will occur throughout the world on any day from 1 April - 8 April from 2 - 4 p.m (depending upon the time zone.) The edible books are exhibited and at 4 p.m., tea and/or coffee is served and the books are consumed. For this High/Low Tea, all works of art must be edible and have something to do with books! Each participating group or individual is responsible for its/his/her own audience and website.
From 2 - 4 p.m., you sip High/Low Tea while viewing the edible exhibit. At 4 p.m., after you have photographed the work, you eat it too! All venues are requested to take photographs or record in video their event and displayed books. Please send two copies of menus and copies of photographs to Umbrella, P.O. Box 3640, Santa Monica, CA 90408. The documentation will be used for a potential (non-edible) book by Umbrella Editions. A description and links of all participants around the world will be available at http://books2eat/com
Tickets may be sold for the event, so that each venue can thus use Books2Eat as a fundraiser for book centers and organizations. For documentation and images of the previous five International Edible Book Festivals, please visit the website. For information, edification and moral support, contact Books2Eat or email@example.com To make your own webpage, go to our website and see suggestions such as yahoo and imagestation.
Tom Beckett is, hands down, the most productive, provocative interviewer of the last twenty years. Forgive the hyperbole, but seek out the record. From his interviews in his seminal journal The Difficulties, e.g the issues focused on Ron Silliman, David Bromige, and Charles Bernstein, to his latest online interview with Thomas Fink, this man provokes poets into talking about poetry, about how they approach what they do, why they do it, whom they do it for, as no other interviewer. Put the interviews together, he’s not a Seurat or Monet but a Renoir, a sensual wash, of ex-patronizing American poetry. More than any other form of literary criticism, Beckett's interviews get the reader to buy the danged books. (I've just shipped off for Fink's After Taxes on the basis of this interview.)
He brings what good interviewers of poets’ve got to have: extensive knowledge of what his subject has written, a good sense of what basic questions he should ask to bring out a full body of a poet’s work, curiosity to follow a thread he hasn’t anticipated, and a presence of his own, a way of asking questions and responding to answers that is as informative as it is formative.
I think it’s damn time for some publisher to bring out a collection of Beckett’s interviews. Even those done twenty years ago, they've still got relevancy -- buoyancy, a reverberating exchange of values we'd do well to respond to today.
Take a morning, an afternoon with a warm beverage and/or friend, or an evening to view the latest Blackbox gallery. Make sure to spend time at gallery devoted to the late Bill Keith, too. The Winter 2005 Blackbox gallery offers works by David Baptiste Chirot, Andrew Topel, mIEKAL aND, jUStin!katKO, Geof Huth, Stephen Vincent, Donna Kuhn, Vernon Frazer, Sheila E. Murphy, and Mirela Roznoveanu. Enjoy!
To view, go to WilliamJamesAustin.com and follow the Blackbox link. Stroll (scroll) through the galleries to the bottom until you reach the latest "show." Take as much time, though, as you'd like to get to this latest gallery.
now playing on bentspoon: five images by Volker Nix, stills from a movie by Nico Vassilakis [want to see the movie], two collages by Jim Leftwich, a silkscreen by Julie Voyce, a self-portrait by Ruud Janssen, an envelope by Catherine Devillers, a postcard by Latuff, [old friends] Jurgen Olbrich and Giovanni Strada and Malok and Stephen Perkins and Pascal Lenoir, and plenty more!
Rob Mclennan is currently looking for poetry, fiction & non-fiction for an issue of John Tranter's Jacket magazine to focus on Vancouver, B.C. writer George Bowering, perhaps Canada's premier poetry gadfly and long-term go-getter.
Send pieces to firstname.lastname@example.org &, if they work, he will forward them on. Jacket magazine reserves the right to veto, so even if Rob likes & accepts it's not a guarantee (but Tranter says he hardly ever uses that).
The issue is slated to appear October 2005. Query first on critical pieces.
At Fierlingue's Poet's Corner. Read 'em aloud alone or in a crowd! I particularly like the edgy sound on "Inbetween Detritus." When you've turned back your ears for awhile, check out the rest of this international site.
Joan Houlihan's latest article "Best American Liturgy" once again has generated much invective. For a thoughtful, indisputably more balanced view than my own, read Jeffery Bahr at Whimsy Speaks. I'll choose to agree to disagree with Jeffery and move on after this post. I'm not beating my head against Houlihan's wall. I've only got so many brain cells (and, with a rushing-receding hairline, I ain't got any padding). In the long run, Houlihan's critique will hit like Richard Silberg's. Huh? Who? My point exactly.
One thing to add to my first post: Houlihan implies in this article that Bruce Andrews has no awareness of craft or that his craft is as esoteric as some Dark Age religious sect. If Hejinian and Silliman (can't you see him enshrouded in brown hood, scribing in the shadows of a dank castle, his nubby fingers permanently black?) and Andrews and Grenier and S. Howe and Bernstein and Watten and Armantrout and Bromige and Scalapino and Perelman and Eigner and Harryman and Davies and (just to mention the "first generation) ... have not created poetry that Joan and others want to read and re-read, they have made their poetics explicit. They have written more about craft, the why, where, when, how of the poem, than other contemporary poets. Can I chant L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E, Poetics Journal, This, Hills, the "Talks" issue of Hills, the seminal listserv, poetics? Has Joan Houlihan read any of these?
The answer doesn't matter. I've read 'em. They have done much to question-and-answer what poetry does, what poets do, how poetry matters, what the matter of poetry is, what's the matter with poetry (though arguably they've been impolitic). I'm happy to move on in the multivarious/farious crafts these poets and so many others of their shadowy ilk have constructed that have made my reading life lively and helped me read my life, my living.
Here are some other thoughtful views that have come through via comments on my first post on the issue:
I like that Houlihan makes the effort for discourse rather than ridicule, as so many poets did in response to one of her past essays, and, unfortunately, are on track for again. If she's wrong, she's wrong. Say why, that's all. She has taken some time to engage in discourse. If all we do (and some of the younger experimental poets do this) is hide in a little group and stroke each other off, dismissing any perceived "other," how does that help anything except to massage egos. There is so little criticism happening from within, especially orginitating from the younger poets, who are probably worried about cutting off future advantage. The closest thing I can find from any younger poet to criticizing the "elders" is Jim Behrle’s recent comment on his blog: “Todays Giant Realization: Ron Silliman is to Experimental Poetry as Ralph Nader is to American politics,” which goes on to say something to the effect of 'once useful, now exploiting for his own gain.' (This post appears to have been taken down and I could only get the quoted portion from Google's cache.) Less than a paragraph of pathos is not the level of crit that is needed.
From Richard Lopez
very good, and very difficult question [See "Running into Walls" post below for the question]. the simplest answer is to write as well as you possibly can. let history decide what it will keep and what it will discard. should a writer accept reading/writing as part of the processes of living, and dying, then one can do little more than make a life by writing well. but whether his/her writing will be part of the canon. . .heck, I'm not sure that should be a goal of the varied manifestations of the writing life. what is the canon anyway? shouldn't we do away with these labels and write/read because we participate, in large or small ways, in the creation of our daily and imaginative realities. because if we are serious then our lives do depend on writing/reading. perhaps that is when we enter poetry, in all its richness and definitions. if poetry be honestly wrought then it will find its readers. just a few stray thoughts.
Thanks Michael and Richard! You've got me thinking. I can't ask for anything more.