Author: Jon Stone

Dear Maurice,

First of all, congratulations on becoming the new editor of Poetry Review. As an editor of numerous anthologies and a former submissions editor at Poetry London, it’s clear you’re well qualified for the position. I’m writing to you now because, after a period of wavering – and following encouragement from an editor of some standing – I applied for the position myself and, in the days following my application, started to think pretty seriously about what I would do if I were offered the job. The more I thought about it, the more I felt that the answers I was coming to represented not what elements of a personal style I would hope to bring to the journal but a deeper necessity for change, and so, rather than keep my powder dry for the purposes of another application years down the line (when who knows what will have transpired), I would like to outline those proposals now and ask you to seriously consider them.

The last three issues of Poetry Review, edited by George Szirtes, Charles Boyle and Bernadine Evaristo respectively, refreshed the feel of the journal enormously, and that project should be pursued under the new editorship. Importantly, I feel that Poetry Review must seek to shed the image of a publication aimed squarely at middle class readers of mainstream poetry. I’m aware that ‘middle class’ and ‘mainstream’ are vexed terms, often used pejoratively, but they have some valid application here. I’ve written previously about the elements of tribalism in British poetry, where mainstream sits in the centre, performance poetry and avant-garde poetry at either side of it. This is a crude delineation, of course, and there are many, many poets and many, many projects that straddle these imaginary boundaries. But am I wrong to infer, simply from reading and listening to a range of view points, that most poets who see themselves as working in the ‘non-mainstream’ area regard the modern Poetry Review as a territory they are all but barred from, while many who see their work as centered around performance regard it as almost belonging to (and promoting) a different medium?

Poetry journals are of course entitled to develop their own character and style, but I feel that there is room for at least one that aspires to carrying out the role of broad overview, creating a space where different poetries intermingle, and it seems fitting that it should be the publication of the Poetry Society. It is, after all, called Poetry Review, and it’s reasonable therefore to expect it to review the full breadth of poetry culture in the UK – and beyond, if necessary. My personal tastes do not stray too far outside of what is generally considered mainstream, (although I’ve been trying to get to grips with avant-garde work for some time) but I concluded, during my brief ruminations on what I would do with the editorship, that the editor should seek to go considerably beyond the boundaries of his or her personal taste, and take on the risk of betraying naivety in certain areas in order to ensure that the contents of each issue are somewhat representative of the full panoply of poetic endeavour. None of us know poetry well enough to stick to what we intimately know and not end up with a partial selection.

But I’m not just talking about the choosing of new poems which are published. In fact, I think that’s perhaps less important than the focus of the essays and reviews. George Szirtes’ issue included a piece on Denise Riley by Emily Critchley that was strikingly different to the character of the majority of pieces PR has tended to publish. I would like to see more pieces along these lines, but more importantly still, I would like to see pieces which explore and question the boundaries between different poetries, or articulate what underlying disputes there are as to the validity of certain approaches. Dialogue. That’s what I’m talking about. I would like to see Poetry Review as a platform for dialogue. Consider a poet like Anthony Anaxagorou, whose politically engaged poem If I Told You has amassed nearly 30,000 views online, and who has worked for the Poetry Society. It strikes me he’s not the normal type of poet Poetry Review would publish, and that If I Told You is not the type of poem that many poetry readers would normally rave about. It is political and somewhat of a polemic. Does this indicate a popular movement in poetry that is apart from what many of us are focused on? I think there is room for such a discussion. I certainly think there is room to acknowledge poetic achievements beyond the winning of centrally-administered prizes.

I mentioned ‘middle class readers’ earlier. I am very wary of making any pronouncement based on supposed class boundaries or stereotypes of certain classes. I am probably middle class myself, but some would call this self-aggrandisement, since I lack property, a high-flying career and a matching crockery set. (It would definitely be self-aggrandisement to call myself working class, since I went to university and my accent isn’t regional enough). I’m also a defender of the much-ridiculed ‘quiet’ poetry reading, where the audience are allowed to sit and entertain their own thoughts about the poetry being read, and success is not measured by the strength of vocalised positive reaction. Nevertheless, I think it’s fairly recognisable there is a large overlap between middle class concerns and mainstream poetry topics, such that we have to be vigilant against favouring certain poets and certain poetries because of how they meet our own expectations. I can’t describe or pin down that middleclassness precisely, because by its nature, it is more cumulative effect than anything that can be ascribed to the contents of one poem or book (although Sean Borodale’s Bee Journal must be near its epicentre). It is present, however, and it provides another reason for potential readers of poetry to close their minds to it, writing us all off as comfortable wine-swillers enthusing about our holidays abroad.

I think Poetry Review should be a point from which to challenge such negative perceptions, and never something which enforces or lends validity to them. I think it should be a place where radically different propositions can jostle with each other, and where readers might cross, in their droves, the strange boundaries between different poetries. I think it is reasonable and right that Poetry Review aims for a readership of such a mixture of backgrounds that no one, seeing the crowd of attendees at a launch night, could think that the journal had a core demographic at all, and where no one entering could feel that they have come to the wrong event. Of course, this won’t be an overnight change, but now is the opportunity to set it in motion.

Yours sincerely,

Jon Stone

In a departure from my generally poetically-inclined endeavours, I’ve written a short five-part Christmas horror story, which will be serialised by Popcorn Horror over their smartphone/tablet app and website from 21-25 December. It’s called Krampus Inc. How to summarise it? Well, suppose the European legend of a Yule devil were true, and he’d been taking tips from humanity in how to get his own way …

This time not a review on Irregular Features, but a guest post for the Magma blog. Kirsty and myself have co-authored this response to Scottish poet Frank Kuppner’s new book, The Same Life Twice, in which I call him ‘the Douglas Adams of poetry’.

A good showing for us again in issue 54 of Magma, available from here. It features poems by Ian McLachlan (co-author of our team-up pamphlet Confronting the Danger of Art), Mark Waldron (who launched the opening salvo in our micro-anthology Pocket Spellbook) and Ben Stainton (who will be appearing in the forthcoming Coin Opera 2).

It also includes a poem by me, alongside the other winners of this year’s Eric Gregory Awards, who are a fine bunch that we’re keeping our eyes on.

Finally, it includes a wonderful review of School of Forgery by David Morley. Morley, one of the editors of Bloodaxe’s The New Poetry (the book that convinced me to start reading poetry seriously), is usually very generous when describing the work of others but also crafts his reviews meticulously, avoiding cliches and trite praise and instead trying to articulate what is unique about a particular poet’s output. Well, I would say that. But I’m serious! Here are some choice extracts:

“So intense is the attention to things and forms that every poem in School of Forgery could be described as high definition performance.

Jon Stone understands that a poetry collection is a poetic form in itself … The whole composition matters. So does every weld. The structure of School of Forgery is ingenious and impressively intricate. Its slotting architectures are slit, mortised and battened.

Ultimately, it’s not its complexity or élan that resonate with me but genuine tristesse. Like Mandelstam studying the science of saying goodbye, it understands the heartbroken space between possibility and requital.”

I am slightly jealous that, as it turns out, my book got to see more of this year’s swifts than I did, however. Maybe next year I’ll try to spend more of the summer outside of London.

Both Sidekick editors – that is, me and the other one – that is, Jon Stone (me) and Kirsten Irving (the other one) – feature in this brand new anthology of science fiction poetry from Penned in the Margins. Where Rockets Burn Through is edited by Edinburgh-based writer and researcher Russell Jones and is a timely revival of a wonderful subgenre of poetry – one on which I wrote an article for Poetry News last year.

The book also features work from poets who have appeared in our previous and forthcoming books, including Aiko Harman, Simon Barraclough, Bill Herbert, Ross Sutherland, Ian McLachlan and Chrissy Williams.

Order the book here. The London launch is on 6th December at Toynbee Studios – more info here.

Both myself and Kirsty have poems published this week in online literary journal B O D Y. Kirsty’s triple-parter Three Portraits is nestled alongside my translations of Medieval Welsh poets Gwerful Mechain and Dafydd ap Gwilym, which are most definitely NSFW.

I’ve been asked to write quite a few short articles on poetry and personal experiences recently. Here’s two that have emerged more or less simultaneously:

On Cynicism, published on the Magma blog.
Placing in the National: How it Did and Didn’t Change My Life, published as part of the National Poetry Competition blog tour on E-Verse Radio. (Also includes a poem).