e-poets Plain Text: big money for fast poetry

in Plain Text

Current features

Past articles

main features

spoken word: Book of Voices

poetry video: Videotheque

background: about e-poets

other features

Plain Text, Library

network neighborhood

e-poets network partners

artist Heather Haley
Vancouver, BC, Canada

Cinasphere
Vallejo, California, USA

Poet in Residence
Queensland, Australia

Farrago Poetry
London, England

artist Patrick Sanchez
poet-at-large

e-poets network
Chicago, Illinois, USA

follow us on Facebook

bigger slam prizes - one poet's view

an interview with Samaiya Ewing, continued; page 2

Do you think by raising the stakes that a slam event producer has a better chance of attracting poets with stronger poetry? ... more competitive poets?

I think that any event producer willing to put up a significant amount of money is likely to attract a greater quantity of poets, and as a direct result of generally having more poets, will have more poets with stronger poetry. So you know, if only 2 out of every 5 poets could be considered strong poets and you’ve only got five poets in a room, then you’ve got 2 strong poets, maybe.

Of course there’s a difference between strong poets and competitive poets, at least there is if it’s writing strength we’re talking about.

But if the same probability applies and you’ve got one hundred poets in a room ... Well, you catch my drift. I guess what it comes down to is that money and writing strength don’t have very much to do with each other. Money doesn’t appeal to writing strength, it appeals to poverty, and there are poor poets on both sides of that particular spectrum.

As for attracting more competitive poets, I think it comes right back to money. Money makes people competitive, people who’ve never been competitive will do a pretty good imitation if you wave a couple thousand dollars under their nose and tell them it’s only theirs if they’re better at one thing or another than the person standing next to them.

So is there a difference between "stronger" and "more competitive" poets?

Of course there’s a difference between strong poets and competitive poets, at least there is if it’s writing strength we’re talking about. Strong writers are not necessarily competitive, and competitive writers are not necessarily strong writers. However, I have to say (once again) that I think the idea of competitiveness ought to be left out of the equation. The line between people who are competitive in every day life and those who are not becomes hopelessly blurred when money comes into play.

Does a more auspicious prize frame the competition in such a way that your fellow competing poets behave differently? ... that the audience is different from the more routine weekly slams that you've seen?

I haven't noticed any different or abnormal behavior, but then I think we've already established that as far as the other competitors are concerned, I'm not paying that particular kind of attention. Too, I don't think that the audience differs much, at least not in relation to the amount of money involved. Anytime you have a slam anywhere, the people in the audience are going to be a reflection of the area, the type of slam (i.e. Black pride), and the night of the week.

article home

Samaiya Ewing interview: 1 | 2 | 3 | next page