The Denver writer's conference (AWP) was an incredible collection of scholars, writers, publishers, editors and nearly everything in between that deals with the business of writing. Three full days of meetings and three nights of readings meant a very full headspace when I returned back to my quieter world in San Diego, CA.

Yesterday, I was exhausted from post travel activities, which included: unpacking, laundry, catching up on endless emails, and preparing for the week ahead. Whew! The past week has been a whirlwind and an eye opener. I did manage to sneak in a DVD to rest a bit and really enjoyed the 2009 film, Adam. A romantic comedy about a young man with Asperger's Syndrome and a beautiful teacher/writer and their evolving romance.

What struck me most about the film was the way in which communication is delivered or mishandled in relationships and the many challenges that come from trying to get inside another's mind. Even without any neuro-deficiencies, it's tough. The film beautifully illustrates the complexity, difficulty or inability to read another's intentions, body language or sarcasm. I don't think anyone needs to have a "syndrome" to be challenged by any of these, social cues or not.

Today, I feel like one of those challenged folks as I scratch my head in utter bewilderment. I heard, what should be joyful news in any other context, that a local poet just won the Pulitzer Prize for one of (their) books. Let me first clarify that I am not up for such an award and am not jealous of anyone winning an award, in fact, to the contrary. I am delighted when someone (worthy) is recognized by such an esteemed bunch. I mean what writer wouldn't be thrilled to win the Pulitzer, right? (And also thrilled for their contemporaries, especially when not competing with them.) So, why does this news irritate me so much?

What causes me confusion is the climate of what is esteemed at this particular point in time in literature. One of the goals of language, I thought, is to make meaning. To communicate your thoughts, feelings, preferences, etc...to another human being. Language was created because we can't read each other's minds, at least not yet ;). However, in the world of poetry, in particular, the opposite seems true. What is celebrated today is often obtuse, disconnected, sparce and utterly void of any meaning making. Often impersonal, overly clever, creepy and highly cerebral, contemporary poetry is often void of any realness, humanness, softness, or heart and soul. I know, I know, some of you intellectuals are already rolling your eyes right now at my use of the words "heart" and "soul," well pardon me. I do not live merely in my head and can't stomach those who do.

What happened to the poets who emoted? When did real feelings and personal experiences go out of style? Are we moving toward an even more impersonal, flarful world? I thought it was the poets who helped us see beyond the material landscape? We are supposed to be the brave ones, the ones others turn to when they can't find the words or make meaning for themselves. Poets are the ones that are not afraid to say what we feel and allow others to really peer inside, right? If poets don't serve this purpose, who will?

One of the interesting, and by interesting, I mean disappointing things I noticed about most of the live readings I went to in Denver, was that for a group of "sensitive" types, their work was sorely lacking any sensitivity. Most performed overly clever, glib, let me impress you with some random nonsense style, that I managed to be superficially moved to only occasional laughter. A small fraction, maybe 2 or 3, moved me in a deeper way, Jill Alexander Essbaum was one of them. This I did not expect. It makes me wonder if we have given up on the idea of making meaning, or is anything meaningful to us anymore? Is the job just too daunting, or are we just too lazy or fearful to go there?

If you have any thoughts on this topic, I'd love to hear from you. Please clue me in on what I'm missing. Shed some light on this for me, please. I'm obviously out here in the dark.

A Book Review…………………………………………………Jeannine Clark

Chelsey Minnis is BAD BAD

just ask her -

or as I like to say,

here’s a little book to find some punishment in –

both personally, academically and professionally.

Pow - Pow, are you ready?

PREFACE 1

Chelsey says in preface 54: the force of poetry is freely said truth…

She also claims in preface 2: Poetry careers are a bad business…(ut oh).

PREFACE 2

This is supposed to be a good poem placed very gently upon the desk…according to preface 37.

PREFACE 6

I had to agree with preface 36: “Poetry writing” is a hardship…

An image of a hungry homeless person standing on the corner with cardboard sign in hand reading – Will Write for Water, or Poetry for Pennies, or Hungry Poet Begs for Anything you can spare, comes to mind when I read this one.

PREFACE 9

In preface 20: I am a poet so I can say things…

AND

Preface 3 asserts: If you are a poet then it should be foremost on your mind to say something and not conceal it……………………………pretty much sums up this book.

PREFACE 13

Now, preface 1 is filled with goodies like: If you try to write a good poem again and again for years and years and receive no awards, no money, no nothing…then you’re happy…

And, all these blurbs are for s---. Like if I were to carry around a turd and pretend it is my baby…

(Where does she come up with these things?)

PREFACE 17

Poetry is crap since there’s no money or fast cars in it…………………….another glorious………………….revelation………………..from preface 1.

PREFACE 20

At one point I picked up her book and thought it was upside down, but then I realized it was right side up but felt upside down, and sideways, even though the writing was perfectly horizontal, if that makes any sense.

PREFACE 24

You may be wondering by now why I am including so many prefaces to this book review, if Chelsey can include 68 in her book BAD BAD, then I figure a few in here won’t hurt.

PREFACE 29

Critics rave about her elliptical style……..there’s much left out………..some oddness…….irreverent references……………..mocking………….cunning……………poking holes………………….bang, bang……………………………..shot, until you’re bleeding pink and white stripes……………………..who says you need to be paid to be taken seriously?

PREFACE 33

Incongruent emotions.

PREFACE 37

Loathing………………..you can guess at what, right?

PREFACE 46

Punchy, provocative, smart and fresh, in places……………….sometimes too dramatic for my taste………………other times, simply sublime.

PREFACE 51

You get to read between the lines.

PREFACE 53

She’s a bit obsessed with death and her death wishes.

PREFACE 55

Ooops, there’s a break in the text I’m not sure what’s missing . See what I mean?

PREFACE 56

Symbols used throughout the book: stars, hearts, crosses, two-headed dear, swords, skulls, birds, diamonds, coffins, crescent moon, money, magic 8 ball, coffin, rainbow, rose, cloud, gemstone, whip, the number 13, and of course, the dot……………………….hmmmm.

PREFACE 58

SAD, sadness too, questionable mental health, good times for her, so it seems.

PREFACE 61

FENCE BOOKS is her publisher. On the back cover the words Decadent! Childish! Are in bubbles - to be ironic I’m thinkin’…….along with a dollar sign. Mocking perhaps?

PREFACE 67

Underpants……..Mildred……..F Lute………Man-Thing……….Don’t do it some more………………………..Double Black Tulip….Truck….P-IRATE………..(I love that last one, the word, not the section as much)…..Foxina…….Men Cry Because of the Heat…Clown……FiFi, NO….NO………P.Chelsey…..Friendship…….C-Passion…….and the two……………….best of the bunch: Anti Vitae………………….-5 Negative…..to name most of her works inside the covers, after the 68 prefaces.

PREFACE 68

Before you read the actual book review, I’d like you to try an exercise or two based on one of her amusing sections. You are invited to write down all the things you think you’ve had points deducted for - that you feel were unfair or just plain wrong. It is called the -5 (Negative 5). For example, if you were scolded as a kid for chewing gum too loud, or for dropping something, or if you accidentally ran over your neighbor’s cat, you would write down:

-5 for chewing gum too loud

-5 for dumping eggs all over my mother’s lap even though I cooked them for Mother’s Day.

-5 for accidentally running over the neighbors cat…

-5 for excessive yawning…etc….etc….get the idea?

Keep going until you create a list of things you’ve had 5 points deducted for. It’s fun, I promise.

The other fantastic, original, insightful exercise you’ll want to try is titled: Anti Vitae, which is the chronology of what she didn’t do well in each year or span of time. For example:

1977-1984 Nothing of Interest

1984 Performed poorly in math. Taken aside by math teacher.

Receded into mediocrity of math.

D+ in conduct.

1985-1988 College application rejected by Cornell, Tufts, Northwester, Dartmouth etc…

45% in math.

You get the idea. Go on, it’s fun to remember all your disasters, failures and overall disappointments. Think of it as the anti-resume.

*If you’re looking for the actual review, well it’s left out silly….that’s what ellipses do. (Duh!)