From the April 2001 Knopf Question-a-Poet Contest
1.
When you began writing the poem "A Kiss in Space",
did you compose the basics of the poem beforehand, or
did it write itself when you looked at the photo? --Holly Williams
Mary Jo Salter replies:
"A Kiss in Space" was a rare poem for me, in that I remember its inception
exactly. I would never have written it if I hadn't seen the photo in the
New York Times of the Russian astronaut on Mir welcoming our American astronaut with a kiss.
I think it was the blurry quality of the photo, even more than the moment it
captured, which gave me the uneasy, though happy feeling that I was about
to write a poem. Somehow, a sharp picture would have been much less
evocative of the distance between us and the astronauts--and would have
given me much less freedom. Because the photo happened to
be reproduced in a newspaper, the image of clipping an idea down to size
presented itself. Most of the poem's details--seraphs, sonograms,
Atlantis, Plato--came barely consciously. I did make a willed
decision to give the stanzas of the poem a blurry shape, to imitate the
feeling of looking at the photo. I wrote this poem before the
"first" poem in the book, "Fire-Breathing Dragon," which describes another elevated
kiss, in a hot-air balloon. Believe it or not, I didn't remember "A Kiss
in Space" at all until I was finished writing "Fire-Breathing
Dragon." Only then did it seem inevitable that they should occupy the
first and last (though inverted) positions in the book.
2. After many readings of your lovely poem "A Magnet" two questions
come to mind: does the rhyme scheme come to you with the first writing
or does it develop after many drafts? I particularly love the three
rhyming verbs that knit together the three stanzas: "stamped",
"slipped" and "crossed". The second question is this: In Italian there is a word, "scarto" that describes how a poet
"discards" a particular word in favor of another word. It's not quite
like a Freudian slip, but works somehow similarly. (both
consciously and subconsciously). A scarto occurs for
me as I read the first line of the poem: "Since she was two, it had
held up her end", where my mind continues to want to read "hand" in
place of "end". Did this occur to you as you were creating the poem, or is it just something that's happening
to me as reader? Finally, I appreciate how you utilize details to make
the poem come alive; they make it believable, palpable, real! Thanks
for sharing it and your other poems with us. --Adeo Nicolai
Thank you so much for giving me the handy term "scarto." I didn't know
the word before, but I have long wanted a word for exactly the technique
you describe. In an essay about Emily Dickinson, I noted how often she
uses what might be called "unwritten puns": for instance, when she writes,
"All the Heavens were a Bell," she may also want us to think that all the
Heavens were a Hell. I'm assuming that Dickinson usually did this
consciously--though I may be wrong. I am honestly not sure whether or not
I intended "held up her end" to suggest the held-up hand as I first
started writing the poem; but yes, I did mean that by the time the poem
was finished. As for rhymes, although I love very off-off-rhymes I'm not
sure I would classify "stamped," "slipped," and "crossed" as rhymes.
I did intend them to have a parallel effect--but do we have a precise word
for that effect? On the other hand, I very much hoped the reader would
hear "crossed" and "fist" as an off-rhyming couplet, to suggest that the
scattered and irregular rhymes of the poem are moving toward closure, like
the two hands joining.
The process of finding, or choosing, or making, the title for a collection
of poems is different for each writer. The titles for your collections, to
date, have been memorable. What is the process you go through to finally
end with a title for an upcoming collection, and how do you determine when a
collection has achieved the wholeness you are working toward? -- J. Martin
I'm glad you find my titles memorable. I keep a little list in my head of
titles by other people that I wish I could have used first: for instance,
A. Manette Ansay's "Read This and Tell Me What It Says." Title-writing is
sometimes a separate skill from book-writing, I find. Some of my favorite
authors employ very bland and interchangeable titles; other writers I don't care for much
have come up with some winners. I do think that titles, both of poems and
of books, are key opportunities to convey all sorts of things--very often,
ironies--to the reader. I would never title a poem "Untitled".
I've never been sure early on what a new book was going to be titled. I
worried with my first book, "Henry Purcell in Japan," that since Henry
Purcell never went to Japan I might seem ignorant to the readers I didn't
even have yet. But the title conveyed strangeness, and much of the book
concerned my own feelings of strangeness when living in Japan. My second
book's title, "Unfinished Painting," came fairly naturally; one poem
described a real unfinished painting by my mother--whose own life might be
considered "unfinished," as she died young. "Sunday Skaters" was perhaps
the hardest title to come up with--I remember worrying that it might seem
too cheerful and leisurely for some of the darker poems in the
book. Again, though, it focussed the reader's attention on poems set in
another country--this time, Iceland. "A Kiss in Space" was fairly
inevitable, once I'd noticed how often in the book I took
an aerial view (whether literal or figurative) on experience. I
have no method or process for titling books, though perhaps I
should. Basically, I come up with a few alternatives and poll my
most trusted literary friends, including my very friendly and helpful
editor, Ann Close. And I hope that no title sounds too much like my
others.
How many drafts of a poem do you typically write before the poem is
finished? --Barbara Blossom Ashmun
Your question is interesting but hard to answer, as I imagine every writer
has a different idea of what "draft" means. If you mean to ask how many
drafts I write of a poem after I have a whole, complete version, I'd say
pretty few; I tend not to make sweeping changes at that point. But along
the way I write dozens of what you might call half-drafts. I was
comforted to read in an interview Richard Wilbur gave that he does what I
do: after he has written a few lines or even stanzas and isn't sure
where to go next, he copies the very same lines over again, hoping that
the next time he'll be propelled forward. It's like getting a running start on a diving board,
and then not diving, and going back and running again however many times
you need to before you dive.
The least time I ever took to write a poem I liked well enough to
keep was a single afternoon. The most time I've taken has to be the 12
years I carried around a folder with drafts toward a poem meditating on
the Book of Job. In the end, that folder shrank to just a few lines
within a poem set in Australia, "The Seven Weepers."
When you finish a poem, what do you find that you have learned in the
writing of it? --Joe Coberly
I suppose the first thing I learn when I finish a poem is that I was able
to finish a poem. I don't mean to reply flippantly: I mean that I
genuinely fear when I write a poem that there won't be another one. I
gather this is a very common experience, even among writers so distinguished
and prolific that you'd never guess they had such fears.
The second thing I usually feel is elation that the poem is a good one. I
don't see how you can go on as a writer if you don't allow yourself this
brief luxury of elation. Usually, no more than 24 hours after I finish a poem,
I begin to feel all too aware of its limitations. Balance between
euphoria and despair sets in if you begin to believe genuinely that this
is the best poem you were capable of for now, and that this is OK. That's
a personal wisdom to strive for, apart from learning new ways with
language.
Sometimes, I "make myself" read poetry that I normally would not like, or
that is outside my comfort zone. For example, one of my favorite poems is
"When You Are Old" by W. B. Yeats. It is short, but full of imagery and
evokes great feeling. I read other things like e.e. cummings that are totally
different in style and feel.
Do you do anything similar such as read things that are "outside your comfort
zone?" If so, what? --Ken D.
I like your notion of a "comfort zone." Interestingly, though, the poem
you mention as one you didn't expect to like, Yeats' "When You Are
Old," was one of my favorite poems when I was very young. (He wrote
another poem very much to the point, "The Folly of Being Comforted.") At
the age of eleven I began copying out into a notebook some poems I
particularly wanted to memorize. Another Yeats poem I copied out was
"After Long Silence." Thinking back, I'm amazed that I went for a phrase
like "bodily decrepitude is wisdom." Or maybe I just whizzed past that one so
that I could arrive at "young/ We loved each other and were ignorant." I
think I must have been dazzled by anti-sentimental words, like "ignorant,"
planted in a poem of such strong feeling. Certainly, decrepitude and
ignorance were beyond my comfort zone--and yet I read that poem again and
again, along with other unlikely lines like Robert Frost's couplet "The
old dog barks backward without looking up./ I can remember when he was a
pup." Why in the world, I wonder, was that child reader worrying about
aging?
As an adult I've had ample opportunities to read outside my comfort
zone--as a college and grad student, following somebody else's
syllabus; as an editor, reading poems by strangers; as an anthologist,
walking a fine line between favoring my own touchstones and acknowledging
the historical importance of certain "great" poems I don't like
much. Sometimes the poems we don't "like" turn out to be turning points.
It's good for us to read this way, don't you think? Better for us
than oatmeal or exercise or all the other uncomfortable things we're
supposed to like.
When you write, do you find that your words appear through formless
inspiration and in between consciousness and sleep, or do you make use of
literal memory and actively aim to document an idea or an emotion in the
most concise diction, syntax, and meter that you can create? --Gil Soltz
Much has been written about the importance of dreams to the making of
poetry, but I'm even more interested in that blurry time you mention
"between consciousness and sleep." I'm jealous of everybody who
regularly remembers dreams. I rarely do remember them, unless I'm awakened
suddenly by a loud sound, say, or by a nightmare. Because I don't remember
many dreams, I've become particularly attached to the illogical thoughts
one has in the minute or two before sleep or after waking. Only this
morning, on an overnight trip, I woke up in a hotel and had absolutely no
idea where I was for a full two minutes. It's during such moments--as I
write in a poem called "Wreckage"--that I try to elongate the fuzziness,
and the attendant weird metaphors and wordplay, for as long as
possible. All too soon the normal world, with its morning news and its
coffee and its to-do lists, can suppress one's imagination. (One nice
thing about reading the newspaper early: sleepy readers are more prone to
misreading, and sometimes the misreadings jump-start poems.) So, finally,
in answer to your question...I guess I'd say that I do use literal
memories in writing, and I do apply my conscious mind to crafting
that artificial thing, a poem--but I hope that I have gotten myself
thoroughly confused first.