Issue 64: A Conversation with Dorianne Laux

issue64

Interview in Willow Springs 64

Works in Willow Springs 78 and 63

April 19, 2008

Terrance Owens, Shira Richman, and Tana Young

A CONVERSATION WITH DORIANNE LAUX

DorianneLaux_NewBioImage

Photo Credit: divedapper.com

Dorianne Laux is the author of four books of poetry. Her most recent collection, Facts about the Moon (Norton, 2005), was the recipient of the Oregon Book Award and short-listed for the Lenore Marshall Poetry Prize. She recently published a chapbook called Superman: The Chapbook, and co-wrote, with Kim Addonizio, The Poet's Companion: A Guide to the Pleasure of Writing Poetry.

Laux says of her poems, "It's really important to me for people to understand what it is that I'm trying to say. On the other hand, I don't want to write simple poems. I want to give people something really meaty to chew on." Her poems balance the complexities of life with an understanding of the emotions of ordinary people. In her poem, "Facts about the Moon," she writes, "The moon is backing away from us / an inch and a half a year. / That means if you're like me / and were born around fifty years ago / the moon was a full six feet closer to the earth. / What 's a person supposed to do?"

Born in Augusta, Maine, in 1952, Laux worked as a sanatorium cook, a gas station manager, a maid, and a donut holer before receiving a BA in English from Mills College in 1988. She is known for poems of personal witness and for writing about everyday experiences. A review in the American Poetry Review referred to her book, Awake, as "Gutsy in its use of daily practice, daily grief and joy. Dorianne Laux's Awake is one of the best first books I have ever read. These are poems of remark­ able maturity."

Awards for her work include a Pushcart Prize, an Editor's Choice III Award, and a fellowship from the National Endowment for the Arts. Awake was nominated for the San Francisco Bay Area Book Critics Award for Poetry and her second book, What We Carry, was a finalist for the National Book Critics Circle Award.

Laux has taught at the University of Oregon, and now lives with her husband, poet Joseph Millar, in Raleigh, North Carolina, where she teaches at North Carolina State University. We met at the Spokane Club where Laux peeled an orange and discussed pop culture, jazz, and the beautiful arches built by termites.

 

TANA YOUNG

It seems that much of your work is autobiographical. Am I correct in reading it this way?

DORIANNE LAUX

I'm a poet of personal witness. I know there's a lot of feeling out there that the "I" is dead and the reader is a void, but I feel I'm talking to somebody. I don't know who it is, but I'm talking to them, and I'm telling them about my experience of being alive, hoping that experience somehow translates or touches someone else's experience of being alive. So yeah, it's almost all autobiographical. There are moments when I shift things, and of course memory is faulty. And then on top of that, you're translating what you feel in your heart and your guts and spirit, trying to translate those things into language, which is already an impossible task. It's all a pastiche, but it's true to my experience—as true as I can make it.

YOUNG

There's a contrast between the idyllic sense in the poems you've written about your child and the difficulties described in the poems about your own childhood . What do these poems tell us about your journey?

LAUX

I came from a dysfunctional family as many of us do. My experience is not that different from anyone's, it's just that people don't tend to talk about it because it's embarrassing, or shameful, or complicated. Too complicated. Like somebody innocently asks, "Hey, do you visit your parents?" Well, it's just too complicated. So I might say, "Sure, yeah, it's fine. I have a wonderful relationship with my parents," or my siblings, or whatever.

My parents' generation wanted things to be economically better for their children. They worked hard to ensure that their children didn't have to work as hard as they did. I think my task was not so much to make things economically better for my child, although that was certainly a goal. But I was also trying to make things emotionally and spiritually better for my child. And they were. So it's still that American concept with a different slant, or a different set of goals. I wanted her to have a childhood that was free of all that. Of course, I didn't protect her completely, and she didn't have an idyllic childhood. You know, bad things happen all the time no matter how hard you try.

One might look at those poems and think, Well, this is what it's like to have been a mother to this child. It was like that, and this poem is representative of this child's life or this relationship between mother and child. And in fact, it's one moment that's been captured. I have yet to capture other moments, maybe, that aren't as idyllic.

To me, poems in some ways are wishes. They're asking us to look at what our best possible situation could be, so that we have an actual visual or aural representation of what we can work toward. It doesn't necessarily mean that it's like that. It means that we wish it to be like that, and so if we can somehow make that alive in language, we can actually make it alive in reality.

SHIRA RICHMAN

In your latest book, Superman: The Chapbook, you seem to be playing with the intersection of the ideal and reality. How did you choose to publish a chapbook at this point in your career?

LAUX

Well, it was wonderful in the way it came about because Joe [Millar] and I went to visit Redwing, Minnesota, where they have an artist colony called Anderson Center for the Arts, and on the grounds they have Red Dragonfly Press. Joe and I would go over every day to watch this wonderful guy, Scott King, work at his small press, and he has a couple, maybe three of these old, falling apart, beautiful, antique printing presses. He's one of the few people in the United States who still makes type, actually forges the type, you know, casts it with metal.

We were just fascinated. We'd go over and watch him casting type and the hot metal pouring down through this little funnel and the letters coming out and he's cutting them. We were hanging around all the time, bothering him. How do you do this? And how do you do that? So one day, he asked us if we would like to make a broadside. He said, "You can actually set the type yourself if you like."

We went over and started setting the type, which was nor as easy as it sounds. There's this big box with all the letters set up in this counterintuitive way, all the most used letters on the outside, and the least used letters on the inside. And so we're trying to find the A and the L and also trying to make sure that the M and the N don't get mixed up. We'd set the type, and then make an experimental plate of it and realize we had all the letters backwards and upside down. We'd have to start over. It took us hours and hours and hours to get these two little broadsides. The broadside I made was of "Hummingbird," which is from Facts About the Moon.

After we made the broadsides, Scott asked me if I'd like to do a chapbook. He had created chapbooks for authors like Barry Lopez and W S. Merwin. He enjoys making these fine-press, beautiful little things and he wanted to know if I had a group of poems that I thought might work well together. And I said, "Sure." So we worked on that for a while—he did all the work on it. I didn't do any more typesetting.

Those are new poems, and it's somewhat common for a writer to put together a chapbook of new poems that you wouldn't get anywhere else, and the small press makes some money. All those poems will be in my next full collection, but they'll be published in the chapbook first.

RICHMAN

Are the poems about pop stars indicative of a general direction in which your work is moving?

LAUX

Those poems were really influenced by reading people like Denise Duhamel, Tony Hoagland, these kinds of pop poems about popular culture. Among my poet friends, I'm the one they come to when they want to know about popular culture. They're like, "Who is Bono?" [ Laughs.] Many poets, they're just not hip to all this—"What's Survivor?"—and I can tell them. "What's Facebook, MySpace?" I know all this stuff. I don't know why. I'm just a junkie for popular culture, and when I was growing up in San Diego, I loved all the popular music of the day.

So I thought, Why shouldn't I write about these people I know? I grew up with Cher. I feel like I know her intimately. Why wouldn't I write a poem about her? And Superman; I feel really embarrassed for how much I love Superman. No joke. When a Superman movie comes out, man, I'm right there. I want to see it. Of course I know that Superman is absolutely ridiculous. This whole idea of America—he's going to save the world—it's romance at its highest pitch. Yet there's something moving about it, something very stirring about Superman. I'm not sure if this is where the bulk of the work is headed, but the poems were fun to write and will flavor the new book for sure.

YOUNG

Those poems feel like coming of age pieces to me. They take me back to the '50s, '60s, '70s, to those summers.

LAUX

Those were good days. They were also terrible days. Of course Superman is not Superman in that poem. He's Superman with cancer, and he's smoking dope, and he's trying to stop the pain in his head, knowing he can't save the world. He breaks my heart in that poem. But that's how I see the United States in some ways, too. He's representative of this culture, which is sick. It's an interesting way to get to some material. Pop culture can influence art on a deep level. If you read somebody like Denise Duhamel or Tony Hoagland, you realize there's something deeper going on underneath that surface. When you think about popular culture, you think immediately of surface. But what's underneath? Like the whole idea of the Beatles breaking up, and what that public and highly contested division meant to a generation.

TERRANCE OWENS

You're known for writing about ordinary people, but these pop culture references seem to go against that in a way, though they also connect ordinary with not-ordinary people—

LAUX

Well, Superman is as not-ordinary as you can get, and yet I make him an ordinary man. The same with Cher, who's this huge diva-idol, but in my poem, she's just a woman getting Botox treatments. So yes, I am dealing with a patently not-ordinary person, but I'm taking my vision and applying it to her. And of course, Cher is ordinary. If she weren't ordinary, she wouldn't be influenced by a culture that tells her she's not beautiful. She's scared. She doesn't want to get old. She doesn't want to lose her attractiveness, her sexuality. That's what all of us are facing.

RICHMAN

David Wojahn said he thinks Americans have difficulty allowing the personal and the political to intersect, and that's why there aren't a lot of successful American political poets. What are your thoughts about that?

LAUX

I do think it's difficult. Our definition of the political is complex. We think of politics as being what's going on, for instance, in Iraq right now, or what's going on in the government, or some issue like feminism, or something that we can put in a little box and say, "Here's the issue, and here's the person talking about the issue." However, any time you ask readers to consider their lives, in any aspect, in any way, to consider their relationships to their children, to their lovers, their husbands or wives, to their jobs, to money, to power, whatever, you're asking them to stop and think. That's a political act, especially right now in America.

We're having a hard time stopping and thinking. We're having difficulty recognizing what makes us human beings. That we're on the earth for a very short time. That life is precious. That death is on the doorstep—that's a huge thing. You're asking people to stop making widgets for a minute or two and consider what role they're playing, not only in their lives, but on the large stage. Any art that's political stops people in their tracks for a moment and asks us to consider.

So it depends on how you want to define political, and I think my poems are political in the way that I just spoke of. But it's also true, more and more, I think, that they're moving into a larger arena. On the other hand, I am not an overtly politicized person. I certainly have my ideas about things—and how I vote, how I move through my life has political implications, but I'm not, quote, a political poet.

In some ways, I think poets tend to be apolitical, because we are so open to possibilities, which makes it difficult to come down on one side or another. We see the complexities of things, so it's difficult for us to say yes or no. We're dealing with stuff that's somewhere between yes and no.

If you said, "Do you think it's right to kill people?" I would say, "No, absolutely not." On the other hand, I suppose there are situations in which I'd have to reconsider that statement, while many people wouldn't. They're firmly on one side or the other. So is that political? I don't know. In some ways you're in Hamlet territory. To be or nor to be. You're going to be asking yourself that question for the rest of your life. There are no real answers, and we know that. And poetry is a way of allowing a human being to live between those two ideas and feelings for a little while.

YOUNG

This reminds me of the encounter you describe in "S. Sgt. Metz," in which you get to the person underneath the camouflage.

LAUX

The uniform, yeah, you could see that man in front of you and say, "Oh my God, what is this guy doing going to war? What an idiot. I hate everything about him, everything he stands for." Or you could be on the other side of things, and say, "Look at this brave young man." Both of those positions are simplistic ways to look at the human being standing there, trying to do the right thing, and you're looking at him really trying to see who he is.

As an artist, I looked at him and thought, This is the perfect specimen of a male human being. The idea of him torn apart on the streets of Iraq was horrifying. To think of this beautiful human body, perfect in every way, put in front of bombs and gunfire was just unfathomable.

Maybe he'll get through, you know? That's the other thing, he's a real person in the world. I never spoke to him. I just observed him, and I saw him talking to an older woman who was standing in front of him, jostling her bags, and he helped her. I could see that he was intelligent, kind, graceful. He was this human being living his life and that life was going to possibly be cut short for reasons I can't fathom, and I don't know if any of us can.

Humans are absolutely fascinating creatures to me, and I so much want to represent them in their dignity. We're capable of miraculous things, and on the other hand, we are cruel, horrible, just horrible. I'm infuriated by humans and absolutely awestruck at the same time. We're such fallible, fragile creatures. And this takes me back to my youth during the Vietnam War when I was saying, "The war is wrong. I'm burning these letters. I hate you. How could you do this?" It took me living for thirty or forty years to look at my brother and realize that was my brother I was hating. How could I have a brother who was killing people? How could I sleep with a boyfriend who was killing women and children? I was too young to recognize certain complexities that I'm now able to recognize. When I was younger, I thought, Oh, this is right and this is wrong. Now I realize I don't know what right and wrong is. All I know is that human beings are gorgeous and worth preserving.

RICHMAN

Hearing you talk about Sergeant Metz makes me think of your poem, "Teaching Poetry with Pictures." Why wasn't that included in Awake?

LAUX

I know. Why wasn't it? My editor didn't like it. He said he just didn't like it, so it stayed out. And now it's gotten so old that I've never thought to put it in a book. I'd forgotten it until you mentioned it right now. I've written a number of poems that have ended up in anthologies or magazines but that never made it into a book.

There's a little poem I wrote that was on the Portland buses called "Romance," and it's only a five- or six-line poem. I really like it, but it's never made it into a book. It just hasn't fit somehow. These poems are just sort of out there, but they're not completely lost. You found one of them. Maybe it will make its way into a book someday. Who knows? Maybe somebody who has more time or interest or patience than I do will gather them.

OWENS

You said in an interview that "First lines are often important when determining the rhythm structure of a poem." What's the spark that first allows the rhythms to come in?

LAUX

It's like music. When you listen to Glen [Moore], who plays jazz, and who I love to read with, he'll just take a line, a piece of music, a musical phrase, and start playing with it. It's basically—this won't be worthy of an interview because you can't transcribe it into the text, but it could be something like [hum s a jazz riff]. That would be the phrase, and then he goes [hums contrapuntal jazz riff]. And then you take that phrase and you start playing with it. That's American jazz, the one thing we export that's beautiful. Most of what we export is not so beautiful, mostly violent movies and fast food. But jazz is something we can be proud of. Now we take any rhythmic phrase and play with it.

That said, I do have a few rhymed poems. "Life is Beautiful" is an example:

Life is beautiful and remote, and useful
if only to itself. Take the fly, angel
of the ordinary house, laying its bright
eggs on the trash, pressing each jewel out
delicately along a crust of buttered toast.
Bagged, the whole mess travels to the nearest
dump where other flies have gathered, singing
over stained newsprint and reeking
fruit. Rapt on air they execute an intricate
ballet above the clashing pirouettes
of heavy machinery. They hum with life.

I can hear the music that I'm playing with, and the lines are approximately syllabic—between eight and twelve syllables per line, somewhat dactylic—beautiful, delicate, intricate. It's also a rhymed poem: Useful/angel, out/toast, singing/reeking, intricate/pirouettes, and it's end rhymed—all the way through, ending on "disorder," and "gorgeous." Not perfect rhyme, but good enough for rock 'n' roll. The poem posits a question: Maybe there are too many of us, and yet the other side is that we're "gorged, engorging, and gorgeous". Yes, maybe there are too many of us, but on the other hand, isn't it beautiful? [Laughs.] Stuck between yes and no.

I grew up in a musical family. My mother played piano, so I was inundated on a daily basis with music. She would play everything from Beethoven, Bach, classical music to pop songs to musicals. She'd play from The Music Man, South Pacific, whatever the popular musicals were at the time. Also, I'd come home from school and say, "I heard this new Sonny and Cher song," or, "I heard this Beatles song," and she'd listen to it, pick it out on the piano, and play it for me. She could play anything. And everyone in my family ended up being musical, except me. I try to put it into my poetry.

RICHMAN

How did that happen?

LAUX

When I was first born, my mother divorced my father and went to California. She was a struggling, single mother and finally met my stepfather and was scared of having kids. When I was coming up, she played, but they couldn't afford a piano. Later, she managed to get one and she started teaching the children. Well, I had already gotten past the rhyme of being taught piano. So, my sister after me, my sister after my brother, all of my brothers and sister's kids play. I did play guitar, but I dropped it after a little bit and went to poetry. I think I took all that musical training into my ear. I could recognize a musical phrase and see how it could be played with to make it interesting.

That's one of the things I start with. "Life is Beautiful." I hear that word phrase as music. I love reading aloud because, to me, it's like playing an instrument. All the phrasing is like singing. I feel like I'm singing; I'm just not singing. [Laughs.] But it feels like singing to me.

YOUNG

There's a point at which one goes from being a student poet to a master poet. When you write, are you still pulling from a mysterious place?

LAUX

Probably 90 percent of what any artist does is practice. We practice and we fail and we fail. You set your pen to the page every day, and of course, you're hoping that something grand will happen. But the chances are slim, and you know that going in, but you go in anyway. That's faith. You keep hitting the page, hoping that something's going to fire, something's going to happen, something's going to bloom out of it. And the more you practice, the more that possibility of success is present. The more you do anything, the greater the possibility that something might actually come of it. So you constantly live with failure, and yet, you know that that failure is teaching you something.

B. F. Skinner discovered this thing, intermittent reinforcement, where you can reward somebody at random intervals. It might be the third time, and the next time it'll be the twenty-fifth time, and the next time it'll be the first time, and the next time it'll be the eighty-seventh time. You can't know when the reward is going to arrive, but that's what keeps you going. It's going to come sometime. And that's all I care about. I don't care if it comes the hundred and fiftieth time as long as it comes, and it's a very powerful thing. Any time you happen upon a poem, your spirit, your entire body, is filled with this energy of that magic that has happened, and you'll do anything to get back to it. You'll do anything to find it again.

I don't worry anymore about writing. There are times that I go through dry periods. I never go through a block. I'm always writing, but there are times where I'm just not on my game, and I'll use that time to read some new poets, go see some art, walk down to the river and just stare at it, or have a conversation with my sister, or whatever—do whatever it is that I do in my life, hoping that I'll get filled up enough. And something will happen, some juggling will happen and boom.

Ellen Bryant Voigt has a great essay in her book The Flexible Lyric. I can't really write about poetry. Some people are wonderful at it, like Ellen Bryant Voigt. I get lost writing about poetry. But she writes these wonderful essays, and in one of them she talks about termites—I think it is—how some people were studying termites. And they put them in a kind of aquarium with all their stuff they use to build these beautiful arches that make nests—dung and wood chips and whatever it is that they use. And she said the termites run around chaotically for a long time, and they have little pieces of this stuff in their mouths. Ultimately, one termite will accidentally drop a piece and another termite will drop another piece on top of it. And once that happens, they all get excited and run over and pick up chips and start making the arches.

When that happens, they all get alert and they'll say, "Okay, it's time to make an arch." And I think that's a wonderful metaphor for how we make poetry. We're just running around in these chaotic circles with dung in our mouths, or wood chips, or whatever. And we drop something and then something else and suddenly this arch starts to appear. We really don't know how it works. I think Ellen's essay comes closest to describing how a poem happens.

It's just this odd coupling of sound and image; our minds are so filled with chaos. Our bodies are filled with it, our emotions, our spirits are just chaotically running around, saying, "What, what? What, what, what, what, what?" And then something happens, and things start to make sense for a moment. Of course that's all that it is, a moment, the moment of making the poem—and the moment of getting everything into its order is a beautiful, ideal moment. Then you go back to chaos, hoping for that moment again .

OWENS

That's a good metaphor for jazz, too.

LAUX

Absolutely; that's what jazz musicians are doing—riffing off a phrase, hoping that things will come together and build an arch of some sort. Of course an arch is a beautiful metaphor, right? There are termites on both sides, building their columns and they meet in the middle. And so you can think of that too as the reader and the writer. They're coming together in the middle and touching.

YOUNG

Are there people you read that help get you in a state of mind for writing?

LAUX

Reading other poets is often what will spark my imagination. I'll see one of their arches and get inspired. That doesn't necessarily mean I'll write a brilliant poem; it just means I'm inspired. It has to be both inspiration and something else that happens. I reread the poets I teach: Phil Levine, Ruth Stone, Sharon Olds, Li-Young Lee, Carolyn Forché, Lucia Perillo, Gerald Stern, Lucille Clifton, C. K. Williams, Yusef Komunyakaa, Marie Howe and Mark Doty, Tony Hoagland, another good essayist. Too many to list, but you get the idea. I love poetry that feels as it thinks. I've been memorizing Keats' "Ode to a Nightingale" and Edna St. Vincent Millay's "Assault." Those poems inspire me.

But lots of things inspire me. Travel—I'm really looking forward to moving to North Carolina, because it's going to be a whole new landscape, a whole new culture, a history that I'm completely unfamiliar with, new people. All of this change is wonderful for a writer because you're shaken out of your habitual responses.

We all get habituated, right? You get up in the morning, have your coffee, and read your newspaper, and that's great. Everybody loves life in its mundane, daily aspects. It's what makes us feel secure. But I also start to go numb a little bit and I don't see what's around me. So I put myself in a new situation and suddenly I'm really seeing the person next to me, hearing music, and I'm smelling, and I can't help but want to write it down.

YOUNG

Do you have a particular time that you write every day?

LAUX

Some people are very disciplined, but everybody has their own way of approaching their art, and for me, because I started my writing life as a single mother and while working as a waitress, it wasn't like I had an office and time every day that I could sit down and write. Life was too chaotic. So I got it when I could. When my daughter was off at school, I'd write. Sitting on the bench waiting for her to come out, I'd write. I'd be doing an errand, and I'd pull over to the side of the road, pick up a Jack in the Box bag, and write something on it. That's how I managed to get poems written—in between times. I've continued doing that.

Whenever it strikes me, I sit down and write. Of course now I'm in a university, so I have all summer to write, which I never had when I was coming up as a poet. I have that time, and my body does sort of click in when spring comes. I can feel my body going, It's getting to be writing time. Yeah. It does kind of get into these seasonal responses. Joe and I are going to the Virginia Center for the Creative Arts for five weeks this summer, and we'll write every day.

I'm hoping I can start putting the new poems together and making them into a book. I need concentrated time to do that. I can write the poems between times, but doing the revision work—that's the hard part. When you're at a writers' colony, you get up in the morning, have your breakfast knowing you have hours to write before lunch, and more hours after lunch and before dinner, and you can get a lot of work done. But most of the time, you're just squeezing it in, and that's fine with me. I'm happy sitting at a bus stop and writing a poem.

RICHMAN

Or at the airport.

LAUX

Yes, I started that Metz poem at the airport. I got halfway through it and my plane was called. I went down to Santa Cruz with my friend Ellen Bass and stayed for a couple of weeks. Ellen gave me an exercise. She said, "I want you to use these words, and these phrases." So I went back to the Metz poem and used the exercise to help finish it, and I used all the words she'd given me. I'm grateful that I can write anywhere.

RICHMAN

Your attraction to capturing moments, is that why you don't write fiction?

LAUX

I love people and psychology. I love stories, dialogue, relationships, description, everything that goes into making a story. But I also love compression and music. And of course our best prose writers do, too, but I'm much more interested in moments. I love reading novels and short stories, but as a writer, I'm not so interested in Fred getting from the living room into the car. I couldn't care less. I want to go inside Fred's soul and play there. Not that fiction writers don't do that as well, but they've got all these other concerns. And I'm much more interested in the psychological moment , the moment of epiphany. I want brush strokes versus whatever is the opposite of brush strokes, which I don't think there is an opposite. But that's what I want to do. I just want those light feathery things.

But back to practical circumstances: I only had these moments in time to write because I had a child. I had to get the dishes done. I had to get the rag out, and the mop. I was writing in these tiny spaces and it's difficult to write a novel like that. You could, but it wasn't something that I had a whole lot of time for, so poetry was a great form. I could use all this stuff: dialogue, arc, character, description, and I could use it all in a very small space within a limited amount of time. While my daughter was at school, I could do this. Poetry was a practical issue for me. I could do a draft of the poem and then go off and come back and play with it a little bit and go away and come back. But more than practical, it was the fact that I loved sound. And fiction, novels, prose at its best does have that sound, but it's a rare novel that 's musically beautiful throughout. It's more often getting information out: And then she went to the store and picked up some oranges and a gun. It's moving things along on a plot level, and I'm not so interested in plot. Reading plots, yes, but not writing them.

OWENS

You seem interested in meeting your readers in the middle, not making them walk across the whole bridge themselves—

LAUX

I grew up as a navy brat in San Diego, living in Quonset huts with bunches of other kids from all over the world, and those kids couldn't care less about reading the back of a cereal box, let alone a book of poetry. Those are the people of my life. Those are the people I want to speak to, the people I grew up with, ran around in the canyons with. It's really important to me for them to understand what it is I'm trying to say. On the other hand, I don't want to write simplistic poems. I want to give those people something to chew on. And that's a fine line, writing a poem that's accessible, and yet has the complexity you feel it needs to be a true work of art. So yeah, I want to meet my reader, and I want mystery, but not misery, not where they're throwing up their hands and saying, "What is this? I can't understand it. What the hell's going on here?" It may be out of fashion, maybe even a bit radical these days, but I feel strongly about being understood.

Issue 74: A Conversation with Andre Dubus

issue73

Found in Willow Springs 74

March 9, 2013

Elizabeth Kemper French and Joseph Salvatore

A CONVERSATION WITH ANDRE DUBUS

andre

Photo Credit: andredubus.com

Andre Du bus's fiction dives into the underbelly and wresrles with copies we often turn away from: crime, poverty, infidelity, violence, merciless bullying, and pathetic sex. His lush layers
sensory detail ground the reader in the smallest moments of his characters' lives and their often unresolved conflicts. We tumble along with them, with rarely a redemptive branch to grab on to. From his first book of gritty scories, to his novels, memoir, and most recent collection of novellas, Dubus looks unflinchingly at the inner lives of the common man and woman: bartenders and recovering alcoholics, construction workers and criminals, bank tellers and strippers, wives and husbands. Even though these characters are sometimes hard to watch, there is a beauty to their tragic stories that keeps us mesmerized. They are bruised and real, and even if we want to turn away,we cannot, because we recognize their desperation in ourselves.

Dubus grew up with his three siblings and single mother in the tough, economically depressed mill towns along the Merrimack River in Massachusetts. He chronicles his childhood- his despair, his estranged relationship with his well-known father, his turn to violence and eventually writing-in his 2011 memoir, Townie. Over the years he has held many jobs that still allowed him to write: bartender, carpenter, house cleaner, halfway-house counselor, and teacher, all of which gave him a deep well of vivid detail to draw from for his fiction.

Dubus is the author of six books, including the New York Times bestsellers House of Sand and Fog, The Garden of Last Days, and Townie. His most recent book, Dirty Love, published in the fall of 2013 , was a New York Times Notable Book selection, a New York Times Editors' Choice, a 2013 Notable Fiction choice from The Washington Post, and a Kirkus Starred Best Book of 2013. He has been a finalist for the National Book Award and has been awarded a Guggenheim Fellowship, The National Magazine Award for Fiction, two Pushcart Prizes, and is a 2012 recipient of an American Academy of Arts and Letters Award in Literature. His books are published in over twenty-five languages, and he teaches at the University of Massachusetts Lowell.

Known for his gregarious and generous personality, Dubus' scandor and humor strike a sharp contrast to his dark prose. A beloved professor and devoted father and husband, Dubus fills his days with family, teaching, writing, and exercise, but as a self-proclaimed Luddite, he rarely depends on technology to help him out. We met in the Marriott in Boston in the midst of a snowstorm, out of which Dubus had to dig his car to drive to us from his home in the town of Newbury port. Because the weather delayed him, he continued to update us by phone , but never by text. To ensure the interview would be captured, we put many pieces of technology in front of him, a digital voice recorder, two smartphones, and even an old-school cassette tape recorder purchased from Radio Shack in the late 1970s. Dubus is on the record proclaiming his fierce vehemence against these new technologies. We began by asking him about the role of technology in his life and in the life of the writer.

 

ELIZABETH KEMPER FRENCH

We were talking about technology a few minutes ago, and I'm wondering what role it plays in your life and your writing.

ANDRE DUBUS III

None. I'm not getting on the digital train. I don't have one of those (a smartphone) and never will. But I'm an asshole, because we'll be at a bar, and I'll say, "Come on, buddy. You're terrible to own one of those, but while you have it, what's the score of the game?"

I don't like modern life- with these gadgets. I know there are advantages to them, and what writer doesn't like the research capability of the internet? I remember I was writing a novel and wanted to know what gasoline cost in East Texasin 1941. I had to call the Boston Public Library long distance from Newbury port. A nice old lady answered the phone. "Just a minute, dear," and she goes off to the stacks. Ten minutes later- long distance, waiting-"I'll have to call you back." Four hours later, I get the information. "Ir was seventeen cents, dear." And now, in your underwear, within a quarter second, you can get that information. I don't like how we're all staring at screens. I cannot cell you how many times I will look up at a reading- and you know what it's like, when you're reading your work, it's like you' re opening your soul; it just feels so vulnerable- and someone in the audience is looking down at a screen. Ir's like you're trying to kiss someone, and they're watching TV I chink it's changing us. Every night, everyone in my house is on
a screen. Sometimes, it's legitimate. My wife has a dance business,doing work. But she didn 't have to do that work before she had the computer; work only happened during work hours. My daughter has the iPhone glued- sewn- into her hand , and she texts a thousand times a minute. And my sons are on the internet doing all they do. So it's a philosophical turning-away-from, and a temperamental turn in g-away-from. The older I get, the more simplicity I want. I don't chink these thin gs have helped us. I chink they've made us little rats, made us pay attention to little, stupid shit. I see this ad, and all these quick cuts, and the logo for the new gadget is, "Always connected." But I want to be disconnected. I want nothing to do with being connected. I want to call when I want to call. And I'm not going to call.

FRENCH

What do you chink of the personas people create of themselves online? Especially on social media sites like Facebook?

DUBUS

I find that part poignant-that people need to show who they were before they're dead. And I think they have every right to pick and choose how they're going to promote that or express char. I'll never do it. My publisher made me get a Facebook page a few days ago, but I'll never go on it. I said, "Put this letter on there," and I wrote: "Dear readers, I'm not a fan of this whole digital world, but I'm a fan of human beings, and so this is here for you to know where I might be, and if you want to come meet me in person, I would love to see you in the flesh-and­ blood, eye-to-eye way. But that's it. I'll never be on chis again. Sincerely, whatever." My wife's got a Facebook page, which she doesn't have time for, and I'll look at the people on it, because how can you be a writer and not investigate a little bit? I'll look and I'll see that most of my friends who are in their fifties, for whom a family never happened- they fell through the cracks as wives and husbands. They're Going to die without having kids. And my heart goes out to these people, because my life began when I had kids. I think, They're all alone. Why not reach out to people you haven't seen for years? Why not? I'm not going to do it, but I'm not going to judge it. So, yes, I am a Luddite. I recently got a contract on the email that said just cut and paste and send it back this way. I wrote back saying, "I don't know how to cut and paste."

JOSEPH SALVATORE

Many emerging writers today are cold by their publisher to promote their work through social media. The AWP conference is a viral place for mostly unknown writers to gather and network. Can you talk about the career versus the work?

DUBUS

I'm not criticizing. I know a lot of publishers are in peril financially, and so they've pushed this task onto us because they've laid off their publicists, and they're trying to cut corners. I have to say, for me, this whole career consciousness is a kind of poison.

I think it's a publisher' s job to do all this shit, so I resist it, and I think we have every right to say, "That's your job. You're taking fifteen percent of every book, so earn it! I'm writing another one." I really feel that way. But let me take that back, coo; there's a caveat to that. I've been fortunate enough to get some nice advances for the last few books, and so I'll do a sixty-city fucking tour even though a book tour is a recipe for self-loathing. I'm very fortunate that I'm in the literary Boston community, because I've got a lot of good writer friends now, and while I didn't always hang out with writers, I have a good chunk of them now, and they're fun to hang out with. But I try to avoid any activity that makes me career conscious, because I am as susceptible to it as anyone. I didn't want to be a writer to be a writer. I just like writing.
You read Townie, so you know I came to writing basically to save my life, and I was surprised it was in me, but it's in a lot of us; there are six or seven writers in my clan. One of the benefits of being my dad's son is I quickly realized no one was going to give me any positive attention whatsoever. The world was not only going to ignore me-it was going to kind of go after me.

I thought, I'll just do it for me- no, not for me- for the characters who are coming. I'll just show up every day. A day writing badly, or mediocrely, is a hundred times better than a day where we don't get to

the desk at all. I never lose sight of that fact that it's a wonderful gift from the Divine, the Mysteries, whatever these things are around us, that I found early on something that, when I do it daily, makes me feel magnanimous toward humanity, keeps me curious, keeps me alive, and it's been a wonderful happy accident that I actually had a career happen. Because that was never the plan. Early on, I couldn't afford an office. There was no office at Emerson College. I was driving one day, thinking, Wow, when the radio's off, this car 'is pretty quiet. So I started to write in my car. I wrote all of House Of Sand and Fog over four years in my car. It was 5:30 in the morning- if it's a carpentry day, I'm in my work clothes; if it's a teaching day, I'm in my teaching clothes. I would get my coffee, go to the graveyard, pull up next to a grave. I'd open my composition notebook, sharpen my pencil with a utility knife, and I'd feel like sleeping. If it 's winter, I've got the car running with the heat on. If it's summer, the windows are down and I'm wearing bug spray. I read a paragraph: "Ah, it sucks. Fuck." Cross it out. Write two lines. Stare at them. Write three or four more lines. Write a paragraph. Ooh! Something's starting to happen. Ah, fuck, time for work! And have to put it aside. But four years later, I had a book.

FRENCH

So did it take the full four years to write House Of Sand and Fog?

DUBUS

It took three years in the graveyard. At the end of that, I had twenty­ two notebooks with a beginning, middle, and end, and then I had to type it. I spent a year typing and revising. Then I sent it out. It went to twenty-four, twenty-five publishers over two years, which is normal. People don't realize this. My first three books went to over a hundred publishers. Seven years of no's to get those three yes's. I also had the model of watching my father; his life never changed at all, whenever he had a book out. He also had a very small publisher. He would get some nice reviews, but he never made much money.I'm grateful for the material success I've had, but it's been a happy accident.

FRENCH

I'm curious about writing in longhand. House of Sand and Fog was in different viewpoints. Did you find , over the course of three years, that it was difficult to find where you were? If you were in Kathy's viewpoint, was it difficult to go back and find where the Colonel was? How did you manage that kind of multiple viewpoint, especially on paper?

DUBUS

Well, it wasn't so much the paper as the lack of time I had to write. I just did a talk with Daniel Woodrell-Winter's Bone-and before every writing day, he reads the entire manuscript before he writes the next sentence. If you've got two hundred pages-that's four hours of reading- before writing the next sentence. So Everyone's got their own way. For me, and this may have helped, I knew I had thirty-one minutes, maybe, in the car before I had go to the highway to hit the job site or the classroom. I would reread enough to get back into character, and with the notebooks, it's crossed-out lines and arrows and numbers. But here's what I love about writing longhand: I built a soundproof cave in my basement, like a jail cell, five feet wide, six feet rail, eleven feet long. It's got a little port window I cover with a blanket, a little desk, and a blank wall- and I'll put on my headphones and I'll Play music and I'll type the previous day's longhand into the thing, and then I'll turn off the music and read over the typed stuff, making revisions, and then I'll keep writing longhand. I need the physical intimacy of flesh, blood, bone, wood, paper. It helps me enter the character.

SALVATORE

So you don 't listen to music when you're doing fresh composition?

DUBUS

No. I have to have complete silence. I put headphones on that I used to use for my table-saw work. I can hear jackhammers or squirrels, but I can't hear human voices.

FRENCH

Do you think it slows you down, in a way that's helpful, to write longhand?

DUBUS

Writing longhand does slow you down. There's a great line from Goet he: "Do not hurry. Do not rest." Some people say, " I need the computer, because my ideas are so fast." I say, "Ideas? I don't trust ideas. Ideas are just ideas." I trust the other stuff. I love that line from Flannery O'Connor, from Mystery and Manners: "There's a certain grain of stupidity the writer of fiction can hardly do without, and that's the quality of having to stare."

What I love about longhand is that when you look at that screen on the machine, every thing's so fucking perfect, the margins, everything. It's like having a partner you think you love- she's so beautiful- but there's really nothing going on between you. He's so handsome and nice, but there's just nothing happening. So every thing's sexy, but I'm dead inside. The handwritten manuscript is homely; it's ugly. It's full of crossed-out words, X's and numbers-read this first, then this and this, then arrow back four pages. It's a messy pain in the ass, and when that starts to read well, you think, Well, there might be something happening here. So I would sometimes read twenty pages of mess, maybe five pages typed, and then I'd write in thirty-one minutes three sentences, and then I'd start the car and go. I like how it slows me down.

FRENCH

In your class at Emerson, you talked about the process of discovery when you're writing a first draft, trying to capture what's happening as truthfully as possible. Later, you've got a beginning, middle, and end, and you know it's not there yet, but you have a sense of what happens, a sense of the conflict in the character you might not have realized at first. The characters slowly reveal themselves to you. So when you go back to revise, do you fear that you're imposing something on the characters now that you're more conscious of the work?

DUBUS

I love this Richard Bausch line: "If you think you're thinking when you're writing, think again. You're much closer to the dreaming side when you're writing, so just dream, dream, dream it through. Then when you're done, try to look at what you've dreamed like a doctor looks at an X-ray, and cry to be terribly smart about it." He's talking about revision. I've stolen Janet Burroway's distinction of story versus plot, and I use it in classes all the time, because I think it's helpful, the way she elegantly lays it out: Story is a causal sequence of events, with a beginning, a middle, and an end. You have to give yourself permission to write through seventy pages of brush, where you know you're kind of off the trail, and you've lost the scent, but you've got to write it to find your way back. You may not keep all that you're writing about his history in dental school, but you've got to know who this dentist is, who's married to your main character. Even though a little voice in your head says, "Ah, this is fucking really slow.This is such a-so what?" But you've got to find it. So what is plot? Plot, Burroway says, is how we arrange that causal sequence of events in order to highlight emotion, dramatic tension, theme, aesthetic, to make it more beautiful, to make it more fully itself. So go back to Bausch. He 's talking about that X-ray on the wall. Even then, he says, 'Try to be terribly smart about it." I think he's talking about plotting. And even then , it's not a contrivance. Plotting is much a dream-like state; it's more rational, analytical, and logical than dreaming, but it shouldn't be too much that way. When it gets too much that way, that 's when you're assuming, Oh, she's a recovering alcoholic. I have to keep remembering that. But then I remind myself: Wait a minute. These are real people. I don't think they're just creations of writers. I think, when you're writing well, you're finding them in another dimension; it's an act of spiritual excavation.

What distinguishes a good work from a great one, despite all the aspects of craft and all the skills you bring to it, is genuine curiosity. I'm speaking for myself. You teach what you need to learn. My worst writing has been when I have not been curious enough about the material. My best writing has been when I have been totally curious. He said this, but is it all that? She says this, but is this all she thinks about what she said? Is this all she feels about what she thinks? And is that all he said when she said what she thought, after she said what she felt? That Hemingway line: "Every writer needs a built-in, shockproof shit detector." Why is my shit detector going off every time I'm in this really well written scene I wrote? I remember when I was in my twenties at some reading, and some famous writer said, "Oh, it gets harder as you go along." I didn't know it then, but I think he was saying that even though you've been practicing writing daily for decades and are more nimble than you were when you starred­ you can describe a woman sitting in a chair, with a light behind her, overlooking Boston, maybe a little more deftly than you could thirty years ago-but just because you write well about something doesn't mean it happened. We get to be such good liars, we're not writing the truth anymore. When I write a story, I'm never gripped with the desire to tell the story. I'm gripped with the desire to find the story, to find it. You can't choose what you'll be pulled coward. Let me give you an example: For years, off and on, I've read in the newspapers about a certain kind of predator. He's not a sexual predator, not a violent predator-just a guy who does something weird. And it's always interested me. But, apparently, not enough, because whenever I've sat down to write his story, twice now as a novel, it collapses like a house of cards. I did a bunch of research and I wrote really, really hard. I've been writing long enough- and I read it. It's a decent passage; it's a decent piece of dialogue. Again, ch is the whole notion of: The writing's not bad; I've been doing it a long time. But it feels ... It took me years to start saying chis in writing classes: To me, there's a difference between making something up and imagining it. Just because I want to write from the point of view of this guy doesn't mean he wants me to be his daddy, doesn't mean he's going co co me co me.

FRENCH

Did you feel less connected to him as a character?

DUBUS

I felt like an actor pulling off a decent performance. But here's what happened. I go into his first victim , a woman working in a bank, kind of a pretty, overweight woman. So, okay, I'm going to co-opt her point of view, just to find her a little bit, and then I'm going to zap her with my guy. I've been writing for three months from his point of view. With two paragraphs of writing from her point of view, she felt ten times more real than he did.This is the mystery I'm talking about. One of the dangers of fine art instruction in graduate programs-undergraduate, whatever,conferences-is that we can demystify the process too much. It's mysterious to me why this overweight, lonely, pretty woman in a bank is far more real to me, in minutes of writing about her, than this guy. So, okay, I'm going to ignore that feeling. I'm going co keep writing, because I'm going co zap her with my guy, because that's the fucking novel I want co write, and I'm going to write it! After maybe six days, two weeks of writing, it was so clear that her passage was imagined and real. And his was fake and contrived and better written because of it. Pascal said: "Anything written co please the author is worthless." I really believe that. I don't chink we get co do what we want co do. I believe writing is an act of humility, of opening yourself co so something larger and allowing it in, no matter how you feel about it. So that lady turned into the first novella in the book coming up. She never even saw the guy again. He was like a Hollywood set held up by telephone poles. I let him go.

FRENCH

Have you had other characters you felt distant from, who you had to work harder to understand?

DUBUS

Lester in House of Sand and Fog.

FRENCH

His point of view is very brief.

SALVATORE

And it's dose-third, as opposed to the two firsts. What happened with Lester?

DUBUS

Here's the thing: I know Sand and Fog became a big success, but I'm haunted by it. I think a better writer would have written a better book, and I'd like another stab at it. One of the challenges for me was Lester. I've got these alternating first-person points of view. Now, this is it again: back to mystery, right? The Colonel-I tried all these various points of view-he would not come, until I got to first- person present, which I didn't want to write in, because I wrote a lot of my first book in first-person present. I said, "It's too intimate, too close." But he would always show up in the present. And then Kathy would only show up in first-person past. I tried all these points of view. Isn't it weird that the only present -tense character in the book doesn't survive it? He can' t tell it in the past tense. That was not conscious at all-just intuition.
When I get to Lester, Kathy's in the house. She's drunk and suicidal, and the Colonel's gone. I'm thinking, Oh, this is great, man. This might actually be a positive thing for once in my writing life. But then, it's fucking Lester, sitting on the porch. I kind of stared at the page for a while, and I just kept seeing Lester. I'm just staring and there he is. I see him waiting. I remember thinking, Fuck! I don't want to get his point of view. I've got, like, a hundred and eighty pages in their points of view.Isn't it kind of late to bring him in? I thought, I'm not bringing him in. I'm going to go back to them. But they were just in a tableau.
I kept seeing him on that foggy porch in the fish camp in the woods, waiting for her. I said, I don't want to write about you, motherfucker, but I guess I have to. I went in with a first- person narrator, because I had this little rule in my head: You can't go from two first-persons to a third. What the fuck? I have to do it first. So I did a first-present. He sounded like a bad piece of matinee cowboy writing. I'm waiting for my woman on the porch. Where is my cute, little alcoholic sex ... " It was awful. I tried first-person past, and it was worse. I tried third-person subjective, but it was still a little more distant- the third. A little alarm went off: You can't go to a third-person POV! And I thought, why not? All of a sudden, I could feel him. I could feel him far more than I could before, but I still felt, all the way through him, through this whole section, he was saying ... With the two first-person points of view, it was two hands pushing this way: "Back off, Jack." When I finally found the third-person subjective voice, one hand was saying, "All right, come on," and the other one was saying, "Back off" For a while, I felt like an artistic failure to not have both hands pulling me in, as I felt with Kathy and the Colonel, bur then I said , " No, chis is you, motherfucker. This is how you are. You've got a guard up, don't you? You're an inauthentic kind of dude. I'm just going to let you be."

FRENCH

I recently looked at House of Sand and Fog and a few other multiple-viewpoint novels for what I'm writing now. I was crying so organically follow all my characters' voices, how they spoke to me, and was concerned the points of view weren't all marching. I had that same moment of-Really? Am I allowed to do that? So it was helpful co see what you had done, mixing first-person past, first-person present, and third-person past, and say, "O h, sure, you can do that."

DUBUS

That's why reading is so important for writers. I'm mystified when I hear people say they don't read when they're writing. Are you kidding me? I remember hearing this story about Richard Yates at the Iowa Writers' Workshop, and I heard my father say it years later- that he had two points of view in the same sentence, and everyone said, "O h, you can't do that!" And he said, "Well, I just did."

Again, that great line from O'Connor: "The writer can do whatever she can get away with. Unfortunately, none of us have ever been able to get away with much." This notion that the art is larger than the artist, that there's such a thing as dramatic unity, and effect, and aesthetics, and some things hold, and some things don't. It's endlessly exciting. I've been doing this for-I don't even want to say it, because I've only published five books- but I've been doing this for thirty years, five, six days a week. The only time I didn't was when we had our kids. For, like, three days I didn't, and then when I had pneumonia twice. I'm as excited about it as when I began, because it's such a descent into the unknown. It's scary and exalted, and I love stepping into the not-knowing. I think one of the dangers of being a successful writer, in terms of books and publications and money and all that shit, is I think you can run the risk of becoming more a thinker than a dreamer. I'm trying not to do that.

SALVATORE

I'm going to return to Lester for a moment. At some point, he takes the bullets out of the gun and gives them to Kathy. And at one point, he thinks, I could have told that kid, "It's not going to work; there are no bullets in there." And he might have stopped the whole thing from going down. You talk about struggling to create Lester. But Lester was probably, in terms of Greek tragedy, the one that scared me the most­, how easily you can go from being an upstanding citizen to falling in ways you never could have imagined.

DUBUS

The truth is, the inauthentic feeling, I ultimately concluded, was him. He did not feel like a contrived character to me, or I wouldn't have left him in. I would have rewritten the whole rest of the book. I am mortified to say that there is so much Lester in me. I've never been a cop, I've never had a gun, but it is no stretch for me to imagine going from being an upstanding citizen to some guy in a jail cell.

FRENCH

And to save the victim, right? That's really what he was doing. He was partially motivated by saving a woman, who he felt something terrible was happening to.

DUBUS

Which brings me back to this notion of imagining versus making up. I'm writing from her point of view, but at first I didn't know she was an alcoholic. I knew she was a cokehead, but I've met coke heads who could drink, I've met alcoholics who can do a line of coke, but not go down the coke road, and then there are those who have dual addictions. I thought, Maybe she's not an alcoholic. Maybe her husband was alcoholic and into cocaine. Maybe she's just a recovering cokehead. Lester's pouring the wine on that date, and she's drinking, and I was actually surprised to see it escalate. She's drinking nips of Bacardi, and now she's going down the spiral, and she's at the gas station , getting gas. I'm following her, thinking, All right, so I'm shitfaced, and I'm fucked up, and this mother fucker'staken my father's house, and I'm the fuck up of my family,and I see the gas is empty. I wasn't like: I will now send her to the gas station to get gas to burn down the house. I go get gas, and I see it with Kathy-Motherfuckers, we're all going down. I'm filling the gas container, and then I go to put it in the trunk, and I see the gun. I forgot the gun was there! She's looking at it; I'm looking at it over her shoulder, kind of in her skin. We reach for it, and I'm thinking, What the fuck's going to happen now?

Stephen King says, "To me, these books are found objects." I thought that was really remarkable and true. But look, none of that can be taught. Ron Carlson says: "Details are for the writer only. They are the instruments by which we steer." So many younger writers think, Oh, yeah, well, I'll give him a job later. What do you mean, give him a job later? Are you kidding me? A guy who comes home from working on hear as in an operating room is a different human being than someone who's been shoveling shit- a different human being than someone who's been changing bed pans or bundling mortgages and sending them to Taiwan.You must know what your character does all day. Not just that­ sensory detail is so important. We all know, we are more in the room than someone who's blind and deaf. They'd be in the room in a different way; they have other gifts that come out, but they are not in the room as fully as we are, because they have been robbed of two important senses. When I write, I'm not bringing in all that sensual detail so much to give the reader a felt experience, although ultimately I do want to give the reader that experience. The main reason I'm bringing in all that detail, though , is so I can be in the body and in the moment with this character to know what's really going on. Let me give you an example-I'm writing from the point of view of Kathy. I'm waking up in my car. I'm sleeping outside the house that was wrongfully taken from me. I've got to pee, and I've got to brush my teeth. But I'm hearing power saws. Now, I know that they're circular saws, because I'm a carpenter, but she's hearing power saws, and she looks out and there are carpenters, cutting into the roof of her stolen house. Even with the bad taste in my mouth and having to pee, I am now running barefoot across the street: What the fuck! That's my fucking house! I'm running with her, and what do I see? An upside-down piece of roof sheeting, with a bunch of roofing tacks sticking out, and she steps on it, nine little holes going into the bottom of her foot. She pulls it out. As soon as that happened, as a writer, I'm thinking, Ah, fuck! Now every time she's in a scene, I've got to remember her foot. The writer could say, "We ll, fuck it. Maybe she just stubs her toe." But that would be making it up instead of imagining it. What your imagination gave you was the sheeting with nails, now work with it. Summon the nerve and the faith, and work with it.

Now what happens? Well, one action stories a causal sequence of events with a beginning, middle, and end. Or that causes them to come down. She's in the house, getting her foot wrapped by this Iranian lady who doesn't even know who she is, and it's sweet. Now I'm in this motel room with my wrapped foot, that's been wrapped all day with an Ace bandage on a hot day. There's this guy who I, as a writer, don't know who the fuck he's sniffing around. I don't even want him in the story. Why? Because I don't want to research cops. But he's sniffing after this woman. I'm not trying to judge, but I'm just allowing him to-okay, here he is. He walks over. She's unwrapping her foot, because it's hot, and as she's starting to unwrap it, she's afraid it's going to smell. And that's right when the handsome, young cop is there and, frankly, she doesn't know it, but nobody wants to smell bad. She sits back so he doesn't smell her stinky foot, and when she sits back, he takes that as some sort of invitation to sit on the side of the bed. She's leaning forward to get more comfortable and then they're kissing, and then they're fucking! And I'm writing this thing: Aw, come on. Bullshit! And then I think, Come on! What kind of a prick are you? And then: What is this? What are you, like, a sex addict, too? This is so fucked up. And the next day, my shit detector did not go off. Now I've got this cop in my story. That whole novel never would have gone to its catalytic, tragic end, without the introduction of that cop and his gun, which never would have happened if she hadn't stepped on nails.

SALVATORE

Cause and effect.

DUBUS

That's all I try to impart in classes. I say, Look. Anyone's invited to this party; you just need real, authentic curiosity, an ability to dream, and concrete, specific sensual detail. Put those together, and it always leads to characters in trouble. Why? Because everybody's in trouble all the fucking time. This is another thing that upsets people, especially Americans: All three of us-hopefully none of us have big trouble, but if I scratch the surface a little, we all have some trouble. That's normal, and that's where stories lie.

SALVATORE

So when Lester sleeps with Kathy, at what point in the writing do you have to figure out why he's having trouble with his wife, and when and if the backstory with him and his kid will come into it? What's the relationship between revision and continuing to tell the truth?

DUBUS

I tend to write chronologically, and I allow cause and effect to happen. That's not to say that the finished story will be in the shape in which I wrote it. With Lester, I begin where I chink he begins in the book, which is, he' swaiting: Where is she? S h e said she'd be here. Why isn't she here? I just left my wife. It's like people: some you're just more attracted to, male or female. You just get along. With Lester, I didn't want to hang out with him. I would rather hang out with the tyrant, the proud, rigid Colonel.
Actually, let's talk about the Colonel and then do Lester, because the first few weeks of trying to write from the point of view of this Iranian guy, he wasn't showing up, and I finally figured out why he wasn't showing up. I found the first-person voice pretty soon, but he still wasn't showing up. I realized I was judging him. I realized I thought, You're a prick. You were with SAVAK, the CIA-controlled death squads. You were a piece of shit. You're just some powerful bastard. It was totally unconscious on my part. There's that great line from Hemingway to Maxwell Perkins at Scribner's. He said, "You know,Max, the writer's job is not to judge, but to seek to understand." I wasn't seeking to understand, but I thought I was. Again, it's like convincing yourself you're kissing her and you're really turned on, but something's not happening. I had this plywood desk I built in our little apartment and I was staring at the plywood. I cut it with a dull blade, and it was a shitty cut, and I was thinking, You don't do anything right. You don't go get a sharp blade. And then thinking, You know what? You're judging this motherfucker. And what happens in life when you feel prejudged by someone? You say, "Fuck you." I think the same is true of characters. He felt prejudged by me, and he said, "Fuck you." So I'm looking at this shitty jigsaw cut, and I said, "Why don't you really try to understand this guy?" I remember asking, "What's it like?"

Charlie Rose asked Mike Nichols, the director, "What's the main question the storyteller asks?" Nichols said, "Well, it's not the main question the newspaper reporter asks. The main question the newspaper reporter has tO ask before writing his or her story is, 'What happened?' What the storyteller asks is not, 'What happened?' but , 'What's it like? What's it really like to be in this thing that's happened?"
So now I'm going to be more open, less judgmental: What's it really like to be a guy like you, from your culture, working with these blue-collar people? As soon as I felt myself embrace genuine curiosity, he showed up, and he stayed. The same thing with Lester- you asked about Lester's marriage and all that. I had far less judgment against Lester. I was just a little irked that I had to go to the third-person point of view and to another character two hundred pages into the story, bur that's what was presenting itself.It was a much shorter trip to genuine curiosity about Lester, but I remember thinking , Okay, who are you, anyway? I called the San Mateo County Sheriff's Department , and got a hold of a Captain John Wells. I probably made twenty calls to him over the next few months. It was a matter of: What's it really like to be a field­ trained officer, seven o'clock, after a twelve-hour shift training younger cops, just left your wife, you're on the porch, you're kind of horny and lonely, probably hungry,and you want a drink, and she's not here. You had that sweet kiss-just the one. And now, it's like acting: Where is she? And now I'm in the car, driving, going into Lester.

FRENCH

Writing a novel takes such a long time-so much of it spent in that dream state you spoke of, not knowing your characters yet, not knowing where you are going.

DUBUS

Yes, no matter what's going on in your life- a novel can take a long time. That one took four years; The Garden of Last Days took five-and­ a-half years; Bluesman took three years; The Cage Keeper took six years; Townie I tried to write for twenty-eight years, three different times. You're going to go through all sorts of highs and lows and changes in those years, but your novel doesn't. This whole notion of imagining versus making up: I cannot tell you how many sex scenes and meal scenes I've written, drinking scenes, that I cur. You're bringing yourself to the characters, but you cannot bring your literal life to the page; you have to find a way to begin to turn it over to them. I think some of the sex is too explicit in House of Sand and Fog. I mean, there's this blowjob. Why do I need that? But I remember why I wrote it so explicitly, and I actually cut two or three moments from that, because I needed to find out what they had together. I still am not sure. I think there was more needy, addictive sex than lovemaking between them, but I needed to write it explicitly to find out. I could feel her need for him. I felt a lot of addictive, desperate need, and not a lot of love.

SALVATORE

I remember thinking the scene with Lester and Kathy was about disconnected intimacy from his wife, a dearth of intimacy for this guy. So he comes togerher with this woman who might be looking for a connection through sex. It's the moment they both have, a collision that was honest, albeit damaged.

DUBUS

I've met couples over the years who are companions, or lovers. I can't tell you how many marriages I've seen where they'll tell you they haven't had sex in five years or something, and they seem to have a solid union. You know where Lester came from? One of the things I cut out of Townie was- I went to Mexico with a bounty hunter, looking for a contract killer. I was twenty-two and had a fake name, and the guy was a bad, bad guy. We went to gay bars, bisexual whorehouses, because he was bisexual. I was meeting with US Marshals and FBI agents, DEA guys from New York, and the Colorado Bureau of Investigation. One night, three in the morning, I'd done some surveillance on a diamond thief. I actually did this for like six months, and it was interesting, but I cut it from Townie, because Townie had its own narrative arc. This felt like a whole other narrative arc. So I cut it. I was a quiet boy, just listening and sitting across from a US Marshal, who had just come from a raid that night. He had this crooked mustache. He was kind of handsome. He looked more like an English teacher than a US Marshal. He looked like he shouldn't be carrying his gun. He was talking tough and almost blew off this guy's head, but I thought, This guy looks like he should be teaching Ezra Pound somewhere. Fifteen years later he shows up in my story.

FRENCH

You just said you were a quiet boy. My interaction with you as a student, or later if reading an interview or catching something that you've done over the years, always showed you to be this incredibly gregarious, open, warm, no-boundaries person. So I was struck by the Andre in Townie, who seemed much more solitary and introspective, even brooding. How do you connect those two pans of you to being a writer?

DUBUS

When you talk about those two selves, the truth is I was scared. Writing Townie brought that back, and educated me to that conscious fear. I spent most of my youth afraid. I was afraid all the time. I was a bright kid, and I was in blue-collar neighborhoods , where articulate, bright kids get stomped, so I always hid my smarts the way a lot of women do.

I got back in touch with me writing Townie: I was physically small, sedentary, weak and terrified- and bright and depressed. Then all the suffering changed, and I willed my way out of it. I became violent, and then I became who I always was. I think if I'd grown up in a safe environment, the way I'm raising my kids, I would have been the class clown. I would have raised my hand. I wouldn't have been ashamed. I once wrote a paper on Walt Whitman that I snuck to the teacher, because I didn't want anybody to know I wrote the paper on the homosexual poet. I was up till three in the morning, making it really good. I didn't do a lot of homework. I wasn't a good student. But I loved Leaves of Grass.
It was learning to defend myself that I fought my way onto my own two feet. So, you know, motherfucker, I deserve to be here, too. What do I mean by "here"? On the planet. My brother was really hard to write about in that book. I took a more traditional male route, where I rook all my hurt and converted it into rage, and I became homicidal. If I'd been an athlete, I could have taken that rage and thrown a football or swung a bat, but I used my fists and feet. My brother did what a lot of girls do-which is a generalization, but I think there's some truth to it- he took all his hurt and rage and turned it inward. He got depressed and sick and wanted to die. I felt it was important to have his suicidal route and my homicidal route. But it was my homicidal route that led me to the nerve it takes to write.

I don't know if I'll put this in the book, but I've been thinking about it since. You know when I write about that membrane? Joe and I just met. If l reached out and touched his cheek, I'd be violating his personal space. But it was in that first fight that I really found out what it was. I saw a shoving match between two fathers at a kids' hockey game a few years ago-"Oh, yeah? Oh, yeah?" They're pushing and shoving each other in the parking lot, and I looked at them, and I thought, Neither one of them is a fighter. Neither one, because there's no foreplay in fighting. None. We're in it- BO O M! My point is, anyone can learn to throw a punch, and it's good and it's valuable, but for experienced fighters, it's like a psychological hymen, and once you break it, it's always broken. Once you punch someone as hard as you can in their face, you've learned to violate the intimacy of another human being, and you'll always know how to do it. And, frankly, it's hard not to reach for that. It's like having a gun; it's like having a nuclear bomb.
I'm not going to belabor everything that's in Townie,but I Don't think I Wrote about this directly, and I've been thinking about it. I'm An uncle figure for a lot of young people, and one of them is a young woman I've known since she was a kid. She's Twenty-seven, twenty-eight now, and she's got a boyfriend who was a brawler from Haverhill- real rough kid. He and I were drunk one night, and kind of reminiscing about fighting, and I was a little ashamed, because I was really reminiscing. We both admitted we kind of miss that moment right before it's going to happen, where you're squaring off and you might get killed. There's such an adrenaline high to the physical combat that's about to happen. You don't know this guy; you don't know how dangerous he is; you don't know how much crazier he is than you are, and it's up to you and your body to get out of this. There's a real thrill and a nerve to step into that unknown. You talked about the quiet me, and, yeah, I am outgoing and gregarious. I was always, but I was afraid to be that way, because I would get stomped. Once I got through the violent years, I realized there's a similarity between the nerve it takes to step into a combat situation and the nerve it takes to try to enter the skin of another human being with a pencil.

SALVATORE

Another membrane?

DUBUS

Another membrane- when you go, Why can't I be her? Why can't I go all the way?

FRENCH

Are you saying that gaining nerve through violence helped you have the nerve to imagine yourself as a writer?

DUBUS

I'm hesitant to say this out loud, because I don't want any young man or woman thinking, I'm going to go kick some ass so I can be a writer. I don't think anyone's going to take it literally, but the truth is, with my little path in life, it's hard to imagine that I would have found writing any other way. I had to fight my way onto my own two feet, to stand there and plant myself and say, " You know, I'm not a piece of shit. I have a life, and I'm going to live it." Once I worked through all that and survived physically and didn't hurt anyone too bad, I think I did find myself in a place where I thought: Okay, now I can start. But it was totally unconscious.

SALVATORE

There's Something about the way you've talked about your writing ritual-a daily act of trying to become the other, your own relationship to a Creator, even your atheism- which suggests a spiritual side. Is that side connected to your art? I was thinking about your father's daily practice of Mass and then writing and running.

DUBUS

Let's talk about the ritual. Because I think that's what you're talking about more than anything. I reread an essay of my dad's recently, maybe "A Father's Story," in which he writes, "Belief is believing in God. Faith is believing that God believes in you."

I do not believe there's a God who loves you. I do not believe there is a loving Creator who knows me and loves me. I feel deeply alone, and whatever good happens to me comes from my hard work, and that's it. I think there's value to feeling alone. So there's that versus ritual. If you look at the word "ritual," it comes from the Latinritus: it means "river." When you step into ritual, you're stepping into some ancient river. I have pagan rituals, and I've never told anyone, but I'll just share it with you. I've got to have a cup of black coffee- dark roast, French Roast, organic. Black. I begin each writing day reading poetry. I've got about four hundred volumes of poetry, and every time I do a reading in a bookstore, I buy a book of poems. I love poetry; I don't write it, but I love it. Right now, I'm reading The Great Fire by Jack Gilbert. If I'm procrastinating, I'll read six or seven poems, and I might read two poems, back to back. Then I'll sharpen my pencil with a blade. I've never told anyone this, but I'll tell you: My wife- I'm hesitant to do it. It's funny how we don 't talk too much. Fuck it. If it has power, it's just superstition, but it's so interesting the superstitions here, because, again, there's a great line in ancient Chinese: "If the mad dog comes at you, whistle for him." My wife gave me two stones:one's a piece of quartz that represents love, and the other is a piece of aventurine-green- that has to do with creativity. I hold those two stones in my left hand the whole time I'm writing.

FRENCH

Even when you were in the car, did you do that?

DUBUS

No, and not when I'm traveling, I don't bring the stones, because I'm afraid of losing them. They stay in my cave. But also, one of the first writers who really influenced me was Breece Pancake. Have you read his story "Trilobites' '? I turned a friend of mine on to that story- he's actually the bounty hunter I worked with, and in his world travels he found a fossilized trilobite, and sent it to me. The trilobite's on my desk, and then a dear brother of mine, who was an artist, brought me back a bottle of water from the Delphi Oracle in Greece. That's been on my desk for twenty years. I write with these stones in my hand; I write with a sharpened pencil; I have headphones on, for complete silence; I have the Delphi Oracle water, the fucking trilobites; the ghost of Breece Pancake; and then , lastly,there's a little piece of alder wood that my cousin put two holes in, and now it's a pencil holder. That's on my desk, too. And my Mead composition book. I am all about ritual. I'm a pagan. I ain't no Catholic.

I remember when Doctorow said he writes in front of a blank wall. He said the only reason he doesn't write in front of window, or in front of a photograph or painting or inspiring quotes is because that blank wall makes him go back to his sentences. I write in front of a blank wall. But I really am merciless about my mornings. Mornings are the dream time.

FRENCH

Early mornings?

DUBUS

I'm not an early dude. I've got to get my eight hours. I go to the university twice a week, and I don't have to be there till, like, two in the afternoon. I'll get my two youngest to their high school, Fontaine's at her dance studio. I get my coffee, go to my cave, and I'm there from 8:30 to about 11:00, and that's it, and then I go about my day. Sometimes it's not that long. For many years, my magic writing time was an hour and fifteen minutes. That'd be about fifteen minutes of staring, then about twelve minutes of foreplay, then about forty minutes of hard work, ten minutes of cool down, thinking about lunch and phone bills. You're out of there. But you can get a lot done in seventy-five minutes a day.

I'm not convinced more time is helpful. My old man, when he was crippled, had a tiny end table where he kept his medications, reading material, ashtray; he was laid up for months. He asked me to build him a larger table. I built one out of pine, three times the size.So he put his medication there, his book. In a week, that whole fucking thing was full. I said, "Dad, why do I have a feeling that if I built you a six-foot table, that's going to be equally full?"

SALVATORE

We were talking about the quiet kid who comes through the fire, but I've been thinking about the spiritual side of you and this thing you do. Not only the feminine side I think I see, but the teacher. You can really quote scuff-not only quote it, but you live it; it's not an act. And you've got so much committed to memory. I feel like some of this scuff suggests a kind of secular ritual, where these are almost like prayers for you, secular prayers. You have so many of those. Was that a part of the way you were reaching yourself?

DUBUS

I have poems memorized. For that reason. They really are like secular prayers. I think I retain what helps me, and I think what helps me is when someone has articulated what I've intuitively felt and never known. Then the words are there for me to give to someone else, if it's helpful to them. I do say, often, that I'm full of shit in so many ways, but what I really mean, where I'm really full of shit is I talk like an atheist, but I feel like a holy man. So I feel like a fraud. Instead of the holy man who's the fraud, I feel like the secular guy who's a fraud. I knew a woman who was going through a horrible time. She was raised Irish Catholic, and she doesn't pray, she said, "Because I don't believe in God, and I think it would be hypocritical of me to pray now that I need him." I said, "That makes sense." I said, "You know, I pray all the time, and I don't believe in God." Right now, my son's driving from Ohio to Florida with a bunch of frat boys to party all week, so I'm praying my ass off about that, because I have to. But the truth is, I do believe- and studies have shown- people fighting cancer. You've heard of this study? They had two groups. One group of people fighting cancer were prayed for by five hundred people- they didn't know they were being prayed for-and another group was not prayed for. The group that was prayed for, eighty percent did better than those who were not prayed for.

I have a hard time believing in a strong head honcho. I don't believe it, and I don't believe there's a God who knows my name. I'm a nameless speck. But I'm a sacred speck, as you are a sacred spec k. Have you read "The Magic Show" by Tim O' Brien? There's a wonderful line in there: "Writers tend to be the kind of people who want to enter the mystery of things." I think that's true of readers, too.

SALVATORE

The kid in Townie was scared, as you said. He was traumatized. And I'm hearing about different spiritual aspects in your life. This sensitivity strikes me as a characteristic of people who suffer from PTSD; one of the characteristics of PTSD is a hyper-awareness to the world.

DUBUS

Yep. I was in a Mexican restaurant with my wife, Fontaine , about five years ago, and something was really weird about the dinner. First, we were having a date, just the two of us, and then I realized, Oh, wow.

I've got my back to the restaurant. I hadn't sat like that in twenty years. I said, " Honey, my back's not to the wall." She said, "You Want to switch?" I said, "No . I'm going to do it. I'll have another round, though." Writing Townie rustled up some emotional sediment. I feel post-trauma coming back. Every day before I work out, I'll do this joint-loosening warm­ up that's part martial arts yoga, and I've got my eyes shut when I do this stuff, and I see the workout I'm about to do. For ten or fifteen years now, I can shut my eyes in a gym; since writing Townie, I can't shut my eyes. I shut my eyes, and I feel some body coming after me to fuck me up. So my eyes are open again. I am always standing in a room, scanning it.

FRENCH

So writing this memoir wasn't healing in some ways? Instead, it brought everything back?

DUBUS

It was both cathartic and wounding; it cleansed me and fucked me up. I think maybe one reason I try to describe the scene in a precise way is I need to know where I am in the room.

FRENCH

In one scene in Townie, there's a full paragraph of sensory description - I think it might be at Salisbury Beach.

DUBUS

I read that last night at the Literary Death Match.

FRENCH

It touches every sense, and that happens so much throughout Townie. I wonder if it is a way, like you said, of grounding yourself, but it also does the same for the reader- because Townie isn't as linear and cohesive as your novels are; it's fragmented, a little more reflective of memory.It jumps back and forth in time and age, but it also grounds the reader in setting and scene. I would read a paragraph or two-sometimes it would just be sensory detail- and as a reader I knew exactly where I was: sound, sight, smell.

DUBUS

First of all, my memory's not that good. Words, quotes are in my head, song lyrics are in my head, poems are in my head. I can see a movie tonight, and I won't remember it next month- it will be a new movie. I forget what happens in books, too. I remember lines, but I won't remember stories. So how can I write a memoir? This I find really poignant about human beings: If you look at the word "to remember," it means the opposite of"dismember." Chop, chop, chop. To remember means to put back together. Which is why I believe the better memoirs for me are the ones where I feel them sincerely trying to put something back together. Once again, what's fueling the writing, even though it's about your own life, is curiosity. Like, I know what happened in my childhood, but What the fuck happened?

FRENCH

We were asking that question, too, of you: Is this really writing by discovery? If you already know the story?

DUBUS

Go back to Mike Nichols's line: "What's it like? What's it really like to be in this thing that's happened ?" What I found about writing Townie was: Okay, thank God, I'm off the hook for having to come up with the events of the story, the way we do with a novel or short story. I know the events: That's the night I got my ass kicked, and I almost got beaten to death. If the cops hadn't shown up, I might have died that night. My creative powers are free to try to capture, What's it like? What's it really like?

Back to sensory detail: I find at least three in each scene to activate it. But with Townie, I used it as a way to open my memory,not consciously; I just noticed that it kept happening that way, so I kept it up. I'll give you an example: I write about Old Newburyport, which really was a tough , ugly, abandoned waterfront town. I met a guy at the gym last week, who's ten years older than me. He said, "My name's Bruce. I grew up there. No one could fucking walk down that street. You'd get your ass kicked. Even if you lived on that street." We were talking. I remember staring at the page, seeing how isolated my brother and I were, how we were the new kids, and it was a tough town, and all the kids were cruel, and we had no uncles and no father around and no mother around­ because she's working fourteen hours a day- and we would sit on the stoop. So, I'm going to write about sitting on that stoop on a summer day. What's it like? What's it really like to be in this thing?

I tried to capture the hot sun, and then the smell-that fucking broken sidewalk in front of our little house always smelled like dried piss, from the drunks who would stumble home from the barroom. A drunk really did wander into our foyer and piss on the floor. Here I am, the older writer, remembering forty years earlier: I could smell the hot piss, the dried p iss, and now I smell this sweet smell on the paint. The older writer knows it's lead paint, flaking lead paint. I'm trying to describe two smells and the feel of the hot sun on our faces, and then, all of a sudden, a panel opens in my memory: Oh, yeah! One of those days, Cody Perkins and those three guys see us, and they start chasing us. And now, Yeah, we fucking ran! O h, that 's right! We ran through the lumberyard! I remember, We jumped over the fence! We got away! We went underneath the pier. Oh! That's when the fucking drowned guy gets pulled out! When I sat down to write that day, I wasn't thinking, This is the day I write about the drowned man to show thematically the danger of mortality. I just remembered: What's it like to sit on that fucking stoop? Back to Ron Carlson: "Details are the instruments by which we steer." That writing session ended with us walking underneath the pier, where I wanted to stay until dark to avoid those guys, but we didn't want to see the dead guy. All of it I'd forgotten until I wrote that. What triggered it was genuine curiosity and sensual derail, which opened panels into my memory.

FRENCH

That makes me think of the Nadine Gordimer quote: "Writing is making sense of life." Because you went back and discovered and relieved these memories and could maybe look at things more objectively, did you make more sense of your life?

DUBUS

I did. I needed to put the pieces back together to become more whole. I think something shifted , changed. Probably the whole time I was writing it, I thought, This is not going to be a book. It's just too private. But I'm turning fifty. Richard Dreyfuss has this great line: "When you're turning fifty," he said, "you're probably closer to your grave than your high school graduation." I felt, this is going to be for my kids. They're going to know me better, and they're going to know where they come from better. I thought , I'm nor going to make this a book. Thar freed me to write more honestly. I saw Mailer in an interview once, it might have been with Dick Cavett: "So, Mailer, you've lived such a large life. Why haven't you written a memoir? You have so much co write about." Mailer said, "I don't chink writers should write memoirs." And Cavett or whoever said , " Why?" This spooked the shit out of me. Mailer said, "I chink a writer's childhood is like a piece of quartz. In every play or novel that you write is light you shine through the quartz at different angles, which has its own spectrum of colors. I'm afraid if I write directly about the quartz, I'll lose my art." So I'm chinking, Fuck! What am I doing to my quartz? And then I realized, if I never write another word of fiction again, if I'm all done , well, I'm all done, because I so need to tell this story. Then I thought , You know what, Norman? Aren't there other quartzes? What about the quartz of being a husband and father? What about the quartz of being a teacher? What about the quartz of being a carpenter?

Finishing Townie put something behind me. I'd already noticed something weird happening: I've never been able co write about the Merrimack Valley in my fiction. All my fiction is based somewhere else. My old man sec all his stories in the Merrimack Valley. I remember ch is interview with Updike, and he called my father the Bard of the Merrimack Valley. I remember reading chat and chinking, He wasn't the Bard of the Merrimack Valley. He doesn't write about this place. It wasn't a criticism; it was an observation. Maybe Kerouac might have been a little bit the Bard of the Merrimack Valley; maybe Greenleaf Whittier. My father's art was formed in some mysterious way, the way all our art is, through the circumstances of his childhood: in l 930s-'40s French-Irish Catholic south Louisiana. Catholicism was huge. Being a Marine was huge. Then the '60s come-chat went into the pot. All the ocher mysterious forces created Andre Dubus's art. He finds himself living in New England , this displaced Southerner, and he secs his stories in the town in which he finds himself, because char was his artistic inclination. But he never wrote about the Merrimack Valley. He set stories there the way Faulkner set stories in Yoknapatawpha County. It was his Yoknapatawpha County, but I felt like he never wrote about this place. There was no frustration-well, there was a little bit of frustration , bur nor much- I just thought it was really inaccurate of Updike to say char.

Since writing Townie, this accidental memoir chart come s from an essay about baseball and my son-these novels I've coming out in the fall are all set in Merrimack Valley. It's like I had written about it literally, having grown up there, being a mill town kid, from an educated family, and now I'm free to dream about it. I couldn't do that before.

FRENCH

You had one story in 7he Cage Keeper that's highly autobiographical.

DUBUS

"Wolves in the Marsh."

FRENCH

Was that harder for you to write at that time?

DUBUS

Yes. John Irving said, "I think that there are at least two kinds of writers: Those whose vision is more somber and tragic, and chose whose voice and vision are more comic." I think about other differences between writers: Those who are more painterly, and those who are more auditory. Hemingway was painterly; Faulkner was auditor y. It's all about voice and language with Faulkner. With Hemingway, if you gave him some brushes, I bet he could have painted. Then there are writers who can create fiction directly, derivatively from their lives, and those who cannot. My father, Truman Capote, Ernest Hemingway, just to name a few, could write derivatively from their lives. My father's vision was narrow and deep- extremely deep- but he wrote derivatively from his life. I recognize ex-wives. I recognize us kids in his work. I recognize friends in his work. A friend of mine read my first two books and said, "Where are you in your work?" I said, "I don't want you to know. I'm trying to be these people."
I don't think one is better than another, but I realized, finally, "Wolves in the Marsh'' was hard to write because it was too derivative. I'm not a writer who can write from my life. Townie I tried to write three times as a novel. I probably put eight or nine years of writing into it. First it was called Lie Down and Make Angels,and it was terrible. Whenever the father figure came out, based on my father, I made him look worse than he was. The mother: I made her look worse. Whenever little Sean Dolan appeared- me- I made him look better than he was. It was dishonest. Capote says, "A writer must write as cool and detached as a surgeon." I didn't have the detachment. Finally, I was able to write it as this accidental memoir, and it has freed me, in some ways. I have wrestled some things into place inside me, but nothing simple, because my post-traumatic stress is back again.

SALVATORE

Can you tell us a little bit about the forthcoming novellas? You talked about how you've shifted a little. Are they more autobiographical, other than just the geography?

DUBUS

No, they're not. The book's called Dirty Love. One story is from the point of view of an eighteen-year-old girl and the eighty-one-year-old great-uncle she lives with. Another is from the point of view of a fifty-six­ year-old man whose wife just cheated on him, and their marriage is going down the tubes. Another is from the point of view of this woman looking for love. Nothing directly autobiographical, but I realized ... Here's a beautiful line from Willa Cather: "A writer is at her best only when writing within the character in range of her deepest sympathies." I asked myself, Where are my deepest sympathies? I don't like global warming! Homelessnessis mean! No! It's only after you've written something that you discover the answers, right? I'm thinking about Bluesman: It was the third novel I wrote, but it's such a first novel. It's overwritten, and what haunts me most about this book when I look back-the guy who directed House of Sand and Fogs a id about Bluesman,"It was an okay book, but it didn't seem like your book." I realized I wrote that book outside the range of my deepest sympathies.

There was a lot of me in that Iranian military man in House of Sand and Fog, there was a lot of me in addictive Kathy; there's a lot of me in fucked up Lester. I was trying to put a lot of me into these characters, but it was more from the outside in Bluesman. I am haunted by that book, because I feel as if l wrote it outside the range of my deepest sympathies. It's all subconscious; it's all the dream world. Again: imagined versus made up. You only know that when you are with your center, when you hold the stones, and sharpen the pencil, and stare and wait.

Issue 73: A Conversation with Major Jackson

issue73

Found in Willow Springs 73

April 13, 2013

Christian Gotch, Aileen Keown Vaux, Casey Patrik

A CONVERSATION WITH MAJOR JACKSON

major-jackson

Photo Credit: poets.org

Major Jackson's poetry is clear, fluent , and musical, sometimes relying on formal structure, sometimes referencing pop culture, and often investigating how seemingly disparate subjects can interact and inform each other. He asserts that a poem "becomes a kind of time capsule," and as such, can contain references to both Kanye West and ancient Greek mythology, as illustrated in his poem "Letter to Brooks," when Jackson writes: "O, Orpheus grant the skills to stir / the dead like Kanye mixing music with fire, I ... Rescue the underground so they can aim higher." Here, the poet's use of high­ brow and lowbrow references also connects the present to the past.

Jackson is the author of three collections, the first of which, Leaving Saturn, won the Cave Canem Prize, and was also a finalist for a National Book Critics Circle Award. A former member of the Dark Room Collective, and current Poetry Editor of the Harvard Review, Jackson experiments with form in his work, without sacrificing the vernacular of the Philadelphia neighborhood he grew up in. As Andrew Dubois pointed out in a review of Jackson's second book, Hoops, his "greatest strength ... is his ability to marry without anxiety the traditional forms of the English poetic tradition with ... the human concerns of an urban, black population."

Jackson's poetry draws a road map from classic traditions to the heart of the inner city, always with an ear attuned to the blues and jazz rhythms he grew up with. Whether he's inhabiting the persona of Sun­ Ra or writing an extended epistolary homage to Gwendolyn Brooks, his poems combine striking imagery with muscular, fluid rhythms.

We met with Mr. Jackson at a deli in Spokane one afternoon last April, where we talked about Kim Kardashian, building community, and the seduction of sound.

 

CASEY PATRICK

How do pop culture references interact with more highbrow references in your poems?

MAJOR JACKSON

I've never made distinctions between highbrow and lowbrow, although some would say I come from lowbrow. The education I received made everything open and available to me. No one said, "Although we're teaching you Shakespeare right now, that's not yours. That belongs to the Brits." To learn about Plato's Republic-to read Plato's Republic­ eventually it's all kind of absorbed into your DNA, and eventually it becomes part of how you order and shape the world around you. When you put those bricks of intellectual inheritance and knowledge into a form, it creates a certain dynamism, the melding of cultures, and it's also a nod to the past. Allusions- whether they're Greek or biblical or whatever-create a bridge to the reader. If something's in a poem that a reader's familiar with, they're on stable ground. And if they're not familiar, they might seek out whatever's being referred to, and it might enhance their reading.

AILEEN KEOWN VAUX

Is it optimistic to hope that readers will perform their own research?

JACKSON

I think there's always a bit of optimism on the poet's part. Some of my friends who read Anne Carson- a classicist, a scholar- feel intimidated by her, but I believe one of the brilliant strategies in her work is how she makes classical figures contemporary, creating an opportunity for us to look at them as human and fallible. She asks what basic kinds of emotions did Eurydice deal with, or Pygmalion, who wants to sculpt the perfect wife. We exercise this wonderful power as writers; we get to impose meaning and import on the world around us, including how it relates to popular culture. If I write a poem about Kim Kardashian, she might not be the familiar name in forty years that she is today, but my poem will help continue her life. That's what happened with Marilyn Monroe as a cultural icon. There were enough people who wrote songs about her, or poems, or who created image of her that her story didn't get lost. We get to shape the future in that regard. We push our present day passions forward in a poem, and the poem becomes a kind of time capsule.

KEOWN VAUX

Do you think incorporating a variety of references into your poems indicates an active searching for a variety of audiences?

JACKSON

If I am doing that, that audience would be geeks like me, people who get kind of high off of history, pop culture, hip-hop, Greek mythology, people who've traveled to the places I've traveled, who've listened to the music I've listened to. It's more like I'm creating a community around me, across boundaries of class, race, gender.

KRISTIN GOTCH

In an interview with Green Mountain Review, you talked about feeling debilitated after the success of Leaving Saturn and the subsequent fear of letting your readers down. Once you build that community around you, how does it change with each book you publish? Do you still experience that psychological connection?

JACKSON

I guess I do, to some extent. First books normally don't gain the kind of attention that Leaving Saturn gained, and I felt fortunate and blessed, but I also felt like I needed to keep writing similar poems. It was like having a pancake house that everybody comes to every morning, and every morning they want the same order. Do I change the menu? Do I change the recipe? My impulse was to go forward and be loyal to my own aesthetic and emotional and intellectual interests. And if readers don't follow, the hope is that other readers will appreciate the different types of poems I'm writing. I know that people might want what you gave them before. But I was only one book in, and I kind of felt a shift at that time. And then I had a really drastic shift from Hoops to Holding Company, and at that point I didn't care.

KEOWN VAUX

What happened between Hoops and Holding Company?

JACKSON

Divorce, heartbreak, falling in love, travel, reading poets I hadn't read before- Cavafy, for example. I thought the poems in Leaving Saturn were written out of a certain kind of urgency. These new poems were, too, maybe even more so. But some of what helped drive that newer work wasn't connected to what was going on in my life. Some of it was just being kind of restless with poetry. How could I teach myself something about language and art?

PATRICK

In Hoops, we see a continuation of poems that we first saw in Leaving Saturn. Would you talk about that evolution?

JACKSON

Well, the poems weren't finished for me. "Hoops" was meant to be a sequence poem, as was "Urban Renewal." In fact, I had imagined my first book not being Leaving Saturn, which was my graduate thesis, but being a book filled with "Urban Renewal" poems, modeled off of poets I was reading who did similar kinds of poems-Robert Lowell and Joseph Brodsky and Derek Walcott. All three men put out books that had these sixteen-to-twenty-line poems that felt like extended sonnets. So I starred in that sequence and wrote it for Leaving Saturn when I was a graduate student, and then I wrote some more of chose in Hoops. Now I've gone back to writing "Urban Renewal" poems. I want to fulfill chat dream of writing a book of only "Urban Renewal" poems. I'm not sure how they'll be received, but that's my mountain to climb.

GOTCH

All of your books seem to be in dialogue with one another, but you're also in dialogue with different poets, living and dead. Is that emblematic of your own work, or do you see that something poetry does in general?

JACKSON

I come from the African-American literary tradition, particularly the Black Arcs Movement of the 1960s, which influenced me when I was an undergrad at Temple University. I studied with one of those poets, Sonia Sanchez. As someone who's explicitly interested in social justice and peace, I admired the social function that particular poetry seemed to take on-and part of that project, writing poems that would raise awareness, was in the tradition of the praise poem. So you have poems to Malcolm X and John Coltrane and Frederick Douglass. These are historical figures. But are they likely to be caught in schools? When I was younger, probably not. The poem became a vehicle to raise awareness. And when Sonia Sanchez gave readings, before she read, she would just- in a kind of roll call, in this trance-like way- call out all these political leaders, artists, musicians, poets, and I loved that, because poetry emerges out of a long tradition of praise, but, historically, praise poems were for the fallen dead, a soldier or a great general, and what she celebrated were creative, imaginative individuals. And then I heard the wonderful Polish poet Adam Zagajewski talk about entering the conversation of what it means to be human, and that concept became important to me. One time, a man came up to me at a festival where I was attending a friend's reading , and he said, "You're Major Jackson ," and I said, "Yeah, and you must be a poet," and he said, "No, I'm a counselor. I run a group for men who batter their wives. But I open every session with your poem 'How to Listen."' And I was just floored by that. Because I imagined my readers as other poets, or at least as a kind of poetry reading public. The fact that poems can enter into other realms of our lives made me think a little more seriously about chat conversation of what it means to be human.

KEOWN VAUX

You've talked about how art influences community, specifically how it functions among communities of artists. There's a line in "Letter to Brooks" where you call Thomas Sayers Ellis your Ezra Pound , in reference to Eilis's role in the Dark Room Collective. Can you talk about how these writing collective form and if physical proximity plays a role?

JACKSON

What triggers poetic movements is often a reaction to some sort of dominant poetics. And on other occasions, as in the case with Pound, there's a dynamic figure who's politicizing his or her particular aesthetic agenda. I mean, Pound was the manifesto king. I guess with the Dark Room Collective, it was proximity, but what I love about that group is that it was founded by readers who were admirers of a tradition in American literature, or a wing of American literature, that wasn't being acknowledged, at least visibly in Cambridge when Thomas [SayersEllis] and Sharan [Strange] and Janice [Lowe] were students in the Boston/ Cambridge area. And then it kind of widened- I mean, I was down in Philadelphia, Natasha [Trethewey] was kind of close, in Amherst, Massachusetts. So, yes, geography can be important. The thing with the Black Mountain Poets is that it was [Charles] Olson who was there, for the most part, as that dynamic figure. [Robert] Creeley wasn't there­ Creeley would come later, Denise Levercov never set foot on campus, so it was orchestrated slightly differently than other groups.

PATRICK

Why do you think these groups form so consistently throughout history?

JACKSON

I think it's out of common interest. Two years in an MFA program isn't enough. I somehow landed with poets in New Jersey- and I adore all poets, let me just say. But there's the poets around Princeton and then there's the southern Jersey poets, and I think we just naturally become cliques. Like I was saying earlier, in terms of reacting to dominant aesthetics, that was very real in the '50s, when we had a reaction against Modernism and then swung way back in the other direction, with a certain kind of formalism, and then those people were in the academic institutions and became the granters of awards, deciding who got published , and so there had to be a reaction against that.

GOTCH

When these groups form, there seems to be the risk of building expectations. In an article you published in the Boston Review about Countee Cullen, you said he wanted to be read "as a poet, not a Negro poet." Do you see readers having those same sort of expectations from African-American writers today- or any groups of writers?

JACKSON

Less so today, let's put it that way. I think what we're realizing is that there are not homogenous kinds of experiences for ethnic and racial groups in America. There's many different ways of being a woman, or being an African American. In fact, I like to believe that we're widening our understanding of what a human being is with these particular markers. How do people both refract and individuate their lives as humans- people who are men, women, white, black, Asian, Latina, octogenarians, teens, transgendered? I had a student who was a female-to-male transgender, an honors thesis student, and I loved the poems he wrote. They were so rich in humanity. One poem was about being young and teaching the girls how to pee standing up. Someone else has probably had that experience, and if I think about the canon as a collection of selves, I want that poem in the Norton Anthology, so that, again, we have a wider understanding of what it means to be human, and don't so easily fear and hate what's unfamiliar. With the wide range of poets writing today- I'm hoping we'll see writing in ten, fifteen years that will be more representative of the rich community of selves that we are.

PATRICK

Understanding what it means to be human seems like it would necessarily involve the political. In an interview with Third Coast, you said, "I do not believe in safe subjects." Are there any subjects you find too dangerous or off-limits?

JACKSON

You've heard of Minnesota-nice. I think about how there are just some things that aren't discussed, and I see what that does to a family and to individuals. I want to believe that there's no topic that's off-limits, and I do believe that all things come to light anyway, at some point. It may be years down the line, but at some point, we see it. What's great about a poem is that you can go to it with a certain amount of freedom from those temporal and spatial kind of restraints. Sharon Olds told me about an exercise she received from Muriel Rukeyser when she was young. Muriel said, "Write the poem you would never show anyone."

KEOWN VAUX

And Sharon Olds went on to make a career of that.

JACKSON

Exactly. It takes a kind of courage, a kind of vision and courage. Some people dismiss poems grounded in personal experience that might seem a little too revealing, but you don't have to read that poet. Just don't read them. Some people appreciate the personal, though, because we too often live our lives in silence, even when there's suffering and anguish. And the poem, I've realized, really does become a vehicle, a life raft to some extent.

KEOWN VAUX

Sharon Olds has an interesting relationship with her readership, because a lot of people want to read her work as purely autobiographical. Is that something you've faced, as well?

JACKSON

I had a neighbor who was a mental health counselor, and one day he said to me, "Major, I read your poems. I see that you've had a traumatic life," and I thought, Dude, you know nothing about me if you're going to read my life through my poems. It's too easy to make a one-to-one correlation between a life and a poem. Someone who wants to do that­- a critic, a reader- does not realize the nuances of composition that may transform what was once fact into fiction. And poets, too, exercise their imagination and play with the facts so that they'll serve the poem, rather than serving up a transcript of their life. One of the things I found frustrating when I read Ian Hamilton's biography of Robert Lowell was his strategy to start with the poems and then connect them to what was going on in Lowell's life. It seems dangerous to try to do that, because if we're writing about our lives, there are things that are being translated­. The language itself is going to play a role in that transfiguration.

I think if l attend to the aesthetic decisions of a poem, if l look at my line breaks, if l think about metaphoric language versus overly descriptive language, I believe- and I'm aiming for a certain kind of cadence, a certain kind of sound- if l tend to those pleasures, because that's the first order of seduction for a reader, the aesthetic dimension-if I tend to that, then naturally the poem is going to evolve away from whatever "facts" I bring to the page. I tell my students that they can play with a reader's expectations of who's speaking. If they're thinking they're getting too much of the self, then do a little bit of cross-dressing, you know? Or, truly, write out of some other speaker's experience.

KEOWN VAUX

What do you get out of writing in someone else's voice? What changes in the writing process?

JACKSON

Stepping into someone's shoes creates moments of empathy- and the relief or freedom from having to come up with a subject, particularly if you're used to writing about your own life, or turning to your own experiences. Writing about someone else can also invite other kinds of intelligences to go to work in a poem. When you write about other people, you're the historian, you're the psychologist, trying to figure out motivations. Sometimes I don't know what motivates me to do the things I do, but I can assess someone else's behavior and sequence of actions, and theorize about why they did what they did.

KEOWN VAUX

In other interviews, you've mentioned place as a vehicle for getting readers to think critically about their own cities, their own towns.

JACKSON

And place is a convenient way of talking about the interior.

PATRICK

Philadelphia appears a lot in your work, though you've lived in other places. Has living elsewhere changed how you view Philly?

JACKSON

I think we create our paradises wherever we are. Some people have a difficult time seeing what's special about where they're at. When I moved to Eugene, Oregon, my affection for Philly grew. It was almost like I was asleep, and in the waking moments of writing I could reflect back on those times. I could almost smell the rain on the sidewalk, or I'd recall my mother driving along the Schuylkill River, on Lincoln Drive and Kelly Drive, the windows down. Those are foundational experiences, and I guess there's always a longing for Philly. But it's been the other way around, too, in that Philly has allowed me to discover my other sacred places. Cape Cod is one of them; the Northwest is important to me. New Orleans is important to me, too. Having lived there, I try to go back every two or three years. So, yeah, I've been in Vermont eleven years, but Philly still excites me.

KEOWN VAUX

How do you define a sacred space?

JACKSON

A sense of safety, a sense of my body feeling like- I'm about to get all mystical, but when I land in certain places, there's a kind of calm, a lack of anxiety. The people are decent. There's a certain regard for life in all of its manifestations, the natural world and other human beings. And of course, these places are all over the world. I'm just starting to be able to have the means to visit other places and have those same sorts of experiences. I feel like it should almost be mandatory that before you go to college, you drive cross-country with maybe two or three other people. And maybe you do volunteer work where you get to know people, not just driving through and stopping at diners and filling up your gas tank, but really getting to know people. Just imagine all the connections you could make.

Issue 65: A Conversation with Fady Joudah

issue65

Found in Willow Springs 65

February 13, 2009

Rebecca Halonen, Rebecca Morton, and Shira Richman

A CONVERSATION WITH FADY JOUDAH

fady

Photo Credit: Poetry Foundation

Fady Joudah was born in Austin, Texas, and currently lives in Houston, but he isn't generally described as Texan. His parents were born in Palestine and, besides the United States, his father's career as a professor took the Joudah family to Libya and Saudi Arabia. Fady Joudah continues to lead a life of international engagement. He has practiced medicine in Zambia and Darfur, with Doctors Without Borders, and in what he describes as a "war zone" in Texas, the emergency room of a veterans hospital.

Joudah became well known in the literary world somewhat suddenly when, in 2008, his first book, The Earth in the Attic, was published as the winner of the Yale Younger Prize. That same year, The Butterfly's Burden, his translation of Mahmoud Darwish's poetry, won the Society of Authors' Saif Ghobash-Banipal Prize for Arabic Literary Translation. If I Were Another, Joudah's second translation of Darwish's work, was released in October 2009 by Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

About The Earth in the Attic, Louise Glück writes, "These are small poems, many of them, but the grandeur of the conception is inescapable. Fathers and brothers become prophets, hypothesis becomes dream, simple details of landscape transform themselves into emblems and predictions. The book is varied, coherent, fierce, tender: impossible to put down , impossible to forget. It will make itself felt."

As a Palestinian-American, and having worked extensively with refugees around the world, Joudah expresses the sense of displacement poignantly, while offering hope through his view of its universality. In his poem "Proposal," we see the displaced re-placed in disorienting, often alienating contexts: "I think of a little song and / How there must be a tree"; "We left our shoes behind and fled. / We left our scent in them / Then bled out our soles"; and "God reels the earth in when the sky rains / Like fish on a wire." But it is the constant shifting, which the sea seems to do best, that offers the promise of survival:

And the sea, each time it reaches the shore,
Becomes a bird to see of the land
What it otherwise wouldn't.
And the wind through the trees
Is the sea coming home.

Poetry, like the sea, offers accessibility to the things most longed for, as Joudah expresses in a piece he published in the Kenyon Review, "In Memory of Mahmoud Darwish," in which he addresses Darwish: "I would memorize and forget you, tuck you in deep hiding places of my soul, as if I were slowly saturating my being with your seas...sea, that word that also stands for prosody in Arabic."

We met with Joudah, during the annual AWP Conference, in the Chicago Hilton, where we discussed spiders, playing with time, and "one of the best-kept American secrets."

 

SHIRA RICHMAN

I'd like to start with a question about the title of your book, The Earth in the Attic. As humans, our lives revolve around the earth, yet in this book the earth is relegated to an isolated, confined, but elevated place—the attic. Can you talk about how you happened upon this beautiful, strange metaphor?

FADY JOUDAH

It's a metaphor that comes out of a simile that is in one of the poems in the book, "Along Came a Spider." As the poem indicates, I happened on it because in one of the refugee settlements where I served, we would wake up an amazing plethora of spider webs after night rain. And spider webs disappear very quickly when the sun scorches them and the moisture evaporates. So it was an amazing scene to drive in the Jeep toward the clinic every morning during the rainy season and see the earth like an attic, in the sense that it was filled with spider webs.

As that poem, "Along Came a Spider," addresses, it was for me the whole idea that the displaced people of the world, the stateless people of the world, or even the non-citizen citizens of the world—if you want to expand it beyond the boundaries of of governments, nation-states, and refugees—are in the attic. As you say, it is maybe, physically, a higher place. But not in all places is the attic a higher place. In some cultures the attic is a separate room, not necessarily a separate floor as we have in many of our homes. Nevertheless, it is just the idea that you store something you don't want to throw away, your sense of existence—you store it and ignore it. Only when you move from that house do you check what you left in the attic and see what you want to take with you or throw away. It was that kind of negligence that I was after.

RICHMAN

Were you also thinking about the story of when spider webs hid Muhammad by covering the mouth of the cave and saving his life? Is there something especially treasured about spider webs?

JOUDAH

What interests me is: How does one divert his gaze to nature, without addressing nature as something separate from what we call human progress? Living where I was—I don't like to name the place and I'm going to get to that—we were surrounded by spiders and other insects. You live comfortably with them. If you see a spider in your house, you don't call the fire department. So I found myself roommating with spiders or living with spiders and that sent me to the childhood story about Muhammad and then to ideas of identity and spirituality and religion. And that also sent me to another concept, which is the very distinct reality that an Arab or a Muslim in the English language is and has been persistently dehumanized, really.

I say this with particular care, not to necessarily make that identity holy by virtue of an absolute sense of victimhood, because no victim is necessarily a saint and there is no such thing as a race of victims. But I do think there is an arc in the poem that tries to address the humanity of the name, beyond the jargon of history. There's also a particular slippery slope in the poem I'd like to address about revolutionary ideas in general. I was trying to create, revolutionize, introduce the concept of displacement of the refugee as that which sends us into a new era of hope and "progress," because it is that sense of horror as byproduct of the nation-state that will probably get us past this limitation of the nation-state and its concept of citizenry and so forth.

In a sense, all religions, when they arose, were modern, revolutionary; they broke with the past, and they advanced the people that initially jumped on the ship. They advanced people, whether or not they were monotheistic. Then myths and traditions and rituals take place. I went far to try to reengage the concept of modernity through the refugee. It's a bit problematic because if you are a refugee or a stateless person or a displaced person, it does not necessarily mean you are some form of saint, whatever that means. But I think we don't have enough recognition of the victim as a victim first and foremost. And there's always a tendency toward apologetic that end up dehumanizing victims more and more.

REBECCA MORTON

Yesterday, at your reading, you mentioned that you work to not abstract people's suffering.

JOUDAH

I think we all walk around with a filtered vision of other people's suffering, and naturally we cannot preoccupy ourselves with it too much if we are going to go on with our daily lives, nor should we to a large extent. But I think that people's suffering becomes a matter of image­-intensive desensitization. I think this is particularly the case for us in the U.S., because we are among the five percent of people in the world who have access to the Internet, to movies, to the digital age, and so forth. We think this access is actually the norm, because each of us has whatever phone we have that we can't operate and laptops and so forth. I see the importance of universalizing suffering. One does not necessarily need to carry the banner of each trauma in the world to at least remain cognizant that suffering which plagues us all is really in large part a product of the abstraction of some people's humanity and not others'.

Some people are seen as fully human, so their suffering is something we connect with and make holy, and other suffering is just racialized or what have you. There is—I think in Darfur—a stunning example of an entire movement that was and still is obsessed with naming the atrocities, and it is unfortunate because it does nothing for the people of Darfur. Even if the naming stuck, it would still do nothing for the people of Darfur. What remains of that "game of the name" is basically racial politics. I was shocked about this because I was there and suffering was far beyond the pettiness that we think of in our important intellectual skin here in the U.S. We're always the interventionists; we're always the ones who are able to do something about things. But the suffering I witnessed was beyond all this jargon.

Theodor Adorno wrote in his Minima Moralia something called The Paragraph. You won't find it in all editions of Minima Moralia, but there's a section in the book Can One Live After Auschwitz? called The Paragraph, and he basically talks about the term, the aporia, the paradox, or the unsolvability of naming something and what happens to the name, and he was specifically referring to the UN charter on genocide. It's a fascinating precedent in the '40s—around sixty years ago—about how this whole idea of naming genocide will eventually turn into a game of names. After what point does suffering on a mass scale deserve no name and become something that has to be addressed, or at least recognized, by everybody?

I go back to the concept of the universality of suffering. The answer to this for some people is: Well, we've decided in international law, which is an important thing if it is at least adhered to and approved—and that is nor the case—that if it's genocide, we will intervene. The game of the name is to do enough to where those who know how to play with the law—whether they wrote the law or know how to play with the wording—go far enough in their atrocities not to have it called genocide.

So what happens? Ethnic cleansing is, in many people's minds, an early stage of genocide. So do you not intervene there? What about civil war that is so horrific in its detail, in the Congo, or in Angola when they had their civil war, or in Sri Lanka, or in places that didn't have civil war—what the Indonesian government did in East Timor? How can you claim that there is a holiness of suffering more important than another or even a legality of suffering? How can you turn such massive suffering into a classification? And whatever answer you give, we have enough history to show us that we know what happens with the politicization of suffering. It dehumanizes the victims repeatedly.

I'm not necessarily saying that we should reduce our threshold for intervention. I'm not necessarily sure that the word "intervention" is the modum operandum here for me, but I think what interests me the most is: Are we truly willing to recognize, first and foremost, suffering, without gaming the name? And then, if we get to that point, what happens afterward? Because I think it would be, hopefully, a brighter moment.

REBECCA HALONEN

How do you understand the role of a poet in all this? What is the poet's duty?

JOUDAH

I don't think that writing the poems themselves has to address these issues necessarily, but I do think that one has to be engaged, as a whole person, with such things, to be open to them and courageous enough to recant one's errors of judgment regarding a larger humanity. I say these words as though I've reached this state, but I'm very far from it.

I can't say that poets should do this or write that. It's an art form; it's an imaginative state of being that dabbles with time, and it cannot necessarily be limited to certain concepts. There's a lot more to poetry and art than the drama of American family life or the politics of refugees. There's room for both ends of the spectrum, I think.

Bertrand Russell engaged himself as a literary man and a morally committed person. For instance, many of us don't know that the Russell Tribunal (after Russell's death) for human rights declared the U.S. action in Vietnam to be genocide. And here's a man who was celebrated in the English world and the Western world and the world over, won the Nobel Prize and whatever. It is not necessary to say that the U.S. has to be punished or not punished. I'm not even getting there. All I'm saying is that the Tribunal's declaration should be recognized. Again, until we recognize such things, morality becomes a political game.

A poet should be engaged wholly with such morally difficult questions, being very careful and aware of the slippery slope of proximity to power. You don't want to raise a banner. We can all get a little too passionate and find out twenty years later that we actually got a little too intense about an ideal or an ideology and ended up as fascist as those we were professing against. But we do have examples of people like Bertolt Brecht or Walter Benjamin who were Marxists and had no trouble backing away from Marxism, when it stood as a political regime they recognized as a problem.

A poet has to be fully engaged, but also has to be careful of the dangers of ideology. I think a poet should struggle for a form of moral and cognitive independence from the jargon of politics or history.

HALONEN

Do you think political poetry is attempting to do that?

JOUDAH

I don't like the term political poetry. I think it is demeaning, and probably a reflection of certain problems within the literary canon and its relationship to power establishments. It's convenient to call something political poetry, because it seems to deflect how the poetry establishment itself is deeply embedded, naturally or otherwise, within the larger political system of power, and I think it's essentially a description as full of hot air as truly propagandist poets are.

There is no such thing as political poetry and non-political poetry. There's good poetry and bad poetry. Whether good poetry happens to be about your dog or about war—it doesn't matter to me. But anyway, there's good poetry. And good poetry is not simply defined by form and theme. There's a larger human engagement that should be addressed within it.

MORTON

You touched on this before, but I'd like to return to naming. There are no place names—or very few place names—in your book, and because of this, I think the reader is a little unsure about how to inhabit the poems. It feels a little like we, as readers, not being placed, are in a sort of exile. I wonder about exile and the position of the outsider in the poems.

JOUDAH

I have to answer in two parts. I think that refusing to name the place is because of the tendency toward sensationalizing the locale, and that distracts from the suffering and the humanity of others. People refer to Darfur in my book of poems, and I insist on not mentioning which parts of the poems speak of Palestine and which speak of the Congolese and Angolan refugees I took care of in Zambia. But it's interesting that some people feel a particular sense of comfort in mentioning Darfur, and that's their problem, not mine.

There's a lot of stuff that merges with so many other states of being. I hated the idea that people would say, " Did you hear what he wrote about in Zambia?" And it's not necessarily about Zambia. It's about the human condition.

There's no doubt that identifying myself as a Palestinian rubs many people the wrong way. The information is also utilized by people to ends I'm not interested in whatever those ends are. You mention the word "Palestinian," and you get people standing on either side of the aisle. I'm not interested in that in my poetry—maybe in some other arena, but not in my poetry. Sometimes it's comical to me to hear the commentary or to read reviews because some people are trying to dabble with how to make sense of political views in the book. Actually, what they're trying to do is make sense of their own political views or lack thereof, not necessarily the poetry that I'm trying to write.

As for exile, I think it's the state of the poet, period, whether it's internal exile or external exile, and in most cases it's both, which I think is also a state of the human condition. I think we all feel internally exiled from ourselves or even our loved ones. You wake in the morning and you're tired of going to work. You put on a particular persona when you're at work, and it's different when you're at home and it's different when you're with your mother or your father or your wife, husband, and so forth. Sometimes the pressures of life make you feel like you're far from who you think you are or who you aspire to be or all these things that we grapple with in modern day psychology. Then there's the external exile, which goes back to the original point that I mentioned—the idea of one of the syndromes of our contemporary existence: What does it mean to be a citizen?

MORTON

I read that you began writing during your residency. What was it that you wanted or needed in poetry during that time?

JOUDAH

Chinua Achebe said something about how you write because you have a story to tell. I have a story to tell; I could have written novels or I could have written essays, but why did I write poetry? I don't think anyone knows how to answer that question. I just think it's some little twist in the brain, that I'm inclined to the rhythms and patterns of poetry as opposed to other methods of linguistic expression.

HALONEN

Do you write in Arabic?

JOUDAH

No. My relationship to Arabic has become quite automatic. There are many instances where I am probably writing something in English directly from Arabic, not being conscious of it at the moment, but when I put it down on paper I realize exactly where the syntax came from, exactly where the automatic translation process came from.

RICHMAN

Why don't you write in Arabic?

JOUDAH

Because I exist in English, I guess, for a large part—as far as writing poetry. In reaction to that, I chose translation from Arabic into English to maintain a relationship to Arabic in poetry. But I have a busy life as it is—as a physician, a father, and a husband. I'm trying to write, I'm glad to be writing. I'm writing and so I'm happy about that. I don't want to put too much emphasis on linking my identity to the language that I write in, as if it's somehow part of a political statement or a cultural statement. I'm glad to be writing poems when I can.

HALONEN

Can you talk a little bit about the opportunities or limitations of translation?

JOUDAH

Translation is a mistreated aspect of poetry. I think all poetry is translated. Perhaps all life is translation, since we consider reality as a matter of perception, and so is our perception of our own reality through language. It comes across as a translation. At least in creative writing as opposed to the hackneyed speech that we all share over the air and whatnot. So that is one aspect of it.

The other aspect is that the actual process of taking work and writing it in a new language gets a bad rap in the sense that the concept of fidelity is, I think, prostituted by even the best minds. Because there is no such thing as infidelity and there is no such thing as fidelity. All forms of translation suffer from fidelity and benefit from it, and suffer from infidelity and benefit from that. Those who say, "Well, you should try to make it seem as much of a natural poem as in the host language," are after fidelity in a different way than those who say, "No, you should be strictly accurate and representative of the original language." They're after a different kind of fidelity. Or a different kind of infidelity. Freud would be happy with this.

What's most important for me in translation is the transference of the spirit of the text. If I translate poetry five or ten years from now, I might have a different opinion, because I think my relationship to language changes as I learn more and have different opinions about it and so I approach things differently. I do think translation should attempt to infuse something new in the host language, so it allows for that sense of mystery to exist, as opposed to those who want a natural poem in the host language—whatever that means, because "a natural poem" has its own problems. The host language has a wide array of "natural poems." I think Celan said, "There is no such thing as translation. You write a new poem." I disagree with him, because my poems take a lot longer to write than it takes me to translate. But that's not what he was talking about. I think he meant that if you're infusing something, you are writing a new poetry, introducing a new poetry.

RICHMAN

You seem to use rhythm deliberately in your work, and in many places I've noticed a symmetrical meter, most obviously in the titles The Earth in the Attic and The Butterfly's Burden. When scanned, they have identical rhythms. There's symmetry in many parts of the poem "Pulse"—in section seven, within the line: "One of us shouted Wow in her sleep," and between the lines of the last couplet of section nine: "Then saplings and mud. / And then the dried sand." How deliberate are you in determining your rhythms?

JOUDAH

Not very, at this point. I used to count syllables a lot, and not for lines. I counted them sometimes for sentences, and sometimes, in shorter poems, I counted them for the totality of the poem. But not per line. I do like the focus on a deliberate rhythm, as you call it. And I also do like occasional merging between classical prosody, if you will, and a contemporary sense of rhythm. But I go a lot by my ear, knowing that poetry is largely dependent on normal speech, whatever that means, and on normal speech patterns, which are varied.

There's an interesting concept in formal contemporary Arabic poetry, similar to what I said, where the unit for prosody, which is called taf 'eelah, is basically in the entire poem or in the entire stanza, so it's not dependent on a line. And I was always interested in this way of looking at the whole poem. That goes back to why I used to count syllables in the entire poem. If I had an even number, I considered the poem metrically complete. But that's obviously not true, because you can also have an odd number and it all depends on whether you use an anapest or a dactyl or a trochee and, again, it goes back to speech patterns, so it's not fixed. But it is a whole idea that in the sentence, in the stanza, or in the entire poem, there is a sense of complete foot count, if you will, a complete meter of sorts, without the focus on line-per-line symmetry.

RICHMAN

I don't know if I'm imagining this, but in "The Onion Poem," is there a glimmer of a ghazal?

JOUDAH

I remember sharing that poem with Marilyn Hacker, and she said, ''I'm glad to see you're making your own form of a ghazal."

I don't like the ghazal form, though, to tell you the truth.

I don't disparage it at all, but somehow it just doesn't appeal to me. I like repetition in poetry, and I think poetry is dependent on repetition and parallel, but I'm not into that form. I guess you could say if the idea in "The Onion Poem '' is to repeat the tone of question—the repetition of question and answer, which is an ancient idea in poetry—you could say that it parallels the ghazal in that sense. I guess "The Onion Poem'' presents its own dialectic in the first question and resolves it, seemingly, in the answer, in the reply. But then again, if I say that, I am not paralleling the ghazal line; I'm just paralleling an ancient method of call and response in poetry.

Formal elements in poetry, especially in free verse, are wonderful when they go past that idea of metrics and numbers, because there are so many aspects of language that lend themselves to formality, whether regarding alliteration or anaphora or epiphora or parallelism or chiasmus. All these wonderful tools, for me, are what make the free verse poem formal.

RICHMAN

In the poem "Proposal," the sea becomes loosed from its seabed and becomes a bird. It becomes wind, which allows it to see aspects of land and to know the trees as home. To what extent do you identify with the sea?

JOUDAH

I don't know. I feel a little emotional to address the question. It's a trope. The sea is a trope. I guess I can hide behind that in my answer.

RICHMAN

I was wondering if you were referencing the fact that the Mediterranean Sea dried up at one time and then somehow returned to its place?

JOUDAH

If I engage in this conversation, I'd be analyzing the privacy of the poem, dragging it out into some sort of a factual discussion, and I think that would take away from it. For me, it's important that readers see and hear that sea the way they wish—as the Mediterranean or as the sea you hear in the air when you're far from the sea. I'm also aware that some people don't know what to do with the mention of the word "Haifa," for instance.

I'm addressing my wife and her father and my father. But really, the poem was written far away from the past and the Mediterranean. I can tell you that much.

MORTON

In the book's first poem, "Atlas," the speaker says, "Let me tell you a fable." This sort of storytelling appears throughout the book. Why?

JOUDAH

I don't have a spontaneous inclination toward a full narrative poem, but I think narrative is essential to poetry and to the contemporary poem. To incorporate it, I have to wed it to lyric. Some people have a rash about the concept of "lyric narrative," and some people are puritans—either there's a lyric poem or a narrative poem. I guess I believe in that merger, or that unity.

I have a tendency toward playing with time. Narrative means that there is a chronological order, or disorder, but I try to incorporate lyric into my narrative so that the narrative appears to be from within my time and from without it. Some people might use the word "legend" or "myth'' for that, and for me, much good poetry comes out of the attempt, the successful attempt, to rewrite myth.

But what is meant by myth? Is it the sublimation of a ritual? And I mean sublimation in the way solid goes into gas, that chemical process. So you take a ritual and you somehow release it of its own physical properties through the language of time. Whatever that means. In interviews you have to say, "Whatever that means." You have to include these disclaimers.

HALONEN

Which poets do you return to?

JOUDAH

I think it varies in different phases. I used to go back to Rilke, but I don't look at him at all now. These days I go back to George Oppen. I love his lyric. I think he's an incredibly engaged poet with the world and has a wonderful sense of humanity that pierces through ideology. A light with luminosity. You can see there's something magical about his abandonment of poetry. He quit poetry and then twenty-odd years later he returned and had a very prolific output in his older years. Through those years you see how he progressed with his syntax. Or not how he progressed, but how he varied and experimented with syntax and lyric. It's refreshing to see this engagement with the world in his actual life and in his poetry while still being true to art itself—instead of getting lost in ideologies.

He's one of the best-kept American secrets. There is a rise to his name now because we are in a state of war. Which I think diminishes his brilliance. This brings me back to political poetry—a lot of people consider George Oppen a political poet, which for me is just absurd. Maybe it's similar to how people get all worked up about the term "confessional poetry."

RICHMAN

I read that when you were seven, you were watching television, and you announced to your mother that you wanted to be a doctor. What were you watching?

JOUDAH

I don't know. I know there was a family gathering—my aunts and cousins and so forth—and we were in Libya at the time. It's a question we all know—everyone turns to you when you're younger and says, "What do you want to do when you grow up?" I don't know why I said I wanted to be a doctor.

I must have been overwhelmed by some sense of…I was thinking about it this morning actually, and this is a way to address the restructuring of memory. This morning I wanted to say that I must have felt some sort of angst in the room or in the family situation. Something must have happened. My family—my immediate family and aunts and uncles and my older cousins—are all refugees in the true sense of the word. They had rough childhoods. I don't know if some of that sense of anxiety was somehow seeping in the conversation and I picked up on it and decided that I had to say something or whatever. I have no idea.

RICHMAN

When did you realize your interest in poetry?

JOUDAH

Probably around the same age, because I used to memorize a lot of poetry when I was younger and recite it and get encouragement and support for such memorization. I started to write random lines— three- or four-line poems or something in Arabic prosody. So I think I've had that interest since a young age, but there was all this side-tracking, with the medicine and leaving one culture and coming to the next. Eventually, I realized I just had to keep writing. I had to keep expressing my own existence.

Issue 67: A Conversation with Prageeta Sharma

issue67

Found in Willow Springs 67

APRIL 10, 2010

SHIRA RICHMAN & AMANDA MAULE

A TALK WITH PRAGEETA SHARMA

prageeta-sharma

Photo Credit: poetryfoundation.org

Prageeta Sharma is the Director of the MFA program at the University of Montana and author of three poetry collections, Bliss to Fill, The Opening Question, and Infamous Landscapes. When asked about a guiding notion for The Opening Question, she answered, “I started with the idea of a kind of unabashed confrontation with disappointment and worked towards a way of reeling it in with a hopeful lyrical edge.” Her work takes on topics to which many may have aversions – philosophy and feminism – with humor and insight as seen in poems such as “Everywhere:”

I was crafting crafts, I had needles, I was sewing butterflies

like women do – but only in terms of thoughts,

not in terms of doing. Or I thought, alas,

lightness is part of the commune of despair.

The scene of a woman doing needlework becomes increasingly strange when we realize she is embroidering thoughts. The thoughts open passageways that lead into communes in which despair surprises with its lightness.

Poems, Sharma asserts, are “places in which you can actually take ideas on, and figure out how they can be inhabited.” Her poems, Major Jackson writes, reveal “’the posture of the life of the mind.’ ascending, where humor is unabashedly handsome and an enormous intellect alluring even to the most cynical pedestrian.” While Jackson points out the ascendant movement of Sharma’s poems, Lisa Jarno talers us to their transcendence: “Prageeta Sharma’s poems are as ever imbued with a crafty playfulness by which the appearances of the ‘I,’ the ‘You,’ and the ‘We’ transcend tricks of the trade.” Thomas Sayers Ellis also notes the expansiveness and profundity of Sharma’s poems that, as he puts it, “seem to live everywhere we’ve lived without wallowing in identity or judgment.”

Sharma was born in Framingham, Massachusetts, to Hindu parents. “Being raised a Hindu,” she says, “I was taught to honor knowledge and books like a religion and so for me poetry keeps this relationship close, true, active.” She earned an MFA at Brown University in 1995 and an MA in media studies at the New School in 2001. In 2010 she received a Howard Foundation Grant. We met with her at the Hyatt in Denver during the Association of Writing Programs Conference where we discussed escaping the institution, poets are creative consultants, and limits of the image.

 

SHIRA RICHMAN

Your poetry addresses feminism in a playful, humorous way. Does humor feel like a way to be taken seriously when discussing feminism?

PRAGEETA SHARMA

I always felt like I had this split personality culturally – I was very quiet, but in my poetry I felt conscious of what a dramatic voice and a dramatic “I” sounded like. It felt melodramatic to me at times. I wanted to construct a voice that was closest to my personality in speaking, in the way that Frank O’Hara had that kind of conversational tone or Kenneth Koch. It was natural to think about a feminine voice that could be conversational and informal, or intimate in ways that weren’t exaggerating the terms of intimacy, but were playful. It is a kind of feminist position to feel comfortable with your voice and engage the reader without putting on airs or trying to construct an over-determined identity for the poem.

When I was beginning to write, a lot of Indian poets were educating the reader about their identity. I wanted to present my personality rather than educate the reader. I’m interested in how we can be, not our best self, but our quirkiest self in the poem, because we have to be this other self all the time. Our artistic self, or the need to be an individual, should be in the poem. That’s a feminist act: to not be one-dimensional in the poem. But I do think a lot of Indian women, culturally, are set up to not have anything to say – except to explain, or to mediate, or to be a messenger of something “more important” than their inner lives.

RICHMAN

Such as what?

SHARMA

When I went to grad school – I graduated in 1995 – there was a lot of “salvation” fiction about the first-generation immigrants and immigrant experience. The subject matter was also very domestic, and I was sort of rallying against that passive “I,” where the character was examined through an omniscient narrator reporting on the culture the characters were immersed in, but never having an opinion about it. You were basically writing for a white reader, who would learn about your culture through you. You were learning nothing about it. You were just putting it on display.

I didn’t want to create poems that merely educated the non-Indian reader. I wanted poems where thinking was happening, because that was a canonical thing. Helen Vendler would talk about the thinking that was happening in, say, Keats – and I’m actually not trying to align myself with “great poets,” but it became this real whiteness – that writing was cerebral thinking, and if you were a person of color, you were telling your story or you were writing the narrative. You were educating people around you instead of actually thinking in the poem, too. It’s important to explore the variety of cognitive experiences in the poem rather than just telling a story.

AMANDA MAULE

Where do you see that thinking happening, or what kind of thinking are you doing in your poetry?

SHARMA

I don’t know if it’s evident in the progression of the books – this is just something I’ve always returned to – but I like thinking of the poem as that place to speak about theory without it being academic. Artists are developing their theories about the world, and we do that in a poem. We don’t have to do it in an essay. That’s the kind of thinking I hope I’m doing. All the stuff that you can’t do anywhere else.

In all three books, I have poems where I’m proposing ideas, a personal philosophy that I think is lofty in an absurd way, but where it’s fun to be absurd with thought. I think a lot of German philosophy is lofty, and a lot of Hindu is more general – you know, general audience ideas. So I wanted to explore places where you could have extravagant thinking without having it fixed to one movement or another. I think men do this all the time. And going back to humor, when women explore humor, sometimes it’s sort of slapstick or jokey, and that can be awkward. But there are so many male poets who are funny in their poems, like Kenneth Koch.

RICHMAN

I think women are funnier.

SHARMA

Women are funnier. I’m just wondering if it’s as much in the poem as in the way we interact and engage. But we may be funny when we’re making points when we’re remarking on something that’s unfair. We can be slightly snide and funny. Are we using the poem as a place to enjoy our playfulness? We are now, I think. A lot more poets are. Arielle Greenberg is, I think. And Matthea Harvey, in the way in which her humor is felt through abstraction and character. There’s that playfulness to the poems. I think her second book, Sad Little Breathing Machine, does that. She has nouns and objects stand in for people. I think there’s a lovely quality in the strangeness of the humor there.

Among South Asian poets, I think there are a few male poets who explore craft and wit, really think of it formally, but I’m wondering if there’s still not more of that playfulness that could be found. In terms of gender, I’m not sure if we’re still fixed with the kind of confessional “I.” Or when we experiment, do we just extract language from the narrative and not necessarily put our personality in there? I don’t know where we are with humor in terms of cultural identity. But in terms of gender, a lot of women are playing; they just don’t want to be too slapstick. There’s a particular poet who I’m not going to mention, who may be just a little too funny. Then you’re like, Ugh, I don’t want that. I don’t want to be a comic. So there’s the risk, I think. A lot of men can be comedic and even use one-liners, and it’s okay. They just take that kind of space.

RICHMAN

I’m having trouble thinking of funny male poets. You mentioned Kenneth Koch.

SHARMA

Kenneth Koch I really love. And Tony Hoagland.

MAULE

Dean Young can be funny, too.

SHARMA

Yeah. And people have said they see connections between what I do and Dean Young’s work, structurally. I like his work. I haven’t thought about it in relation to my work, but I certainly know he was publishing when I was younger, and his poems were playful and exploratory. Structurally, they had a voice that was working against some perceived notion of the poem he was undoing. That’s something I like to do. If there’s a rule, I want to play with it.

RICHMAN

One of the funny poems of yours is “After the Weekend with Geniuses.” The fiction writers are the geniuses who are full of pages, and the poets are the warriors and false gardeners who end up languishing on the lawn like love-starved lawn ornaments. Are poets lazy and ornamental? How are fiction writers different?

SHARMA

I spent a weekend with a bunch of fiction writers and we were helping Heather McGowan, a fiction writer, think about her first run of edits on her novel, which was experimental. Whenever we talked about it, I would say, “You know, if it were a poem, you could just do this and you wouldn’t have to do those fifty things.” But it was never helpful because she couldn’t just do this. So I thought, “We’re so extravagant, poets. We can just do this little thing and then lounge about and not do any more.” With the poem, you have a lot of autonomy I don’t think you have as a prose writer. We poets have more autonomy to be ourselves. That’s extravagant, I think.

MAULE

Dean Young has surreal tendencies. Do you see a relationship to surrealism in your work?

SHARMA

My undergraduate study was really formal, and I learned a lot about modern and contemporary poetry – the canonical lens – and then went on to Brown, which was an experimental program. There was a new or different, alternative cannon: Stein and O’Hara and Ashbery. And realizing you could read Eliot and Pound and go one way, or read Eliot and Pound and go the other way. You could go to Lowell or you could go to Olson in your thinking. That was really new to me to think that – Oh, there are open parentheticals, or, Oh, language, words can stand in for other words. You don’t need a simile here; we don’t need to do this with craft.

Then I moved to New York and realized that the poets who seemed to have the most fun, in general, were having fun on the page and having fun in their lives. It spoke to me that I could play in the poem, and I could find surrealism. I think there are some poems trying some surrealism….

But I guess, more, it’s imagination – really figuring out where you want your imagination to be. I think it would be easy to say that I’m surrealist, but I don’t think I am. I don’t think it’s a structure I try on. I just like pairing certain ideas. I like being contrary, so a poem is set up to sort of contradict itself. Just as we go from one thought to another, the poem invites another idea. I don’t think I’m as experimental at all. I’m that square peg in a round hole. I’m not sure what makes the poems so different from somebody else’s in terms of contemporary, nontraditional poems – if we call narrative traditional. But I don’t know if we’re doing that anymore.

I do like some surrealism, but after a certain point I get tired of a poem being purely nonsensical, in the sense that I don’t need meta-symbolism for the poem. Tate does an American surrealist thing where suddenly you step back – I forget which poem it is, but he’s talking about a daughter marrying a prince. After a certain point, you realize the absurdity of this father-daughter relationship and where it goes, and it’s quite metaphorical but it’s also absurd, and you understand that the essential part of the poem is that father-daughter relationship can be estranged in such complicated ways that you might not be able to talk about them directly. I love Tate because the surrealism provides a way to talk about complicated relationships. The surrealism serves a philosophical purpose, makes room to talk about something. I think Dean Young does that, too. I think American surrealism, if that is indeed the right term, does something that the metaphor isn’t always able to do.

RICHMAN

In some of your more recent work, you put the urban into a wild setting, such as being mugged in a river. What sorts of things do you do to ground or un-ground your imagination?

SHARMA

I don’t know how I ground myself. I do feel like an outsider in ways in the West. I used to feel like an outsider in suburbia, growing up with no other Indians around me. I can really go to places where things are invented for me. There are social norms I have to explore. I try to create high stakes around some questions, and then my imagination takes over. I position myself in a place where I have to explain myself, and the terms that I’ve set for myself are both real and imaginary. For example, Homi Bhabha, the theorist, talked a lot about – I’m going to butcher this because it’s been a long time since I’ve read the essay – but he talks about how colonized people will mimic the colonizer. That’s a very interesting power dynamic. He has this beautiful line where he says, to paraphrase here, Mimicry represents ironic compromise, not always representationally but even in the language, then I was somehow enacting a theory that felt very close to me, which was about power relationships.

RICHMAN

You seem to write a lot about ideas – your ideas about ideas, and what triggers a viewpoint.

SHARMA

Theory is interesting to me. I’m naïve and excited about it at the same time. Poems seem to be places in which you can actually take ideas, and figure out how they can be inhabited.

RICHMAN

Do you think that’s a common view? I’ve heard that ideas are for essays and images are for poems?

SHARMA

I can’t stand rules like that. After a certain point, you have to have the strength and character and belief to be a writer. Images aren’t going to save you from yourself. Beyond craft issues, you have to start wrestling with why you are who you are. Your poems are going to have to save you. If you think about great poets, they’re always doing something new. If we talk about anyone who’s doing something interesting, we’re not talking about how they follow the rules.

I’m teaching an insider and an outsider class where we read poets inside and outside canon. I think what’s hardest for all of us is to say what makes us uncomfortable. When do we think the poet is getting away with something? Why is that so disturbing? When do we think correcting them is appropriate? What are the problems with over-determining the body of work by any given poet and its significance? Sometimes I just want to stop being in the institution and say, Well, what is the real pleasure here, and what’s the pleasure you’ve been taught to experience in the poem. Un-schooling may allow you to write something different.

RICHMAN

What would it take to escape the institution?

SHARMA

I don’t know if anyone can escape. In grad school, our professor, William Keach, asked my friend what he was doing for the summer, and he was like, “Oh Professor Keach, I don’t even want to tell you, you’re a Socialist/Marxist.” And he said,  “No, I want to know what you’re doing for the summer.” My friend said, “I’m working for Citibank,” and Keach said, “We’re all working for Citibank.”

In essence, we live in the institution. I think I make fun of being in an institution because I work in an MFA program. There are things that naturally happen in that environment. But I think it’s funny to think more ironically about it being an intentional community and that we all agree to be a certain way and do certain things and push against certain things. It seems people don’t generally like work that’s far from the institution. “Language” poetry’s been co-opted by the academy, but people don’t know what to do with spoken word. People see a lot of outsider poetry as being written by someone not knowing, not reading, or not understanding literary traditions. It’s interesting to thing about what inside and outside mean.

I try to introduce my students to poets who either write outside the academy or don’t consider their poetry identity to be their primary identity – you can have a multi-functional, professional identity. Ofelia Zepeda is a linguist at the University of Arizona, and she’s a poet. What she’s don’t for Tohono O’odham culture – she’s been preserving Tohono O’odham language for Native communities – has been primary and has served her poetry, and her poetry enacts it. I think it’s interesting when you have certain ideas and your work enacts them, so that you’re engaged in how your work does something maybe larger socially.

I think that goes back to how I want South Asians to feel good about how complicated they are. Rather than trying to please the reader or aim for certain success, they can fail. So much immigrant culture is based around this idea of needing to be successful, so usually you don’t choose to be a poet because it’s not a choice that can pay the bills or that can make your family proud of you. In some Indian communities, it’s fin to be an intellectual. But being a poet is kind of scary because it’s creative.

I’m interested in communities where people do explore the difficult: being a poet, writing about things that aren’t cool to write about. I think if you’re only success driven, your art will fail.

MAULE

Could you give more examples of outsider poets you’re teaching?

SHARMA

We’ve read Amiri Baraka; his earlier work as LeRoi Jones is so popular. People love how he writes about influences – the Beats, Black Mountain, Olson, Pound, Eliot – in ways that re-center him around racial discourse. He’s not that confrontational in the earlier work, but the more confrontational he gets, the more uncomfortable the white reader is with Baraka.

I found I was in this non-place where I didn’t feel threatened by the work at all. I was interested in the politics, and I’m interested in what the work tries on. I’m trying to explore what it’s like to be a white reader reading work that’s confrontational, having never occupied that space where I’m confronted as the person employing the power. It’s interesting when you’re both inside and outside, and I’m trying to get my students to figure out how their identity is complex but not generalized. They love the canonical work. I taught Jorie Graham’s first book so we could talk about a first book that propelled someone into the canon. They can identify all those moves in Graham. They can very much imitate Graham. But imitating Baraka is hard for them. If we go back to Homi Bhabha’s ideas of mimicry and ironic compromise, maybe they’re not experiencing enough of that compromise in the poem.

I’m also teaching an Indian poet, Rukmini Bhaya Nair, who’s a cognitive scientist. She writes out of the model where there are some strange narrative turns in the poems that you don’t expect. We’re reading Claudia Rankine’s Don’t Let Me Be Lonely. Claudia is Jamaican, so she looks at her identity as it relates to being in America, but she also has other ideas of lineage – that’s the thing I’ve really been trying to get my students to thing about. What if they could construct this imaginary lineage that they come out of? What would it be? Would it culturally represent just one thing? What does that mean, to be a contemporary poet writing out of one kind of lineage? Some poets aren’t writing out of just one lineage.

Some of my students – especially at the undergraduate level – are like, “We don’t have a lineage, and we don’t know what you mean by that.” I have to ask them, “Do you want to have a lineage, or do you want to figure out the places you’re writing from? Wouldn’t it be nice to think of it as a lineage, or is it that a cultural thing – that I would want a lineage?” Because in Indian culture, you really love the idea of mentoring, passing down wisdom. I always loved that idea that I had a lineage.

In talking about feminism, maybe you can have a feminist lineage and thing of women you write out of. I’m always thinking: What do we do with class now? or What did Sharon Olds offer or Anne Sexton? I don’t really like Sexton’s work that much, but she was a big outsider poet in a lot of ways. She was a sort of strange housewife in therapy in Newton, Massachusetts – I’m from Framingham, Massachusetts – so I always thought, God it’s funny to think of her getting on the subway and going to Cambridge and taking a workshop and having her therapist. That was very outside.

RICHMAN

Speaking of lineage, it’s been said that in Infamous Landscapes you are responding to Wordsworth and a landscape “cast in hysterics.” Can you talk about this?

SHARMA

I see Wordsworth as naïve and lofty and I thought of what the feminine equivalent of that would be. So I thought, I want to try hysteria. I’m interested in the individual and the sublime and how you have the landscape stand for certain emotional intensity and registers. I wanted to reposition that kind of loftiness in a feminine voice and see what it would look like. But then, I also like George Oppen and Barbara Guest, so those three influences, if you put them together, would feel closest to the work in that book.

I wanted to replace a kind of innocence or idealism with more of a hysteria. I say “hysteria” but I don’t mean that the woman is always cast as hysterical. I just like taking up space in ways that confront the masculine poetic authority. What do we have for poetic authority for women? We can be kind of dramatic and insistent upon certain ideas, but we can also be confrontational.

Somehow we haven’t managed to assume the same kind of, even, romantic poetic authority. It’s very hard to figure out, so I was just trying to assume poetic authority in ways that would mirror or counteract it in romantic work. I mean, Byron has so much poetic authority, and yet he’s transgressive. You know, we’re always hearing how bad Byron is, like, “He’s having way too much fun.” I mean, they all did.

Wordsworth is kind of the most naïve – I say naïve because the poetic authority is always that wandering and speculation – but you don’t really know where you’ve arrived at the end of Wordsworth. I was thinking of inhabiting that romantic space, but enriching it with a more feminine sensibility, rather than a childish one, or a naïve one.

MAULE

Where do we find poetic authority? Or does it just happen and we look back on it and say, “There it was.”

SHARMA

I think we are steeped in the poetic authority of the 18th and 19th centuries, and we have it in the 20th century, too – I guess Lowell had poetic authority – but I’m thinking of Eliot and Pound. I always felt really uncomfortable with male poetic authority because I felt that it was a way to flex knowledge. It was like saying, “Okay, pack the poem with everything you know.” And if it didn’t have that, such as in Lowell’s later work that’s more confessional, then it becomes, “I’m a wealthy man who can’t bear it.”

I started to connect to this poetic authority with craft, so that you have to set up the stage, your poem has to have placement, the voice has to be determined, and you have to figure out if your images are really serving what they’re supposed to serve. When you away from tradition, what are you doing it for? Are you turning away from poetic authority or are you reconstructing a kind of authority that has been ignored or has not been engaged with? I think you can do it formally or informally. People always talk about Kamau Brathwaite and Derek Walcott: what Brathwaite does informally, Walcott does formally. You know, Omeros is an amazing book for what Walcott does with Homer. So, wow! That’s an incredible shift in poetic authority.

I’m thinking about whether authority comes out of craft or if it comes out of the space to do what the poem needs to do. Historically, I think it came out of white men who believed in the tradition. I think I’m always trying to deconstruct the tradition, to figure out if you can have authority after that. But I know that I have a lofty authority in my poems to try all this out.

MAULE

If my name was Prageeta I would want to put it in a poem, and you’ve done that. How does this affect the relationship between the poem and the reader?

SHARMA

I like to be self-mocking in the poem and I like to have the reader understand that certain truths are constructed but that I am still trying to play with the seriousness. So we have the “I” as the ultimate authority, but what if you put your name in the poem? What does it do to the “I?” Or what does it do when I’m writing in the third person and I refer to myself as the third person? It’s obnoxious in one sense, but it can also allow the poem to have a natural remove: I am removed in some way from the authority of the “I.” I’m playing with that.

I apologize a lot, and I am interested in how we have certain gestures that are constructed culturally in terms of gender, and how we play with our diminutive self. I try to position myself in these powerless places that are my most vulnerable powerless places, and then play with that. Or, when the reader is instructed or spoken to, it creates an intimacy in the text. It’s almost a reaching out or an invitation. I like trying to break down the spaces of reader and speaker so that there’s an intimacy that maybe the speaker doesn’t always have.

MAULE

I see that breaking down of the space between reader and speaker in Bliss to Fill. The whole first section is called “Dear _______.”

SHARMA

Yeah, I’m interested in the lyric in that book. In that epistolary form, that heartfelt engagement, I really am trying to speak to the reader as a friend, or as all sorts of manifestation. I wrote that in New York my first couple of years there, steeped in a fabulous writing community.

A lot of poems in The Opening Question were my graduate manuscripts that were reformulated with additional work. So, Bliss to Fill was my second manuscript. I knew it could be freer because Subpress Collective was a really generous project. So I could enjoy all of the vulnerability of O’Hara’s lines. That was really an exciting time to think about the immediacy of the poem. I don’t know if my poems now are as focused on that immediacy of the poem. I don’t know if my poems now are as focused on that immediacy as they were in Bliss to Fill. There is a certain rawness to that book that would be hard to recreate.

MAULE

Poetry allows us so much freedom and intimacy and the ability to lounge out on the lawn. What is the biggest challenge of poetry?

SHARMA

Our challenge is that we allow ourselves to exist outside the economy. That’s why we get a lot of freedom. It’s very political and very interesting and if people could sit comfortably with that, they’d feel more empowered.

RICHMAN

Value, worth, and money come up a lot in your work.

SHARMA

I’m lucky in that I have a good job. Before I took this job, I worked a lot of different jobs in New York and I had the same questions with each: “Okay, who is the person I’m working for?” Or, “How’s this environment going to help me be creative, help me believe in a lifestyle, and help me take care of people whom I love?”

I worked for a famous artist who made a lot of money. He taught me essential things about being an artist that were not about the work. And so I realized, The work is private – you do it, you believe in it – but you have to make smart decisions about who you are outside your work. You have to deal with money. You have to know how to. This artist taught me how to insure things. I learned that poets should be collecting art and figuring out how to have assets that are non-traditional. Poets should be immersed in their culture, the culture being produced around them, and engaged with it. And to really live in your mind by being shrewd – don’t think that just because you’re a poet you can’t figure out how things work around you.

I am really interested in money. I don’t know if it’s because I’m first generation American born and my parents are immigrants; they came here from India with 200 dollars. They’ve done well, they’ve struggled, and they’ve experienced a lot of racism and a lot of discrimination. I have, too. I don’t have the luxury of not thinking about money, but I also really love what poetry offers me in terms of my identity.

At a meeting yesterday, I was joking and everyone went silent. I said, “Well, you know, we may not be able to promise our students lucrative careers, but they won’t have a midlife crisis.” I think we’re providing them an inner life, which actually keeps people from buying crazy cars or leaving their spouses. I think there are a lot of interesting things that poetry offers that aren’t about money. But I’m still a director and I recruit people to come to an MFA program. I’m not trying to be a hypocrite. I get a paycheck. I don’t want people to take out loans for poetry. But I also think that people take out loans for the most ridiculous things anyway. Like why would renovating your house be more important than your inner life? I think people should pay more attention to what they spend money on and what it means to spend money on something. What’s actually nourishing?

RICHMAN

I love this set of directions for poets and I’m especially interested in the one about how poets need to be engaged with their culture.

SHARMA

We are so keen to historicize what has been interesting in the past for poets. It’s like saying, “In the 50s, we had O’Hara who’s a poet among painters. Oh, that’s great.” Well, he was smart about knowing what was going on in a really exciting world – a parallel universe of art-making. A lot of those poets were involved in the arts and they knew they were on the pulse of seeing great work as it was being done, and they were also making work and making connections.

We have a weird economy of high and low art, but we forget that curators are looking at what’s happening in strange rural places and seeing amazing work coming out of those spaces. Poets need to participate in everything going on around them or instigate or initiate or collaborate and see themselves as participating and engaging… or articulating a sense of what’s going on around them. That is, creating the history that will then be romanticized.

It just seems strange. I think scholars can do all that historicizing. Poets need to be making work right now and believing that they have some kind of agency. It’s useful to not historicize, to not call attention to something that doesn’t exist anymore, but to look at the living artists. All these careers are propelled by just believing that you have agency – by doing something new – and a lot more poets should worry less about whether they’re being read or how many books they’ve sold and just be more involved in the arts in ways that will feed them.

You don’t have to think you have to be somewhere; you just have to be immersed fully where you are. Dale, my husband, is a performance artist, and I will have a crazy work week where I’ll be talking about poetry and I’ll be writing a little bit or whatever. And he’ll present something and I’ll just think, “Oh my God, it’s just genius.” I know I’m biased because he’s my husband but he has taught me so much about being in your work all the time and believing that it’s the most meaningful place that you have to be in the present, and understanding and engaging with it.

MAULE

Do you see any potential for technology/poetry collaborations?

SHARMA

Well, my biggest fantasy – have you been to BAM in Brooklyn – the Brooklyn Academy of Music? I remember my parents actually went there in the 70s when Peter Brookes had created that adaptation of The Mahabharata. It was a very experimental theater in the 70s, and here was this suburban family from Boston going to see this beautiful adaptation of the classic Indian text.

But then I thought, Wow! Brooklyn Academy of Music has done all the great commissions, and the poets have collaborated with artists and composers. Tom Waits and his poet wife have done these incredible productions. And I’m thinking, Well, all the language in all of those things has the lyric in it. It’s got poetic elements. It’s fragmenting language in order to heighten it, so it all involves poetry when we’re looking at experimental theater or multimedia productions.

I think poets could be more actively engaged in cross-genre productions, in the aesthetic experience and the pleasure of it. In my workshop, I teach Matthew Barney’s Cremaster Cycle and I think, How does video art become so extravagant, whereas when you have it in the poem, it’s unreadable? People will watch video art or animation – why is the visual element so much more engaging than what your mind can conjure? Why is it so disturbing when it happens in the poem? But you can spend five million dollars on it and have it represented at a gallery and it’s conceptually the same thing. In some ways it’s more flawed because of its budget.

I think poets need to hijack more things. We need to be out there saying, “You should really have a poet do that.” Matthew Barney should hire a poet to work with. We bring a lot more imagination to pieces. Sometimes what’s surprising about some of the video art is that it’s literal or Freudian. Even David Lynch. But we have his early videos and we see credit to C.K. Williams as a consultant on one of his films from art school. It would be nice if poets were not seen as so “fringe-y” but more useful. Like vessels of imagination.

MAULE

Why are poets seen as “fringe-y?”

SHARMA

Because we don’t make money. Painters are “fringe-y,” too. Until they have big accounts.

RICHMAN

So many people think there’s no need for so many people studying and writing poetry, but it seems like you’re arguing the opposite – that as many people as possible should discover the inner life of a poet.

SHARMA

I don’t think you have to be teaching at a university to be a poet. I don’t think you have to give up who you are to do one thing or four things. There are 5,000 students entering MFA programs a year. But that’s a very American thing, isn’t it, to have anxiety around people studying the subject? Isn’t that inherently competitive? Say we could have 5,000 people a year who are more engaged with their humanity? Though you could be a narcissist going through the program, so you have to split the 5,000. Maybe 2,500 are interested in bettering themselves. Not that poetry has to be therapeutic. But on the flip-side, all of those narcissists are actually doing something productive, instead of being awful people. So, in some ways, however you come out as a writer, it’s all productive.

RICHMAN

What do you do in your life to maintain literary friendships and the kinds of community you need to nurture and support yourself as an artist?

SHARMA

I like community; I like being involved in what people are doing, but I think a lot of people don’t. They want the community to serve them, but they don’t want to do enough for the people around them. I’m not saying I do everything right, but I like paying attention to what people need. What I really like about the MFA program is that you’re all present with each other. And that stays. I think students and faculty get to keep and protect and preserve the community around them. But I think it can be hard being the poet. It’s easy to send poems out and publish, but it’s hard to believe that you did the right thing. That’s where all the struggle is – believing that it’s okay to be a poet, especially when you’re invisible.

But, then it’s kind of funny, too. I’m seeing a family friend tonight – she’s going to come to the “One Hundred Days Reading,” this celebration of Obama’s first hundred days in office. She’s a nurse in Boulder and I was like, “There’ll be a lot of people in this space; it’s going to probably be a little bit unsettling.” It’s like, all of the interest and engagement – I don’t know how many of those poems are going to make sense to her. But Obama makes sense to her. And then she’s going to have this funny experience with these poems playing in rhetoric language. But it’s all play, ultimately. That’s what’s so confusing to non-writers. They’re like, “Oh… this is all fun.” and that’s the secret. We’re having fun all the time.

Issue 69: A Conversation with Robert Lopez

issue69

Interview in Willow Springs 69

Works in Willow Springs 55

February 3, 2011

Blake Butler, Samuel Ligon, and Joseph Salvatore

A CONVERSATION WITH ROBERT LOPEZ

robertlopezauthorphoto

Photo Credit: unsaidmagazine.wordpress.com

The fiction of Robert Lopez occurs in a world simultaneously oppressive and hilarious, in which people fail to recognize their spouses or lovers, in which something is wrong but it's not clear what, in which characters are subjected to a kind of imprisonment they don't understand and, at first glance, hardly seem to care about. But they do care; throughout the work, characters demonstrate a deep, subtle resistance to the restrictions of their lives and relationships and institutional affiliations or entrapments-a resistance coupled with an inability to master forces in a world they can't begin to understand. Often noted for his distinctive voice and style, Lopez creates worlds and characters we somehow at once recognize and yet have never seen before, arising from language and cadences that compel like a kind of beautiful, weird song.

Robert Lopez was born in Brooklyn, New York and raised on Long Island. He's the author of two novels, Part of the World and Kamby Bolongo Mean River, and, most recently, a book of stories called Asunder. The Faster Times notes that "the Lopez syntax has evolved over the years to become both recognizable and utterly unique in its uncompromising approach. Language may be a dull instrument, but it's the best we've got; lucky for us, Lopez is up to the challenge." The Review of Contemporary Fiction refers to his prose as "like a great jazz performance : pointedly provisional, even damaged, and solicitous of audience participation."

Lopez's stories have appeared in Bomb, the Threepenny Review, New England Review, Willow Springs, Norton's Sudden Fiction Latino, and many other places. He's taught at Columbia University and William Paterson University, and he currently teaches at The New School, Pratt Institute, and Pine Manor College's Solstice Low-Residency MFA Program. He's been a fiction fellow of the New York Foundation for the Arts, as well as a visiting writer at the Vermont Studio Center. He edits No News Today, a blog, or running anthology of dispatches from a deep pool of writers, including Roy Kesey, Amelia Gray, Terese Svoboda, Jess Walter, and Nelly Reifler, to name but a few.

We met with Mr. Lopez at the Omni Shoreham hotel in Washington DC, where we talked about logic and connective threads, damage and its aftermath, repetition and refrain, knowing and not knowing, and how, as a writer, "you have to cultivate your fears, your perversions, your peccadilloes, your compulsions."

 

BLAKE BUTLER

Throughout your work there's a balance between knowing and not knowing, revealing and not revealing. Your characters seem at once unaware of their social function and hyper aware of it. Is this a product of you, the writer, not knowing what you're going to write as you're writing?

ROBERT LOPEZ

I'm always most interested in not knowing. That's my default. To me, there's authority in that ignorance, because I know that my narrators and characters don't know anything and I know that they're aware that they don't know. I also know that it's frustrating as hell to them, but that they, on some level, accept it. They want connection with people, but they know that connection is never going to happen.

JOSEPH SALVATORE

They want connection so badly they can't do it right?

LOPEZ

They don't know how to do it right.

SAMUEL LIGON

What makes a story feel complete to you?

LOPEZ

By the time you get to the end of a piece of fiction, I think you should feel that you've been someplace, that you've had an experience. Somewhere I read John Turturro saying, when asked how he played a character: "Well, what you saw is what I did. I can't really go beyond chat." Similarly, for me, the way a story works is how it works. It's an intuitive thing. I might feel, Okay, here's the end. But that doesn't mean I necessarily know how my fiction works, or that I want to demystify it.

I do have a sense of how short stories work structurally and formally, though I can't say I understand the workings of long fiction, even though I've written two novels. There are probably ten failed stories I cannibalized for Part of the World. Same thing with Kamby Bolongo Mean River. I cannibalize what doesn't totally succeed in its original context but chat has something good or interesting, some language or a situation, and I use chat. The fragmentation leads to something that starts to feel complete. I like what Donald Barchelme said about college-something like "Fragments are the only form I use." I work with fragments because it's the only way I know how to work when I put together something long.

BUTLER

Some of the linchpins for your characters are their feelings of comfort when they recall memories from childhood, particularly in Kamby. All else-the concrete reality around the narrator-seems somehow chimerical.

LOPEZ

And what's funny to me is that I don't find anything particularly sustaining in memory. The present always beats the hell out of anything we may have done in the past. Same goes for the people in my past­ people I loved. Memory is flawed, hazy, and therefore unsatisfying. So it's funny that to the narrators or characters in my fiction, memory is the only thing that's reliable or real.

LIGON

What's the driving force of Kamby?

LOPEZ

The character is static-he's confined. But he wants out. It's his desire to escape that's the driving force, unlike, for example, Beckett's character in Molloy, who's in this bed, in this room. He doesn't want to be anywhere else. He's accepting of where he is and what he's doing. He's telling his story; he's going to cell it now, tell it one more time, etc. Whereas, the narrator of Kamby wants the hell out of that place, but he doesn't know how to achieve the escape. That's where chose suicide attempts come in-if they are suicide attempts. Bue if he were to get out, I don't chink he would be able to survive.

LIGON

What's wrong with him?

LOPEZ

I have no idea.

SALVATORE

You've said that you write in a state of not knowing, and that, after the writing is over, you remain uncertain of what you've done and maybe even why you've done it. One could say chat your books enact that same not knowing. So, not only are the characters and the reader kept in the dark, but the writer keeps himself in the dark, too?

LOPEZ

That's exactly right.

SALVATORE

So you're totally resisting the old Fiction 101, which is that you should know your characters' predilections and preferences- what color sheets he sleeps in, which cereal she buys, whether his wristwatch is digital or has a face. This is the stuff we're told we're supposed to know, even though cereal and wristwatches are never mentioned in the story.

LOPEZ

Exactly. For example, there's no mention of the parents of the narrator in Part of the World, and I have no idea about them-who they were, how they brought him up. It never occurred to me. The truth is, to me there's no such thing as character. There's no such thing as story. Or plot. All we have are words arranged on a page. It's on the reader to make character. There's no such thing as a Holden Caulfield. Somehow readers experience and feel like they know this character, but there is no real character.

SALVATORE

But language has to signify something. Plot exists because the writer chooses to construct language to make meaningful articulations that move in a particular direction. We can't just say that words are empty signifiers.

LOPEZ

Of course they're not empty signifiers, because then you could put any words in any order. In the Raethke poem, "My Papa's Waltz," the words are in a very specific order. Half of the poem's readers think it's about child abuse, the other half think it's a father and son horsing around. Does it matter what Roethke's intent was? No, it's up to the reader to decide. As a writer, I'm going to do what I have to do to keep myself engaged. I hope I'm going to keep a few readers engaged along the way. And then, what you make out of it is what you make out of it.

LIGON

In Kamby, the reader does get deep context for the narrator's life. We end up knowing a lot about him. Why do you show us what you show us in Kamby?

LOPEZ

I never think about what needs to- well no, that's a lie- I do think about what needs to go into a story to compel the reader. I love what VS. Prichett said: ''A short story is something glimpsed out of the corner of the eye in passing." I've always held onto that. And not just for a short story, but also for a novel. Obviously a novel has to be fuller; it has to be a different experience. But you can cultivate the "not knowing" part of that fullness. And so, what's left out of Kamby and what's left out of Part of the World is as important as what's put in.

The narrator in Kamby talks about his injury, and then he mentions a place called Injury, Alaska. Now, is Injury, Alaska a real place? I have no idea, but he claims to have grown up there. Some of his claims are kind of ridiculous because, obviously, there's no place in Alaska where they need air conditioning. So is he intentionally fucking around with the reader? I don't think he's intentionally trying to be duplicitous.
Unlike many writers, place really doesn't interest me. Which is why Part of the World doesn't "take place" anywhere. Kamby might take place in Alaska, or it might not. Very few of my short stories even mention place. And none of these people have jobs-at least that are mentioned. The jobs of the characters don't interest me. What does interest me in, say, Kamby, is what is revealed about the character through his memories and his feelings about those memories. Whether it's Charlie being a boxer, or his mother being kind of an abusive deadbeat. But my intention is not to explain why he's where he is or how he got in that situation.

BUTLER

All of these things we're talking about-the traditional elements of fiction-are play-toys for what's really the magic of your writing, which is the logic. In your novella, The Trees Underground, we watch a character's logic evolve by bouncing back and forth between orchestrations of place, person, and memory. In Kamby, when the character remembers what his brother used to do to him, it isn't as interesting as him trying to figure out why he remembers that and who exactly that guy was. And it's logical; it's like math without anything following the equals sign. How do you use what I'm calling logic as a tool in your writing?

LOPEZ

It's a great question and it really resonates with me. How do writers create transitions in narrative? My approach is to pick out something that's come before the time in which the story takes place. I try to create a connective thread. So it's just a matter of finding out what those threads are and which of those threads interest me. The narrator of Kamby might mention something that his current tormentors are doing to him; and that's going to catapult him into talking about the time he was with Charlie and they were out early one morning sneaking out of the house or whatever. I couldn't possibly work without that logical progression from point to point. Maybe I rely too heavily on it.

BUTLER

But that's where the emotion is for me, because that's how life feels.

LOPEZ

And that emotion is: How the fuck did I get here.

The narrator of The Trees Underground finds himself someplace and has no idea how he got there. But he's there and he's responsible for people who need his help. He doesn't know what qualifies him to do any of the things he's doing, yet he has to do them. He's also hoping to get the hell out of there, just like in Kamby Bolongo. But unlike in Kamby, he has responsibilities. Both narrators find themselves mysteriously confined to a place. Both narrators feel a certain impotence because they have no real free will; they can't leave for some reason or another.

SALVATORE

And in Trees Underground it becomes a question of, Does he really have these responsibilities, or is this something they do to keep him busy because he's annoying?

LOPEZ

Yeah, it could be that as well. Absolutely. And I don't know the answer.

LIGON

Is the logic logical? Is it rational?

SALVATORE

It's logical to the narrator in the moment he's in. It's like a dementia patient. You watch them and in the moment they're convinced-"This is this way and that is that way"-and the next minute, they're almost a different person. "No-that's not how it is." And it continues to change because something's wrong with their brain. It's true now, and it's true now, and now it's not true, but it'll be true again.

LOPEZ

Most of us can connect, maybe, to these narrators or characters to a degree, but not completely. The narrator of The Trees Underground is kind of extreme-dull-witted and totally befuddled by what he's doing and who these people are, and he doesn't understand very fundamental things. I think this rubs up against what we know of the world and how we move around the world and feel like we can give the appearance that we're competent. We're holding it together to an extent.

LIGON

Does fiction need damage to work?

LOPEZ

I think we're born damaged. I think we're marked at birth. You know, you come out of there and they slap your ass, and it's already traumatic. And immediately you're thrust into coping mode. As Larkin so famously said: Your parents, they fuck you up. And then our schools fuck us up. So, yes, I find damaged characters, damaged narrators to be the most compelling kind. But they have to be human at the same time.

BUTLER

The damage is always off the page. We don't know what the hell is wrong with a character, as though we're getting the aftermath.

LOPEZ

It's always the aftermath-when they're taking baby steps toward something that resembles recovery. For the people in my fiction, it's baby steps all the way through, across tenuous ground. They're trying to make it across somehow, without getting more damaged along the way.

BUTLER

You use a lot of diched language and repetition and something that almost feels like sampling. Characters repeat things they've heard. But you're not really quoting it; you're sticking it into the rest of their speech. It's like they're dinging to these meaningless ways of speaking.

SALVATORE

Yeah-the characters skew a cliche chat reveals some kind of mystery in the story. And then the form enacts it by this recursive-what might be called repetition, but I'm thinking more like Gertrude Stein's recursion­ where when we return to either a phrase or a sec piece, it's slightly skewed again. Is chat a strategy you practice?

LOPEZ

We all know the experience of deja-vu, like, I've done this before. I play with chat experience in Part of the World-places and events and thoughts and language occur and reoccur. I use borrowed language to illuminate something and to create tension. In Part of the World, the narrator is totally unaware that he's ripping off Nabakov or Proust or Wallace Stevens. Sometimes he's doing it verbatim, and sometimes he's fucking around with the text. But he has no idea, because he doesn't know what's his and what isn't. He can't distinguish a thought that might be original from something that he read or that someone said to him. He appropriates what another character says to him the same way he appropriates Beckett or Shakespeare. He doesn't know what belongs to him.

LIGON

The repetition makes your sentences and word choices feel extremely deliberate. Your teacher, Amy Hempel, has been referred to as a "line writer." Are you a line writer?

LOPEZ

I think there are certainly line writers, who produce work in which the line becomes the dominant experience of reading, as opposed to work that's all about story or narrative. You could say Alice Munro is a narrative writer. But Updike, to me, was a line writer. Those sentences are put together in a way that seems much more sophisticated than, say, Alice Munro's.

Music was a big part of my experience growing up, and as a teenager I started singing and playing guitar. I'm into the ways that music works structurally, and this informs my use of language and line. Repetition is key in music-the refrain is a vital element. If you cake refrain out of music then the whole thing can fall apart.

LIGON

Is there risk in too much focus on line?

LOPEZ

There can be, certainly. And sometimes risks work out and sometimes they don't. Sometimes a writer's prose is so dense that a reader isn't able to extract any emotion. The language can be meticulous; the lines, the sentences, can be perfect. But one can't get any feeling out of it. I've read well regarded work chat has left me feeling cold- not cold as in the chill of fear-I mean cold as in flat-lined: books that are perfectly constructed, but I couldn't draw a visceral response from the work. Language-wise they might be perfect, but I need something more. The language can't be-for me, for my sensibility-it has to work for me. Like Gertrude Stein said, there has to be a "there there."

SALVATORE

It's interesting that you talk about the need for emotion, and Stein's "there there" in light of your strategy of cultivating ignorance and not providing characters with jobs, places, and in some cases, past history. You've said you want compelling-

LOPEZ

It has to be entertaining.

SALVATORE

So, on the one hand you don't want to know too much about what's going on behind the curtain of your fiction. And yet you actually, I chink, are a craftsperson who's mo re conscious of craft than he's admitting. And who, as a reader, responds to the very craft elements that he feigns ignorance of. This is what it seems to me Blake was saying about characters making him feel human feelings. I'm wondering if, when you talk about creating compelling work, you're not simply talking about plain old plot?

LOPEZ

Ah, God. I have no idea. I mean, for me- it's like the Supreme Court's definition of pornography. I can't define it, but I know it when I see it. I know it when I do it.

Sometimes whatever it is that we're calling "compelling" happens in the initial composition, and a lot of times it happens in the revision. For instance, in Part of the World it happened solely in revision, because in the very, very first draft, absolutely nothing compelling happened. I was playing with the tenets of the nouveau roman, trying to get rid of everything to see what was left. But then, going over it, I thought, Okay, you need something to happen. So, chat sense of a "there there" definitely happened in revision with Part of the World.

LIGON

What bores you as a reader?

LOPEZ

Again, it's similar to the Supreme Court thing. For instance, each of you goes about creating a story in an entirely different way, but when I read your work, I feel there's a heat that's generated. On occasion, I pick up The Night in Question, by Tobias Wolff, and every semester I teach "Bullet in the Brain." Bue I recently picked up Back in the World and I read all the first lines, and they just weren't as dynamic as his other first lines. Writers are cold, "The whole story has to be in the first line." What bores me is the overly familiar, the pedestrian.

SALVATORE

If we apply chat logic, "Call me Ishmael" would probably not pass-

LOPEZ

No, no, "Call me Ishmael" certainly does. There's something arresting about "Call me Ishmael." Is chat not your name? Who are you? What else would we call you? That, to me, is a brilliant opening.

SALVATORE

Amy Hempel used to say that she couldn't write past one line if that line wasn't working. Is it that way for you with the first line of a story or novel?

LOPEZ

Every piece I've written-the novels, stories, or the play I just finished-comes from a single line. They never come from an idea or an image or an experience; they come from one single line. And the next line pushes off the previous line. In Kamby, that line is "Should the phone ring I will answer it." I like the contingency of that. There's power and powerlessness in that line. "Should the phone ring," which is totally outside my control, "I will answer it."

SALVATORE

The theorist Gilles Deleuze, in writing about Melville's Bartleby, says that the comical is always literal. It can't be metaphorized because of the way it works in Melville, the syntactic queerness of "I would prefer not to," a linguistic formula that is the story's "glory" and which "every loving reader repeats." He talks about different kinds of humor, including works by Kleist, Dostoevsky, Kafka, Beckett. Do you see yourself as a part of this lineage? It's a humanizing kind of humor, in a certain way.

LOPEZ

I saw this really good movie recently- Winter's Bone. It was entirely humorless. Now, you can do a dark, dark movie, and I respond to darkness. But God damn it, have some laughs along the way. That was my major problem with that picture- there wasn't one chuckle or light moment or even a dark funny thing; there was nothing funny at all. When that happens, it's one note and no matter how compelling it is I don't respond the way I'd like to respond. I'm not saying I want something to be jokey, like Dave Barry in the Miami Herald or something.

BUTLER

I think there are two kinds of humor: inside and outside. Your characters tell jokes about things they think are supposed to be funny, or that they really think are funny, which makes their shitty world a little better. But then, there's the humor where you're looking at this guy who's keeping track of which way his erections go, left or right. And he's not joking . The scariest moments are when I see your characters doing things I do myself. I'll be reading about something a character does and I realize that I do that and I'm like, "Oh my fucking God!" Because everyone does those things in different ways.

LOPEZ

I tell students that you have to cultivate your fears, your perversions, your peccadilloes, your compulsions. You have to use that stuff because it's ultimately going to make the work vibrant and come off the page. All the stories we tell have been told a million times before. Nobody's going to come up with a new story. It's all the same old thing; somebody is losing something, somebody wants something, somebody is afraid of losing something, somebody is afraid of wanting something. We can't not write those stories. We cultivate the strange things that make us unique, and that uniqueness is what connects us to other people. Otherwise strangeness is just a freak-show. Like what you see on Jerry Springer.

BUTLER

You've said you don't know how to write a novel-that though you've written two novels, you don't think of yourself as a novelist. Do you consider your novels to be very long short stories?

LOPEZ

No, I think they're novels. But when I think of a novelist, I think of someone who sits down and writes novels. John Updike is a novelist, Anne Tyler is a novelist. I do consider myself a writer, but as often as not, I feel like it's almost always a happy accident every time one of these things comes together- whether it is a one-page story or a novel; like it was almost the luck of some sort of draw.

BUTLER

The last lines of "Monkey in the Middle" are, "I've come to realize that what goes on when I'm not around is none of my business. Mostly." If it feels like luck to you, why do you keep doing it?

LOPEZ

Because it gives me something that nothing else does, and because it's what I can do. When it's working, it's such a satisfying feeling. And, you know, it's nice to have the books on the shelf. You can look at them and say, "I did that," although I rarely do this. At any rate, there's a line in the Wallace Stevens poem, "The Planet on the Table:" ''Ariel was glad he had written his poems. They were of a remembered time/Or of something seen that he liked." And then later in the poem, there's this: "Some affluence, if only half-perceived,/In the poverty of their words." The desire to make something that wasn't there before motivates me.

There's a magic when a line comes and you put another line behind it. I remember Stanley Elkin saying something like-at this point he was in a wheelchair-"Well, I might not be much physically, but on the page, I'm a god." When we write, we can be gods. Though, of course, our readers don't think of us as gods. Kamby certainly has some detractors­ a few people have voiced their disappointment about that book.

LIGON

What do they want that they're not getting? Plot?

LOPEZ

I imagine. But they can go to a million other writers for chat. It's none of my business. I wouldn't know plot if it knocked me in the-

BUTLER

But you're a huge movie lover. And plot is a major part of movies, particularly certain kinds of movies that I know you like, like The Godfather. So what's the difference between telling a story in image and writing a script?

LOPEZ

When you do something visually you have the instrument of the actor who communicates so much without using language-without resorting to the base thing chat language is. One of my favorite moments in film is the brilliant Anthony Hopkins in The Remains of the Day. He's in his parlor, right? And he's the most uptight character you're ever going to come across-entirely introverted and withdrawn, scared of human contact. He's in his parlor, he's in his safe place, and he's reading a book, and a woman he's attracted to, played by Emma Thompson, invades his space. She wants to know what he's reading; she's curious. "What are are you reading? Just tell me what you're reading." But he doesn't want to tell her. By not wanting to show her the book, he's saying, "This is my private time and you're invading it. I want to be alone." He's holding the book to his chest, but she's insistent; she's moving in on him, which he is not inviting at all. She's caking the book physically from his hands. And the heat chat Hopkins has in his eyes, of repression-he wants her, he's extremely attracted to her, but he doesn't know how to go about the next human move. He can't negotiate it; he can't handle it; he can't express it, certainly. But Hopkins somehow manages to communicate all of that without language. It's all here; it's all in his face.
That's what film can do. And I can think of other moments. The end of Big Night is one of my favorite moments in film. The brothers have had this argument, it was horrible, and you think they're now estranged. You think, This is it, they have to go their separate ways. The very next morning they're exhausted, they've had this big night and there's a scene entirely without dialogue that goes on for minutes. It's extraordinary. Stanley Tucci makes eggs for himself and then for his brother, played by Tony Shalhoub. The whole scene is like a silent movie at this point. That's the kind of thing that when we write fiction we just can't do. And in film, I want to know what's going to happen-I expect to know. I require plot. Whereas, in fiction, I don't require that at all.

LIGON

You have a deep emotional response to the ending of Big Night. Can you talk about a similar response you've had to fiction?

LOPEZ

You know, it's funny. I've almost never had- I'm not quite our new Speaker of the House where I can cry on a dime, but I can get emotional. I can be emotional. Music has moved me that way many times, film has moved me that way. That hasn't happened in a long time with film, though. But there have been times with film where I've either felt leveled in the seat, where I can't move, or I've been moved to tears. I have never been moved to tears, except for one time, with reading. And it wasn't fiction, it was nonfiction. It was Andre Dubus in Broken Vessels. There's an essay in that book that moved me to tears. But for fiction, I'm neither-it's a different feeling. It's visceral because I do feel stirred somehow. I feel compelled, I feel entertained, but somehow it's a different kind of emotional connection. Maybe it's because it's the thing that I do. I don't know.

LIGON

Do you get as much pleasure from it today as-

LOPEZ

Not even close.

SALVATORE

In what, reading or writing?

LOPEZ

Reading. I read my friends, and I get pleasure out of that, but there was a time when-if a new book by a writer I admired was coming out, I was there that Tuesday getting it. And that doesn't happen anymore. I think I've been over saturated. I teach four workshops a semester. That means I'm reading critically all the time. So even if I read somebody I consider a friend and who I like-not even a close friend where I want to read everything, but a casual good friend and I want to support them-I pick up the book, because I'm supporting it and I'm reading them, and I like their writing. But I go for a little bit, and then it's as if I say, Okay, I've got a sense of that, and I put it down. It always feels like I'm on the job.

BUTLER

The pleasure factor has diminished for me, too. I don't necessarily feel on the job, but I feel the pulling away. Each year I feel a little less pleasure, reading and writing.

LOPEZ

I remember feeling it was a magical experience to get a new book. Magical.

SALVATORE

What are some of those magical books you couldn't wait to buy? And what are you drawn to today?

LOPEZ

These days, there are no authors other than my friends that I'm excited about. Because it seems I've already seen what's being done. There's nothing new for me there, which I know is bullshit, but whatever. And the books that I loved in the past- well, I picked up I Sailed with Magellan recently, and I remember the first time I read "We Didn't"-it was in the nineties-and that story knocked me on my ass. I thought it was one of the greatest things I'd ever read. It lived in my memory as a brilliant, brilliant story. But when I recently picked up I Sailed with Magellan and reread "We Didn't," it just wasn't happening for me.
That story is the same, but I've changed and now the story doesn't work for me. I lament the change. I've become too ruthless as a reader. If there's a line, if there's a clause that explains too much or feels too commonplace, I can't abide it and I stop. But I did read The Coast of Chicago recently and totally dug it. I didn't have a single moment where I thought, "Well, whatever." But looking at I Sailed with Magellan, I've been trying that and it just hasn't happened for me. And I don't know exactly why.

SALVATORE

Your work, it seems to me, is influenced by David Markson and Samuel Beckett. Would you talk a bit about those influences or others?

LOPEZ

I've said this before, but reading Hemingway's ''A Clean, Well­ Lighted Place" many years ago made me want to write a story. So I wrote a story or two. I had no instruction, I wasn't an English major. I took lit classes in college, but didn't pay attention in them, so I never did the work. I actually paid for the papers I handed in. The way I was taught literature in high school and college was to look for symbols and memorize and extract interpretive meaning that was concrete. We would read a poem and say, "What's the poet really saying?"
What's the poet really saying? The poet said what's on the page.

SALVATORE

But poets do talk about how hard they've worked on a metaphor, and to make a particular, very aestheticized event for the reader, right? So poets are thinking about it.

LOPEZ

And that's poetry I'm not interested in. I read Wallace Stevens. I love Wallace Stevens. I don't want to know that he's trying for metaphor, because to me, he's not. To me, he's putting language down that has metaphor. To me-and I tell this to my students all the time-it's like acting. You want to feel the anger, you don't want to show the anger. If you feel the anger as an actor, the anger will come out. But if you're crying to play anger, you're going to be overacting. If a writer is trying to be true to whatever he or she is putting down on the page, the metaphor is going to happen. It has to happen, because everything. I mean, we don't live in a bubble. We don't live in a vacuum. Everything is contingent upon something else. Everything is related to something else. So metaphor is inevitable. It arises. It cannot not happen. So, when people say, "I'm trying for a metaphor, I need a metaphor," I think it's the wrong way to go about it. It gets heavy-handed. It makes the reader say, "You're not trusting me as the reader to get it, and so you have to hit me over the head with it."

LIGON

You mentioned Hemingway-

LOPEZ

Hemingway made me want to read. When I came across Carver, he made me want to be a writer. Not just write a story, but make a life out of this activity. There was something about the power and mystery of chose stories. Every one, at the end, had a punch in the gut. I felt like I'd been someplace. I felt I'd experienced something. And I had an emotional, visceral connection to it, along the lines of "Ballad of a Thin Man;" something has happened here but you don't know what it is. And I was totally fine with not knowing what it is.

But when I came to read Markson's Wittgenstein's Mistress, and the fragmented way chat was put together, I said, "Okay, fragments. That's something I can move around in." And so that worked with me and that sparked something in me. And also, Beckett's Molloy-where he strips everything down, and gets rid of so much. I like what Faulkner said in his Nobel acceptance speech, ''All literature is the human heart in conflict with itself." And, to me, I try to distill that down to someone in a room-How did I get here? How do I get out of here? How do I make connections with other people? There are feelings of isolation. And disappointment. Beckett and Markson handle that on a language level and a narrative strategy level that moved me and opened up my head to what could be done on the page.

LIGON

In contrast to some of the bleakness of the worlds you create, are you a romantic? Your characters are so often disappointed, like: "It shouldn't be this way. We're damaged and it shouldn't be this way." There's something innocent and romantic in that view.

LOPEZ

I've never thought of it in those terms, but I think you're right. I mean, I think all of my narrators believe that life shouldn't always be this hard. This is how it is, but it shouldn't be this way. And almost like Jesus on the cross: "Why have I been forsaken, oh Lord? Why me? Why have I been forsaken?" But then, also: They get through somehow. Somehow, they get through.

Issue 75: A Conversation with William T. Vollmann

Willow Springs 75 Cover shows pink pressed flowers on rough paper.

Found in Willow Springs 75

April 12, 2014

DAVID ALASDAIR, MELISSA HUGGINS, GENEVA KAISER

A CONVERSATION WITH WILLIAM T. VOLLMANN

Vollmann201

Photo Credit: Elliot Bay Book Company

 

When I'm dying, I want to think I did what I felt was best for the words I was writing," William T. Vollmann declared in a 2014 essay in the Atlantic. "For an artist... it's good to remember that nothing is true for all time-and therefore, that all is permissible. You shouldn't get stuck in any one truth."

The author of more than twenty books of fiction and nonfiction, Vollmann is known for placing himself in dangerous situations in pursuit of artistic authenticity. That same quality has made him into something of a cult figure among his fans, drawn to the mythology of a writer whom the New York Times Magazine described as showing "a disregard for personal danger that would shame Hunter S. Thompson or Errol Flynn." At twenty-two, he traveled to Afghanistan in hope of supporting the mujahideen rebels' fight against the Soviets; in the early 1990s, he survived a sniper attack in Bosnia that left his companions dead; he also spent two weeks solo at the magnetic North Pole, researching a novel, during which he nearly died of hypothermia. He's written about smoking crack with prostitutes, riding the rails, and visiting a nuclear hot zone in Japan, among other subjects, but says he writes without an intention to shock his readers. "I don't shock myself, and I don't care about shocking others," he told the Paris Review in 1993. 'Im not an egocentric or a performer."

Vollmann has traveled widely in his search for knowledge and understanding, writing about subjects as complex as immigration, poverty, war, climate change, racism, prostitution, and others. He also takes photographs, paints, draws, and produces other artwork in his studio. In 2013, he published a book of photographs, a series of self-portraits, cross-dressing as a woman named Dolores. "Not only am I physically and emotionally attracted to women," he writes in the introduction to the book, "I also wonder what being a woman would be like."

His novel Europe Central won the 2005 National Book Award in fiction, and his seven-volume book on violence, Rising Up and Rising Down, won the 2003 National Book Critics Circle Award. Named by the New Yorker in 1999 as "one of the twenty best writers in America under 40," he has written for many publications, including the New York Times Book Review, Esquire, Spin, Granta, the New Yorker, and Outside Magazine.

In 2012, Harper's published Yollmann's essay, "Life as a Terrorist: Uncovering my FBI File," which recounted Vollmann's discovery, upon filing a request under the Freedom of Information Act, that the FBI once suspected him of being the Unabomber. In the essay, he details the loss of personal freedom he experienced as a result and criticizes what he sees as an American surveillance state.

We spoke with Yollmann during the Get Lit! Festival in Spokane shortly before the publication of his collection Last Stories and Other Stories. We discussed empathy, the importance of story, and his travel to places of conflict.

 

MELISSA HUGGINS

Empathy is a significant part of both your fiction and nonfiction. In Riding Toward Everywhere, you wrote, "I never want not to feel." Could you elaborate?

WILLIAM T. VOLLMANN

It's discouraging seeing the misery and suffering of others and knowing you can't alleviate most of it. I wonder what kind of a world we are making for ourselves. As far as I can tell, we're doing almost everything wrong. You send money to United Way or another charity and you think about how a lot of it might go toward salaries, and what's left will go toward some policy that may or may not be effective. Does any of it get to the people who need it? I feel similarly about global warming, that there's nothing I can do. A lot of my friends say they put away the paper or turn off the news when they hear about it, because it only upsets them. I don't want to be that way.

I felt reluctant to embark on the book I've been working on about fossil fuels versus nuclear energy, because it's such a dismal and complex subject. But in 2011, I happened to be traveling to Japan right after the tsunami, so I went to Fukushima and visited the forbidden zone. It was extremely upsetting. I returned in 2014 to find that, in many ways, it's worse. There are so many places we would rather not think about-the Hanford nuclear site here in eastern Washington, for example-because the truth is, once there's any sort of radioactive contamination, it will be a problem for centuries. Who wants to face that? The only thing worse than facing it is not facing it. I feel it's my obligation to speak up. Not necessarily to expect I can make a difference, but to try.

HUGGINS

Do you think that's every artist's obligation?

VOLLMANN

No. Nabokov once said that he banished from his bedside any book that told him what he should do or how he should feel. He thought that was almost always bad art.

DAVID ALASDAIR

You've been described as "a globally conscious voice," and you seem to participate in much of what you see. Do you think it's enough to report what you observe, or do you need to be a global participant?

VOLLMANN

Ghandi said that you should consciously eschew the desire for results. Do what you think is right, and hope but not really expect. I think that's a sane and consoling way to look at it, but there's always an opposition between words and action. That was one of the two things that most tortured Yukio Mishima and probably led to his absurd political suicide. He felt like writing great books was not enough. All you can do is your best. You never know how you're going to affect people. I'm proud of the little things I've done for people in different parts of the world, bur for all I know, some of those things have ended up causing harm. You can never be sure. Maybe somebody has read one of my books and decided to do something more important than I ever did. I can hope so, but I'll never know.

ALASDAIR

How is your approach different from that of a journalist?

VOLLMANN

I've met journalists who think the most important thing is getting a good story. I would rather let the good story go if l have to do something indecent. If I have a very clear story, I can be pretty sure I'm missing something, because the answers are always muddled. If someone says, "It's obvious the Taliban are bad," guess what? It's not obvious at all. It doesn't work like that. Things are always more complicated than you think. Of course there's a danger in being paralyzed by that, but maybe that was one of the reasons Nabokov said what he did, how he didn't want the book to declare, "this is this," and "that is that." In a novel, you want things to be ambiguous and nuanced and complicated. Up to a point, that is. You don't want to come away from a book saying, "Well, I don't know whether Hitler was good or evil." But you can say, "It's very interesting that even though he was evil, he was kind to animals, and the people around him liked him." In a way, that makes him worse, more dangerous, more effective. It also means he had the capacity to be good in certain ways, but didn't exercise it. To me, that makes a book more interesting. Of course if you're prosecuting somebody like that at Nuremberg, you say, "It doesn't matter if this Nazi was nice to animals. He deserves the death penalty."

GENEVA KAISER

During your National Book Award acceptance speech, you described how you learned about the Holocaust in school, then learned that you were German. You said you tried to read yourself into that horrible event, to attempt to imagine how anyone could have done that. What do you mean by reading yourself into the event?

VOLLMANN

I think it's something every writer ought to do. Flaubert famously said "Madame Bovary, c'est moi." I have to feel that I'm in all my characters, because the only way for me to make the characters real is to think, If l were this way, then maybe this is what I would have done, and if l believed this, then I would come to this problem that way. Otherwise they're opaque to you. You have to put yourself in everybody you write about. That doesn't mean you have to go out and kill six million Jews to understand Hitler. It simply means asking yourself, What would Hitler think? What would I do if l believed all this garbage? It's a creepy exercise to start imagining yourself being some monster, but a useful one. As long as people are opaque to each other, there's no hope of international or social understanding.

ALASDAIR

When you were younger, did you think you could fix problems you saw in the world?

VOLLMANN

I used to think there were answers. Now I think there are questions. Those questions have to be answered, and once we arrive at an answer we've done something important and necessary, but the most common mistake is to think we've answered a question for all time, that there is no other possible answer. I like what Jung says about the shadow, how there is a dominant paradigm in our consciousness and in society, and that it has come into being for a very good reason and serves its purpose. Whatever we define goodness or justice to be, that is central in our consciousness, while the stuff we define as bad gets pushed to another part of our consciousness, so much so that we feel very strongly about it and can't even consider that there might be something good in it.

Jung also used to say that in a war, the center of evil is usually about a kilometer behind the enemy lines. That's how it is now. People are saying how awful al-Qaeda is, how terrible the drug lords are, how we have to stop the child molesters-and these are all legitimate things to worry about-but as we go on insisting that things are this way and not that way, reality is imperceptibly changing. Suddenly, these concerns are going to be irrelevant. The things that were so important in our parents' time or our grandparents' time-all the worries about the Cold War, how we had to watch out because the Communists were going to come and get us and maybe the Russians were going to start a nuclear war­, nowadays, who cares? That's why it's important to always re-examine who we are and what we think we know.

ALASDAIR

Do you think that, as a society, we ask those questions enough? At your reading in Spokane you said, "Each and every one of us here is a potential terrorist," and the audience laughed. Have we come to terms with living in a surveillance society?

VOLLMANN

I think we treat it too seriously. My FBI file is ridiculous, and very possibly so is yours. Without the Freedom of Information Act, I would never know that. Yes, of course, any of us could be a terrorist, and it's almost certain that there will be another September 11, that some terrorist will get through. Maybe there will be a dirty bomb dropped on Spokane someday. Bur part of the problem comes from insisting we know the answer. I'm sure Bush and Obama meant to do good by attacking and continuing to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a lot of people think maybe they have. I don't. I think it's been a disaster. But maybe Bush thought that was all that he could do, that it was the only answer he could see. If I think of it that way, then some of my disgust goes away. But the longer we prosecute these ineffective and unjust wars, the more enemies we make, and the more people are determined to take revenge against us. Even if that weren't so, the fact that people hated us before means they're going to hate us again. Saying that we have to give up so much of what's valuable about being American-being able to say what we want and do what we want, even if it's eccentric or even hateful-for the sake of some illusory safety ... maybe that's like the old military joke: "We had to destroy the town in order to save it."

HUGGINS

Personal freedom is something you examine in many of your essays and books, including Riding Toward Everywhere and Imperial. You seem to be wrestling with a dichotomy of being proud to be American while also experiencing disgust at certain actions or attitudes.

VOLLMANN

I'm very proud of the American Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. The idea of being American is inspiring to me and inspiring to people all over the world, the idea that our homes are our castles, that we can all go to hell in our own way, that we may not be equal in capacity but we are equal before the law, and that we are ruled by a government of laws, not a government of people. But of course all these wonderful things that Whitman expressed so beautifully in Leaves of Grass are mostly illusory. Only a small portion of them have ever been realized. Sure, it was liberty and justice for all, but not for women, not for blacks, not for a long time. Yes, there was a sense of infinite freedom, the ability to go where we wanted on the frontier, but only at the expense of the Natives. I think it's important to remember our history and say that our country is a work in progress. It will never be perfected, because human nature is imperfect, but it's something to strive for. When the Constitution, for instance, is violated, there's no reason to be surprised or shocked. It always has been and always will be. But it's important to say, "I object to this."

I believe, though I cannot prove, that my mail has been opened for many years. Either some yo-yo is opening it, or envelopes aren't what they used to be, the machinery at the postal service is really bad, et cetera. If l get some books from my French publisher, the box is open, and oftentimes the spine of every single book has been carefully slit. I take these nice books and all I can do is throw them in the garbage at the post office. I have no recourse. When that happens year after year, you get a little crabby about it. Is that irritation and sorrow I feel worth saving the rest of you from a dirty bomb in Spokane? Of course it is. But what if it doesn't do anything? As far as I know, I'm pretty harmless, and maybe all of you are harmless, too. So if 99 percent of us are harmless and they started doing this to 99 percent of us, would it be worth it? Of course there's no answer, just a question. I have my answer. But my answer could change if there were a dirty bomb.

KAISER

At the beginning of Poor People, you write that poverty is never political. If it's not political, what do you think it is?

VOLLMANN

Poverty is a state of being. Like everything else it can be politicized, but the people who experience it deserve to own it and to feel it in the way they want to feel it. It's really a facet of consciousness. You could be poor and believe that you were poor for one reason, while I might not think you were poor for that same reason. But you might say, Well, this is how I feel about it. I could be poor and have more money than you. You could have no money and be happy and not consider yourself poor. I think it's important for us not to get in the way of others and say, We're going to define what you are.

HUGGINS

Are there political solutions for poverty?

VOLLMANN

There are political solutions for everything, of course, but people don't agree on politics. They don't agree on what poverty is. There have always been poor people, therefore it's likely that there always will be, therefore there is no permanent solution. To think we can solve it with a stroke of a pen is utopian. In Poor People, I mention that Vlad the Impaler had what he thought was the greatest solution to poverty: he took all the poor people and had a banquet for them and then burned them alive. Problem solved. But guess what? I saw somebody who was poor yesterday, so it wasn't entirely effective.

KAISER

In Poor People, you stated that you pay people for interviews and for taking photographs of them. Do you worry that paying someone for their story will cloud the authenticity of a piece? Is there a risk of someone saying what they think you want to hear or not giving you the full truth?

VOLLMANN

You always have to wonder that, whether you pay people or you don't. You never know for sure, but some of it depends on how you pay and what you're paying for. I think that when people don't have anything, it's the right thing to do. I pay them so I'm not just taking from them. Hopefully, I'll get something out of it, maybe financially, maybe not, but at least I'm going to learn something. It's a lot easier for me to pan with ten, twenty, or a hundred dollars than for them to acquire that amount of money, so why wouldn't I do that?

I know the New York Times has all kinds of guidelines: you can't accept things from the people you're interviewing; you can't let them take you out for dinner; you can't pay for this or that. I can see where they're coming from, but I think that's mistaken. When I interviewed Ted Nugent, he had me over to his house for dinner, and I got to meet his family and see how he cooked some venison that he'd killed. It was great. Of course, I was grateful for the meal, but it didn't change one word I said about him. I like to think we can all be big boys and girls and not sell or buy our opinions for trifles. Upton Sinclair said, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it." But why not pay people what you can and what seems fair? In a way, I think that's a more freeing thing. If anything, why shouldn't I be able to say what I want to say? They're still getting something out of it, even if I were to say something perceived as negative. It doesn't bind me in any way.

However, it does depend on what you are paying for, what you are asking, how leading your questions are. When I went to Taliban Afghanistan, I expected to dislike the Talibs very much, expected to think that what they were doing was wrong and unpopular, that they were despots. Instead, I mostly found that the Taliban were wildly popular. Since Afghans are devout Muslims, they would tell me, "The Taliban is the most perfect government on Earth. It's so close to the glorious Koran, and we're so lucky to live under the Taliban, because they've protected us from the time when the warlords could just come into your house and carry off your wife or daughter forever, leaving you with no recourse." They said over and over: "Nowadays you can take a gold coin and leave it in the street for twenty-four hours, and it will still be there, because anyone who takes it will get his right hand cut off, thanks to Sharia law. Thank God for the Talibs; they are the greatest."

Of course, I thought, What about the women, what do they think? Again, I found that our perception of the Taliban infringing on the rights of women was not entirely true, because most of the women were rural women, working in the fields, who had never been able to read or write anyway. As I traveled through the fields, they made sure to show me. "Look, here they are with no burqas, you can see their faces, they're working. The only ones who have really suffered are the urban educated women, who are 1 or 2 percent of the population." So I'd say, "Let me talk to a woman and see what she thinks." Which of course was like trying to wander around inside the CIA. To try to talk to a woman? What a disgusting thing to want to do. But sometimes it would be arranged where a woman would lock herself in the bathroom of a house and agree to talk to me through the bathroom door while her husband and son and her brothers were present, all frowning and listening and she'd say, "Oh, yes, I love the Taliban, they're the most perfect government on earth." I'd think, Okay, you have to take that one with a grain of salt. But every now and then, I would manage to meet begging women on the street wearing the burqa, with nobody around, so they could never be identified, and they would tell me the same thing. I would weigh that a little more heavily. They had no particular reason to lie. You can never know for sure, but you can consider when the answer is likely to be skewed. Though I'm sure if I had been a fool and told the man whose wife talked to me from the bathroom that I really wanted her to say the Taliban are terrible, and offered an additional five dollars to get her to say that, I'm sure she would have.

On another trip, I was in Yemen and I knew there was a lot of female circumcision occurring there. I've always been interested in understanding more about it, so I asked my interpreter whether there was anyone I could talk to. I wanted to find out what the families think of it, what the girls think, this and that. He said, "Sure, I'll arrange it. The local butcher is about to cut some girl's parts off tomorrow, and you can come and see." He told me the family would need a couple hundred dollars. I started to suspect that they were going to circumcise their little girl only because I was paying them. So I said, "Oh, no thank you; I guess I don't want to do it." I would have felt awful about something like that. In terms of the difference it would make to that family, a couple hundred dollars would be like $200,000 or $2 million for us.

It's so important to think and think and think before you're in that moment. Usually, you have to make your decision quickly. One of the most important decisions I have to make when I go to a dangerous place is whom to trust when I walk out of the airport. Fortunately, I've never made a wrong decision or I'd be dead. There have been a couple times when I thought, I don't like the way this person is behaving and I'm not gonna do what they're telling me to do. But most of the time you have to look at them, decide right away, and go with it.
When it's only my life, the stakes are relatively low. Hopefully, if something happened to me, I would hardly even know it. But I do want to be careful and think that I'm not victimizing anybody. Most likely, I have. Most likely, we all do without knowing it.

HUGGINS

Would you say that your travels, often to dangerous places of conflict, are driven more by you as a writer or you as a person? Would you have felt compelled to visit those places whether or not you were writing about them?

VOLLMANN

Mostly by myself as a writer. When I first went to Afghanistan, I wanted to do something good. I hoped to write about it later, but the most important thing was to try to do something for the Afghans. When I went back to Taliban Afghanistan twenty years later, I only wanted to write about it. There was nothing fun about going there, and I had no real expectation of being able to accomplish any good, though I still had a feeling of obligation to the people I'd met, who had been so kind to me when I was in my twenties. Sometimes in Sacramento, I
hear people say things like, My boyfriend's over in Afghanistan kicking some raghead butt, or something along those lines. That's not the way I look at them, and it's important for me to tell people how great they are. Whether that does any good, I don't know.

ALASDAIR

In An Afghanistan Picture Show, you said, "I always asked for facts and I never thought to ask for stories." Do young writers make the same mistake? Have you changed in that regard?

VOLLMANN

I was an idiot. I think our society tends to make that mistake. We think that if we have some kind of numerical statistic, we really know something. We forget that statistics themselves are only stories. If you look at a beautiful atlas or if you go on the spider web and they simulate something for you onscreen that seems quite real, you have to remember the old maxim of the programmer: garbage in, garbage out. Those things are only as good as their data. A story is like one of the photos I sometimes take with my big 8" x 10" camera. I have a few seconds, I see someone, I say, "Please let me take a picture of you in this doorway," but it could be a year or more until I've printed it and actually look at the photo. That's when I see something about the background or the person's expression and realize, Oh my gosh, this really means that. The camera can see and remember things I can't. It can capture something objective and special about a moment that I wasn't capable of recognizing.

It's the same thing with a story someone tells you. When I interviewed the neo-Nazi skinheads in San Francisco in the 1980s, there was one guy who told me very proudly, "It's so great when we go out and murder the niggers." I thought, Do I have any proof that he ever killed a black guy? In a way, the most important thing is the story itself: that's what he wants to be known for, that's part of his identity. That's in the background of the photograph. That you can trust. When you tell another person something about yourself, you create a persona. You're clothing yourself in something, looking your best. In a way, this was his way of looking his best. The context is so important.

ALASDAIR

For both your fiction and nonfiction, you've traveled to physically experience locations that you're writing about. How important is that to your process?

VOLLMANN

For what I do, I think it's very important. But what I do is not the only way to do anything. In the Seven Dreams books, the subtitle of the series is "A Book of North American Landscapes." The first volume was about the arrival of the Vikings in North America, and I was able to go to Iceland and walk through the ruins of Erik the Red's farm and think, Okay, this is more or less what it looked like to him. These are rocks that he probably gathered with his own hands. Here are the gulls, here's the ocean, here's the midnight sun. How does this make me feel, and how would this constrain me? It's one more way of entering into a person's consciousness. You can't get all the way there, but you can get some of the way. You feel differently in a desert than you do in a forest, so if you're trying to write about forest people, you can enter one and experience a closed-in, teeming feeling, you can think about how there's much less light and how that might make you feel, and how while moving through dark sections of the forest it might be easier to imagine that something sinister and unseen is present. I think that's helpful in trying to recreate the psychology of people.

The immersion is tiring at the beginning, when you haven't brought the material alive. As I was writing Argall I had to build up vocabulary lists of Elizabethan words, and it took a while before it felt natural to use them. As I was writing Fathers and Crows, I had to learn a lot about the different forms of technology used by different Native tribes. You try not to make mistakes. There's a huge amount of drudgery involved. It's like learning a foreign language for me, maybe because I'm not so good at foreign languages. It's tedious trying to memorize vocabulary and syntax. But once you've gotten a little bit of it into your head, you have something to build on and it gets more fun. When I'm near the end of one of these Seven Dreams books, for instance, I almost always dream about the characters at night. I wake up and feel like I'm in that world, and I know exactly what this person or that person would do. Of course, I don't really know what they would have done; I only know what my recreation of them would do. But it's a fun and beautiful feeling. Even if it might be a bleak book, there's something fulfilling about having that kind of play in a world I've dreamed up.

It's wonderful traveling and not knowing what you're going to learn. Tiring, sometimes frightening, but so interesting. You never know how any given day will go. Often you think you haven't accomplished something, and then the last interview, which maybe you'd seen as an afterthought, teaches you so much. But once you're going through the material, you might not know what you've really accomplished and then you find a common thread here and here, although this contradicts that, and you begin to get some kind of a consistent, nuanced picture of the particular subject. That usually happens in the writing. I think it would be a terrible thing to go somewhere and want to write an article about how bad the Taliban is or how good the Taliban is. Because how would I know? In Riding Toward Everywhere, I quoted Thoreau along the lines of, "It's so important not to let our knowledge get in the way of what's far superior, which is our ignorance." As long as I know I'm ignorant when I go somewhere, I have a chance of learning something. Otherwise it's hopeless.

KAISER

Do you put more research into your novels than your nonfiction?

VOLLMANN

In some ways, yes. If you're writing about something that's right in from of you, then of course there's effort involved, but you go out and see what there is to be seen. You don't have to try to imagine what things looked like, so in that sense it's easier. Writing Imperial was kind of a long slog, but I enjoyed it, and so much of it was primarily about what I observed. Even now, I wouldn't say I know enough about illegal aliens to write a novel about them. I would have to do much more research, and it took me a number of nonfiction books dealing with prostitutes before I could create, in my opinion, viable prostitute characters, which I finally started to do in The Royal Family. It takes a while to get to know people.

A while back, I was closing out some of my old notebooks, and found I had some notes that hadn't been used. They were from Sarajevo during the siege, when I took a lot of notes for Rising Up and Rising Down. I don't think I could have written the story "Escape" convincingly without my experiences in Sarajevo. That story is the first in a kind of triptych at the beginning of Last Stories, and in a way, the young couple in the story, who were based on a real couple killed during the siege, gradually turn into ghosts. I decided to protect their posthumous privacy, give myself more freedom, and make up different personalities for the characters so that I could use whatever material I got from people I talked to. It became more vivid than having to look at their photographs and describe them exactly as they were, which would be more the Seven Dreams approach. But the last two times I visited Sarajevo, before I wrote the story, I asked people what they remembered about the siege, and was amazed to find that people told me, "That never really happened. That was just an urban legend." Quite sad, really.

HUGGINS

You've observed that humans, particularly Americans, are terrible at remembering our history. In your example from Bosnia, that couple, who were dubbed the Romeo and Juliet of Sarajevo, did exist. How do you attempt to separate fact from fiction when relying on the stories and memories people relay to you?

VOLLMANN

If you tell people's stories and their own stories change over time, then the fiction is the fact, and that's what you want to report. Often very good things come out of that amnesia. One time, I was writing a story about Cambodian gangs in Stockton, California. Historically there's a lot of unfriendliness between Cambodians and Vietnamese. The two countries have been fighting each other in various forms for many, many centuries. But when these refugees came to Stockton, the kids started getting picked on at school by black and Latino gangs, though they had never known these other ethnic groups. In self-defense, or so they put it, they formed their own gangs. Because all the Asians were lumped together in the eyes of these other groups, Cambodian boys were suddenly going out with Vietnamese or Hmong girls, and they were all the same to each other. Their parents said, "How can you do this, how can you go out with her?" But they'd overcome that. It didn't matter to them anymore. Of course, it's just as much of an unpleasant story as a happy one, since they were joined together in order to fight other ethnic groups. But it's still interesting.

ALASDAIR

Has your view of the world changed over time? Have you become more cynical about people or more optimistic?

VOLLMANN

The longer I live, the more I like individual people, and the more pessimistic I become about groups and institutions and humanity in general. Last fall I gave a lecture in Santa Barbara and there was another speaker, a vegan who advocated for human extinction. Now, I like to eat meat. I have an idealized version of where steak comes from because I used to work on a cattle ranch. I killed the cattle myself, and I thought they had a pretty good life and didn't suffer. But maybe if l saw a factory farm I would think, I really shouldn't do this. Or maybe it would be okay. That's an area in which I've never educated myself.

But I can see where she's coming from. The planet would be better off without us, and it might be that the only thing that would save both us and the planet would be a massive human die-off. Since we don't seem able to regulate our greed, maybe if there were some tremendous epidemic, it would give the ecosystem a chance to recover and save us long term. Would I push that button to kill most of the human race? I don't know; that would be pretty hard.

ALASDAIR

When you see history repeating itself, such as recent events in the Ukraine, do you feel a call to activism, a desire to be part of it?

VOLLMANN

If I were twenty, I would. Now I look at that conflict the same way I look at the situation between Israel and Palestine. It's a very, very old and complicated problem. The only thing I know is that if someone tells me who's right and who's wrong, that is wrong. It would be wonderful to have the privilege of going there to learn what I think, to figure out how I could help someone, but that would take a lot of time and resources. Could I do it? Maybe. But if I do one, probably I don't have enough money or enough years left in my life to do the other. I wish it weren't so. I keep crying to do more for others, wondering whether I have done enough. That's the crazy, haunting thing. It's so easy to harm somebody and so difficult to help anybody. It's really, really hard to know what to do about almost anything.

History repeating itself: that's how it's always been with human beings. Otherwise, children would be better than their parents. But the human race seems to stay at about the same level. You have to expect it.

ALASDAIR

At your reading in Spokane, you spoke about what makes you appreciate Cormac McCarthy's work. Do you think the nihilistic, amoral universe he writes about is close to what you've seen on your travels?

VOLLMANN

I think he's a great writer. Maybe the greatest American writer alive, maybe not. McCarthy is mostly interested in a certain kind of relation between people: in aggression, exploitation, obsession. Sadomasochism. That stuff is all present in humanity, and that's what he chooses to focus his work on. But I don't think the world is so monochromatic. A lot of people are kinder than his characters. Similarly, Shakespeare is a great writer, but I don't believe that people think and act in such complex, colorful ways as he made them think and act. That doesn't make him any less great, it only means he's adhering to a different kind of reality.

One of the reasons I liked McCarthy's Border Trilogy was that I thought it was kind of a departure for him. Suddenly he allowed some human tenderness. The Road is ultimately an optimistic book: it's about the love of a father and his son. All of us who are parents know that in the normal course of things, our job is to prepare our children for our deaths so that they can go on without us. That's exactly what happens in this book. In a way, it's the most normal story in the entire world, which makes it great.

KAISER

It's often been observed that your books are longer than most publishers generally accept. How has your relationship with editors changed over time?

VOLLMANN

It's become easier in the sense that as we all get older, it gets easier to say no. You find out that a consequence of being agreeable is that you get trampled on, and then the book isn't as good. So you might as well say no. Some people think the most important thing is to please their publisher and maximize their sales, and that's fine. They'll say, "My agent thinks I should get rid of this," or, "The bookstore wants me to change the title." A lot of my writer friends do that, and I don't look down on them for it. I only know that if I were going to do something like that, why wouldn't I sell insurance? I could probably make more money.

I would rather do it my way. Then, when I suffer the consequences, as I often do-lower advances and poor sales and so forth-I take responsibility for it, instead of thinking, I did everything I could to please these people, but there was still some unfortunate result; woe is me, what a victim I am. No. I'm proud of the choices I've made, and I would make the same choices again. I was very lucky when I first started publishing to have an editor in Britain. One time I asked her, "How long can the book be?" and she said, "Bill, it has to be as long as it needs to be. No longer and no shorter." That's what I've tried to live by.

That being said, when I write for magazines, I let my stuff be cut all the time, and never once has it been an improvement. I let them do it their way, and they send me the finished version and I throw it in the garbage. They say, "How was it?" and I say, "It was perfect," and they tell me, "Bill, you are so easy to work with." And everyone laughs all the way to the bank.

HUGGINS

Your work often experiments with style. Do you begin with form, or does content determine style?

VOLLMANN

It depends. I originally thought Seven Dreams would all be one volume. But when The Ice Shirt turned into its own book, I realized I wanted to write it in the Norse style, with kennings and so forth, and later I knew Fathers and Crows had to be in that florid, pseudo-French style. If I could, I would do that with each of those novels, make each one appropriate to its period. But a book like Europe Central is told in a more neutral style. The book switches between the Nazi voice and the Soviet voice, and it also has an omniscient narrator telling the story in a certain voice that doesn't necessarily relate to those two warring societies.

Generally speaking, it's more fun for me to write fiction than nonfiction. I had fun in parts of Imperial, but with fiction you can express what you want to say using a beautiful sentence. In nonfiction, it's good if you can make your point with a beautiful, clear sentence, but you can't ever let language get in the way of the important thing you're trying to say. You're less free. The work I call nonfiction is really nonfiction, so I don't make anything up, though there are certainly times when I would like to. In An Afghanistan Picture Show, there's a kind of reverie I had when I was there and I included it, but I would have loved to have made my experiences with the mujahideen a little more dramatic, with a little more finality. But I won't do it. I don't think that's right. However, in nonfiction you are attempting to understand something, and the quest to understand something can be very exciting in its own right.

Fiction, on the other hand, can certainly contain elements of nonfiction, but I'm free to shape those any way I like. In The Dying Grass, the book about Chief Joseph, I deviated from the history more than I often did in Seven Dreams. This was because General Howard divided his army into two columns when they were chasing Joseph, and one column never got to Montana because Joseph took another route, so those people just turned around and disbanded. But because I'd already gotten invested in these characters and I was trying to make their relations with Howard say something important in human terms, I had him keep the whole army together. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, as long as I footnote everything and explain why I didn't have him do this but instead had him do that. Whereas if you're writing something based on a Norse saga, you figure they probably made up a bunch of stuff anyway. You have lots of freedom, just like in the good old days when you could write science fiction about Martians and canals and the watery world of Venus, but those days are long gone.

I change my style all the time. But I don't pay very much attention to what other people tell me to do. There was this neat old guy down in Imperial named Leonard Knight, a Christian guy who started painting a dirt ridge and called it Salvation Mountain. He kept adding more and more paint, and people started donating paint, too. It looks like Candyland down there, except it has all these messages to repent. He must have been at it for more than twenty years, and he died last year. One time he said, "You know, Bill, people are always telling me how to improve, and I know that almost everyone is smarter than I am and I know that if I just did it their way my work would be so much better, but somehow or other, I just keeping doing it my way." He had a big smile on his face. That's how I feel, too. My books are flawed and so are McCarthy's and so are Shakespeare's. Everyone's work is flawed, but at least my flaws are my flaws.

Issue 76: A Conversation with Kim Addonizio

Willow Springs Issue 76 cover shows a rustic painted wall in yellows and browns.

Interview in Willow Springs 76

Works in Willow Springs 63 and 37

July 16, 2014

JEFF COREY, KRISTEN GOTCH, AILEEN KEOWN VAUX

A CONVERSATION WITH KIM ADDONIZIO

Kim-Addonizio-author-photo-by-Lin-Tan_1000SQ

Photo Credit: Lin Tan

.. .I'm saying
in the beginning was the word
and it was good, it meant one human

entering another and it's still what I
love,  the word  made flesh . Fuck
me,
I say co the one whose lovely
body I want close,

and as we fuck I know it 's holy, a
psalm, a hymn, a hammer ringing
down on  an  anvil, forging a whole
new world.

These lines co me from Kim Addonizio's poem " Fuck" from her fifth collection of poems, What Is This Thing Called Love. It is for moments like these that Addonizio was referred to by Steve Kowit as "one of the nation's most provocative and edgy poets." Yet provocative and edgy seem like surface examinations of a body of work that is deeply beautiful and supremely intelligent. Her poems are honest reflections of human experience, instinctive and electric- like a first kiss, a first couch-the word made flesh.

Kim Addonizio was born in Washington, D.C. in 1954 co tennis champion Pauline Betz and acclaimed sportswriter Bob  Addie. Although she was raised in a family of athletes, Addonizio herself was never interested in sports. In her essay "For My Mocher, One Lase Grand Slam," recently published in the New York Times, Addonizio writes, "I used to have a really snotty attitude toward sports, convinced that they were trivial compared with Art, but that was when I was young and ignorant. Now I know better. Now I understand the importance of the body." Indeed, her honest depictions of the body compel us to her work. Throughout her writing she examines the body, boldly facing its most  intimate details-the long vein  rising up along the underside of his cock... the strawberry mole on his left cheek-facing how it succumbs to age-curled yellow toenails and a belly as milky as the swirls of soap.

Addonizio is the author of collections of poetry and short stories, as well as two novels and two books on writing, one of which, lhe Poet's Companion, she co-authored with Dorianne Laux. She has earned numerous awards for her work, including Guggenheim Foundation and NEA fellowships, Pushcart Prizes for both poetry and nonfiction, and a John Ciardi Lifetime Achievement Award. Her poetry collection Tell Me (2000) was a finalist for the National Book Award. At the time of this interview, Addonizio was anticipating the release of her latest collection of stories, The Palace of Illusions, including the story "Intuition," which first appeared in Willow Springs 74.

An accomplished blues harmonica player, Addonizio often incorporates music into her public readings. In fact, much of her poetry is tied to American blues. Her most recent release, My Black Angel, is a collaborative collection of her blues poetry alongside woodcuts of blues musicians by artist Charles D. Jones. Of this collection, singer­ songwriter Lucinda Williams wrote, "I don't just hear the blues in these poems. I see the blues in these poems. I see myself in these poems." Addonizio is drawn to the intimacy of the blues, what she describes as "one consciousness speaking to another about what is really true for them," and she sees her poems as part of an ongoing conversation with these traditions and musicians. "It is a call and response," she says, "a way to be part of the same song."

Addonizio teaches creative writing classes privately and spends most of her time between New York City and the San Francisco Bay Area. We met up with her at the Port Townsend Writers' Conference last year, where she taught a blues and poetry class with Gary Copeland Lilley. On a summer afternoon, we discussed blues, sex, the life of the artist, and pushing boundaries.

 

KRISTIN GOTCH

In the introduction to My Black Angel, you mention growing up with bands like Led Zeppelin and the Stones, and then coming to the blues after that, which felt like coming home. How did the blues feel like coming home?

KIM ADDONIZIO

Because I had those chord progressions in my head already, by listening to rock 'n' roll and the blues of Paul Butterfield. A lot of those musicians were responsible for some of the revival of interest in early blues figures who had faded into obscurity. They brought some of them back to perform for audiences, and they kind of had a second career later on.

What turned me on to blues harmonica was Sonny Boy Williamson-it was like being struck by lightning, which was the same way poetry hit me. When I heard Sonny Boy Williamson play, I sat up and took notice, and that's when I began to get interested in the blues and blues harmonica. I was into Chicago blues first and then I learned a lot about early country blues from another harmonica player who was into the Delta stuff. I started going to music workshops, which are a lot like writers' conferences, except that you have harmonica players wailing away and making strange sounds.

GOTCH

In What Is 7his 7hing Called Love, you open with a Willie Dixon quote: "The blues are the true facts of life " How so?

ADDONIZIO

There's something primal about the blues, so much about feeling first. That's what speaks to me. The language of the blues hits on those primal subjects-love and loss and getting through hard times. There's also a subversive element that Gary Lilley was talking about in class, the way those songs are about struggle. So you can take it to the political level, but it is also personal. The blues singer is a singular figure, you know, singing about his or her own sorrow, but singing about it for everybody. That's what I like. The intimacy draws  me in-which  is something I feel in lyrical poetry too, one consciousness speaking to another about what is true for them.

JEFF COREY

When did the blues begin to insert itself into your poetry?

ADDONIZIO

As I was learning to play harmonica, ten or fifteen years ago, I started doing it right away, even though I wasn't sure how, exactly. I would just get up and torture audiences with my bad blues harmonica. I had to make myself play in front of them because I was terrified. But I made myself step up and do it. Luckily, I got a little better at the music. I began to figure out how to make it work-the harmonica is in your mouth so it's a little hard to speak a poem while you are playing. One of the first things I did was learn a simple harmonica song and tag that on to the end of my reading.

Then I started to write songs in those blues forms, in the basic AAA-that call and response and a turn that takes it someplace else. I think "Blues for Robert Johnson" was the first one I did where I figured out how I could say the poem between playing licks on the harmonica.

AILEEN KEOWN VAUX

As a writer and a musician, how are your experiences similar and different as a performer?

ADDONIZIO

When I first started reading my poems I was terrified. It took a while to get comfortable in front of an audience. That doesn't mean I never get nervous now, but I am a lot more comfortable getting up in front of people and reading. With the harmonica, I played with a blues band for a year and that helped me enormously, because we just got up and put out our equipment and did it. Ultimately, it's about practice, about rehearsal. If I'm doing a solo piece or if I'm doing a reading where I know there is going to be music, I will really practice those pieces. I'll have my set figured out between the words and the music and which harmonica I'm going to play.

KEOWN VAUX

How do you begin to explore a new art form, as you did with the harmonica, and incorporate it into your life as a new practice of art?

ADDONIZIO

You can study this throughout your whole life. And I hope to. I don't listen to a whole lot else. I like a lot of different kinds of music, but I find myself listening to more blues, because I'm also trying to learn the music, so if I have any free time, I'm sort of making use of it in that way. If I'm making pancakes, I'm listening to the blues. If I'm making dinner, I'm listening to the blues. I'm driving, which is when I practice my harmonica, I'm listening to the blues.

I'd probably get good really fast if I were playing six hours a day. I mean, that's what professionals do-the guys who really play, and I'm not one of them. They practice six to eight hours a day. I don't have that kind of time. I feel lucky I've gotten someplace with it that I can be okay. I don't think I'm going to get to the point of mastery, because I'm too focused on writing. I'm just glad I've gotten to the point where I can enhance what I do as a writer with music.

KEOWN VAUX

How does your writing practice differ from your musical practice?

ADDONIZIO

Right now, I have a regular writing practice, usually nine to noon, five days a week. That has been my time. Morning is good for me-wake up, have some coffee. I have this time that feels completely free and mine. I don't have to get dressed. I'll close the curtains, shut out the world. And then sometimes, that will fuck me up, because I'll get into that interior space and not be able to get out of it. So I won't go out that day, because I'm too into it. It strips away the outer layer, and I feel so vulnerable sometimes that I can't deal with the outside world. Sometimes it's hard for me to stop it. But that's the time I try to carve out.

COREY

Ralph Ellison says that the blues is an autobiographical chronicle of the personal catastrophe, expressed lyrically. In your book Ordinary Genius, you say, "When you explore your own life in poetry, it's good to remember that no one cares."

ADDONIZIO

You know, I had to sugarcoat that a little bit.

COREY

These two sentiments ring true, but they also contradict one another. What do you think about these two ideas in relation to one another in the context of writing the blues into your poetry?

ADDONIZIO

I think it's about how you make an audience or reader care. How do you make an audience care about your personal troubles, your personal sorrow? That's where the craft comes in. You've got to make it interesting. Nobody's going to listen to you singing off key. You have to find a way to get the notes right. In poetry or any kind of writing, it's about getting the words right. It has to beguile someone. It has to attract. It has to entertain or offend them. Wake them up or knock them down. Writing works in so many different ways. There is writing that hits us with its raw power. Then  there are quiet things that put us into a hypnotic space and take us into other realms. But you can't assume that your life is going to be important to anyone. It's never going to be what it is to you, because you are the hero of your life.

COREY

What themes do you find emerging in your work when you write about the blues?

ADD ONIZIO

Love is one of my preoccupations, as I'm sure it is with a lot of people. I think about Joni Mitchell in relation to this, actually, and how when I was a teenager , her album Blue was an important soundtrack for my life. All my poems are about my search for love, which doesn't seem to cease-so many of her songs are about  that struggle with finding love or negotiating love. I'm sure that was an influence.

Another of my preoccupations is human suffering, trying to comprehend it. Every writer has those obsessions that become their territory. Kafka said his whole writing  territory  was  about  going back to the two or three images that first gained access to his heart. I think all of that starts to become the focus of your writing, what you circle around , whether you're writing about yourself or you're writing persona poems.

I just wrote a piece for New Ohio Review called "Pants on Fire"­ they wanted essays on the subject of lying and truth in poetry. My essay mentions several of my poems and how I lied in them and what's not true. I think those states of feeling are true, even if I might borrow something to make it a little more interesting or troubling or dramatic.

KEOWN VAUX

You talk about the "truth of the idea" in Ordinary Genius, and it struck me that-well, the details matter, but whether or not they actually happened shouldn't be the primary concern.

ADDONIZIO

Right, and that's where it goes back, for me, to song. Because the blues singers, you know, they're singing, "My baby done left me." Well, probably, sometime during their life, somebody did leave them, but they're writing it like it happened yesterday, because it's more powerful if it happened like, "Woke up this morning and my baby was gone."

COREY

You said the blues struck you like lightning. And then it gradually evolved to this active impulse to play and a routine of practice. Did something similar happen to you when you started writing poetry?

ADDONIZIO

When I was struck by poetry, I had been playing the Bute. I took it up in my twenties, and played it seriously for about seven years, seven days a week, playing, living with a composer. Then, when I got struck by poetry, I realized immediately it was an art form, that just as I'd had to practice three hours a day on my Bute  to get anywhere,  to get better, I would have to practice poetry. I understood that, which a lot of people don't when they start writing. They just think, I'm going to write. But I understood right away that this is a discipline, I had to start applying myself, and that's when I went to graduate school, at San Francisco State. My writing time was haphazard because I had a baby and I was a part-time single mother. I had to work and go to graduate school part-time for four years. It was like, write when you get on the streetcar and write on the way to school.

GOTCH

I was reading a piece Robert Palmer did on Led Zeppelin, in which he discusses how the blues became an important lesson for Robert Plant. He quotes Plant as saying, "With the blues, you could actually express yourself rather than just copy, you could get your piece in there... I could use several blues lines, well-known blues lines, but they were all related to me that day. And that's because the blues is more elastic." What makes this genre such an effective outlet for self-expression and collaboration?

ADDONIZIO

I'm doing that not only with  the blues but with literary traditions as well. I've found myself writing more allusive poems and bringing in lines, whether straightforward or torqued from other poems. It's the same as jazz. A musician will steal a lick from somebody or play a lick in homage to someone else. A horn player will drop in a Charlie Parker lick, and everybody will recognize it. I think I've just been doing that more as a practice in my writing in general. It's a way to interact with the tradition, with those songs, with poems. As Janis Joplin said in "Ball and Chain," "It's the same fuckin' day, man," and I think that's true-it's all just the same fuckin' song, man.

It's call and response. Which is part of what the blues is about. You know, poets and writers don't use melodies, but we're still singers. And I think allusion is a way to blend, connect, be a part of the same song. Whitman was talking to us when  he was writing.  He didn't know us, we weren't alive yet, but he was talking to us. And we can talk to him.

KEOWN VAUX

The idea of collaboration seems like an important facet in your work-from My Black Angel to the craft book with Dorianne Laux. How has collaboration affected your work?

ADDONIZIO

It's broadened it, and I hope to collaborate more, especially with musicians. My Black Angel is going to have a CD with it. We're going to Houston to record, and I have no idea what that's going to be like. But I'm really excited, because we're going into a studio with professional musicians and some of the poems to figure out what the CD is going to be. It's a cool direction.

I don't have enough music people around  me to do it a lot, so when I come to Port Townsend, I can do it here at Centrum, because I have collaborators that I know I can work with. In general, in my life, in Oakland or New York, I don't really have those people. One reason I've tried to do some stuff on my own is that I can still pull in another art form I think audiences like. I feel like I'm an-I don't want to say ambassador, but I want to bring this music, this African American music, to audiences. Because of where I am as a poet in my career, I have that audience. I want to bring the blues in front of them, say look at this tradition, look at this part of our history.

I'm performing at a blues and word festival in Florida. After I visited the first time, they decided they wanted to have me back and to have a blues band this time, so I'm going to collaborate with musicians, where the students are going to write blues poems and have a competition to read their work on stage with musicians. It's nice that these interests I've had have come together in a way that I'm lucky enough to perform with some people and to make something happen.

COREY

In that sense, do you think of your full body of work as collaborative?

ADDONIZIO

Yes. It's ultimately all part of the conversation. It's one little part. It's one voice.

COREY

Outside of the blues, another subject throughout your work is drugs, alcohol, addiction-do you see the relationship your characters have to their addictions as romantic?

ADDONIZIO

I have romanticized it, like a lot of people have. And that's probably not a good thing to do.

COREY

You've said you write from emotion rather than autobiography. Do drugs and alcohol serve as a kind of tool to access that emotional truth in your work?

ADDONIZIO

The first rule of fiction is that only trouble is interesting, so you go where the trouble is. I think that's part of it. Any kind of bad behavior is interesting and compelling, in the way that the ordinary and routine of life aren't. So I think that's definitely a big piece of my process-looking for trouble. And I spent a lot of my twenties doing drugs and drinking heavily, so that comes into it.

COREY

The way you maintained the narrative throughout Jimmy & Rita made me reevaluate what a short story collection or a book of poems is.

ADD ONIZIO

I wrote one poem about those two people, and I decided that for some reason, I wanted to figure out their story and write a book about them. So from one poem, I had the idea of writing a novel in verse about them. That's when I had to figure out who they were and write the book.

And then another book-

COREY

ADD ONIZIO

I wrote a novel, continuing their story. I had to do it as a novel at that point.

COREY

What is it about these two characters that led to so much creation?

ADDONIZIO

They came to me and wouldn't leave me alone. I was involved with them for a number of years. I think the narrative impulse has always been there for me; I was a narrative poet. Now I think that narrative impulse has gone into stories. I created characters and felt that they were very much alive. I thought I was done with them  with  the book of poems, but then I wanted to get them to a better place. I wanted to know what  happened  after the  ending of Jimmy & Rita, when  Rita  is in a homeless shelter and Jimmy is God knows where. So I started the novel where Rita returns to the shelter one night, and she's looking for Jimmy in San Francisco.

COREY

Are there any current projects where you're like, I just need to blow this up into something bigger or into a different genre?

ADDONIZIO

No, there isn't. I don't know what's going to be next. I have a play I wrote a draft of that's not working at all, that I'm afraid to go back to because I don't know if I can fix it or make it work. Ocher than that, I sort of have nothing, which for me is a scary place to be. I like it when I can say, ``Okay, I'm building toward a project. And then, when the project is done, my immediate feeling is, Where's  my next project?  Help, I need a project! I have to find something to focus on so long and, God, you never know where you are. If you go down the wrong road, you have to throw away a bunch of pages. It makes me crazy. I guess I did it to see if I could, because I like to challenge myself, but at this point, I don't really want to do that again . Right now, I'm reading essays, and I don't want to read anything else. Except poems. If it's a poem day, I'll read poems.

KEOWN VAUX

You mentioned a new collection of essays-do you have a shape or theme for this new project?

ADDO NIZIO

It's called Bukowski in a Sundress. That might give you some idea. And the subtitle, right now, is Confessions from a Writing Life. It's personal essays about sex and writing. Everything is from the lens of being a writer, but it's also certain experiences from my life. It's more memoir, in that it's supposed to be entertaining essays about being a writer and situations I've found myself in.

COREY

Speaking of sex, what is the relationship between loneliness and sexual desire in your work? I'm thinking specifically about "Summer in the City." [hands her the poem]

ADDONIZIO

I have not looked at this poem in a long time. It's like somebody else wrote it. I remember at the time that I was taken by Hopper's images that seem so isolated, so full of ennui, and I guess I was drawn to those and wanted to recreate that effect in a poem. I wanted to do a series on Hopper. It didn't pan out. There is only "Summer in the City." His images make you want to know what the story is. The poem was triggered by the image itself and trying to recreate that in language, whereas other poems may come from my own loneliness and trying to express that state.

KEOWN VAUX

I notice that across all the genres you write in-the way you express this state of longing, specifically centered around how women look at men. Do you think you're creating something akin to the "female gaze?"

ADDO NIZIO

I don't think I tried in any way to do that. Whatever came out came from my perception, but there wasn't an attempt to turn around the male gaze, or do anything like that. It was more about trying to write something, to be honest about a certain perspective. I don't tend to think in abstractions, it's more what the moment brings out and then stepping back to take a look.

KEOWN VAUX

In A Box Called Pleasure, characters  talk about performing for one another , then they say to the reader, "We are performing for you." Performance and pornography are inextricably linked. Would you talk about the intersection you see between explicit writing and writing in the pornographic mode? Have you, or others, ever categorized your work as pornographic?

ADDO NIZIO

In that book, for a number of pieces, I was figuring out different ways to write stories. I was reading people like Kathy Acker and George Beattie . I was reading Marquis de Sade. I was reading literary , pornographic texts in addition to Sontag's essay on the pornographic imagination, in which she addresses using pornography as a literary mode. I was interested in these writers who were pushing boundaries. I could go out in this book and not have any limits on what I was writing. I could say the most outrageous things. I think that's what Kathy Acker taught me. I feel the same way in poetry when I read Sharon Olds. You know that feeling of-What? What is she saying in a poem? I had no idea you could say things like that. I decided imagination is free and I can make it go anywhere I want.

GOTCH

During her reading last night, Erin Belieu talked about some poems being uncomfortable for her to read in public-but she read them, and I think she even said a few times, you know, 'Tm never reading that one again ." Have you had a similar experience?

ADDONI ZIO

It depends on the poem, it depends on the audience . I keep saying poem, but I have to remember I'm a fiction writer as well. I remember reading from Jimmy & Rita at a community college and feeling like, This is a big mistake. And at the end of it, sure enough, one of the students raised her hand and said, "Why does your work have to be so nasty?" I said, "Well, what do you mean?" And she said, "It has a lot of curse words in it and these bad things happen and I don't understand the people." I said, "Life is like that sometimes. And maybe it's not for you right now, but this is what some people's lives are like." I'm trying to present that because I think all aspects of life should be presented. There shouldn't be anything we're not writing about or thinking about, in terms of human experience.

KEOWN VAUX

I'm curious about how you  address  what  it is like  for a woman to walk around in this world, specifically, with respect to two of your poems. If you put "Dead Girls" and "Augury" in conversation with one another, what would they talk about?

ADDONIZIO

I think they're both about being a girl in the world, a woman in the world, you know, because we're powerful, but we're vulnerable, too. I think that's what it is-both aspects. Boys and children are vulnerable in that way too. Also, the predatory aspect of sexuality is so powerful. I have a daughter. At the time I wrote "Dead Girls," Polly Klaas had been taken from her home in Petaluma and raped and murdered. My daughter was the same age at the time, so I think there are three poems in that book about children who are abducted. It was very much on my mind, being the mother of a girl child, and thinking about how vulnerable she was in the world. And ''Augury" is the other side of the coin, a women's beauty and power, girls coming into the awareness of their power, a girl on the verge of beginning to recognize her sense of herself. I know it happens for boys in a different way. But I don't know that-because if I would have had a boy, I would have been writing different poems. I had a girl, so I didn't get to see that side of it.

COREY

Because augury means how things will happen in the future, do you see this more as inevitability or an idealization of things to come?

ADDONIZIO

You mean making my daughter  Helen  of Troy?  I think parents do feel that way about their children. We admire the hell out of them.

We love chem so much. And when you see your child so uncertain about herself, and getting dressed up for the prom and getting ready and checking herself out-Do I look okay?-and you're looking at her, just stunned by her beauty. It's interesting, not seeing your own beauty, which you know, we all struggle with.

COREY

You're someone who has built a career as a writer without being affiliated with any particular institution or university.

ADDONIZIO

I basically chose to be an entrepreneur, to be in business for myself I didn't like working for people  much. Over the years, I've worked  as a waitress, at an auto parts store, for a car dealer and at a ball bearings manufacturer-a lot of auto-related jobs. I didn't like having to go to a job every day. So teaching would seem the ideal thing, because you have a lot more freedom when you're teaching, but then when I got into academia, I felt stifled by it. I loved going to graduate school, I had a great experience at San Francisco State-I learned a lot and had some good teachers and met fellow writers. But I was teaching composition, and I didn't like that much. So I thought, I'll teach creative writing, teach to people who want to hear what I have to say and not the comp students who don't care and aren't interested in creative writing. But I didn't have the credentials to teach creative writing full time-I don't think I had a book out or anything-so I started trying to do it on my own. I tried to become a bartender, and then right when I was about to take a bartending job, I thought, Well, maybe I could start a writing class, and ifI can, maybe I won't have to take the bartending job. I got enough students after my third attempt for a private class. It's about temperament. I couldn't handle academia. I wanted to be an artist first, which meant I had to figure out my own shit. On the other hand, without the university, I don't think I could have survived. The readings I give around the country at different universities are significant pieces of my income.

COREY

When you talk about being an artist first, does that influence how you allocate your time?

ADDONIZIO

I have made art the priority, and that's not to say anything about people who have university jobs. Everybody has to do something to survive. I'm at the point now where I wouldn't want a full-time university job, but I'll be a visiting writer in a heartbeat. I did that recently and loved it. It was fun to come back to a campus. Although I remember arriving at San Jose State and feeling a little freaked out, like, okay, there are grades, I have a little cubicle, I have these keys, I have an office, I have to have office hours. I was nervous my first day there, but then it was great-because I love teaching.

I pay my own health insurance, and have for most of my life. Right now, I'm on really cheap insurance in New York that doesn't cover anything unless I get seriously ill and land in the hospital, in which case I'll only be set back $10,000. Because that is my deductible. And it covers just about nothing. So this year, I'm just not getting sick. I'm not going to the doctor. I can't afford the health insurance I had before. So I'm not sure what my next step is.

KEOWN VAUX

Move to Minnesota.

ADDONIZIO

Yeah, exactly. Because they have a really good arts council there and you can get big grants from them. Or Massachusetts, where health care is basically free. That's another possibility. But those are the kind of things that are my considerations. Whereas, if I'd been teaching in a university for twenty years, I would have health insurance, I would have all kinds of benefits I don't get as a freelancer. So it's a little more uncertain, but I've gotten comfortable with that. I've gotten used to the ebb and flow. Ah, shit, I have a great life. Let's face it. I mean, oh, God, the ebb and the flow and the uncertainly, the drama of it all? I fucking love my life. Because it's all centered around doing what I love to do. I'm a writer. That's my primary thing. And I get to do that, and make some kind of living at it. It's amazing.

Issue 77: A Conversation with D.A. Powell

77

Found in Willow Springs 77

September 12, 2015

JESS L. BRYANT, MICHAEL SCHMIDT, DANIELLE WEEKS

A CONVERSATION WITH D.A. POWELL

6a00d8341c630a53ef0120a85469d1970b

Photo Credit: Trane Devore

"I WISH I COULD GO through the poem image by image, line by line, and tell you where it is me, and where it is somebody else," D.A. Powell says in an interview with Nashville Review. "But to tell the god's honest truth, I don't know if l know all of that one hundred percent, nor should I." Powell's exploration of the world as a way to explore the self—and where the two become indistinguishable­—is part of the draw of his poetry, which is personal, inventive, yet a somehow familiar look at the world.

D.A. Powell is the author of several acclaimed books of poet­ry, including Chronic (Graywolf Press, 2009), Useless Landscape, or A Guide for Boys (Graywolf, 2012), and Repast: Tea, Lunch, and Cock­tails (Graywolf, 2014). Chronic received the Kingsley Tufts Award, and Useless Landscape, or A Guide for Boys won the National Book Critics Circle Award for poetry.

Of Powell's collection Repast, Christopher Richards writes in the New Yorker, "it is a jagged, one-of-a-kind opus, which endures both as a personal testimony and as the rare poetic work that manages to capture the ineffable on the page." Richards also notes that a "sense of belonging both nowhere and everywhere is evident in Powell's creative magpieing," which comes from Powell's imaginative blend of cultural references, including "gay hanky code, Whitman, The Weather Girls, Hollywood romances, and biblical heroes."

Although Powell is known for addressing gay culture in his work and, specifically, the AIDS pandemic, his poems also explore Chris­tian tradition and elements of contemporary culture, demonstrating an acute awareness for the way film, music, and art impact society. Underlying many of Powell's works is a view of survival that subverts familiar tropes of suffering and illness. With lines that look to both the past and future, Powell gives new life to the subjects of his poems. In the poem "meditating upon the meaning of the line 'clams on the half shell and roller skates' in the song 'good times,' by chic," Powell writes:

it's still 1980 somewhere, some corner

of your dark apartment

where the mystery of the lyric hasn't faded,      and love is in the

chorus waiting to be born.

Powell has received a Lyric Poetry Award from the Poetry Society of America, a National Endowment for the Arts grant, a Paul En­gle Fellowship from the James Michener Foundation, and the Bos­ton Review Poetry Prize, among other awards. Carl Phillips, a judge for the Boston Review's Poetry Prize, wrote of Powell's work, "No fear, here, of heritage nor of music nor, refreshingly, of authority. Mr. Powell recognizes in the contemporary the latest manifestations of a much older tradition: namely, what it is to be human."

We met with Mr. Powell for tea during the Montana Book Festi­val in Missoula, where we talked about exile, Jesus, and the difference between being a poet and writing poetry.

 

DANIELLE WEEKS

So many of your poems are so funny. Do you think poetry takes itself too seriously?

D.A. POWELL

For God's sake, it's art, but the kind of ponderous pontificating that people do around it, you would think it's semi-precious metal. Yes, poetry takes itself too seriously. I was first drawn to it as a kind of humorous interaction—not because I thought it was saying deep things, but because I thought it was saying things in funny, inter­esting ways. I love poems that poke fun at the idea of a status quo or an ordered world. I have always been drawn to poetry that's casting a gob of spit in the face of art, to quote Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer: "This is not a book. . .it is a prolonged insult, a gob of spit in the face of art ."

JESS L. BRYANT

Is irreverence one of the effects of your poetry?

POWELL

I use lines as pressure releases. I take something and tighten the tension of its muscles and then release it. That was particularly helpful when I was living in Iowa. In the Bay Area, I was visible. In Iowa, I was invisible. Imagine you go someplace where any manifes­tation of the community you lived in before is hidden or obliterated. But it was actually helpful, because I didn't have to worry about any­ thing other than writing. Those long barren roads in the winter were my life. It's like I was working with flatness, working with a poten­tially obliterated landscape. The line had to erase time and space and history. Though that's not what I thought I was doing at the time—I was just writing . But looking back, I realize I needed to take myself away from California in order to write about it.

The songs of exile are the greatest songs of history.

MICHAEL SCHMIDT

Were you thinking of any particular song of exile?

POWELL

I like a passage in the song "By the Waters of Babylon" that goes sort of like: By the waters of Babylon, we lay down and wept when we remembered Zion, but how can we sing the Lord's song in a foreign land?

In Iowa, I felt like I was in a foreign land. Whenever I was writing about the world I came from, I got to choose it, in a way, so I was pro­miscuous about choosing. I tried to be careful about populating the poems in ways that were plentiful and had many tones and many kinds of language. I think that was my reaction to the barren world I was living in: This has to be pretty—this has to be something else. It's the problem of the open field. You have to figure out how to make it look like something more than boring housing develop­ments. Please, I would rather see your filthy old barn.

BRYANT

I've read that the conventional canon of male poets did not inform your work.

POWELL

Neither did white poets. My reading direction, the path that got me into poetry, was through African-American poets. I thought there were maybe three or four white poets in the world, all of whom probably weren't very interesting. I would go to the library and get my books and never notice there were other poets except the poets I was already interested in. I do remember I once checked out a book by Ted Hughes because I thought it was by Langston Hughes. I was reading it and I thought, Wow, this is really bad. He's so off his game.

WEEKS

Does it bother you when people assume your poetry is at least somewhat autobiographical?

POWELL

I don't worry about it. I feel like that's on the readers. In no other art form would we assume we're getting the creator's life, because most people's lives, including my own, are super boring. As Alfred Hitchcock said, drama is life with all the boring bits cut out. A poem is a kind of small drama. Short stories are drama. All writing is es­sentially the drama of what, who, how, those age-old questions that propel us forward to read more. You can populate a poem with as much true experience as you want or need, because that's how we know the world—through our own selves—but I think it would be egotistical for writers to imagine that the poetic version of what they present is in any way a resemblance of their own life. There are cer­tainly poets who speak from an authentic and consistent "I," but even they're inventors, right?

In order to be an artist, I don't think you can worry too much about an audience's reaction. You can worry about it in terms of, Oh, nobody likes my work, but once people are there to read you and hear you, it's kind of your duty to turn your back, the way the conductor turns his back on the audience. We're looking at the person who is re­sponsible for the art, and I think as an artist, you have to do the same. You're looking inward at that moment when you're most vulnerable. You're deep inside yourself, trying to bring up the courage of convic­tion of your writing, not worrying about whether anyone is going to get up and walk out. I kind of hope they will walk out.

BRYANT

Do they ever?

POWELL

All the time. I don't think anyone has ever walked out for any terrible reason, but you never know. I'm always encouraged by the people who show up. I gave a reading in Tyler, Texas, at the universi­ty there, and these folks showed up—grad students, a heteronorma­tive couple—with their child, who was in a Boy Scout uniform. I'm like, "Um, I don't know if this is age-appropriate," and they were like, "Don't worry, he's been to a lot of these," and I realized they were the kind of parents I'd had. My parents didn't filter content. They didn't say, "Is he reading things that are dirty? Is he listening to things that are criminal?" They didn't care. In that way, it made it possible for me to indulge myself in reading and experiencing literature at what­ ever level I wanted. So I realized these folks were good parents, and I didn't curb my reading, didn't pay attention to whether they left. They might have. They sat in back, just in case, and I think we were all a bit relieved.

SCHMIDT

Do people ever expect too much from poets?

POWELL

I think that does happen sometimes. I'm glad people reach out to me, but there's only so much you can do in a day. I can't blurb books for everybody who asks—I am physically not able to do that. And you don't want your endorsement to be just a rubber stamp. One year, nine people asked me for letters of recommendation for Guggenheim Fellowships, and I said yes to all of them. I wrote letters and none got in, because the committee must have thought, Well, he's not very selective. That taught me something. You have to pick the moment when you step forward and say, I've been told to help this person.

I love poetry, and I love that people are passionate about what is, really, one of the most esoteric and hermetic things in the world. It's really like we're having a big conference about masturbation, and we're being frank and candid about what hand we prefer—or toys and lubricants and all those other things. It's this intimate thing we share. It' s marvelous, but maybe it's just a metaphor for other things we can't talk about.

WEEKS

Do poets need to attend conferences?

POWELL

Those are really good things to do if you want to be a poet. If you just want to write poetry, you don't need any of that. I think you have to be able to separate those things from each other. Many times, young people unconsciously or subconsciously try to be poets, instead of just writing poetry. If you write poetry and people like it, then all the other things you'd hoped would happen often happen. So it's misplaced energy. And at times, all that misplaced energy is working in ways we don't realize, but not in ways that help. Send to a dozen contests if you feel like you want to publish this book right now, but if you'd rather wait until someone asks you to publish the book, do that. There's not any right or wrong way. Whatever way you choose, you want to be able to offset the footprint of that choice in some other way.

When you advertise yourself, whether for good reasons or bad, you're selling a little bit of your soul, and you have to buy that back by doing good things for people. Every time someone comes up to you and has you sign a book, you feel like you can get that piece back somehow. But you can't pay it back to the people who are reading the work—it has to be to the art itself, the energy within that art.

I'm always happy when I sign a book, because I'm glad it's a book somebody cares to hold. Even if they turn around and throw it in the bin at the thrift store, I don't care. Somebody cared enough about the book to have that interaction. It's wonderful and unexpected and weird. I remember how timid I was when I would approach a poet to sign a book—how much courage that took—and then how like a deer in the headlights I was if they talked to me.

Oh, my Lord, Gwendolyn Brooks would make everybody who got a book signed sit across from her, because she didn't want to look up at people. She was like, "We're going to be like civilized people. You're going to sit down and talk to me." So every person in the long line would sit and have a conversation with her. I remember I was at her book signing, the last person in line. She goes, "Sit down, sit down," and I was like, "Oh, no, you must be tired," and she says "I'm not tired, I've been sitting." So I sat and engaged in conversation with her, but the entire time I felt that I was unworthy in that conversation.

I realize now I was being stupid, silly, but there was something about the power of her words and the kind of energy Olson talks about—poetry as energy transferred. That energy made me feel like she was a kind of divine being, which I'm not entirely sure she wasn't, but she didn't see herself that way. She saw herself as a poet. She went out and did readings and gave back to the community. I try to remember those moments. How can I help the person who's sitting
across from me at a book signing?

They say that President Obama spends 98 percent of his time with the person he's meeting assuring them that everything's okay. That's actually the bulk of it. All those photo ops you see are just Obama saying, "Don't worry, we'll get through this, you're doing great." He has to realize that he has this power people are investing in him. And it's the same as a poet. People are investing a power in you that you have a responsibility for. You also have a responsibility to remind them that it's not a big deal. We all pay taxes.

WEEKS

Poets aren't the public figures they used to be. But they still have some kind of power. . .

POWELL

Isn't power a bad thing? Doesn't power corrupt? I would rather not have power. At work I'm always thinking, whatever other people want, I'm going to go along with that, because I don't want to be the decider. What kind of power do poets have? Very, very little, and yet, what power we have can be monumental, though we can never guar­antee that that's going to be the case.

I've known Claudia Rankine for a long time, and she's recently become highly visible. She understands and respects the power of hope people are investing in her. She understands it's a terrible bur­den of responsibility to bear when you're at that most visible moment. But what a great honor, as well. I think it's like what people say about having children. You become your better self. It's like what people say about having an audience, too: you become your better self, and if you don't, you won't have an audience. Unless you're Bukowski, and then people go to be abused.

I saw Claudia Rankine's video work, and now with Citizen, she's this public figure who's stepped into the world out of necessity. Wouldn't you rather choose that no unarmed, innocent people are being killed by police without warrants? There are all sorts of things you would trade for that position.

WEEKS

Do you use social media?

POWELL

I love Twitter, in the sense that I get a lot of information that way—a quick sort of digest. But I find that I don't click on a lot of articles from big media companies like Slate or Newsweek because I'm getting too many ads. I'd rather go to the library and read. But I do like the social dynamic of Twitter.

I'm noticing that more and more poets are on Twitter. Oliver de la Paz, Robert Pinsky—people you thought would not be there­—Carissa Chen, Ada Limon. I keep up with what's going on in the world of poetry. Not that I always approve.

WEEKS

Is there something useful about the 140 character limit of Twitter?

POWELL

It 's the same number of characters or spaces as the number of syllables in a sonnet. Someone must have thought of that. It's not too short, and it's not too long. Goldilocks would be happy there. People can ask you questions, but they can't ask you more than one question. Unlike email, it doesn't become a to-do list. And you can see what other people are doing without having to have all the interaction. It's just: What 's Nancy Sinatra up to these days?

BRYANT

You make references to popular culture and to specific brands, such as Twitter, in your work. What do you think about the impulse for writers to avoid these references in order to attain some kind of timelessness?

POWELL

Nothing is timeless. Scientists have been trying to figure out a language that people in 20,000 years will be able to read, something visual to warn people away from radioactive waste buried in Nevada. They have to think of a future that doesn't include any language we know. Would someone translate our poetry into that language? May­be, maybe not. Most of what you write doesn't last. That's the beauty of it. The beauty of art is not the timelessness, but the ephemerali­ty—the idea that someone paid attention to a moment in such an arbitrary and decorative way and let it go into the world.

SCHMIDT

Does this ephemerality influence the structure of your poems? Is that why Tea, Lunch, and Cocktails contains no complete sentences?

POWELL

There's an inevitability in syntax—beginning, middle, and end­—and I wanted to resist end. Thematically, this had to do with HIV and the AIDS epidemic, but I didn't make that connection right away. I thought I was just being a stubborn poet—Yeah, I don't like complete thoughts; I don't like this idea of syntactic order. Isn't it the job of prose writers to write in complete sentences?

One of the great things about poetry is that it doesn't have to do that. I was being defiant, and it turned out to be a choice that made sense. But I didn't know that. You can't plan everything in advance. I talk to people all the time who are like, "Yeah, I've got this idea for a book," and I'm like, "Well, there's your first problem. Don't have an idea. Just write. Having an idea for a book is a mistake. You'll never get there because you won't achieve your ideal." People labor over books for years, like, no, this isn't what I wanted. It's not working out. Well, why don't you be happy with what you did write? Why don't you throw away nine-tenths of that and write more?

BRYANT

You experienced the AIDS epidemic firsthand. How important is it for writers to write about their own time?

POWELL

For me, to be a writer is to be irresponsible to begin with. There are certain subjects we can't shut up about, and that's our nature. The question becomes, do people want to hear it? Do they like it? That goes to the idea of shaping, deciding what will be a palatable ver­sion of this idea for a reading audience, something I always try to undercut immediately. I don't want to worry about people's ideas of proper subject matter. I like being improper. I like being irreverent. That's one of the things we've loved about literature for centuries. I'm reading Gulliver's Travels right now, and Swift's constantly writing about shitting and pissing, all these things polite novels leave out. He's reminding us that we're beasts, that we're animals.

BRYANT

Speaking of beasts, would you discuss the use of violence in your work?

POWELL

I've experienced physical violence, and I feel like it's a subject one must be truthful to. At the same time, I don't want to use it in any kind of exploitative or sensationalist way. I'm reading Sula by Toni Morrison now, and the violence in that book happens unexpectedly and in a world of absolute beauty. That's what violence is: a tear in the fabric of one's nature, one's life, one's experience of the world. I try not to set it up too much, and I try not to make too much of it. Having violence come in unexpectedly, and having it not be too explained, is like when Hart Crane can't help yelling out this unfor­givable thing at the end of the first Voyages. He sees the kids playing by the ocean, and he says: "If they could hear me, I would tell them the bottom of the sea is cruel." You don't want to say to the world, "The bottom of sea is cruel," but at the same time, Hart says that this is the case, and one must be aware of that.

In my experience, you could leave a gay bar and be in the middle of a shooting. It has not always been a world of acceptance. I don't think that'll be the same in twenty to thirty years. We'll look back at the literature of the period and say, "Wow, people were barbaric then." That's a good feeling, to notice that everyone prior to us was a barbarian.

WEEKS

Earlier you mentioned "the ordered world." Why do you think humans feel a compulsion to create order and to suppress anything outside of that order?

POWELL

The universe functions on rules, so humans are doing nothing new in that respect. The question is, who gets to write the rules, and what do the rules exclude That's always changing . Abbie Hoffman said ev­ery law is political, because when you have, for example, a law against murdering, you will see the investigating police approach somebody who looks like they have no money before they approach somebody who looks like they have a million dollars. That's politics. That's not morality. That's a decision based on economics or appearance or looks or sexual identity or gender, and when we find society making those kinds of assumptions, it's our duty to intervene. Whether you choose to do that in your art or not is irrelevant.

I feel like the act of writing is a resistance to the order of law, the order of mankind. It's a resistance to governance, to all the implied and stated rules that say we actually have to have a physical address, to carry an identity card.We have to have an income—and if we have an income, we have to be taxed on it. Art is interrogating all those kinds of things at all times, whether we're aware of it or not.

I think writing means writing in your time. You don't have to stand on a soapbox. Writing is a political act because you are using a language that is used against you every day to tell you there's a Clean Air Act to protect you. You're using language to say, "No, the air today looks gray." Even by writing a simple line like that, you have made a mark against the world in which you're living and shown it to be something other than what people are selling to you.

WEEKS

How does the unconscious work in your writing?

POWELL

I try not to think when I'm writing. At the same time, I recognize that once words are on the page, they have meaning, and I try to look at that. A couple of years ago, an editor asked me for work. I sent some, and the editor said, "I want this poem," and then it turned out later that the editor didn't understand the poem. I was like, Should I be insulted by that? And I thought, No, because there are a lot of things I like that I don't understand. I'll often like a poem before I understand it. The understanding is the value of the appreciation. I want to go back in there and think about why I like it, but there's something really wonderful about living in the realm of the pleasure of the senses and saying, "I don't know why I like that line, but it sure sounds good."

In the first poetry workshop I took, we had to translate something from a language we didn't speak–into English—and I was deter­mined to make everything make sense, even though there were words I didn't understand. It didn't fit, but I wanted to make it fit. We came to class with our assignments, and one of the guys read a poem that repeated this line: "The killing kills the cakewalk." He was working with a language that had a lot of hard consonants. The instructor, David Bromige, said, "It's such a wonderful line. What do you think it means?" and the kid said, "I don't know, I just liked it." I remember being jealous of the fact that this guy got to have such a good line in his poem without it having to mean anything. I thought, I want to do that. I want to do that more.

I don't think that guy ever went on to take another poetry class or to publish poems—he was just taking the class as something to do­—but that line has stuck with me. That's the power of poetry: even if you don't understand it, you can remember it and go back to it time and time again. Every time you do, you're going to find a different relation­ship to it. Over the years, "the killing kills the cakewalk'' has occurred to me at various moments in my life as a kind of pronouncement on what was going on in that moment. I know the author of that line and the teacher of the author of that line had no idea what it meant, and yet, there it is: a line of poetry forever stuck in my head. That's what poetry should do—create in you this lasting affection without it be­ing about anything except when it pops back into your mind.

We all have lines like that that we remember vividly. A woman in one of my early poetry classes had a line in her poem that began: "Mother, I have always been a black child standing against a white wall." So powerful. I don't know if she ever wrote another poem, but it was a great opening. Those things stick with you. You can't help it. You can't unlearn them. Poetry is unlearnable language. Un-unlearn­able language. Maybe both.

I love surrealism, and I teach it because I feel like people mis­understand surrealism as the early definition of surrealism, which is to be beneath reality and in the dream world—to have access to the irrational and all that. Surrealism as a literary device has those irrational qualities, but at the same time, it's also a powerful means of expression. In a culture or language or world or community in which certain things are unsayable, you can resort to a kind of surrealism­ which is code, which is information, which is speaking about vio­lence, about queerness, about things the society can't or won't accept in ways that are surreptitious or sneaky.

What African-American poetry taught me was the complexity and depth of signification, which is to be able to talk about being an other, while at the same time denying to a huge chunk of the audi­ence that you are talking about those things. The brilliance of layering language is something I learned and absorbed early in queer culture. We could send messages to one another across the room in language that was not intercepted by heteronormative society. Surrealism can be used as a defense mechanism as well. In Eastern Europe and in the former Soviet Union, surrealism was often used to talk about op­pressive government, and I think sometimes we do that in the United States, as well. It's one of the lenses we can use as writers.

BRYANT

Would you talk more about language that rises from oppression?

POWELL

It's being able to say, "Is she family?" in a small town and knowing most queer people wouldn't think someone just asked if she was your relative. We know what that word means. We know it's code. Being able to develop that language in places where you don't want to be revealed is one of the great things queer culture has given us. And now so much of that language has been co-opted by non-queer culture, and we think, well, that's kind of a compliment, but at the same time, what do we do when we don't want to be picked up by everybody in the room?

Also, there's the fucked up thing that happens when people misuse your language and the signals get crossed. Like when a heterosexual man says, "Yes, my partner and I recently broke up," and you're like, Oh! Are you telling me you're not straight? You're misusing my lan­guage.

We had to say partner because we were never allowed to say wife or husband. Give us that much, until you give us full equality. Which we now have, except for, God rest her soul, Kim Davis.

BRYANT

That's like a surrealist performance.

POWELL

But isn't it wonderful that we can see it as the bizarro version of culture, rather than the normal version?

BRYANT

With growing acceptance, do you see more co-opting of queer language and identity?

POWELL

I certainly see it in San Francisco, where the entire city has become metrosexual. Queer bars are no longer queer bars. Straight bars are no longer straight bars. People actually have to talk to each other in order to know, and no one assumes gender or gender identity or sexuality or marital status or anything without actually having a conversation. I try to go back in my mind and think, what is it that we really wanted all along? Isn't what we wanted the ability to be different, the permission to be different? Not to be absorbed into the melting pot of assimilation.

I think that LGBT rights have come far on the coattails of mar­riage equality. But that's essentially a middle-class concern, having to do with assimilationist values rather than people focusing on, say, job equality, protection from being fired, protection from discrimi­nation, protection from violence, those things that particularly affect people in the transgender community who are at subsistence level or homeless. We need to be protecting them, and the conversation is still more about, will Bob and Bob get their marriage license so that their adopted kids will have two fathers? That's about property and inheritance, and some of us don't have property or inheritance and need to be taken care of. That's why I'm more interested in helping the Larkin Street Youth Center, helping people who are still on the run from a place that won't accept them, rather than working for the benefit of the middle class, which I think usually takes care of itself.

BRYANT

What about the permission to be different?

POWELL

I live in San Francisco, where if we need to pee, we pee. I'm not going to qualify this or quantify that or ask permission, or anything like that.

That's actually one of the wonderful things about Toni Morrison. She's not trying to write a book that explains black culture for a white audience. She's simply writing about a world that exists partially in real life and partially in the imagination and that is true to the life of the characters.

I want to be truthful to queer culture in all of its forms, not just the thematic, society-version harlequin. The African-American poet Haki R. Madhubuti writes about what he calls "the small doors of tokenism" and of the acceptance that exists only in terms of, Are you our kind of people? Will you fit in here? I never want to be that guy who's like, Oh, you can take me anywhere.

You can't. I often will end up putting myself into uncomfortable situations, going to a small college in rural Utah, for example, to read poetry to an audience that includes queer people who don't feel safe in their environment; it feels like visibility has come for a moment. I don't want them to feel like the freaks of their class, or like they're freaks in my work. In my work, everyone's a freak.

BRYANT

That's what I love about New York City and San Francisco. The anonymity gives everyone permission to be a freak.

POWELL

And it's changing. The Castro used to be a place where there wasn't Pottery Barn. There wasn't Starbucks. There wasn't all of that shit. When we would go there, it was kind of raunchy and danger­ous and ugly and perverted and wonderful. Unapologetically sexual. Unapologetically S&M and leather, and all that stuff just out in the streets. It wasn't as welcoming to diversity as it is now. If you wanted to meet black men, you would go to the Pendulum; if you wanted to hang out with your lesbian friends, you would go to Josie's. There wasn't the cross-pollination that there is now. But at the same time, the development of subculture and of subculture strategy and subcul­ture history—it was a fortress against what was really an ugly time in human history. The violence against gay, lesbian, and transgender people is ongoing, but we've made so many strides. We know now about killings. It used to be that they were buried in the police blotter and nobody knew. Your friend would disappear, and you'd find out weeks later that he'd been found with twenty-six stab wounds and ruled a suicide. You're like, No, I don't think my friend would have stabbed himself twenty-six times.

SCHMIDT

In Cocktails, you wrote about movies because you said you were tired of your own mind. Does that outside perspective reach into the internal and renew it in some way?

POWELL

The fact that one is writing from a mind other than one's own is a purely enabling fiction to begin with. I think what I meant was that I wanted to put the camera in a different location. Sometimes you want close-ups, sometimes you want medium shots, sometimes you want the worm's eye view, looking up at the world. I felt that in those poems I wanted to not be responsible for the content. They didn't all start out as what they ended up. Intent on my behalf is usu­ally running around 1.5 on a scale of 10. Fifteen percent of my writ­ing is intentional—I said it that way, I meant it that way, that's my literal mind. Most of the time I don't know what's going to happen. I'm always surprised when I open my mouth and say shit. Why did I say that? It just came out.

Even my completely original poems are arrangements of things I've written and said at various moments. Even if it's one continuous draft of a poem, the poem that you're writing at 4:22 in the afternoon is different than the poem that you're writing at 4:23 in the after­noon. You're veering off-course all the time. That's the experience of writing. What are the paths I could take with this image, with this idea? I think you become comfortable and conscious of the choosing nature of language. And that helps you because at any given mo­ment you could say, "Well, would this speaker in this poem say sofa or would they say couch or would they say davenport." All of those things change the rhythm of the line, the music of the poem, the culture of the poem, the geography of it, the history of it. Every word you choose is a stain you're putting on the page, and the idea is to have the stains work in such a way that they create, for the spectator, for the reader, some pleasurable experience. It doesn't have to resolve itself in an image, but it often does. It could just as easily be about a mood or an encounter or a perception.

All of those different words–you're aware of them in the way a painter is aware of the round brush and the flat brush, in the way a drummer is aware of the difference between the tom-tom and the snare. We're using language all the time. We've just become more conscious of how we use it. Then you have to unkink all of that feeling and become natural to the form of whatever it is that you're doing. The idea of going back to the natural—your original perception—you can spend years trying to figure out how to do that, and by the time you figure it out, you're doing something different. Basho said you want to be quick and clean as if you're slicing through a cold water­ melon. But we can't always be like that. It takes a lot of trial and error to get to that point, so you choose your best moments.

SCHMIDT

You've written poetry entirely composed of section headings, cor­rect?

POWELL

Yes, from the apocryphal and pseudographic writings of the lost bible. We seldom invent words, and when we do, I doubt we own them. It's not really a word if no one else uses it—it's just gibberish. Most every word you use came from some place. If you can really do something cool and new and amusing with someone else's language, of course do it—but it shouldn't be the only thing you know how to do.

Sometimes you just do it by accident. Hart Crane sat down to type, ''And yet this great wing of eternity," and accidentally typed, ''And yet this great wink of eternity" and thought it was so much bet­ter. He said, I'm going to keep that. Of course eternity is just a wink. If it were a wing, everybody could do that. When you read that line, it seems so true that you just take it as gospel.

WEEKS

Do you see an underlying connection between spirituality and writing?

POWELL

I believe, as Keats believed, that writing is "the vale of soul­ making." It is this place where we are developing. Lucretius reminds us that everything is equal parts fullness and emptiness, and it is the emptiness that creates sound. Lao Tzu tells us that it's not the clay, but the hollow part of the vessel that's of use, its emptiness that aptly makes sound reverberate inside us. All that internal space is connect­ed by a vast network of signals, waves, sounds . We are creatures of light and sound, and so my spiritual self is rooted half in this con­scious embrace of the fact that we're all really just nothing—truly nothing in the world—and yet we're in these units, these bodies that have connective tissue designed to bring in information about the other nonmaterial that's around us that we perceive as material. Part of my spiritual life is in recognizing the absolute interconnectedness of all things and the absurdity of the separation of bodies into sepa­rate little colonies of molecules and atoms.

At the same time, I recognize that everything takes its creative energy from friction and from a kind of a volatile existence. I recog­nize that all ways of seeing the world, all ways of being religious, all ways of being spiritual are going to be in conflict with one another. No one—well, perhaps one person—knows the truth about existence. My spiritual path is to be wrong about most everything in ways that are mostly instructive, at least for myself. I feel like in order to stay on that path, I choose from the greatest writings I encounter, including the Bible, which happens to be a problematic text in so many ways. Even St. Paul, homophobe that he was, distinguishes between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. If you tap into the spirit of the language of our sacred texts, it's essentially good. And don't worry about the letter of the law—that's somebody else's problem. If you don't like the letter of the law, change it. If it offends you, if I offend you, then suck it up. If there's a passage in the Bible that's no longer relevant to your life, like owning slaves, or having multiple concu­bines or wives, or supporting incest, there are lots of other things that the Bible does include that are overlooked.

God destroyed the city of Sodom for what, exactly? It's never quite clear. You have to take a giant step back and say, "If people want to pervert that text into a platform against other people, that's really fucked up." It doesn't mean I have to participate. There's a lot of beauty in God's words, whatever words those are, whatever form they're in. They come as easily in ordinary life as they do in the writ­ten text. The written texts are something we can agree on and argue about and have a conversation about. What people said cannot be debated, and that's the big problem of the gospels. And the great beauty of them. There are at least four versions that we recognize, and thousands of others that we don't recognize, so who knows what really went on with Jesus and all them boys? I'm sure there were certain things they weren't able to talk about and had to signify. Brotherhood and all that.

BRYANT

Christ was celibate and chose to surround himself with men.

POWELL

If we choose to believe he was celibate. John the Divine was, repeatedly, in the position of being the apostle whom Christ loved. Leaning on his chest at the last supper. Being loved by him. Even at the moment of crucifixion, the narrator of the Gospel of John has Jesus look down at John and say, "Lo, here is thy mother." Saying to Mary, "Go, here is thy son." And the tradition is that John and Mary lived together with an emphasis that she treated him like a son, and he treated her like a mother. For all intents and purposes, John was Jesus's significant other. But if that makes people uncom­fortable, which apparently it does, it gets left out. In the Acts of John—which are perhaps not by John, since he dies in them and it's hard to write about yourself if you die—John has this beautiful con­versation where he says,"I didn't want you to marry. I wanted you for myself. I wanted you as my beloved." I can understand why people left that out. It can be frightening for some people, but why is that? Why is love strange?

Issue 79: A Conversation with Laura Kasischke

Willow Springs issue 79 cover shows photo of a pink dress against a concrete background.

Interview in Willow Springs 79

Works in Willow Springs 39 and 34

March 31, 2016

JULIA ROX, CODY SMITH, DANIEL WEEKS

A CONVERSATION WITH LAURA KASISCHKE

laura-kasischke

Photo Credit: poetryfoundation.com

IN A REVIEW OF SPACE, IN CHAINS for the Kenyon Review, Jeremy Bass writes that Laura Kasischke "[posits] her readers in the space of active consideration, a space in which the reader might feel, as her poems do, actively alive in a world that is both fanuliar and strange, at once common and surreal." Although Kasischke's writing comes from familiar places—grief, illness, mortality—those places become transformed by her use of rhythm, space, and juxtaposition.

Laura Kasischke is a novelist and a poet, earning such honors as fellowships from the National Endowment for the Arts and the Guggenheim Foundation. She has published ten collections of poet­ry, including Gardening in the Dark (Ausable, 2004), Lilies Without (Copper Canyon, 2007), Space, in Chains (Copper Canyon, 2011), which won the National Book Critics Circle Award, and The Infin­itesimals (Copper Canyon, 2014). Her novels, some of which have been adapted into films, include The Life Before her Eyes (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2002), In a Perfect World (HarperCollins, 2009), and Mind of Winter (HarperCollins, 2014). The board of the 2012 National Book Critics Circle Award called Space, in Chains, "a formally inventive work that speaks to the hor­rors and delights of ordinary life in an utterly original way."

Much of Kasischke's work explores the line between the mundane and the catastrophic. Apocalypse and mortality sit next to small, everyday moments, such as in "My son practicing the violin," when the speaker observes that "Even the paper cup in my hand has learned to breathe." Reading her poetry evokes the surprise and sudden recogni­tion of something that has been on the tip of your tongue, something you haven't been able to name until that moment—until Kasischke reveals an image or turn of phrase that feels exactly right.

We met with Laura Kasischke at the AWP Conference in Los Angeles, where we talked about existential terror, the Book of Reve­lation, and David Lynch.

DANIELLE WEEKS

Is there anything you've been obsessed with recently?

LAURA KASISCHKE

I have revolving fixations, and while this isn't really poetry related, I'm obsessed lately with true crime. Because of the internet you can watch crimes committed and solved all the time. I think my obses­sion started getting bad with the Serial podcast. I've been working on a novel that's crime related—a horrible murder that happened close to home. So now, with the novel, I'm not just watching crime on TV—I'm, you know, doing research.

CODY SMITH

Is there anything we can learn about storytelling from Serial?

KASISCHKE

There had to be a lot of manipulation there, excellent timing, and presentation with the backstory, but I think the strength of Serial is based on the strong material she kept chipping away at. There was probably a lot of jettisoning—boring interviews and other stuff she took out to streamline it. That's key—getting lots and lots on the page so you have too much and can get rid of things. I used to say to students, "Just get it on the page. Worry later about the clutter, because it's far better to have material to get rid of than pulling your teeth to find material." Documentary filmmakers will say, "We shot 500 hours of footage to make this one hour film about starfish." And you might think, what a waste of all those other hours. But it couldn't have happened if they hadn't had those things to take away. You could compare it to a stream of consciousness poem or novel. Sarah, the narrator in Serial, was not like the surrealists who said you could not revise anything. She revised and shaped and streamlined.

WEEKS

The critic Stephen Burt describes your poetry as suburban surreal­ism.

KASISCHKE

I like the surrealist impulse—which doesn't necessarily have to be a dream landscape. I like association and the subconscious or uncon­scious mind being the source of inspiration. I grew up in a suburb and often go back there in my brain when I'm writing. I'm not trying to always return to the suburbs, but as a writer you only have so much material.

WEEKS

Your novel In a Perfect World is centered on a pandemic that leads to an apocalyptic world, and you have poems with apocalyptic themes. Is the apocalypse one of your obsessions?

KASISCHKE

In the novel, I was interested in asking, what if the Black Death happened now—if a third of the people died, or two-thirds? As for the poems, I don't know why the apocalypse comes up. My parents weren't super religious, but I took to religious stuff like a fish to water. I became much more religious when I was younger than either of them were, and I think it startled them, and they quit going to church just when I got most into it. I still have the Bible that was given to me for my Confirmation, and I completely annotated the Book of Revelation. I've always been interested in that book—the dream­-like, surreal kind of crazy content. I used to know whole passages by heart. And I've always been interested in the Plague and the Middle Ages—the dance of death.

SMITH

Do you take any of your pacing or rhythm from the Psalms?

KASISCHKE

I think I was influenced by the Bible, yes—I really only encoun­tered language like that in church. We didn't have much poetry around, and I didn't know there was a lot of free verse to be read. I had one poetry anthology and thought it was the only contemporary anthology in the world. Maybe I read the Bible because I wanted that experience of language. Until I got to college, I hadn't encountered anything like Ezra Pound that I might have read instead of the Book of Revelation.

SMITH

I noticed your use of repetition in some of the poems in The In­finitesimals, such as the "Beast" and "Trumpet" poems. How does repetition come into play in the work as a whole?

KASISCHKE

I was looking at plates from this book at The Cloisters in New York, an illuminated Book of Revelation. I was looking at those images for inspiration, but the plates became less interesting than the descriptions of them: "Oh, there is a small bestial form."I had different poems that came out of the same inspiration, so I gave them the same titles. A few of these poems were many-part po­ems. I pulled them apart, and they worked better separately, so I moved them around. I started to like the idea of many poems under the same umbrella of this title or description. After a while, if I did that long enough,I realized that every book could have the same title. Where do you stop? And honestly, that could be kind of cool, but I don't know if it would've gotten published. Then people would really be asking, "Why do you have 50 poems with the same title? What happened?"

WEEKS

Do you see a difference in purpose between poetry and fiction?

KASISCHKE

I read poetry to see what other people are, how they can change my mind on something or excite me or startle me or inspire some sort of feeling in me or sense of mystery. I'm not the first person to say that poetry needs to be something done in language about something you can't really do in language. You have that creepy, uncanny feeling—this isn't a musical telling us something we could otherwise hear about. This is terra incognita. You can't really go there in language, so the poet's done the best he or she can to take us somewhere else.

For me, writing poetry is just about me. Not all poets feel this way, and that's probably a good thing, but I'm writing poems to see what I can come up with. I think poetry is about expressing an experience or a memory or a possibility or something about the human condition you really can't sit down and talk to anyone about.

Fiction can serve the same function. Mrs. Dalloway is my favor­ite novel, and I wouldn't call that high entertainment or anything­—it's about the mind and about this weird place we inhabit. We find ourselves on Earth for a little while trying to figure out what we're doing and what's going on, but we spend most of our time trying to pretend that this isn't all that weird—the fact that we're going to die and that we have no idea when, and no idea if anything will happen after that. Even if we convince ourselves that we do think we know, we don't have any proof. There are people who say we do, but we don't. So, my God, we have to go around acting like it matters if we get to the dentist on time.

ROX

How do you bring freshness and surprise to your work?

KASISCHKE

With a few of my novels it's been fun—but also frustrating—to start without a plan, just a landscape or character. As I'm writing, I'm figuring out what's going to happen next, just the way you would as you're reading a novel. It's fun until you realize, three-fourths of the way through, oh, this has to be from a different point of view. I should have made a plan but I didn't know what was going to happen, so how could I?

There's that Robert Frost quote, "No surprise for the writer, no surprise for the reader." I'm less interested in the reader's surprise, though, and I think readers can be forced to be surprised by just in­serting something surprising. The exciting part for me is the sub­ conscious—when I suddenly realize, oh, I wasn't going to say that or maybe I shouldn't have written that or I didn't know where I was going but I'm going in the right direction anyway.

It's easier to play out surprise in a poem because you work on it for a couple of days, then if it doesn't go anywhere and you've surprised yourself by not writing a very good poem, you can throw it away. But if after five years you've surprised yourself by not writing a very good novel or one that makes absolutely no sense. . . . Well.

Even with the most formulaic writing, it's all about the things you discover beyond your rational mind. In writing even the driest of essays, it's the writing process itself that holds the surprise. Part of what's fun is not putting on the page what you already thought and wanted to express but using writing as a way to figure out what you have to say. Once you start doing that, it's all about surprising yourself.
And that happens every night in our dreams. You think, whoa, where'd that come from? Maybe it was something weird or startling or it seemed like someone else's life, but it came from you. Last night, for example, I dreamed I had a cat litter box I was getting ready to clean. I saw the litter was moving and that something was coming up from underneath. I called my husband—I was freaking out, I don't know why—and I made him watch. We saw this slimy head come out-like something being born out of there. I went running from the room, upset to see this mucousy baby coming out of the cat litter. After a while n1y husband said,"Oh, Laura, you need to look at this, it's really cute!"I did not want to look, but I came in and there was a cute little kitten sitting on top of the litter. I was so excited! Where did that come from? The writing process can be like that—just sort of, whoa, where'd that come from? It comes from a part of our brains we don't have access to when we're not sleeping, dreaming, or writing.

WEEKS

A lot of your work has humorous moments even if it deals with death or medical recovery. How does humor work in your writing?

KASISCHKE

For a long time I was not interested in humor in poetry—I only wanted the darkest of material and tones. But then I realized I didn't always want to read the darkest material. I think David Lynch helped me realize how much more morbid things can be when they're leveled with humor, how they become even more startling and horrify­ing. When I watched Blue Velvet, I was like, oh, that's it-that's the tone you want. There are so many funny moments, like at the end with that robin chomping and chomping on a worm, in this really campy, disgusting way that's hilarious. We laugh at that, but it's still just horrifying.

WEEKS

In your poem "Twentieth-Century Poetry" you write, "Twenti­eth-century poetry-an eagle/in a cave, bleeding: such/a lot of noble suffering/in a dark and lovely place, full/of widows pleading." Do you see a kind of violence in twentieth-century poetry or the twentieth century in general that must come out in poetry?

KASISCHKE

I'm sure if you looked at any century's poetry you would see how it's influenced by horror, but the twentieth century was really a house of horrors. I was reading an introduction to twentieth-century poetry and thinking about how laughable it was: Well, this poet influenced that poet and this poet influenced that poet, and just kind of tossed in there was the information that he died at Auschwitz and he killed himself after getting out of Auschwitz, and it's like, oh . . . this says so much more than what the rest of the introduction to this anthology could really say.

ROX

You've referred to the "dead white men'' in some of your poems—

KASISCHKE

Right. Wordsworth. I'm ashamed now, looking back. I knew nothing about Wordsworth. I didn't like his name. I didn't like the idea of there being a British poet named Wordsworth who wrote about daffodils. But did I know anything or had I read anything of his? No, I just assumed. Then I read William Blake and read about him and realized he'd lived a hard, horrible life and wrote some of the strangest poetry. I wanted poetry to be mysterious and weird, and he's a British man who's dead so I thought his poetry couldn't be weird. But it is weird. This isn't news to anybody except me for a little while.

WEEKS

Were there any dead white women who were influences?

KASISCHKE

I read women. But it's a smaller group because they mostly lived and died without being educated, so they couldn't write. This might be controversial to say, but when you're a sixteen-year-old female who wants to write poetry, everyone hands you Emily Dickinson, and I didn't really like her. I was like, she should have gotten out more. I don't know. But now I've come around to seeing, at least, what every­ one says. But I don't return to Emily Dickinson a lot. Sorry.

ROX

Were there other female poets who influenced you?

KASISCHKE

There were a ton of women just a little older than I was or who were still alive and writing—Sylvia Plath and Anne Sexton. In my own state there's Diane Wakoski, and it was just flabbergasting to one in high school to think, here's this woman who's writing poetry in my state and she's alive and she publishes it. It was her and Alice Notley who were introduced to me in college. But there were a lot of others, too, like Carolyn Forche. I was at the University of Michigan, so there were a lot of women poets coming through. I was in the resi­dential college, which was kind of offbeat, and my poetry teacher was Ken Michalowski. He knew Allen Ginsberg and he ran a press and he knew all these beatnik or sort of political '60s and '70s poets. And he was an expert on the New York school of poets, so I was reading Denise Levertov. Anne Waldman came to the residential college and read her poetry. So, yes, there were a lot of women who influenced my poetry.

WEEKS

Women who write about domestic issues often get labeled as writers of"chick lit." Have you ever felt you were treated differently as a female writer, based on the things you wrote about?

KASISCHKE

Not really—because of the readers I always wanted to have. I have nothing against men reading my poetry, but I've always felt that women might prefer it. I wish one of my novels would get called chick lit, because those sell. But, really, no. I probably lucked out in that way, being in the generation I was. Some of the women I've named who are ten to twenty years older than I am, they would be in a college or in a city where it was really all about the men poets and their sensibilities, and they fought that battle so that I could just write for them. In our MFA program today there are quite a few more women than men in every class, and I think sometimes it's the guys who get, "Why are you writing about this?"

WEEKS

Are there writing rules or etiquette that writers force themselves to follow?

KASISCHKE

One of the rules I've always understood is that melodrama ought to be avoided. But I don't want to write a poem unless it's over-the­ top melodramatic. Really, I'm not sure anybody can follow any rules except the internal ones. I'm sure I had a teacher say, "Don't be so melodramatic," or "It's too clever to have a little rhyme at the end like this," but I don't want to not have that.

I've been around long enough to see trends come and go. For a while, a ton of metaphor or imagery was just not where it was at—ev­erything was more cool and abstract. Poetry fashions change. Some­ one does something that works, and we all start to imitate it. But then you move onto something that becomes a reaction against that first style. All you can really do is develop your own voice and write about the things you're obsessed with.

Everybody says to write the kind of poem you want to read. I think about that a lot, and sometimes it's upsetting, because I think I've just written exactly the kind of poem I don't want to read. I mean really, right now, what I want to read are these mysterious short po­ems, and I don't write them well. So I end up with another long, sprawling narrative poem, and I think, that's not what I wanted to do. You make your own rules and just keep changing them.

What if you don't allow yourself to write a certain way because you've heard it's not the thing—it's corny or sentimental or whatever, so you don't write poems you otherwise would have written. Instead you're busy trying to write a poem that's not natural to you. And then you've lost those poems that might have been yours.

I've gone through periods where I was writing poems because I thought, oh, it seems like that might get published, and i would like to get published now, but they were such a waste, and I dragged them to the trash after long enough.

Maybe you have to go through a sentimental period or a melodramatic period where everybody will roll their eyes and you won't get published because the work's too heavy-handed, but maybe that clears the way for poems that won't do that.

ROX

In an interview with The Smoking Poet, you described Dan Cha­on's process of "letting things mate.” Your poetry often makes amaz­ing associative leaps that result in a cohesive poem. Is that a result of "letting things mate?"

KASISCHKE

I don't really know. I have a journal, and I'll write down some­thing, but then I'll start a poem that's not really related to that. Later, I'll find I can cannibalize that earlier material for the poem. Art is a process-oriented discipline. When things are going well and I'm in the process of writing a poem,getting to the end seems subconscious. There's work I can do gradually. I know if I'm in the right place and I've got material and a journal or something that I can, you know, mate my other stuff with, then I'm sort of using the poem to think, and sometimes there's a miraculously appearing ending, where differ­ent pieces come together. I find writing poetry very stressful for this reason. Maybe some people do it to relieve stress, but I find it stressful because I have to get into the place where the work's not going to be necessarily rational. I have to be able to construct an ending that seems organic even though I worked hard to force the ending onto it. There's nothing organic about it.

ROX

In your Willow Springs profile, you said you started writing the poem "Near-misses" with just the ending image of the spoon sliding into the soup. How did that poem develop from that image?

KASISCHKE

I think that was a case of ideas mating. I'd written that image down, and I wrote a little bit more of something, and then I wrote a little bit more, and I put them together and slammed down that end­ing. So that kind of “mating" does happen sometimes. That's probably when it's easiest to write a poem. Even if it's a typo or you have this first line or you know this title or this last line is something you feel strongly about, and you just get the rest of it to mate. When Chaon talks about forcing things to mate, it's like you're writing and not writing a poem now. Hopefully, the things that come out of it have connections you can heighten. It's sort of tricking yourself into being able to write. I think it's good to study craft, but I don't know if that word fits for me. I can manipulate line breaks and revise, basically, but that's not really craft.

The whole idea of craft seems like being false. For me, poetry is more about improvisation. I think there are things you know, and maybe some attention to traditions and studying how other poets make something happen—but during the process of writing, there's either a logical culminating moment or it's a throwaway.

WEEKS

Has there been a time when you're reading or writing and some­ thing feels false to you for that reason?

KASISCHKE

I've been trying to put together new and selected poems, and I'm looking at old books. Maybe other people, when reading a particular poem, haven't really thought to themselves, ugh, this is no good. But I can't even look at some of these poems, because I know I faked it a little—that the whole impulse was wrong. It's like relationships you look back on and think, oh, that was just . . . I was in that for all the wrong reasons. You don't want a lot of evidence of that past lying around, but with poems you can't burn the photographs—they're always there.