This article from The Chronicle of Higher Education combines the usual “too many poets, too many journals, too many MFA programs are ruining poetry” argument with Foetry–esque accusations of too much corruption and cronyism in the poetry world.
Sometimes these kinds of articles depress me. Besides the fact that I’m a fan of people outside a tiny circle on the East Coast writing and publishing poetry, I’m an optimist who wants to believe that the poetry world is a meritocracy, even when on the inside, I know it’s probably pretty corrupt – as easily corrupted, for instance, as environmental science (which recently experienced an embarrassing uproar about top scientists faking or mis-stating data about global warming in order to make their theories stand up) or politics. When I studied biology, and I actually researched papers – on genetic engineering, on carbon dating, and on tissue culturing, to name three topics where I went back to original sources – I was surprised to see that many papers that were used as references were later withdrawn or discredited because the data was corrupt and the scientists who wrote it exposed as cheats. Which depressed me then, maybe enough to keep me from going into research after graduation. Because, really, if you can’t trust your scientists and your poets, who can you trust?
It reminds me the orca who killed a Sea World worker today (and had previously killed two other people. This is one mad whale!) I used to think whales were sweet, because there are documents of whales saving people, and I personally love seeing them in the ocean, but then I found out sometimes they beat up other whales and dolphins too. I actually watched a bunch of orcas beating up a smaller whale of a different species. And dolphins themselves act like gang members, beating up smaller, lonlier dolphins. And I love seals, but a little while back a seal attacked and drowned a girl, a marine biologist who was my age at the time. Animal nature, human nature, both a little darker than we’d like to admit? I guess, once again, it’s up to the individual. Not all poets, scientists, or seals can be trusted.
Even if the poetry world is fairly corrupt, you’ve got to keep writing, keep sending out, keep believing that someone, somewhere will stand up for you even if they don’t owe you a favor. Am I too naive? I just read for a chapbook contest and didn’t think about anything beyond: “Which one is the most interesting and the best written?” Is it possible there are lots of judges out there doing the same thing?
Jeannine Hall Gailey served as the second Poet Laureate of Redmond, Washington and the author of Becoming the Villainess, She Returns to the Floating World, Unexplained Fevers, The Robot Scientist’s Daughter, and winner of the Moon City Press Book Prize and SFPA’s Elgin Award, Field Guide to the End of the World. Her latest, Flare, Corona from BOA Editions, was a finalist for the Washington State Book Award. She’s also the author of PR for Poets, a Guidebook to Publicity and Marketing. Her work has been featured on NPR’s The Writer’s Almanac, Verse Daily and The Year’s Best Fantasy and Horror. Her poems have appeared in The American Poetry Review, Poetry, and JAMA.
Suzanne
No you’re not naive, I think you’ve summed up the poetry world pretty well. Although, I have to tell you I’m now reconsidering our upcoming trip to Mystic Aquarium!
Marie
Think of all the prizes (Whiting Awards, Guggenheims, etc) for which there are no applications–it’s always been about who you know. That said, if you’re an active member of the poetry community–through readings, reviews, what-have-you–your work is bound to come to the attention of someone who’ll go to bat for you should you need that recommendation someday. This isn’t new. I just believe that even amidst back-scratching etc, if you do good work, talent will out. And you’re a fine example.
Collin Kelley
Yes, keep writing, keep submitting, but NEVER expect anyone to help you. Help yourself first and then when help is offered, consider it as icing on the cake you made. Many of the accusations made in the essay are, sadly, spot on. You can press your nose up against the glass of po’biz and come away unscathed, but once you stick your head in, it sort of crumbles like when your found out there was no Santa Claus.
David V
Easy with that Santa Claus talk, Collin.
Like J, I spend a great deal of time in other universes – scientific, community – and the truth is that our agendas play a role in everything we do. Spent positively, our agenda results in networking, personal development, artistic and job opportunities, expansion in our fields, etc. Spent negatively, we have favoritism, narrow-mindedness, and – in the extreme – deceipt.
But rather than be saddened, I think the evidence supports us believing that most practitioners in most fields are honest and constructive. In most areas of technology, it’s required: growth debunks falsehood quickly. In art, sticking to your circle limits you to your circle and most people would rather something more expansive.
Not everyone has the generous energy of this little corner of The Internets, but most of us muddle along being generally upstanding, I think.
Orcas? Can’t speak for them. But poets continue to impress me.