Comments on: AWP Countdown

By: Rich Villar

Rich Villar — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:44:10 +0000

AWP is far too big and unwieldy an event to be simply labeled as being “all about workshop poetics.” Whatever that even means. There are so many panels, platforms, side events, and participating writers of every imaginable stripe, that a publisher would be foolish not to at least consider a table, or just mill around to meet people. Publishers need readers, and AWP has em. It’s a big ole trade show. It may as well have been held at the Javits Center.
Lest we forget, there are just a LOT of people hiring, whispering about hiring, publishing, whispering about publishing, networking, getting friendly, and hobnobbing with other people who happen to work in the same industry they do. Even L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E poets gotta E=A=T, right?

By: Jennifer Bartlett

Jennifer Bartlett — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 21:09:39 +0000

Hey Daisy,
To be blunt, I’m talking about groups or magazines which publicly reject workshop poems: i.e. Rebecca Wolff, Silliman, and language poets. Some remain consistent in their criticism, others just to join AWP after rejecting the workshop poem. Are you with us — or against us?

By: Daisy

Daisy — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:09:13 +0000

Jennifer–
Do the poets who get called, or who claim to be, experimental really reject workshop poetics? Seems to me most experimental or would-be experimental poets have been to or teach in creative writing school, or both. Is there really anything more academic than 21st Century experimental poetry? I agree that “can real experimentation happen in the academy?” is a good question. I don’t mean to be making judgments about the quality of the work of individual poets who do or don’t get called experimental.
Daisy

By: Jennifer Bartlett

Jennifer Bartlett — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 16:06:49 +0000

I understand what you mean. Defining experimental is a difficult thing, and one feels that whatever one writes, they’ll be accused of being wrong. I don’t mean small presses. I mean poets and editors that reject the workshop poetics and then jump at sign up for AWP, which is all about workshop poetics. I gave an example on my blog today.
I’m not out to attack people, and there are so many fine people involved in AWP. But, why do people who reject ’straight;’ poetry want to go to a conference where Pinsky and Gluck are major speakers?

By: AWP 4 Me

AWP 4 Me — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 15:53:00 +0000

Jennifer,
This is an interesting question. It requires a definition of experimental, a functional one, before it can be answered.
I can say that my experience of AWP is one in which a lot of small presses spend the little money they have in order to show their wares, like any trade show, with the hope that perhaps their list may get a little coverage or some sales. AWP is one of the few marketplaces available to so-called experimental and non alike to get their books and magazines out there.

By: Jennifer Bartlett

Jennifer Bartlett — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 12:26:33 +0000

I’ve been wondering (just in general) why are experimantal poets involved in the AWP?
Isn’t that contradictory?

By: Sheryl Luna

Sheryl Luna — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 04:01:18 +0000

Looking forward to Con Tinta and AWP. You and Rich Yanez have done a wonderful job of keeping this event going year after year.

By: Emily Warn

Emily Warn — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:54:22 +0000

Thanks, Rigoberto, for letting us know about this reading of poets essential to the Nuyorican poetry movement.
Holy Howl, though! The poetry invasion of New York City seems to be happening all on one night. I count 23 different poetry readings listed here.
Emily