Afric McGlinchey's The lucky star of hidden things

     Afric McGlinchey's debut collection, The lucky star of hidden things (copyright 2012 Salmon Poetry), is an unusual literary gem. lucky star is not a book to be read in one sitting. I can attest to this fact; lucky star contains poetry that is spare and lovely, yet, I found myself treating her work with reverence. The world McGlinchey offers the reader is dark, mysterious, and all-together accessible... however, if one is willing to revisit the sacred spaces McGlinchey has created, the reader, in this case, myself, finds the landscape deliciously altered – for the better.

     In the interview below, McGlinchey discusses her poetry collection, as well as other current literary matters. I would like to thank Afric McGlinchey for her patience, artistry, and honesty. I look forward to reading more of her work – with pleasure – in the future.

                                                    

   A-KP: Please explain the inception of The lucky star of hidden things.

   AM: Chance really had a hand in it. I won a prestigious award in Ireland, and soon afterward, Salmon offered to publish my collection.

    As I have lived in a number of countries, a strong impulse all my life has been trying to find a way to belong to wherever I am. Usually, however, as is the case with many writers and creative people, I have felt an outsider, and feel that I am often more of a witness than a participant. So I decided to make that the focus of my collection.

   As for the title, that came about by chance. Someone mentioned that they found my imagery very ‘celestial’ so I looked up stars, and discovered Sadalachbia, the nomadic star, which translates into English as The lucky star of hidden things, so I thought it fitted perfectly, as I sometimes use private coded symbols when writing about difficult subjects.

  A-KP: What part of your life influenced your poetry more, and why: your Irish heritage, or, your time in Africa?

  AM: Interestingly, I only began writing seriously when I returned to Ireland in 1999, when I discovered the Munster Literature Centre and started attending workshops. This is where I am creatively stimulated, where I read, and study the craft. But my image base is strongly influenced by my years in Africa (Zambia, Zimbabwe, South Africa, and time spent in Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia and the Transkei too). I also return regularly, as my father still lives there, and my daughter, who was born there, has returned to live there too.

So, both influence my writing.

   A-KP: Your poetry is quite arresting – cinematically - and, the language is immediately accessible, which gives your work broad appeal. Given your academic background and training, how do you feel about the idea of poetry being available for mass consumption? 

   AM:Interesting question. In his essay, ‘In praise of difficult poetry,’ Robert Pinsky argues for ‘difficulty’ as opposed to poems that are too easily understood, and I agree. It is infinitely more satisfying to read a piece of writing that offers itself up more slowly, where the reader is rewarded for his or her closer attention. Then again, there is a level of difficulty which can be alienating, where the writer, rather than communicating, is simply building walls. While accessible poetry can be dismissed by the academics, everyone gets offended by insular arrogance, although not everyone is brave enough to admit it. It’s a fine line. But I’d rather err on the side of clarity than perverse obfuscation – the act of writing is intended to communicate, after all. For my first collection, I felt the need for a narrative thread to run through the poems. Although, as you say, most are ‘accessible’, I wouldn’t say they are equally so. Ideally, I’d like my poems to communicate on a number of levels, and be open to more than one interpretation.

     A-KP: The Tokoloshe sequence (Late, Exorcism, Curse), a three-part narrative of an exorcism, is profoundly disturbing. I felt, while reading Tokoloshe, that this was a very brave piece to write, not in a confessional way, but, in a 'bring the fear out into the daylight so people can see it's for real' way. Was this based on real events, and, if so, what inspired you to write it?

  AM: Yes, the three poems were all based on true events, although the only factor linking them really is the spectre of the tokoloshe. They took place at different times. I lived on a farm where fear of the tokoloshe was a very real thing. I know of a perfectly healthy person who simply lay down and died after being cursed. The poem Curse refers to the time of land invasions, when a curse was put on us, in an attempt to scare us away; but we don’t believe in the tokoloshe, so it didn’t have power over us, although for the purposes of the poem I altered that detail slightly. 

The ‘Exorcism’ experience was amazing. We hired a n’anga (witchdoctor) to do the exorcism on our farm, as all our workers were convinced they had been cursed. So he did his ritual, with everyone watching, and just as it says in the poem, at one point, everyone screamed and ran. When I asked them later what had happened, they said, ‘but didn’t you see? Small men, knee-high, running out of all the rondavels!’ So the exorcism did the trick.

‘Late’ describes a tragic event, one that I’ll never forget. I find that I need to write about events that have affected me emotionally.

     A-KP: The current trend of modern poets is to employ the device of 'travels through life, both internally and externally', but none as distinctively as yours. Would you agree/disagree, and why?

    AM: I think a number of poets use this device as you say – I wouldn’t have thought my method was particularly ‘distinctive’. Perhaps you are referring to the clarity of my approach – the use of sections to allow for differing themes along the journey to date: my African life (In my dreams I travel home to Africa); returning to Ireland and taking on new challenges, as a mother, an individual, and, as a writer (The road); some witness poems (What we saw), and learning to trust again, after a long relationship had ended (Leaning into your world). My life has been more of a physical, literal journey than usual, so it was easier to chart the collection this way, and perhaps that’s what you mean by distinctive? Although I have seen divisions into sections used elsewhere, for example in Sujata Bhatt’s Pure Lizard, JohnFitzgerald’s The Mind, Jane Kenyon’s Constance, Harry Clifton’s The Winter Sleep of Captain Lemass, or Grace Wells’ début, When God has been Called away to Greater Things, to name a few.

     A-KP: There is an undercurrent of vulnerability that runs through your work, particularly in the poems “Totems,” “Invasion,” and “Wolf House.” Do you feel that it's necessary for a poet, in keeping with her work, to maintain, as well as cultivate, a constant state of openness? Why/why not?

   AM: I don’t feel it’s necessary to be open; it’s probably a matter of temperament. Some poets are open, others are more reserved. In some instances, it might be harmful to be too open. But when combined with a cool editorial eye, poetry that allows itself to reveal vulnerability, can be very effective.

   A-KP: What kind of feedback are you receiving from your poetry colleagues with regard to The lucky star of hidden things?

   AM: They’ve been pretty positive, on the whole. Certainly, they’ve been supportive. The book’s only been out since summer, but already it’s on its second reprint. My work has been described by reviewers as melodic, sensory, exotic, scattered with interesting non-Anglo language and imagery, and immersed in the flux of life.

     A-KP: I notice that many publishers are not yet offering poetry collections in e-book format, though I know that Salmon Poetry has an e-book category on the homepage of their website. How do you think the transition from physical books to virtual books will affect literature, particularly poetry, in the next five to ten years?

     AM: Salmon are good at spotting trends, and staying abreast of the market, and no doubt most books will end up as e-books too. But Salmon have also just opened a bookshop, so they obviously trust that there’s going to continue to be a market for the physical product. And as a book-lover, I agree. There’s something about turning the pages, the physicality and aesthetics of the thing, even the smell, that e-books just can’t compete with. There’s something intimate about a book. When I’m asked to review e-books, I always refuse, and say I need to read the hard copy – and then they send it to me. I’ve resisted getting a kindle so far – maybe that’s a little more tactile, and includes the sound effects of turning a page…I don’t know. But I’m hoping there are more people like me, who will ensure that physical books don’t vanish altogether. And you can’t sign an e-book!

     A-KP: What is one piece of advice you would share with a poet who is getting ready to put together a début collection of work?

    AM: Be able to stand over the integrity of every single poem.

     A-KP: Now that you have “arrived,” with your début collection, what are your future literary plans?

     AM: Well, while the début collection is the most exciting one of any poet’s career, the second is probably the most challenging! I’ve already been given a date for the next one, but plan to wait until I’m really ready. This time, I’ll work to a specific theme, and try out different voices and forms, I think. But so far, I’m simply writing the poems that are arriving, and am going to allow the theme to emerge organically.

Note: If you would like more information on Afric McGlinchey, you can visit her website: http://www.africmcglinchey.com/

The lucky star of hidden things, Afric McGlinchey, copyright , 2012 Salmon Poetry, salmonpoetry.com, ISBN 978-1-908836-083, 83 pages, $17.90 (USD).

Author photo and book cover photo © 2012 Afric McGlinchey and Salmon Poetry

Article content © 2012 Marie Lecrivain

Words Cast Upon the Water: the Trouble With Simultaneous Submissions

(Original article previously published in Magnapoets, Issue 2, July 2008,

minor updates/changes have been added to reflect recent events.)

One morning as I opened my email, I noticed one marked "regarding submissions from 1/12/08," from a poet whose name I will not reveal. He notified me that one of his poems had been accepted elsewhere for publication, stated I that had his permission to publish the others, and hoped, if I liked his work, I would re-publish it and the other poems in an upcoming issue. After re-reading his submission, I congratulated him and told him, "No thank you."

For the record, I applaud the poet's honesty in admitting that his work had been simultaneously submitted (he stated so in his first email). However, this poet's work, while technically sound, did not resonate with me, which is, ultimately, why I turned him down.

As a writer/ editor, I find myself walking a precarious tightrope on the subject of simultaneous submissions. In publishing, this is a conundrum that has plagued me for years. Within this essay, I will explore the matter based on my own and other others experiences to shed some much needed light on the matter: why poets/writers brazenly - or not so - simultaneously submit work to the "quickest" bidder.

According to an article I discovered in the online magazine Ink and Blood, Norman Mailer was the first to pioneer simultaneous submissions, utilizing the natural frustration and subversion that go hand in hand with a writer's persona to send out manuscripts en masse to publishers. If I ever had the chance to meet Mailer (alas, he's since shuffled off this mortal coil), I'm not sure if I would've shaken his hand, or kicked his ass, in that order. (Note: with manuscripts, simultaneous submissions are another story for another time).

I'm not a prolific writer, though many people would disagree with me. In my opinion, it's vital to me that my work is read by as many people as possible. Yet, I want the "life" of my prose and poetry to last. This means, in accordance with my literary ethics, to refrain from sending the out same five poems to ten different literary journals, which, according to aspiring novelist and Subtle Tea editor David Herrle, is "like a guy 'poking' several women to raise the chance of impregnation."

As the editor of poeticdiversity: the litzine of Los Angeles, I no longer accept simultaneous submissions, In doing so, I find that many poets/writers choose to believe I'm being disingenuous when the rules of my publication clearly state:

7) Previously published work will be considered for publication, but with the following caveat; please cite where the work was published for the former, and contact us if your submission was accepted elsewhere for the latter. This will not bar submissions from getting published in poeticdiversity, it's just that every publication has its own rules and we don't want to step on anyone's toes. Simultaneous submissions will not be considered. And yes, we do check!

More often than not, these same submitters assuage their conscious with the fleeting validity of publication rather than risk the opportunity to be honest in return. Before I made my decision to stop accepting simultaneous submissions, I would do the following: perform a Google search to determine if the work had appeared elsewhere. If the work had already been published, I would request a publication date and name. Nine times out of ten, my request is ignored.

Because of this, I routinely reject work of those who are less than forthcoming. It’s not in my best interest, nor in my nature to represent the work of liars, the notable exception being, in quite a few cases, the poet/writer in question who accidentally omits the mention of previous publication. This is an honest mistake, and one that I made on occasion. Poets/writers who generate a body of work that spans a few years can easily fall prey to forgetfulness, as poet and Magnapoets executive editor Aurora Antonovic states, with unforeseen consequences:

"While there are honest mistakes (sometimes poets forget to where they've submitted what, or editors reject a poem only later to publish it, and the unsuspecting poet has already sent it off elsewhere), anyone who knowingly does this is engaging in unethical behavior. If poets (or anyone for that matter) want to be taken more seriously, they have to begin by behaving responsibly.

I've never knowingly simultaneously submitted somewhere, but I have made mistakes with records or an editor has made mistakes. Human error is one thing, but deliberate misleading of submissions records is serious enough, in my book, that repeat offenders ought to be no longer considered for publication. After all, no serious publication wants to get into copyright trouble."

I have yet to hear of a small press publication/literary journal suing another for violating the "exclusive" or more specific (though it reeks of nationalism), "first time North American serial rights" rule, and Antonovic raises an excellent point: The frustration writers and poets are exposed to, caused by editors who are not timely or courteous enough with responses, which compels them to simultaneously submit. Time lags have inspired Richard Beban, ex-pat, poet, and author of What the Heart Weighs (Red Hen Press 2004) and Young Girl Eating A Bird (2006 Red Hen Press), to take a hard line with journals, and to seek alternate and more selective means of publication:

"Since I began work as a poet in 1994, I don't bother sending to any publication that wants:

1.) exclusive rights, and

            2.) simultaneously claims a response time of six months or beyond.

I think six weeks is reasonable, no matter how "understaffed" a publication claims to be. Part of staffing should include the commitment to give writers enough respect that you don't hold their work for inordinate amounts of time. Writers like to see their work in print, yes, and particularly within their lifetimes. I also query about the work after six weeks, unless the specified response time is longer.  I even bug The New Yorker, which apparently has NO specified response time, judging from the black hole my poems go into when I send there.  I give them (the publication) three months in any case, and then gleefully simultaneously submit elsewhere."

Not everyone is as organized or as adamant as Beban. In my opinion, his approach is straightforward, and somewhat fair - because he has clearly established guidelines. Many newer poets/writers, legitimately bound by time constraints, don't have the time to research ALL the publications that they wish to submit work to, as one anonymous writer/editor/poet shared with me:

"I do send out to about five different publications at a time when I submit sets of poems. I do that with publications who say they accept simultaneous submissions, because they agree to take that risk. And writers take risks; too, when we send work out to journals because it's more likely than not that we're rejected. Of course, odds of acceptance depend a lot on the match between quality of work and quality of publication, but if we only submitted serially we'd be hard-pressed to have any kind of publication credits at the end of the year. At the end of the day, getting published is either important to you, or it's not. And if it is, you want to be smart about it and increase your odds by increasing your submission sights.

Groups like Writer's Relief make their living getting people published by doing that very thing: targeting about 30 publications with a single set of poems from an author. I know a handful of poets who use that service, and it does seem to work for the writer. I'm sure it's hard on editors when work is pulled at the last minute which is why a lot of them don't accept simultaneous submissions."

While the writer quoted above is acting responsibly by employing an intermediary like a writing/publishing resource to act on his/her behalf, there are many more poets/writers who are not, either because they are new to the submission process, and become overwhelmed by the plethora of submission rules, or because they experience frustration caused by the increasingly iconoclast rule of "exclusive rights," which has caused a potential pandemic of dishonesty between poets/writers and editors. As the rift widens, not only does the relationship between the poet/writer and the editor disintegrate, but the standard of a publication can become compromised, as John Amen, poet and editor of The Pedestal Magazine, maintains:

"Pedestal does ask for firsttime rights; i.e., we don't (re)publish previously published material; we do accept simultaneous submissions and ask that folks let us know if/when work is accepted elsewhere. This policy doesn't seem to be creating too many problems, although we've had a couple of situations that led us to consider changing the policy. Personally, I've never been into simultaneous submitting. I don't know why, it just doesn't appeal to me.

Now, there's another thing that goes on from time to time: someone wanting to publish a particular piece in various publications at the same time. It's not a question of whoever says "yes" first gets the piece; it's that the writer wants everyone/all the editors to publish the piece. As we ask for first rights and don't republish material, this clearly doesn't work for us. But more importantly, I think this practice does a disservice to the literary landscape. It fosters homogeneity and compromises the uniqueness of a particular publication."

I'm in accordance with Amen - and - I firmly believe that homogenizing one's art is the ultimate form of self-sabotage. I base my opinion on personal experience and a hard-won work ethic. Which is more important: elusive popularity coupled with the fleeting validation I receive every time my name gets into print, or the TRUTH that exists in my words? This is the question I ask myself as a writer when I submit work for consideration of publication, and, as an editor to whom work is submitted to on a weekly basis. I strive to respect myself and others in this capacity, and I believe that honesty is the key to bridging the chasm between poets/writers and editors.

This responsibility rests with the poets/writers. After six years, I have found that it IS possible to build a CV of publication credits without casting out my poetry and prose like the proverbial bread upon the waters. The following guidelines may help:

1) Be clear and careful. Study a publication's guidelines. Follow them to the letter. If a rule is unclear, take the initiative and contact the publisher.

2) As Beban illustrates, construct clearly established parameters regarding submissions. One suggestion: Unless the publication in question takes submissions on a rolling basis, consider your submission to be defunct if you have not heard from the editor by the publication date, and then take it somewhere else. Or, if the publication gives permission to contact them after a specific time, do so. You and your work deserve respect.

3) A writers' resources, like Doutrope, offer over 4,300 venues for publication, along with (daily) updated listings, a submissions tracker, notification of changes to publications (defunct, dead, temporarily closed to submissions). Duotrope is free, though I would encourage those who use it donate money to its upkeep once in awhile.

4) Keep a log of your submissions; dates, titles and email correspondences. Duotrope offers a log,. Many online publications are now using Submittable's Submissions Manager program, or you can create your own in an excel spreadsheet. A lot of confusion and anger can be avoided by getting organized in this fashion.

5) Be patient. Getting published en masse does not guarantee your literary immortality. Turn off the little voice inside your head that urges you to disseminate your work like fish food in a tank full of guppies. Too much food can kill the fish!

6) You all have heard this one, and it bears repeating. Carefully PROOF your work before submitting it anywhere; that stray comma or missing period can make a difference between a "Yes," or, a "No. Thanks for playing."

7) If all else fails, publish your work on Facebook, Twitter, Blogger or Live Journal where the whole world can see it, and where you can be fawned over or condemned to your heart's content.

I fear the day is coming - , no - it may already be here, where instant gratification outweighs the desire for quality literature. Of my own volition, I do my best to stem the tide. I wish each and every one of you "good luck."

Finis

(Note: Thank you to all those who answered my questions regarding this matter, which, of course, we all know will not be resolved any time soon.)

© 2012 marie lecrivain

Update on Alternate Lanes Anthology

The poets and writers who will be included in the new poeticdiversity anthology Alternate Lanes (copyright 2012 Sybaritic Press) are:

L.Ward Abel

E. Amato

Michelle Angelini (aka Rina Rose)
Craig Berry

Jim Bolt

Lynne Bronstein

Deborah Edler Brown

Gully Burns

Charles Claymore

J. de Salvo

Meg Elison

Jerry Garcia

Sandra Hunter

Alex S. Johnson

Scott Kaestner

Deborah P. Kolodji

Eric Lawson

Tess. Lotta

Gregory Longenecker

Tamara Madison

Matt McGee

Brenda Petrakos

Rick Lupert

Daniel McGinn

Scott Nichols-Collier

Apryl Skies

Julia Stein

Anthony Torchia

Mary Torregosa

D.L. Warner

Florence Weinberger

Hilda Weiss

I want to thank all the writers, poets, and artists who submitted work, especially for sharing your individual points of view on traveling through the City of Angels in anything other than a car. I especially want to thank Angel Uriel Perales for assisting me with making the final choices. The anthology is due to be released the week of July 2, 2012.

article and photos copyright 2012 marie lecrivain