poetry, publishing and blogs - what it means to be a poet on the internet

russell engages us in poetics conversation

this is a fabulous conversation, cherubs. if you haven't read into it yet, hop on over to Yuckelbel's Cannon and read the post he links to, read the comments on that post, read Russell's post on the matter, read the comments on Russell's post... then finally, add to it.

trust me, by the time you've read everything that's humming you'll have something to say... or you'll be writing your own blog post about it, furthering the conversation (and hopefully engaging new poets and talkers in the dialogue) like i am here.

the matter: professional poets. the question arose, what does it mean to be a professional poet?

never mind that. what does it mean to be a poet? that's a taxing question.

a poet: one who writes poetry. is this good enough? no, because then you get into the whole debacle of defining poetry. trust me i've tried this one, it isn't easy. in fact i sort of came to the conclusion that, like porn, you just know it when you see it.

a poet: one who calls him or her self so. a poet: me. a poet: russell. a poet: you.

we could go around in circles all day trying to figure out what makes a poet. i am a poet. the end. don't beat around the metaphysical bush, just admit to it, you are, otherwise you would not be reading this. promise.

so the real interesting issue here, for me, is how we, poets, share our work.

i made the analogy in russell's comment thread about the blogosphere being the new network of hipster cafes.

keats and wordsworth were the first of their kind. forget where i read it, but they made tea shops the place to be. today, poets make blogs the place to be.

but there's a problem, as russell notes, for poets who wish to gain recognition via publication online in order to someday find their name in print. publishers are beginning to deny poems that have already been published to blogs.

a catch 22
recently, whenever anyone has asked me how to get published, i tell them to start a blog.

all of my success in poetry publications to date are *directly* linked to my blog and the connections i've made with other blogging poets.

a collaboration i took part in with another blogger (someone i met through blogging) is being published before the end of this year--in print.

didi at mipo radio found me through my blog.

i was found by the editor of in our own words--a print anthology of poetry--via my blog.

we're all being included in the anthology of younger poets--another print anthology--because we blog.

and the lovely folks at the onion union found me through my blog.


it's interesting though... that publishers are beginning to realize, to notice the power of poetry blogs. look at the number of readers we share. hell, even if we're only reading each other, then some of us are getting more readers than some small presses.

i know that a hand full of people are going to see this post (and although they may not read it, they read the short poems i post, right ozy?).

maybe that's a problem for small presses though. blogs are easy. they're free. they're interactive. they're modern and they're everywhere.

the old argument that paper will stand the test of time holds true for me. paper is gorgeous. i LOVE print chappies and magazines and anthologies. nothing beats them.

but as a poet... what medium do you chose? or do you have to?

as magnificent as paper is... i build my micro-empire, built my name, on the web. on blog spot. thank you google.

i've even met one of my best friends through google's blogger.

so, as poets who blog... what do we think?

the real issue here... do we have to chose a format? or, how do we balance our worth in paper and continue to maintain a secure network of close, open minded poets whom we share our work with?