Letras Latinas Roundtable: Nayelly
Barrios & Lucas de Lima
This roundtable was born from a gesture in keeping with Letras
Latinas’ mission of collaborating with individuals in projects that seek to indentify
and support emerging Latino/a writers, in this case we present you with a
roundtable interview featuring Nayelly Barrios and Lucas de Lima, in
conversation with myself as moderator.
What made this project particularly significant for me is that as
opposed to the two previous roundtables (2
poets, 3 countries and 3
featuring 3) which I had moderated for Latino/a Poetry
Now, in this roundtable I have contributed both as moderator and participant
thus given the opportunity to express the logic behind my own craft. This
opportunity has given me valuable insight on what it is like to be on the
answering side and has raised my own benchmark as moderator for future
roundtable interviews.
*
By forcing the lyric to
scream, I learned to drown out the kind of skeptical thinking that posits
language as a construct to be wary of, even if just in my head. So, my goal was not just to play with
language as if it were a trinket but to wrestle with its potential.
--Lucas de Lima
Approaching my poetry
in this manner has inspired me to move more freely within myself. Some poems
just behave differently on the page than others. I have written poems that
organically disperse all over the page and in other cases, poems refuse to do
anything outside of a villanelle or sonnet form. It has been my experience that
when I allow myself liberties on the page, my inner writing intentions demand
inapprehensive presence outside of me.
--Nayelly Barrios
As these snippets suggest both poets are critically engaged with what
poetry can do both on and off the page. Lucas de Lima’s preoccupation with
rescuing a “faith in language” leads him to a particular type of “typography”
which can enact the necessary “movement “ to move to the “fertile soil of
grief” where death can be addressed. Nayelly’s recognition of poetry’s need to
move freely, to “behave differently on the page” has led her to find in her poems a place both of resistance to forces which seek cultural
or linguistic
containment and of celebration for our “culture’s significance” through the
“chiseling of craft.”
*
And so
without further delay I invite you to listen in on this conversation featuring
Nayelly Barrios and Lucas de Lima.
In the storage closet,
an accordion peeks out, stretches/ its arms in silence waiting for music to
break/ through the vacant radioactive hum.—Nayelly Barrios
LIKE THE
GATORS UNDERNEATH NEW YORK/WE CLOG THE SEWERS OF LITERATURE.--Lucas De Lima
LAURO VAZQUEZ:
What I like about these particular lines I’ve plucked from your poems
is that in a way these lines manifest key features of your poetry: Nayelly’s
use of sonnet-like and traditional forms to create beautifully crafted images
and a language that recall the textures, colors and tastes of her childhood
landscapes and which for me recreate a contained feeling of movement which is
at once alluring and comforting. Or
Lucas’ transfiguration of language in which historical and personal narratives
bleed into one another and which for me recreates a fast-pace feeling of
movement where text(s) and history(ies) are competing to write and rewrite each
other. Is form movement? If so, how does the image, line-break, or the use of
typography help create, capture, and release movement in your poetry?
Another topic of interest (beside movement and poetry) and which I
have been thinking of for some while now is the way in which different texts
and mediums have the capacity for infecting each other. I am thinking of this
now because of Nayelly’s long poem “In the picture where you pose with a can of
beer” and the way in which Nayelly uses Ramon Ayala’s song “Mi Golondrina.”
Ramon Ayala’s haunting use of the metaphor of a swallow long-gone, accompanied
by the semi-sweet sounds of the accordion create a fascinating tension which
infects itself in Nayelly’s piece and recreates the emotional tension which
makes this particular song memorable.
Lucas’ poems, their images, characters and texts are also constantly
infecting, tearing and rewriting each other. Some images/dichotomies prevalent
in those poems: Lucas/Maria, feathers/scales, sewer/genes, blood, gator/bird,
bullet/armor, father/Sobek. What
reflections, observations come to mind when you hear those dichotomies? How
does poetry infect other mediums and how is poetry itself infected by the
outside world, in particular by those forms of art which poets might be quick
to exclude from the realm of poesy (popular music for example, as in the case
of Nayelly or the “obscene
adornment” in Lucas’ poems?
LUCAS DE LIMA:
To formally enact movement in my manuscript, I wrote in upper
case. I didn’t know how else to address
the death that my poems orbit--an alligator attack suffered by a dear
friend. It took summoning a naïve,
immature faith in language that has long been deemed unfashionable. This process was sort of like becoming a
teenager again, which was the time in my life when I met Ana Maria (it was the
90’s and we both loved Tori Amos). By
forcing the lyric to scream, I learned to drown out the kind of skeptical
thinking that posits language as a construct to be wary of, even if just in my
head. So, my goal was not just to play
with language as if it were a trinket but to wrestle with its potential. Without realizing it, I tried to improvise prayer,
maybe the kind you would make to a plastic Virgin Mary. Only when I let my subject transform into
something both sacred and profane, bloody and kitsch, did the project become
fertile soil for grief.
I also wanted to cut through another disinfectant: the elegant, quietist lyric still predominant
in American poetics. I guess this was an
issue for me because some of those poets were an influence to my younger self
who didn’t know what else to read--Frank Bidart and Louise Gluck, for example,
whose confessionalism at least gestures at grandeur. But in most poetry published in major
journals, only a self-determined human being gets to know or do anything,
especially in the midst of critters or trees.
Somehow my “I” had to explode in a melee of feathers and scales, and
typography was just one leap of faith, one cheap thrill, used to generate myth
that would encompass multiple embodiments, whether human, nonhuman, dead, or
alive.
Bhanu Kapil once said something that has stayed with me about race,
confidence, and the difficulty of being visionary. She linked these concerns to the question of
power: “who has the power to imagine these transforming things, the things that
will transform the circumstances or conditions of others?” We poets on the racial, sexual, and/or class
margins are of course taught not to
be powerful and visionary. We especially
aren’t supposed to envision worlds that defy homogeneity and disorient perspectives. Such faith in our own abilities, fuel to
translate and transfigure our experiences, would turn us into all-too-capable
monsters. Our voices might actually get
loud. It’s a symptom of this moderation,
I think, that we’re often discouraged from engaging the brutality already in
our mediascape, if not our lives, as per the strikethroughs in Lauro’s poetry:
“these and other
executions ...other exclusives... are brought to you...endowed to you
by the tv guides... the
wall st journals.... the academic journals of the ‘poetic I’”
Or the “shame” Nayelly speaks of as “a uterus cut/open and gutted/like
sapote.”
In their striving against containment, perhaps your manuscripts also
respond to the sort of policing I’ve experienced in life and even the most
well-intentioned writing circles. Do
you, like me, want your writing to become infected in the ways Lauro points
out? What might your identity have to do
with this?
LAURO:
I don’t think that in my writing I have set out to respond to any sort
of “policing.” I think part of the reason for that is in that only recently
have I started to find myself belonging to any of the number of constituencies
that are part of contemporary American poetry and because I have also been
blessed with great mentors who have encouraged my writing in diverse ways. I do
think however that there exists an implicit danger and distrust of poets--as
you say--that are on the “margins” of society and who attempt to be “powerful
and visionary.” I think part of the reason for this has to do with what fact
that there are within poetry, conservative strands that--as the poet William
Archila points out, categorize socially-committed poetry as a “limited and restricted
way of looking at language.” I see my poetry more as response to that than to
specific instances or groups that have sought to restrict my writing.
I am a CantoMundo fellow and one of the things I took away from this
year’s Master Poets workshop was what keynote speaker E. Ethelbert Miller
called--and I am paraphrasing--the poet’s battle for the myth’s of society.
What images or memories, for example, keep coughing up when we think of the
collapse of the twin towers and more importantly who controls these images,
these myths? I think this question applies to a variety of issues and movements
(LGBT rights, immigration, economic inequality, environmental degradation,
etc.) and the myths that saturate and dictate our ways of thinking, that form
our opinions on these issues. As a poet, what I attempt to do is reclaim some
of these myths. In the particular poem which you have pointed out I have set
out to construct the character of a dishwasher that sets out to write against a
language of power. My use of the language of news media, with its strikeouts
and censorship bars is only a construct against which I juxtapose the
“dishboy’s” attempts at poetry, at constructing a language and new mythology
that will be in diametrical opposition to power and which might move a reader
to look beyond the false myths that saturate our society.
My attempt is thus not only to engage in these battles and reclaim
some of the images and the language which have been hijacked by the 1% of this
word in order to exclude the great majority of people (both in the
industrialized world and in the developing world--but especially in the
developing world) from enjoying the wealth generated from the global economy’s
exploitation of cheap but rapidly depleting fossil fuels but also to debunk
those myths which keep us from tearing down those systems of economic, social
and environmental degradation. This
however does not mean that craft takes a backseat to the content of my poems.
If anything the poetry, the craft becomes even more important. Because
of the history of politics and poetry in this country, I have to work twice as
hard to make my poems “polished.”And for me the line break, image, sound
(especially repetition), and narrative combined with other literary genres
become the tools by which I sculpt my art.
One of the things I love about poetry is the fact that the only
subject of poetry is poetry and because that is the case it can speak about
anything (it can speak about the political but it can also speak about Ramon
Ayala or an imaginary concert where the instruments continue their singing long
after the fallout of radioactive rain, as in Nayelly’s poems; or it can give
off a “lyric scream” which restores the speaker’s faith in language as poetry
does in Lucas’ poems).
So my question becomes what elements in your craft do you feel are
essential in allowing you to “wrestle” with poetry and to make her/him “scream”
or “sing” what you want, what do you do with those sounds?
NAYELLY BARRIOS:
I wouldn't say form is movement, but that is not to say I think it
fits into a matter of restriction. Form is form. Form is what is outside when
you wake up each morning. The movement in poetry, or a specific piece, is a
combination of linguistics / form and imagery. I am drawn both to writers who
fearlessly explore the field of the page and adhere to more traditional
structures. Though, lately, I have been toiling mostly with sowing my work all
over the landscape of my pages. Approaching my poetry in this manner has
inspired me to move more freely within myself. Some poems just behave
differently on the page than others. I have written poems that organically
disperse all over the page and in other cases, poems refuse to do anything
outside of a villanelle or sonnet form. It has been my experience that when I
allow myself liberties on the page, my inner writing intentions demand
inapprehensive presence outside of me.
I love having other mediums of art available to engage in conversation
with my poetry. I don’t believe there is a medium of art not infected by the
rest or that is lacking dialogue with another work of art. There is a sense of
searching and absence in some of my work and I feel those particular poems can
benefit in a dialogue with other mediums. Allowing my work to become
infected/influenced by these mediums helps me further understand and expand on
what I am doing in my work.
The poets I have studied with (among those, Amy Fleury and Emmy Pérez)
have always encouraged me to establish and celebrate the presence of my
culture’s significance on me through the chiseling of my craft. I have been
very fortunate to work with poets that have never attempted to restrict my
growth in any manner. For example, the “shame” Lucas refers to in my poem Acrylic on Pons is definitely a gesture
against containment, containment the speaker has imposed on herself in regard
to the manner in which she has reared her child. My work is definitely infected
by my identity and my culture and those two are in conversation with one
another in some of my work.
LUCAS:
I like how you both speak to the tradition of the poet as herself a
medium whose objective is not to purify language, but to continually electrify
it. And to saturate us with the
materiality of words. As Latino/a poets,
are we particularly sensitive to this materialization? I’m curious about what the effect of
bilinguialism is for you. What happens
when you insert Spanish in a poem?
Nothing? Does it feel like you
are inhabiting a border?
Lauro, I wonder if the label of political poetry isn’t also normative
sometimes. If one criticism of poetry
from the margins is lack of innovation, the flipside seems to be the mandate by
which all writing should have a clear set of ambitions, and stick to a path of
emancipation worthy of good, card-carrying liberals. My favorite writers reject this goal. Clarice Lispector, Hilda Hilst, and Roberto
Piva, for instance, weren’t so programmatic as to find themselves promoting the
Brazilian flag’s slogan of “order and progress.” Lispector meditated on eating cockroaches,
Hilst wrote a pornographic trilogy, and Piva titled one of his manifestoes “THE
XXI CENTURY WILL GIVE ME REASON (if everything doesn’t blow up beforehand).” Unlike
their contemporaries in Brazil, these writers weren’t trying to realize
a future already imagined by Marxism, feminism, or other movements, however
much those struggles inform their work.
Visionary writing like theirs suggests a wayward feeling in the dark for
the sublime, the unknown. Nayelly’s
phrase about an “inapprehensive presence outside of [her]” reminds me of this,
as does the interest Lauro and I share in myth-making.
In terms of craft, imagery is the easiest way for me to tap into unthinkable
energies. I recently took a class on the
baroque that clued me into how important ornateness is to my appreciation of
art. I love coming up with an onslaught
of images intense enough to make the poem feel like it’s lashing back at
me. Plus, the baroque is very Latin
American and queer. It absorbs and
spills, pulling off immense tonal and syntactical variety, as in Jean Genet’s
sentences.
LAURO:
For me the issue of bilingualism is intimately tied to identity. I see
my use of Spanish and English (in my everyday conversations) as a mirror of my
contradictory condition as an economic refugee of Mexican origin. I have a hard
time taking ownership of either language and of feeling like I “belong” to
either country.
On my mother’s side of the family I come from the southern state of
Oaxaca, a place dominated by an agricultural economy and where--according to a
2003 World Bank report--70% of the population live in extreme poverty, meaning
people here live off of less than $1.25 a day. These highly precarious
conditions have been the result--like the violence along the “maquiladoras”
around the border--of NAFTA’s neoliberal policies and its deepenign of the
wealth gap within Mexican society. It is of no consequence than that after 1994
(when NAFTA was signed)we saw a huge increase of displacement both within
Mexico and across the border. Oaxaca for example saw the migration of millions
of traditional corn farmers who could no longer compete with cheaper imports of U.S. subsidized-corn and were displaced
to urban center across Mexico and beyond the border. (Today, Mexico--the place
where corn was born--can no longer produce enough corn to feed its people and
imports much of it from the U.S.). This migration from the countryside, to the
urban centers, to the maquiladoras along the border, is responsible not only
for producing a cheap labor pool for the massive Narco organizations to employ
but for the repetitive waves of economic refugees spilling into the U.S.
I came to this country--to California--as an undocumented child in the
late 1990’s at a time when the state was going through a wave nativism and
anti-immigrant fervor similar to what is happening today in states like Arizona
and Alabama. These were “native” Californians responding to these waves of
economic refugees and to the on-going de-industrialization that had been
occurring in the U.S. economy since the 70’s but which had intensified under
NAFTA.
For me my bilingualism reflects a side-effect of this political and
economic reality which first drove my family to abandon Mexico. And while
Spanish is my first language, it is the English language I love. English for me
is like a first love, as soon as I began writing in English I fell in love with
what I could do with the language and have never forgotten that feeling. In a
way this is one of the those strange ironies that occur with any process of
colonization--because really the reality that exists between countries like the
U.S. and Mexico is one of neocolonialism. Spanish does nothing for me and if I
included it in my poetry it is because I want to include the vulgarities and
the beauty of the songs--the music that many of these economic refugees--the
now cooks and janitors and nannies in our schools and restaurant and
homes--listen to.
This experience makes me wonder about Nayelly’s experience with
bilingualism, is her experience similar or different from mine? I can’t make up
my mind. I am thinking of Nayelly’s line siempre
sere llanta in her poem “When It Rains in Dreams.” That single line for me
captures the beauty, the intimacy of growing up in a Spanish-speaking
household. For me this is similar to my use of the crude phrase “no mames guey” which I often heard while working with Mexicans and
Central Americans in restaurants. For me this phrase captures the comradeship
and the humor that exists between co-workers despite the circumstances that
brought them together in the first place.
Lucas’ preoccupation with the normative aspects of political
poetry is also something I’ve been thinking
and struggling with. I think that there are certain tendencies, perhaps not
from the world of “political poetry” or the author's writing it, but rather
from those that consume that poetry--the “card-carrying liberals” as Lucas says, that expect us to write a
certain way. But perhaps this too is symptomatic of a bigger problem with in
“Latino/a Poetry” and that being that we must only write about certain things,
and in certain ways. Those certain things can vary, from injustices in the
“barrio” to your abuelitas “salsa...”
When I first started writing poems I found myself self-restricting my
poems to “factual” injustices that happened to people that I actually knew,
such as friends getting deported for simple lack of a driver’s license, friends
being victims of gang-violence, etc. I
would find myself building narratives around these events and as a result these
poems were not particularly successful. (I also refuse to write for example, of
my own border crossing, or of my mother’s, of my mother’s work cleaning
toilets, these are not poems that move me to write and which when I’ve tried
turn out horribly.) Back then I think I wanted to write a certain kind of poem,
a poem that had moved me and had galvanized me to do something about the
political and economic realities that had driven my family out of Mexico and
into the grills and toilets of American restaurants. But no matter how hard I
tried I could not write like that, that was not what I know, academically
speaking, that is not how my mind works.
I am a very interdisciplinary thinker, I am good at building myths and
constructing characters. And when I gave myself the freedom to write beyond the
factual injustices happening around me, beyond the milpas of Oaxaca and the border crossings that first brought me
here, I was better able to build a poetry that is better suited for what I am
trying to do: Deconstruct the myth that the West’s model for economic
development is sustainable and that it leads to prosperity . It does not, it
leads to prosperity for the few and to
renewed and ever more clever systems of colonialism and to environmental
and human atrocities.
In terms of craft, I think my poetry is informed by the mixing of
genres, by narrative, repetition, imagery and the dramatic monologue or at least
these are the tools I try to use in order to sculpt new myths and bring a
dialogue that moves not through “speech and rhetoric” but through an
imaginative process.
I like what Lucas has to say about tapping into “unthinkable
energies,” my poetry I feel like is also an attempt at that. I do think ornateness has a violent aspect to
it, we are repulsed by that which is over the top. I think of the Spanish word
“empalagoso” which my mother use to say to me when something--usually ice
cream--became sickly sweet and she could no longer bear to eat, passing it
along to me. And violence to of course spills and amplifies, as Lucas says. I
think that is one of the things that keeps the force of this poems lashing out
for me. The alligator attack spills and self-amplifies into for example the
“Marias” in these poems. What does this form of violence do to our narratives
and to our intentions for poetry? What does it do to ourselves?
NAYELLY:
In re: Bilingualism, plays an
important role in my craft. My family and I moved to the U.S. (to Michigan) in
1990 when I was four years old. Spanish was my first language and, being the
talker that I have always been, I quickly began devouring the English language
in order to be able to communicate in the playground. Learning English was an
enjoyable experience for me. As I grew up, using it in a regular basis was
troublesome. I spoke Spanish to my parents and grandparents and my attempts to
speak English to aunts, uncle, and cousins (who also spoke English) were met
with disapproval. I was criticized for speaking “too much English,” while my
school teachers expected me to speak English at all times. Family was convinced
I would forget my heritage. I was even called gringa and pocha. These words
were hurtful to me. When I moved to El Valle (Texas), the teachers at the
elementary school I attended prohibited the students from speaking Spanish.
They made me feel ashamed of Spanish. That they actually accomplished that
baffles me now, but I was only a child following rules then.
Eventually,
I learned/was forced to compartmentalize when and where I used English and
Spanish (and Tex-Mex, which I was also criticized for using). In middle and
high school, I excelled in my English classes over other courses and visits to
Mexico (my birth country) left me feeling like my Spanish wasn’t Mexican enough
and ashamed about that. I felt like La India María. No me sentía ni de aquí, ni
de allá. This all went on from age four until about…now. Around some Spanish
speakers, I feel like my Spanish isn’t good enough and some native English
speakers make it a point to discuss my accent (for better or worse). Perhaps
the former is insecurity and the latter simply a lack of tact, regardless, I
can’t deny it is bothersome to have to deal with.
Spanish
is my intimate language, the language that is most closely and strongly tied to
my emotions and personal experiences. As I learned English and insisted in
keeping my Spanish, I found myself forced to segregate the public and private
spheres. I never enjoyed doing that. In my poetry, I take the liberty to use
Spanish freely as the poem calls for it. If I want to use Tex-Mex I will. If I
want to pepper English and Spanish, I do so happily. Meh, I don’t care who
likes it or not.
When
using Spanish in a poem, I am no longer allowing my language critics to dictate
how I choose to use my languages. Growing up bilingual, I felt like I was
constantly skipping from one side of my language to the other. Now, I choose to
allow them to coexist in my poetry and everyday life... hasta en mis Facebook
posts. I want my poetry to be a bridge between both languages for me. A bridge
they can both be merry on.
LUCAS:
I
think all three of us are talking about recognizability and the ways we are
each perceived as Latino/as, whether in poems or in everyday life. It’s traumatic to grow up as an
immigrant. The experience withered my
relationship to language altogether. I
was a painfully shy, anxious, and self-conscious kid in middle and high school,
to the point that for years anything I said in English or Portuguese first had
to be scripted in my head. The excess of
my writing is probably compensation for those exhausting, lonely years. Even now that I’m in my late 20’s, it takes
enormous effort for me to feel a certain degree of freedom in my poetry. That’s where the embrace of failure, a
concept many poets are thinking about nowadays, has helped me. Even with the gator manuscript, I told myself
I was just writing flaccid poems. I
faked my way through elegies until I eventually started to trust the results
and could see beauty in my deficiency. I
think I was learning to let my grief turn against itself, if that makes any
sense, so that my project could actually de-elegize itself and refuse to lay
the dead to rest. I wonder if this is
how I’ll always start manuscripts--mired in doubt and utter bleakness!
I
much prefer being in the zone of violence Lauro associates with ornateness,
where words seem to realize a potential so artful it can feel destructive. It contaminates the poet and/or the
reader. But of course, even ornateness
can feel prescriptive as a goal that sets the boundaries of your writing. Maybe that’s where being an immigrant is an
advantage. We’re used to being on the
move, to destabilizing speech in response to the ways it, too, has marked,
scarred, and changed us.
*
Nayelly Barrios is
a Rio Grande Valley native. Her work has appeared or is forthcoming in Beloit Poetry Journal, Puerto del Sol,
and DIAGRAM. She is
Co-Editor-in-chief of Ostrich Review.
*
Lucas de Lima has
published poems and reviews in Action
Yes, CultureStr/ke, and Rain Taxi,
and is a contributor to the multi-author blog Montevidayo. His
chapbook Ghostlines is out from Radioactive Moat Press.
He currently lives in São Paulo.
No comments:
Post a Comment