Showing posts with label R.M. Vaughan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label R.M. Vaughan. Show all posts

Monday, February 01, 2021

Two poems for RM Vaughan


(1965-2020)

1.

Ten reasons why and why and where and back
in the days when your poems had the

longest titles, lists

of what could otherwise be im-
possible. Now, a list of news
you could not experience: how NASA
 

discovers evidence of water

on the sunlit surface of the moon; how
the stars might shine; the death

of Diane di Prima. I catch

the opening of her poem, “The Window”:
“you are my bread / and the hairline

noise / of my bones / you are almost
the sea”



2.

I will not write you an obituary, it has been
but five days. It has been a week. It has been

the whole

of your life. Where are you? Now, they say
you’re found, and now. A tribute

of dazzling, knitted scarves. Today,
the longest day. Richard,

we love you. Please get up.

 

Sunday, October 25, 2020

RM Vaughan (1965-2020)

I don’t know what to do with this. Nearly two weeks after he had been reported missing in Fredericton, Canadian poet, writer, critic and artist RM (Richard Murray) Vaughan was found dead on Friday. At the time of this writing, there haven’t been any further details, apart from the fact that police do not suspect foul play, a piece of information that is simultaneously better and worse. I don’t even know. He had been in Fredericton as writer-in-residence at the University of New Brunswick as part of the 2019-20 academic year, but remained in the city due, I suspect, in large part, to Covid, and living with writers Nathaniel G. Moore and Amber McMillan [see Nathaniel G. Moore's piece today in The Toronto Star]. As he wrote me in an email on September 22nd of this year: “I’m waiting out the pandemic in NB. It’s sweet, quiet, cheap. Montreal can live without me for a bit.”

I first heard of Richard and his work somewhere around 1994-5 through Joe Blades [see my obituary for Joe here, who also died this year], back when Richard (originally from Saint John, New Brunswick) was still living in Halifax. Richard was writing poetry and plays, and making small films, if my recollections are correct. Or was he in Toronto by then, having relocated from Halifax? I know I caught his work in the anthologies Plush, ed. Michael Holmes and Lynn Crosbie (Coach House Press, 1995) and The Last Word, ed. Michael Holmes (Insomniac Press, 1995). It was around that time that I began to visit Toronto a couple of times a year, hanging out with Michael O’Connor (publisher of Insomniac) and Michael Holmes, among others, and Richard was just around. He was a couple of years my elder, and he seemed to be everywhere. I saw him at readings, social gatherings and on the street; I saw his work in journals and anthologies, and heard him read. We spoke of his poetry manuscript-in-progress, the book that became his full-length debut, a selection of dazzling scarves (ECW Press, 1996). I might have been the only one who preferred his prior title, “the sand that is everywhere,” and I even tried to use the title myself, given he wasn’t. I couldn’t quite manage to write anything that properly fit (perhaps he had the same issue; perhaps this was the issue all along). My poem for Richard, utilizing his title, appeared in my own first ECW title a couple of years later.

This was back in the Toronto days of Blood & Aphorisms magazine, of Tortoiseshell & Black, of the Toronto Small Press Book Fair, of Insomniac Press’ monthly reading series at Tower Records, all of which Richard seemed to be around for, whenever I floated through town. There was Richard alongside contemporaries such as Mike O’Connor, Phlip Arima, Stan Rogal, Stephen Cain, Nancy Dembowski, Jay MillAr, Natalee Caple, Stuart Ross, Death Waits (now known as Jacob Wren) and John Barlow, etcetera. During those days, Richard was actively working on poetry, plays, fiction and film, which eventually moved into writing on visual art, all of which he seemed enthusiastic about, even if he did also produce the occasional (often witty) caustic remark. It was part of the package of Richard, to comment at some disappointment or foolishness, that it could all be done better. Why isn’t it being done better?

Richard had such great titles. I included his poem “HOW TO SPEND MOST OF YOUR TIME ALONE AND STILL WRITE CONVINCINGLY ABOUT SEX” in an issue of STANZAS (#8, May 1996) alongside “The Big Fuck,” by Judith Fitzgerald [see my obituary for her here], a gesture that seemed ridiculously appropriate, and even perfect. How could I ever have been so lucky? I included some of his work in an issue of Missing Jacket (#5, April 1997). I published his poem “the seven good reasons why The Boys In The Band could be a musical     or, I am the dollar in the dolorosa” asn an above/ground press broadside (#44, 1997), most likely timed for some event I knew I would see him at. See what I mean? His titles were magnificent. Not long after that, I published his single-poem chapbook 14 Reasons Not To Eat Potato Chips On Church Street (April, 1999), composed as a list poem, and as a love poem (with snarky comments and critiques) for Toronto’s Gay Village. As the poem reads:

3.         If you have to drop by The 519, the tight-faced lesbian at the front counter will remind you, correctly, that queer youth of colour are being physically and verbally absued in Third World sport shoe factories owned by the parent company of Frito Lay.
           
How could you?

4.         And what are you gonna do with the bag? It can’t be recycled (see #3).

He would mail me items occasionally, and randomly. Small notes, occasionally on print-outs of images not fit for all audience. All sent mischievously, and with a positive note and a great deal of love. The piece Alana Wilcox posted yesterday over at Coach House reminded me of such.

And of course I can’t find my copy of his second poetry collection, Invisible to Predators (ECW Press, 1999), to verify how much or how little of that material might have appeared there. I really don’t know. If not, that would presume that these pieces never made it into print beyond these small bits of ephemera. During this same period (most likely in 1997, possibly as a tour for his poetry debut), he read for my reading series, The Factory Reading Series at Gallery 101, when the series was still called “poetry 101,” and held in the gallery space above Wallacks, at Bank and Lisgar Streets. He was reading with British Columbia poet Joe Rosenblatt, who had returned to town to read from a volume of selected poems and visual art that had been refused by the original printer (a whole other story), thus missing the event that had already passed by, the opening of Rosenblatt’s gallery show at the Carleton University Gallery. I think the week that fit into their schedule was one that had held a number of other literary events, which meant our audience was but two people. Rosenblatt didn’t seem to expect much (the empty liquor bottle underneath his chair after he had left provided some answers to Joe's casual indifference to the small crowd), thanks to the printer of the book, and Richard just seemed amused by it. Richard read first, and one of the audience, most likely not prepared for Richard’s openly gay content, walked out during his reading. Richard seemed delighted by this, and said after that he was going to tell people that “half of his audience walked out” at the Ottawa launch. And in hindsight, Richard's response to this one lone audience member underscores the realities of his approach to life and to art, having come out as a gay man during a period of time that wasn't necessarily safe or welcoming; and the fact that he was an openly, and seemingly comfortable, gay man exploring some of this content in his work, makes it that much more remarkable. He wasn't the first, not even of his generation, to be writing out gay themes and issues, but from the time I first became aware of him, he was consistently producing work, writing and publishing and exploring, in a way that might have provided him enormous difficulty, or even harm. Simply by being himself; his own delightful, funny and scathingly-witty self.

9.         Drop one chip, just one, and you’re increasing the typhus-carrying microbe population by about 2 billion. Thanks a lot.

10.        One publically-consumed bag of chips is sexually counter equal to: one flattering new haircut, 3 subtle yet penetrating colognes, any favourite, loose-fitting flannel shirt, plus a whole week’s worth of consciously sucking in your stomach at 30 seccond intervals. Double the ratios for Ketchup flavour.
           
Math never lies.

I remember having conversations about him about adoption, as he too was adopted. I had always been interested, and been looking; he was less interested, and published a lengthy article on Parent Finders as being useless and a big scam, basically. The title of a 2018 opinion piece he wrote for The Globe and Mail offered much of what his thoughts on the matter seemed to be: “As a person who was adopted, I'm not lost, I’m lucky.” In March 2014, Richard was in Ottawa (for an arts jury, we think; most likely with the Canada Council) and came over to visit. We spent an evening—Christine, Richard and myself (with four month old Rose)—in our sunroom, talking about everything and anything, and drinking wine. We talked for hours, as though there hadn't been years since I'd seen him. Why didn’t we take any photographs while he was here? He took a cab here, and we hung out for hours in the sunroom, before he wandered off again in another cab. He was charming and witty and delightful, and I most likely loaded him down with chapbooks.

Later on, he responded via email to my journal G U E S T with enthusiasm as well, asking if he could edit an issue as well, not realizing it was a journal for current or former editors of small presses. Earlier this year, when I suggested he could do with what he wished for periodicities, he became immediately enthused, and worked on editing a folio of Queer poets from New Brunswick. After we had posted it, Shane Neilson of Frog Hollow Press had requested Richard expand the project, for the sake of a chapbook, which Richard was very excited about, and actively working on. Might that book still be possible? I had been looking forward to seeing it. The folio also meant that we’d been corresponding over email quite a lot since March (and the essay I posted of his in April, as part of the “Talking Poetics” series), with multiple back-and-forths, including photographs he’d send along, including one of the dog he said he was living with, of whom Richard seemed quite fond. He was excited on my behalf for the half-sibling and birth mother updates and photos I’d been sending him. On March 4th, he responded with: “Your new found siblings are adorable! As, of course, are you. And I'm glad to hear things are better for your dad and Christine. You've been through quite a bit the last few years. Can you go on strike? Tried that once, didn't really work for me, but hey?”

He was warm, generous, energetic, cranky and enthusiastic. He was a champion for those who needed it, and very much attentive to the kinds of assistance he could provide to younger writers. He even wrote on above/ground press's 25th anniversary, when no one else would. How would he have felt about trending on Twitter, I wonder? I know he would have absolutely hated that the original notification from the Fredericton police was his driver's licence photo (both photographs here of Richard were provided by Richard himself, earlier this year). And oh, that wicked wit. I liked him very much and I will miss him a great deal.

And now I’ve been more than two hours seeking out his Invisible to Predators on my bookshelves. Unsuccessfully, I might add, although I did find my copy of his third poetry book, ruined stars (2004), a book that writes about, among other subjects, trauma, visual art, pop culture and queer identity, including this, from a collaboration with the painter William Forrestall, “Conversations with Will”:

(I don’t know about you) But
I’m tired of running around, spending my days
absorbing, absorbing, absorbing
 

being smart and unhappy at the same time

It’s too much, it makes my hair gray it keeps me up at night it makes me eat
more than I want to
it drowns out the me in things
 

simple things, the stink of an apple   the weight of a full mug
the heartlessness of the cold air when I walk
home or –
 

Yes, that Me, that conceit     is just Desire
           
Sure, but      who doesn’t want the world?

 

Monday, March 26, 2018

above/ground press gets some love in the globe and mail!

In case you didn't catch, Toronto writer, artist and filmmaker R.M. Vaughan was good enough to pitch and write a short piece for The Globe and Mail on above/ground press' twenty-fifth anniversary! Thanks so much! You can see the original article (that appeared online on Tuesday, and in print in Saturday's paper) online here.


And, fyi, while above/ground press might be nearing 900 publications, that number might not be achieved until Christmas, or even the new year (we're in the 860 range right now; check the sidebar for a list of names and links to new titles from Steve McCaffery, Sara Renee Marshall, Alice Notley, Gary Barwin and tons of others, including a long list of forthcoming). But that's okay. (and you know I'm still willing to backdate 2018 subscriptions to January first, right?)

Vaughan is also the author of two publications through above/ground press, including half of issue #8 (with Judith Fitzgerald) of the long poem magazine STANZAS, with his poem “HOW TO SPEND MOST OF YOUR TIME ALONE AND STILL WRITE CONVINCINGLY ABOUT SEX” (May 28, 1996) and the small chapbook 14 Reasons Not To Eat Potato Chips On Church Street (April, 1999).
Ottawa’s Above/Ground Press marks 25th anniversary and 900th publication

R.M. VAUGHAN
SPECIAL TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL


A lot can happen in 25 years. Ours are busy times. And then, there’s publisher rob mclennan.

The Ottawa writer, himself the author of 30 plus books of poetry and fiction, runs Above/Ground Press, a micropress specializing in chapbooks, broadsheets, quarterlies and zines. This year marks Above/Ground’s 25th anniversary – and it’s close to prepping its 900th publication.

900th. The 1000th is due in the fall. We may need a new definition of the word busy.

When asked about recent Above/Ground publications, mclennan responds by sending a box crammed with 20 new titles, including works by Natalee Caple, Gary Barwin, Joe Blades and Stephanie Bolster, as well as several issues of Touch the Donkey, a poetry magazine similarly stuffed with new works.

How does he do it? Perhaps the larger question is why does he do it?

mclennan seems surprised by the numbers himself.

“Odd to think that my ‘forthcoming’ list is larger than most chapbook presses’ entire publishing catalogues. I’ve been doing it for so long that it is simply a part of my practice. And it’s bloody good fun. I told myself years ago, that if I stop having fun doing something, I should no longer do it, and now both Above/Ground press and my reading series, The Factory Reading Series, are 25 years old. The Ottawa Small Press Book Fair turns 25 in fall, 2019.”

“I get to spend my days writing and thinking and reading (in between the requirements of a household and two small children); how could that not be seen as the most glorious fun possible?”

Above/Ground is funded by a devoted subscription base, people who “want everything the press makes in a calendar year,” mclennan tells me, plus online sales and book-fair sales. Above/Ground also swaps works with micropresses around the world.

“I didn’t get into small publishing because I like math,” mclennan says.

But the actual labour? It must be exhausting.

mclennan shrugs off the question. “I fold and staple in front of the television during evenings, and have for the whole run of the press. Folding and stapling I can do as part of my evening not-writing downtime. I’m currently on my third long-arm stapler over the 25 years of the press! I’ve most likely worn off my fingerprints by now.”

Being a publisher and a writer is tricky in Canada. Being a self-publisher and writer even more so (mclennan contributes to various Above/Ground titles occasionally and is of course the main editor). Canadian publishing, and arts in general, prefers clear divisions between creators and managers, makers and gate-minders. Again, mclennan is not fussed by such distinctions.

“I grew up on a farm, so I was raised with the idea that one exists in a community in which we all have different things we can do for the group. This is what I can do, so I try to do it for as many writers that appeal to me as possible.”

But mclennan is far from naive about the business – and anxieties – of publishing while writing.

“I’ve realized that those who are seriously interested in being ‘career’ poets might initially be interested in what I’m doing, but very quickly move on. I’ve had multiple young poets over the years realize that there isn’t really anything I can do for their career, so I tend to get ignored, which I’m quite okay with.”

“Those that do love the [micropress chapbook] format, and see the format as simply a means to an end (i.e. getting the work distributed) are the ones that tend to stick around. They’re my people.”

Thursday, April 24, 2014

Council for the Arts in Ottawa Mid-Career Artist Award;

Much to my shock, on Tuesday night I won the Council for the Arts in Ottawa Mid-Career Artist Award [see the link to the shortlist announcement here]. Enormous thanks to Michele Provost for nominating me for such an award, the judges, my fellow nominees, everyone at CAO and to Monty Reid, Amanda Earl, Sean Wilson and Marcus McCann for graciously and generously writing letters of support. Who knew? Fortunately, I listened to recent advice from RM Vaughan that I should dress like I was going to win (although "prepare a speech" might also have been good advice, fyi).

I sat beside the Mayor, handed out multiple "poem" leaflets and a few chapbooks, and even sold a copy of my new collection of short stories to a banker.

See the Ottawa Citizen blog post on the awards gala and other winners here. Photos by Pete Laporte.

Thursday, January 20, 2011

RE: READING THE POSTMODERNISM, ed. Robert David Stacey

Following the postmodern conference held in May, 2008 [see my note on the conference itself here] at the University of Ottawa, finally comes RE: READING THE POSTMODERNISM: Canadian Literature and Criticism after Modernism, ed. Robert David Stacey (Ottawa ON: University of Ottawa Press, 2010), a collection of some of the pieces presented, including pieces by Robert Kroetsch, Frank Davey, Linda Hutcheson, Christian Bök, Stephen Cain, Alexander MacLeod, Gregory Betts, Herb Wylie, Jennifer Blair, Jason Wiens, Pauline Butling and Susan Rudy. As editor Stacey writes in the introduction:
When I first encountered the term as an undergraduate at McGill University in the late 1980s, talk of postmodernism was everywhere. For me at that time the postmodern seemed virtually the property of Linda Hutcheon, whose books—The Poetics of Postmodernism (1988), The Politics of Postmodernism (1989), and The Canadian Postmodern (1988)—I eagerly took up as indispensable supplements to my course readings. It was through Hutcheon’s texts that I and many of my peers were first exposed to theorists such as Roland Barthes, Jean-François Lyotard, Michel Foucault, Jean Baudrillard, and Jacques Derrida, whose writings, different and sometimes incompatible as they are, nevertheless characterize the so-called linguistic turn in the humanities with which the postmodern, as aesthetic, is broadly aligned. These thinkers and their associated literary and philosophical concepts are among the most cited in the present collection as well. That this is so suggests that their ideas remain relevant to an understanding of the postmodern, even when the effort has been made, as it has here, to broaden and complicate that understanding beyond the dominant Canadian view.
At nearly four hundred pages, I can understand why not every piece gets invited to participate in the post-conference collection, but I have to admit to being disappointed to not be able to further engage with a piece by Toronto poet and critic Andy Weaver. Still, the collection furnishes rare essays on selected works by Lynn Crosbie and the late Daniel Jones in Stephen Cain’s “Feeling Ugly: Daniel Jones, Lynn Crosbie, and Canadian Postmodernism’s Second Wave,” and bill bissett, the late bpNichol, Steve McCaffery and Judith Copithorne in St. Catharine’s, Ontario poet and critic Gregory Betts’ “Postmodern Decadence in Canadian Sound and Visual Poetry,” two essays which, by themselves, notwithstanding a single other piece, are more than worth the entire collection. As Betts writes:
In fact, as Johanna Drucker points out, Canadian sound and visual poetry was distinct from other concurrent manifestations precisely because of its self-conscious use of theoretical and philosophical implications within its radical aesthetics (128-129). Experimental poets such as Nichol, McCaffery, Judith Copithorne, and bissett, and sound poetry groups like The Four Horsemen, Owen Sound, and Re: Sounding, used their creative work as the embodiment and manifestation of radical manifestos for emerging postmodern tropes like deconstruction and poststructuralism. Their art, as Habermas predicted, was indeed a decadent explosion of the barbaric yawp, the wild grunt, and primitive howl—proprioceptive intensities amplified by an anarchistic transhistoricism. As Nichol wrote, “i break letters for you like bread […] this is the divine experience. that i have found my words useless to reach you” (Gifts n.p.). Though language is said to fail in this passage, its sacrifice is a devotional offering to Nichol’s invented neologistic gods. As such, it releases an unexpressed, elusive spiritual fulfillment: an imaginary order emerging through disorder. Postmodernism in Canada begins with this kind of pale utopian fire, with this kind of playful, self-conscious irony. The spirit of decadere, of falling away from established norms of language-use without falling toward anything—a systematic derangement of the senses—represents an embrace of the end of order, the end of stability. In lines such as these, Nichol remains optimistic about the experience of instability, of being beyond or outside of language and the language game.
This collection also reminds me that I’ve seen a number of interesting and compelling critical pieces by Toronto writer and critic Stephen Cain that seem both academic and incredibly readable, exploring corners that so often otherwise would have gone unnoticed, including a magnificent piece on the Toronto geographies of bpNichol’s The Martyrology Book V (1982). I wonder, might Cain compile his essays into a collection at some point? Cain’s piece in the conference, and thus in this anthology, focus on Lynn Crosbie’s incredible novel Paul’s Case (1997) and Daniel Jones’ Obsessions (1992), writing of “These two novels, written by two friends living mere blocks from each other on College Street in downtown Toronto at the time, both illustrate the formal style and ideology of this new postmodernism, as well as share a similar affective expression (primarily that of paranoia and irritation) and, throughout, articulate a lack of social and political agency.” An explanation of much of the nihilism Cain talks about from this period could so easily be summed up in a quote he brings in by R.M. Vaughan, from an interview with him published in the anthology The Notebooks: Interviews and New Fiction from Contemporary Writers (eds. Michelle Berry and Natalee Caple, Toronto ON: Anchor, 2002):
When [Michael Ondaatje] got the Governor General’s Award for Anil’s Ghost he made a speech about how important it was for him in the 1970s to get the Governor General’s Award for Billy the Kid. He said that getting that award when he was in his twenties gave him validation, gave him access to a bigger audience, and gave him all that stuff that we all need at certain periods in our career. And I thought, well, good for you for putting this in context and giving people a sense of the importance of these sorts of things.

Then my second thought was, all the people I know who are currently writing the equivalent of the experimental book that you wrote in the seventies will never never never get near the Governor General’s Awards, or the Gillers, or the Griffin. It’s like that generation, with a few exceptions, got in and then slammed the gates shut. Of course, that’s the history of the boomers in all fields, that’s their economic survival strategy.
Still, why do we care about postmodernism? It’s already over, I’ve heard some suggest: why bother? But I’m far more interested in Stacey’s mention in his introduction that offers the same idea, footnoting that “A notable exception is Christian Bök who forcefully argues in “Getting Ready to have been Postmodern” that, at least in terms of literary criticism, genuine postmodernism has yet to begin in earnest here, having been aggressively suppressed within the dominant critical discourse of Canadian literature.” This, in my mind, is a far more compelling direction to move further of our writing and criticism in. Targeting Hutcheon, specifically her book The Canadian Postmodern, in a scathing defense of the postmodern, Bök writes in his essay:
While Hutcheon might argue that postmodern literature is “ex-centric,” insofar as it occupies a marginal position at the periphery of our culture, she nevertheless exacerbates the marginality of such literature by failing to discuss anti-classic, anti-mimetic fiction on the grounds that it has only a minor status among the major voices in Canada—and consequently, she forfeits the appropriate opportunity to study the work of avant-garde writers who have gone largely ignored in canonical narratives about our literary heritage. Even though a handful of critics have balked at these rhetorical manoeuvres, her book has nevertheless sanctioned exuberance among far too many scholars who now have permission to read, as postmodern, any realistic narrative that demonstrates even the merest degree of narrative aberrancy. Such scholars have adopted the catchy jargon of the “pomo,” but they have continued to evade any sustained encounter with the most obdurate examples of postmodern innovation, thereby ignoring the rare cases of a more experimental genre in order to depict as progressive the many cases of a more conservative genre.