Poetry Distribution

by deborah on March 18, 2008

Allen Taylor’s post “Modern Poetry is Sick” discusses whether poetry is sick when it’s not accessible. In this post, “accessible” can mean the poem itself being easily understood and/or the poem being accessible via book, forum, video, blog and so on.

Allen quotes a blog post by Michael Palmer that says poetry must do the following to promote itself:

  1. Shift production from lyrical to narrative verse
  2. Change its distribution model
  3. Working toward canonization

Number two particularly resonates with me. I’d like to see video used more with poetry. I’ve been wondering how to get poets reading their poems on video, how to host it (YouTube?), and how to distribute it. If I used YouTube, I’d not have to pay for hosting the large files.

My next question would be about the best way to get quality video of poets reading their work. Would they use their cameras? Would I only videotape people near where I live so I could do it myself? Do I really want to spend my time on this?

About point number one above, Michael Palmer writes:

To change production of poetry we need to shift toward narrative verse. This is an easy task, as nearly all poetry published today is lyric poetry. Almost no one is writing or publishing narrative verse. This alone can explain the marginal state of modern poetry because people love stories. They crave them. They pay billions of dollars a year on movies, cable bills, novels, and video games just to experience stories. But they don’t turn to poetry. Why? Poetry can tell a story with such power that the reader or listener’s body chemistry alters to fit the rhythm of the line. Nothing else can do this. But people don’t think of poetry because poetry no longer tells stories; it no longer entertains; it has become art for a dying art’s sake. When we ignore narrative verse in favor of the lyric we are depriving poetry of its natural audience.

First of all, vegging out in front of a movie, a cable show or a video game does not take the same mental exertion as reading. I can’t see anyone making the argument that watching American Idol takes the same energy as reading Wallace Stevens. I think people’s inclination to do what’s easy — like water taking the easy route through a canyon — will incline people towards spending more on movies and cable television than on poetry. Comparing cable and movies to poetry is comparing apples and oranges.

Moving to narrative poetry is not the answer. Not all lyrical poetry is “difficult” to understand or necessarily lacks a story. Please tell me if you can’t understand this lyrical poem by Philip Larkin.

I don’t think “dumbing down” poetry is the answer.

****

In the world of marketing, you rarely market to everyone. You define a target market and aim to solve the problems of that target market. A dog agility expert will not care about your golf clubs (most likely). Someone who “doesn’t get” poetry will rarely be part of a market who will read your book. What we need to do is develop that market aka “audience.”

In a recent interview, I answered questions about how I started to write. That reminded me that I LOVED the poet who visited during a Poet in the Schools (PITS) program in the 5th grade. After that, no one could get me to stop writing and reading poems. Since the No Child Left Behind act was implemented, I wonder how many poets have visited schools?

I agree with Palmer that we need to add to our distribution methods for poetry and disagree that poets need to change how they write.

What do you think?

Share and Enjoy:
  • del.icio.us
  • Netscape
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Facebook

{ 2 trackbacks }

Deborah Ager + 32 Poems Poetry Magazine | Mark Doty Reads Walt Whitman
March 25, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Poetry Blog of 32 Poems Magazine | Border’s Book
April 6, 2008 at 8:33 pm

{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }

Bernadette Geyer March 18, 2008 at 8:16 am

Hey Deb,

To respond briefly to two of your points, Arlington County’s Department of Humanities has a great program that puts poets in public schools. I am teaching thirteen individual 1-hr workshops this spring. I know of several other poets also participating, although I’m not sure how much total funding there is for the program on an annual basis.

Secondly, I recently heard about the Poetry V-log, http://www.poetryvlog.com/, which features a different poet each week reading his/her poetry. I have a listing of online poetry readings (among other resources) I’ve been compiling at http://resources4poets.homestead.com.

cheers,
Bernadette

Allen Taylor March 18, 2008 at 9:36 pm

Good post, Deborah. You and I are pretty much in agreement. I don’t think a strictly narrative form would solve the problems of poetry. A part of the problem is poets don’t know how to market themselves. You have to find the audience for your style as you correctly pointed out. And I do love Philip Larkin. The poem you linked to is one of my faves. It certainly is accessible.

We have this new medium of the Internet and its various tools and avenues of communication. The best thing poets can do for themselves is to learn to use them to build networks with others who share a particular style.

As far as your dilemma with video goes … I am thinking along the same lines. Struggling with that one. I have ideas, but they are untested. I recently discovered poetryvlog as well and am quite impressed, though there is room for improvement. I’m looking forward to seeing how poets learn to use the new tools at our disposal. I’m hoping to learn to use them myself. :-)

G. M. Palmer March 19, 2008 at 10:44 am

Dear Deb,

First of all, if 50 million people or so will read exceedingly thick Harry Potter books (not to mention the 100 million Americans who read +2 books a year), I don’t think it’s possible to dismiss what people will do when presented with excellent material.

Secondly, I am not for “dumbing down” poetry. Read my blog. I rail against Billy Collins et al for doing just that. What I am calling for is to write poetry that will appeal to the widest possible audience while still being complex and delightful — following the example of Dante and Chaucer not Zukofsky and Silliman.

Peace,
GMP

G. M. Palmer March 19, 2008 at 11:05 am

One more thing — Larkin’s dead, which means I’m not talking about him. I’m talking about the mainstream poetry published today. For example — the November 2007 issue of Poetry. Nearly every poem in there is either impenetrable or so empty as to not be worth reading.

deborah March 22, 2008 at 9:55 pm

@ Bernadette — Thanks! I recently became aware of the vlog for poetry. I think GM posted it on his site.

@ Allen — Yes, we do agree on a lot. On a second reading of your blog post, I realized just how much!

deborah March 22, 2008 at 9:56 pm

@GMP — I can see your point. I think we want the same thing — a larger and deeper audience for poetry. I think most people would find Dante and Chaucer too hard to read though.

Oh, I did not see mention of the November 2007 issue of Poetry. Maybe I missed it. Sometimes, I do that when reading online.

Peace and all best,
Deborah

GM Palmer April 1, 2008 at 3:28 pm

Deb –

The average reader can sail through a good translation of Dante and Chaucer and any literate 14th century Italian or 15th centry Englishman could certainly have read them simply — heck, when I taught seniors — regular high school seniors — they used to laugh their bottoms off at the Wife of Bath — in the original middle English.

Leave a Comment