I am, I said...

Kenneth said:
...innovative or experimental writing lives only in the academy.
The slam is arguably the most innovative, controversial and exhilarating poetry movement in decades. It is not only established as a force to be reckoned with, but has given the genre a cocky edge that wooed those who had long ago relegated poetry to dusty bookshelves. The slam is responsible for spoken word's unflinching link to hip-hop, with all its energy and promise. The slam is one of the reasons poetry is where poetry is.
Granted, we can't do without the academy. But we can't afford to marginalize those without access to the academy, or those who never craved or required access.
I began my life in poetry as a slammer, was a slammer for almost 10 years, and the academy tried its best to blow me off the map. My work was maligned and trivialized in every arena except the one I was in. Even now, more than a decade after the last time I actually participated in a slam, it's the persistent qualifier tacked to my name.
I could have proved you right, but I didn't. The academy tried for years to call me something other than a poet--the words "actress" and "imposter" come immediately to mind. I could have listened. I could have believed.
You say innovative writing can't breathe outside the academy. I'm breathing. I'm singing. Damn, I'm screaming.
You didn't attack me personally, didn't talk about my mama or anything; never said you did. But you questioned my legitimacy by saying that the work I've done--as well as the work of countless slammers, collaborators and artists--is somehow diminished because we didn't hang out with the (alleged) cool kids. I've spent most of my creative life in a movement that changed the face of poetry but, according to you, I don't exist--because the academy says I don't.
Not in the equation? Gotta disagree with you there.
P