ModPo discusses Gertrude Stein's "Tender Buttons," October 2, 2013 - Part 1

ModPo discusses Gertrude Stein's Tender Buttons with guests Ron Silliman, Rachel Blau DuPlessis & Bob Perelman on October 2, 2013 at the Kelly Writers House at the University of Pennsylvania.
Modern and Contemporary Poetry, taught by Al Filreis, is a fast-paced introduction to modern and contemporary U.S. poetry, from Dickinson and Whitman to the present. Participants (who need no prior experience with poetry) will learn how to read poems that are supposedly "difficult."
Learn more about ModPo here: www.coursera.org/course/moder...
Visit the Kelly Writers House at writing.upenn.edu/wh

[@nephthyswolfe7835]

i've listened to this several time, and each time hear another aspect. Thank you all! C.J. Prince

[@emmagoldmansherman]

Thank you Rachel for the erotic charge in Stein! As a lesbian nonbinary and autistic person, it seems completely obvious to me how incredibly charged the language is and thrilling to hear her announcing herself (a stein is a carafe...) as being not so strange an arrangement and spreading. I love it!

[@lastrada52]

The way these people analyze Stein's writing seems stuck in neutral. She's great, she's not so great, she's unique, she's abstract, she's this, she's that....They tightrope walk around talking about her as being great and being so "out there" that the average reader gets confused with her writing. They get confused....so that translates into greatness? Bottom line is that Gertrude Stein was not a good writer at all. Among those supporting my opinion were: Sherwood Anderson, James Thurber, Katherine Ann Porter, Stein's own brother Leo -- who referred to her writing as an "abomination." Her experimentation was considered serendipitous. A result of an inability to communicate effectively and was deficient in the skills required be an effective communicator. To paraphrase. Some praised her nonetheless. I have read she was used a non-linear approach, was cubist and abstract. While I do read this writing it has never impressed me. For if I was impressed I would have to then consider William Burroughs as great as well. And in some respects, Burroughs was better than Gertrude. I can picture his tales in my head. However, Gertrude did help many artists & writers become famous. Her name could open some doors. She would have been a valuable ally. That's her true legacy. BUT....anyone who attempts to write like Gertrude is going to have difficulty finding an agent or publisher willing to produce this work today. What audience would there be? Gertrude's material was published originally by a third tier publisher. Many people do not realize they read Gertrude because it was written by Gertrude. I have proven this countless times when I purposely add my name to their work and submit it under my name and the story is returned to me with comments like "what is this crap?" Ah...but I didn't write it....Gertrude Stein did. I even used an old less famous short story of Hemingway's and got the same response. Torn apart as if I was an amateur. Are the creative writing teacher's wrong? Are we reading "classics" that are classics simply because they were written by those we highly regard now? I think Gertrude Stein wrote because she wanted to be part of the elite writer's circle she helped create and knew it would be her name that would carry her to that peak...and not her ability to tell a story. She pushed the envelope -- today we look upon it like she did something special. But did she? Today, if you send her stories to a publisher -- without her name on it -- you will get a rejection slip. You yourself today can write in some new modern progressive original and creative way -- but, if no one understands what you're talking about -- the reader can't relate to what you're trying to say -- you are not going to become a writer of consequence. There are too many variables. Some will say write simple like Hemingway. Others say write with intelligence and wit like Capote or Hunter Thompson. Others will say write something down and dirty like Kerouac. Create your own genre like Dean Koontz. But, in reality what is truly great writing? I can think of two that qualify -- Mark Twain and Charles Dickens. Oh, there are others that can be added, but those two wrote in a world few of us will ever see when it comes to putting ink to paper. For me the name Gertrude Stein is synonymous with someone who elevated others of the artistic world to greater heights, and she played an important role in solidifying their contributions to the arts. She also had a cantankerous personality, was bold, gay (which in France was no big deal), clever wordplay, and brought people together in salons -- that was priceless. But "a rose is a rose is a rose..." While it's a clever phrase....it's not necessarily great writing no matter how many times you say it. If so -- then whoever came up with "yada, yada, yada..." should also be considered a great writer. "Tender Buttons" is a story Anais Nin would have tossed out.

[@hollyyork1528]

I enjoyed reading your comment, John, and it leaves me troubled by a question: Did you truly submit plagiarized pieces to prove a point? Where? Wow! What do you think would have happened if someone had recognized them? Pretty unnerving!