Alive
and barking

Jennifer
Strauss
Judith
Beveridge (ed.)
The Best Australian Poetry 2006
UQP, $24.95 pb, 143 pp, 0702235687
Dorothy
Porter (ed.)
The
Best Australian Poems 2006
Black
Inc, $24.95 pb, 212 pp, 1863952624
Seeing
these two anthologies side by side in that obscure corner allocated
to poetry by so many bookshops, a casual browser might note that
both begin with Robert Adamsons A Visitation
and conclude that uniformity rules and one volume will suffice.
Not so: a full savouring of the past years poetic crop requires
both. In fact, A Visitation is the only poem common
to both selections. Certainly, they share poets and it
is among these twenty that readers are likely to recognise established
names such as Alan Gould, Kate Llewellyn, Jan Owen, Peter Porter,
Philip Salom (all in their egalitarian alphabetical order), but
in each case the particular poem selected is different. Beyond
that, there is substantial variation in the selection of poets:
nineteen of Beveridges forty poets dont appear among
the eighty-two present in Porters more extensive volume.
Some differences of selection result from the different mandate
given to each editor. Beveridge, according to the subtitle of
her volume, was to draw only on Australian literary journals.
The acknowledgments indicate that this extended to the literary
pages of the Australian and the Age, but apparently excluded more
political journals such as Overland, Hecate
or Arena, although these publish a considerable amount
of poetry. This is perhaps an unfair quibble. It is not as if
Beveridge excludes overtly political poems vide Philip
Harveys Non-Core Promise or Gig Ryans
Kangaroo and Emu but it is not accidental,
I think, that both these poems attack the soft underbelly of politicians
via parodic distortions of the language of politspeak: How
to turn the words into gestures, parsing / liperal sirface while
its business as useyouall (Harvey); We
have signed niiine memoranda the minister umpteenths
out / ramping up his slush funds rumpled horn (Ryan).
In this, they exemplify one aspect of Beveridges editorial
principles: I decided that my main criteria of selection
would be for poems which showed that the poet had an engaged,
vital, deep relationship with language; no easy or given one
I wanted poems that showed a thorough coming to terms with the
difficulty of circumscribing a position within the dark maw of
words.
Porter had a less restrictive field of choice, drawing not only
on anthologies and journals, but also on collections. In her preface,
she makes a strong and cogent plea for the importance of the latter,
all the more impressive in coming from an
accomplished performer at the poetry gigs she defines
as not enough to sustain long-term poetic effort:
The
real tragedy of Australian poetry is not how few good poets there
are, but how few books of poetry are bought and read. It is wonderful
to see the crowds hanging from the rafters at poetry gigs and
to hear the roar as favourite poets perform their work
But poets do not live by applause alone. Our best books demand
and deserve the same support by publishers, book-sellers and readers
that the alpha list of fiction and non-fiction takes for granted.
Indeed,
it would be sad to see the poetry annals totally without recognition
of the importance and quality of recent collections from poets
as diversely accomplished as Les Murray, Jennifer Maiden, John
Tranter or Laurie Duggan. Maidens Foxfall poems
were for me a highlight of Porters anthology such
scalpel-sharp, almost perversely beautiful images of distaste
for the sugars of ambition, the syntax of Gump,
the whole / bushy new millennium, its malice, / its killer
smile and phantom techno-shares. A mastery of shifting registers
is even more pronounced in Les Murrays The Nostril
Songs, an exuberant, bravura performance to delight those
who will always be grateful for the way that Murray opened up
a whole new territory of poetic idiom, structure and sensibility
in poems such as The Broad Bean Sermon, Sprawl
or Walking to the Cattle Place.
Some thirty collections are listed in Porters acknowledgments.
The selection and publishing schedule for the anthology means
that a number of these date from the later part of 2005, and thanks
to same deferral process, anyone wanting a taste of one of the
most striking 2006 collections, Robert Adamsons luminous
The Goldfinches of Baghdad, will have to wait for the 2007
anthologies. The number of publishers involved is not extensive,
and it is alarming to see that seven collections come from Five
Islands Press, the continued existence of which is in doubt thanks
to the semi-retirement of its founder, Ron Pretty. The list drives
home the debt of gratitude that we owe for Prettys readiness
to foster new talent by taking on the commercial risks of first
collections. That gratitude must expand exponentially when we
see how many poems in each anthology were first published in Blue
Dog, the biennial publication of the Poetry Australia Foundation,
established and driven by Prettys commitment. The Foundation
and Blue Dog are at least sure of survival under the aegis
of a newly formed Australian Poetry Centre, made possible by generous
sponsorship from the Copyright Agency Limited. The best possible
Vale that poetry readers can give Pretty is to ensure that his
work continues by joining the Foundation or subscribing to Blue
Dog. No excuses: you can learn all about it on www.poetryaustraliafoundation.org.au.
Despite
her enthusiasm for the current collections, a great deal of Porters
material is drawn from the journals that are the lifeline of local
poetry. An initial impression that she had cast her net more widely
over these did not survive a cross-check. The list of journals
consulted is much the same for both volumes. It is rather that
Porter has trawled for a wider catch. This is, of course, partly
a function of the generous number of poems allowed by the publisher.
There is space for small poems by relative unknowns to catch the
eye and give quiet pleasure. Two such face each other on pages
forty-four and forty-five: James Charltons Letter
to Walt Whitman re: Iraq speaks unspeakable horror through
the imaginative framing device of its power to silence one of
modernitys most loquacious poets. Aidan Colemans imagistic
Blue-Tongue diverts as it spins nine lines from an
initial comic image of that aggressive-looking lizard as Fat
like a full tube / of toothpaste. Porter does seem, however,
to have a more omnivorous poetic appetite than Beveridge. More
taste, perhaps, for apparent disconnections such as the magical
aphorisms of Kevin Brophys Sentences, which
begins: After being away from my son for a day his size
frightens me. / Always I am surprised by the bitterness of coffee.
More sympathy, too, for unbowed warriors of the avant-garde such
as Ken Bolton and joanne burns, or ex-perimental departures such
as Jordie Albistons play with internal line dividers in
Amoroso:
the
next morning | look | even the
poem is masculine now : mouthing out
metaphors one by one | tongue in my
ear | hand on my thigh! Arms astretch
in muscular lines | I am not inclined ||
It
is tempting to allot control as Beveridges primary
criterion, and energy as Porters. After all, Porter
speaks, in her briefer preface, of knuckle-raw poems
among the embarrassment of riches available for selection.
That is not a phrase one imagines Beveridge using admiringly. But
it is not so simple: poetry works on both energy and control, and
the ratios shift about. Consider, for instance, the rep-resentation
of Judith Bishop, one of the newer poets appearing in both anthologies.
Still Life with Cockles and Shells (winner of the 2006
ABR Poetry Prize) has marked affinities with Rosemary Dobsons
poetry, not only thematically in being based on a work of art, but
also in the finely detailed, elegant poise of its language and structure.
It is selected by Porter, while Beveridge chooses Rabbit,
much more visceral in its evocation of urgent movement, the technical
control of its long lines essential but inconspicuous:
Rabbit,
winding up your stride, in your alignment, recalling full stretch,
a gods arrow-head, shaft, lengthening from nose to tail,
aching to occupythe whole damn bubble of the moment of each movement
Bishop,
like West Australian Kevin Gillam, is that new breed of Australian
poet: a graduate of a Creative Writing course (in Bishops
case, from Washington University in St Louis). They are witnesses
to the fact that such courses, if they cannot create natural talent,
can give an intelligent awareness of the craft so long to
learn and an assurance that must otherwise be acquired,
or destroyed, through the trial and error of haphazard publication.
Still, they must depend in the end on publication to find their
audience, and this is most likely to start with journals and anthologies
such as these. I for one will now be watching for the forth-coming
first collection mentioned in Beveridges notes on contributors.
But it is not only new poets who can come to our attention
through such anthologies. Gillams name reminds us that anthologies
can bridge those gaps of distance that feed the regionalism of
much poetry publishing, in particular making some West Australian
poets virtually unknown on the east coast, and vice versa. Judith
Wright once argued that regionalism was needed to break up the
nationalist/provincial dichotomy souring the pursuit of an Australian
poetic identity. In context, she had a point. Now, however, despite
all the cant about the triumph of individualism, a pressure towards
cultural centralism risks dismissing the outer regions of both
place and ideas as provincial at best and un-Australian
at worst. We need to hear (and listen to) all the voices. Years
ago, John Crowe Ransome wrote in Philomela of the
split consciousness making the romance of the nightingales
song inaudible to a bantering breed, sophistical and swarthy.
The irony was that his poem evoked both states, bringing them
back into their endlessly uneasy yet complementary relationship,
offering more than a truncated, amputated life. One reason why
poetry matters is that it is supremely the art of holding contrarieties
in a tensed whole; it is also the art of letting us see those
contrarieties in their purest, most challenging, most playful,
most melancholy selves.
Beveridge and Porter may be different kinds of poets, but they
understand the commonweal of poetry, and their respective books
serve it well. Each has attractions over and above the poems themselves.
Those who like to have their poets placed in context will value
Beveridges notes on contributors; others will be grateful
for the different kind of context given by Porters opening
section, honouring five poets lost to death in recent years. It
is an ecumenical group: Bruce Beaver, Shelton Lea, Richard Deutch,
Vera Newsome, Lisa Bellear. One possible downside of Porters
eclecticism is that readers may reject some of her choices. While
I would not wish away one of Beveridges poems, there are
a couple of Porters I actively dislike something
in their rhetoric or attitude makes them, in Porters phrase,
deeply uncongenial. I name no names. It is bad enough
editing an anthology, knowing that necessary exclusions will give
offence, or worse, deep hurt; a reviewer is even more constrained.
With so many good poems not explicitly recognised, why waste space
on rejections that, after all, bear the stamp of my own
sensibility and thoughts about certain approaches to writing
(Beveridge). I would rather plead gratitude for the many unmentioned
poems that made me laugh, sigh, reflect and agree with
the editors that Australian poetry is in mettlesome condition.
Jennifer
Strauss has published four collections of poetry, critical studies
of Harwood and Wright, co-edited The Oxford Literary History of
Australia (1999) and edited The Oxford Book of Australian Love
Poems (1993) and The Collected Verse of Mary Gilmore Volume 1
(2005).
|
|
|
|
|
More
current reviews
Rosemary
Sorensen on Rodney Hall's Love without
Hope
'A conversation about an anachronism led Rodney Hall to his
new novel, Love without Hope. He acknowledges his wife,
Bet, as the person who informed him that until the 1980s there
was a Department of Lunacy in New South Wales, with an asylum
superintendent titled the Master of Lunacy'. Read
full review
John
Button:
Testosterone in Spring Street - on The
Victorian Premiers 1856-2006
'Gough Whitlam was sometimes naughty. Descending in a crowded
lift from a conference attended by a number of state parliamentary
delegates, he looked down on his fellow passengers and growled
"pissant state politicians". It was the sort of remark
he liked to get off his chest.' Read
full review
Robert White: Damaged
Archangel - on Samuel Taylor Coleridge
'If Coleridge had died in 1797, at twenty-five, he would later
have been readily accepted by students in the 1960s as their
truest role model, in place of Blake. As radical as anybody
in England at the time, he zealously espoused the deomcratic
ideals of the French Revolution and planned to practise in America
a brand of utopian anarchism which he named Pantisocracy.' Read
full review
|
|