__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Wednesday, February 26, 2025

TtD supplement #272 : seven questions for Jennifer Firestone

Jennifer Firestone is the author of five books of poetry, including Story (Ugly Duckling Presse). She is the co-editor with Marcella Durand of Other Influences: An Untold History of Feminist Avant-garde Poetry (MIT Press) and with Dana Teen Lomax of Letters To Poets: Conversations about Poetics, Politics and Community (Saturnalia Books). Firestone is an Associate Professor of Literary Studies and Chair of Writing at the New School’s Eugene Lang College.

Her four poems “From Dream Sequence” appear in the forty-fourth issue of Touch the Donkey.

Q: Tell me about the poems included here as part of “From Dream Sequence.”

A: Dream Sequence came from what I consider a failed poetry project. I was part of a poetry salon run by Kimberly Lyons during the beginning of Covid. At the time I felt that my dreams were colorless. In fact, I don’t remember most of my dreams during this time period. Nevertheless, I needed to bring a poem to this salon and I brought a few pages from a dream I remembered. In the dream I was shoplifting, driving around lost, and then suddenly aware that I was teaching a class that I barely ever showed up to. I realized, as I had before, that my dreams were the same old anxieties and fears manifested into “night narratives.” I was a bit humbled by how simple I seemed.

My family loves to share dreams. I try to be a polite audience but I tend to lose interest. Is the reportage of dreams a low-level version of narcissism? From there Dream Sequence took off. Like most of my writing, the work typically evolves from resistance and perplexity. I began to write less about my dreams and more about the act of dreaming. What are the best “conditions” for a dream; is that such a thing? What happens when dreams are blurred with domestic noise and outside interruptions. Can I steer my dreams away from panic and cowardice and more toward desire and potential?

Q: How do you consider this project failed?

A: So the original project (hopefully not this iteration!) I felt failed as it was too self-conscious; I felt my hand in it. I think I was relying on the substance of my dreams to carry the poems, to do its magic and I’m not sure that’s as exciting for the reader as it is for the writer. The surrealists did a good job with working with dreams, so did Bernadette Mayer, Alice Notley and many others. But it felt a bit surface to me; it lacked tension. I put these dream-poems away for a year and then came back again and realized I needed to bring in my critique, my doubts along with my dreamworld in relation to the material world. As Rachel Levitsky said to me after hearing me read some of these poems at Familiar Trees, wow a dream writing project that doesn’t include dreams.

Q: How do these pieces compare to some of the other work you’ve been doing lately?

A: My other work right now is more documentary/investigative. Dream Sequence is a series that includes some research about the mechanics of dreaming and other writers’ perspectives about dreams but it’s not as project-oriented. In Dream Sequence I developed a persona who is somewhat unpredictable and subversive. I see the speaker as an anti-heroine of sorts. I’m also playing with the echoes of more traditional romantic poetry, with elements of the rhyme and diction, but transposed to the contemporary time period.

Q: You mention that most of your other works are project-oriented. What brought you to moving through project-based works?

A: I appreciate the grounding of a project-based work but at times the research and approach can feel similar to some of my more academic work. Dream Sequence feels a little more slippery, surprising. I’m not sure where it’s going to end up. Perhaps it’s like dreams where you don't know when they will come to a sudden stop and what the feeling might be that remains with you. Since I’m chairing my department right now and overwhelmed with work and the state of our country and the challenges my family faces, I needed something that could possibly address these various stressors but also be playful and suggestive and beguiling. Additionally, I tend to be restless and contradictory, so if I take on a particular writing approach or aesthetic I tend to abandon that the next time around.

Q: With a handful of published poetry titles under your belt, as well as your current works-in-progress, how do you feel your work has progressed? Where do you see your work headed?

A: Ah, “progression,” I think that can be a tough word in relation to one’s poetics as poetry/being a poet resist a linear trajectory. I just know that each of my books has some correspondence with the last one but also steps into a different direction formally and topically. I care less and less about trends and hold myself more to my own integrity: am I being too surface? Have I pushed the language? Who is the work speaking to? How does it move from my own habits, affinities and obsessions and reach to the unknown and defamilarized? Does my craft and form meet the needs of the subject? Am I including the broader world versus my own little microcosm? The questions go on. Being a poetry professor for over twenty years, along with participating in several editing projects, have made me more critical, word for word. My students know that I won’t hold back when offering critique. At the same time, I’m not about the “workshop poem,” and can fully embrace a messy, disjointed poem if that’s what the work wants to do. I think as you get older you become more aware of time so for me it’s not just about publishing, it’s about what I can offer that might be useful, joyful, interesting to others. I have many aspirations as I think about future projects. I want to keep exploring subjectivity and language-making as that is what informs our consciousness and awareness in relation to others. I want to continue using the vehicle of a camera and in extension, photography, as a way to investigate framing and perception. I want to keep including animals and plants in my work. I want to keep an eye to what is marginalized and devalued as that is where we can learn and understand systems, preferences and biases. I want to work with a traditional form and see how that will influence my poetics. I want to write long Ashbery-like prose blocks as I love his work very much. I have fallen back into essay writing (last year I created and taught a new course entitled The Poet’s Essay), and hope to write a book-length creative nonfiction about my father’s death but more so about my cultural concerns regarding rituals of grief. I might write a strange play. I am always thinking up new ideas. I also have done numerous collaborative projects and will probably do more. If only I didn't work full-time and have three kids. . .. but this is my life.

Q: Through your creative and editorial work, I’ve long had the sense that much of your writing exists in conversation with other writers and works. You mention John Ashbery; what other poets and/or particular works sit at the back of your head as you write?

A: I would say my writing is in conversation with my friends’ work. I feel very fortunate that I’m in conversation with many brilliant writers such as Brenda Coultas, Erica Hunt, Marcella Durand, Evelyn Reilly, Karen Weiser, Cole Swenson, Kimberly Lyons, Albert Mobilio, Anselm Berrigan, Lee Ann Brown, Tracie Morris, Hoa Nyugen, Pam Dick, Anne Tardos, Anne Waldman, Sarah Rosenthal, Eléna Rivera, Wendy, Xu, Tonya Foster, Dana Teen Lomax, Rachel Levitsky, KPrevallet, Julie Patton, Carla Harryman, I’m leaving off many more whom I adore. I think friendships can be overlooked, like you should first scan your bookshelves versus who is breathing besides you. My recent MIT Press collection, which I co-edited with Marcella Durand, Other Influences: An Untold History of Feminist Avant-garde Poetry, subverts the concept of influence. When you are deeply engaged with others’ writing to the point that the writers form your communities you can’t help but be influenced by them in your own writing. I don’t want to name particular works here as I tend to resist iconization of my favorite books. I am also fickle. I read toward my mood and need. Sometimes Stein is the perfect antidote and sometimes she gives me a headache. I have a genuine curiosity and generous attention to lots of diverse work. Although I tend to write what would be labeled as “experimental,” I’m quite open to various kinds of writing. That’s probably what makes me a good professor and reader of works, as I try not to let my own aesthetics entirely govern my reading practice. I like work where there’s a pressure on and attention to the language, where exploration of the subject and form is self-aware, nuanced: this could be Matsuo Bashō Wanda Coleman, Wallace Stevens or Susan Howe. I also like meaning to be just out of reach—when a poem has intention to some degree but perhaps doesn’t know its full sweep, where I can feel its thinking and struggle.

Q: Finally, who do you read to reenergize your own work? What particular works can’t you help but return to?

A: Again too many to list but I’ll try. Rilke’s Duino Elegies, Paul Celan’s Breathturn and Threadsuns, anything Ashbery, Myung Mi Kim’s Dura and Penury, Bernadette Mayer’s Midwinter Day, anything Lyn Hejinian and particularly her lecture, “The Rejection of Closure,” Rachel Blau Duplessis’s Drafts, her writings in The Pink Guitar, Emily Dickinson, anything Harryette Mullen. I’ll cut myself off here.


Friday, February 7, 2025

TtD supplement #271 : seven questions for J-T Kelly

J-T Kelly is an innkeeper in Indianapolis. He lives in a brick house with his wife, their six children, his two parents, and a dog. Debut poetry chapbook Like Now (CCCP/Subpress, 2023). Poems in The Denver Quarterly, Bad Lilies, and elsewhere.

His poems “Cult Classic,” “Going Out” and “Aesthetics 101” appear in the forty-fourth issue of Touch the Donkey.

Q: Tell me about the poems “Cult Classic,” “Going Out” and “Aesthetics 101.”

A: The first two poems go together. I have questions about the movies. Movies are very expensive to make — in terms of money but also numbers of people, hours of work, &c. Poetry is the opposite. It costs no money to write a poem. And yet you can still be killed for it — amazing! Movies are a communal experience — much more so than poetry. When you’re involved in making a movie, how do you fit your creative input with everybody else’s? When you’re in the audience, how do you manage the social aspect of your experience?

And then, of course, there’s the wordy-mechanical part of writing the poems. These two movie poems go together in this way too. I was very much thinking about sentence structure and Gertrude Stein. And I’m perennially thinking about how one sentence leads to another. How does one even stick to a subject? Where is the subject? How does a sentence change a previous sentence?

As for “Aesthetics 101,” I like to think this poem speaks for itself. Except for that part about the teeth. And maybe the Hydra. And the French words.

Q: How do these pieces compare to some of the other work you’ve been doing lately?

A: Lately I’ve been more interested in the Bible. There’s the truism about the King James leaving its footprints all over the English language. But what I’m interested in is how foreign a concept the religious life is. And I’m using the term religious on purpose. Faith is pretty slippery, it’s not accountable. You can have a statement of faith, a creed, but that’s getting back to religion. Religion is repetition, things written down, people gathering together, more repetition, enemies. And I’m religious. And it’s weird to me. Sometimes I’m bopping around my life of schedules and budgets and phone notifications and cars — and then I'll think of Moses walking up into the hills by himself to go talk to God. And I ask myself, “Am I connected to that? How am I connected to that? What are these words I’m reciting that are thousands of years old? Are words that durable? What about words is durable?”

Q: What brought you to attempt these explorations through the form of the lyric, as opposed to through some other manner? Have you any models for these kind of poems?

A: Mostly I write short pieces. I think my average poem length is under 20 lines. One very practical reason for that is that I have six kids. I don’t get much contiguous time for writing. Harder to sustain the things in longer pieces that need sustaining with such short writing times.

But maybe the weightier reason is that by temperament and by long habit I talk too much. And it doesn’t help me. So I’ve been learning to say less. And in writing I find I am drawn to writing that is direct and spare and that doesn’t try to lead the reader from one point to another. “You talk a lot / but you’re not saying anything. / When I have nothing to say / my lips are sealed. / Say it only once. / Why say it again?” Irony and all, that’s what draws me to the lyric.

I don’t have a direct model for these poems, but they do come out of reading. John Ashbery, Robert Creeley, Tom Snarsky, Kyla Houbolt, Jordan Davis, Rae Armantrout. Those are probably the ones I would connect to these poems.

Q: With a published chapbook debut under your belt, how do you feel your work has developed? Where do you see your work headed?

A: My work has developed more difficulties, more questions. What kind of poems do I want to write, anyway? And why? God only knows. I am shopping around a full-length manuscript. And I’m glad I didn’t try that when I was young. The anxiety might’ve killed me. Now, and with everything else going on in my life, it really doesn’t have a chance to rise to the surface. Or not for long. I look at the stuff I write, and I wonder if any of the five things I think I do well would even show up on the board of Family Feud. And if all that sounds depressing, it’s really not. I am enjoying writing. I am enjoying working out just what it is that I like and don’t care for, what I would like to see more of in the world and what I needn’t bother with. And I do wonder what to do with this feeling I have that something is building up behind the dam and whether that feeling is connected to a slowly growing desire to write something longer.

Q: Given your chapbook debut wasn’t that far back, what was the process of putting that manuscript together? Has putting that out in the world prompted you to see your work any differently? What has been the response?

A: I was really lucky to work with a publisher who likes eclecticism. He looked at many more poems than could fit in a chapbook and he suggested a grouping. He was really looking for a collection of good poems, rather than a narrative or theme or an arc.

Here’s what the process taught me. A poem is like a syndrome, right? If you have 7 of these 12 things going on, then you’ve got the syndrome. If you only have 5 things, well then you’re pretty sick, but insurance won’t cover it. Ashbery reportedly would give each poem in consideration for a collection an A, B, or C. And you’d think he'd put all the As together and call it a book. But he thought you needed a certain percentage of Bs in there.

Reception has been pretty good for this chapbook. That is, I’ve tried to get it into the hands of people who are part of the conversations if like to be part of. And mostly, those people have been pretty happy to receive it and pretty happy to be in conversation with me. Has it sold well? I believe we have broken even, and I may even get a check in the new year, maybe enough to buy myself a chapbook. If it’s big enough, maybe I’ll get a year subscription to Hanging Loose!

Q: Has this process shifted the way you write, in any way?

A: I’m still writing the same way. That is, I keep one long Google doc open for six months at a time and every day I write in it. Sometimes I pull a poem out of it. At the end of six months I go back over it all and pull out lines I like. Then I start a new doc. Once a year I pull out all the poems and look at them and try to figure out what might hold together.

But when I look at an individual poem, I am asking:

Is this poem big enough? Is there enough of the world in it?
What's the vocabulary of this poem? Does it have all the words it needs?
Is it a serious thing?
Is it any fun?
Does it tell the reader what to do? (A yes would be bad.)
Did I write this poem already?
Q: Finally, who do you read to reenergize your own work? What particular works can’t you help but return to?

A: Kenneth Koch. The first poem of his I read is “One Train May Hide Another.” I’d never read anything like that before. I’ve read it aloud to many people. I asked around and got some ideas of where to start with Koch, and I’ve read a fair bit by now. Some favorites: “Some General Remarks,” “The Art of Poetry,” “The Boiling Water,” “The Brassiere Factory,” and my very favorite, “Passing Time in Skansen.” Koch’s poetry is like listening to your favorite teacher talk spontaneously and perhaps at length on a subject they love. I try to absorb from him love, energy, interest, fun, exuberance, daring, curiosity. If I ever think to myself, “Why poetry?” I can read some more Kenneth Koch and respond, “That’s why.”