Besides the posted Slate poem, I'm also open to more general questions and topics-- about poetry, Slate, the Favorite Poem Project, etc.

Use of real names-- as by Paul Breslin-- welcome.

Mr. Pinsky, for what it's worth, I think you're doing better than the editors over at Poetry (for example). Which is to say your batting average is higher. (Then again, they have to a lot more at bats per year. More opportunities to swing and miss.)

Question is: how does a magazine raise it's batting average? Because even the ball player hitting .300 wants to hit .400. And the guy hitting .400 wants to hit .500.

Here's an idea I've had turning in the rock-tumbler in the back of my brain: why not do a poetry contest through the Poems Fray of Slate? Similar to the "Bad Poetry Contest" (of a year or so ago), there might be a week in which poems could be submitted by posting. Fray readers could vote their favorites by thumbs-up ratings, or posting glowing blurbs to the poems. (Also the number of page views of each could be taken into account as a measure of their success.) At the end of the week the judge, Mr. Pinsky, would review the submissions and - taking into account the "editorship of the readers" via the "voting" - pick 1-5 for publication as the Slate poem of the week. (Where it would then enjoy its grand prize: excessive analysis by Fray partisans, lol.) This seems a great way to increase poetry readership at Slate, to diplomatically reach out and bring in more, and to generate internet buzz. Not to mention potentially increasing the batting average of Slate poetry. Because thousands of eyes are better than two. And are the final arbitor of good poetry, are they not?
____________________

Hello Mr. Pinsky,

Seems that there have been more poems by "big name" poets - Hoagland, Komunyakaa - appearing on Slate of late. Should we take this to mean the profile of Slate Poems (hardly ever cited in The Best American Poetry series, for example) is rising in "po-biz"? Might we see more of this in the future - and perhaps poems from bigger names such as Hass, Kinnell, Ashbery?

Thanks for your time in taking our questions.

Dear Prof. Pinsky:

What journals would you recommend that we spend our very few dollars on? I have a subscription to Warwick Review and AGNI, and am overwhelmed by the array of options when it comes to literary magazines. What kind of outfit is likely to publish work that will appeal to an admirer of Celan, Hill, and Heaney?

All best,

Zachary in Bos.ton

The contest idea, in some form that doesn't demand excessive labor from this end, is worth thinking about. I'll discuss possibilities with Maggie Dietz (Assistant Poetry Editor) and others here.

I haven't been aware of any trend regarding bigness-of-name in what is submitted or selected, or my recruiting activities. It's surprising how many poets, especially those over fifty, do not feel comfortable with the Web or Web publication. I know a few who do not use a computer at all.

Another difficulty in recruiting poems is the Fray itself-- the anonymity (maybe along with some frustration by Fray participants wanting to be published?) sometimes leads to responses that are pretty harsh, or even rude. That can make it hard to persuade poets to publish in Slate.

Not that readers need to be concerned with making my job easier! But as with the Web generally--too large a subject for me to deal with as clearly as I might like-- I think that manners need to improve. I suppose what I hope is that we will treat one another a bit more as we do when in a room together--say, a supermarket checkout line--and a bit less as we do while driving. (Another instance of anonymity damaging civility.)

This is a matter the good editors at Poetry don't need to deal with quite as much. Although the letter column gets pretty contentious over there, people use their real names. And the cooling-off period is longer.

Thank you for the good appraisal of the batting average here-- and of course Maggie and I would like to raise ours!

The one literary magazine that I customarily read cover-to-cover, every word, is Threepenny Review. Full disclosure: I often publish there, and I know the editor, Wendy Lesser.

Threpenny always has interesting art, lively reviews, unpredictable pieces, high standards for fiction and poetry. The tabloid format, the thematic illustrations, Wendy's care and imagination, make it highly readable.

Poetry Northwest, in a new incarnation, has been doing an outstanding job.

These things are hard to keep track of, because characteristically a magazine gets hot for a few years or even just a few issues, and then cools down or fades. But those are two recommendations.

Mr. Pinsky,

What makes Slate attractive as a place to publish poems is that Slate has a solid daily readership (how many millions is it in now?) and the poems ARE read. As the (sometimes) "rude" responses evince. At least a rude response is better than no response. (See in example below where "Stoned" has received no responses. This may be because your presence is taking up all the oxygen in the Poems Fray today, or because people are indifferent to it. Rather if it were hated. Hate is better than indifference because at least it had an effect; peopled cared enough to hate it.) Meanwhile how many poems, bad or otherwise, are published in the thousands of literary journals and go (relatively) unread, unloved, and unhated? Slate poems, no matter how rude a response may be, are lucky in comparison.

IMHO, anonymity makes Poems Fray more honest than say, blurbs on the back of poetry books, because posters tell you how they really feel rather than massaging a superior's posterior, advertising for a friend or former student, or whatever other politics they may be practicing. To those posters poetry isn't their business but simply their passion.

As for the rudeness, its not anonymity that makes it happen. It's the facelessness. Even if I give my real name (which is something many of the posters know), I'm still just a faceless username with opinions. Opinions that may inflame the opinions of other usernames with opinions. What makes people more civil in say, a grocery checkout line where people are just as "anonymous" - as in we don't know their names - is the physical proximity that could lead to violence. You can drive away in your car after calling somebody a name but it's harder to run while you're waiting for the cashier to bag your Hungry Mans.

Glad to hear that the contest idea will be taken into consideration. Seems it would make an innovative and democratic way to enliven Slate Poems.

Cutter, you make a good point here regarding "anonymity" --my somewhat imprecise use of the term-- when you say:

What makes people more civil in say, a grocery checkout line where people are just as "anonymous" - as in we don't know their names - is the physical proximity that could lead to violence. You can drive away in your car after calling somebody a name but it's harder to run while you're waiting for the cashier to bag your Hungry Mans.

That is true. And yet I feel a small but distinct element of disproportion in this very conversation, wherein I am "Robert Pinsky" and you are "Cutter McCool."

I'm not sure of that disproportion's nature. (Different advantages and disadvantages for each of us?) But whatever its nature, is the disproportion worth it? What are its effects or corllaries?)

In the absence of the "physical proximity" you shrewdly identify as a factor in manners, a name (and home town or location, as in print letters-columns?) might nevertheless be a step in the right direction.

I have the impression that many in the poetry Fray have been thrilled and appreciative of Paul Breslin's generous, insightful and erudite posts. I think part of their authority comes from his use of his real name.

I do know that other well-known poets who have participated in discussion here --and enjoyed it-- have been discouraged by an element of silliness and even occasional nastiness. Perhaps naively, I have thought that the mask-monikers increase the likelihood of frivolous or rude static.

(I know I am unlikely to revolutionize things by persuading people to abandon pseudonyms for real names-- though I do advocate that. But maybe this matter, the history of online manners, is worth thinking about critically?)

As they say in epic poetry, What is your name, and where do you come from?

Mr. Pinsky, if I may respond to your response to Cutter…

The underlying factor why you and Paul Breslin choose to use your real names as monikers is by virtue of the fact that it is under those bylines by which you have established yourselves. I would think it quite foolish to suddenly adopt an anonymous descriptor at this point having been published in print as well as online in many different forms using your real names. It would require an a.k.a., I would think.

The fear of nuisance and rudeness from anonymous participants which you described as being shared by some of those who have appeared here and elsewhere in forums and discussions, that is, established authors or poets or experts in some form or another, is an understandable objection to a more frequent presence or participation in online events. But the important thing to remember is that participants like myself, for instance, have established themselves using their chosen moniker. I have been NuPlanetOne for more than a decade, and since I have not established an entity using my real name, my conduct and opinions and poetry or any other behavior I engage in will bring me shame or fame in equal measure as compared to those using their real names. In other words, if I am rude or libelous or obnoxious, I can no longer do so anonymously, there is only one NuPlanetOne. I would have to suffer the consequences.

I think it is also important to get used to the fact that one day chosen monikers will be as ubiquitous as cell phones. Some kids are choosing their monikers at 5 or 6 yrs of age. They will use them online and in gadgets all their lives. And don't get me wrong, I hate getting use to this shit just like some of those you mentioned near or over fifty who are not even connected. I empathize at times wholeheartedly with your concerns on that point.

But as NuPlanetOne I can be googled. There will always be anonymous hecklers. But they must remain so or establish in all seriousness the case they hope to make. Thanks for dropping in.

I have the impression that many in the poetry Fray have been thrilled and appreciative of Paul Breslin's generous, insightful and erudite posts. I think part of their authority comes from his use of his real name.

I can speak only for myself, but Paul's use of his real name has nothing to do with my appreciation of his insightful ideas and his generosity in taking the time to share those ideas.

I do know that other well-known poets who have participated in discussion here --and enjoyed it-- have been discouraged by an element of silliness and even occasional nastiness.

Having posted on Slate's Poem Fray for seven years, I've seen several poets participate in discussions here. By and large, they are treated with respect if they treat other posters with respect. If there is sometimes an element of silliness or nastiness, all one needs to do is overlook it.

An online discussion board is the ultimate equalizer. People who post on Slate include PhDs, MDs, JDs, ABDs, blue-collar workers, religious zealots, aetheists, bored housewives, people from all over the world. The best posters are those who treat everyone with respect, those who take their own ideas and the ideas of others seriously, but don't take themselves too seriously.

MaryAnn

Dear Robert Pinsky,

I did not choose a nickname so I could anonymously rip poets to shreds and eat them for breakfast. I chose a nickname so I could not be followed off-line into my private life. I look at it no differently than locking the door when I leave the house in the morning.

Sincerely, Jane Doe (real name)

PS - Ahem. I feel the above may be just a tad bit on the passive-aggressive side. Rest assured that it is still much less vituperative than two earlier drafts I deleted. Asking me to give up my nickname is equivalent to asking a turtle to relinquish its shell. I am actually quite fond of being islandtime.

On the sunnier side, may I say that I am thrilled on three accounts? One, you are here. Two, you have added some commentary to this week's poem. And three, you are willing to have a conversation with us. Do you know how many times we have wistfully wished for just these things? Thank you!

My questions for you are:

1) Do you ever come here just to relax and read our comments? Is it even a relaxing place?

2) Do you feel (or could you ever feel) welcome in this group and want to be a part of it? I'd like to think that if you have your name attached to this endeavor, we're someone you could at least luke-warmishly endorse and mingle with.

3) Have you ever read anything here, a poem or just conversational stuff, that impressed you? I am still quivering from the hurtfulness of the, the, the whatever you allege to have heard us called, the slush-pile of the world? (Whimper.)

4) Did you know I won the 1996 Pulitizer prize for silliness?

Hi,

I have a lot of questions. Feel free to pick the one(s) that you find most interesting.

1. I remember from a small book you wrote, The Sounds of Poetry, that you wrote about the combinations of Anglo-Saxon and Latin/French registers. I wonder if you've thought more about this subject since writing the book.

2. I'm very curious what inspired you to translate Dante.

3. What is your favorite poem among the poems you've written?

august

(edited for punctuation/brevity)

Dear Islandtime,

Clearly I am not likely to transform the longstanding Web tradition of name-masks. I'll be content that I've expressed to admirable souls like you (and Mary Ann) my perception of an imbalance between real names and monikers. To me, strangely unquestioned.

To your questions:

1) Yes, I have enjoyed checking out the Fray from time to time. At it's best, I find it encouraging and stimulating: a town square or Fleet Street. With its equivalent of excellent cafe conversations. I don't mean to focus only on the loony or deranged moments.

2) Welcome? Certainly-- this is a platform of people who share my interests. "A part of it" is a trickier question. From time to time I have perceived an amazing exaggeration of my authority, power, etc. As though I were General Motors, or the poetry editor position the highly-paid equivalent of a cabinet post. Dear people of the Fray, I must advocate for you and poetry with the editors of a large, expensive operation in which we are a small part.

So far, in this attempt to communicate with y'all, yes: I have enjoyed it. And it appears that the Landor epgram, by being superbly made, moving and very short, has made a good first occasion.

3) Of course I have appreciated the excellence and thoughtfulness of much that has been posted here. And it's easy enough to ignore the occasional notes of triviality, Unabomber Certainty or Egoists Gone Wild. Like the world, the Fray has some of everything. (That phrase was, "The Voice of the Slush Pile.")

4) Yet again, the committees that hand out these awards are shown to be gravely fallible.

Mr. Pinsky,

To pick up on what NuPlanetOne, MaryAnn, and islandtime said on anonymity:

1) On boards such as this participants earn their authority not by their name - as in "Robert Pinsky, former PLOTUS" - but by the perspicacity of their posts. What gives the posts of Paul Breslin authority is not his name (never heard of him before I started posting here) but their consistent quality. Likewise MaryAnn has earned reputation for being the most thorough and even-handed reviewer of your selections; Ted Burke for being professorial, insightfully tangential, and dense; waltz_n_capsize for being hilarious, etc. As MaryAnn said, this is the ultimate democracy.

2) Was Samuel Clemens nastier because he wrote as Mark Twain? I chose the moniker "Cutter McCool" to be the Mark Twain to my Boring Realname. Having a clever username, which implies clever posts, is a way to help establish a reputation online.

If you're very interested in knowing my Boring Realname I'd be happy to send a submission to Slate with "aka Cutter McCool" in the cover-letter provided it might end up in your hands to read it. I have nothing to hide from you, being a "real name," but plenty to hide from the crazies (cyberstalkers, trolls, vampires, etc.) who sometimes frequent these other-side-of-the-printed-page­, slushpile parts.

waltz_n_capsize for being hilarious..

Cutter,
There are a good many fools who call me a friend, and also a good many friends who call me a fool.” (Chesterton)

I thought that from MaryAnn's list I might have been a likely suspect for either the bored housewife or religious zealot (though I'm neither bored, nor married to a house.) But thank you for remembering me in your tribute.

I agree with yours and other's assessments of the good reasons to remain anonymous online. Until the bad guys unmask, the good guys are wise to remain alter-egoed.

Still, there are enough people on the PoemsFray board who have been answered this from me, What is your name, and where do you come from?

Clearly I am a stranger to your customs here.

Cutter McCool, when I read your "until the bad guys unmask, the good guys are wise to remain alter-egoed" I'm inclined to defy the bad guys by demonstrating that one can go unmasked.

A pen name like "Mark Twain," certainly in his case, was not a mask but what the person is known by or as-- the way Archibald Leach was known as Cary Grant.

I'm content to have raised the matter-- makes it easier for me to use my own, somewhat nondescript actual name while dealing with y'all with your colorful masks. (And maybe one or two of you will drop them, at least partially, some time.)

Possibly, the more I knew about the Web the more I would get your point. But I stand by the idea that there's a certain desirable something about going unmasked.