UPCOMING SHOWS:
RECENT SHOWS:
TAGS:
Northwest Passages: Michael & Matthew Dickman
- LATEST COMMENTS
- TheKnowing apparently knows nothing. - poetrybuff
- These guys are so pretentious it makes my head spin ... - TheKnowing
- Do you really find those reviews to only be negative ... - Emily Harris
Twin brothers Michael and Matthew Dickman got a break earlier this year any young poet would love: a New Yorker profile and several poems published in the magazine. Matthew won a major poetry prize last year and both recently published their first collections of poems.
Poetry website coldfront magazine said Michael's The End of the West is
straightforward and self-centered and immature, but it also cares about you. It puts a lot of weight on very small moments and it wants you to read it very, very slowly. It knows for sure that when you walk away from it, you will be leaving unnerved.
Reviewing Matthew's All American Poem, the same website called the author
a spinner of tales, a would-be sad bastard sifting the fragments of teenagehood-cum-adulthood to write and write his way to meaning. Sometimes, he knows what to do when he finds it; other times, it is corrupted by toss-me-the-megaphone “Poetic” attacks: in the words of Elaine Benes, big budget movies with plots that go nowhere.
The 33 year-old brothers have won disdain as well as fame (well, as far as fame goes in American poetry). Poet Michael Schiavo says
The Dickman brothers have skated far into the poetry world on the novelty of being twins, the fact that they appeared in a Tom Cruise movie. . . their “rough-and-tumble” background. . . and by being so very in love with poetry. How wonderful.
Join the fray! You can read some of Michael's poems here, here, and here. And Matthew's here, here and here. What do you read in Michael's spare, dense, inner-focused poems? Or in Matthew's exuberant, discursive celebrations?
Tagged as: matthew dickman · michael dickman · northwest passages · poetry
COMMENTS: (18 total)
-
Don't get your hopes up for an interesting program. Emily's introductory smug, knows-it-all paragraph is where the show will go. You just have to love Emily's own poetic style with an url link on the word "disdain."
-
Do you really find those reviews to only be negative? To me, they spoke of complex characters, of young, talented writers who feel and care and are able to communicate some of what they experience, in their case through poetry. Can any of us do that all of the time? Clearly not, although I might hope otherwise. Of course there are other reviews. You can find several for Matthew's work here and for Michael's here.
And it was a great show.
Emily Harris — Mon July 20th 12:54p.m.
-
If there is one thing I could change about the New Yorker, it would be the poetry---it is the only thing in the magazine that is repeatedly underwhelming. So whether or not, their profile and poetry appeared on the pages is irrelevant to me---but it is indeed a break, the New Yorker is a break for any new writer(s).
Poetry is the contemporary art of literature---from a critical nature poetry's alleged value is so often derived on what came before it. And, is this progress? Or, what is the current trend? And, does the poetry reflect this? These are some things I hate about poetry. Or at least about poetry and its alleged canonical value.
The style of the Dickmans' poems are part of the relentless hipster malaise that has infected everything---a sickness where everyone is allegedly too cool for school, but everything is too schooled for cool. These manufactured poems will be perfect for the Mac crowd as they cycle from Stumptown to American Apparel while munching on teensy bars of 100% Cacao.
To be serious. I kind of feel bad saying this, but it has got to come out sooner-or-later, and perhaps it already has: Michael's poems are okay. Matthew's poems are not good (at all).
I get stuck on references such as the overuse of proper nouns (kind of like I used above: Stumptown, American Apparel, etc.) in poetry. It is an easy gimmick or an illusion that said event is a little more exotic then it actually is---it's trickery and the Dickmans are repeat offenders.
-
Your evaluation is farcical. Or you simply don't understand their work. Either way too bad.
One of the definitions of poetry "any communication resembling poetry in beauty or the evocation of feeling" The Dickman poems do both in different ways.
There is no trickery in putting words to paper. In this case a book of honest poems from both poets.
-
kismet,
Poetry for me is anything and everything, I'm pretty holistic in my approach. Nor did I say their pieces weren't poetry. It is just poetry I found trite and some other things---or even if I didn't care to explain myself: I simply didn't like it. You can't argue aesthetics---although to be fair we both are trying to. I do like poetry by-the-way. I don't discriminate amongst literature.
No, I suppose the physical act of putting words on paper is never trickery, but certainly the concepts or ideas behind those words, most definitely can be. Or to bungle that one, I could simply write the word "trickery" on a sheet of paper; or "this is not a sheet of paper." I think I could probably argue that all words are a form of trickery, because they are only representative of symbols or concepts that reside in our minds and are not those actual concepts. Back to the proper noun thing: I think the use is too much tell and not enough show.
Besides the above I was not impressed with the sound the words made together. I am not referring to some arcane traditional poetic rhythm either. What you have left: are the concepts, which seemed flash, pop, and cosmetic. You can be modern, edgy, austere, asymmetrical, comfortable or cacophonous and still do so in an oddly beautiful fashion. Their poetry just doesn't do it for me.
-
The Dickman brothers are writing poetry of a new generation, yet they are self-aware and self-scrutinizing enough to not drown in the implications of being solely generational poets. I do wonder what other young poets they see as a part of this, if they do at all.
-
Oh, and Matthew, I'm so glad that you read "Somedays"! It's my favorite of your poems.
-
Just stumbled on to this show, and one of the dickman's reading - awesome! Stopped me in my tracks.... THANK YOU!
-
I'm curious about the factors in their upbringing and education that led these brothers into poetry. It doesn't seem that there's much room for it in modern life.
-
Writers are always killing "the best line" because it stands out. Painters and actors do the same in their respective fields.
Have you ever noticed it's a process only artists go through? An accountant never excises a particularly elegant formula in an Excel spreadsheet cell. An auto mechanic never says, "Damn! I tightened that bolt too beautifully. It stands out. Must undo it or the whole repair will just not come together in the right way..."
-
Visiting portland, where i used to live
bits of sentiment...
visiting my brother, visiting an old flame (who is a twin)
standing in the shower, listening to a delightful poem
wherein the author imagines beautiful women standing in their showers, & simply touched the way that poetry so directly can.
even caught a tear with my towel
i'd read the new yorker piece without much judgement or reflection, I have no problem with buzz about good poetry,but i'd forgotten their names & now I will catch up on some reading.
thank you for a good conversation and a good poem!
-
Wow.! This broadcast was great!! The Dickmans' poetry is amazing to hear. I too stumbled on it.
What a treat.
OPB I hope you are busy scheduling them for the next time!!
-
I was wrong.
This was a terrific radio show! Spontaneous, lively, wordy. Congratulations.
-
You weren't wrong. The commentator was different than the one scheduled:) It was a great broadcast.
-
gorgeous to spend the evening listening to you people. thank you for an excellent show.
-
These guys are so pretentious it makes my head spin. You compare this interview to that of yours with Sherman Alexie, and it is night and day. These guys are always being called "young poets" yet they are not THAT young. They just aren't THAT talented. It is like an excuse for them... that they might someday catch up to a real poet like Alexie, but I doubt it is going to happen. If you want prose and purpose, skip both of the Dickman's work. They are just trying too hard, and real talent goes beyond fellowships and teaching high school poetry workshops. Listening to them go on about writing is more like an Introduction To Faking Cool. Time to get a real jobs, guys.
Side note: Lents has never been that bad of a neighborhood. By acting as if it was, the Dickmans only make themselves even less believable.
-
TheKnowing apparently knows nothing.
-
I find it interesting that Emily Harris (former Berlin Correspondent) chose a magazine (Coldfront) with so many negative comments when there are so many positive reviews out there of the Dickmans' work. Also the term "got a break" invites the thought that perhaps it was not deserved. Their poems are published because they are good. It is that simple.
I found both books genuine. Matthew Dickman's poems speak to the every day person, events and feelings. Reaching out to those of us who don't often read poetry. Michael Dickman's poems I found thought-provoking, unraveling like a mystery.
To use a quote from Michael Schiavo, who was unable to find a publisher for his book until his job at the book store somewhere in Vermont, is not worthy.
Instead of citing examples from egocentric jealous poets, why not cite reviews from reknown poets that are out there about the Dickmans' work. I trust their opinions more and find them more valuable.
Oregon is lucky to have spawned 2 rising poets and I am grateful to them for sharing their work.