When Kerosene’s Involved
by Daniel Romo
Black Coffee Press, 2013
100 pages / $12.95 buy from Amazon
Confession: I bought this book because the cover is pretty rad. I don’t even know how I came across the book, but I’m glad I did. The poems in here, as the title and cover suggest, are bundles of fire. Upon reading, the embers blaze into your guts and you are left a charred individual. Romo skillfully blends fantasy and narrative, pop culture and persona poems, while adhering to the integrity of the prose poem. Make no mistake: THESE are “prose” “poems.” They are not glorified flash-fiction incorrectly labeled as prose poetry, as much writing is today. The poetry in the book is first, foremost, and evident. Take the book’s first lines from the first poem, “Singe.”
Grandpa Manuel burned the beaks of chicks. Scooped them up in his rancher hands and played agricultural matchmaker: searing metal kissing their tiny mouths.
July 9th, 2013 / 12:09 pm
You no doubt read Greg Gerke’s deeply critical post about Lars von Trier’s Melancholia. Curtis White has now posted his own much more positive impressions of the film. I’ve tried convincing the two of them to go at it like me and Chris Higgs—I even introduced them during AWP—but they’re being too polite. Chime in in the comments section, demanding blood!
(My own thoughts on Tree are here. I have nothing to say about Anonymous.)
Every Friday at Big Other, I’m posting links to feature-length films that are up at YouTube. And I’m doing it for you!
Let’s talk about the cult of the anonymous comment. Seems like a significant portion of the comments in forums of this nature where someone actually comes out and says something directly criticizing another person for something they feel strongly about, it is done in an anonymous context. No link, no email, usually a goofy name. Being able to see the ISPs behind the comments, I can tell you that a lot of the time these comments come from people who had posted before while supplying their real name and links, and their veiling only began when they actually had something to say.
Which is, obviously, confusing, supposedly being a group of ‘writers’. [For the record I hate referring to people as writers, because every person is a writer. It’s like saying I’m a breather.] But these people who under the guise of the idea that they write regularly and more seriously than people who are just writing down grocery lists or whatever, it seems like these would be the kind of people most willing and fully ready to associate the words they are saying with their personas. Right? You are a ‘wordsmith,’ you say things that other people are supposed to want to listen to, so why go anonymous when you are actually saying something with some balls behind it?