CASE STUDY: Poet Karen Blomain on Productive Writing

Hello there! If you are new here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.

BLOGMASTER’S NOTE: Poet Karen Blomain is well known not only for her books of poetry, but also as a highly-regarded writing workshop leader. She has also published in other genres and recently had a full-length stage play produced by a regional theater in Pennsylvania. She has been kind enough to kick off this new series of CASE STUDIES about productive writers, answering questions about how she deals with the FOUR CORNERSTONES OF PRODUCTIVITY for the writers.

*****

GENERAL:

TOM: Not being a poet, I do not have any understanding at all about how a poet approaches writing. The romantic view is that poets just listen for the muse to speak to them. Sudden inspiration drives the pen. No thinking, organizing or even very conscious discipline during the writing process is necessary. Is that romantic view of poetry accurate?

KAREN: It’s both romantic and accurate. The initial impulse of the poem is much as you describe. Suddenly, something hits. Some metaphor suggests itself in an otherwise ordinary day. Then the scribbling begins to see where it might lead. Richard Hugo in “The Triggering Town” refers to the initiating subject. So perhaps it’s the view of laundry hanging on a clothesline that begins to scroll backward in time and suggest a connection to some emotion or experience. Of course, I’m speaking of my own process here. Other poets may work in a completely different way. I just let the writing come—without censor or judgment—not even thinking about how anything is connected. It always is. That’s the integrity of mind. Once I have everything I can think of to say—no matter how digressive, silly, or weird written down. I give it a rest. Later I come back and take this raw material and see how it makes itself into a poem.

THINKING:

TOM: Do you “think” about your poetry writing in any organized way? Like mulling over objectives for yourself as a poet? Tapping your inner resources for ideas for future poems — or even poetry book collections? I guess what I’m asking is, do poets “think” about their work before actually sitting down to do it?

KAREN: I would hate to think of my thinking process as organized. And I never have an a priori idea about what a poem is about in the sense of aboutness that, for instance, an essay has. I find the aboutness somewhere about midway through the rewriting process when it announces itself and I say, “Oh, that’s what’s underneath this idea. That’s the connection between these two things. The unconscious is often much more literal than we imagine it is. Much craftier too. One thing I know for sure: I have to go slowly with this process or I may lose the point completely. What do the images suggest? How do they pile up toward a particular meaning? A long time ago there was a poetry textbook I love the name of because it says so much about poetry: How does a poem mean. I like that because poetry is much more about how a poem means than what it means.

I do often get ideas from reading other people’s poems in much the same way musicians hear and understand what each other might be doing and then add their own spin to it. When I teach poetry, I often have students read a book or two and find a line that speaks to them and then write toward or away from that line—agreeing or enhancing or arguing with or complaining about the line. It’s a great exercise.

I don’t actually think about anything before I write. But I definitely have a very specific feeling that makes me know I am about to engage in poetry. It’s quite different than other types of writing I’ve done: fiction, essays, plays.

I save scraps of things that I think might eventually work their way into a poem. I keep a “button box” with little provocative items, words, images, snatches of overheard conversation, metaphors. When I feel stuck, I mine that box. Often, the thing I select is just the thing I’ve been groping for.

TOM: Can you describe any thinking routines that you follow?

KAREN: I like to think about the way a poem suggests itself rather like a frayed bit of yarn that I can tug and follow as it unravels itself. The most important piece for me is to separate writing—that spacious, non-judgmental, attentiveness–with rewriting and editing. The second two should not take place simultaneous with the first. Do them much later. Let the raw materials of the poem breathe and coalesce for a while before rushing in to tidy it up. And especially be careful with revising that you don’t eviscerate the poem. I think it best to wait a week or two in stage one—going back to reread and add if anything new occurs, but do not get rid of anything or even put much effort into the order of things for a long while. As you can tell, poetry is not fast food. In fact, there are poems in my new book, Hard Bargain, that I have been writing for twenty-five years.

ORGANIZING:

TOM: Do poets organize things? If so, how and why?

KAREN: When I do get down to editing, I depend very much on my ear to tell me the order of things. Poetry, whether free verse or formal verse, is, above all, a kind of music. You have to allow the order of the poem and the music of the poem to interact. In the new book, there are a number of formal poems: pantoums and villanelles mostly. These require a different kind of organizing because of the repetition and rhyme scheme. The editing process is fraught with pitfalls. Go slowly with change. Sit with it for a while. Revisit and rewrite.

TOM: Do you have any organizational tricks that helped you create your poetry book?

KAREN: I find organizing a book of poems among the most challenging tasks a writer can undertake. There are so many things to consider in the movement through a book. It’s, I think, rather like writing a symphony—pushing toward a flow with has both variety and cohesiveness. Some poems are difficult to place. I’ve had poems for years that I have not been able to figure out how to use in any of my books. They are good poems, but for one reason or another they don’t work in the sequence.

WRITING:

TOM: Do you as a poet simply use Microsoft Word as your word processor of choice? Or do use some other program for your writing?

KAREN: I use Word. I use a pen and tablet. I use paper napkins. For years, I used a fabulous old IBM Selectic. Now I use my laptop.

TOM: If you could create a writing software to suit your own needs, what would you include?

KAREN: A simple way to keep track of and compare various versions. It’s amazing that a fourteen-line poem can often go through fifty revisions.

TOM: What other resources did you keep at hand while you were writing your book? Dictionaries? Synonym dictionaries, or rhyming dictionaries? If so, what specifically do you yourself turn to, either in print, online resources, or software?

KAREN: Occasionally, I consult a rhyming dictionary—as a last result and almost always with poor results. Otherwise, I do consult dictionary.com to see if I am using a word correctly. Mostly for poetry, I rely on my own vocabulary, as that sounds most natural to me as the language of my own thoughts. I believe, as my guru poet William Stafford said, that poetry is the music of ordinary speech. I try to avoid arcane words or tortured syntax. Instead, I like a kind of democratic, energetic language.

PROMOTING:

TOM: Do you have a literary agent? If so, how did you find one? If not, how do you go about representing yourself to potential publishers?

KAREN: 99% of poets do not have an agent. There is simply not enough money in poetry for agents to be interested. I have had various agents for my fiction. I am not particularly good at getting my work out. Every once in a while, I’ll notice that I have a bunch of new poems lying around and I’ll send then out to literary magazines. I’m just terrible at the bookkeeping end of these things. I wish this were not the case. Maybe somebody could (or already has) invent a good software program for keeping track of submissions. I would love to know about it. I just do it rather haphazardly.

TOM: Was your poetry book published by an established publisher? Or did you self-publish? How did you choose between the two options, and why?

KAREN: My first two books were published by Nightshade Press which also published my second and third chapbook. When the Nightshade owners retired, I didn’t have a press for a while. Then FootHills Publishing approached me. I have admired their product. A book of poetry is a little jewel and I like the production quality of the book to mirror the content. I am extremely happy with my book and the work of Mike Czarnecki and FootHills Publishing. Check out the website. He publishes some of the best poets of our time. And his handmade books are beautiful.

TOM: Do you do anything yourself to promote your book? If so, what? What promotional help does your publisher provide?

KAREN: FootHills Publishing has a great website and Mike provides some leads for readings. I offer workshops and readings and network through those contacts. Check out my website www.karenblomain.com to see where I am appearing in the next few months. I also belong to two writers groups. Occasionally, I do classroom visits in schools. Both the publisher and I used the net to promote the book.

CONCLUSION:

TOM: What advice can you provide to aspiring poets regarding the productivity and business side of writing? Any other parting advice?

KAREN: My advice to all writers is the same: don’t rush the process. Don’t be in such a hurry to publish that you short-change the process of revision and editing. Join a writers group. Network with other writers. Know your markets and your audience. Don’t make it into such a business that you forget it is an art. You are never going to make a million dollars writing poems, but the writer’s life is priceless.