SATURDAY POETRY SERIES PRESENTS: SUFGANIYOT BY RABBI RACHEL BARENBLAT

A version of this post was previously featured on the Saturday Poetry Series.

Sufganiyot homemade by your favorite Saturday Poetry Series editor
Homemade sufganiyot from the kitchen of your favorite Saturday Poetry Series editor


SUFGANIYOT
By Rabbi Rachel Barenblat

In oil, pale circles roll and flip,
doughy moons inflating.

The fun part: poking a finger
inside, giving a wiggle and twist,
pushing a dollop of jam
knuckle-deep, then two, ’til
the cavity gleams raspberry.

Latkes are pedestrian.
These puff like a breath held.

There, and here,
a million women finger
these cupped curves,
probe the soft center,
push the sticky treat inside.

We glance at each other, faces hot.
We lick the sweet from our hands.


(Today’s poem originally appeared in Zeek and was reprinted on the Saturday Poetry Series with permission from the poet.)


Rabbi Rachel Barenblat, named in 2016 by the Forward as one of America’s Most Inspiring Rabbis, was ordained by ALEPH: Alliance for Jewish Renewal as a rabbi in 2011 and as a mashpi’ah ruchanit (spiritual director) in 2012, and now serves as co-chair, with Rabbi David Evan Markus, of ALEPH. She holds a BA in religion from Williams College and an MFA in Writing and Literature from the Bennington Writing Seminars. She is author of four book-length collections of poetry: 70 faces: Torah poems (Phoenicia Publishing, 2011), Waiting to Unfold (Phoenicia, 2013),Toward Sinai: Omer poems (Velveteen Rabbi, 2016) and Open My Lips (Ben Yehuda Press, 2016), as well as several poetry chapbooks.

Editor’s Note: Each year for Hanukkah I make sufganiyot. Measuring out the ingredients from my mother’s recipe, I will myself to have the patience necessary to wait for yeast to rise. I knead the dough with equal parts pressure and love then apply more patience, more waiting, before rolling and cutting “pale circles,” transforming them in oil into “doughy moons inflating.” Each year I make sufganiyot, and each year when I do, I think of this poem. It has been four years since I first featured this poem on the Saturday Poetry Series, and it has been with me each year since, an indelible part of my Hanukkah tradition.

As sensual as this poem is — as hot — it is very much a poem about tradition, about ritual, and about the coming together of women. For it is women who have traditionally ruled the domain of the Jewish kitchen, and women who, year in and year out since time immemorial, have applied their pressure and patience, their love and their care, to wright the delicious sustenance that is Jewish holiday food. And what, really, brings us together in our rituals and traditions more than food?

Each year as my best friend and I make our sufganiyot together, my mother makes the same recipe 2,500 miles away. Meanwhile, women all over the world are doing the same: “There, and here, / a million women finger / these cupped curves.” Each year, today’s poem reminds me of that disparate togetherness of women. This year I reprint this poem in honor of the women all over the world who do the work necessary to make the holiday season what it is.

May this season of light be a beacon in the darkness, and may the new year be better than the last.

Want to read more by and about Rabbi Rachel Barenblat?
The Velveteen Rabbi – Rabbi Rachel Barenblat’s Official Website

Kelly Cherry: Three Poems and an Interview

cherry-physics-for-poets-large

[The following poems appear in the limited edition hardback chapbook, Physics for Poets (Unicorn Press 2016), and are reprinted with permission of the author publisher. The interview was initially published in Inside Higher Ed.]

***

DNA

We scale a winding staircase
or swinging ladder like Jacob’s
in the Bible as if we might
ascend to eternity,

a state in which we’ll be
bionic and brainier,
with silicon chips. We’ll be
a new species: Homo

Wikipediens,
our minds digitalized,
able to access all
information and

we’ll persist forever,
or anyhow, not be dead,
not quite, though without
time, it must be said,

we also won’t be alive.
Yes, if you’re nostalgic
you may seek to disembark
from evolution, but

first, ask yourself whether
your child and spouse deserve
protection from disease,
death, and accident,

or can you let them go,
unique as they are,
irreplaceable,
into a place darker

than shadow?

***

SETI

Radio telescopes like massive elephant ears,
pricked to catch the least word or code
whispered across the universe, listening
in on the steady murmur of deep space, muffled
as if underwater. Do we hear the clash
of civilizations, formerly great nations
battling others for land, water, oil?
Oh wait—that’s Earth. Surely in outer space
we’ll find a species superior to our own.
Surely such beings are even now texting
urgent messages to us: We want
nothing to do with you. Humans, stay home.

***

Everything Lifted Off from the Earth

Everything lifted off from the earth.
Trees rose into the clouds, their roots trailing like bridal trains.
Buildings drifted starward.
A stampede of palominos flashed across the sky.

Then the people let go of whatever had held them back
and rose up, some slowly, some faster,
so that it was not unusual to pass or be passed by a friend or enemy,
but conversation confined itself to pleasantries.

The planet itself moved off its orbit, and many were afraid
that it might roll after them and knock them down like bowling pins,
but it dropped away in the opposite direction, becoming ever smaller,
a tumbleweed, a softball,

and the people kept leapfrogging into space
as if they were headed for heaven.

***

An Embarrassment of Riches

Kelly Cherry is the author of more than twenty-five books and chapbooks—including novels, story collections, nonfiction (essays, memoir, and criticism), translations, and eight full-length collections of poetry. For her short fiction, she has been included in Best American Short Stories, New Stories from the South, and has received an O. Henry Award, a Pushcart Prize, and has won the PEN/Syndicated Fiction Prize three times. Her poetry has been widely anthologized and has earned her the James G. Hanes Poetry Prize and a position as the Poet Laureate of Virginia. Despite this impressive list of publications and awards, and for reasons I don’t fully comprehend, her recognition has not reached the level of, for example, Margaret Atwood (to mention another woman writer of her generation who also writes in every genre, is likewise prolific, and who ranks among my favorite writers). Obviously, Cherry is well appreciated and has many avid fans, but as one of those fans, I can never quite forgive the world for not offering her even more acclaim and readers.

I first encountered Cherry’s work while I was an undergrad, sometime in 2001, if memory serves. I was living in North Carolina at the time and reading Fred Chappell and David R. Slavitt with something like an obsessive’s necessity. Being the spunky kid I was, I approached Chappell and Slavitt to do interviews with them, and both were kind enough to accept my request. Those encounters led to future professional interactions with both and a lasting friendship with Slavitt. It also led to both men separately suggesting that I read Kelly Cherry. I went to the university bookstore and found The New Pleiade: Seven American Poets, which included Chappell, Cherry, and Slavitt, as well as R.H.W. Dillard, Brendan Galvin, George Garrett, and Henry Taylor. These seven writers had been friends for years, shared certain writerly predilections, and were all authors at LSU Press (which put out the anthology).

I was immediately struck by Cherry’s poems, which I loved, but I was also struck by certain personal affinities she and I shared. (I am, I must admit, that sort of reader who is always trying to find myself in the work and lives of the authors I admire.) At the time, I was nearing completion of my BA in philosophy and German, and so I was pleased to learn that Cherry had done graduate work in philosophy at the University of Virginia. And her interests include more than philosophy, ranging from Russian literature to Latin American politics to scientific research and more. And here again, I was struck by our overlap in interests, given that I have traveled to Russia out of an abiding interest in Russian literature, spent months in Latin America studying the language and culture, and was a physics major when I first entered college. Without lingering too much on these similarities of interest, suffice it to say that I began reading her work with an eagerness that has been richly rewarded.

Kelly Cherry has published with big NYC presses as well as prestigious university and small presses, and she has had a glorious career by any sane measure—awards, teaching gigs at top universities, grants and writers’ residencies, and so forth. Her career is one most writers will never approach. If anything, Cherry suffers an embarrassment of riches. Had she published only books of poetry, I think she would be more lauded as a poet than she is today; had she published only short story collections and novels, she would be more lauded as a fiction writer than she is today; had she resisted the urge to write critical essays and to do translations, her creative work would get more attention; and so on. The issue here is not, I think, that she should have limited her intellectual and creative energies in such an unnatural way, but rather that the literary and academic worlds need to adapt themselves to her model—not she to theirs.

I hope you enjoy reading the following interview as much as I enjoyed conducting it, and I also hope that if you haven’t yet explored Cherry’s work, you will now.

***

Okla Elliott: You’re hard to pigeonhole as a writer, given that you’ve done fiction (both long and short), nonfiction (both creative and critical), poetry (both formalist and free verse), and translations. In what ways have each of these various enterprises informed the others? Do you think of yourself as having a dominant or primary genre, or do they all have an equal draw for you?

Kelly Cherry: I think of the genres as concentric circles, with poetry at the center. None is more important than the others, but poetry is the focal point, the heart. I’m also on record as saying that poetry reveals the actual world, fiction reveals the world of relationship, and nonfiction reveals the perceiving mind. And I’ve also said that the poem is about the line, the short story about the sentence, the essay about the paragraph, and the novel about the scene. These formulations are useful to me and I’m happy to offer them to students, but of course each of the genres differs from the others only in degree, and there are plenty of writers who delight in working at the borders. Yet emphasizing the differences makes transitioning from one to another easier for me.

I really love working in all these genres; I stay busy.

OE: Your poem “Lt. Col. Valentina Vladimirovna Tereshkova” brings together two currents I’ve found in your work—the Soviet Union (and/or Russia) and science. You have written variously on these topics, ranging from poems about Einstein to a science expedition in Siberia (once again merging the two currents) to a story about an American woman in love with a Latvian man (back when Latvia was part of the Soviet Union), and other works as well, such as the chapbook Songs for a Soviet Composer. Why and how do these two themes intertwine for you? Why the fascination with them, either together or separately?

KC: I did meet a Latvian man—in Moscow to hear rehearsals of a symphony he’d composed—and we tried to get married. (I should mention that the story you refer to, “Where the Winged Horses Take off into the Wild Blue Yonder From,” which is now in The Woman Who [Boson Books, 2010] is not autobiographical; much in it has been changed or reimagined.) In 1965 nobody took us seriously; in 1975 they had us under surveillance, threatened him, woke me in the middle of the night with intimidating phone calls. This narrative can be found in my memoir The Exiled Heart (LSU, 1991). I was in Moscow in the first place because I love Russian literature. I wanted to see where my favorite writers lived and the people and places about which they had written. I had no fondness for the Soviet Union and was philosophically opposed to Communism; that just happened to be where the country was at that time.

Similarly, I’ve always been interested in science and in college took quite a number of courses in science and math. Sputnik went up and my parents developed the idea that I should become a scientist. That didn’t work out; I already knew I wanted to study philosophy and write, but I gave my parents’ notion a shot. Of course, I was interested in science the way writers are interested in pretty much anything: as something to write about. Sometimes I think those first three years of college were a complete and sad waste of time: I wasn’t learning anything I really wanted to learn. Sometimes I think that’s just as well: If I didn’t learn much about science and math, I learned to appreciate the methods and accomplishments of science and math, and that has meant a lot to me.

Currently I am working on two poetry manuscripts, one a book-length poem about a scientist, the other a collection of shorter poems about math and science.

OE: You mentioned philosophy as an early interest, and I know you studied philosophy at the graduate level and have written a collection of poems, The Retreats of Thought, where you think through various philosophical problems in the sonnet form. In what ways do you see philosophy and literature interacting—in general and in your own work? And which philosophers have most influenced your thinking and writing?

KC: I don’t think anyone’s ever before asked me exactly this, Okla, and I’m delighted you’ve brought it up.

The philosophers who probably influenced me most were David Hume and Charles Sanders Peirce. I was doing research for a dissertation on Peirce’s epistemology when I dropped out of the program (not for academic reasons). Hume was a wonderful writer and clear thinker. I found Peirce’s ideas of firstness, secondness, and thirdness fruitful and useful and admired his views on scientific method. I did not read Peirce as a semiotician, as I understand literature teachers often do, though I do like some of his formulations about the nature of language.

Another influence was Augustine. Not because of his religion but because his Confessions, when I came to write The Exiled Heart, struck me as the perfect model of a memoir. I also found his thinking about time fascinating, as reflected in two of the sonnets in The Retreats of Thought.

It is harder for me to explain how I see “philosophy and literature interacting,” because I have always seen them as interacting. I like novels of ideas. I’m partial to German and Russian literature, despite loving many books neither German nor Russian, because they discuss ideas. The American dread of boredom seems to me to stem from a fear of thinking. (Thank god for Moby-Dick.) The novel I most would like to have written is The Magic Mountain, unless it is War and Peace or The Brothers Karamazov or Crime and Punishment. Or an ancient Greek tragedy!

In any case, philosophy seems to me inherent in life, inescapable. Every day one makes dozens of decisions, and the process of dealing with them is philosophy. My brother once told me the only question that interested him was How. I replied that the only question that interests me is Why. (Of course he then nodded with big-brother sagacity and male superiority and said that Why is a ridiculous question. And I suppose that from some points of view it can be a useless question, but that doesn’t make it any less interesting, at least not to me.) (You now have an idea of what kind of family I grew up in, and maybe it was that environment that made me want to study philosophy.)

To return to my brother, it was a book he gave me for my fourteenth birthday that made me want to major in philosophy. I confess I am no longer much interested in analytic philosophy. I had a fair amount of that in grad school and can appreciate the hold it has on some people, but writing sentences or lines all day long inclines me away from it.

Finally, so far as poetry goes, how can philosophy not be a part of it? Well, yes, I know some poets strive hard not to ask philosophical questions, but to the degree that they succeed, in my opinion, the poem fails.

OE: You’ve openly identified as a southern writer in essays and in interviews, yet you’ve written about (and/or lived in) the Midwest, Russia, Europe, England, The Philippines, and South America, in addition to working with traditionally southern themes. What does it mean for you to be a southern writer? What advantages or disadvantages do think that category has created for you?

KC: Of course I want my work to be gladly received everywhere. Who doesn’t want that? But I do admire the way Southern readers celebrate Southern writers. Southern readers are wonderfully and helpfully loyal to their writers. I admit I’m not especially Southern all things considered, but I am Southern in some specific ways. I was born in the South, spent part of my childhood in the Bible Belt, and my parents told stories about their families, who lived in the Deep South. I have a finished manuscript of short stories set in the South; I haven’t sent it out yet.

OE: You’ve published books with big NYC presses, university presses, and small presses—and you’ve done this over the course of a few decades now. How have you seen publishing change during your career? Which aspects are better and which are worse? (For example, what are your opinions about Kindles, online publishing, the proliferation of MFA and PhD programs in creative writing, etc?)

KC: Let’s see. I go where I have to go to get published. The dreadfulness of the contemporary publishing world dates back to the mid-sixties, but it was really around 1980 that corporate pressure drove the big houses into the smash or crash syndrome: books had to be hugely popular or were not worth promoting. Popular usually means less than serious, less than artistic. I know: lovers of genres will take issue with this, but I’m not denying that A Canticle for Leibowitz is a wonderful book. I’m saying that artistic merit is not what big publishers look for, nor can most big publishers today assess artistic merit, and certainly their sales divisions cannot. Nor can most big publishers even afford decent copy editors these days—or maybe they think grammar and punctuation don’t matter anymore. Now, I’m not dead against big houses—I wish one would take on my work and promote the hell out of it, because, like every writer, I would like more readers. But perhaps I know too much now: I know their promises are often empty, I know what matters to them is money, I know really excellent editors are rare and perhaps especially rare in a big-publishing environment hostile to the care and attention excellent editors want to provide.

The big publishing houses are primarily interested in young writers, but those young writers who fail to sell enough copies are then out on their collective ear. Is that any way to treat young talent?

University presses these days pretty consistently publish the best work. A majority of the writers I admire publish with them or with small publishers. I cherish the relationships I have with university presses.

Yes, I think MFA programs create certain problems, but I attended one and will always be grateful for the teachers who gave me time and interest and encouragement.

My husband has a Kindle and loves it. But he also reads real books. He reads whenever and wherever he can. I prefer holding a book in my hands but have no objection to somebody else’s preference for an eReader.

I don’t know what the future will be. I can’t guess at forthcoming technological advances. I do think we are in danger of a world in which every writer has to write, print, publish, promote, and maybe even write the reviews of his/her book. Just thinking about it exhausts me. As one friend has suggested, a serious, candid critic with a broad education who reads across big/small publishing lines might make a significant change in our culture. Let’s hope one such arises.

OE: There is constant debate over the best way(s) to become or improve oneself as a writer, with people variously championing or pooh-poohing MFAs and/or PhDs in creative writing. I, for example, have advised nearly every undergraduate writer I have taught to study abroad for a year and to take a wide range of classes from anthropology to philosophy to foreign literatures. What advice have you given or what advice would you give a young writer today?

KC: I second the advice you give to students, Okla. I also think students should know something about science and mathematics and history, and of course, they must be readers. Being a reader is more important than attending school, but it does help to attend school. I also encourage students to try their hand at different genres and forms and to make good friends who care about your writing, because there will be times when those friends will be lifesavers. And learn to revise. And learn to wait. Revising and waiting become easier as one ages.

OE: I know it is unfair to ask writers to assess their own work, but I am going to do it anyway. Which of your books do you think are your best and why? Also, a slightly different question: Which ones hold the nearest and dearest place in your heart?

KC: Like most writers, I think, I’m always most excited about what I am currently working on. I think my best fiction books are Augusta Played, In the Wink of an Eye, and We Can Still Be Friends (the title of which should have been either “American Minuet” or “Dancing with Ava Martel,” both of which were rejected by the editor). My favorites–because they were fun to write–are Augusta Played, In the Wink of an Eye, and The Society of Friends. Currently I have my completed story manuscript and am at work on the last story collection in my trilogy of story collections set in Madison, Wisconsin. A novel is in (slow) progress.

My best poetry books are probably God’s Loud Hand, Rising Venus, and The Retreats of Thought. But I think “Questions and Answers” in Natural Theology and “Requiem” in Death and Transfiguration are two of the best poems. Another collection is scheduled to appear in 2013 and two others are well underway. Right now those “two others” are my favorites (i.e., I am enjoying the process). The collection I most often read from these days is Hazard and Prospect: New and Selected Poems. In that book I assembled the poems according to theme and I’m glad I made that choice. But if I ever have a second opportunity to do a new and selected, I’ll construct the book chronologically, just to observe the difference. I think there would be a difference.

I feel fortunate and grateful to have had some of my nonfiction published in four books to date. I can’t really choose among those. The most recent was Girl in a Library: On Women Writers & the Writing Life. I am working on a nonfiction book about male writers (not to say that male and female writers are opposed but simply to carry through the structural composition). I have ideas for three more nonfiction books after that, but whether I can get to them remains to be seen.

The difficulty with this question is, of course, that time may change my response to it. But here, anyway, is how I assess my work at this particular point in my life.

Three Poems by Russel Swensen

swensenc_w

[Editor’s note: The following poems appear in The Magic Kingdom, which is available through Amazon.com and directly from the publisher, Black Lawrence Press.They are reprinted here with permission of the author.]

Elegy for my Twenties

They were spent, despite my best efforts
in the city of Los Angeles
where the palm trees never seemed real to me
floating in front of the hair salons & nail parlors
in their wooden dresses that shone slick
as taffeta or

the trees were
beauticians talking amongst themselves

knowing something about loss
that escaped me then (as it escapes me now)
about how it can be dressed up

or concealed or made to shine with a hard
cake-like light

that both dazzles & sedates. Like youth itself,
once you have passed it by as I passed derelict cars
on the 405

old carapaces leaking old & silent families onto the shoulder
or into the rearview mirror

where they hardened & turned red with distance.
But this isn’t about them.

& if I claimed to care about them,
perhaps that would be worse than simply not caring,
perhaps some things you can’t make beautiful, perhaps one
solitary thing

which you do not own, but hold, helplessly in your hands, this
self you’ve invested so much in. This self you’ve surrounded
with swaying

trees & abandoned cars & sentient perfume (that clings to you
because it loves you) does it even sound

familiar? Do you remember instead do you prefer
to regret

those condemned houses you used
to wake in those decaying recliners with bad cocaine on tv
trays your little parade

of women you drove mad with worry the needle you found
in your car the black rubber staff that had been inside someone
& left behind—

is this better, is this worse. It has to matter,
but it doesn’t.

There is this notion we have that
to write a good poem you have to be a good person
or seem like one—

which means you can’t trust anyone. This is a problem,
a real one.

You’ve never had any other.

***

Missives from the Emerald City

Blown by a storm of mild disinterest—or too many
acquaintances—

into that bar, the one I always hated,

La Poubelle, I find myself watching a girl in a white fringe dress
stumble through the exits, only to

spit out Texas across

the sides of her borrowed Lexus. She catches my eye; smiles

look mom, no hope, vomits on the other

side; drives.

***

Customer Satisfaction

Do you live for the weekend do you polish
your body like bone
…………………..does it put the lotion on its skin
when you’re down

do you get up again? Do you love the blue plastic angel
or just the unstable?

Do you remember
………………….would you prefer to forget?
…………….(your hand red
from her summer dress)

Is that, said the Lion, what you mean by regret? Is it hard to answer
with your heart in its teeth?

……………………………………(if on distant shores, we should ever meet
………………………..again…)

Why were you there standing in line? Why you were there

at that particular time? Is there someone we should call? &
were your injuries sustained

in the fall? (a singular accident—children dangling
from rides

like singular black tassels—did you

get there in time?

***

Russel Swensen is the author of Santa Ana (2012) and The Magic Kingdom (2016). His fiction and poetry have appeared in Black Clock, Quarterly West, Pank, Third Coast, Devil’s Lake, The Collagist, and elsewhere.

This Train Is Bound for Glory by Okla Elliott

This Train Is Bound for Glory

by

Okla Elliott

 

1.

The concrete platform vibrated subtly as the train entered Philadelphia’s 30th Street Station. I gathered my luggage, checked my ticket, and prepared to board the southbound train to North Carolina to visit my family, like I do every Christmas. As the train approached, I felt a childlike and quasi-transcendent excitement. My heart always responds with joy and eagerness to trains approaching. My sense of self is expanded beyond personal limits, spread out across the distances I might travel and the people I might meet.

I first fell in love with trains and public transit more broadly speaking when I studied abroad in Germany during my junior year of college. Everything was suffused with Romantic bluster—me on a train heading to Berlin or Prague or Krakow with my journal and some classic of European literature—and I felt the weight of history everywhere around me. I watched the countrysides and cityscapes flash by as I wrote naively self-important entries in my journal and scribbled notes for novels that would never reach completion.

But there is more to trains than the Romantic fantasies of a blissfully ignorant boy from Kentucky seeing the world for the first time. Public transit can be instrumental in solving many of our economic, environmental, and even cultural problems.

2.

The first thing to consider when looking at the economics of public transit is that it creates jobs that cannot be outsourced. The ticket inspector, the train conductor or bus driver, the repair crews for the railways, the mechanics who perform regular repairs and safety checks, and the staff at train stations and bus depots are all employees that must be physically located in the United States and, more specifically, in their home regions and cities. But it is not just that these are stable jobs with government benefits that will improve the lives of these workers directly. A recent study shows that investing in local public transit has a noticeably positive effect on the local economy overall. According to the American Public Transportation Association, every tax dollar invested in passenger trains yields nearly four dollars in local economic growth.

And the economic gains don’t stop there. In terms of alleviating the disadvantages that come with income inequality, public transit can be helpful as well. Champaign-Urbana, IL, offers a year-long pass with unlimited rides on the city buses for only $70, an amount a worker might pay in a single week if dependent on taxis or Uber. Chapel Hill, NC, offers bus service for free, thus eliminating any financial burden for poor workers needing to get to work. This means that workers who can’t afford a car or can’t drive a car due to a disability or illness can still hold a job and earn an income.

And it’s not just the poor who can benefit here. According to The Transit Savings Report, a monthly analysis produced by the American Public Transportation Association, public transit can save users an average of $764 per month, or about $9,167 a year. With the middle class getting hit right, left, and center with increasing college tuition, decreasing or stagnating wages, and ever-increasing economic precariousness, these savings are not merely nominal but necessary.

Congestion alone costs us billions of dollars per year. According to a recent US News & World Report article: “The cost of congestion to the average auto commuter was $960 in lost time and fuel in 2014, compared to an inflation-adjusted $400 in 1982.” And overall costs nationwide are expected to balloon: “In the next five years, the annual delay per commuter would grow from 42 to 47 hours, the total delay nationwide would grow from 6.9 billion hours to 8.3 billion hours, and the total cost of congestion would jump from $160 billion to $192 billion, researchers estimated.”

Even if we ignore the predictions for growth in cost, we’re still looking at $160 billion dollars a year wasted nationwide due to traffic congestion. By using trains and high-speed rails, not only can we vastly reduce fuel waste, passengers can complete minor work tasks during the time spent on the train, if they so choose, thus reducing wasted time. I know that personally some of my most productive hours have been spent in trains. During various train trips over the past handful of years, I wrote nearly a third of my doctoral dissertation, read hundreds of pages for pleasure or for work, and graded dozens of student papers. None of this could have occurred had I been driving a car, an activity that precludes nearly all other productive efforts.

3.

But we have to think about more than economics when determining public policy. In many ways, the most pressing matter facing us as a species is the environment, since if we don’t reverse our policies that are destroying the planet we rely on for nourishment and breathable air, we won’t have the opportunity to solve any of the other problems that face us. Here again, public transit can help. Trains are 17% more efficient as a means of travel than airplanes and 34% more efficient than cars—and that’s in the current state American trains are in. If we were to modernize all of our passenger trains and invest in new technologies to improve fuel efficiency, while also increasing the number of people who rely on trains as their primary mode of commuter and long-distance travel, the positive impact on our environment could be colossal.

Inter-city travel is not the only area where public transit is more efficient. Bus travel within cities is considerably more environmentally friendly than car travel. What’s more, there have been great strides made in biodiesel and hybrid buses that are even more fuel efficient than regular buses. A recent study shows that there is no decline in performance of biodiesel buses, yet literally every pollutant is reduced in quantity when the switch to biodiesel is made.

It should also be mentioned that both liberals and conservatives in this country regularly use the catch-phrase “energy independence.” I by no means believe that public transit, including electric trains and biodiesel buses, can allow us to achieve complete energy independence, but by reducing our need for petroleum energy sources, we can make great strides not only in protecting our environment but also in reducing our need to purchase oil from countries in the Middle East. And since liberals, moderates, and conservatives alike agree that energy independence is desirable, this could be a major selling point for increased public transit.

4.

On a less idealized note, I have noticed interesting differences region to region in regard to the race and economic status of those who make use of public transit. In the Northeast and Midwest, you will find people of all races and socioeconomic strata riding city buses and regional trains. In the South, where there are much fewer public transit options, the customers for public transit are almost entirely poor and largely people of color. The view of public transit as something only poor people use, and something even to be ashamed of using, can be found everywhere in the country, but it is certainly more pronounced in the South. (Having never used public transit in the Southwest or the West, I can’t speak to those regions, but we need to battle this perception everywhere, if we’re going to change out nation’s policies vis-à-vis public transit.)

In effect, public transit could prove to be a place of commingling among various sectors of society—a laboratory of desegregation, a mobile melting pot of the sort our country often speaks of and rarely works to promote.

5.

I don’t expect everyone to fall in love with trains the way I have or to share my perhaps ridiculously Romanticized notions about them. I do, however, believe we can change Americans’ attitudes toward public transit in terms of general associations with trains and buses, as well as in terms of practical decision-making.

And the popularity of Amtrak has increased notably since the 2008 economic crisis. Take Alabama for example. In 2008, the National Association of Railroad Passengers reported 47,399 passengers in the state. In 2010 that number had grown to 62,737, and in 2014 the number was 62,426. This represents a 32% increase in passengers that has remained steady, and this number is even more striking given that Alabama is generally ranked rather poorly in terms of its public transportation. And we saw similar increases across the nation. In Ohio the increase from 2008 to 2014 was 119,000 to 152,000. In Illinois the number increased from 4,295,300 to 4,883,900—meaning that over half a million more passengers rode Amtrak in 2014 than in 2008. In Pennsylvania a quarter million more passengers used Amtrak in 2014 than in 2008. I won’t enumerate each state’s increases, but suffice to say that these increases have occurred across the United States and have remained steady over the past half-decade. It is therefore irrefutable that we are seeing greater demand for public transportation in this country; all that remains is to muster the political willpower to make it more widely available and more affordable.

But while the facts and statistics are overwhelming in favor of public transit, numerical data can often feel bloodless and alienating. I began this essay by relating my personal introduction to trains and my emotional responses to them. Cognitive psychology teaches us that we most often have an emotional response to something and then devise rational arguments to support that more immediate emotional response. When I first fell in love with trains and travel in general, I didn’t know any of the statistics I’ve listed here. I looked those up later.

I am not suggesting that we never make rational decisions based on data. We certainly do, and our policy-makers certainly should. Educating people about the advantages of public transit will have a positive impact on our nation’s policies in this regard, and simply creating a wider debate about public transit will serve to raise awareness on the issues surrounding it. But we can’t stop there. We have to show the joys of crossing the country by train, the personal pleasures of being able to sit back and read that great novel you’ve been meaning to get to instead of having your attention take up by driving for several hours, and so forth.

6.

Here are five suggestions for programs that could increase the popularity and efficiency of public transit:

1) We need to instate a lottery-style program that gives away a dozen free month-long passes on Amtrak each month. Anyone signed up for Amtrak’s Rewards Program would be instantly eligible and randomly chosen. This would offer incentive to sign up for the Rewards program and it would increase train travel as well as create the opportunity for people to explore the possibilities of extended train travel.

2) Even though Amtrak’s writer-in-residence program has had its issues, this sort of program is precisely what we need. We must clarify and correct the issues that occurred with the inaugural group of writers, but that should be easy enough, and all programs have issues early on. What if we included other programs as well? Student scholarships for educational trips over spring break or tickets for law students wanting to participate in a presidential primary of their choice (tickets split equally between registered Democrats, Independents/third-parties, and Republicans) are two ideas that come immediately to mind, but tickets supporting education and professionalization of many varieties could be easily devised.

3) A family vacation discount program could not only increase the number of current passengers but also go a long way toward creating those sorts of lifelong memories in younger generations of Americans that might change the culture’s overall view of public transit as a whole. And given its focus on families, we might even be able to get Republicans on board (pun sort of intended) for the program.

4) For local buses, we can create programs that link into welfare. Republicans and Democrats alike talk about welfare-to-work programs. What if we guaranteed that welfare unemployment recipients had free transportation to make it to job interviews and then to make it to their new jobs after receiving them? I would suggest free passes during the entire time on these programs and then for two years after receiving gainful employment, thus allowing time for workers to get on their feet and either purchase regular bus passes or a car, if that is what they prefer.

5) Commuter trains reduce traffic congestion, improve inter-municipal economies, and help families where perhaps the parents have to work in different cities—to name just a few of their benefits. I would propose that we do bulk-rate buying by businesses and public institutions to reduce the cost of long-term commuter passes. And this is a case where we have precedent to use municipal, state, and federal funds to build such lines.

7.

We have to change not only our policies about public transit but also our attitudes toward it, our sense of how it can enrich our personal lives. There is no question that increased public transit offers myriad advantages for our society in terms of economic and environmental concerns, but it can also offer us many hours more leisure, more cultural opportunities, and better relations between the various demographics that make up our population. There is a host of concerns facing the United States today, and at first glance public transit might not make it near the top of that list, but resting as it does at a nexus point among several major issues, it must become a central focus of progressive and non-partisan activism.

“The Mummy Returns: A Film by Kanley Stubrick” a Book Review by Christopher Nelms

cover2x1

The Mummy Returns: A Film by Kanley Stubrick

 by

Christopher Nelms

Fresh off the success of I Hate the Internet, Jarrett Kobek’s press, We Heard You Like Books, has released Kanley Stubrick by Mike Kleine, a novella written in a resemblance of verse which slightly resembles prose without cons but mostly resembles resembling. I’ll give it to you straight, like a sparkling glass of dry pear cider: Kanley Stubrick is one of the kinkiest pieces of “weird fiction” I’ve read in the years I’ve felt were years, and I’m not talking about the curl of its hair like sneers, though it is profoundly pubic in the way it has been made, thankfully, public, like an uncanny valley, fuel to fossil-fools.

On the surface, Kanley Stubrick (hereafter, KS) is a dyslexic ode to Paxil-flatlined channelsurfing, Waterworld-waterboarding, Ambien-ambient affect, & the banal catechisms of mildly curious cohabiting partners, but look closer: you will see it is, in wacktuality, an ultimate species of revenge tragedy, in the Grand Guignol-tradition of The Duchess of Malfi, Freudian psychoanalysis, Golden Girls, and the Bill Kill diptych of legendary American film-cosmetologist. Tintin Quarantino.

Caution: there are spoilers ahead, but only in the plot which imbricates, imprecates, and eventually bowdlerizes all human life onto the cutting-room floor of soiled Macguffins, the compost from which all plots flower into parasites for their parasites.

Playing with popular YA-dystopian tropes, KS gets the plot rolling with a pair of stolen (?) shoes, about which inquiries must be made via a device which enables disembodied communication on a global scale. Soon, it becomes quite clear how we must think of “shoes” in this world. Shoes have soles and you put them on your feet to protect them from harm, and also to make walking easier, faster, to increase the productivity of this slowest and, sadly, most common of all human forms of locomotion (excepting crawling, a form of locomotion whose inefficiency, neoliberal capitalism, with its ravenous emphasis on the bottom-line, has shamed, made undignified for humans of age to not participate in the myth of standing on their own two feet, proud & upright, pulled up by their own bootstraps).

Now, Stanley Kubrick, unlike Halfred Aitchcock, is not commonly known for his use of Macguffins to get the plot rolling, like dung beetles, in his films, but, I would argue, Kubrick is an even greater practitioner of the Macguffin than Aitchcock or Quarantino. Dispensing with Macguffins in his films, Stanley Kubrick created a single overarching Macguffin to drive the plot of his career, legacy & critical reception: namely, that he was a genius. Armed with this insight, we can return to KS’s rather disarming Macguffin: the allegedly stolen shoes which belong to the narrator’s cohabiting partner. It has been established shoes are for feet, feet are on legs, legs are for walking under a regime of global capitalism which only allows global, disembodied verbal communication via device as a way to improve the efficiency of biopoliticized bodies ashamed to crawl, etc. We also say an “argument has legs,” when it seems to get somewhere, and legs are obviously the argument a legacy makes; legs move through an argument with space as legacy moves through an argument with time. As a man walks to the other side of town to testify of his presence by being present on the other side of town, the pyramids of Egypt walk to the other end of history, even their ruins testimony to their presence.  Only the profit-motive of prophet-motives didn’t let them crawl to nowhere.

With airtight logic, Kleine spins his plot from out of WW1 aeroplane documentaries and missing shoes until somehow we get to volcanoes & Stanley Kubrick. It is an airtight plot that ends like the moon, like all plots, with nothing left alive to sense. Just as volcanoes burn all oxygen away from them, just as Kubrick faked the moonlanding in an airtight plot to mask the moonlanding didn’t occur because the moon was airtight, the plot of KS burns with scrupulous logic, creating an airtight vacuum which nonsense like vampires or tardigrades can live swimmingly in.

Fuck a vampire though, this ain’t that kind of YA junk. Like the Beatles, Trix, and crushing trauma, vampires are for kids. The literary monster which best figures the contemporary world is quite obviously the mummy, a dead aristocrat woken by a meddling, Orientalizing, white-chocolate-Academia-nut cookie-cutter colonialist, come to shuffling, stumbling half-life amid halls of useless wealth, where the writing is literally on the wall. Like a newborn baby, the mummy’s mission, once brought to half-life, is simple: take revenge upon those who disturbed its ancient sleep of nothingness so it may return to the nothingness from whence it came, and in the meantime, “magical means” shall empirically provide a reason for that nonsensical mission to occur.

There are no mummies in KS, at least that I remember. I read it twice, both times a few months ago and each time I was amazed at how much the book wanted you to forget it, eating itself out of house and home into the desert of the spill, dyslexhurt of the Spleeven Stillberg. KS is a book which is a mummy which uses its own wrapping for toilet paper, capturing what it feels like to be on social media, watching an endless scrollwork of hieroglyphs hook up to each other human-centipede-style, an eternal feast of previously embalmed and digested thoughts being passed down a butt-stuff chain of command like wisdom, from mummymaw to mummyhole to mummymaw to mummyhole, intestinally diluted, liked, and shared. Kanley Stubrick, much like the misprisioned film director referenced in its title, is a mistake only in a magical world that thinks something as supernatural as a mistake could exist.

Kleine creates a utopia in KS where you don’t have to slouch with the indignity of enforced dignity, where the alimony of innocents pisses clowns, and the second cumming crawls, ouching towards Bethlehem’s please-bittered bitte, l’chaim. Stanley Kubrick sphinxes Oedipus with riddles of His Emperor’s New Shoelessness & Freud goes beyond the pleasure principle wearing Stanley’s borrowed, battered genius-macguffin-shoes, a pair of plastic knockoff Crocs melting into the Bedouin sands of human history as if they were Madame Tussaud’s wax Walter White impersonating Shelley’s impersonation of history’s impersonation of Ozymandias. Aeroplanes invented by ancient aliens buzz and strafe all founding fathers, even Cary Grant, and Mt Rushmore gets stoned to death for adultery, it’s burial shroud a gigantic Kaepernick jersey made of gold, arsenic, and old lace, a pledgeless negligee of star-mangled banter to a new world order of an airy B&B-world without boarders. Onward history channels, impotable but surfable.

The moral lesson of Kanley Stubrick would be unimpeachable if it held office: That revenge is a wish best heard tolled. Let the pyramid of the contemporary world shake with the #woke death-rattle of embalmed culture. Let the bells of your phone’s alarm clock warn you into the danger of another dawn, the orange clockwork of a dying sun. Be like the scarab, producer & eater of dung, a holy-roller of eyes-wide shit, sacred as perennial floods and divine bovinity. The world is a wax museum and the hopes of its inhabitants guttering wicks. Let Earth melt into a hot puddle, tilt on its axis, and pour its molten smelt in a last gasp of trite kink upon the obsidian silk skin of necrophiled space. Be the nothing you want to be in the world.

In short, I liked this book from We Heard You Like Books like I like my moss-piglets, mummified but woke, extremophilic, and ready to take meaningless, gleeful revenge on the Empire’s archaeologists. But like Levar Burton used to get paid to say: you don’t have to take my word for it.

***

Christopher Nelms is a scribbler living in Athens, GA. His forthcoming self-help book, Take Yourself Out and Someone Else With You: A Terrorist’s Guide To Dating, will be coming to a dustbin near you in June 2017.

SATURDAY POETRY SERIES PRESENTS: KELLY CRESSIO-MOELLER


Profile b/w scarf – aroho – Version 3



ON WHY I NO LONGER SIT AT THE WINDOW SEAT ON A TRAIN
By Kelly Cressio-Moeller


Germany was like a step-mother: utterly familiar, utterly despised. ~ Erica Jong


It’s a good day for a lie-down, overcast and
wet-wooled – even the rain wants to be horizontal.
I am day-dreaming of goose down when I
enter the train, scoot into an open seat,
press my cheek against the streaked window.
The station’s soothing voice announces,
Zurückbleiben bitte, someone runs in just before
the doors close, slams me against the side
of the compartment, takes a lungful of my air.
In an accent foreign as my own, he asks
my name, if I “want some fun” back
at his room. I buy time before the next stop,
tell him I’m “Whitney from America”
(anything but my real name in his mouth).
Now he locks his arm through mine and thick
fingers jab my ribs. His leg, an anchor –
his pocked face smirks like he’s already
notched his belt.

I imagine the defence move my brother
taught me where I smash my palm heel into
some asshole’s nose, shifting bone into brain.
(Where is my Siegfried in this country of the
“Nibelungenlied”. What would Kriemhild do?)
My eyes ransack the forest of businessmen,
cutpurses, hausfraus, the heroin chic: rows of
enameled faces, cow-dumb, indifferent as teeth.
Let the Ausländer fight it out!

Thigh-grab, elbow-jab, hand-slap – his broken
English splinters the air. Whitney Houston
in my head singing “I Will Always Love You” on
some godforsaken loop as I mentally run through
my list of German imperatives: Hilfe! Polizei!
Vergewaltigung! (a word that takes longer to say
than the act it defines). I backhand him across
the mouth, escape before the doors slam.
He’s waving (waving!) through the glass,
a blurry fat-lipped sneer retreating – the air
staccatoed with rasps of my breath. It begins
to hail marbles (even the gods are throwing stones),
feathers or lightening bolts would feel just the same.

Only later with candlelight und Butterkuchen,
do I re-surface to Vivaldi’s soaring strings on the radio.
I mention my morning combat-commute.
My host shrugs his shoulders before loading
the Meissen with another helping of Schadenfreude.
He says, Da muβ man durch : ‘one must go through it’ –
as if it were a tunnel, something to be run through.



** The line What shall I wish for myself? is a reworking Mary Oliver’s line What shall I wish for, for myself?

Today’s poem originally appeared online in Tinderbox Poetry Journal, Issue 1 and appears here today with permission from the poet.


Kelly Cressio-Moeller has new work forthcoming in Radar Poetry and has been previously published at Boxcar Poetry Review, burntdistrict, Crab Orchard Review, Gargoyle, Poet Lore, Southern Humanities Review, THRUSH Poetry Journal, Tinderbox Poetry Journal, Valparaiso Poetry Review, and ZYZZYVA among others. Her poems have been nominated for three Pushcart Prizes, Best New Poets, and Best of the Net. She is an Associate Editor at Glass Lyre Press. Visit her website at www.kellycressiomoeller.com.

Editor’s Note: During the dark days this November I delved into poetry as a kind of antidote, and in this way I arrived at today’s poem. Incredibly timely, it speaks to an experience that is all too common and far too marginalized. “I moved on her like a bitch,” America’s President-elect said, “I did try and fuck her,” he said, “Grab them by the pussy,” he said; “You can do anything.” And I thought, “anything but my real name in his mouth.” I thought, “even the gods are throwing stones.” I thought this poem. And those who have no idea what this poem is about, those who do not have to regularly question their safety, those who are unsympathetic to this experience– “one must go through it,” those people say. “[A]s if it were a tunnel, something to be run through.”

Want more from Kelly Cressio-Moeller?
Cha: An Asian Literary Journal
Escape into Life
THRUSH Poetry Journal
Tinderbox Poetry Journal
Valparaiso Poetry Review

Three Poems by Matthew Nickel

the_route_to_cachare_cover

A Good Clean Village—War Monument

Gorge du Tarn, France

To have gone off and left the gorge
Deeply cut with river flowing,
To have gone off and watched them die
One by one, into the trenches

Friends, cousins, the man who gave you
A wooden cross for Noël, the cousin
Who taught you to swim, Uncle Jacques
Who held stained hands around yours,

Holding the taut line jerked by trout
Fighting in the green swollen river
Icy around shivering thighs,
Satisfactory holding in the current,

To have gone off to watch your brother
Bleed to death in the mud beside you
Your father caught by Germans, witness to
His execution, one pistol to the head

One shot you did not hear for the screaming
Breath dry in your mouth as you ran
Toward them caught by your mother’s brother
Thrown down to save you from yourself,

To have gone off and to walk back, alone
To the gorge wind and moving stream, to the
High pass and cliff clutch, to the nothing
That crumbles from the limestone edges

To have gone off and to come back
Arched shoulders burdened
All for a German tourist loud with camera
Taking your picture unaware

As you wash your lettuce in the branch
That cuts the village, where you used to
Wash your feet before dinner so that
Mother would be happy,

Mother, now dead who had gray tears
When you came home alone, lines
Around the mouth darkened when she knew
No one else was coming back.

But you let him take your picture
Because your lettuce is clean now
It has come from a good walled garden
On the edge of the cliff in a good clean village

You shake your lettuce cage dry in the sun
Wave to the men playing boules by the stream
And you think of leeks fat for dinner, potatoes
Dirt groveled chthonic and waiting,

And trout caught in early dawn,
All for your family coming soon, where
Laughter loud from grandchildren will
Surround your table, satisfy a deep longing

In the day’s last light, while the sun drops
Behind the wall of gorge, where you can hear
The stream from the village
Fall down into the river endlessly flowing.

***

Coda—Le Pèlerinage: Les Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer

I hold her hand as waves wash over our feet
singing loud Salut, salut, O Saintes Maries
her eyes sing aloud the depths of the sea

dark gypsy hands reach up the boat is high
gray eyes chant—Vive Les Saintes Maries
Vive La Sainte Sara—waves lift us to sky

she dances in water weaving light
we reach for the boat and touch fingers
her voice edges the sky around the saints

we look at each other say nothing waves
lap our bodies and sand is in our hair away
bishop robes over dunes gardians trot out the day

procession vanishes into carnival a man ratchets
a hurdy gurdy you picked a fine time to leave me
suddenly we are not alone we see familiar faces

though we do not name them gliding beside
compound of sea and sand eyes like a friend
or some long lost mother for whom we cried

we step infinite and slow until a fish leaps
into the chaos of sun windless over a wide sea;
we sing harmony on forgotten beaches

with voices out of the irredeemable past present
only in hymns over water and the steady vibration
of hearts together mounting wind over sand.

***

Not Just La Patria—For RPW

For West is where we all plan to go some day. It is where you go when the land gives out and the old-field pines encroach. –Robert Penn Warren

Walking out of Notre Dame there beyond
The pigeons Charlemagne, Roland, and Olivier
Face the west lingering like ghosts brackened
Green on the edge above that aged bronzed river:
This will be my final night in Paris alone
Before I move south for the winter.

I look across to the Left Bank, Shakespeare & Co.
Remembering the nights reading Warren’s
A Place to Come To upstairs on a sagging bed
Dusty beside a window facing Notre Dame;
Warren brought the earth, la terra, into focus
Made the past edge fiercely over tomorrow;

I had fled to France, to escape the maelstrom
The vision-curse of American western solitude
“Go west, my son,” and lose yourself into sublime
Emptiness, a delight in mere survival, selfhood,
Thinking this, I was startled when overhead
I heard cathedral bells rolling time into clouds;

Charlemagne, that legend of the Western World,
Hovered with staff ready to strike down
The enemies of the West: where was Roland’s
Horn, where were the pine trees and the breath
That long blew our past into forgetfulness
Ah que ce cor, he said long ago, but the battle

Is never won and the soul contends for amnesty
In the epic of our ancestry: do we return to
Roncevaux and find, as if for the first time,
The immutability of stone rising from earth
Do we sing lost songs in crowded brasseries
Over a mug of Mutzig and cassoulet because

We are unable to resign ourselves to the end
Of what we love, because we, like the stone,
Will not fall down to the terror of the times—
We inherit from the dead more than a history:
The direction of a hand gesture dripping water,
The discovery of self in the gloom of landscape

In the doom of a strange land; we inherit voices
The dead speak if we listen, but how do we hear
Them in the cackling of the modern world—
At dawn, the train departs Paris, land unfolds southward
The sea shimmers soon beyond Avignon, ruins
Thinking, nothing is lost, nothing is ever lost.

***

A Mid-Hudson Valley native, Matthew Nickel is the author of the poetry collections The Route to Cacharel (Five Oaks Press, 2016) and The Leek Soup Songbook (Des Hymnagistes Press, 2015), and he is the editor of numerous anthologies of poetry, including Kentucky Writers: The Deus Loci and the Lyrical Landscape, Des Hymnagistes: An Anthology, and many others. He has written critical essays on American and British writers such as T. S. Eliot, Ezra Pound, Robert Penn Warren, Elizabeth Madox Roberts, Ernest Hemingway, Richard Aldington, and his book, Hemingway’s Dark Night: Catholic Influences and Intertextualities in the Work of Ernest Hemingway, was published by New Street Communications in 2013. He is currently an assistant professor at Misericordia University in Northeastern Pennsylvania.

Marc Vincenz: Three Translations & an Interview

fig-2-secret-letter-cover

Thousandfurs

for R. and C.

Unstitching, tacking, fastening,
losing the needle, the red thread;
snapped the blue long ago.

I find oddments of old clothes,
memory carriers,
witnesses of suffering, happiness too—
cut to size, measure up, adjust to fit,
consider the patchwork in daylight.
Mending is a metaphor.
Has one lived too long?

Once I wove wreaths of wildflowers
for children
and studded plastic crowns
with glass jewels.
There was a boy, and I, his girlfriend;
children accumulate time
not out of years—
children played mostly until 6
up in the old country, where no timepieces
chop life up
into you-have-to, you-are-permitted-to, and being.
I gave them the names
of mountains, birds and flowers,
signposts to the Creation Lab,
where a thousand years are an instant.

I must, having gotten older and old,
adjust, attempt to cope with Thousandfur-stuff,
search within sleep
for hiding places and nooks—freeze—
burn one day with hair and skin
while herein the mythical hope,
the invisible one is collected
from the cryptic, smiling messenger,
God with the winged shoes.

***

Aftershine

I’m standing here alone
in the early autumnal sun,
frilled dahlia petals and rotten wood
hole-punched by rays of sunlight.

Over fading hazelnut leaves,
cloud-towers deconstruct,
and a yellow and distant light
swarms upward behind the mountain, as if
a new earth were sending
golden birds ahead.
It’s only a deceptive luminance,
a glittering afterglow,
like lost joy she paints,
paints over,
in a picture
never to be completed.

***

The Word

for Corinna Jäger

The word is sealed shut,
you must dig for the word;
the word cuts through
so it may carry on.

The word
comes to pass;
catch it in flight,
don’t tie it down,
just hold it as you would a bird: free,
because the word wants to fly,
wants to be grounded and rooted, to seed and to
bud,
who knows where, when—
no one knows the legend of the word,
and one who might know it,
would be one
who spoke with God.
Both poets and children
seek the right word,
but the right word
mostly arrives too late.

***

Thomas Bradly: Congratulations, Marc, on your new translation of the great Erika Burkart’s Secret Letter (Cervena Barva). To what extent can your cosmopolitanness be attributed to your “peripatetically linguistic renderings of foreign verse?

Marc Vincenz: When you live as I have done, through extremely diverse cultural landscapes—say for example, from the gagging metropolis of Shanghai one day to the expansive volcanic plains of Iceland the next—you develop a broad view of the world, of language. You become an observer, an accumulator of culture; ideally, absorbing the most illuminating sounds and visions from each of the places you set your bag down. There is a moment, after all this wandering, when something coalesces in that vast array of voices and images. They come together in your mind as one, and somehow the world becomes easier to listen to, to silently observe. Language itself becomes easier to absorb. At least, that is my experience of it.

Does my international upbringing have something to do with my affinity of/for other languages and cultures? Most certainly—it’s a passion, Tom. Do I feel comfortable in a wide array of places and sounds? Yes, absolutely. It was entirely the way I grew up—slipping in and out peripatetically from place to place, from tongue to tongue.

TB: And what of your own poetry? How has your international exposure influenced your work?

MV: Naturally each locale has its own fragrances, its own cultural quirks, mythology, architecture, landscape, customs, politics—and yet, all of these are mirrors of another culture: different ways of expressing (symbolizing) the same things. Humanity, after all, is human—desires and needs are much the same the world over. Imagination and innovation is a constant. It is my firm belief that inference and foresight are at the heart of human language. Likely this is the reason why poetry has such an important role in my life.

Something from everywhere I have laid down tracks has wormed its way into my writing. And, in that sense, I suppose you might say that much of my writing is about place—or to put it more succinctly, about defining space. Becoming the Sound of Bees and my newer work are set in mythical lands—or lands of the wandering mind, if you will. These mythical lands are assemblages of many cultures. Spaces that appear to be specific are not obviously contextualized; allusions to figures out of history or entirely out of the realm of the subconscious (forests, mountains and oceans) materialize from out of the possible past or potential future. These are reflections of many eyes and tongues, many senses—real or imagined. They are attempts at the discovery of a common thread or vibration that carries through most known and imagined worlds. It seems to me that by stepping outside the every day or very familiar and placing it somewhere new—an assemblage or clustering (as if around a cell or an atom)—that the most captivating thoughts become less obscured.

TB: So how does this continual up-rooting, this constant changing of locale, effect your own work?

MV:  Traces of diverse mythologies or cultural symbols creep into your every day, into your sense-field; smatterings of music and snatches of landscapes too. A poem may arise with a visualization or it may make itself known sonically through an opening line, a mental image or a melody that leads the rest of the poem musically or imagistically. So, sound, cadence and tone (the singsong resonance of a particular tongue) finds its way through the tiniest of crevices. And the most vibrant visuals too: from the street stalls of Asia to the jungles of South America to the mountain landscapes of the Alps.

Quite often, while working on a poem, I’ll find myself transported to one of these distant locales. When there in your mind’s eye, you can’t help by become enchanted with the feast of senses. More often than not, I allow these senses to come through and reflect themselves in the poem. Occasionally they lead down dead end roads, but mostly they are loyal companions on my literary journey. Over time, I find it easier to tap into these other worlds—even sitting in a café in the middle of New York City. And strangely, at least for me, it is probably the most effective to dream up a world at the polar-end of the place you find yourself in that particular moment.

As you know, I was brought up a wanderer. It is in my blood, no matter where I find myself, and so, in the course of my writings, I drift and delve—from the embalmed history to the embedded memory to the unleashed imagination, which is, of course, a reflection of memory too.

You seem, lately, to be bringing these hugely far-flung worlds, traditions and idioms together into a composite poesy and mythos, planetary rather than regional. Is this a conscious project? I would think, if you set explicitly out to do such a Herculean labor, it might be daunting, to say the least. But, reading your books in succession, it feels more like a—to use the devalued term—organic process.

The actual outpouring comes organically, as you say, however it can and may be induced by train journeys, earthquakes, mountain paths and or encounters of a circumspect kind. No, seriously, I would say it is a natural other-dimensional state of awareness, no more than slipping into or shedding of a second skin. It hovers there all the time: a parallel state of reality—a would-be-could-be-probably-will-be. There’s that foresight in the firelight again, that sense of reaching into the primordial fire: the realms of mythology and magick, the realm of “sacred” symbolism.

From time to time, there are themes or images that arise in those semi-conscious moments that drive the narrative along its axis mundi (or axiom). These may arise in the moment or come much later. It doesn’t really strike me as a Herculean labor, rather more of a natural wandering, almost as if I were walking though a familiar landscape: a forest, a cove, a plain, a valley (there you see that sense of filling in space along a stream of words). Ernst Halter rather aptly explained his own process as one of traversing a great body of water and somehow having a second sense as to where he might encounter the next atoll or islet. The journey itself then becomes the network or web that links these islets into a Oneness. It is a kind of working in reverse: knowing the goals, but not quite knowing their precise location. Only after the journey can the map be drawn and charted. (Interesting to note that my mother’s father was a surveyor and cartographer. I still have his fifty-year-old brass theodolite in the bottom of a trunk somewhere.)

Jon Chopan and Thomas Cotsonas: A Conversation

pjimage

Jon Chopan: The first thing I am thinking to ask is about essays. What I mean is, you said this was a collection of short stories and I see that, but I read some of these pieces as essays. Do you see yourself at all as an essayist?

Thomas Cotsonas: I don’t see myself as an essayist.  I’m not sure why, exactly.  I think maybe it has something to do with the word itself.  “Essayist” makes me think of someone like Emerson or Montaigne.  I think of Susan Sontag or the Joan Didion of “The White Album.”  I love all those writers, but I think the pieces in the book that are essayish or that have essayish moments are up to something else.  I guess I’m talking about personas here.  It doesn’t occur to me to wonder whether the “I” on the page in “The White Album” is any different from the real life Joan Didion, you know?  But I hope it does occur to readers to wonder whether the “I” in things like “René Renée,” “Quartet (4),” and “Zeno’s Parachute” is different from me, the author.  Something happens when you’re reading something you think is fiction and you come across a passage that makes you question that label.  There’s a dissonance there, like the wrong chord has been struck.  I’ve always liked that dissonance as a reader, and I guess I like that dissonance as a writer too.  Maybe it boils down to this: “essayist” feels too restrictive.  If I think of myself as a writer of fiction—and I do—pretty much anything goes.

Speaking of labels: Pulled from the River has a few.  The blurb on the cover calls it a “memoir,” but the other blurbs call it “fiction” or “a novel.”  Black Lawrence’s website files it under “fiction,” but if I’m looking for the book on Amazon it’s “literary nonfiction.”  What do you think of the book as?

JC: I mean, it’s fiction if only because it breaks the one rule that would otherwise make it nonfiction, which is to say that I play fast and loose with the facts, at times. Otherwise, I think it is a collection of things, stories, essays, fragments, that add up to a book length kind of lyric essay that reflects on and distills and wrestles with a specific moment in my life, with a specific set of mostly real people and mostly real events. I think it is very much a persona of me, but I think even Didion, for instance, is creating a persona. The Joan Didion in “The White Album” isn’t Joan Didion the writer at the desk, right? I mean, it is a version of her. I think the beauty of fiction is that you can steal any form you want, an essay, an index, a contributors note and use that form as you see fit, so long as you understand the conventions of the form. I don’t think, by dictionary definition, that the essay belongs to nonfiction. It might by convention, but that is exactly why fiction writers should be writing essays. Conventions, to my mind, are made to be broken, upset as it were.

To that end, a lot of the work in Nominal Cases uses a kind of frame around its stories. You mentioned “René Renée.” To my mind this story uses the essay as a frame around the story. So, we get the “I” who is weighing something (the essay), the story of “René Renée,” and then the “I” again, who sort of weds the two, the story and the essay together. When you’re working on a piece like this, do you think on that essay part (the part we might call meta) or the story part first? How does your process unravel in regards to where an idea like this comes from?

TC: Absolutely Didion’s creating a persona or a version, I agree.  I didn’t mean to suggest that someone writing an essay is not engaging in some kind of persona-creating, but rather that someone reading “The White Album” (or something like it)—the average reader, let’s say—probably doesn’t ever pause and go, “I wonder to what extent the Didion”—or whomever—“on the page is different from the Didion in real life?”  I think it’s fair to say that most writing involves some element of persona-creating, whether it’s “The White Album,” “Borges and I,” something by Maggie Nelson, or John D’Agata’s About a Mountain—or either of our books, for that matter.  I just think it’s a different experience for readers to encounter explicitly autobiographical elements in something that’s called fiction than it is in something that’s called nonfiction.  Generally speaking, I’d say the autobiographical is more or less assumed in nonfiction that uses an “I,” but somewhat unexpected in fiction.  So: I agree with you overall, but I prefer the fiction label because I don’t want the kind of reader expectations that come with the label of nonfiction or essay.  I mean, in a perfect world maybe we wouldn’t need genre labels.  Bookstores and websites could just file everything alphabetically according to author or something.

As for the process in “René Renée,” I think the story part came first, and that what happened was I didn’t really like where it was going but liked it enough to try to give it something else, to make it turn in on itself in a way that felt engaging and true—not just like “Let’s be meta for meta’s sake, you know?”  In a lot of these stories in the book, the characters are confused or stuck in some way—they’re paralyzed by something.  They hedge.  So it occurred to me at some point to try to make some of the stories themselves confused/stuck/paralyzed.  That part wasn’t too difficult: I have way more false starts and unfinished things laying around than I do finished things, and I’ve always been fascinated by fragments of stories and unfinished projects in any medium.  What was difficult was trying to get a story’s paralysis to feel necessary, to get the reader to go along with stories that hedge or deliberately ask the reader to remember that they’re reading a story, which a lot of readers probably don’t want to do and for which I don’t blame them.  Texts that make use of metafictional devices can be a real slog to get through, especially if you’ve come to that text for escape.  I hope the stories that use metafictional devices aren’t a slog.  I hope they feel rooted in something that’s true.  I hope that’s something like an answer.  That was a tough question, but a good one.

I’d like to shift gears a little bit now, if that’s all right.  As you’ve just said, you think of Pulled from the River as a collection of things that add up to a kind of book-length lyric essay—I like that description of it.  One of the things I really enjoy about the book is the variety of forms on display.  You give us fairly straightforward, traditional short stories, letters, flash fictiony things, and a kind of coroner’s report, to name just a few.  How did you go about putting the book together?  I mean, what was your process for arranging the stories in the order they ended up in?

JC: That’s a tough question. I like it. I guess that, looking at the opening few pieces, the strategy was to get all the balls in the air right away. The title story goes a long way toward doing that, but then I think I needed to get individual pieces focused on those parts right away so that the reader would see early what was going on, which pieces of the mosaic to really focus on. After that, I think the goal was to return to those major story lines, the narrative chunks, before the ball had been in the air too long, before the reader could forget about it. In that way, I think I was trying to juggle everything so that the reader would have an easier go at juggling.

I think, even though this strikes me as a bit lazy on my part, I am really interested in bouncing that question back at you. One could read this as a “traditional” collection, where everything is meant to stand alone, but I really started to see overlap and a kind of dialogue across pieces, across the space of the book. Were you focused on that when you put Nominal Cases together? Were you very consciously thinking about the order?

TC: I know what you mean about the juggling.  Narratively speaking, we have several storylines to hold in our head, several characters to keep straight across an ambiguous timeline and through a variety of styles and forms.  But you definitely pull it off, and you’re right: the title story—for me at least—really helps out with that.  I actually went back to it a couple times as I read.

I wasn’t focused on order at all when I was writing the stories that ended up in the book.  Five of the stories—four and one-third, actually—the ones that deal with Walter Eccles and the Eccles family—were part of a novel I was writing that didn’t really work out.  (Note: I’m not done writing about them.)  All the other stories were written as standalones during a period when I wrote an incredible number of stories—most of which will probably never see the light of day.  At some point, I gathered everything together to see how much I had.  It was only then that I started to see the overlap or dialogue that you’re talking about in your question.  I was completely unaware of it when I was writing.  After I was aware of it though, the process was similar to what you said about your book.  I organized the stories into units: there were the Eccles stories; the first-person monologues; the four “Quartets”; the all-questions story; the baseball things; and the city stories.  I knew I wanted the Robert Moses story to be at the book’s center, and I knew I wanted “The City’s Father” to come right before it.  Everything after that was like a balancing act, you know?  Making sure I rotated between the units in a way that felt coherent if someone was reading the book front-to-back.  I have to give some credit here to Michael Martone: it was his idea to break up the four “Quartets.”  It was one story when I first put the book together, and it wasn’t working like that at all.  We met one day to talk about how things were going, and I think I said that something didn’t feel right about it.  That was when he mentioned breaking up that story.  I went home, gave it a shot, and really liked what it did for the collection.  Everything fell into place after that.

Here’s something a little bit more general: I’m fascinated by what I guess I’ll call underappreciated books or authors.  I’m thinking of things that have meant a lot to me as a reader or a writer, but that for some reason or other haven’t gotten a whole lot of attention.  I’m always interested to hear what other people—other writers, especially—say in response.  Are there any books or authors you’re really into that you think are underappreciated?

JC: I think, maybe, John Haskell’s I am not Jackson Pollock is one of those books. I really love what Haskell is doing there. It reads like an essay collection but it is fiction, the cover says stories. I also really love Bernard Cooper’s Maps to Anywhere. I think something similar is going on. The work lives in that space between fiction and nonfiction, between essay and story. I like that. I enjoy that experience. As narrative goes, I really love Richard Brautigan’s last novella So the Wind Won’t Blow It All Away. I read it once a year. There is something really wonderful happening there. It is not, if I am remembering right, one of those works people talk about when they talk about Brautigan, but I think it is one of his best.  What about you?

TC: The first thing that comes to mind for me is Sarah Orne Jewett’s Country of the Pointed Firs.  It came out in 1896 and is an absolutely killer short story cycle set on the coast of Maine.  It’s short, but the prose is gorgeous.  I’m not sure why no one reads her anymore.  I love Bohumil Hrbal’s Dancing Lessons for the Advanced in Age too.  People talk about his later novel, I Served the King of England, I think, but not Dancing Lessons for some reason.  NYRB put out an edition a few years ago.  It’s a hilarious, wise, beautiful drunken rant written as one continuous sentence for 117 pages.  Also: J. Robert Lennon’s Pieces for the Left Hand.  It’s a book of 100 little anecdotes that’ll take the wind out of you.  Oh, and thanks for the Brautigan tip: I love In Watermelon Sugar but haven’t read So the Wind.  I’ll have to check it out.

JC: What are you working on now?

TC: A couple things.  A novel that takes place over the course of one winter day in Rochester, New York.  The book’s protagonist is a man who works at a packaging company.  On this particular day he decides he’s not going to go into work, and the book’s about what happens that day.  I’m also kind of always writing these very, very short stories that I call “contortions.”  I’ll write them on the train or during office hours or if I’m stuck with the novel.  Someday I’ll probably have enough good ones to put them together for a book.

“World History” by Erika Burkart

fig-2-secret-letter-cover

World History

In time, history crumbles
into stories,
each ending so tragically that the reader,
though he be
no statistician,
turns the page,
pausing at length,
before he closes the book
on secular misunderstandings.
Elbows propped upon the cover,
he stares into the future,
a sphinx on the graves
over the hollow groves
of a past—
dark as always,
infiltrating into the present.

(translated from the German by Marc Vincenz)

***

[The above translation appears in Secret Letter (Cervena Barva Press, 2015) and is reprinted here with permission from the translator.]