Skip to main content


There is a lot of talk about the loss of species, and the loss of indigenous languages, about the loss of old buildings, and the loss of manners. And there should be.  But one of the most pressing cultural issues of our time is sadly overlooked by almost everyone - and it is the endangered status of the literary book as a physical object, especially, the poetry collection.

Poetry books have existed, in the English language, for several hundred years, but, until the time of Wordsworth and Coleridge, it was relatively rare for poets to write in a language most people could relate to, and to have their books published for sale in shops.  Keats, famously, sold only a few hundred of his books - but what books!  Anyone owning one of them now would be fiercely lucky.

Eyewear, the blog, and its editor, Todd Swift, have long been interested in, and supportive of, use of the Internet to promote and extend the reach of, poems, and poets.  All to the good.  But the digital expansion, and rise of the ebook, has lead to a societal norm where fewer young people, the future readers and buyers of books, acquire physical copies of the books they read. Arguably, for mass market fiction, this is less worrying.

However, for smaller presses, it is nothing short of a crisis.  In Canada, almost 100% of active small and independent presses are government funded.  Even in the UK, most of the poetry presses receive some Arts Council funding.  It is literally impossible to run a long-term poetry-dedicated small press without some form of grant, subvention, patronage, or outside support. It is not possible to sustain a long-term business model relying only on market forces and sales, where poetry is concerned, because overheads (staff, editorial, accounting, design, printing, pr, postage, distribution, sales team marketing, launches, etc) will tend to be more than sales.

The reason for this is simple - and it is a fact I have been hammering on about because almost every poet I speak to is ignorant of this fact - poetry books do not sell.

"Sell" is a funny word.  Of course, it is possible to sell 50 or 200 copies of a poetry book, via friends, family, local contacts, and a few interested critics, and poetry-friendly readers.  But this is - though the average for all poets in America, Canada and the UK - pathetic and derisory, when compared to sales of non-fiction, and fiction titles.

As such, poetry publishing is almost always a subsidised act, done for a larger, wider, cultural good.

Now, before the digital age, that good could have been arguably described as elitist, modernist, or what have you.  Noble for me, maybe not for all.

However, in 2014, the great war ahead of us is the fight to save, literally, the future of the poetry book qua poetry book.  Not the ebook of poetry. Not the poetry website, or blog, or 3D hologram.

The book, tangible, printed, on paper, lovely paper, with ink, pages you can touch, and turn, and put a rose between, or a clipping of an obituary, that you can mark up, and hold while reading under a tree by the sea, or a lake...

That sort of book will be gone in 20 years.  Hell, in 5.

Of course, Faber and Picador and a few other presses - big presses connected to multinational business - may survive, and publish poetry books.

But most poets are unlikely to be picked up and published by an ever-smaller number of major presses, and most are not rank amateurs who want to do vanity press stuff.  Who will publish the 99% of poets who deserve a book?

Well, right now, who publishes them are university presses, and small presses, and indies, run by dedicated, decent, hard-working people. Unsung heroes. These presses are backed up by a few good bookshops and book-buyers, who know the heroic cultural role they play.

So - when Eyewear asks for people to buy its books, and for people to consider becoming a patron of a small press - ours or another - we are not asking for selfish motives alone.

I do what I do - publish poetry - because when I was a child, and a teenager, and a university student - lonely, off-kilter, often sad - poetry books were there for me - brilliant, inspiring, informing, difficult, maddening, provocative, mind-blowing books of imagination and music, power and lyricism, strange and uplifting, challenges to the everyday world of business and death, money and boredom - poetry books are one of the most radical items any prisoner, atheist, idealist, soldier, sailor, priest, worker, baker, teacher or dying patient can have - they are always tickets to ride, doors to enter, planes to escape - a weapon, a tool, a bed, a friend.

I love and loved poetry books, and felt loved in return.  It is my true vocation, my life's destiny, to help create and promote poetry books.  Not poetry, an idea in a vacuum - but books with poems in them.  No house or home or flat or boat or cell is complete without at least one poetry book.

It is a good, in and of itself.  There is no evil in a poetry book, and publishing poetry books is saintly, it is as heroic as fighting against oppression - it is fighting against oppression.  Poetry publishing resists the coming great cultural wasteland, the illiterate age coming.

Which is why I ask you to share this post with all you know, and why I ask you to write a cheque to Eyewear, or another small press you know and admire, this month.  Write it for one pound, one dollar, or fifty pounds, fifty dollars, or for a million dollars or pounds.  Give what you can, give what you must.

Join the war to save poetry books.

Please share this post with everyone you know.
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog


According to the latest CBS, ABC, etc, polls, Clinton is still likely to beat Trump - by percentile odds of 66% to 33% and change. But the current popular vote is much closer, probably tied with the error of margin, around 44% each. Trump has to win more key battleground states to win, and may not - but he is ahead in Florida...

We will all know, in a week, whether we live in a world gone madder, or just relatively mad.

While it seems likely calmer heads will prevail, the recent Brexit win shows that polls can mislead, especially when one of the options is considered a bit embarrassing, rude or even racist - and Trump qualifies for these, at least.

If 42-45% of Americans admit they would vote for Trump, what does that say about the ones not so vocal? For surely, they must be there, as well. Some of the undecided will slide, and more likely they will slide to the wilder and more exciting fringe candidate. As may the libertarians.

Eyewear predicts that Trump will just about manage to win th…


Like a crazed killer clown, whether we are thrilled, horrified, shocked, or angered (or all of these) by Donald Trump, we cannot claim to be rid of him just yet. He bestrides the world stage like a silverback gorilla (according to one British thug), or a bad analogy, but he is there, a figure, no longer of fun, but grave concern.

There has long been a history of misogynistic behaviour in American gangster culture - one thinks of the grapefruit in the face in The Public Enemy, or Sinatra throwing a woman out of his hotel room and later commenting he didn't realise there was a pool below to break her fall, or the polluted womb in Pacino'sScarface... and of course, some gangsta rap is also sexist.  American culture has a difficult way with handling the combined aspects of male power, and male privilege, that, especially in heteronormative capitalist enclaves, where money/pussy both become grabbable, reified objects and objectives (The Wolf of Wall Street for instance), an ugly fus…


The Oscars - Academy Awards officially - were once huge cultural events - in 1975, Frank Sinatra, Sammy Davis Jr, Shirley MacLaineandBob Hope co-hosted, for example - and Best Picture noms included The Conversation and Chinatown. Godfather Part 2 won. Last two years, movies titled Birdman and Spotlight won, and the hosts and those films are retrospectively minor, trifling. This year, some important, resonant films are up for consideration - including Hidden Figures and Moonlight, two favourites of this blog. Viola Davis and Denzel Washington will hopefully win for their sterling performances in Fences. However, La La Land - the most superficial and empty Best Picture contender since Gigi in 1959 (which beat Vertigo) - could smite all comers, and render this year's awards historically trivial, even idiotic.

The Oscars often opt for safe, optimistic films, or safe, pessimistic films, that are usually about white men (less often, white women) finding their path to doing the right thin…