Comments on: The Turn of the Thumbscrew

By: scott stampfli

scott stampfli — Sat, 23 May 2009 01:13:35 +0000

Regarding our review of Mr. C in 1990: Creely was helpful to me as a kid learning about word structure- but as a poet or person evolves into a healthy being one realizes the value of life force and poetry as an active natural way of living and helping the world move Further- and yeah- Still an Art Drunk after all these years…!

By: Owen Hill

Owen Hill — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 17:08:38 +0000

Haven’t read the prose piece but I’ll look into it.
And I agree, it’s too easy to break things into early work/late work.
I think that’s especially true for O’Hara. The recent New York Times
review of the his selected (Logan, I think) fell into that trap. Am I
the only one who likes O’Hara’s later poems? They read like linguistic
waterfalls, Little Elegy for Antonio Machado is a beautiful poem, and
it doesn’t read “early” or “late”. Just a damn good poem. .
and thank you for the welcome, Don.

By: Don Share

Don Share — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 12:33:18 +0000

Hey, Owen, welcome and thanks for this great postscript!
I always thought the prose piece that accompanied On Earth as well as the way Creeley read his late poems helped put them into perspective, even into relief. The trajectory of his work is not only interesting but poignant – in his case, and arguably also O’Hara’s, it doesn’t quite do simply to break a life’s work into halves and pit one part against the other. Just my opinion!

By: VINCENT FARNSWORTH

VINCENT FARNSWORTH — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 07:19:37 +0000

Hey! Am I famous yet? To answer various questions above—
If memory serves, multiple authors because of the “integrity” thing. I remember I based the cute little text on the post-reading discussion with all those folks and so thought it right to include them. Maybe to spread the blame around too.
For years I ran a poetry journal called JEJUNE: america eats its young (back issues available, operators are standing by) and organized many poetry readings over the years but I don’t feel that poetry must have something “done for” it (assuming it isn’t “done for” already).
Creeley reportedly described the review as “mean-spirited” when Tom Clark showed it to him and I would concede that now. When Creeley came to Prague years later he gave a beautiful reading in a cafe, so maybe he just wasn’t an auditorium poet. Still as noted by others his work at that time was indeed lackluster at best so the kick in the pants was necessary, even if it came from a young whippersnapper.
Well at least some line of mine proved to be unforgettable by someone — too bad it wasn’t in a poem.

By: Owen Hill

Owen Hill — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 00:03:42 +0000

Amazing, how long text stays around after the context melts away.
A little context—this first appeared in a three-page copy shop zine.
The aesthetic was low-fi punk. We would have taken “at times even
mean” as a compliment, at the time. I remembered feeling squeamish
when William offered to reprint the piece—it was sort of written to be
destroyed. But we went for it, in that old punk spirit of “what the hell!”
Poets play their cards pretty close to the vest now, so this kind of anger
probably seems dated. I think it has a place, though—that “kill the father
(mother, too!)” spirit is important in the arts—keeps us from getting co-opted.
The difficult/accessable question doesn’t apply here—our little group was reading
Mina Loy, Neidecker, Berrigan, Trakl, Brecht—not exactly Billy Collins types. That
You’re Not Smart Enough To Understand the Difficult has always been a red herring,
anyway—and we weren’t attacking Creeley for being difficult, we just felt he’d fallen
asleep at the wheel.
As a postscript, though, I have to add—I saw Creeley at New College a little later
that year and he put the lie to everything we’d written—gave a truly great reading.
And McClure is doing some of his best work now—at Seventy-something, his brain’s
on fire and he has all the chops.
Well, we were young.

By: Doodle

Doodle — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:41:03 +0000

Isn’t it against the law to shout FUCK WORDSWORTH in a crowded place??

By: Ms Baroque

Ms Baroque — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 20:56:42 +0000

Oh my God, I love that: “some Art Drunk” (some of my best friends are Art Drunks…). I’m just thinking when I might be able to use it. And the last line? It’ll stay with me too.

By: unreliable narrator

unreliable narrator — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 16:26:00 +0000

Well, at least these multiple authors do have some awareness of their ethos-undermining tone: “Of course it’s easy to be negative, and to be glib about it”; for as I’m sure they, and we, know all too well, every writer has those days—some of us more often than not‚—wherein every single word we write or speak aloud makes those around us yearn to bolt from the room whilst screeching life-affirming bumper-sticker slogans. I’m just, as the kids today say, sayin’.
That last line will stay with me now, too. Though it also makes me think of Vogon poetry.

By: Annie Finch

Annie Finch — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 04:17:18 +0000

Point well taken about how older poets should continue to inspire–and interesting to see that the younger poet would have liked to hear Creeley’s “greatest hits” rather than less consequential but newer work.
Just for the record, I heard Creeley just months before he died–fourteen years later, in a small crowd in a bookstore at the VA Festival of the Book–and it was a wonderful reading, mostly moving new work from his last book (much of it in iambic pentameter!) and a few greatest hits. He mused generously and shared his insights sensitively with the audience. Just for the record.

By: Jonathan David Jackson

Jonathan David Jackson — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 22:43:25 +0000

D. A. Powell: Your response in the comments (”BORING” is not merely the province of the inaccessible, though I can see where one might be quick to jump to that assumption. And “accessible” doesn’t preclude difficult. Take Gertrude Stein–very accessible, but often difficult”) was extremely apt, as usual. Spot-on.