Hi Robert,

for someone who's been waiting so long for the message to be delivered this
might appear a trifling reply, but:

I feel that authorial presence is compounded and invoked by the structure
of poetry readings nowadays. The introduction often does this, the venue
often does this, the audience comes because to do this (that's the
investment in 'name' that goes with audiences being bigger and lessening
Lawrence's justified complaints about the reasons behind why people go to
some readings and not others. The audiences aren't often following ideas of
poetry they are flocking or not to bathe in particular practices (I'm not
suggesting that is bad pers e, but it does compound the deposits in
authorial presence).

Those writers who when use I to ironicise or undermine authorial presence
are not any less implicated as the authors of their writing surely? I would
certainly agree that all performance risks positing the presence of the
performer into the reception. I think the situation extends well into
'live' music, 'live' theatre, 'live' dance and so forth.

I realise that 'live' is another one of those contestable terms and that
without forms of indirect testimony it would have no definition. There are
many drives for my own stated turn away, some more personal than others. In
no particular order they would be:

-   being fed up with the continuing debates both here and elsewhere around
'performances' and 'readings' as being either lower or higher, more
populist or more accessible or more ephemeral and therefore (so the warped
reasoning often goes) less worthy of serious consideration, as forms of
literary activity

-   the hypocrasy of those who hint at opinions such as embedded in the
point above and yet go out and do readings anyway because it's a good way
of networking or they can earn a few bob or it's a good way of using
authorial power to hit on younger poets for sexual purposes or whatever

-   a generally appalling level of feedback of any kind (either positive or
constructively critical) in these Islands. To which I must except the USA
and Canada (sorry I can't speak of wider experience further afield) and
Ireland. I value the feedback as an integral part of versioning within the
compositional process and feel that especially English reserve as a gutless
void.

-   rows of guys with beerguts leaning on the public bar or scuffling about
in abject demeanors (no criticism of any person either living or dead is
intended by this gross overcharacterisation)

-   poor turnouts. Sianed and I both made four hour journeys from different
parts of England for a joint performance in London earlier this year to
work for over 2 hours to about 8 splendid people, lit by an angle-poise
brought by the organiser from his home. Good evening, good performance
(even though I say so myself), even good lighting (i like low-tech) but we
both felt that enough was enough on doing such commitments. There are other
ways of getting the work 'out there' and of 'reading' / 'performing' it
than that. A debilitating experience of a debilitating (on the whole)
cultural format. Please, do we really need it?

-   all of the ongoing arguments about literacy versus orality

-   all of the old arguments about longevities as superior to
ephemeralities

-   all of the hard won bitterness I obviously feel and is being expressed
here and that leads me to have said that it's time to be giving energy
positively into something else in terms of writing and 'performance'

-   essentially comfy bourgeois models of literary consumption prevail

I DO want to make it absolutely clear that I have enjoyed being in
audiences at readings immensely and enjoyed giving readings (sometimes)
immensely too. But as I have said earlier I have become suspicious of both
the pleasures and the anxieties that audiences and authors (unless we are
going to conflate the two) bring to and take from readings and performances
today. It may change. What LAwrence posted last week about SubVoicive leads
to suspect that it might have to change if it is to have any credible more
of survival.

love and love
cris





%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%