WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.660 align:middle line:90% 00:00:00.660 --> 00:00:02.670 align:middle line:90% Thank you. 00:00:02.670 --> 00:00:05.610 align:middle line:84% I asked this question of the earlier panel, too. 00:00:05.610 --> 00:00:09.840 align:middle line:84% But I think it's certainly relevant for our topic. 00:00:09.840 --> 00:00:14.400 align:middle line:84% And that is, the one feature of today's literary landscape 00:00:14.400 --> 00:00:19.410 align:middle line:84% is the sheer number of small presses, both print and online. 00:00:19.410 --> 00:00:22.920 align:middle line:84% New journals and presses are launched every day. 00:00:22.920 --> 00:00:25.850 align:middle line:84% Do you see there being pros and cons to this? 00:00:25.850 --> 00:00:33.290 align:middle line:90% 00:00:33.290 --> 00:00:35.850 align:middle line:90% Is the sound-- OK, we're good. 00:00:35.850 --> 00:00:38.190 align:middle line:90% I think it's almost all pro. 00:00:38.190 --> 00:00:44.310 align:middle line:84% I'm a fan of having more and having more options, partially 00:00:44.310 --> 00:00:48.060 align:middle line:84% because, I mean, as a writer, it's 00:00:48.060 --> 00:00:49.312 align:middle line:90% an exciting time to be around. 00:00:49.312 --> 00:00:51.270 align:middle line:84% I mean, you stumble across a new website that's 00:00:51.270 --> 00:00:54.240 align:middle line:84% doing something cool, that you didn't think was even possible, 00:00:54.240 --> 00:00:55.530 align:middle line:90% or you didn't think of. 00:00:55.530 --> 00:00:57.112 align:middle line:84% I mean, or even, if it's like, you 00:00:57.112 --> 00:00:59.940 align:middle line:84% can see a cool little press start up, and all of a sudden 00:00:59.940 --> 00:01:01.218 align:middle line:90% it's turning out-- 00:01:01.218 --> 00:01:02.760 align:middle line:84% there's a little press that does kind 00:01:02.760 --> 00:01:05.640 align:middle line:84% of matchbox-size publishing, which I think 00:01:05.640 --> 00:01:07.350 align:middle line:90% is just amazingly cool. 00:01:07.350 --> 00:01:09.930 align:middle line:84% I mean, there is a downside in the sense that, if you-- 00:01:09.930 --> 00:01:13.080 align:middle line:84% I mean, starting a journal or starting a press, 00:01:13.080 --> 00:01:15.390 align:middle line:84% you have to find a way to distinguish yourself 00:01:15.390 --> 00:01:18.380 align:middle line:84% from that crowd, which for me-- and the one main way 00:01:18.380 --> 00:01:21.398 align:middle line:84% to distinguish yourself to me is design. 00:01:21.398 --> 00:01:23.940 align:middle line:84% But the other than that, I've noticed in the last, especially 00:01:23.940 --> 00:01:27.120 align:middle line:84% decade really, is how much easier design has 00:01:27.120 --> 00:01:30.240 align:middle line:84% gotten for people, provided you to put the time in. 00:01:30.240 --> 00:01:35.820 align:middle line:84% I mean, you can easily lay out a book in InDesign 00:01:35.820 --> 00:01:39.000 align:middle line:84% that will look almost as good as anyone who lays out 00:01:39.000 --> 00:01:42.420 align:middle line:90% a book at Knopf or whatever. 00:01:42.420 --> 00:01:44.280 align:middle line:84% It helps if you do a little bit of reading, 00:01:44.280 --> 00:01:46.120 align:middle line:90% and typography and so on. 00:01:46.120 --> 00:01:47.880 align:middle line:84% But, I mean, these tools have really 00:01:47.880 --> 00:01:51.738 align:middle line:84% flattened the playing field so that if you 00:01:51.738 --> 00:01:53.280 align:middle line:84% have some sort of knowledge of design 00:01:53.280 --> 00:01:55.140 align:middle line:84% and you had the interest in doing this, 00:01:55.140 --> 00:01:57.150 align:middle line:84% you can immediately establish yourself. 00:01:57.150 --> 00:02:00.030 align:middle line:90% 00:02:00.030 --> 00:02:03.008 align:middle line:84% And I think you can pop out if you have an interesting idea. 00:02:03.008 --> 00:02:04.800 align:middle line:84% I mean, the downside of this is, of course, 00:02:04.800 --> 00:02:09.060 align:middle line:84% from a writerly standpoint is trying to figure out, OK, well, 00:02:09.060 --> 00:02:11.550 align:middle line:84% which of these presses should I send my work to, 00:02:11.550 --> 00:02:14.050 align:middle line:84% which will still be around in 10 years? 00:02:14.050 --> 00:02:18.750 align:middle line:84% Which magazines are interesting and are going to be valuable 00:02:18.750 --> 00:02:22.350 align:middle line:84% and that my peers will recognize? 00:02:22.350 --> 00:02:24.780 align:middle line:84% And I think, that is a real problem for writers. 00:02:24.780 --> 00:02:29.100 align:middle line:84% But it's not a problem that research can't deal with. 00:02:29.100 --> 00:02:31.650 align:middle line:84% And it's been the same, I think, probably, 00:02:31.650 --> 00:02:35.730 align:middle line:84% for most of the history of publishing is that some things 00:02:35.730 --> 00:02:37.530 align:middle line:90% will be around and some won't. 00:02:37.530 --> 00:02:39.780 align:middle line:90% And you're kind of taking a bet. 00:02:39.780 --> 00:02:41.930 align:middle line:84% I mean, I've submitted my work to a journal that 00:02:41.930 --> 00:02:44.430 align:middle line:84% --like a journal, let's say like the normal school, which is 00:02:44.430 --> 00:02:45.690 align:middle line:90% a pretty cool-looking journal. 00:02:45.690 --> 00:02:48.750 align:middle line:84% But people ask me for work, and I'm like, yeah, maybe. 00:02:48.750 --> 00:02:52.728 align:middle line:84% But I saw that first issue, and the design was great. 00:02:52.728 --> 00:02:54.270 align:middle line:84% I mean, I saw that, and I'm like, OK. 00:02:54.270 --> 00:02:57.155 align:middle line:84% To me that means I'm going to send them something 00:02:57.155 --> 00:02:59.280 align:middle line:84% because I want to try to get into the ground floor. 00:02:59.280 --> 00:03:01.322 align:middle line:84% And it indicates a certain amount of seriousness. 00:03:01.322 --> 00:03:03.960 align:middle line:84% The production value-- this is a print magazine. 00:03:03.960 --> 00:03:05.760 align:middle line:84% The production values are very high. 00:03:05.760 --> 00:03:08.310 align:middle line:84% They clearly had a budget, which I 00:03:08.310 --> 00:03:12.150 align:middle line:84% can't say really I have a budget for my press or my magazine. 00:03:12.150 --> 00:03:14.400 align:middle line:84% And so, there are still ways, I think, 00:03:14.400 --> 00:03:18.180 align:middle line:84% of distinguishing between the sorts of journals. 00:03:18.180 --> 00:03:18.930 align:middle line:90% But, I don't know. 00:03:18.930 --> 00:03:20.647 align:middle line:90% I just have a hard time-- 00:03:20.647 --> 00:03:22.230 align:middle line:84% I have a hard time seeing the downside 00:03:22.230 --> 00:03:23.745 align:middle line:90% to so much great literature. 00:03:23.745 --> 00:03:26.220 align:middle line:84% And some of it sucks, but, I mean, 00:03:26.220 --> 00:03:28.150 align:middle line:90% that's always been the case. 00:03:28.150 --> 00:03:30.390 align:middle line:84% So from any perspective, I think it's a plus. 00:03:30.390 --> 00:03:33.420 align:middle line:90% 00:03:33.420 --> 00:03:35.220 align:middle line:84% And I think what you said about design 00:03:35.220 --> 00:03:38.850 align:middle line:84% is so interesting because now in this day of e-books, 00:03:38.850 --> 00:03:42.150 align:middle line:84% and apps, and all different ways to read 00:03:42.150 --> 00:03:44.850 align:middle line:84% a book, I think in terms of the print world, 00:03:44.850 --> 00:03:47.040 align:middle line:84% and that's what I'm most familiar with, 00:03:47.040 --> 00:03:51.540 align:middle line:84% that's what's going to survive, these beautiful, well-crafted, 00:03:51.540 --> 00:03:53.010 align:middle line:90% well-produced books. 00:03:53.010 --> 00:03:55.560 align:middle line:84% And that's what people are going to want to spend money on, 00:03:55.560 --> 00:03:58.320 align:middle line:84% to have, to enjoy the craft of the book. 00:03:58.320 --> 00:04:01.590 align:middle line:90% 00:04:01.590 --> 00:04:05.790 align:middle line:84% Well, I agree with a lot of what you said about the upside, 00:04:05.790 --> 00:04:12.880 align:middle line:84% but I can think of a couple of downside aspects to this. 00:04:12.880 --> 00:04:16.800 align:middle line:84% One is, in online publication, for instance, 00:04:16.800 --> 00:04:19.800 align:middle line:84% since our first issue in April of 2000, 00:04:19.800 --> 00:04:22.720 align:middle line:84% we've always published electronic chapbooks. 00:04:22.720 --> 00:04:26.310 align:middle line:84% So we featured the work of particular poets, 00:04:26.310 --> 00:04:29.430 align:middle line:84% sometimes poets and translation, sometimes 00:04:29.430 --> 00:04:32.640 align:middle line:84% collaborations, anywhere in length 00:04:32.640 --> 00:04:37.380 align:middle line:84% from what would be maybe 8 to 45 pages. 00:04:37.380 --> 00:04:40.530 align:middle line:84% For those authors who are published in that mode, 00:04:40.530 --> 00:04:45.870 align:middle line:84% they are often perceived as not being really published 00:04:45.870 --> 00:04:48.690 align:middle line:84% because they don't have something to carry around 00:04:48.690 --> 00:04:50.470 align:middle line:90% with them and sell. 00:04:50.470 --> 00:04:52.590 align:middle line:84% People will say, has your work being published? 00:04:52.590 --> 00:04:58.470 align:middle line:84% And you don't have the object to point to or hand to-- 00:04:58.470 --> 00:04:59.430 align:middle line:90% hand over. 00:04:59.430 --> 00:05:01.950 align:middle line:84% The other thing, I think is a downside 00:05:01.950 --> 00:05:06.300 align:middle line:84% is the sheer amount of work being published. 00:05:06.300 --> 00:05:10.008 align:middle line:84% And as a result, I think there's been a couple of things 00:05:10.008 --> 00:05:10.800 align:middle line:90% that have happened. 00:05:10.800 --> 00:05:16.740 align:middle line:84% I remember at one point, like in 2008, during a lot of online 00:05:16.740 --> 00:05:20.460 align:middle line:84% reading from all sorts of different magazines, 00:05:20.460 --> 00:05:26.250 align:middle line:84% really places with great production values 00:05:26.250 --> 00:05:30.090 align:middle line:84% as Ander mentions, or people that looked like they just 00:05:30.090 --> 00:05:32.010 align:middle line:90% put it up the day before. 00:05:32.010 --> 00:05:34.710 align:middle line:84% And I became aware that there is this kind 00:05:34.710 --> 00:05:37.830 align:middle line:90% of internet voice of poetry. 00:05:37.830 --> 00:05:44.310 align:middle line:84% And it is a particular style of writing that is unidentifiable. 00:05:44.310 --> 00:05:48.480 align:middle line:84% It has this sort of tone, play with language, 00:05:48.480 --> 00:05:54.810 align:middle line:84% this preoccupation that can almost spit in anyone's mouth. 00:05:54.810 --> 00:06:00.660 align:middle line:84% And so there's this kind of verisimilitude, 00:06:00.660 --> 00:06:03.570 align:middle line:84% a kind of similarity that is occurring 00:06:03.570 --> 00:06:06.480 align:middle line:84% in a way, as if everyone is moving 00:06:06.480 --> 00:06:09.010 align:middle line:90% to the middle at the same time. 00:06:09.010 --> 00:06:10.650 align:middle line:84% The other thing that I think might 00:06:10.650 --> 00:06:16.140 align:middle line:84% be a factor is that criticism in terms of these great books that 00:06:16.140 --> 00:06:19.560 align:middle line:84% will last or these authors that will last, 00:06:19.560 --> 00:06:24.120 align:middle line:84% that partly depends upon the exercise of criticism. 00:06:24.120 --> 00:06:29.160 align:middle line:84% And criticism as an active or very engaged 00:06:29.160 --> 00:06:33.435 align:middle line:84% practice in American letters has practically disappeared. 00:06:33.435 --> 00:06:36.450 align:middle line:84% I mean, we have a few notable critics 00:06:36.450 --> 00:06:38.200 align:middle line:90% that comes to everyone's mind. 00:06:38.200 --> 00:06:42.240 align:middle line:84% And they are always talking about the same few great poets. 00:06:42.240 --> 00:06:45.690 align:middle line:84% But in terms of critics who are out there reading 00:06:45.690 --> 00:06:49.500 align:middle line:84% the work of today and helping shape that dialogue 00:06:49.500 --> 00:06:52.320 align:middle line:84% and conversation, that seems to be 00:06:52.320 --> 00:06:57.090 align:middle line:84% one consequence of what's lost, in part because readers just 00:06:57.090 --> 00:06:59.250 align:middle line:90% can't keep up. 00:06:59.250 --> 00:07:00.120 align:middle line:90% Much less critics. 00:07:00.120 --> 00:07:02.190 align:middle line:84% I mean, if I was a practicing critic, 00:07:02.190 --> 00:07:05.490 align:middle line:84% I would find it maddening, given the proliferation 00:07:05.490 --> 00:07:07.530 align:middle line:90% of titles and journals. 00:07:07.530 --> 00:07:09.450 align:middle line:84% And I mean, it's almost like trying 00:07:09.450 --> 00:07:11.050 align:middle line:90% to keep up with whatever's new. 00:07:11.050 --> 00:07:11.550 align:middle line:90% Right. 00:07:11.550 --> 00:07:14.370 align:middle line:84% Whereas at a certain point, you could reliably 00:07:14.370 --> 00:07:18.450 align:middle line:84% go to a few journals that had established themselves. 00:07:18.450 --> 00:07:21.640 align:middle line:84% I think it would be awful from a critical perspective. 00:07:21.640 --> 00:07:24.540 align:middle line:84% But at the same time, there's a lot of interesting criticism 00:07:24.540 --> 00:07:25.425 align:middle line:90% being done online. 00:07:25.425 --> 00:07:26.047 align:middle line:90% Mm-hmm. 00:07:26.047 --> 00:07:27.630 align:middle line:84% I mean, I think of the Constant Critic 00:07:27.630 --> 00:07:31.350 align:middle line:84% is a website run nominally by the Fence people, 00:07:31.350 --> 00:07:36.210 align:middle line:84% I mean that does, I think, really striking poetry reviews. 00:07:36.210 --> 00:07:38.220 align:middle line:84% And it's in the disappearing days 00:07:38.220 --> 00:07:42.850 align:middle line:84% of the space from print journals and certainly from newspapers. 00:07:42.850 --> 00:07:43.350 align:middle line:90% Right. 00:07:43.350 --> 00:07:43.850 align:middle line:90% 00:07:43.850 --> 00:07:46.290 align:middle line:84% I mean, I guess I want to speak to quality. 00:07:46.290 --> 00:07:48.540 align:middle line:84% But there's a lot of people writing a lot of criticism 00:07:48.540 --> 00:07:51.995 align:middle line:90% online that, to me-- 00:07:51.995 --> 00:07:54.370 align:middle line:84% I mean, I think it's a great thing that they're doing it. 00:07:54.370 --> 00:07:56.680 align:middle line:84% But I also would find it maddening. 00:07:56.680 --> 00:07:58.140 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 00:07:58.140 --> 00:08:00.360 align:middle line:90% Well, I agree on that. 00:08:00.360 --> 00:08:03.930 align:middle line:84% Then there are other magazines that have been around 00:08:03.930 --> 00:08:07.500 align:middle line:84% for a long time that have exerted a critical presence, 00:08:07.500 --> 00:08:08.800 align:middle line:90% like Jacket-- 00:08:08.800 --> 00:08:09.300 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 00:08:09.300 --> 00:08:10.710 align:middle line:90% --for instance or-- 00:08:10.710 --> 00:08:12.150 align:middle line:90% And Parnassus, which is dead. 00:08:12.150 --> 00:08:15.760 align:middle line:84% Right, yeah, or Silliman blog or whatever. 00:08:15.760 --> 00:08:19.890 align:middle line:84% But still, in terms of those particular groups, 00:08:19.890 --> 00:08:22.560 align:middle line:84% I think one way in which they can be criticized 00:08:22.560 --> 00:08:24.930 align:middle line:90% is their packs. 00:08:24.930 --> 00:08:27.690 align:middle line:84% In other words, the Jacket people, 00:08:27.690 --> 00:08:32.130 align:middle line:84% their criticism supports the Jacket poets. 00:08:32.130 --> 00:08:35.669 align:middle line:84% So you have poets moving around as it were 00:08:35.669 --> 00:08:38.039 align:middle line:84% and these kinds of, I don't know, 00:08:38.039 --> 00:08:43.919 align:middle line:84% packs, clans, tribes, whatever, where the criticism that you 00:08:43.919 --> 00:08:47.910 align:middle line:84% see is often connected with a particular group of poets 00:08:47.910 --> 00:08:51.035 align:middle line:84% and a particular kind of poetry, praise 00:08:51.035 --> 00:08:57.290 align:middle line:84% a style within those parameters, but seldom goes outside of it. 00:08:57.290 --> 00:08:57.790 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 00:08:57.790 --> 00:08:59.910 align:middle line:84% And I think-- I would extend that to say that I do 00:08:59.910 --> 00:09:03.030 align:middle line:84% think that it created more cubbyholing 00:09:03.030 --> 00:09:04.372 align:middle line:90% of little groups of poets. 00:09:04.372 --> 00:09:06.080 align:middle line:84% I mean, as the internet has for anything, 00:09:06.080 --> 00:09:07.140 align:middle line:90% I mean, you can find-- 00:09:07.140 --> 00:09:08.730 align:middle line:84% if you're a hiccup fetishist, you 00:09:08.730 --> 00:09:11.800 align:middle line:84% can find your hiccup fetishists online, 00:09:11.800 --> 00:09:14.850 align:middle line:84% which I stumbled on and obsessed with these hiccup fetishes that 00:09:14.850 --> 00:09:16.140 align:middle line:90% are-- 00:09:16.140 --> 00:09:18.390 align:middle line:84% which don't ask me how I found this. 00:09:18.390 --> 00:09:20.210 align:middle line:84% But, I mean, the internet does create that. 00:09:20.210 --> 00:09:21.390 align:middle line:90% And so, there's less of a-- 00:09:21.390 --> 00:09:24.030 align:middle line:84% I guess, there's less of a space for criticism 00:09:24.030 --> 00:09:27.780 align:middle line:84% that is moving back and forth, or even trying to tackle, say, 00:09:27.780 --> 00:09:29.115 align:middle line:90% different sorts of poetics. 00:09:29.115 --> 00:09:29.850 align:middle line:90% Mm-hmm. 00:09:29.850 --> 00:09:33.360 align:middle line:84% I think of Joan Houlihan as a critic who I love a lot. 00:09:33.360 --> 00:09:36.390 align:middle line:90% And she writes for-- 00:09:36.390 --> 00:09:39.660 align:middle line:84% she's got a column on Web del Sol. 00:09:39.660 --> 00:09:43.350 align:middle line:84% And she's a very cranky critic in a way that a lot of internet 00:09:43.350 --> 00:09:45.570 align:middle line:84% criticism is like, yeah, it's either you're just -- 00:09:45.570 --> 00:09:47.670 align:middle line:84% and blog criticism you're just trying to start some beef with 00:09:47.670 --> 00:09:48.450 align:middle line:90% someone. 00:09:48.450 --> 00:09:51.270 align:middle line:84% Or you just kind of-- or like everything's great, 00:09:51.270 --> 00:09:52.890 align:middle line:90% can we be friends on Facebook? 00:09:52.890 --> 00:09:55.860 align:middle line:84% But she's someone who is really actively trying to deal-- 00:09:55.860 --> 00:09:58.290 align:middle line:84% trying to tackle other schools of poetry 00:09:58.290 --> 00:10:01.320 align:middle line:84% and figure out what's going on, and how can I deal with that, 00:10:01.320 --> 00:10:03.840 align:middle line:84% and how can I not just stay in my own sphere? 00:10:03.840 --> 00:10:05.250 align:middle line:90% So I certainly agree with that. 00:10:05.250 --> 00:10:08.250 align:middle line:90% 00:10:08.250 --> 00:10:09.500 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE]