American Hybrid: A Norton Anthology of New Poetry by Cole Swensen

American Hybrid: A Norton Anthology of New Poetry Reviews

• 
  Oscar

  Could also be titled: Experiment for Experiment's Sake.
  
  I only got through 2/3 of the book (has to go back to my local library) but what I did read was very mixed. My chief concern with this anthology is how it breaks down the tensions in United States Poetry to a "fundamental division" between narrative and experimental texts when all that is explored in this volume is the negotiation between variations in U.S. English non-linear narrative in contemporary academic poetry without putting any focus on hybrid texts outside of academia and/or explore the boundaries of English.
  
  Many of the selections from the poets really only hint at the possibility of hybrid text as the samples rarely show a collision of the two coming together with only a few poets actually able to balance plain language and disrupted text in a single poem or even a few pages. Some of the poets who do show the best of all worlds in this collection include Nathaniel Mackey, Michael Palmer, John Yau and Harryette Mullen.
  
  With a shaky premise to begin with (poetry has always benefited from a collision between various camps, not just a late 20th century argument between academics), a very loose definition of "academic poetry" (probably included because almost every poet is in academia), and a mandate that hybrid poetry can lead us back to a "purer sense of language" and help in the "renaming of the world" (I thought that was the job of all poetry), this collection doesn't offer a plurality of voices but instead seeks to limit the definitions of what modern poetry can be.
• 
  Cat

  Well, I wrote a whole long review about experimental poetry and how I struggled with this collection and then Goodreads crashed on me and I don’t care enough about this to do it again. It wasn’t for me. Maybe it’s for you.
• 
  Jesse D

  I think the percentage of poems I liked was somewhere around maybe 10% - which isn't awful for any anthology this big - but the stuff I didn't like I really didn't like.
  
  I feel like a square for articulating this, but I just don't think that there's very much actually happening in a lot of this "experimental" poetry. I sort of distrust that word in general - do these experiments provide results? what are they? showing your work is fine, but I guess I also want to know what conclusions these experiments have provided. I guess language is arbitrary and you can make it do weird stuff - duh - but I like poems a lot better when I can actually read them.
  
  I sort of wished two paragraph intros provided more context, because the editors clearly see value in this work, and I wish I could too. Instead, they read like blurbs - telling me how great what I'm gonna read is, instead of providing some sort of critical context that maybe would help me know what's going on.
  
  The stuff I did like in here, though, I liked a lot. The collection is a really good survey of a certain kind of poetry, and if the intros were a little more in depth and provided more commentary on the specific poems in the anthology, it would have been really helpful.
• 
  Tracie

  I gave this book five stars because it really opened my eyes to a new way of looking at poetry. It was the text for a poetry class I took, and I learned a lot just from the few sections and pieces that we read. I tried my hand at writing with some of the styles presented, and I was introduced to poets I should have known but had never been introduced to. This is definitely not poetry we were taught to memorize in school, which is a bit refreshing as well as uncomfortable all at the same time. Good stuff!
• 
  Julia Bucci

  "Of Politics, & Art
  
  Here, on the farthest point of the peninsula
  the winter storm
  off the Atlantic shook the schoolhouse.
  Mrs. Whitimore, dying
  of tuberculosis, said it would be after dark
  before the snowplow and bus would reach us.
  She read to us from Melville.
  
  How in an almost calamitous moment
  of sea hunting
  some men in an open boat suddenly found themselves
  at the still and protected center
  of a great herd of whales
  where all the females floated on their sides
  while their young nursed there. The cold frightened whalers
  just stared into what they allowed
  was the ecstatic lapidary pond of a nursing cow's
  one visible eyeball.
  And they were at peace with themselves.
  
  Today I listened to a woman say
  that Melville might
  be taught in the next decade. Another woman asked,
  'And why not?'
  The first responded, 'Because there are
  no women in his one novel.'
  
  And Mrs. Whitimore was now reading from the Psalms.
  Coughing into her handkerchief. Snow above the windows.
  There was a blue light on her face, breasts, and arms.
  Sometimes a whole civilization can be dying
  peacefully in one young woman, in a small heated room
  with thirty children
  rapt, confident and listening to the pure
  God-rendering voice of a storm."
  
  -- Norman Dubie
  
  
• 
  Elizabeth

  Self described "anthology of new poetry" and it is. Many of the writers are those I admire the most. The collection is eclectic---or is that the intent of the authors, after all, to collect the vanguard writings out there?
  
  I studied many of the writer's in this anthology. I studied with some of the writer's in this anthology. Love, love, Donald Revell...Stacy Doris has incredible work included. I'm happy to see that much of the new writing comes from the West Coast. The authors determined that the writing "out there now" is a hybrid bringing in two distinct influences: Post-Avant and Third Wave...using two or more poetic forms/influences to create the Hybrid poem.
  
  I'm happy to see a collection which includes what I would call experimental and avant-garde (as I believe avant-garde to a term that is timeless and evolves with time and history. It transcends all forms and content in regards to poetry consistently describing that which is absolutely NEW and shall we say, "edgy?" or leading in a unique manner from the rest of the group.
  
  I'm not sure I'm comfortable with "post-avant" How can one be Post-innovative? Nevertheless, the anthology has some of the finest examples of fascinating work. But it must be said that many of the Poets and writings are actually quite dated as far as when the various pieces were published. Some poetry dates back to the 60's, though it is still fresh and invigorating, the actual publication year may not technically address the Hybrid or Avant-Garde poetry that is being published today.
  
  This is due to a decision on the part of the Editors to only include Poets who have already published 3 books. Those innovators that are still in Chapbooks and/or with only a book or two under their belt, are not included. I think that is a mistake. We miss many of the rising stars or comets in today's Poetry Scene.
  
  But I do highly recommend this book as a must buy/read. The writers included led the charge to playfully engage word and thought with much affection and fearlessness and that is, after all, why we write. We write to feel, hear and roll the words in our mouth and off the tongue and gaze so happily at the form on the paper we cherish so much. It is an act of love to write poetry. This book is a lesson in Poetry as an organic meme that connects all humanity by creating itself in any manner playful or otherwise for us to savor and learn from. Where are we headed next? How is construction related to sustainability? How is the paper influencing the form? I am here to rave about Rebecca Solnit's recent release of the San Francisco map book as poetry. It is a stunning beautiful piece that one cannot afford to miss--just as this book is. I hope we see a 2nd Volume of American Hybrid with the new writers who have between one book and one chapbook published. We may see a very different collection then. Hooray, for my former teachers alive and dead! I guarantee reading this book will strain your neurotransmitters and synapses for electric metaphors in your new work--as it did mine.
  
  I'm seeking more Stacy Doris and Rebecca Solnit & Hannah Weiner.Lyn Hejinian......its enough to make me want to lounge in a pool, swim slowly and languorously toward the poem as a living thing who will and does return one's feelings. and BTW, Happy to see my Alma Mater mentioned, CCA, as I think it is indeed a great place to learn the rules and how to break them lovingly. Done. et Not actually finished the book.....more like a reference book to me....you know, when you read a poem that makes you run and skip and smoke a cigarette outside in the breeze while you remember your own work very similar - well if it makes me run or breathe deeply, then I buy 2 copies for both sides of my house so I can find it at all times. There that's the story. One in the living room and one in the bedroom. Thank you for reading.
  Elizabeth
• 
  CX Dillhunt

  disturbing introduction--it's inaccurate, simplistic, & opportunistic; a clever title, but doesn't hold up, needs much more thought; neither the collection itself nor the shabbily written intro/premise work...it seem that many poems are hybrids, but no one set out to write them, & the academic/avant-garde dichotomy is foolish as best to hold up as the "non-argument"
• 
  Ann Woodlief

  This collection of poetry (mostly current) is beyond me! I may be too old to "get it." The poets mostly teach in MFA programs, so I don't have a lot of hope for the future of poetry. Also, this is a Norton anthology, sure to be taught often in colleges. Sigh!
• 
  Savannah Wilson

  This book is the the perfect example of awful and pretentious poetry that makes nearly zero sense for the sake of seeming intelligent and deep. There were maybe a dozen poems out of the 500 pages of this book that I liked.
• 
  Lesley

  Best anthology I've seen.
• 
  Bonnie

  The worst use of the term "hybrid" ever!
• 
  Julie

  I am not an academic and yes, as some reviewers said - this book read like a text book. I enjoyed that aspect of it as I want to learn as much about poetry as I can. I enjoyed the variety of poets and the poems themselves - none of them were familiar to me. Because I read a lot of poetry, this both surprised and delighted me.
  
  I may seek a copy of this book when I return this copy I checked out from the local library.
• 
  Leigh

  This mix of poems feels important. It chronicles a historical shift in American poetry that, according to the introduction, later generations (including mine) will have forgotten.
• 
  Erin Powe

  not a fan of this stuff. Makes me love George Herbert even more.
• 
  Big Hard Books & Classics

  A good old anthology of American poets
• 
  Gagne

  While I haven't read every poem (yet), the selection made by my professor wasn't too favorable by me. It's highly inaccessible, but there were also poets I enjoyed and whose work I could access and read and enjoy and I feel that if a work is inaccessible, it is unenjoyable and unreadable.
• 
  Elizabeth Janney

  The editors Cole Swensen and David St. John make the argument that American poetry in the 21st century is less marked by an experimental / traditional split that characterized the 20th century, but rather functions as a hybrid blending both impulses into new poetic territories. Hank Lazer wrote a book of poetry considering this in the 1990s called "DoubleSpace".
  
  Swensen's introductory essay is a nice summary of contemporary American poetry and invokes (without citing) deleuzoguattarian theory (rhizome, immanence, transcendence). He offers a terrific explanation of this split in twentieth century poetry:
  "This split (experimental/traditional) is more than a stylistic one; it marks two concepts of meaning: one as transcendent, the other as immanent. Thus, twentieth-century American poetry offers both a model of the poem as a vehicle for conveying thoughts, images, and ideas initiated elsewhere--a model that recognizes language as an accurate road map or system of referring to situations and things in the real word -- and a model of the poem as an event on the page, in which language while inevitably retaining a referential capacity, is emphasized as a site of meaning in its own right, and poetry is recognized as uniquely capable of displaying that" (xviii)
  
  I'm not, however, convinced of the overarching argument of hybridity; I would like to be. First of all, this is definitely an academic hybridity (not a consideration of visual arts, technology, other cultural traditions, technology, self-publishing). Mainstream poets like Mary Oliver, Louise Gluck, Billy Collins, Donald Hall are not in this anthology. Poets, traditionally considered experimental, like John Taggart, John Ashberry, Susan Howe, Norma Cole, are here. Perhaps the argument they are making is more about relieving our language of dichotomies in the 21st century...that 21st century (and perhaps 20th century) poetry is more complicated and interesting than these boundaries: the experimental or "immanent" tradition in poetry (juxtaposition, rupture, fragmentation, open form) continues to explore traits usually aligned with more traditional work (linearity, narrative, firm closure, etc.) and vice versa. That the assemblage of a poem is traditional and experimental and linear and nonlinear and and and ... instead of either or.
• 
  Ann

  In their introductions, editors Swensen and St. John, both accomplished and forward-thinking poets, outline the contention that spurred this anthology: for a long time, poetry has been divided, or has divided itself, into two basic camps, traditional and experimental. In contemporary American poetry, the editors argue, and the poets collected here demonstrate, these distinctions no longer make sense, as poets now draw equally from both traditions, often in the same poem.
  
  All of the poems in this volume are not timeless and without faults. There are legends like John Ashbery and Jorie Graham, aside many other poets. There are poems in this volume that may turn many people off of contemporary American poetry. But they turn some of us on.
  
  Best of all are poems that are not so experimental that they cannot be read and understood, whether literally or as abstract notions--or both. Set your mind free: take a leap of imagination. For example, the exquisite Mary Jo Bang.
  
  from "Alice in Wonderland"
  
  Such a fall! Watch fob and waistcoat.
  How late the mistake is made.
  How long the clamoring lasts.
  
  Who are you? Bending against a blade
  of green grass. Smoke fills
  the Caterpillar. Smoke floats
  
  over the polka dot snow.
  Have you really changed, do you think?
  This is the best part of the dark edge of down.
  
  Down, down, she fell. This is the best part
  of the edge where one is not one-
  self. Don't I know it, Alice says
  
  Slightly less successful (to me, at least) but still interesting are the thin attempts to reboot classics.
  
  "Styrofoam Cup," by Brenda Hillman
  
  thou still unravished thou
  thou thou bride
  
  thou unstill
  thou unravished unthou
  unthou unbride
  
  All the poets in this anthology are trying to define poetry in the new millennium.
  
  
  
  
• 
  sculptcha

  anthologies are always so hard to rate. there were some snoozers and just utter crap, but there were some beauties that changed the way I see.
  
  because these poems are so experimental, they seemed to me more about the process and experience of reading than finished works. most of the selections hinted at deeper meanings and more realized ideas somewhere beneath the surface, but hadn't quite figured out how to translate their visions. reading these poems feels like looking through artist sketchbooks.
  
  many of these poems are accessible, but just as many, if not more, are not. if you don't have patience for difficult, absurd, self - indulgent poetry, then you'll probably be doing a lot of skimming, but it will be worth it for the hidden gems.
  
  obviously not recommended for people who don't like poetry to begin with, but you really have to love it in order to appreciate this anthology.
• 
  Andrea Slot

  I used this for an upper level poetry workshop but was a little disappointed at the limitations of the book. I think many poems could be called "hybrid" in the contemporary poetry scene today, and so I think the book needed to be guided by a much clearer definition of just what a "hybrid" poem is. Then the poems chosen could have better reflected that clear definition. Instead the poems seemed to have been somewhat arbitrarily thrown together. I also felt the poems ultimately erred on the language/experimental side of poetry. This is not to say that I didn't enjoy this book; it just wasn't what I was expecting or needing as an anthology for students in this particular class.
• 
  brinley

  Probably would not recommend this to someone who is new to poetry, but for people like me who dig it & want a good perspective on what's hip w/the biggies right now, this was a pretty good starting point. Anthologies are not my favorite way to read poetry (prefer to read from a book the author composed, rather than selections from different works), & at times the selections seemed scattered. But still! Poetry is cool! Best read in chunks instead of all at once, I'd say.
• 
  Rupert

  Excellent anthology. I judge these types of books by how many new authors I discover through it who I want to explore further and this one hit the pay dirt. Not quite the magical mothership of the Anthology of New York Poets edited by Ron Padgett, but that one I read in my wild-eyed poetic youth and it's full of scribes who will live forever.
  This book also has nice informative one page biographies/introductions to each author that gives the reader a good context for their work.
• 
  Dennis

  The introduction itself is worth the price of this beautiful anthology of American poetry today. In the intro, Swensen sums up how the divisions of American poetry merged into what we have today--an eclectic mode of where tradition meets experimentation. Then the fun starts with an introduction of each poet and a sample of her or his work. A must!
• 
  Juliet

  I really dislike the cover of this book and hope the innards are much better.
  
  Well, I only got about halfway through this collection before returning it to the library--and based on what I read, I'd give it about 3 1/4 stars.
  
  Overall, it seemed a little too disembobied for the likes of me. I'm not a big fan of disembobied narratives. I'm too busy hyperventilating inside of bodies.
• 
  Heather Gibbons

  A timely, somewhat controversial, and much-needed anthology of many wonderful contemporary American poets. I don't always agree with the editors' selections, but I'm so glad this anthology exists. I'm tired of trying to teach from anthologies that claim to be contemporary yet contain mostly poets from the 1950s-60s-- and only a narrow, rather conservative slice of their generation at that.
• 
  Shawn

  Last Monday I listened to David St. John, one of American Hybrids' co-editors, discuss the anthology and its origins at the Napa Writers Conference. He re-inspired me to explore these poems and poets. Diverse. Interesting. Baffling. Frustrating. Everyone is represented! The highlight, so far, is discovering a poem by Norman Dubie, "Of Politics, & Art." Wow.
• 
  Ian

  The book is a must read for any poet or lover of poetry. The writers included in this anthology are than playing with form or structure. They are redefining the capacity of poetry. For writers, the book opens whole worlds of possibility in the voices that can be used, the way a poem can be presented, and many other things.