Blazing Away

BlazeVOX announced yesterday that it would close at the end of the year after it was revealed the press was asking poets to help subsidize the publication of their books. Today, the press changed its mind. This back-and-forth began when Brett Ortler wrote a long blog post about his dealings with BlazeVOX at Bark. Brett's book was accepted for publication and editor Geoffrey Gatza asked for a $250 donation to help with production costs.

In just a few days, the controversy spiraled with plenty of poets weighing in on how wrong this is, that BlazeVOX is a "vanity publisher" (it's not) and the revelation was another smirch on the grand tradition of poetry and publishing.
 
BlazeVOX has published some fine poets: Anne Waldman, Megan Volpert, Eileen Tabios, Christine Hamm, Daniel Nester, Didi Menendez, Amy King, Andrew Demcak and Kazim Ali to name a few. I have a number of the press' books in my library and I always thought they were well done. However, BlazeVOX made a misstep in not disclosing its co-operative publishing approach. It was only a matter of time before a poet made an issue of it, but the vile and derision heaped upon the press over the weekend is, sadly, typical of a certain part of the poetry "community" in America.

The fact is that many poets believe if you're not published by one of the indie darlings or one of the biggies like Knopf or Norton, you're an abject failure as a poet. This myth is perpetuated in academic circles and by poets who make a "career" hopscotching to residencies, who also subscribe to the "must win a first book contest" rule.

The publishing industry is having its ass handed to it on daily basis by writers circumventing agents and publishers to self-publish via ebook format and inexpensive printing options like Lulu. Poets who live and die by the academy are, for the most part, taking the hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil stance against this publishing revolution. Those who have no interest in MFA and academic cultures just laugh and go on with making their art and disseminating by any means necessary.

BlazeVOX's lack of transparency is disappointing. The donation request should have been clearly stated in the submission guidelines. Gatza made an error in judgement, but the complete damnation of the press, which has produced some fine books over the years, is outrageous. Gatza has been called an illiterate, a scam artist and far worse in the comments on Ortler's blog and at HTML giant. Meanwhile, the icons of American poetry who have given awards to their friends, students and husbands are still on their pedestals, along with the complicit presses. In many ways, the BlazeVOX controversy says more about the "poety community" than it does about the press. It reveals deep insecurities, self-importance and fragile egos on the part of poets trying to "make it" in a niche part of literature.

I'm glad BlazeVOX has decided to stay in business, despite many of its supporters – and even a few poets published by the press – running in the other direction for fear it might damage their "reputations." Getting a book published by a press isn't easy. Many beloved indie presses now require a reading fee (Four Way Books is one) and poets spend hundreds or thousands of dollars in contest fees without batting an eye. Once a book is published, poets must purchase copies of their own books beyond the agreed upon number of author copies and the majority of marketing/touring will be coming out of the poet's own pocket. There is no free ride in publication and those who tell you otherwise are liars.

I hope BlazeVOX continues its tradition of publishing quirky and "weird" collections, but does so by being upfront about its policies. The press has worth and so do all the fine poets it has published in the past.