Revision Process

[Leanne]

Poetry isn't science. And even with science, knowing history and biography in relation to the scientist affects how we understand the theory. I don't think there's much reason to look at the poem as separate from the poet. Poetry is a subjective humanistic experience, there are of course objective standards and taste, still the author exists, the personal connection between the reader and the author is important.

You must have been the bloke cheering the van that knocked down Barthes. Me, I lean quite heavily toward the post-structuralist ideas and I don't care if they don't fit with the cult of the I that is endemic in poetry today. Once the initial writing process is done, everything else is reading, even when I come back to it myself. And every reading rewrites it, whether literally or in the reception of the reader.

Personally, I couldn't give two shits if I connect with an "author" or not. Poetry for me is and probably always will be an intellectual experience rather than some visceral response. If a poem moves me to tears, it's not because I feel for the author, it's because the author has reminded me of something or made me examine an aspect of the human experience and the emotion is mine, not the poet's. A poet might be loaded with emotion when he/she writes, in blood on the tear-stained page or whatever, but if there's no intellectual connection then I have no reason to care.

If someone actively addresses me and wants to engage me in a conversation about his/her poem, I'm happy to do that. Otherwise, I have plenty of other people in my life upon whom I can practice my editorial genius and be received with just as little appreciation as by poets here.