CALL FOR PAPERS: KADAR KOLI—THE VIOLENCE ISSUE

The idea for this special issue of kadar koli emerged from a question posted by British poet Keston Sutherland to the UK poetry listserv and to the Sous Les Pavés online discussion group in response to “calls for violence” during and after the U.K. protests: “I … want to know what people think about the wishing for and urging of violence (against whom? just the police, or who else? how?).” One example cited by Sutherland is Justin Katko’s “Lines for a Protest Song, After 9 December”:

Sometimes I wish that instead of their horses
They’d call up the hold where they store their guns;
And when they shoot one of us down we’ll rise up stronger,
For in the taste of our blood be remembered we are one.

Sutherland’s question is an urgent one, particularly for participants in the “Occupy” movement who are debating the role of violence in collective action, its justifications and consequences: What kind of violence? Coming from whom? For what ends? Indeed, from Tunisia to London to Oakland, our current geo-political landscape has been swept by a series of uprisings, reminding us of the power of mass mobilization and of the intimate connection between violence and democracy. What role does or can poetry play in these uprisings? This question suggests the venerable problem of aesthetics and politics: How might thinking about violence alongside poetic practice throw different light on this quandary?

These questions open up other areas of possible inquiry that fall under the general heading of violence and contemporary poetry. How have contemporary poets responded to or documented different kinds and instances of violence? What kinds of poetic practices have been developed as a result of violence? How does violence get defined or named by poetry? Slavoj Žižek says we should distance ourselves from “the fascinating lure” of “violence performed by a particular agent” and instead try “to perceive the background which generates such outbursts.” How does or can poetry disclose the unseen contours of the violence that determines our everyday lives? How can poetry illuminate—or sound out—the histories of discipline and punishment that determine the quotidian?

Violence is often said to be “meaningless.” But perhaps violence does have meaning. What can it tell us? How does it communicate? Perhaps, it is only the poem that can help us answer these questions. How have poets reckoned with the ways that language itself is bound up with violence? Similarly, how might the poetic act be an act of violence, however necessarily?

Finally, it might be said that the same logics that structure our socio-cultural realities also shape the field of contemporary poetry. Certain “brands” of poetry, for example, remain dominant. The editors would like to see work that tackles the structural violence that shapes our field.

For this special issue of kadar koli, we invite submissions that reckon with the relation between violence and contemporary poetry. We seek poetry, short critical statements (max. 1,500 words), and longer critical essays (max. 4,000 words). We are also interested in art (collage, photographs, drawings). Deadline for submission is January 15.

kadar koli 7 will be produced as a print journal, as well as an open-source, downloadable file, in Spring 2012.

PLEASE SEND INQUIRIES TO: kadarkoli7@yahoo.com

Posted in Form and Theory, Habenicht Press release, Literary | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Interview with Ryan Eckes

Ryan Eckes in Philadelphia, September 2011

Welcome to a new feature at Primitive Information. I hope to conduct interviews with poets whose small-press books have found their way onto my desk lately, both as a way to find out more about them and to help get the word out about these great books. The first interview is with Ryan Eckes, whose book Old News was recently released by Furniture Press. (Click link for purchasing info.)

Thanks to Ryan for chatting with me; the interview was conducted via e-mail in October. Enjoy!

DH: The event that provides not only the title of this book, but also a sort of ongoing theme and frame for the text, is described early on: the discovery of some Philadelphia Inquirer issues from the 1920s underneath the carpeting in a house where you were living. Tell me more about this—how does this inform and resonate with the poems and pieces in the book, and what made you decide to reproduce and explicitly reference some of the content from those old newspapers?

RE: As soon as I found the old papers I wanted to make something out of them, but it was a year before I figured out what to do: just re-tell the most fascinating stories, paring down and lineating to bear out what’s most fascinating. I was drawn more to odd local stories that wouldn’t make the news today, mysterious banalities and antiquities, especially those with oddly beautiful language (phrases like “I have been shy of bandits”) than I was to national or “historical” events. At the same time, I was ready to start writing about the block I was living on, where the neighbors were very social—people outside every evening, talking, hanging out, kids running around. It was the most communal block I’ve ever lived on in any neighborhood, and I was collecting all these interesting little stories from my neighbors. So I figured I’d pull them together, the old news and what was happening in front of me every day, and see if I could find some fluidity between them, see what kind of Philadelphia I’d end up with.

The plan was to construct one whole story out of a back-and-forth between the past and present, using an idea from one piece (either an old-news-story poem or present-day poem) to lead me to the next. What better way to begin than with forgetting, I thought, and so the first found piece was FORGETS CHILD ON TRAIN, and I started building from there. The following piece, “training,” responds to it, reaches into my own childhood for some introduction and opens up a space for the next poem, and so on. So there was a level of improvisation even though I was culling intermittently from a pool of articles I already wanted to use. I left out a lot of interesting material because it didn’t fit into what I ended up building, which was this scrapbook (of a city) with momentum that’s meant to be read front-to-back, which you can do in under an hour, though it might take longer to digest.

DH: The first two poems of the book seem to register a sort of bafflement and wonder in these encounters with other worlds—that of the past, that of the urban landscape of Philadelphia, with its priests, neighbors, roofers, etc. It all seems to harmonize into this unsettling and unsettled space: the “blah blah, he said, blah blah blah, I said” as you have it at the end of “odd years.” I wonder if you could talk about that. I know you told me that the series of poems here was conceived as a book pretty early on, and I’m curious if moments like those were a conscious concern as you worked, a fruitful place to go with the poetry.

RE: Bafflement’s a really good word. Typically I write into experiences that baffle me, and I’ve always struggled to remain “at wonder” with the world—I suppose poetry is a way to do that. In retrospect, I can see a pattern of unsettled spaces in the book, if I’m following you on that, but I don’t think I was very conscious of those as I wrote. That is, I wasn’t purposely trying to create an unsettled space—it wasn’t a goal. But I was trying to understand what was around me and in so doing arrived at questions I then used to push myself further from page to page, to expand the stakes.

DH: One of the things I admire about this book is that the “other worlds” I alluded to brings you in contact with lots of people who are less than, shall we say, enlightened about things like race. And you don’t shy away from that. Has this caused any problems in terms of reception of the book? Did you think about altering some of that or leaving it out, toning it down, etc.? What did you think was the importance of leaving it in there? An example: The end of the prose piece, “how to get around,” records a conversation with a neighbor, “frankie,” which reads, “so why don’t you take the subway, i say. ah, the subway, he says, well the subway’s a little too dark for me if you know what i mean.”

RE: Racism is very common, isn’t it? At least around here it is. Common as a dog barking. I can’t see why I wouldn’t point it out. I mean, if I’m writing a book about Philly I’m certainly not going to pretend racism’s not a part of it. I’m not a marketer. I call it as I see it. Maybe some poetry reviewers will say it’s not poetic to reveal some of the pitiful ways that working class white people attempt to confide their racism in each other?

In any case, nobody’s expressed any beef that I know of. But the book hasn’t been reviewed yet, and so far most of the people who’ve read it know me, and perhaps about a quarter of those are not poets. I should probably say that my sense of audience includes people I grew up with and possible readers who are not writers, people much less concerned with literary history than with history—the conditions of the society we live in. While I hope the book challenges and entertains anybody who reads it, there’s no way I’m going to write into some narrow idea of “reception.”

DH: A lot of the themes of the first part of the book seem to converge in the poem “inside the scowl”—neighborhood tensions, race, marriage, and this cherry tree that you and your wife are trying to plant, a very well-worn poetic symbol that is rescued (for me) by the humor and hopelessness of it all, specifically the anxiety around dog shit that city-dwellers know all too well. Last line: “ginger, did you shit on my tree?” Talk about the turn to really materialize the issues and open up some intimate details at this point in the book.

RE: Ginger was a dog I wanted to pick up and punt down the street. Ginger. That poem vents feelings that had built up—my anger, a feeling of being stuck—inside the scowl of South Philly. It’s a gripe about the neighborhood, which I was experiencing as very static at the time (in 2008, middle of that election year). In it I admit my prejudice against the Italians. I think the poem’s saved by its acknowledgment of the contagiousness of a certain kind of pettiness. I’m glad the humor came through. Up to that point in the book most of the writing is observation-based (more show than tell, you could say), so that poem does function as a vent. I actually worked it over many times and at one point considered cutting it. Good thing I didn’t because much of the later narrative depends on it. It was important to balance the found material with the personal, the intimate, to keep the whole thing real.

DH: I am really struck, on reading this book over again, with the idea of the neighbor, especially this guy frankie who keeps popping up like a disturbing motif. He really ought to have his own theme music. In the poem “originally,” he makes an implicit statement that jibes strangely with an idea in Robert Pogue Harrison’s book Forests, which maps the appropriating of forests during the Middle Ages in England (among other things), drawing a distinction between the shrinking “wild” forest and the “juridical zone” of the park, the latter brought under the king’s sovereignty for the uses of hunting and sport. Clearly frankie’s not about to engage in a disputation with you about critical theory. But when the two of you are talking about the woods that used to be in the north of philly and you say, “still plenty of woods, though, if you think about pennypack park,” and he replies, “pennypack park, no, i don’t think about pennypack park,” this really opens out on the contentious issue of zoning, sharing, and “naturalizing” of urban space—also registered in his objection to a cherry tree that you’d planted. Talk about these different conceptions of that space and how they fall differently for older generations vs. younger, in changing neighborhoods, and so on. This seems like a conscious concern of the poems and it intersects in interesting ways with the personal, cultural issues that also come up.

RE: Funny story—that tree we planted, which appeared to have died by the time I moved out of that house and which I mention near the end of the book as a metaphor for the dead relationship, ended up surviving. I noticed a year or so later it was still there, growing, which turned out a nice personal coda, for me, that the literal tree behind the vehicle of the metaphor withstood the tenor (the broken marriage, permanent)—as if life resisted language stubbornly and actively as it does pavement, as if life did what I wanted poetry to, while the little tree in the poem’s no worse for it, since it’s not the same tree. It was a reminder, or lesson, even, that life—i.e., what grows out of the ground—will fictionalize whatever you do, make a cartoon of you, and you can roll with that fact as best you can or get steamrolled. I’ll go ahead here and define wildness, for a human, as rolling with that fact.

I painted Frankie as the worst, I think, mostly out of what I saw in him that I disliked in myself—his concrete nature, you could say, which I can sympathize with. I could see the absurdity of planting a tree on that tiny sidewalk, and I felt insecure in that it was something people new to the neighborhood were doing (it was my ex-wife’s idea, who isn’t from Philly, nor USA) and I didn’t want to be seen as a stereotypical young person from outside the city—but to an older guy like Frankie, I was, since I’m from the Northeast, a newer, suburban-like part of the city (built for cars, spread out with shopping centers rather than corner stores, etc). I understood his distrust of beauty, which is tied to class identification and anti-intellectual masculinity, and his excessive trust of nativeness (Philly is one of those places where people like to live in the same neighborhood their whole lives). The difference is that I hate my own—and his—distrust of beauty (hence poetry). Also, I’m not this born-again racist. Those differences outweighed my desire to try to show him our commonality, which I was unable to do anyway. So I’ve got this book now that might offer a window into how all that tension, fear and miscommunication works. Maybe I should I leave a copy of it in his mailbox?

DH: Now I wonder if you could extend that theme of “space” out from your book and talk about the particular poetic space of Philadelphia, which likewise seems important here. I read this as a cultural artifact of a poetic community, in a way. You thank poets (in the acknowledgments) like CA Conrad, Frank Sherlock, Stan Mir, Rachel Blau DuPlessis—poets inside and outside the academy, but all nestled in the “Philly scene.” How important was that community to the development of a project like this, and how does it inform your poetry in other ways?

RE: Those poets’ voices are in my head, their sound and sense, and I keep absorbing them. There’s always both conscious and unconscious dialogue going on, and poetry comes of that naturally. It comes of what I read, hear, and who I talk with all the time. From 2005-07, while in Temple’s creative writing program, I read many books of poetry that were conceived as books (or “projects”), so I’m sure that was an influence, though I can’t trace Old News to one specific influence. But the poets you named there, and others, are deeply invested in place, including this city, and it shows up in their work. No doubt their commitments and poetics have rubbed off on me.

While working on the manuscript I wrote after Old News (Common Sense), there were moments I would read over what I’d written and think, “Am I just ripping off The City Real and Imagined?” I wasn’t, of course, but I was definitely after that lyric intensity and could hear Frank and CA in my poems, especially in the months after their book had come out and I couldn’t get enough of it. Song & Glass by Stan and Passyunk Lost by Kevin Varrone had also come out at that same time, I remember—all this wonderful shit at once, I could hardly stand it. If my poems are any good, I’m indebted to them. There’s some great company around here.

DH: Turning that question around: your own role in the community, how you inform it. You and Stan Mir run a series called “Chapter and Verse Reading Series,” and you seem engaged in lots of ways with what’s going on there. Looking at it from the outside, it seems like a really vibrant and varied scene, one I’ve been hearing great things about for years. Temple has obviously been a center of cutting-edge stuff for a long time, and now with Charles Bernstein at UPenn, there is a contemporary poetics community springing up there, too. CA Conrad’s “somatics” and other figures (like those mentioned above) just seem to represent some of the most exciting stuff going on anywhere these days. How do you fit in, especially as someone who’s both born and raised in Philly and part of the academic world as well?

RE: That’s an interesting question. Well, I’m active mostly outside the academy. As an adjunct, occasionally I teach an undergraduate workshop at Temple where I enjoy messing up kids’ lives by introducing them to poetry. But in general I’m getting coffee or beer with writers and speculating about the world situation or what we’re doing tonight, or borrowing their books to camel up. I would say that is how I fit in. And there’s the reading series, which is great because of Stan. I show up at the Kelly Writers House when my work schedule doesn’t impede—Michelle Taransky, Sarah Dowling and Julia Bloch (when she was here) have made great things happen there. And there’s Kim Gek Lin Short and Debrah Morkun and the con/crescent dudes, Nick DeBoer and Jamie Townsend, always bringing good poets to town to read at various venues. We all try to keep it lively and alive, and I do what I can in that. I try to make things happen, basically, and that includes writing poems.

***

from Old News

The Evening Bulletin, Monday, May 7, 1923:

FORGETS CHILD ON TRAIN

Sleepy Father Leaves Four-Year-Old Son

andrew gray said he had
taken his boy
to the aquarium
and was so tired
when they boarded
the elevated train
for home he had
fallen
asleep

awakening
suddenly without
thinking of
the boy who
was looking out
the window
the father
hurried out of
the train.

*

training

at a party an academic who doesn’t teach asked me what i write about. i drew a blank and remembered my first grade teacher, mrs blank. she would never say blank — she would say space, fill in the space. in class we watched the challenger space shuttle lift off and explode into nothing on the screen. there were no answers. when asked to stand and say my name, i said big blue O, which was wrong. the world was a big blue O. it challenged you to fill in the space with a summary, and the teacher gave you an A for effort, which began with an E and felt like jogging the inside of an O to make something go, make the O go fast, not slow.

Posted in Interviews, Small Press Reviews | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Actually, you are NOT f*kin perfect…

Take a look at these:

Christina Aguilera – Beautiful (Official Music Video)Christina Aguilera

Pink – Fkin Perfect – Official Music Video – YouClubVideo.

Katy Perry, “Firework”

I’m not sure when it was, exactly, that we became a nation of Stuart Smalleys, sitting in front of a mirror and telling ourselves this. It’s a disturbing trend, however, that I’ve noticed in music the past several years. Certainly it’s not unique to this era — every period of popular music has its element of self-affirmation and healthy ego-boosting, necessary to assert one’s own personality and break through into generational identity. But the three songs posted above, each one sung by a beautiful female pop star, seem to me to go a step beyond that.*

*Or at least, taken together with a parallel trend I outline below, they go a step beyond that.

They bear remarkable similarities, especially in terms of the imagery of the music videos. The basic formula is: misfit / outsider undergoes abuse / ridicule, learns to accept his or her own uniqueness / sexuality and realizes that he/she is “perfect,” “beautiful,” etc. Both Christina Aguilera and Katy Perry deal with queer youth in their videos; Perry seems to throw in a young cancer victim as well. Pink keeps things simple and focused — we follow the arc of a young woman all the way from early childhood through teen years of being the odd kid out, abuse, flirtations with suicide, finally to a blossoming as an artist (and, apparently, wife and mother). The woman is played by Tina Majorino, who was in Napolean Dynamite and also had a supporting role as the straight-edge Mormon pal of Amanda Seyfried‘s character in Big Love. It is probably the most effective, since it doesn’t try to overreach — and it also doesn’t feature the silly motif of fireworks shooting out of boobs, like Perry’s video.

Nothing wrong here, in a certain sense… and I would add Lady Gaga‘s “Born This Way” to the list; though it’s more overtly programmatic, Gaga’s entire career to this point reads like a giant affirmation of outsiderness / queerness, with her concerts, full of positive feedback and motherly assurance, as the Smalleyesque group hug craved by her fans. Up to a point, I don’t have a problem with any of this. But taken together with our dysfunctional political gridlock, culminating most recently in the debt limit stalemate; the riots in England, which at least express understandable outrage at “austerity” measures that are a slap in the face to the already exploited lower classes (though the fighting amongst rioters and looting of neighborhood businesses is a misguided channeling of that rage); and the buffet of environmental issues and general decline of the West — taken with all this, it does seem a little to this Midwestern boy as though we are collectively huddling in the corner and telling ourselves everything’s going to be fine.

How to put this somewhat diplomatically? We are facing the worst political and economical crisis this country has seen in several generations — an utter breakdown of communication across the political spectrum and an abject failure of leadership in the face of difficult choices — and the attitude expressed in pop music is not only symptomatic of the problems, but represents the core reason we fail so utterly at solving them. Put the above together with the following messages, from male pop stars:

Bruno Mars, “Just the Way You Are”

Hot Chelle Rae, “Tonight Tonight”

–what you get is a disconcerting brew of affirmation mingled with apathy.

I’m especially annoyed with the perfectly execrable Bruno Mars, whose lazy and derivative melodies seem cadged from bubble-gum b-sides, yet who is universally hailed as the Next Big Thing in pop. The video for the aptly titled “The Lazy Song” appears to have cost about $50 to make, including the plaid shirts and monkey masks. “Just the Way You Are” is simply self-affirmation from another point of view — that of the male’s, looking at the objectified female — and obviously there is no pretense here of a larger, more inclusive scope; the video says it all, as a beautiful dark-haired model blushes and preens under Mars’ gaze and unabashed encomium. Gag me.

I actually enjoy the last song, above — it doesn’t pretend to be anything more than a mindless party tune — but its refrain of “Lalala — whatever” etc. falls in line with the overall attitude I’m getting at here. “Everything’s fine — don’t change a thing — you’re perfect — you’re a firework — whatever.” We’ve had a full decade following 9/11 of wars, terror, political blundering, and economic decline, and the main tenor of the response in pop music has been just this kind of ignoring-the-problem, let’s-keep-things-positive crap.

It is what makes stuff like ongoing grade inflation not only possible, but inevitable; it is what leads to burgeoning obesity rates; it is, most damagingly, what encourages the cognitive dissonance in which people perceive themselves to be much more well off than they actually are, to belong to a higher class that is actually working against their interests — which I’ve written about before.

* * *

I’ve often wondered what happens to those losers on American Idol after they leave, crestfallen and angry, having been told that they’re not actually the wonderful, talented singers they thought they were. We enjoy watching those terrible auditions; we marvel at the lack of self-awareness, the over-inflated ego that led some tone-deaf soul to believe that she could carry a tune — missing, perhaps, the underlying truth that we are all encouraged to believe ourselves capable of anything at any given moment — but I wonder what happens to them. I would bet most of them just give up in shame. Some probably persist in baseless, clueless self-belief. I wonder how many of those losers go home, look at themselves long and hard in the mirror, and actually work to get better; take classes, embrace the pain and humiliation, put in the several years of hard work it would take to actually get to a point of beginning to know if one ever could be good enough.

* * *

Whenever I teach creative writing, I include some of Keats‘s letters. The letter on “Negative Capability,” of course, and the one on “Poetical Character” — but also the one he wrote to Hessey in October 1818, in response to the latter’s having sent him a copy of a note defending Keats against harsh criticism of his first volume of poems, particularly the “slip-shod” Endymion, as Keats himself calls it in this letter. It is, like so many of Keats’s letters, a beauty of clear-headed brevity, finely turned phrases in which a complex thought process is crystallized.

In this case, the subject is self-criticism and aesthetic judgment. Keats had been viciously attacked by a passel of mostly anonymous Simon Cowells, many of them motivated by resentment towards Keats and his circle (particularly Leigh Hunt) that had little to do with the poems themselves, and some literally advising him to “keep his day job”: “It is a better and a wiser thing to be a starved apothecary than a starved poet; so back to the shop Mr John…”

Here is the relevant part of Keats’s letter:

I begin to get acquainted with my own strength and weakness.–Praise or blame has but a momentary effect on the man whose love of beauty in the abstract makes him a severe critic on his own Works. My own domestic criticism has given me pain without comparison beyond what Blackwood or the Quarterly could possibly inflict. and also when I feel I am right, no external praise can give me such a glow as my own solitary reperception & ratification of what is fine. J.S. [John Scott, who'd defended Keats] is perfectly right in regard to the slip-shod Endymion. That it is so is no fault of mine. –No!– though it may sound a little paradoxical. It is as good as I had power to make it–by myself–Had I been nervous about its being a perfect piece, & with that view asked advice, & trembled over every page, it would not have been written; for it is not in my nature to fumble–I will write independently. I have written independently without Judgment.–I may write independently & with judgment hereafter.–The Genius of Poetry must work out its own salvation in a man: It cannot be matured by law & precept, but by sensation & watchfulness in itself…

Keats does several things here that I find pretty remarkable. First, though, what he does not do: he does not stick his fingers in his ears, skulk off stage, and vow to the camera that he’s actually a great poet and those bastards don’t know what they’re talking about, and blah blah blah. He does not take it personally, though some of the criticism has been quite unfair and personal. He does not curl up on the floor and quit. Having precociously published a poem that is, truthfully, pretty weak in places, he takes responsibility.

But he also does something else.* Without denying that the poem is not terribly good, he defends himself and his writing process by recognizing that if he had allowed his own or others’ critical standards to guide the composition, he never would have completed this very important phase of his creative growth. He fiercely asserts his “independence” as a writer and critic, assuring Hessey that he has painstakingly developed (through years of careful reading and practice, though he doesn’t say this) his own internal barometer for his work. It was necessary to shut that down while he wrote Endymion, but henceforth he will apply it more fully as he writes. Here Keats perfectly captures the entire creative and critical process that an artist must undergo. The wildly creative part — which is, arguably, akin to the ego-boost of self-affirmation described above — that enjoys inspiration, joined with the self-critical part, which guides revision and does the hard work of making final aesthetic judgments. As time goes on, Keats implies, the two can work more easily together, which is why mature artists tend to waste less time going down fruitless paths.

*He also, of course, improved greatly as a poet, which is the reason we’re still reading his letters and poems.

Nor did Keats stop being self-critical, even as he wrote his greatest poems. In 1819 he wrote to his editor Woodhouse that while his Isabella — a tighter and tauter poem all around than Endymion — was “weaksided,” “[t]here is no objection of this kind to Lamia” (one of his last long poems). One could argue that it was Keats’s endless drive to absorb, adapt, and improve that constituted his true genius, rather than the easy narrative of transcendent talent achieved early. But I digress.

Look, I don’t begrudge the misfits of the world — especially those who already endure an incessant message of negativity and degradation that echoes from the puritanical mainstream discourse in this country — their dose of encouragement, especially those who dare to question and explore received ideas about sexuality. There is nothing wrong with that, and having attended Lady Gaga’s concert here in Buffalo last Spring, it was wonderful to see so many kids happy and proud to be weird.

But there comes a point where something akin to Keats’s self-judgment kicks in. Where facts that don’t fit one’s worldview aren’t simply discarded, or bent to make room for one’s outsized ego. Clearly, given our political situation, this problem is not confined to today’s youth. But it does seem to go largely unchecked, and it seems to be getting worse. If Keats had thumbed his nose at his critics, insisted that they just didn’t get it, and continued churning out the decent but ultimately mediocre verse that went into Endymion, we simply wouldn’t have some of the greatest poems in the English language.

Posted in Music, Politics, Video | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

kadar koli 6 is here!


Cover image by j/j hastain. Contributors: Zack Finch, Geoffrey Gatza, j/j hastain, Henri Deluy (trans. Jacqueline Kari), Edmond Caldwell, Micah Robbins, The Rejection Group, Sarah Jeanne Peters, Josh Stanley, John Hyland, Robin F. Brox, Brenda Iijima, Morani Kornberg-Weiss.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Recent News About Habenicht Titles, etc.

Yes… the blog is back. Thanks to webmaster extraordinaire Jerrold Shiroma, I’ve done a redesign that’s taken care of the issue with the sidebar, and having cleared a few hurdles on the school front, I can get back to posting here more frequently.

For now, some recent mentions of Habenicht titles (as well as my new book):

John Gallaher discusses the release of The Rejection Group’s 5 Works

John Latta reviews The Rejection Group

j/j hastain and Benjamin Winkler talk about Micah Robbins’ Crass Songs on Inherent Fracture

SPD recommends Field Work for June 2011

John Hyland reviews Field Work for goodreads

Posted in Habenicht Press release, Literary, Small Press Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

New Habenicht Chaps

Very limited number of all five chapbooks available for $15, plus shipping (specify in order whether you want white or black Rejection Group cover)
[N.B., as of 4.22.11, Sarah Peters and JodiAnn Stevenson now sold out]

Set of remaining three chapbooks (5 Works, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Five Windows Light the Cavern’d Man) available for $10, plus shipping
[N.B.: As of 1.11.12, Sir Gawain is sold out.]


The Rejection Group (white cover), 5 works, 19pp, saddle-stitched, $7 plus shipping



The Rejection Group (black cover), 5 works, 19pp, saddle-stitched, $7 plus shipping



***very limited number copy of 5 works signed by by K.G., V.P., C.B., K.S.M., and K.J.: $20 plus shipping***



Sarah Peters, Triptych, 3pp, hand-sewn, $3 plus shipping
***sold out***


JodiAnn Stevenson, Houses Don’t Float, 4pp, hand-sewn, $3 plus shipping
***sold out***




Brooks Johnson
, Five Windows Light the Cavern’d Man, 3pp, hand-sewn, $3 plus shipping



David Hadbawnik, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, 3pp, hand-sewn, $3 plus shipping
***sold out***


ALSO STILL AVAILABLE:


12pp. Letter-press cover designed by Richard Owens and Clifton Riley. Hand-sewn. Habenicht Press, 2010. $7 plus shipping.



$10 plus shipping


Posted in Habenicht Press release, Literary | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Field Work

Field Work page on BlazeVOX

· Paperback: 138 pages

· Binding: Perfect-Bound

· Publisher: BlazeVOX [books]

· ISBN: 978-1-60964-010-1

Previously posted excerpts from this project can be found here, here, and here.

Limited time only — buy a copy for $10, shipping included:


Posted in Literary, Spleen | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments