Connie Post

Connie Post on “In the Arc of Evening

connie.png

The hypnagogic state is the state right before sleep, where your mind is most open, most lucid. It is a state most unbound to the constraints of our earthly existence. I often see things at this time, visions in my brain, in which I am lifted from this time and place to another time and place. Sounds crazy, right? Maybe, but I feel like in this state, our minds are able to expand in remarkable ways. I have used this unique state of consciousness to gather images or thoughts that sometimes serve as kindling for good poems. ”In the Arc of Evening” was born of my hypnagogic state. I infused the elements of insomnia as part of the poem in order to describe how these images can also be disturbing and wake me from sleep. But eventually, we all must fall asleep and face what is waiting for us. As I struggled to rest, I started to wonder how did people get to sleep centuries or thousands of years ago? Was there a sleep shaman who helped them? Were there teas and elixirs? Did they hear the animals outside rustling around? Did they travel forward in time to find me in a bed in a room and whisper their secrets in my ear? These are all questions that preceded my writing this poem. 

I believe that as poets, we must expand our minds beyond what we see and hear in this world and imagine ourselves as another part of history. How would we love? How would we survive? Would I die in battle or alone in the woods? During these late nights, my imagination gets a good work out. I think we need to exercise our creative minds in ways that expand the right brain. I have a fair amount of existential angst, and sometimes, it makes sense to use that to build a poem. I spend time wondering about how whole societies have collapsed and when ours might collapse (especially now in light of the pandemic and the particular fears we are living with). At times, I can go too far with my imagination and the poem does not work or does not appeal to the reader in the manner in which I intended. But that’s okay because I think we should consistently be in the discipline of challenging our brains to think in different ways. 

Late at night, when everyone in the house is asleep but me, my mind travels to these long-ago places.  One night I dreamed I was a bird flying over Stonehenge. It felt so real. This is the place where poems can begin. 

CLAIR DUNLAP

CLAIR DUNLAP on “Astonished” and “Black Abstraction

Clair Dunlap.jpg

In her poem “Messenger,” Mary Oliver states that her work “is mostly standing still and learning to be astonished.” I grew up easily astonished by the landscape I was raised in, and I was the last child anyone would have thought would move halfway across the country. I came to Minnesota for college and did not plan to stay here afterwards. The idea was always to immediately and triumphantly return to the Pacific Northwest. Clearly, nearly a decade later, this didn’t happen, and I’ve been preoccupied with the idea of home ever since. 

Georgia O’Keeffe was an incredibly intrepid woman with many homes that she loved deeply in different ways over her long life. The way she made these homes and carried them with her means something to me that I find hard to put into words: it is a blueprint, a guide of some sort by which I also try to write my way home in poems. Her painting “Black Abstraction” is a rendering of what she saw going under anesthesia—the tiny pinprick of the overhead light, the strange dark forms looming, the suggestion of an arm. O’Keeffe’s abstractions are my favorites because they dive straight into the feelings of a thing. A place. An object. They take the familiar and blow it up until you recognize it in the unrecognizable. 

O’Keeffe said of abstractions: “Even if I could put down accurately certain things that I saw & enjoyed it would not give the observer the kind of feeling the object gave me.—I had to create an equivalent for what I felt about what I was looking at—not copy it” (March 21, 1937, to an unidentified recipient). This is how I feel attempting to describe what it is about home that means so much to me. What it is that is impossible to render in plain language. Why when I say, “I want to go home,” there is something there that can’t be and isn’t anywhere else. The trees, the sky, the strange animals skirting the tidepools, the light against the mountains. Most of my work is me trying to create this equivalent so that someone can understand the memories I have of the big brown pond full of largemouth bass my parents’ house sits around. Or how looking East down the street while waiting for the bus to junior high was a perfect view of the Cascades. The one house on the block with the most enormous ferns in the front yard that, as a kid, I thought looked like something straight out of when dinosaurs lived. The exact shades of color which are impossible to describe to anyone who hasn’t also seen them. I have friends who have accepted, by now, my hatred of Midwestern winters and the humid summers. It’s a joke—one I’m in on, but one that also sharply chips away at a particular place in me where something important is kept. The poems I write about observing nature are my response to the misunderstanding of my desire to go home. It is not so much about hatred of here, but about love of there. They are an attempt to make it clear what it is I’m missing to someone who has never seen it. They are a bridge between where I am and where I came from: also finding in Minnesota an eagle, or a blooming skunk cabbage, or blue aster.

O’Keeffe always referred to painting as “the work”—dragging canvases with her on hikes through Texas plains, rising with the sun to capture a particular shade, modifying her Ford so she could sit in it and paint out of the blazing heat. It is enjoyable work to write about my home which constantly astonishes. It has been more tedious work to find that same awe in the place I live, but necessary. Only in the last few years has the Midwest in my poems seen the lilacs bloom, or watched a red bird against the snow, or catalogued the day my partner and I saw our first ever yellow-bellied sapsucker and then spent all of our walks searching each tree for the neat rows of taps it left behind. When I write about the lakes here, I am writing about the lake back home we dove into at night from the pier. I am writing the equivalent to the best of my ability in the hope that you will understand.

The way that Georgia O’Keeffe was compelled to put the way she felt about a place or an object down on paper in some attempt to be understood—sometimes painting the same thing time and time again—the way she tried to crack the world open so it felt more true—watching it through the hole in a pelvis—was, I think, the same astonishment Mary Oliver practiced, and the same one I try to find now. When I go out on walks with my dog and we stop to watch a falcon lock eyes with a squirrel in a tree down the street, or a cardinal flaming against the summer-green foliage of the neighbor’s yard, or a robin ecstatically bathing in a puddle at the end of a driveway, I think of both O’Keeffe and Oliver pausing on their own walks just to watch and work. To note the details of things which might look small, but which feel large: the curl of a flower’s petal or the edge of a bone, the speckled clam and the blue plums.

Patrick Vala-Haynes

Patrick Vala-Haynes on Writing

Vala-Haynes

Witness to a Fall Morning” is the record of an observation while on a run in the foothills of the Oregon Coast Range. There’s no metaphor. Invention, yes. My neighbors are people who wonder what all the fuss is about. Why the romance about country life? They don’t believe they’re worthy of a story.   

After the sturm and drang of teenage scribblings (which scribblings I count among the best of my work), I abandoned poetry for 35 years. I’d always imagined myself a novelist or a screenwriter and have pursued story with a sense of vengeance. While seeking opportunities for a good kill, I’ve never stopped questioning my methods. I’ve whipped myself through technique and structure, and practiced dishonesty in the pursuit of an audience because writing is pointless without one—at least one. Why the hell not try poetry again? 

For an audience?

If I find myself askew of too much of the poetry I read, maybe it’s because I read too much. But put those words to a voice, let me struggle with the author’s odd inflection or the twang of a verb, a rhyming ditty about a frog or a fencepost, and I’ll give credit. For me, poetry has always been dialogue. I need noise and response, I want raised brows and surprised grunts. I want the sweaty thousands of a Sunday afternoon rock concert, knowing full well that 10 gray-haired, mostly bored and teary-eyed folks (I count myself among them) may not respond to the level of excitement I feel on stage. I’ll take what they give and celebrate the moment. By their presence they deserve an honest telling. I’ll fight against the rattle of a farm truck going by, the click of a wine glass on a capped tooth, the snore coming from the corner. If I can’t win that battle, I’ll sit down.   

I’m a lover of narrative. I’m stuck on telling people’s stories, whether with 25 words or 125,000. 

As a writer, I promise good intentions while inventing lives and histories. I have to imagine my words are deserving of an audience. Maybe I’ll show people something they otherwise wouldn’t have seen. That’s my arrogance, that I’m worthy of being heard. I also know doubt. I know that in moments of silence, between coughs and the shuffling of feet, my every false moment will be magnified. That I need to listen. I’ll go home and try again. I’ll run a little harder.  

Jake Bailey

Jake Bailey on “Portrait of the Marianas Trench

Dear Reader,

I hope that all is well in these trying times and that poetry has helped keep you afloat in a world torn asunder by illness and systematic oppression. I also hope that this brief essay will help momentarily distract you by providing insight into my writing and what I think about meaning.

I have a hard time assessing my own poetry until I have sat with it for a year or so. My disorder makes it difficult to parse out signification sometimes, so I will speak to my writing process and conception of meaning in relation to the poem and in general. 

Generally, I will write while manic or while carried in the soft caress of a joint or two. In either case, my mind is able to unhinge from my normal experience of the world and language begins to take on a musicality and novelty that I am unaccustomed to when overly sedated by medication. The cannabis, especially sativa and sativa dominant hybrids, aids in circumventing the fogginess of the anti-psychotics that I take, allowing me to reach out for poetic vision, for voices that are not my own placed inside my mouth. While they appear as external to my waking self, the voices of thought within my mind mirror particular events in my life and encounters with the world. For example, in “Portrait of the Marianas Trench,” I had about four joints to reach the plateau of insight. Even though I was unable to understand it in the moment, this poem is ultimately about my divorce and the events leading up to and following severance at the nexus mental illness. However, that is just my current interpretation. 

I believe that meaning arises at the nexus of the written word and incarnation of the reader or listener within the world of the poem. As such, any interpretation derived from the schematic structures—i.e. the words themselves—has the potential to be valid and can be further sustained by conversations with other persons who have read the poem. I believe in what Wolfgang Iser terms the “virtuality” of a text. His theory postulates that a text consists of schematic formations that do not inherently have meaning within themselves, the formations being individual words, sentences, and connections between different words (drawing heavily on Roman Ingarden and phenomenology). He also posits that meaning does not exist solely on the side of the reader, either, avoiding relativism. Rather, Iser posits that meaning comes into being at the intersection of a dipolar union: between reader and written word. Meaning is, then, an emergent phenomenon relying on both the agent and the poem’s incarnation in word or speech. As such, your interpretation of my poem is wholly unique, though connected to other interpretations because of the always existent pole of the written or spoken word. 

Ultimately, my poem is what you make it within the permeable boundaries of the written poem and its recording. If you would like to know anything else about Iser, Ingarden, the virtuality of texts, or hermeneutics, just shoot me a direct message on Twitter or email me through my website.

All my very best,

Jake Bailey