Great article by Angela Topping.
https://angelatopping.wordpress.com/201 ... zines/amp/
Cheers,
Tristan
Old Poetry Magazines
-
Antcliff
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 6599
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:35 am
- Location: At the end of stanza 3
I am unclear why 20 to 30 years hence provides a more revealing viewpoint than now. In thirty years I may not care whether I paint the great picture, make love to x, vote y, go to z...but, therefore...? I may not have cared 30 years before about a particular cause, but would anybody say that was a more revealing viewpoint? Is there anything wrong with wanting your band to play in a good venue today, even though you may care less about that in 30 years?In 20 or 30 years, you will no longer care whether or not you got into a particular magazine or not.
Seth
We fray into the future, rarely wrought
Save in the tapestries of afterthought.
Richard Wilbur
Save in the tapestries of afterthought.
Richard Wilbur
Morning Seth,
I suppose what she is saying is that when we look back, whether we were published or not in these mags, it doesn't matter as much as it did, partly because we can see how little being published in mags means in the long term. (Obviously, it means a lot to us when it happens, probably in part because the poetry community is much like any other community: caught up in itself, self-referencing and attaches too much importance to its own procedures/workings). Most poetry mags are ephemera as she says, and don't matter a great deal in the long run, besides bibliographically.
I think it's an irony that most poetry is so easily forgotten when one of the main goals of poetry is to produce a memorable turn of phrase. In this respect, it seems to me that pop musician have taken the place of poets. Maybe this is why Dylan won the Nobel. Who knows.
Cheers,
Tristan
I suppose what she is saying is that when we look back, whether we were published or not in these mags, it doesn't matter as much as it did, partly because we can see how little being published in mags means in the long term. (Obviously, it means a lot to us when it happens, probably in part because the poetry community is much like any other community: caught up in itself, self-referencing and attaches too much importance to its own procedures/workings). Most poetry mags are ephemera as she says, and don't matter a great deal in the long run, besides bibliographically.
I think it's an irony that most poetry is so easily forgotten when one of the main goals of poetry is to produce a memorable turn of phrase. In this respect, it seems to me that pop musician have taken the place of poets. Maybe this is why Dylan won the Nobel. Who knows.
Cheers,
Tristan
-
Ros
- Moderator
- Posts: 7963
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 4:53 pm
- antispam: no
- Location: this hill-shadowed city/of razors and knives.
- Contact:
First point: "Print journals often seem more prestigious, but online has a wider reach and a greater chance of longevity. That’s a valuable lesson." Yes!!
I'd agree that the all-out rush for publication sometimes damages a poet's progress - many are more concerned about getting into mags than actually working at the poetry (at least, that what Antiphon's experience would show). People aren't thinking about what the reader might actually want to read. And what a mag publishes is only the choices of the editor, which may or may not be able to spot the poems that will last.
I'd agree with Seth, though, that whether it matters in 20 years is somewhat irrelevant - if it is an aim now, and gives pleasure now, then that is enough. And of course being published can lead to other things, eg getting a book published, being invited to readings etc. So it has immediate effects.
Certainly most poets will be completely forgotten 100 years after their death; but so will the activities of most other people.
I'd agree that the all-out rush for publication sometimes damages a poet's progress - many are more concerned about getting into mags than actually working at the poetry (at least, that what Antiphon's experience would show). People aren't thinking about what the reader might actually want to read. And what a mag publishes is only the choices of the editor, which may or may not be able to spot the poems that will last.
I'd agree with Seth, though, that whether it matters in 20 years is somewhat irrelevant - if it is an aim now, and gives pleasure now, then that is enough. And of course being published can lead to other things, eg getting a book published, being invited to readings etc. So it has immediate effects.
Certainly most poets will be completely forgotten 100 years after their death; but so will the activities of most other people.
Rosencrantz: What are you playing at? Guildenstern: Words. Words. They're all we have to go on.
___________________________
Antiphon - www.antiphon.org.uk
___________________________
Antiphon - www.antiphon.org.uk
One of the significant differences to print, at least for me, is that ezines that no longer publish, often disappear from the internet. Definitely puts the 'encouragement' into a limited time perspective. However, it is true I am more likely to dip into an ezine for reading than purchase a print magazine. I don't find 'standards' between the two forms of publication significant. Most of the poetry I read are in books, usually from the same publishing house.
mac
mac