Howl

I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked,

dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix,

angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection to the starry dynamo in the machinery of night,

who poverty and tatters and hollow-eyed and high sat up smoking in the supernatural darkness of cold-water flats floating accross the tops of cities contemplating jazz,

who bared their brains to Heaven under the El and saw Mohammedan angels staggering on tenement roofs illuminated…

– Howl, Allen Ginsberg

It’s been a long time since I engaged with Howl in its entirety. Those first few lines, sure; if you’re into poetry in any way, there’s pretty good odds you can reel off the first line and half of Howl from memory. They’re among the most well-known in American poetry, and there’s no getting around the fact that they’re a brilliant opener (Although, I have to admit, in my head I punctuate it differently – I saw the best minds of my generation, destroyed by madness, starving, hysterical, naked – which is actually kind of sad considering I once wrote an honour’s thesis about the use of space and punctuation in poetry and how it should affect the reading of a poem. In a form that already has a natural break in language generated by the existence of a poetic line, for example, what does it mean when you add a comma to the end of the line, effectively generating a pause within a pause?)

In any case, it’d been a long while. Then someone at work alerted me to the existence of the movie Howl, based on the obscenity trial that surrounded the poem when it was first released, and my natural weakness for cinema about beatniks and poetry led me towards tracking down a copy. It’s a brilliant film that sidesteps many of the problems that usually afflict films about the beats (ie, over-focusing on the various artists tendency to self-destruct) and actually explores why Ginsberg was interesting and how important the publication of Howl and Other Poems ended up being. It goes right up there with Bright Star as one of my favourite films about a poet, ever.

However, my favourite part about the film lies in its special features list – there’s recordings of both James Franco and Allen Ginsberg doing readings of the poem. I can count on one hand the number of poems I actually enjoy when they’re read aloud – most of the time I find myself getting irritated at readings, trying to reconcile the foreign rhythms being forced on the material with the rhythms I hear when in my head when I read on the page. Howl’s one of those rare exceptions, though, given that it’s rhythm is based on the metric of the human breath and it’s got the kind of easy repetition of phrases that’s hard to get wrong. It’s also possible – although I don’t remember for sure – that I came to Ginsberg’s poetry through his readings first, and his voice is generally distinctive enough that it gets lodged in your head.

The other nice thing about the film is that it prompted me to go and re-read the “and other poems” part of Howl and Other Poems, and I got to revisit a bunch of poems I’d forgotten I’d loved: A Supermarket in California; America; In the Baggage Room at Greyhound. It’s been a long while since I mainlined a whole bunch of poetry, rather than reading individual poems, and it reminded me of how much I used to enjoy reading it before study and endless poetry readings and the nightmare of my thesis sucked all the fun out of it.

Hanging with the Spokesbear: Undead Press

Spokesbear: Undead Press.

Peter: Really?

Spokesbear: For reals, yo.

Peter: Okay, really? 

Spokesbear: Are you objecting to the topic or the patter?

Peter: Both, but mostly the latter.

Spokesbear: Stop trying to hold me down, dog.

Peter: Seriously, what the fuck’s with that?

Spokesbear: Just trying it out for size.

Peter: Stop it. Really.

Spokesbear: Like you never fantasize about walking into a room and saying ‘what up, bitches?’

Peter: I do not.

Spokesbear:

Peter: Okay, I do to, but that’s not the point. I never actually break it out in conversation ’cause I know it’s a bad idea.

Spokesbear: Hater.

Peter:

Spokesbear: Okay, I’ll stop, but you have to talk about the Undead Press thing.

Peter: Fine.

Spokesbear: Fine.

Peter: FINE.

Spokesbear: FINE.

Peter:

Spokesbear:

Peter:

Spokesbear:

Peter: So, the Undead Press thing?

Spokesbear: Yeah?

Peter: Really hard for me to talk about without engaging in victim-blaming.

Spokesbear: Sure, ’cause you’re an asshole.

Peter: Yes, but not just ’cause of that. Everyone’s in a hurry to help out this poor woman who had her work massacred by Undead Press, to commiserate as to how badly she’s been screwed by the evil publisher who rewrote her work without permission, but they don’t really address the core problem – a newish writer, eager to get published, doesn’t know what to look for in her contracts and agrees to a pretty shitty deal from an unprofessional press because it’d result in her getting published.

Spokesbear: Neil Gaiman did the “money flows towards the writer” post about it.

Peter: Sure, and that’s great, but I get cranky about this sort of shit. Writing isn’t hard. Learning about writing isn’t hard. If you haven’t yet worked out that  a contract which doesn’t even offer you a contributors copy of the anthology is a bad place to get published, then it makes me wonder exactly how much research you did before submitting. Not everything in writing has to be a harsh life lesson, you know?

Spokesbear: Like you’ve never signed a shitty contract.

Peter: Sure, I have. But never one that shitty.

Spokesbear: So, what, you’re a special snowflake?

Peter: No, but I believe that if you’re going to be in business, be in fucking business. Being published and read isn’t some magical thing that will change your life forever, no matter how big a hurry you’re in to get to this seemingly exalted state where you have a published story. Even at seventeen I was smart enough to think this place that takes my work and publishes it and gives me nothing in return is probably a bad fucking idea. Things like the Undead Press story just make me want to go out and beat new writers with a clue-by-four until the words “GET FUCKING PAID FOR YOUR WORK” are bludgeoned into their brain. ‘Cause I guarantee you – I guaran-damn-tee you – that the same internet that’s all “aw, how horrible and shit” about Undead Press are the same people who fucking lost their shit when John Scalzi took Black Matrix publishing to task for offering a fifth-of-a-cent-a-word back in 2009.

Spokesbear: And you remain so calm about it.

Peter: Shut up, bear. You started this.

Spokesbear: I’m just surprised. You’re…actually pissed off.

Peter: If you’re going to be in business. BE IN FUCKING BUSINESS.

Spokesbear: And people who just want to write for a hobby?

Peter: Post shit on your blog. The moment you’re signing contracts, start trying to figure out what the contracts mean. The sole useful thing I saw out of hundreds of people posting their support for Mandy DeGeit is the guy from Post Mortem Press who showed her the kind of clause you should make sure is in your contract, the one that goes:

5. EDITING AND PROOFREADING
The Publisher shall make no changes in, additions to, or eliminations from the original Work without the consent of the Author. Typographical and spelling errors are exempt.

Peter: I’m sure the various shows of support make the writer feel better, but actually pointing out the things to look for in a contract? Informing people how to spot the shoddy ass of a publisher before you submit (and here’s a hint: 90% of people publishing small press Zombie anthologies without paying for work are going to be dodgy as fuck. The ones that pay for work aren’t necessarily better) – those are the responses I can get behind. There’s an awful lot about this situation that could have been resolved with a little common sense and googling basic short story submission advice on the internet.

Spokesbear: But that would require not being excited about the forthcoming publication.

Peter: Nah, it doesn’t. One can be excited about something and still be sensible about it. Mistakes will happen, even then, but it should cut down on the Undead Press type situations at the very least. We just don’t do that because the internet likes to see someone whose wrong, and the inevitable dog-pile occurs the moment there’s a clear-cut moral decision to be made.

Spokesbear: You realise there’s nothing in this that doesn’t make you sound like an arsehole.

Peter: I’m okay with that.

Spokesbear: If you’re sure.

Peter: You’re the one who made me talk about it.

Spokesbear: For reals, yo.

Peter: Fucking stop it.

Spokebear: Sorry.

Peter: Damn right.

Post-Script: I did a far less rant-driven version of this post for the blog at my Writers Centre dayjob. If you do nothing else, I recommend the writer beware follow-up about clauses you should look for regarding editing of stories. 

Everything is Artifice

Years ago, when I first started my never-to-be-finished PhD, I had one simple belief: everything is artifice.

I suppose it’s a natural enough conclusion to come to when you’re twenty-two years old and reading Lyotard’s theories on the post-modern condition during the bulk of your waking hours, and it certainly seemed to explain an awful lot about the things I didn’t quite understand about the world. That any attempt at authenticity was but a carefully constructed stratagem to create the illusion of authenticity made sense to me. After all, I lived on the Gold Coast. Trying to deal with the concept of authenticity on the Gold Coast is fucking confusing, since the whole damn city embraces artifice as its default state.  You make sense of it as best you can, or you get the get the hell out.

These days I’m older and dumber and I have about thirteen years of additional experience to process, and I’m still not entirely sure that my twenty-two year old self was wrong. The performance I put on for the world is less involved than it used to be – there’s fewer feather boas and trenchcoats and nail polish, more writing and submitting and getting things done – but there’s a part of me that’s consistently aware that there’s a performance going on.

This is one of those things that dominates my decisions to embrace the kinds of art I embrace: I distrust any art that offers up authenticity or meaning as its primary virtue, unless it’s coupled with a self-awareness about the artificial nature of the work. Serious cinema – by which I mean big, Award-winning dramas about big and serious things that are primarily naturalistic in their approachsets me on edge. I’d much rather watch noir, with its obviously artificial camera angles designed entirely to evoke mood. I’d rather watch cartoons, which embrace their lack of realism with a fervor that few other mediums could match. Hell, I’d rather watch soap operas, ’cause at least they looked like they were having fun.

The moment a film takes itself seriously, it’s dead to me. What I want is a sense of fun. What I want, more than anything, is the ability to see the performer inside their performance, and get a sense that they’re both enjoying  themselves and they’re willing to let their audience in on the fun. In the argument between style and substance, I’ll go with the work that has a sense of style every time. At twenty-two I had serious, deathly art-crushes on David Bowie, Andy Warhol, and Oscar Wilde. On William Gibson and Kathy Acker and Poppy Z. Brite. At thirty-five I still have serious, deathly art-crushes on those same people, and more yet who have come along since.

Everything is artifice.

This has been on my mind a lot this weekend because I’ve been re-reading Steven Pressfield’s The War of Art after having a discussion with my friend Kevin about it’s relative flaws and merits as a guidebook for artists. I have enormous amounts of problems with Pressfield’s book – it’s a core of good advice wrapped up in a package that’s so “authentic” it makes my teeth hurt. Pressfield believes in things, and he believes in them strongly. He suggests that creating art can cure cancer. He suggests that teaching the world to avoid procrastination will result in a drop in crime, sickness, domestic abuse, and other unpleasant things. It’s the kind of po-faced, manipulative “authenticity” that appears in self-help books everywhere, and it fills me with rage.

Big, unpleasant, bone-gnawing rage.

The weird thing about all this is that I do believe there is magic in art. I didn’t for a long while; for about ten years I was firmly in the camp of those who wanted writing to be craft, something that can be taught and respected and disassociated from myths about muses and the magic of creativity. These days, though, I’m back in the camp that says there can be a space where art is transcendent. Where it can take you and reshape you and make the world a better place. Where it can make you feel and recontextualise the world in exactly the way you needed it recontextualised.

I just don’t believe the magic of art is a big magic anymore. It’s smaller and quieter and it affects each person differently. Ordinary, everyday magic. Ordinary, everyday miracles. Quiet moments where art makes your fingers tingle.

Everything is artifice, but that’s all magic has ever been anyway. Ritual. Mis-direction. The world given context by performance.

And so we keep writing, keep creating, keep doing the things we do. And we hope it finds the people who need it in the times when they need it most.