DAVINA TOMLIN: What do you think
makes this particular book of poetry different from your previous books in
terms of theme and format?
JOHN SIBLEY WILLIAMS: Well, thematically, I think we all write about
what haunts us, what keeps us up at night, what questions we just can’t find
answers for. So, in that regard, many of my books explore the same larger human
concerns, be they personal or cultural. The themes are interconnected, are
threads that together form a single tapestry. Be it national prejudice or fears
of how I’m raising my children, our bloody history or the search for self when
the self just keeps vanishing into the communal. Certain poems may push one or
another theme more to the forefront, often based on our current political
climate or internal changes that have reprioritized my daily life, but in the
end, I recognize pretty clear thematic threads running from my early chapbooks
all the way to Skin Memory.
But format is a different matter. I am terrified of growing stagnate,
of writing in a manner I’m already comfortable with. So my previous collection,
As One Fire Consumes Another,
entirely consists of short, newspaper column-like prose poems. Skin Memory is an amalgam of that
format, traditional prose poems, narrative free verse, and more experimental
free verse. And I am currently experimenting with mixing short, staccato lines
with page-width ones to see if that format might yield a new perspective.
TOMLIN: When do you decide to
create a collection of poems like this, when do you know that you have a
“book”? How do you organize and edit poems to create a collection?
WILLIAMS: I wish I had some mystical answer here, but honestly I just
write and write and at some point I realize I have a hundred or more poems and
should probably see if I can carve a collection out of them. Sometimes I can’t,
because the poems I’ve written are too disparate to come together under one
banner or because they’re just not up to scratch. But when the connective
tissue does emerge, it’s such a thrilling sensation.
When organizing a potential collection, I print out all the poems I’m
considering for inclusion and take notes in red ink on the top of each. I
briefly reference the themes and images in the poems, and I judge them on a 1-3
scale (in which a 1 means it definitely deserves inclusion and 3 means it will
likely fall to the cutting room floor; 2 being a maybe). Then, based on those
little notes, I categorize them in piles and try to find a workable order that
will read smoothly. A collection should flow like a river, so I may follow a
poem that ends in a night image with a poem that begins with light. The biggest
issue I encounter is how to break up poems with different structures. Should
there be one section of free verse, another with prose poetry? Should those
structures be mixed and the sections be based on themes? I just play with a
collection until it feels intuitively right. But even that can be elusive. Skin Memory endured seven full rewrites
and restructures over the course of almost three years before it found
publication.
TOMLIN: Why do you choose
certain formats for certain poems (newspaper column vs. couplets etc.)? In your
previous book “As One Fire Consumes Another” all the poems had the same format, what changed in this book? For
you, does the structure create the poem or vice versa?
WILLIAMS: Normally, the structure tends to emerge during my writing
process. Be it traditional prose poetry or white-space-heavy experimental free
verse (and everything in between), I let the poem find its format instead of
deciding on it beforehand. Usually, the act of reading lines aloud while I
write them—where I naturally pause and inflect, how much breathing room images
demand, the speed and flow of the lines leaving my mouth—is enough to dictate
form. And, as you noticed in Skin Memory,
those forms can be rather diverse. I have a bit of everything in there. As One Fire Consumes Another, however,
was a different beast; it was a personal experiment to see if I could create a
set form consistently used across multiple poems that enjoyed the best aspects
of free verse and prose poetry. I wanted the narrative flow and inherent
conceptual linkage associated with the latter and the frequent, tense line
breaks of the former. I found that happy medium in that newspaper column form
you noted in Fire. And the poems in
that book feel like newspaper clippings, in a way, so the structure melded with
the content. But this approach isn’t common for me. Usually the poem dictates
its own structure.
TOMLIN: You often make
references to other writers and historical moments (Jules Verne, “Perfect
Storm, Massachusetts 1991”) in your poems. This seems to ground the reader and
the poem, when do you think this is necessary, how do you use this as a tool?
WILLIAMS: Grounding is exactly right! Some poems require a bit of
context to fully understand or appreciate them. For example, I referenced the
Perfect Storm in one poem to create a sense of place and an intimacy; the
reader recognizes this strange little story does exist in the tangible world,
that it’s not wholly imagined, that the author directly experienced it. That
kind of grounding allowed me to explore the idea of “storm” in a broader sense
without losing a sense of reality. My hope for the Hekla poem is that the
reference to Jules Verne provided a historical context for my own experiences
when visiting that gorgeous place of potential death. Such references can also
work as anchors for a reader to cling to when a poem makes unexpected moves
into the highly metaphorical or ambiguous. As a reader, I feel I can trust a
conceptual poem more if I have an anchor or two to keep me weighted to reality.
TOMLIN: At times in this
collection you seem to appreciate human’s constant attempt to make marks in the
world and at times disparage it, when do you think this urge is
destructive/productive? It seems in the final section to be humans attempts at
mark-making which spark collective grief (“After-Bruise,” “Sanctum,” and “Before, and the Birds After”)
WILLIAMS: That’s such a weighted question, but my feelings about it,
complicated and guilt-ridden as they are, are quite straightforward. I don’t
think we can celebrate human achievement without recognizing the human
suffering behind it. We cannot discuss the creation of our railway system,
which links us all and helped birth, well, half the country, without
acknowledging forced labor and indigenous massacres. Europeans would not have
birthed (read: conquered) this country without genocide. Consumerism provides
us with nearly unlimited choice while fracturing society into haves and
have-nots. Human history is a history of great advancements born on the bloody
shoulders of “the other”. So, yes, I feel we have as much to celebrate as
mourn. They seem to go hand-in-hand. In terms of the past, all we can do is act
as honest witnesses, ensuring the complicated, contradictory truths of our
nature aren’t rewritten or erased. In the final section of Skin Memory, I think you’re right, I’m trying to move beyond
witness and see if there are other ways of progress without that corresponding
pain.
TOMLIN: In this instance, where
do you see the role of poets not from indigenous communities or immigrant
communities in dealing with issues like “forced labor and indigenous
massacres?” How do navigate what is and is not your story to tell?
WILLIAMS: This could not be a more crucial question. Privilege comes
in so many forms, most invisible until you shine a light on them and see their
hazy edges. Gender, sexuality, race, religion, socio-economic status, family
status, and even these have gradations. They all combine to give us a cultural
advantage or disadvantage and exploring my own advantages and how they contrast
against those born or raised without them is a central theme of my work.
In terms of how to discuss it, I feel it all comes down to a mixture
of self-awareness and empathy. It’s a balancing act between witness and action.
All of us whose privilege allows us the space to write freely, who aren’t
judged by superficial qualities, who needn’t fear police or politicians or
bosses who could withhold that one paycheck that makes our children go hungry,
we need to investigate how we got where we are and what we can do to expose
such inequities.
The question is how. How does one explore privilege from the inside
out? Often met by controversy, some privileged poets have chosen to adopt
another’s voice, to attempt the persona poem. I feel confident that these
attempts are well-intentioned. However, I don’t feel that’s my place. If I have
not suffered as so many others have, who am I to speak in their voice? Instead,
I write about privilege in two ways, by discussing my own safe white lineage
and by writing about others (instead of writing from another’s point of view).
And when writing about others, I don’t hide the fact that my perspective is
inherently tinged by privilege. That’s what I mean by combining self-awareness
and empathy.
TOMLIN: I was particularly
interested in “Before, and the Birds After” which, as do some of your other poems in this collection, references
violence in schools, I saw it an
effective way of processing national tragedy without verging on the preachy,
where do you see the line between political statements and poetry, how do you
advise aspiring poets to find a balance?
WILLIAMS: I never set out with a given theme or larger political meaning
and maybe that helps lean me away from didacticism. I usually begin a poem with
a series of images. Then I try to create a world for these images to inhabit.
How are they connected? What mood do they convey? And as I fashion that world,
the themes (often cultural and political ones) organically emerge. From an
empty silo: hunger, class issues, and a family falling apart. From a tire
swing: the horrors that once hung from that same tree. From a gut-shot doe
dragging itself into a tree’s calm shade: a son trying so damn hard not to be
like his father. I try not to overthink it, lest the themes feel forced.
Instead, the images themselves seem to birth their own grander meanings. While
editing a poem, however, I do insist more heavily on connecting any loose
threads. Now that the themes have surfaced, I revisit each image to ensure it’s
the most evocative way of expressing those themes. Would a sycamore be more
haunting than an alder? Should I vanish the bridge I’d placed over that
overflowing river; does the bridge imply a degree of safety that doesn’t fit
the poem’s vulnerability?
If I were to give advice on avoiding preachiness, I suppose it would
be this: is your intent to scream your opinion into an echo chamber or do you
want the reader to experience emotions that lead them toward your opinion? As
in politics, poetry, to me, should never hammer people over the heads with
their “point”. Should poetry even have a “point”? Isn’t the world too nuanced
and contradictory for that? All we can do is witness and explore. So let your
poem speak for itself. Find subtler ways of weaving in politics. Hurt us; don’t
tell us to hurt.
TOMLIN: Another theme in this
collection (especially the first section) is the way in which language creates
human understanding, and its limits (an example of this is the line “no center.
No past tense. No word that means the same translated back to its native
silence,” from “Hekla, Revised”). Why
do you think you were interested in this theme for this work, and where do you
see the “play” of poetry fitting into this idea?
WILLIAMS: Celebrating language while recognizing its limitations (and
in some instances its disenfranchisement of individuals and cultures) is the
main focus of my first collection, Controlled
Hallucinations, and it does seem to carry through in all my work. I guess
I’m enthralled by the simplest of dilemmas: using language to explore,
question, and doubt language. Its power is evident. Rhetoric defines
civilizations, molds philosophies, and has been used to empower and deprive,
equally. We define ourselves by words, which both place us in arbitrary little
boxes and, ironically, separate us from other animals. Yet, in the end, words
are simply constructs, symbols that mean whatever we want them to mean. And we
interpret them based on our own backgrounds, experiences, and prejudices.
There’s a sense that language is limitless (in application and political
power). There’s a sense that it’s actually rather absurd, that gesture is the
only true language. In a way, that’s what I mean by “No word that means the
same translated back to its native silence.” I also mean it to grieve how
conquering countries erase native languages. And what remains of older
languages becomes irrevocably changed, their meanings permanently altered.
TOMLIN: What’s next for you?
WILLIAMS: I rarely work on a specific project. I tend to simply write
and see what happens. So, I’m writing new poems, yes, but not with a given aim.
I am also a professional poetry editor and run various literary workshops, which
keeps me both busy and inspired, and I am about to begin my teaching residency
with Writers in the Schools (a nonprofit program through Literary Arts here in
Portland that places professional writers in local high schools). In addition to this, I’m a father of twin
toddlers and am touring to support my two new books, so personal writing time
has taken a temporary backseat to other (creative and personal)
responsibilities.
No comments:
Post a Comment