to do in the way I wanted: I really needed eight + six to be a small-format book with 96 14-line poems one to a page, but I couldn’t get anyone to do it like that. There is still a residual stigma in self-publishing, but it was good enough for Shelley and Blake and many others. The other side of that particular coin is that once you get typecast as a publisher people tend to forget you’re a writer.

11 – How do you see Reality Street evolving?

We’re upping the production rate from a very modest four titles a year to six. Some of those will be innovative prose fiction. I need to change our printing/wholesaling arrangements to get better access to the US/Canadian readership, which is increasing all the time. I hope most of our forthcoming titles will be available at Amazon.com as well as Amazon.co.uk, which has not always been the case, and that generally I can achieve better fulfilment of customer orders in North America. Salt Publishing and Shearsman Books have pioneered massive production using POD, ie publishing in the order of a book a week. I’m not going down that route!

12 – What, as a publisher, are you most proud of accomplishing? What do you think people have overlooked about your publications? What is your biggest frustration?

There is a lot I am proud about. The anthology of innovative writing by women, Out of Everywhere, published in 1996, made a big impact and continues to inspire new young readers and poets. I’m proud of doing substantial editions of outstanding poets I first met 30 and more years ago, such as Allen Fisher, Maggie O’Sullvan and the late Bill Griffiths. Denise Riley entrusted her Selected Poems to Reality Street when she could have probably negotiated a contract with Faber or the like. I’m really pleased I took on Paul Griffiths’ amazing Oulipian short novel let me tell you, entirely constructed out of Ophelia’s vocabulary in Hamlet, when no one else would touch it, even though Paul has a high-profile track record as a novelist and a writer on music. And I’m excited to be co-publishing (with New Star Books in Vancouver) the much missed David Bromige’s Collected Poems next year – Ron Silliman and Bob Perelman are doing the editing. I’m only frustrated that many of the authors I’ve published have not had the acclaim they deserve.

13 – Who were your early publishing models when starting out?

See the answer to question 2.

14 – How does Reality Street work to engage with your immediate literary community, and community at large? What journals or presses do you see Reality Street in dialogue with? How important do you see those dialogues, those conversations?

In Britain, Salt, Shearsman, Barque Press, West House Books are some of the presses publishing similar kinds of innovative work, and also Oystercatcher Press, which publishes only pamphlets. But a number of mini-presses are starting to flourish, linked to younger poets in a rejuvenated poetry scene. There are interesting reading series in London (Crossing the Line, The Blue Bus, Openned), Brighton (Desperate for Love, Chlorine), Manchester (The Other Room) and Cambridge. There aren’t many print magazines left to challenge the more venerable ones such as PN Review. One that has emerged in the past year is the Cambridge Literary Review, and Poetry Wales has become more lively recently. On a smaller scale there is the irregular If P Then Q. Poetry Review, published by the Poetry Society, has reverted to conservatism after an interesting period four or five years ago when avant-garde poets were given house-room. Online is where much of the action is: Great Works, onedit, Signals, Intercapillary Space and various blogs and internet forums.

15 – Do you hold regular or occasional readings or launches? How important do you see public readings and other events?

Yes, it’s important; each Reality Street book gets a launch reading if possible, sometimes in conjunction with one of the reading series I’ve mentioned.

16 – How do you utilize the internet, if at all, to further your goals?

The internet is absolutely vital to small presses in this century. If you are not on the internet, you’re not visible. I completely refurbished the Reality Street website a couple of years ago, and added a blog. It now gets 20-30 hits a day – nothing compared to Silliman’s Blog, but it all adds up. It’s a shop window for the books and the authors – each author gets a page to him or herself.

17 – Do you take submissions? If so, what aren’t you looking for?

Being open to submissions is difficult when you’re only publishing 4-6 books a year and your shop window is open onto the world. Reality Street has published several books resulting from unsolicited submissions, but it’s not a completely open invitation. I would suggest writers aspiring to be published should have a look at the website if they are not already familiar with the press. If they don’t know any of the authors we’ve published and are not prepared to investigate them, then it’s unlikely they have anything to interest us. If they really think their work should be published by Reality Street, then they should contact the press through the website. I may then ask them to submit a manuscript for consideration. If they don’t get a reply from me, then that means the proposal is not of interest. I definitely do not reply to emails starting “To whom it may concern…”

18 – Tell me about three of your most recent titles, and why they’re special.

Bill Griffiths’ Collected Earlier Poems is probably the best introduction to this wildly innovative British poet, who died prematurely in 2007. The wonderful Fanny Howe has a small book of poems from her formative years in Emergence – this is her second Reality Street book. Jim Goar is a US poet previously based in Norwich in the UK and in South Korea, whose Seoul Bus Poems came out of the blue – it’s great, I loved it, I published it.