The POETIX website is now a ghost ship suspended in cyberspace, but it exists to perhaps give future generations some understanding of how the Los Angeles poetry community wanted to present itself within and without its local/regional sphere.
In one of G. Murray Thomas's last reviews, he wrote this manifesto--yet another reiteration of the old "layers of meaning" (i.e. make it opaque and/or amorphous) canard:
In my opinion, all poetry (all art, in fact) needs to be open to interpretation. That is how we bring our own experiences to the poetry, and engage with it emotionally as well as intellectually.
The above is apparently preferable to understanding the poet's experiences and intent inherent in the poem he/she has written.
Showing posts with label G. Murray Thomas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label G. Murray Thomas. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 27, 2016
Monday, June 27, 2016
No unambiguity allowed.
G. Murray Thomas (ex-NEXT magazine creator and Long Beach/OC icon) in his current Poetix.net review column:
In my opinion, all poetry (all art, in fact) needs to be open to interpretation. That is how we bring our own experiences to the poetry, and engage with it emotionally as well as intellectually.
In my opinion, all poetry (all art, in fact) needs to be open to interpretation. That is how we bring our own experiences to the poetry, and engage with it emotionally as well as intellectually.
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
Poet Julia Stein gets Murrayed.
"If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it."--Elmore Leonard
But in the world of poetry, some people (particularly reviewers who wish to culturally shape their communities) prefer writing that sounds like writing.
Here are two excerpts from G. Murray Thomas' review of Julia Stein's book WHAT WERE THEY LIKE?
But too often the poems acquire their power through flat statements, rather than poetic language. This is especially true in the final lines with which she closes many of her poems. Too often they end with a line which punches the gut without engaging the imagination. “A cruise missile left her/ paralyzed on half of her body.” (“I Wanted to Believe”); “I ask Congress to stop the destruction of this city.” (“Do I look like a Sumerian goddess”); “she wants to send money to stop the war” (“My Mama Remembers”).
What Were They Like? delivers a powerful anti-war message. Stein succeeds in her goal of showing the lives of average people swept up in the horror of war. But I’m sad to say it rarely rises to the level of great poetry in the process. Regular readers of my reviews know I like my poetry open-ended. I like to discover meaning in the poems I read, not be slapped in the face with it. Poetry is such a perfect format for expressing ambiguity that, to be honest, I feel cheated when a poet does less with it.
The full review can be read at http://www.poetix.net
But in the world of poetry, some people (particularly reviewers who wish to culturally shape their communities) prefer writing that sounds like writing.
Here are two excerpts from G. Murray Thomas' review of Julia Stein's book WHAT WERE THEY LIKE?
But too often the poems acquire their power through flat statements, rather than poetic language. This is especially true in the final lines with which she closes many of her poems. Too often they end with a line which punches the gut without engaging the imagination. “A cruise missile left her/ paralyzed on half of her body.” (“I Wanted to Believe”); “I ask Congress to stop the destruction of this city.” (“Do I look like a Sumerian goddess”); “she wants to send money to stop the war” (“My Mama Remembers”).
What Were They Like? delivers a powerful anti-war message. Stein succeeds in her goal of showing the lives of average people swept up in the horror of war. But I’m sad to say it rarely rises to the level of great poetry in the process. Regular readers of my reviews know I like my poetry open-ended. I like to discover meaning in the poems I read, not be slapped in the face with it. Poetry is such a perfect format for expressing ambiguity that, to be honest, I feel cheated when a poet does less with it.
The full review can be read at http://www.poetix.net
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Quotes from two poets via LUMMOX magazine.
Kudos to RD Raindog Armstrong for giving rebirth to LUMMOX magazine as a mammoth annual issue (now onsale). It throws a wide net in terms of poets and writers--and includes people from places other than Southern California.
Here are some quotations from the interview/essay portion of the issue:
"...I know there are plenty of people who will disagree with me on this, but I feel the battle between academic poetry and performance poetry, which seemed so important ten years ago, is largely over. Sure, there are still disagreements over what constitutes good poetry (or even what constitutes poetry at all), but the divisions are not entirely as clear. There is much more of a spectrum these days. I hear poets with MFAs doing stuff that would have been considered pure performance, and I hear poets with no formal education writing poems as finely crafted as anything out rhere. Maybe it's not all liked, or even appreciated, but it is all accepted as poetry."--from interview with G. Murray Thomas of NEXT magazine and NEWS CLIPS AND EGO TRIPS.
"Far and away the worst most flagrant element is the rampant and utterly rapacious careerist ambition practiced by increasing numbers of poets and would-be poets, a kind of relentless, compulsive self-promotion, which it it weren't so damaging would be almost comically ludicrous....unabashed status seeking...continual seeking and cultivating reading opportunities...intense conferences in restaurants talking only "shop"-which these days means comparing strategies to get published; which poetry "prize" to pursue; taking every available workshop and of course sucking up to celebrity poets. These "name" folks are cultivated to 'get ahead'; attending no readings except your own and those of certified eminences and the ne plus ultra of this utter betrayal of the traditional poet's stance: contriving to secure a co-featured reading with the big-shot poet."
"It's hard to bust someone for undertaking an advance course of study so as to earn a living teaching about what [he or] she loves. But "let's put it where it is": the MFA is a "union card". And real poetry does not come from the Academy. It comes from the confrontation of the nakedness of the poet's soul with 'being-in-the-world'.--excerpts from Steve Goldman's essay "The Coming of the YUPOETS".
Here are some quotations from the interview/essay portion of the issue:
"...I know there are plenty of people who will disagree with me on this, but I feel the battle between academic poetry and performance poetry, which seemed so important ten years ago, is largely over. Sure, there are still disagreements over what constitutes good poetry (or even what constitutes poetry at all), but the divisions are not entirely as clear. There is much more of a spectrum these days. I hear poets with MFAs doing stuff that would have been considered pure performance, and I hear poets with no formal education writing poems as finely crafted as anything out rhere. Maybe it's not all liked, or even appreciated, but it is all accepted as poetry."--from interview with G. Murray Thomas of NEXT magazine and NEWS CLIPS AND EGO TRIPS.
"Far and away the worst most flagrant element is the rampant and utterly rapacious careerist ambition practiced by increasing numbers of poets and would-be poets, a kind of relentless, compulsive self-promotion, which it it weren't so damaging would be almost comically ludicrous....unabashed status seeking...continual seeking and cultivating reading opportunities...intense conferences in restaurants talking only "shop"-which these days means comparing strategies to get published; which poetry "prize" to pursue; taking every available workshop and of course sucking up to celebrity poets. These "name" folks are cultivated to 'get ahead'; attending no readings except your own and those of certified eminences and the ne plus ultra of this utter betrayal of the traditional poet's stance: contriving to secure a co-featured reading with the big-shot poet."
"It's hard to bust someone for undertaking an advance course of study so as to earn a living teaching about what [he or] she loves. But "let's put it where it is": the MFA is a "union card". And real poetry does not come from the Academy. It comes from the confrontation of the nakedness of the poet's soul with 'being-in-the-world'.--excerpts from Steve Goldman's essay "The Coming of the YUPOETS".
Saturday, October 13, 2012
NEWS CLIPS AND EGO TRIPS poetry panel--Part 8
Only two more portions to go after this one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvsOkAD3CNE&feature=plcp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvsOkAD3CNE&feature=plcp
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
NEWS CLIPS AND EGO TRIPS panel Part 6
Jumping forward to Part 6 of the evening. Discussion of venues past including
Tom Ianniello's famed Iguana Cafe and Exile Books and Music in the San Fernando Valley.
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Friday, August 3, 2012
An open letter to poet/musician Matthew Mars aka Matthew Niblock.
Dear Matthew, A famous quote attributed to you is "I hate bad art.". Recently on the Facebook wall of G. Murray Thomas (poet and NEXT... founder), you made a remark about how my poetry doesn't qualify (in your assumed opinion). Though we don't really know each other, I've seen a couple of your features (one in Laguna Beach, one in Hollywood) during the period when you were most active in L.A. poetry. I know a little of your work, and you have talent--but I'm curious as to whether or not you've read enough of my poems between 1998 and this year for you to pass an open-and-shut verdict on my work. Really, I don't care if you don't like me personally. But I'm offering you the opportunity to use this blog's comment section to tell me (and other readers) exactly what you think about my poetry. And please offer quotations of lines/verses where necessary. Awaiting your response--which will stand without any further reply from me. Sincerely, Terry McCarty
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
Coda to poetry book review post on full disclosure.
No, I'm not tearing the fabric of the poetry community to shreds by writing a blog post about poetry book reviews--though I get the impression (from the commenter on my previous post) that a number of people will think otherwise. All I'm saying is that reviewers should flag their connections to small press publishers if conflicts of interest are too blatant to be ignored, no matter how small the community believes itself to be. And, if necessary, reviewers shouldn't be afraid to recuse themselves and let someone else do the review if necessary. In the case of G. Murray Thomas and Poetix, there's a second reviewer, Eric Morago. He can take up the mantle.
Monday, June 4, 2012
The art of full disclosure when writing poetry book reviews.
First, I'll start with a full disclosure of my own: I once had a book published by Lummox Press and was included in an anthology of its Little Red Books series.
G. Murray Thomas, who reviews books for Poetix.net (alongside Eric Morago), knows the proprietor of Lummox and has toured with him in recent months.
But Murray routinely reviews poetry volumes published by Lummox and even more routinely fails to offer any kind of full disclosure. This modus operandi has also occurred with books from Write Bloody. There, the ethical conundrum gets a bit stickier because Derrick Brown's Long Beach-based small press recently offered up the NEWS CLIPS AND EGO TRIPS anthology, based on the NEXT....poetry magazine edited by....G. Murray Thomas.
Once again, I'm aware that a certain segment of the SoCal poetry community views itself as small enough where friends write reviews of each other's books and few people don't care to see this as any kind of an issue.
And I'll give Murray the benefit of the doubt and guess he does his best to be objective when writing reviews of Lummox and Write Bloody offerings.
But, if the poetry community in SoCal wants to trumpet its idealness more convincingly, then it should avoid too many occurrences of even the appearance of conflict of interest.
UPDATE 6/5/12: Heard from Murray privately (sent him comminique via Facebook); essentially, his response is that "most people" know he knows people from local presses and that he's not interested in full disclosure. Case closed.
G. Murray Thomas, who reviews books for Poetix.net (alongside Eric Morago), knows the proprietor of Lummox and has toured with him in recent months.
But Murray routinely reviews poetry volumes published by Lummox and even more routinely fails to offer any kind of full disclosure. This modus operandi has also occurred with books from Write Bloody. There, the ethical conundrum gets a bit stickier because Derrick Brown's Long Beach-based small press recently offered up the NEWS CLIPS AND EGO TRIPS anthology, based on the NEXT....poetry magazine edited by....G. Murray Thomas.
Once again, I'm aware that a certain segment of the SoCal poetry community views itself as small enough where friends write reviews of each other's books and few people don't care to see this as any kind of an issue.
And I'll give Murray the benefit of the doubt and guess he does his best to be objective when writing reviews of Lummox and Write Bloody offerings.
But, if the poetry community in SoCal wants to trumpet its idealness more convincingly, then it should avoid too many occurrences of even the appearance of conflict of interest.
UPDATE 6/5/12: Heard from Murray privately (sent him comminique via Facebook); essentially, his response is that "most people" know he knows people from local presses and that he's not interested in full disclosure. Case closed.
Sunday, May 6, 2012
Recycled poetry observations from 2009--with updated thoughts.
I just looked at some old blog posts and stumbled across the one from early in 2009 where I took exception to a review that G. Murray Thomas wrote on Poetix.net of my chapbook "yellow tree red sky"--and in retrospect, I shouldn't have been surprised about some of his negativity since a few months earlier, I wrote a post discussing a not-positive Murray review of North Hollywood poet/host Radomir Luza's then-current chapbook. And I should have been more aware (in the sense of SoCal poetry politics) at the time that criticizing a critic and then submitting a chapbook for his review might have consequences.
Here's the portion of my early 2009 post that still resonates with truth over three years later:
When I began going to open-mikes almost eleven years ago [now over fourteen years ago], there were coffeehouse and independent bookstore readings that made room for just about everything, like a variety show: "serious" literary poetry, traditional rhyme-and-meter verse, monologues, stand-up comedy, musicians, etc. etc [plus slam poets in open mike or as features]. And Murray seems to have cast his lot with the hosts and influential poets in LA/OC that seem to think that only "serious" poetry should be allowed with the other subsets I mentioned above actively and/or tacitly discouraged.
I remember a few years ago at the Moonday reading at Village Books in Pacific Palisades when, after reading on the open-mike, Holaday Mason (a well-known L.A. literary poet) performed her five minutes. The late Anne Silver (then a Moonday co-host) spent a minute or two copiously praising Holaday for her work--and, to me, the message was ultraclear; I was too depth-free and craft-poor for such a distinguished reading. I got Ms. Silver's message--and never returned to the reading again.
Time to say it again: for poetry to flourish--particularly at a time when there will be renewed jeers over the idea of the arts being essential in a near-Depression economy--a big tent needs to be pitched.
It's not to be expected that all poetry will be to the liking of everyone--tastemakers, professional/amateur poets or civilians who prefer merely to attend.
But at some point the "poetry community" needs to stop pushing the poetry-eugenics nonsense that poems should be nothing more than gilded creations engineered to be admired for their complexity and intricacy--sort of like building a scale model of the QUEEN MARY in a Sparkletts jug or (to steal a phrase from the late Robert Mitchum) construct a replica of the Taj Mahal from matchsticks.
Otherwise, there's going to be an increase in boring, arid, intended-more-to-impress-than-enlighten-or-even-stoop-to-entertain "craft-conscious" word art which will likely go unremembered a month from now--let alone a decade or even a century.
Here's the portion of my early 2009 post that still resonates with truth over three years later:
When I began going to open-mikes almost eleven years ago [now over fourteen years ago], there were coffeehouse and independent bookstore readings that made room for just about everything, like a variety show: "serious" literary poetry, traditional rhyme-and-meter verse, monologues, stand-up comedy, musicians, etc. etc [plus slam poets in open mike or as features]. And Murray seems to have cast his lot with the hosts and influential poets in LA/OC that seem to think that only "serious" poetry should be allowed with the other subsets I mentioned above actively and/or tacitly discouraged.
I remember a few years ago at the Moonday reading at Village Books in Pacific Palisades when, after reading on the open-mike, Holaday Mason (a well-known L.A. literary poet) performed her five minutes. The late Anne Silver (then a Moonday co-host) spent a minute or two copiously praising Holaday for her work--and, to me, the message was ultraclear; I was too depth-free and craft-poor for such a distinguished reading. I got Ms. Silver's message--and never returned to the reading again.
Time to say it again: for poetry to flourish--particularly at a time when there will be renewed jeers over the idea of the arts being essential in a near-Depression economy--a big tent needs to be pitched.
It's not to be expected that all poetry will be to the liking of everyone--tastemakers, professional/amateur poets or civilians who prefer merely to attend.
But at some point the "poetry community" needs to stop pushing the poetry-eugenics nonsense that poems should be nothing more than gilded creations engineered to be admired for their complexity and intricacy--sort of like building a scale model of the QUEEN MARY in a Sparkletts jug or (to steal a phrase from the late Robert Mitchum) construct a replica of the Taj Mahal from matchsticks.
Otherwise, there's going to be an increase in boring, arid, intended-more-to-impress-than-enlighten-or-even-stoop-to-entertain "craft-conscious" word art which will likely go unremembered a month from now--let alone a decade or even a century.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
A glass-half-full statement re NEXT reunion in Long Beach tonight.
Tonight is the publication reading/party for NEWS CLIPS AND EGO TRIPS at Harvelle's in Long Beach. Won't be there, but I express thanks to G. Murray Thomas for publishing NEXT magazine and continuing its poetry calendar onto the Poetix.net site. Finding a copy of NEXT in the spring of 1998 was one of the best things to happen to me as a poet/writer--that a scene in SoCal existed and poetry wasn't limited to Drew Barrymore and Charlie Sheen and the old Cafe Largo on Fairfax.
Friday, April 20, 2012
G. Murray Thomas on NEXT magazine's impact.
From NEWS CLiPS AND EGO TRIPS, here's a small portion of Murray's introduction--pay special attention to the final sentence:
"I well remember the way poets' eyes would light up as I walked in with a stack of NEXT...s. That was the key to the whole enterprise. We quickly became an essential and beloved part of the SoCal poetry scene. Poets relied on us to tell them where the readings were, as well as to keep them informed about the hot poets in their midst, and the hot readings to go to, and the other happenings in the scene. Sure, they argued with us plenty, but they loved us.
They also wanted to be written up in our pages. Although not all of them who did get ink were happy with the results.. We supported the community, but we were also critical of it, and we were not always nice about it."
NEWS CLIPS AND EGO TRIPS: not a review but an observation.
I will keep my promise not to write a specific review of the G. Murray Thomas/Derrick Brown NEXT magazine compilation NEWS CLIPS AND EGO TRIPS.
But, here's an observation from reading some of its content:
There are articles/letters from several LA/OC community veterans in the book. And I've either irritated or created extreme fits of pique in some of those vets; some of that has come from questioning the way things get done/people get rewarded in the community, while other times I've been scourged for talking to Poetry Royalty as if they were mere mortals who need to be looked at eye-to-eye instead of from a bowing-peasant perspective.
It's definitely worth it to be more enlightened as to past history and to know that a lot of today's poetry community issues existed in a seems-like-long-ago time when the Internet was relatively primitive and readings were abundant.
And, unfortunately, it's clear from diving into the book that a lot of the "if we don't like you and/or what you write, we'll smash into you like an atomic-powered ram" ethos of certain community vets was also ever-present fifteen-to-eighteen years ago. After all, they see themselves as fighting (and also working) hard to get their eminence in the community--and they see it as normal to take up the shield and the sword to beat back professional challenges and notions of dissent from damn-fool younger people who must be made to know that so-and-so is THEE greatest host/poet in the city, etc..
As Woody Allen said in a different context (about mainstream Show Business) in CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS, "It's more than dog eat dog. It's dog doesn't return other dog's phone calls."
Nothing further to add--except to recommend that SoCal poets buy a copy, read the book and form their own opinion(s).
But, here's an observation from reading some of its content:
There are articles/letters from several LA/OC community veterans in the book. And I've either irritated or created extreme fits of pique in some of those vets; some of that has come from questioning the way things get done/people get rewarded in the community, while other times I've been scourged for talking to Poetry Royalty as if they were mere mortals who need to be looked at eye-to-eye instead of from a bowing-peasant perspective.
It's definitely worth it to be more enlightened as to past history and to know that a lot of today's poetry community issues existed in a seems-like-long-ago time when the Internet was relatively primitive and readings were abundant.
And, unfortunately, it's clear from diving into the book that a lot of the "if we don't like you and/or what you write, we'll smash into you like an atomic-powered ram" ethos of certain community vets was also ever-present fifteen-to-eighteen years ago. After all, they see themselves as fighting (and also working) hard to get their eminence in the community--and they see it as normal to take up the shield and the sword to beat back professional challenges and notions of dissent from damn-fool younger people who must be made to know that so-and-so is THEE greatest host/poet in the city, etc..
As Woody Allen said in a different context (about mainstream Show Business) in CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS, "It's more than dog eat dog. It's dog doesn't return other dog's phone calls."
Nothing further to add--except to recommend that SoCal poets buy a copy, read the book and form their own opinion(s).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)