Tampa Review Poetry Prize—get those poems shined up

In Monday’s mail, a contest announcement arrived. The Tampa Review invites poets to submit manuscripts for the annual Tampa Review Poetry Prize. I’ve researched the contest and feel comfortable sharing the news with my readers. The fee is reasonable--$20. The prize is worthwhile—hardcover book publication, $1,000 in prize monies and selected poems published in the Tampa Review. This is one of the few contests I haven’t seen criticized by poetry insiders, so shine up your poems.

Steve Kowit won the 2006 prize for his collection ‘The First Noble Truth.’ Kowit is a poet whose work engages the reader because (1)the work is accessible and (2)emotion is always evoked. His book ‘In the Palm of Your Hand’ is a handbook I frequently recommend to poets when I speak and read. Kowit is also the very best workshop presenter I have ever encountered.

Read guidelines and get full information by visiting the Web page about the Tampa Review Prize. Deadline is December 31.

I’m tempted to enter it myself; I can’t seem to shake the lead out when it comes to submitting poetry. Conversely, I can’t seem to stop writing it. I think we poets are completely muddle-headed.

Readers and books diverge, but is the news really as bad as pop pollsters claim?

COMMENTARY

Now comes the latest in a long line of those pop polls mass media loves. What better way to grab attention? An Associated Press-Ipsos poll reveals 1 of 4 of American adults didn’t read a book in 2006. This begs the obvious question: what about the other 3? And it begs a question I love to ask. Who has time to squander yapping on a phone with a pollster? What type of personality agrees to do this? Come to think of it, questions are going off in my brain like light bulbs. I’m an avid reader, but often, there’s simply not a book on store shelves that makes me pull out my wallet and fork over my cash (or do the one-click purchase at amazon or other online retailers). I have a veritable library here at home; I like to re-read books that have pleased or interested me. So much of what is published today is disposable literature.

I suspect some of those non-readers do indeed read, just not books. The Internet provides the largest library in history, right at your fingertips, with lots of free content about every subject known to mankind. A book is one of many vehicles for words. Now, thanks to technology, we have a choice of vehicle.

I also read Democrats read more books than Republicans. This was determined by polling 1,003 adults. But here’s the rub—those adults were willing to talk to a stranger on the phone and hopefully—because there’s no way to prove otherwise—tell the truth about how many books they allegedly read. Pop polls are like pop science. Pollsters from both political parties love to draw a dividing line because that’s how they get votes and promote dogma, using terms like “red” and “blue” to suggest your level of worth and/or morality.

“Fat is contagious,” one study reveals. Think about it. Think about your family, friends and coworkers. If fat is contagious, wouldn’t they all be fat? Silly stuff, these declarations.

Pop polls and pop science. Take them for what they’re worth, somewhere on the level of a wad of used gum having a sidewalk meltdown in summer heat.

---

I have removed a comment containing an embedded links list to other sites. Please do not use the comments option to SPAM others. Legitimate comments are always welcome. SPAM will be zapped.

Five great Web sites for writers

Want to know which digital camera is best for your budget and your purpose? Or how to shorten that URL to an easier-to-remember Web address? Or whether a Web site has published your content without legal permission? How about finding information about fair poetry and writing contests? Or maybe just find a site with forums, markets and writer-bewares (not to mention a free newsletter). Here are five Web sites useful to writers.

1. PC World is a commercial site with information about tools and aids for the computer. There’s a great review of digital cameras. I looked at cameras on-site, and then quizzed an editor I knew about the best camera for my needs. Being able to take a good photo is a great asset if you’re providing content for Web sites or for newspapers. You don’t necessarily need the most expensive camera.

2. TinyURL.com is the site with a quick fix for a long URL. Visit the page to learn how to convert that really long Web address into something snappy and easy to remember.

3. Copyscape allows you to input a URL to see if your content has been used elsewhere on the Web.

4. Winning Writers offers a free newsletter and basic site access as well as a more expansive subscription at a modest fee for information about fair contests.

5. Writers Weekly is tops for general information, forums, markets and writer bewares. I’d say Angela Adair Hoy is probably one of the best independent advocates for writers on the Web. Free newsletter. The Web site also has a great comparison chart about print-on-demand publishing costs.

I’ve personally used each of these sites with great results.

Don’t be naïve: if your content is good enough to publish you deserve to be paid

I often have aspiring writers ask me if they should write for free. I usually tell them if something’s good enough to publish, you should be paid for it. I confess I often see things published that weren’t good enough to see the light of day, in my humble opinion, but yesterday I saw something that completely blew my mind.

There was a “job” listing by a publication at the freelance board for the Society of Professional Journalists. I took a look at the publication’s Web site. The manuscript and image submission guidelines state the following:

“By submitting your material, for good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency and receipt of which you hereby acknowledge, you hereby grant to (publication) a non-exclusive, perpetual, worldwide license to edit, rerun, reproduce, use, syndicate, and otherwise exhibit the materials you submit, or any portion thereof, as incorporated in their feature, (name of feature) or the promotion thereof, in any manner and in any medium or forum, whether now known or hereafter devised, without payment to you or any third party.”

Amazing. My advice to you when confronting terms like this: Just don’t do it.

The Web enables any aspiring artist in any genre to set up a blog or Web site and share your work. This is the era of citizen journalism. Why would you want to assign any kind of rights to your material if you’re not getting compensated? So you can say someone else put your work on their site and stuck your name on it?

This is almost as bad as buying an anthology so your poem will be included in a book.

Be smart. If your content is good enough to publish you deserve to be paid. And if you’re not offered compensation, go and set up a blog or a Web site. You can do that free at a number of places, including blogger.com.

On publishing a book of poetry

My new poetry collection is almost complete, and I’m considering different options for publishing it. I had the benefit of a traditional publisher with my last two books.

But copyright developments in the marketplace as well as thoughts about profitability are leading me to take a hard look at self-publishing.

If you’ve been following the columns I’ve written about the Faulkner vs. National Geographic case, you’ll see how cloudy copyright issues can be. It’s my opinion Judge Lewis Kaplan erred in his decision on that case.

I actually read his decision, all of it.

I also read amazon.com reviews posted by those who purchased the Complete National Geographic collection. Everything I read there drives home my position—the CNG was not an archival collection of the original issues. I love the reader’s comment exclaiming, “I have to watch a damn Kodak commercial?”

I seriously doubt the judge had the foresight to experience sample CDs from the collection, but I could be wrong about that. You’d think they’d have demonstrated the product in a courtroom where such a sweeping decision would take place.

My point is that some of these photographers, whose heirs actually sided with Faulkner, signed a contract before technology made such a collection possible. There would have been no way for them to foresee the creation of this product. As a consequence, their beautiful photographs are rendered to pathetic images in many cases, according to reader reviews. That would make any artist feel pretty lousy because this distorts, possibly even damages, the integrity of the original artwork. After all, you hear the name ‘Geographic’ you automatically think pictures.

At this point in my career, I see contracts that ask for everything but the kitchen sink. That’s one reason I don’t submit poetry anymore to online magazines. Most lit zines can’t pay a writer—they just don’t have the budget. But at least if I have my poetry in a collection that I own, I will have some control over where it’s published.

The downside is the time necessary for making sure the book gets distributed, possibly by placing it with a distribution channel who has arrangements with a major wholesaler.

I actively participated in the marketing of both my other books, so I figure I’d have to do the same if I were to invest my own money in publishing my work.

I saw on the National Writers Union site there’s a report for members about this subject. I haven’t read it yet, but the gist of the report focuses on comparable benefits for self-publishing if your books are done through a small traditional press as mine are rather than a big house.

Publishing is changing drastically, in no small part because of technology. It pays to weigh any decision beforehand, for we learn much at the expense, often unfairly assessed as in the National Geographic case, to others.