Skip to main content

A REALLY LATE POST: LUKE KENNARD ON JUDGING THE BEST BRITISH AND IRISH POETS 2017!

SUBMIT UP UNTIL MIDNIGHT TONIGHT!: http://store.eyewearpublishing.com/pages/the-best-new-british-and-irish-poets

As the saying goes: judging poetry is like judging a friendship, or flavours of ice cream, or whether you can make the jump from one low wall to another. Nobody knows how or why you’d want to do it, you have to try very hard to maintain objectivity and you’re likely to end up lying on your back with no friends, covered in ice cream.

That said, judgement and being judged is fairly central to any creative endeavor. When I talk to students at open days I try to put their minds at ease about the whole marking process. How can you assign a numerical grade to a work of art? It’s no different, I argue, to the reality of professional (or semi-professional or committed amateur) writing. Whether by an editor, an agent, a producer, a critic, a reader standing in a bookshop deciding what to buy: your work is going to be judged. Deal with it. (It now strikes me that this probably isn’t very reassuring at all).

            I remember getting my first poem published. It was after years of trying and, in all callowness and hubris, aiming far too high and being surprised when the TLS didn’t respond to my submission. It was the year after I took an MA in creative writing, and I was working in data entry at the local council, a job which was boring and untaxing enough to leave me desperate to write most evenings and, indeed, during the less busy hours at work. (This was before social networks so it was harder to waste time on the internet unless you [shudder] joined a message board). It was a long absurdist poem about the psychiatrist-client relationship with a focus on synaesthesia and bad jokes. (N.B.: Please don’t take this as an indication of my exclusive taste in poetry – I’d be mortified.) When it was accepted by Reactions 4 – a University of East Anglia anthology edited by the poet Esther Morgan – I left my dented Fiesta in the carpark and ran eight miles home, whooping like Daffy Duck. My dad had to drive me to work the next day.

            The first poems you publish really stay with you – that feeling really stays with you: that somebody else has encountered something you’ve made and said yes to it. It goes without saying, really, but it’s the first, vital step in finding an audience for your work. Anthologies such as Eyewear’s The Best New British and Irish Poets series give new and emerging writers that opportunity.

At the moment it’s fashionable to describe an honour or opportunity as “humbling”, so I’ll deliberately avoid that. Humbling would be lots of people saying I’m not up to the task or shouldn’t be editing it, or saying That Kennard; he’s everywhere, he is, like shit in a field. So it’s not humbling to be asked to edit this anthology: it’s a great joy and responsibility to be entrusted with the task and I’m really looking forward to choosing the poems.
 
GET SMART AND ENTER NOW!
 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

CLIVE WILMER'S THOM GUNN SELECTED POEMS IS A MUST-READ

THAT HANDSOME MAN  A PERSONAL BRIEF REVIEW BY TODD SWIFT I could lie and claim Larkin, Yeats , or Dylan Thomas most excited me as a young poet, or even Pound or FT Prince - but the truth be told, it was Thom Gunn I first and most loved when I was young. Precisely, I fell in love with his first two collections, written under a formalist, Elizabethan ( Fulke Greville mainly), Yvor Winters triad of influences - uniquely fused with an interest in homerotica, pop culture ( Brando, Elvis , motorcycles). His best poem 'On The Move' is oddly presented here without the quote that began it usually - Man, you gotta go - which I loved. Gunn was - and remains - so thrilling, to me at least, because so odd. His elegance, poise, and intelligence is all about display, about surface - but the surface of a panther, who ripples with strength beneath the skin. With Gunn, you dressed to have sex. Or so I thought.  Because I was queer (I maintain the right to lay claim to that

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats , but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin 's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill , and Jorie Graham , are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell , smart poets? Or, Pound ?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views? Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se.  What do I mean by smart?

"I have crossed oceans of time to find you..."

In terms of great films about, and of, love, we have Vertigo, In The Mood for Love , and Casablanca , Doctor Zhivago , An Officer and a Gentleman , at the apex; as well as odder, more troubling versions, such as Sophie's Choice and  Silence of the Lambs .  I think my favourite remains Bram Stoker's Dracula , with the great immortal line "I have crossed oceans of time to find you...".