Was shocked and sad to find out that L.A. poet Erica Erdman passed away yesterday.
I didn't know Erica that well, but she was a class act as a person and as a member of the tribe called "the poetry community."
Met Erica in the late 90s at Amelie Frank's reading series at the Hot House in North Hollywood. Saw her last at the 2009 Newer Poets reading at the Downtown Los Angeles
Public Library.
Here's a link to Amazon.com for Erica's book THE APOCALYPTIC KID:
http://www.amazon.com/Apocalyptic-Kid-Erica-Erdman/dp/1892687003/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1266636221&sr=1-1
Friday, February 19, 2010
Making Poetry Cake: Re Los Angeles poetry and MFA mania.
Stop me if you've read this one before:
Last night, I was at a poetry reading and this person I'll choose not to name this time (suffice it to say he has some standing in local Los Angeles/Orange County poetry and I've mentioned him by name in past entries) made comments about poetry needing "layers of meaning" and saying it to an audience which included people with Masters of Fine Arts degrees...
[the person who told the story first e-mailed me backchannel to say it was a story with someone else as the protagonist--then later claimed that I was repeating "private" conversation, rather ironic considering that he was talking in a loud, I'm-holding-court voice where a lot of the store could hear him]
Assuming the latter part of the remark was a way of saying "it goes without saying that MFA-degree-holders already know this."
For a dumb literal-minded too-easy-to-tell-what-my-poems-mean person like myself, it's just another indication that time is passing. The type of reading where you can hear people of a fair diversity of style and skill levels is disappearing locally--although The Rapp Saloon, the Saturday Pasadena Public Library reading (one Saturday afternoon a month at the location on Washington St.) and the fourth-Saturday Barnes and Noble Encino reading [now disappeared] are three remaining examples.
Other readings ranging from the Cobalt Cafe to Redondo Poets to Two Idiots at the Ugly Mug seem to have abandoned the "talented amateurs can feature too" policy in order to subtly enforce a "let's just bring poets in who are from academia and/or qualify as prize-winning/published by respected small-presses" criteria. This is apparently a form of eugenics meant to "uplift the quality" of poetry [or "we're honored to have honored poets bless our small venues"].
To my mind, all of this MFA/who-are-you-studying-with/who-are-you-submitting-to stuff seems to be a way to make the process of poetry (rather, becoming primarily a teacher with poetry slightly off to the side) similar to baking a cake. Just follow the instructions to the letter and you'll have a career in the Wonderful World of Words!
And be careful to not display too much individuality or simplicity or attitude, or your poems won't make it to the top of the slush pile and/or you could be (gasp!) denied tenure.
It's so different than when I was a youngster of 38 and 39 when you could self-publish chapbooks and actually sell enough to make a little bit of money. Of course, Academia Worship existed then as well, but it wasn't the only game in town.
Now, it practically is. And plenty of people want to believe that if you do A, B and C, the glorious results of D will happen.
So let's all strive for layers upon layers of meaning, showers of ambiguity, a soupcon of pretension, epigraphs stolen from 17th-century geniuses--and, above all else, to give public shout-outs to the really brilliant talent in the room.
Voila! You've baked a Poetry Cake!!!!
Last night, I was at a poetry reading and this person I'll choose not to name this time (suffice it to say he has some standing in local Los Angeles/Orange County poetry and I've mentioned him by name in past entries) made comments about poetry needing "layers of meaning" and saying it to an audience which included people with Masters of Fine Arts degrees...
[the person who told the story first e-mailed me backchannel to say it was a story with someone else as the protagonist--then later claimed that I was repeating "private" conversation, rather ironic considering that he was talking in a loud, I'm-holding-court voice where a lot of the store could hear him]
Assuming the latter part of the remark was a way of saying "it goes without saying that MFA-degree-holders already know this."
For a dumb literal-minded too-easy-to-tell-what-my-poems-mean person like myself, it's just another indication that time is passing. The type of reading where you can hear people of a fair diversity of style and skill levels is disappearing locally--although The Rapp Saloon, the Saturday Pasadena Public Library reading (one Saturday afternoon a month at the location on Washington St.) and the fourth-Saturday Barnes and Noble Encino reading [now disappeared] are three remaining examples.
Other readings ranging from the Cobalt Cafe to Redondo Poets to Two Idiots at the Ugly Mug seem to have abandoned the "talented amateurs can feature too" policy in order to subtly enforce a "let's just bring poets in who are from academia and/or qualify as prize-winning/published by respected small-presses" criteria. This is apparently a form of eugenics meant to "uplift the quality" of poetry [or "we're honored to have honored poets bless our small venues"].
To my mind, all of this MFA/who-are-you-studying-with/who-are-you-submitting-to stuff seems to be a way to make the process of poetry (rather, becoming primarily a teacher with poetry slightly off to the side) similar to baking a cake. Just follow the instructions to the letter and you'll have a career in the Wonderful World of Words!
And be careful to not display too much individuality or simplicity or attitude, or your poems won't make it to the top of the slush pile and/or you could be (gasp!) denied tenure.
It's so different than when I was a youngster of 38 and 39 when you could self-publish chapbooks and actually sell enough to make a little bit of money. Of course, Academia Worship existed then as well, but it wasn't the only game in town.
Now, it practically is. And plenty of people want to believe that if you do A, B and C, the glorious results of D will happen.
So let's all strive for layers upon layers of meaning, showers of ambiguity, a soupcon of pretension, epigraphs stolen from 17th-century geniuses--and, above all else, to give public shout-outs to the really brilliant talent in the room.
Voila! You've baked a Poetry Cake!!!!
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
LA TIMES sports crank Bill Plaschke on Lindsey Jacobellis.
There's a lot of times I don't agree with veteran LOS ANGELES TIMES sportswriter Bill Plaschke (a rare instance of a column of his I liked was about the recent efforts to blame the young Georgian luge contestant for his tragic death), and this conniption fit about Lindsey Jacobellis (which comes down to Plaschke being miffed that Jacobellis, having lost a second chance at Olympic Gold, didn't want to meet the press IMMEDIATELY afterwards) is one of those times:
http://www.latimes.com/sports/olympics/la-sp-olympics-plaschke17-2010feb17,0,2895259.column
Here's an especially barbed remark from Bill re Lindsey (highlighting by me):
"In its 12th year at the Olympics, snowboarding continues to grow in ways we never imagined. It is now officially a bratty kid who is convinced we will never understand it."Seriously, mainstream media just doesn't get it sometimes," said Nate Holland, another Olympic snowboard cross racer. "It's not always about winning. It's about fun, style, showing your stuff."But once every four years, the sport is put under a national spotlight and judged like all other American sports, by standings and a scoreboard. The boarders may not like that harsher glare, but they certainly don't have any trouble cashing checks from sponsors who do."
http://www.latimes.com/sports/olympics/la-sp-olympics-plaschke17-2010feb17,0,2895259.column
Here's an especially barbed remark from Bill re Lindsey (highlighting by me):
"In its 12th year at the Olympics, snowboarding continues to grow in ways we never imagined. It is now officially a bratty kid who is convinced we will never understand it."Seriously, mainstream media just doesn't get it sometimes," said Nate Holland, another Olympic snowboard cross racer. "It's not always about winning. It's about fun, style, showing your stuff."But once every four years, the sport is put under a national spotlight and judged like all other American sports, by standings and a scoreboard. The boarders may not like that harsher glare, but they certainly don't have any trouble cashing checks from sponsors who do."
Monday, February 15, 2010
RIP to Doug Fieger of The Knack.
Was a bit saddened to hear Chris Carter announce the death-from-cancer of Doug Fieger (frontman of the power-pop band The Knack) on yesterday's edition of BREAKFAST WITH
THE BEATLES on L.A.'s KLOS-FM.
Here's Fieger's page on the Internet Movie Database:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1223826/
"My Sharona" was The Knack's biggest hit (from its 1979 debut album GET THE KNACK)--and one that momentarily reactivated the band
in the 1990s when included in the Ben Stiller/Winona Ryder/Ethan Hawke/Janeane Garafolo
GenX-comedy-of-manners REALITY BITES.
[Less remembered now is the hostility The Knack endured from 1979-1980 for perceived sexism/lasciviousness in certain song lyrics and "all they are is hype" backlash from the music press (ROLLING STONE was a key player--publishing lip-licking tidbits like a "Nuke The Knack" slogan making the rounds).]
THE BEATLES on L.A.'s KLOS-FM.
Here's Fieger's page on the Internet Movie Database:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1223826/
"My Sharona" was The Knack's biggest hit (from its 1979 debut album GET THE KNACK)--and one that momentarily reactivated the band
in the 1990s when included in the Ben Stiller/Winona Ryder/Ethan Hawke/Janeane Garafolo
GenX-comedy-of-manners REALITY BITES.
[Less remembered now is the hostility The Knack endured from 1979-1980 for perceived sexism/lasciviousness in certain song lyrics and "all they are is hype" backlash from the music press (ROLLING STONE was a key player--publishing lip-licking tidbits like a "Nuke The Knack" slogan making the rounds).]
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
A wreath on the grave of THE JAY LENO SHOW.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jay_Leno_Show
Two notes to add to the Wikipedia article:
1. I'm assuming that David Letterman was possessed by a malign form of glee in proposing the Super Bowl commercial for LATE SHOW WITH DAVID LETTERMAN to Jay Leno--knowing that Leno's shaky hold on a "good guy" persona would take a further hit with a "can't laugh at
myself" turndown.
2. Last week, Bill Maher made his final guest appearance on THE JAY LENO SHOW.
When Maher brought up the topic of Jay's "vulnerability" (see Note #1),
Leno cut Maher off and rushed to a commercial break.
One final prediction: The Jay/Dave ratings war may be a bit more unpredictable from March onwards. Yes, Leno will be Number One some nights--and Letterman will beat him on other occasions.
And more than a few of us will opt for Coco if he finds himself on Fox or Comedy Central.
Two notes to add to the Wikipedia article:
1. I'm assuming that David Letterman was possessed by a malign form of glee in proposing the Super Bowl commercial for LATE SHOW WITH DAVID LETTERMAN to Jay Leno--knowing that Leno's shaky hold on a "good guy" persona would take a further hit with a "can't laugh at
myself" turndown.
2. Last week, Bill Maher made his final guest appearance on THE JAY LENO SHOW.
When Maher brought up the topic of Jay's "vulnerability" (see Note #1),
Leno cut Maher off and rushed to a commercial break.
One final prediction: The Jay/Dave ratings war may be a bit more unpredictable from March onwards. Yes, Leno will be Number One some nights--and Letterman will beat him on other occasions.
And more than a few of us will opt for Coco if he finds himself on Fox or Comedy Central.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Survey: Which classic rock act would you like to see at the 2011 Super Bowl?
Wasn't at home for this year's Super Bowl, but I did get to see a snippet of The Who's stage performance (sounded good to me though Roger Daltrey can't negotiate high notes as in his youth/early middle-age).
With full expectations that the NFL will again opt for veteran rock acts next year, here's a list of artists with 12-minute stadium-rocking potential. Send your votes to the e-mail address above so I can tally them:
A. LED ZEPPELIN
B. VAN HALEN
C. THE EAGLES
D. THE BEACH BOYS
E. THE ROLLING STONES
F. DEF LEPPARD
G. SANTANA
H. ELTON JOHN
I. ROD STEWART
J. ERIC CLAPTON
K. JOHN FOGERTY
L. JOHN MELLENCAMP
With full expectations that the NFL will again opt for veteran rock acts next year, here's a list of artists with 12-minute stadium-rocking potential. Send your votes to the e-mail address above so I can tally them:
A. LED ZEPPELIN
B. VAN HALEN
C. THE EAGLES
D. THE BEACH BOYS
E. THE ROLLING STONES
F. DEF LEPPARD
G. SANTANA
H. ELTON JOHN
I. ROD STEWART
J. ERIC CLAPTON
K. JOHN FOGERTY
L. JOHN MELLENCAMP
Friday, February 5, 2010
Peter Biskind's STAR bio of Warren Beatty--two perspectives.
Here's free-lance journalist Vanessa Grigoriadis' gossip-laden take on Peter Biskind's STAR--a gossip-laden biography of Warren Beatty: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/books/review/Grigoriadis-t.html
And, for contrast, here's the Janet Maslin review which appeared a month earlier in THE NEW YORK TIMES: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/books/07book.html
To my point of view, the Maslin review is the more thoughtful of the two. But Grigoriadis does take notice of the continuing virus of male sexism towards women (be they journalists or artistic colleagues) in the Industry. And she was a victim of that sexism more recently when an on-the-money ROLLING STONE profile of troubled comic/HOWARD STERN SHOW regular Artie Lange received a boorish on-STERN rebuttal from Lange friend Norm Macdonald.
As for Warren Beatty, he had a great run from BONNIE AND CLYDE through REDS (excepting DOLLARS. THE ONLY GAME IN TOWN and THE FORTUNE--which I'm assuming he accepted because they were directed by Richard Brooks, George Stevens and Mike Nichols, respectively). ISHTAR, even when released, wasn't as bad a film as the let's-review-the-budget shallow nonsense that defined its reputation for the last twenty-three years. And BULWORTH was an honorable valedictory for Beatty-as-filmmaker--leaving aside the disaster-laden-career-finale of TOWN AND COUNTRY.
Maybe Beatty enjoys being all-but-retired and a late-in-life husband/father. Maybe Beatty can't get over seeing himself as the eternal old-school leading man to have a strictly behind-the-camera career as producer/director--or even to be a mere actor in other people's films.
But, in the end, Beatty's body of work as a filmmaker deserves to outlast the who-he-slept-with curiosities--and the books which focus more on the latter than the former.
And, for contrast, here's the Janet Maslin review which appeared a month earlier in THE NEW YORK TIMES: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/books/07book.html
To my point of view, the Maslin review is the more thoughtful of the two. But Grigoriadis does take notice of the continuing virus of male sexism towards women (be they journalists or artistic colleagues) in the Industry. And she was a victim of that sexism more recently when an on-the-money ROLLING STONE profile of troubled comic/HOWARD STERN SHOW regular Artie Lange received a boorish on-STERN rebuttal from Lange friend Norm Macdonald.
As for Warren Beatty, he had a great run from BONNIE AND CLYDE through REDS (excepting DOLLARS. THE ONLY GAME IN TOWN and THE FORTUNE--which I'm assuming he accepted because they were directed by Richard Brooks, George Stevens and Mike Nichols, respectively). ISHTAR, even when released, wasn't as bad a film as the let's-review-the-budget shallow nonsense that defined its reputation for the last twenty-three years. And BULWORTH was an honorable valedictory for Beatty-as-filmmaker--leaving aside the disaster-laden-career-finale of TOWN AND COUNTRY.
Maybe Beatty enjoys being all-but-retired and a late-in-life husband/father. Maybe Beatty can't get over seeing himself as the eternal old-school leading man to have a strictly behind-the-camera career as producer/director--or even to be a mere actor in other people's films.
But, in the end, Beatty's body of work as a filmmaker deserves to outlast the who-he-slept-with curiosities--and the books which focus more on the latter than the former.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
The myth of Rahm "f---ing r----ded" Emanuel as tough guy rather than profane lapdog.
http://www,fdlaction.firedoglake.com--for/ Jane Hamsher's take on Rahm Emanuel, the Special Olympics and his recent upbraiding for using the word "retarded."
http://www.taibbi.rssoundingboard.com/ for Matt Taibbi's opinion--with a few choice remarks aimed at those who choose to serve as word police.
By now, a lot of us common folks and media spoonfeeders (raise your hands, John Heilemann of NEW YORK magazine and Mike Madden of Salon.com) seem to have swallowed the grape-flavored myth of Clintonite Rahm Emanuel as the Obama Administration official who Gets Things Done with a "realistic" (read "despises liberals and liberalism") worldview.
Given the mixed-bag, incremental-at-best record of Obama: Year One, it's time for the Emanuel myth to be laid to rest.
It may be one thing for Emanuel to yell at people to "obey" administration dictates if they work in the White House or happen to be Senators/Congressmen. But to demand that liberal advocacy groups (i.e. MoveOn) fall into unquestioning lockstep is a bit much.
Rahm Emanuel is a go-along, get-along lapdog for the status quo of Wall Street (which wants to continue to do business the way they're accustomed to regardless of the Great Recession) and the (let's be PC here) plus-sized cats of both the Democratic and Republican parties.
Obviously, despite the opportunistic efforts of Sarah Palin (who merely objected to the word "retarded"), Emanuel won't be leaving the White House--probably because he's convinced too many people of his Importance to Obama.
But, to quote Gertrude Stein out of context, there truly isn't much there there where Rahm Emanuel is concerned.
And it's time for the mainstream media and the people who take it seriously to absorb that fact.
http://www.taibbi.rssoundingboard.com/ for Matt Taibbi's opinion--with a few choice remarks aimed at those who choose to serve as word police.
By now, a lot of us common folks and media spoonfeeders (raise your hands, John Heilemann of NEW YORK magazine and Mike Madden of Salon.com) seem to have swallowed the grape-flavored myth of Clintonite Rahm Emanuel as the Obama Administration official who Gets Things Done with a "realistic" (read "despises liberals and liberalism") worldview.
Given the mixed-bag, incremental-at-best record of Obama: Year One, it's time for the Emanuel myth to be laid to rest.
It may be one thing for Emanuel to yell at people to "obey" administration dictates if they work in the White House or happen to be Senators/Congressmen. But to demand that liberal advocacy groups (i.e. MoveOn) fall into unquestioning lockstep is a bit much.
Rahm Emanuel is a go-along, get-along lapdog for the status quo of Wall Street (which wants to continue to do business the way they're accustomed to regardless of the Great Recession) and the (let's be PC here) plus-sized cats of both the Democratic and Republican parties.
Obviously, despite the opportunistic efforts of Sarah Palin (who merely objected to the word "retarded"), Emanuel won't be leaving the White House--probably because he's convinced too many people of his Importance to Obama.
But, to quote Gertrude Stein out of context, there truly isn't much there there where Rahm Emanuel is concerned.
And it's time for the mainstream media and the people who take it seriously to absorb that fact.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)