Email exchange between Klyd Watkins and Edward Smith about Edward’s poem “Welcome, Darling” 

 

I like the way the second part of WELCOME puts literary visibility into perspective. I laugh at the dream in the first part--good reading. I must say I don't yet see how the two parts of the poem work together. Maybe it will come to me. Klyd

 

When I was writing it, I felt the inner wrenching of giving up where I planned for the poem to go, and went instead with the part about Whalen & O'Hara, with Berkson in between.  I think, looking at it with the eye of "reason later", that the common thread is the utter passivity I feel to the gift God called me back to.  After so many years, I feel like what Arthur Rimbaud might have felt had he lived long enough to have lunch with TS Eliot on a Paris boulevard pre WW One.  Not that I've been to Africa or anything.  Just away.  My second wife, Sindy, came to me in dreams many times before I met her in 1992.  Now that we're divorced, . . . it somewhat scares me that some other female would start showing up in my current dreams.  But nothing like the awe of really getting into the ear-mode of long ago.  Just like riding a bicycle; one does not forget.  Also like Vietnamese, which I speak every few years. 

 

The boundary blurs then between me and the poem.  That's where Berkson comes in.  And others.  .  .  . So...that's a number of worries, and a fair amount of "here it comes & what can I do about it?"  Sometimes I think of Lincoln, the frontier lawyer and failed candidate, who had the whole schmeer of the Civil War just thrust on him, dumped into his lap.  He saw himself as passive, according to all the best historians.  So you see.

 

An interesting postscript to this poem was that I Googled  Berkson, found his e-mail, and sent him the poem.  He shot back a reply in eight minutes!  Thanked me for the poem, and asked me to look him up when in San Francisco. Edward Smith

 

That was something of what I was already feeling the unity of the poem was—it was one negotiation with the muse.

 

The feeling of being copiously passive before the muse is one of the greatest rewards of being a poet. Don’t argue with the muse. Don’t even say “yes dear,” as she has an ear for sarcasm. Has quite an ear period—hell, she’s the muse. During the writing of Ghost Trees, a chapbook of mine which is on its way to you by snail mail, I became very conscious that my role was passive. I would eventually have to put the segments in order but other than that I was to go out in the woods and sit down and take what I was given. The poem got its start in fact when I surrendered to the prompting to write down my inner most intuitive responses to the forms of trees, despite the fact that it was clear that a 15 page long poem about trees sounds dull as can be, and I surrendered to the command that I was to have no concern about making the poem easy to read and to let my syntax become quite complex is search of a diction that was very plain. Joyful, that writing. It was my idea to make the muse a character in the poem, and I could tell she liked it. Looking back later I realized that I had left myself one very active role. I tried to control the pace of the poem—the speed at which the reader would hear the poem in his head—by the line breaks, and thus give clues to which way the syntax was going. As I was finishing Ghost Trees an even longer poem was coming to me, a poem about Jack—of Jack and the Beanstalk and of the Appalachian Jack tales. This writing was great fun too, but I know now that I became too passive. Getting the line to work in this poem, which has reached a hundred pages already, is an on-going struggle because I took so much of the material with no active involvement.

You speak of “the gift God called me back to.” I think you are right that when we write in our lives and when we don’t write in our lives is related to spiritual growth.

 

Klyd