[New-Poetry] Lifshin Syndrome

[JforJames at aol.com]

Welcome, John J. 
 
I think Bukowski doesn't hold a candle to Lifshin's appearances in the  
little magazines. By number of books, they're  probably comparable. Also I'm sure 
in Bukowski's later years, he  didn't bother to submit work. It was probably 
enough trouble for him to keep up  with the multitude of litmags soliciting his 
poems/stories.
 
But the most important distinction is that Bukowski sells. Whatever  the 
reason, Bukowski has sold many books for many years,  when living and now 
posthumously. When Black Sparrow shut down,  Bukowski was the jewel in their crown. 
Some say it kept them afloat for years  beyond what the others on their list 
could have supported. Bukowski, to  his credit, must of have been the loyal sort. 
His fame was  international and he could've sold out to a New York publisher 
at any time, I'm  sure.  I think it was Ecco (by then a imprint of Harper 
Collins) that  paid, dearly I'm sure, for the rights to publish his works. I'm  
sure, in good capitalist fashion, they'll milk that investment until the  
copyrights run out.
Finnegan
 
 
 
In a message dated 11/2/2007 5:25:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time,  
jjeffreymail at yahoo.com writes:

It's my  first post to this list and, unbelievably, I find myself having to 
defend Lyn  Lifshin, a poet I neither know, admire, nor--to be honest--give a 
shiatsu  about.  Still, I don't see why anyone cares how much she writes or  
submits.  And while the wonder whether she writes down every thought or  never 
edits may or may not be true, that doesn't explain the fact that she's  been 
published so much.  We'd  have to rattle a thousand editors' doors about that.  
She only submits;  they choose to publish.

(Of course, the answer why they publish her is  simple if you've ever sat and 
read a pile of submissions.  Most of it is  amateurish, muddled, and 
unpublishable.  I've read some of Lifshin's  stuff, and it's not horrible.  So she 
gets published because her stuff  still in the sifter after some vigorous 
shaking.)

But please, how could  prolific writing be a negative?  For her or anyone?  
You write and  write and write and then...  What?  Have you emptied the juice  
box?  Is that all you've got?  No mas?  Mo mas? 

Or is  the issue that you wrote all that--took all that time--and it might be 
 awful.  Well, let's tear off the wrapper and look: Yep; it's awful.   Except 
for that line there...  And maybe that little thought,  yes...  
And--Oooo--isn't that a nice phrase?...  Next time, let's  leap from that verb--and write 
and write again.

It's not a simple  numbers game, no.  But it is a matter of exercise and 
practice and  rummaging new closets.  What effort doesn't improve with  
repetition?  The music analogy was apt, as would a sports analogy, or  painting, or 
programming, or cooking, or throwing tomatoes at an opera  singer.

Okay. I've got to get back to work; all this writing has made  me eager to do 
nothing.

Now, where can I submit this?

John  J

P.S., If Lifshin's promiscuous publishing makes people scratch, any  thoughts 
on Bukowski, who's published about a half dozen books of "new" poetry  since 
his death?  (I almost put those quotation marks around the word  poetry in the 
sentence above:   Does that give away my opinion of Bukowski?)








************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/pipermail/new-poetry/attachments/20071103/4510544b/attachment.html