Myco-outtakes


First: the 75th anniversary double issue of Shenandoah launched this week! The website has been professionally redesigned, too (I’m so glad Beth secured funding for that just under the wire–universities are all belt-tightening now). I read and proofread the whole issue so I know for sure it’s terrific. I hope you’ll check it out. If it makes you want to join the party, by the way, the dates for submission windows are here. The number we can handle in any period maxes out fast, by the way, so aim to send early.

Otherwise, my central mission for the last two weeks of spring was to enjoy visits from my adult kids; rest; and read lots. More difficult aims I made some progress on: catching up on chores (the yard was egregious) and taking stock of the poems I’ve been jotting and forgetting so I could get some under submission at magazines. I’ve now read everything in my digital files, revising what seemed most promising and sending out a few (there are other drafts handwritten in notebooks, I suspect). Revision has been slow, partly because I’m legitimately tired, but partly because many of the poems I dug up are emotionally intense as well as wobbly in quality. It was hard to remember some of the occasions and feelings that inspired them.

Revision, for me, is a long process that requires critical distance I can only gain by putting work aside for a weeks or months. Often changes follow that classic formula of cutting the poem’s throat-clearing opener, its overexplained ending, most of the adverbs, and occasional moments of defensiveness or self-pity. Often there’s a governing metaphor with logic that doesn’t quite fly, so I have to re-enter the thinking and parse the poem logically. This sometimes involves expansion, too, especially if I realize I’ve been too oblique or have been dancing around the hard stuff. Those are the architectural moves, but the finishing work of strengthening diction, especially verbs, and trimming unnecessary words (my former colleague Heather Ross Miller called it “thattery and whichery”) also seems endless–I think of some new tweak every time I reread a poem. And some are beyond rescue. I can make them cleaner and craftier, but I’m not capable of rendering them genuinely powerful, the kind of poems a reader might fall hard for–at least, not now. It’s hard to pin down that quality, but often a poem with strong appeal conveys vulnerability or insight, or the language is especially surprising and sparkling.

Below are two poems I drafted in spring 2021, one while my mother was ill, the other not long after she died at the end of April. This was the period from which much of my book Mycocosmic emerged. Clearly I thought they weren’t fully realized enough to make the manuscript’s final cut. I tried to reapproach them this week, but I still agree with my former self. They’re not bad; each has some good language, imagery, and sound textures; and I continue to identify with the feelings I was trying to capture. I just don’t feel confident that they would have value for others. Maybe they need expansion–second stanzas, deeper digging? I’d be interested to hear how you make these judgment calls: do you have criteria that are clearer than mine? Hmm, now that I reread that first one for the twentieth time, how is a reader supposed to know that the “robot” means a foot massage machine my mother gave me? Well, you see what I mean.

Hymn

Robot foot massage. Pot of chai.
Forget to put cherries in the cherry scones
then prod them into sticky dough the way
anxiety will poke at my sticky brain
all day. Walk in the drizzle and fumble
my mask. Ink a million puzzles
in the paper. Learn that it’s Palm Sunday
on Twitter. Try to call my mother
who must be doing her physical therapy.
Do my physical therapy. The old pain
in my knee is reincarnated. Unblessed wine
messes with my tendons. I lied; I never
do my physical therapy. Or rarely.
A salted bath is sacred ritual, barely.

The Fog Burns Off

Someone pushes off in a yellow boat laden with morphine.
Slowly the bones of her face appear: high forehead smooth
as bone, thin bridge of her nose. The first story-spinner
of your partly-cloudy life stops telling tales, although
perhaps not hearing them as she sleeps, lips open
for gusts of breath. They get further between. The crease
in the center of her brow eases, eases, until it disappears.

6 responses to “Myco-outtakes”

  1. “architectural moves” — I like that term. My approaches to revision are similar to yours and most uneven: sometimes a decade between revisions, sometimes an hour. I’m not as careful and analytical as you are, and less well-versed in formal structure and sound, so…sloppier, I suppose. Less logical. I know I overuse to-be verbs. Often I try changing the governing pronoun of the poem; what would this sound like if it were a non-me narrator? I tweak perspectives. Sometimes that hides what generated the poem in the first place. Not always a bad thing.

    That last poem? So tender (as my mother slowly, slowly, slowly moves in that direction). I think it is marvelous.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I think you’re pretty well-versed in structure! And I agree about POV experiments and needing to reduce to-be verbs. Thank you about the poem. Still thinking about what the hitch is for me. I DO have an analytical approach to everything, which has pluses and minuses…

    Liked by 1 person

  3. The way you talk about your revision process is such a gift! I’ve never really thought about mine, but now I’m inspired to be more mindful. I just kind of wade in and do what seems right, what the poem seems to need, but how do I know that…? Thanks for the poetry craft assignment, Professor Wheeler. 😉

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Two fine poems from you there, wherever they stand on the revision train there. With my wife’s long journey with her mother’s dementia and other things, I’m soaking in the bonds of mother-child connections and separations, so they resonate with me.

    In my middle age I used to revise fairly quickly, nearly all my poems going though overnight to maybe a week-or-two later revisions, usually resulting in 2-3 versions before I think I have something that’s plausibly finished. In my old age, I now do more revisions on poem versions that might be several years old, which opens up the saved words to new perspectives. Those shorter-interval revisions most often are trying to better say what I thought the poem’s inspiration wanted to say — but the revisions on old poems let me ask broader questions about what must be said, often based on what the poem unintentionally expressed or could have expressed that my initial inspiration wasn’t aware of. It may not be necessary to wait years to use that mode of revision, but that’s how it occurred to me.

    Liked by 1 person

    • That’s a great way to describe the reasons for waiting longer. Sometimes I publish a poem in one version after the shorter process you describe, then overhaul it for book publication years later. Sending good wishes to you and your wife–that’s a hard passage.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a reply to Poetry Blog Digest 2025, Week 25 – Via Negativa Cancel reply