Sunday September 30th
Books Upstairs Dublin, reading with Dean Brown &
Bernadette McCarthy
Sunday July 22nd
Kinsale Arts Week reading at Cru 4pm with Gerry Murphy
& Elizabeth O'Donoghue
October 6th -11th
Shanghai International Poetry Festival
with Adonis, David Harsent, Ales Steger, Yang Lian, Zhao
Lihong & Others.
Thursday April 27th
Irish National Poetry Day reading with Gerry Murphy &
Matthew Sweeney at Waterstones, Cork
September 16th
National Culture Night Readings
Elizabeth Fort, Cork 6pm with Gerry Murphy
Grand Parade Library 8pm Cork Anthology Launch
July 15th to 18th
Velestovo Poetry Nights, Lake Ohrd,
Macedonia
August 16th &17th
Velestovo
Poetry Nights, Macedonia
July 25th
Reading at Waterstones Booksellers, Cork
January 19th
Sparks Literary
Festival, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada.
November 16th
O
Bheal Winter Warmer, Cork
November 14th
Cafe U Dvoritsu,
Zagreb, reading from Poezija
November 12th
Ribook, Rijeka, Croatia, reading from
Poezija
November 7th
Keats-Shelley Memorial Association, St
Martins-in-the-Fields, London, where I gratefully received
the 2013 Keats-Shelley Prize for Poetry
November 3rd
Polish-Irish Poetry Night, Metropole Hotel, Cork 7.30pm
October 30th
Talk to MA in Festive Arts Class in the University of
Limerick.
October 21st
Talk to MA in Creative Writing Class University College
Cork
May
Participating in 2013 Spring Festival « Le
Banquet du Livre », in Lagrasse, South of France.
April 18th
Crossroads
Festival, Bookshop West Portal San Francisco 7pm
April 16th
April 13th
April 11th
November 3rd
Reading at Cork City Library to mark
launch of New Anthology celebrating SIMON
Friday October 7th
Lunchtime reading at the Irish
Writers' Centre, Dublin
August 24th -29th
Struga
Poetry Evenings Festival, Macedonia
August 19th-20th
Velestova Poetry Nights Macedonia
Saturday February 19th
Cork
Spring Literary Festival
Saturday October 9th
at The
Liberties 998 Guerrero, San Francisco.
Tuesday October 5th
Moe's
Books, Berkeley, California. Article
about this event in Eastbay Express
Friday September 17th
The Short Story & New Media - A
Seminar
At the Frank O'Connor International Short Story Festival
Chaired by festival director Patrick Cotter. Is the
printed book endangered? Is web publication valid? In the
future will key texts be published only on Kindle? How do
podcasts help in promoting the short story? Listen to a
selection of festival participants discuss these crucial
questions and take the opportunity to ask questions from
the floor.
Venue: The Ballroom, Metropole Hotel, MacCurtain Street.
Time: 2pm. Admission: Free.
Frank
O'Connor International Short Story Festival, Cork
Thursday August 26th
City
Library Galway for Over the Edge
May
With James Harpur, Irish Pavilion at
Shanghai Expo
March 10th
10.00am Handan campus, Fudan University,
Lecture Room 217 of No.5 classroom building, College of
Foreign Languages and Literature
March 12th
14.00 Shanghai Normal Univeristy East
Campus, Room 106, Foreign Language Department
March 14th
12.00 Reading at the Shanghai Literary
Festival, Glamour Bar, Bund 5
March 29th
Reading at The Poetry Now
Festival Dun Laoghaire
April 7th 7pm
Launch of new book Making
Music at Cork City Central Library
April 21st - 25th
Reading at the International Istanbul –
Beyoğlu Poetry Festival
May 31st - June 5th
Introducing Irish authors at the
European Short Story Festival Zagreb, Croatia.
September 16th - 20th
Curating the Frank O'Connor
Interanational Short Story Festival in Cork. details here.
June 6th, 7th and 8th
Reading at Force 12 Literary Festival in Belmullet, Co.
Mayo.
September 13th and 14th
Reading at the Full Moon Poetry Festival (Täiskuu
luulefestival) in Rapla, Estonia.
October 15th - 19th
Reading at the Cuisle Poetry Festival in Limerick.
Wednesday 8pm Belltable Arts Centre
November
Reading at the Unitarian Church, Stephen's Green, Dublin
on thursday 6th at 6.30pm
November 21st Reading at the New Sorbonne, Paris.
December 15th
Featured Poet at O Bheal, Long Valley, Cork.
A paper delivered to open the symposium on Contemporary
Munster Poetry in English on Friday May 23rd 2008
When I preface my remarks by saying that
this is not an academic paper but a polemic. I’m not
making an apology. I’ll begin with a quote:
“It seems that every writer has to make the
imaginative grasp at identity for himself and if he can
find no means in his inheritance to suit him he will have
to start from scratch.”
The exclusivity of male pronouns in that
statement is indicative of the age in which it was made
and of its author: Thomas Kinsella in Sean Lucy’s “Irish
Poets in English” published in 1972. Kinsella’s male
preference was further expressed in 1986 when his Oxford
Book of Irish Verse was published containing no
living Irish poet of the female gender. But it was an
exclusion of more than gender. It excluded a great many
other poets too, most neatly by its date of birth cut off
point, poets who not only failed to fit in by age but who
also failed to suit Kinsella’s programmatic agenda, mainly
because their work was influenced by traditions other than
the one Kinsella was promulgating.
In 1985 in John Haffenden’s book of
interviews with contemporary poets, Kinsella was asked:
“Do you feel a kinship with other
contemporary poets?”
Kinsella responded:
“The simple answer is: No. I don’t feel that
there is a group activity afoot in which I play a part, or
a creative heave in which maybe two or three poets are
engaged. I don’t think it’s as coherent as it looks: it
would be pure journalism to think like that.”
I can’t help thinking that that is the
answer to a different question from the one which
Haffenden asked. I believe it’s possible for a poet to
share a kinship with another without having to belong to a
movement or group linked by written or unwritten
manifestoes. I will expand on this point later when I
focus on Munster poets. We all recognise in Kinsella’s
response here the genesis for the infamous locution
‘journalistic entity’.
I don’t think I’m being overly cynical when
I see a huge irony behind the contradiction of Kinsella’s
various statements and actions. I wholeheartedly agree
with his declared sentiment that a poet must start from
scratch in the formation of his or her identity, where
identity is a synonym for voice; and even where identity
might be some atavistic code word for national belonging I
still agree with the idea that if one can find no means in
one’s inheritance to suit, one must begin from scratch.
But in promulgating the exclusive idea of
his dual tradition and shaping it by that notorious
anthology Kinsella effectively would deny to an Irish poet
any option of starting from scratch. Patrick Galvin,
Padraig Fiacc, Desmond O’Grady, Michael Longley, Maire
Mhac an tSaoi, Eavan Boland and Eilean Ni Chuilleanain
in the eyes of Kinsella apparently didn’t conform to this
tradition and doubtless nor would Dennis O’Driscoll,
Matthew Sweeney, Maurice Riordan, Gerry Murphy or myself
and many others. One might accept the argument that the
senior list of excluded simply failed to make Kinsella’s
grade on the criterion of basic poetic achievement were it
not for the inclusion of Seamus Deane, Valentine Iremonger
and a few other second-raters in their stead.
I agree with Kinsella’s idea expressed over
twenty years ago that things are never as coherent as they
look. Generally in the Anglophone world poets have too
much common sense to align themselves with one formal
grouping or another. In an Irish context most if not all
such perceived groupings are in fact journalistic
entities, in so far as they are usually identified as such
from outside the group and not bound by shared aesthetic
or manifesto; but I also believe that Kinsella’s so-called
dual tradition constitutes a grouping which would seek to
deny entry to most Irish poets of the female gender and
most Irish poets who happen to be men and who do not write
within Kinsella’s atavistic tradition. In short I believe
the poetry of Irish tradition and identity to be the
greatest journalistic entity of all, one which encompasses
the so called Northern Renaissance.
In my wide reading of European poetry, my
acquaintance with critical monographs on the big names,
the listings of national anthologies, the word identity
doesn’t enter into matters. One might argue that Europe’s
poetries are more neatly contained within borders than
Irish poetry in English is. That would ignore the fact
that the two great German-speaking poets of the last
century were not German. Rilke was born in what is now the
Czech republic, educated at an Austrian military academy
and spent most of his writing life in Germany, France and
Switzerland. Celan was born in what is now the Ukraine,
published his first poems in Romanian periodicals, had his
first book published in Austria (selling less than thirty
copies in its first two years of publication by the way),
lived the rest of his life in France, published in Germany
but was shunned by the contemporary German group 47,
initially for the trivial reason that he read his poems
aloud in the Eastern shamanistic fashion, whereas the
Germans preferred a non-showy, non-emotive declarative
style of public reading.
There are no great treatises written on the national
identities of these giants of 20th century poetry.
Yet national identity, how an Irish poet and
his or her work might fit into tradition, might be shaped
by Irish history is practically the only critical
discourse that goes on in Irish studies departments,
relieved occasionally by the attentions of gender
ideologues. Both the nationalist (of green and orange
varieties) and gender critical camps fall into the
categorisation of “enemies of poetry” as explained by the
great Trinity classicist W.B. Stanford in his book of that
name. For Stanford, and a great many poets, the enemies of
poetry include those scholars and critics who would treat
poetry as if it were essentially a way of presenting
information, history, science, education, ethics or
politics. Rarely in an Irish context is a poet assessed on
his or her use of diction; the basis of his or her
aesthetic provenance or kinship. Where a poet’s
relationship with language is examined it’s usually
exclusively in relation to Irish, or where an academic has
risen to the bait of a poet sprinkling his work
with slang or dialect which forms no natural component of
his own diction. In this case it’s always a man.
Many poets, desperate for any kind of
attention whatsoever for their work are quietly complicit
in this great criminal undertaking. It’s one thing to be
complacent about how others read your work (and in the
real world one has no real control over such matters
anyhow) but it’s quite another thing to deliberately set
out to write poems which fall more easily within the
parameters of such critical discourse. And of course in
the context of writing primarily to generate academic
exegesis this is an appropriate moment to point out the
existence of a small pond, the anachronistic grouplet in
Irish poetry referred to variously as the modernists and
neomodernists who write texts in a post-modernist world,
specifically for one another and the handful of critics
who write about them.
.
Dennis O’Driscoll has written in the journal Metre:
“Irish Studies programs in America increasingly influence
the terms on which Irish poetry is read – maybe even
written – at home.” More recently a prominent Irish poet
whose newest work has been appearing in periodicals to
great acclaim from other poets confided in me that he was
reluctant to include these poems in his next book because
he worried that their content wasn’t Irish enough.
Thankfully we are in the dying moments of
this historical phenomenon. Affluence at home has acted as
an emigrational tourniquet. The steady stream of Irish
blood fleeing across the Atlantic is coming to an end. The
collapse of Irish-American political influence is
signified by the exponential rise in Asian-studies and
Latino-studies departments overtaking Irish Studies in
popularity and sources of lucre.
Earlier in the week I was emailed by a friend in
California a recent article in the New York Times
entitled “Does the Real Ireland Still Exist”. Authenticity
for the American author amounted to the sight of a
thatched cottage and finding oneself in a pub where people
played the fiddle and burst spontaneously into song:
Kinvara Co. Galway in other words. I responded to my
friend by emailing her that the real Ireland for me
consisted of a place where half the neighbours on my
street spoke Polish and every twentieth face in the city
centre was Asian in origin. I told her that the rural
corner I have always liked the best was West Cork, much
shaped by the invasion of Western European hippies in the
Seventies who settled, culturally influenced the place and
now have started to balance on their knees grandchildren
with Cork accents and German, Dutch and French surnames.
The fact that my friend in California could take an
article published over two thousand miles away from her
and send it instantly to a friend five thousand miles away
underlines the stupidity of expecting a contemporary Irish
poet to work exclusively within a set of influences marked
out in Kinsella’s anthology.
And such an expectation was stupid long
before the existence of the internet or the phenomenon of
immigration in Ireland. In the 1960s Penguin began a
stupendous series of modern poets in translation which
revolutionised the way many poets working in English
wrote. The revolution was most noticeable in America with
the rise of poets such as Charles Simic, Stephen Dobyns,
James Tate, and others. In Britain any such innovative
tendencies were quashed at the xenophobic doors of
newspaper reviewers and commissioning editors. Where the
work of Zbigniew Herbert, Paul Celan or Miroslav Holub was
lauded in the critical pages of cold-war British journals
any British or Irish poet who dared to reveal these
influences in his or her own work was dismissed as lazy
and incompetent for not working within the well-made-poem
tradition, such censure extended as far as that great
critical mind Anthony Twaite who dismissed Ted Hughes’s Crow
and Thom Gunn’s Moly as being technically
incompetent.
I might just digress here to make the point
that a great many people believe there are many different
ways to make a poem well and that the so-called
well-made-poem is not always made well. An example would
be Sean Dunne’s obsession in his first two books with
metrical regularity to the point where arguably page after
page hammers the anvil of the inner ear with a sonic
monotony. Incidentally if anyone thinks I’m being
malicious here, this is a criticism I made while Sean was
still alive in a review which Sean thanked me for having
written. I like to think that the greater musical variety
of his third book resulted from an assimilation of this
point.
Thankfully the emergence of a generation of
British poets born in the 60’s and nurtured on those very
same Penguin modern poets in translation has dispelled all
such reactionary poppycock, but not before seeing a poet
like Dennis O’Driscoll remain critically ignored and taken
for a lightweight throughout most of his career until
recently, where most attention now is coming from
non-Irish-Studies-specialist American peers. O’Driscoll
might have been a highly influential voice in Irish poetry
criticism were it not for his sensitive skin and the
intimacy of the Irish poetry scene. After a scathing
review O’Driscoll wrote of a James Simmons book, Simmons
at a poetic gathering assaulted O’Driscoll in that
marvellously gifted way Celts have with passive aggression
by saying: “What did I ever do to you?” O’Driscoll later
wrote, (with better manners than I have by not naming
Simmons), “it never seemed to occur to him that I just
didn’t like his poetry”. O’Driscoll stopped writing about
Irish poetry from that moment on but continued to publish
in journals such as the TLS, Poetry Review, Harvard
Review, the Crane Bag, The London Review of Books and
other places, articles which contained in their titles
names such as John Berryman, Charles Simic, Stephen
Dobyns, Tomas Transtromer, Kaplinski, Milosz, Symborska,
Zagajewski and Holub.
As with many other aspects of progress in
Irish life there has been a delay of twenty years before
developments in Britain, were mirrored here. The
disintegration of reactionary hegemony in Irish poetry is
only now beginning to gain momentum,
There are a number of reasons why the Irish
poetry publishing scene was so dysfunctional in the 80’s
and 90s: most of the greater talents were published in
Britain by Faber, Oxford, Cape, Anvil or Bloodaxe; few
women were published. In a survey I conducted of poetry
publishing in English in the Republic in late 1991 I could
conclude that 89% of Raven Arts Press poets were male, as
were 84% of The Gallery Press and 95% of Dedalus. Gallery
had just one poet on its list who hadn’t graduated from
university: Michael Hartnett. Very few of the poets
published by Gallery were accepted without having been
validated elsewhere first, either by having won a national
prize or having been previously published by another
publisher. Dedalus, which exercised more independent
mindfulness in the judging of a new poet’s worth still
published only graduates and practically only men.
Essentially in 1991 if you were a new poet who happened to
be a woman who had not entered university, had not yet won
a poetry prize you stood the proverbial snowball’s chance
of being published. The emphases on university graduates
inevitably led to a situation where many of the most
visible poets published were those who were also jobbing
academics and more gifted and influential as academics
than as poets and if you want me to name names Gerald Dawe
and Seamus Deane spring immediately to mind. Like Dawe and
Deane many of these poets who fitted the Irish Studies
criteria perfectly were more than likely published by the
Gallery Press, were devoid of any capacity for humour and
mostly displayed ignorance of the innovations which had
occurred to the free verse poetic line during the course
of the 20th century. At this point I’d recommend a
marvellous book just published by Graywolf Press, written
by James Longenbach called “The Art of the Poetic Line”.
Peter Fallon rightfully takes great pride in
correctly claiming that most Irish poets submit their
manuscripts to him before any other publisher, but I
believe that he has drawn the wrong conclusions from this
phenomenon. The Gallery Press has consistently published
beautiful books for their time, involving quality paper,
fine binding, tasteful typography, striking covers and
excellent proofing. After the demise of Dolmen all other
regular publishers on the Irish scene have been less
consistent, verging often on the tacky in their production
standards. Poets are generally bibliophiles and
bibliophiles love the book as an objet d’art.
Poets especially love their own books to possess the
beauty of objets d’art and I have no
embarrassment in proclaiming publicly that my own repeated
failed attempts at getting published by Gallery had more
to do with this issue than any faith in Peter Fallon’s
editorial infallibility or anticipation of the company I
might be keeping within the same catalogue.
I digress at this point to say I have always
found Peter Fallon to be an agreeable person whom I
continue to admire for his commitment to his own ideals
and the seriousness with which he has dedicated himself to
the publishing of some Irish poetry, but only in the same
way as I have great personal admiration for certain
politicians whose parties I would never vote for. In the
interests of Irish poetry I believe that the myth that
Gallery Press represents all that is best in Irish poetry
must be debunked.
So why Munster poetry? Why indeed? Am I
merely proposing another apparently a priori journalistic
entity? There would be some truth to that argument. On the
level of Real Politik we are playing a game; the
interests and commitments of young academics must be won
over, they must be persuaded that the cultural produce of
our own backyard is worth their attention. They must be
persuaded that it is essential to be involved in an
intellectual debate with ourselves. Academics generally
work by comparing and contrasting. Before they can be
persuaded that many of these poets can be worthy of
individual assessment it would be easier to draw attention
to their collective strengths. But the justifications for
groupings of Munster poets are not just theoretical, I
believe they can be derived from empirical observation.
Heather Clark in her excellent introduction
to her book The Ulster Renaissance, Poetry in Belfast
1962 to 1972 addresses many of the questions
pertinent to identifying coherent groups of Munster poets.
She writes:
In the Anxiety of Influence , Harold Bloom wrote
of the living writer’s struggle to usurp positions of
authority held by past masters; however in the case of
Hobsbaum’s workshop and the Belfast poetry coterie, such
‘struggles’ occurred among living writers within a shared
geographical and, to some extent, cultural space. Although
Bloom does not attribute influence and its adherent
anxieties to the social circumstances of which writers
find themselves part, his model is nevertheless useful,
for it suggests that literary groups might themselves be a
way for writers to resist, or even overcome, the anxieties
of influence though strength in numbers. As Donald Hall
writes in Poetry and Ambition:
“It is no accident that Wordsworth,
Coleridge, and Southy were friends when they were young;
if Pound, H.D., and William Carlos Williams had not known
each other would they have become William Carlos Williams,
H.D. and Pound? There have been lone wolves but not many.
The history of poetry is a history of friendships and
rivalries, not only with the dead great ones but with the
living young.”
Peter Sirr reacted to my call for papers on
Munster poets with deep scepticism, a scepticism he has
not applied to an alternative grouping proposed by Justin
Quinn and David Wheatley which contains Sirr, the two
young academics themselves and several other poet
academics close in age.
Wheatley qualifies this grouping by making
the point:
“Among the usual contributory factors to such group
identification are a shared regional or educational
background and publishing history, early critical
reception and journalistic labelling. Whether or not the
different writers’ work has anything real in common beyond
these externals is another question entirely.”
Val Nolan has written an article reporting
on a recent talk by John Montague at NUIG which will be
published next month in Southword. Nolan writes:
"He also believes youthful jealousies and
anxieties to be ‘extremely healthy’ and poets should
‘continue to feel a sense of competition.’ Citing ‘Tom’
Kinsella as his example, Montague believes that good poets
flourish only with ‘extraordinary peers’, what he calls
the ‘how-did-they-do-that’ effect. ‘Look,’ he says, ‘at
the “Ulster team”. They play as a team; the Arts Council
sees them as a team… When this happens, ‘a generation
begins to emerge that is different’."
Aside from having sympathy for Montague here
in his apparently unrequited relationship with Kinsella
(if we are to remember Tom’s response to Haffenden) we can
recognise how appropriately Montague’s “extraordinary
peers” effect applies to that generation he is rightfully
or wrongfully credited with spawning. Certainly his
presence with Lucy in the English department of University
College Cork during the 70s and early 80s facilitated an
atmosphere where would-be poets were more than tolerated
but actually encouraged. And many of these would-be poets
escaped their conditional qualification. Poets who passed
through UCC during this period with almost apostolic
succession included Gregory O’Donoghue, Maurice Riordan,
Theo Dorgan, William Wall, Gerry Murphy Thomas McCarthy,
Sean Dunne, Greg Delanty and Liz O’Donoghue. All of these
poets have to a lesser or greater extent been competitive,
supportive peers who avidly read one another’s work and
were spurred to improve individually by so doing.
Other characteristics which these poets have
in common is that with a couple of exceptions their work
has been too cosmopolitan in character to have interested
the Irish Studies specialists. They are all relatively
laid back in style and tone which is not to say
technically negligent. Even a syllabically coherent poet
such as Thomas McCarthy is linked to the wildly enjambing
Gerry Murphy by an avoidance of what August Kleinzahler
has identified as the self-important Nobelese posturing
language common in Heaney, Wallcott and Muldoon. This Cork
grouping has had an above-average interest in translation
and the production of versions; even before the Cork 2005
translation project came about, undoubtedly influenced by
their deeper absorption of European and American poetry
than pre-1990 British work.
Aside from this group, the undeniable Innti
group also emerged out of UCC at this time and in
translation have influenced even those Cork poets without
Irish.
But the threads of kinship spread through
Munster both geographically and generationally. The
surreal is something which runs through the work of Gerry
Murphy, Patrick Galvin and Paul Durcan, the latter having
lived and worked in Cork for twenty years and who was
included in Dunne’s 1985 anthology the Poets
of Munster. Galvin, in turn has other connections,
to the folktale worlds to be found in Hartnett and Ni
Dhomhnaill. Hartnett in turn displays European influences
which are also echoed in the work of Galvin, O’Grady, Wall
and Riordan, and Asian influences echoed in Dunne.
For the brave young academic, with a genuine
interest in poetry, the opportunity to make a name through
original, pioneering scholarship, avoiding the overmined
Joyce, Beckett, Kavanagh, Yeats and now too the Ulster
Renaissance, is presented by Munster poets. There are
other areas, groupings of poets in Ireland, one as I said
earlier identified by Wheatley and Quinn, who present
research possibilities, but wearing my hat as Artistic
Director of the Munster Literature Centre I’ll leave it up
to others to plead their case.
|