My adventures in commercial publishing tell me that publishers still seem to
think that writing is a gentlemanly pursuit, practised by those who have a
private income and for whom the income from books is pocket money or
something...it drives me crazy. The problem is that writing is a vocation
that requires such investment of time and being to follow truly, and nearly
all that investment will be placed under the rubric of "love" ("but of
course, you do it for love"). Which is, of course, in one sense totally
accurate, at least in my case: but I still have to eat, which is not an
optional human activity, and feed, clothe, house and educate my kids, and
supply them with CDs and other necessary accoutrements of 21C life. And the
"love" in this context becomes a sign of excess, disposability; it exists of
course outside these commercial economies, hence its power, and indeed, the
power that exists in writing itself, but in this case it is supposed to
function as a replacement for these economies (the reward from writing for
love means that a writer has such a sublime life that money is unnecessary).
In any case, I have had a few "frank and honest" (as they say) conversations
with Penguin, to disabuse them of this attitude; and such has been my anger
about it, I have in small ways actually got somewhere. I couldn't - and
still can't - believe how much the dice is loaded against writers in the
economic structures of the publishing world.
As for the "co-survival of family and poetry"; that's one area where I have
never seen conflict. Maybe because my vocations as poet and mother have
grown together in such a way that they seem to me inseparable. Which isn't
to say, of course, that it is an easy equation -
Best
A
On 31/7/05 1:05 AM, "Mairead Byrne" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Well Alison, I like Cummings' poetry very much. And I have to say the
> biography included some photos of him which I liked too. But, probably as a
> result of my own life, I have a strong appreciation for paid work and
> financial/family responsibility. It disillusioned me that Cummings never
> worked or earned money but relied on borrowing/subventions from friends and
> family. It was not disillusioning, but sobering, to see the extent to which
> class and Harvard connections facilitated his career. When the economy of the
> poetry world is folded back, as it is a little here, it refreshes me to the
> realities of my own class/economic situation, and how this informs my career.
> I felt something similar when I read Bin Ramke's support letters
> on the foetry site: I have never been able to generate such letters and
> reading them makes me aware of how little I have contented myself with, and
> the level of support that is necessary in order to get a book published. This
> is not a criticism of Bin Ramke, who has published my work in the Denver
> Quarterly and who has always been attentive and responsive. Just that when
> one lifts oneself out of one's struggle long enough to read something like the
> Cummings' biography, one can gain awareness about the realities, limitations,
> and achievements of one's own situation.
> I think also my disillusionment with Cummings may relate to a general
> disillusionment with the romantic image of the poet; not surprisingly I am
> more keenly interested in the construction of the woman poet, and the
> reconciliation or at least co-survival of obligation to family and poetry.
> Nothing new here I know.
> Mairead
Alison Croggon
Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com
Editor, Masthead: http://masthead.net.au
Home page: http://alisoncroggon.com
|