Ernesto,
You are quite right - I didn't notice it said Glam until after i'd
sent, so apology for that. And yes, i suppose it is a bit off
kneejerking to an advert for an event (Geraldine is right to tell me
off for that). I used your post to say something when i should have
waited and broached the subject separately - but of course lists like
this don't usually work like that - i just respond these days if
something gets to me at the moment - beyond the moment I can't be
bothered. Anyway, sorry for that.
But yes, I have issues with the gap between performance poetry's
rhetoric and its reality. Unlike many though, I happen to think that
this is not a trivial or marginal phenomenon - it is a symptom of a
much wider problem. I recognize however that these issues are a devil
to deal with without messing with and upsetting people's genuine good
intentions, and conversely are a devil to deal with because they make
any objection sound 'snobbish' etc. (I notice how this word appears
near the end of your post, as anger built I suppose.) But it is that
very thing, the easily applicable label of 'snob' (or its equivalents)
which is the biggest barrier to any serious discussion of the thing.
It is the other side of the coin of trying to discuss the problems of
poetry and academia without the label 'anti intellectual' getting
bandied about. I've been accused of both those and more on this list
before, it's what happens, I'm used to it. There must be something
psychologically comforting in being attacked from two different sides.
I'll just try to deal directly with a few points you made. You said:
"I'd be delighted if self-denominated "innovative and experimental"
poets joined in. In fact, some of the poets who have confirmed
participation do experiment with language and genre."
The use of the phrase 'self-denominated' kind of sets the tone of your
derision, but nevertheless, I'll pretend some good faith on both our
parts. In my experience when such poets do enter into those arenas the
results are mostly confusing and negative for both performer and
audience. There are important exceptions, there are also unimportant
exceptions. Unimportant exceptions include such things as a poet
performing something that 'fits', even if it is different to the kind
of stuff he/she might normally do. I've done this myself on many
occasions, and of course it works, or works as well as anything else,
why shouldn't it, if it conforms to certain expectations? Therefore it
is not really an exception is it? Important exceptions on the other
hand are rare, and there are two. There are poets who welcome the
challenge of any audience and who perform with apparent self-
confidence and bravado in front of anything from a drunken crowd in a
pub to the poetic equivalent of a disdainful job interview committee.
The bravado can carry them through. But these people are very rare.
What lies behind their success might be pure ego or political
idealism, anything, it doesn't matter, they can do it. Out of the
hundreds of poets I know only a couple would qualify for this group.
The second important exception isn't so much a type as a reliance on a
certain composition of the audience - audiences vary, of course, and
though there is definitely such a thing as a typical 'slam' audience
and a typical 'performance poetry' audience neither are 100%
predictable - and I have on rare occasion witnessed a 'difficult' poem
working in such circumstances.
There is also what I call the 'allowable slot'. For example when
Apples and Snakes arrange their bill of readers for an event there is
nearly always a token 'quiet one', or 'serious one' etc. These are
invariably quiet or serious ones who won't upset the cart of course
which, I'm sorry to say, often means that they aren't very good. I
have also witnessed the phenomenon of the quiet and serious one in a
Slam situation getting through round after round simply because it is
the exception, so it gets heavily clapped, but only up to a point, and
this having nothing to do with its quality. All of this sociology and
group/crowd psychology, nothing to do with poetry.
You finished by saying:
"if you think that the bit of "harmless fun" represented by the Glam
Slam should be kept away from this list, I apologise for being
insensitive and posting it here; I'll be more thoughtful in the future
before posting something to this list.."
Yes ok Ernesto, I can see your need to be sarky. I have no objection
whatsoever to your posting the event. And good luck with it by the
way. As you say, it is dealing with a wider remit than your average
'slam' - but that isn't my point here. I welcome anything anyway which
brings up real discussion, related to what is actually going on out
there - there isn't enough of it. The only time I really did object to
the nature of a postings context was when one of those ....ing awful
'send us your poems and for a fee we will tell you what's wrong with
them' sites was advertised here.
I'll probably respond in a different post to Geraldine, because she
brings up another set of issues.
Cheers
Tim A.
On 17 Jun 2009, at 17:09, E. Sarezale wrote:
> Dear Tim Allen,
>
> The name of the event is Glam Slam (not 'grand slam'). Relevant, I'd
> argue, because of its intended pop-rock references (Prince,
> Bowie,...), its nods to the urban gay-latino-black culture it
> originally comes from (i.e., "Vogue Balls" in NYC) and its attempt
> to appeal to a sexually, racially and culturally varied audience.
> (Also "literarily" and linguistically varied, incidentally).
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glam_Slam
>
>
> As you state, yes, it is "a bit of fun" - and that's what it mostly
> it aims for.
>
> But it also very much welcomes:
> "challenge and questioning, weather of genre, language or identity,
> that innovative and experimental poetry are known for".
> (I chose to keep the literal quotation without correcting the typo)
>
> I'd be delighted if self-denominated "innovative and experimental"
> poets joined in. In fact, some of the poets who have confirmed
> participation do experiment with language and genre (some even with
> gender -- in Spanish the same word is used for both concepts).
>
> I'm confident that the crowd at the event will be able to cope with
> the challenge and the subversion that experimental poets will bring.
>
> As a side note, there are serious (mostly sexual politics-related)
> issues motivating the event. Not just "fun". For many 'lesbian/gay/
> trans-gender' people community', events like the Glam Slam are
> important as a (participatory) alternative to other commercial or
> cultural activities that they may find either alienating or
> exclusive. These people (including writers and poets) can still feel
> ostracised and marginalised nowadays (see recent Amazon 'top-
> shelving' scandal), with limited outlets for self-expression. And I
> am not talking about Iran or Russia, no. Also about the UK and the
> rest of Western Europe, USA, Canada....
>
> Conservative? Harmless? Safe? "so acceptable"? (the discussion here
> could go on for ever; and sadly I don't have the time)
>
> Maybe not everybody will think this is a valid endeavour. But I'd
> rather it not be put in the same pigeon-hole as your average poetry
> slam competition. I may be fooling myself, of course...
>
> Even if I agree that the "competing categories" are not terribly
> original or inventive (and most of the poets in the slam will be far
> from "innovative" and "experimental" as understood in this forum),
> I do wonder if the event deserves the derogatory and (sadly, I must
> say) snobbish tone used in your post.
>
> Having said that, if you think that the bit of "harmless fun"
> represented by the Glam Slam should be kept away from this list, I
> apologise for being insensitive and posting it here; I'll be more
> thoughtful in the future before posting something to this list.
>
> Regards,
> _ernesto
> p.s. "performance poetry" is indeed one of the most ill-defined
> categories I've ever come across.
> http://sarezale.com
> http://myspace.com/sarezale
> http://youtube.com/sarezale
> http://youtube.com/videopoems
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Tim Allen <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Sent: Wednesday, 17 June, 2009 11:56:19
>> Subject: Re: grand slam wants you
>>
>>> "A poetry SLAM competition in two rounds.
>>
>> First Round: 4 Competing Categories:
>>
>> DARK poem - a sad poem wearing all black
>> GLAD poem - a happy poem in colourful clothes
>> SHAG poem - sexy words in lingerie, fetish, flesh
>> DRAG poem - gender-bending words in drag"< etc
>>
>> Probably a bit of fun but sooooo cliched it makes you cry. Why is
>> it that all
>> this performance stuff is so predictable and conventional and does
>> everything to
>> reinforce stereotypes (aesthetic and otherwise)? The whole thing
>> goes against
>> the grain of challenge and questioning, weather of genre, language
>> or identity,
>> that innovative and experimental poetry are known for. This is why
>> the
>> performance scene, despite all its rhetoric about being about youth
>> and energy
>> etc, is ultimately so conservative and harmless and safe, and hence
>> why it is so
>> acceptable to the literary establishment.
>>
>> Tim A.
>> Please excuse cross posting
>
>
> http://sarezale.com
> http://myspace.com/sarezale
> http://youtube.com/sarezale
> http://youtube.com/videopoems
|