Improvisational skills can be as important to the practicing poet as to actors, stand-up comedians, and jazz musicians. In the Beat Era, Gregory Corso and Allen Ginsberg enthusiastically promoted Zen-informed “Automatic Writing” sessions, wherein lines of prose and verse were composed and recited “off the cuff” in a group setting with prompts designed to test as much one’s ability to “tap a flow” as show off linguistic and stylistic prowess. Similarly, Ted Hughes and Sylvia Plath were famous for their poetry parties—featuring liquored-up improvisational Battle Royals that were often conducted in conjunction with various other antics (unfortunately, said antics are beyond the scope of this discussion!)

It should come as no surprise that the tradition of improvised poetics is very much alive in the 21st century, as evidenced by the popularity of a unique website called QuickMuse, which recently celebrated its one-year anniversary. A visitor to the QuickMuse site can not only read original verse composed under the strictures of a shared writing prompt and a 15-minute “Shot Clock”— but also, with the help of a device called the Poematic, one can literally play back the resulting poems, as they were written, line by line, strophe by strophe, thereby receiving an unprecedented glimpse into the compositional mind of an accomplished poet at work.

QuickMuse events are “head-to-head” affairs, attracting world-renowned participants such as Robert Pinsky, Paul Muldoon, Jeffrey McDaniel, and Thylias Moss. The only feature you won’t see is an American Idol-style text message voting system, by which a winner is picked at the close of each competition. QuickMuse, to its credit, is much more about appreciation of poetic creation, than any kind of hyped one-upsmanship.

Recently, I contacted QuickMuse founders Ken Gordon and Fletcher Moore:

They were gracious enough to grant me a brief interview. Following, is a transcript of that Q & A.

6 QUICK QUESTIONS FOR QUICKMUSE FOUNDERS KEN GORDON AND FLETCHER MOORE

Writer’s Profile Project: Hello, Ken and Fletcher!

Many readers of this blog are themselves poets and writers, some with blue-chip credentials and reputations years in the making. I would expect a fair number of these individuals to frankly recoil from the prospect of participating in the “QuickMuse Dynamic.”

How might you allay the understandable apprehensions of such writers, convincing them the benefits of a QuickMuse Duel—both for the participant and the reader—far outweigh any inherently tangible risks?

Ken: It’s not really possible to convince writers that QuickMuse is a good idea, i.e.– to argue, guilt-trip or otherwise connive them into taking part in our “exercise in extemporaneity.” Either they get it immediately, or they don’t get it at all. Robert Pinsky, for instance, gets it. In an interview QuickMuse conducted with the former Poet Laureate, he says:

“The truth is, I have been doing this kind of composing, playing with sounds and meanings, all day long — sometimes all night long — for most of my life. Inside my head.”

Which means, of course, that a lot of the writers I approach wind up saying: “Um, I don’t think this is for me; have a nice day; don’t bother me again.” (My favorite rejection came from a certain Pulitzer Prize-winning poet who pronounced the whole thing “ghastly.”)

It’s somewhat different with readers. You say to a literate 21st- century reader, “Hey: there’s a website that gives you an x-ray into the creative process of world-class poets (Paul Muldoon and Marge Piercy), fiction writers (Rick Moody and David Leavitt) and even humorists (Neal Pollack and Roy Blount Jr.) The software allows you to peer over their shoulders as they type and delete and revise,” and they reply, “Quick: what’s the URL?”

WPP: I am fascinated by the QuickMuse “Poematic”—an Instant Replay-type device which literally follows the poet—keystroke to back space, to cut-and-paste, all the way through a finished 15-minute poem! Indeed, if the reader is patient enough to “follow the action”, he or she gets a fairly intimate glimpse of the compositional mind, at work in real time. Is there a patent on this technology? Can you expect a spate of imitators? What broader applications are implicit for the 21st century, by virtue of the amazing Poematic?

Fletch: It’s been almost a year and a half since we put this together, and only in the last few weeks have we begun to see similar systems, most of which are aimed at very different purposes. I think we enjoy a certain advantage insofar as we’re sitting at a relatively untraveled junction — poetry and technology. This sort of thing is becoming increasingly simple from a technological point of view, but many programmers often forget that culture is more than just technology. You can build something dizzyingly sophisticated, but if no one uses it, it’s just as worthwhile as if it hadn’t been made.

I’ve often suggested that the experience I have watching poetry come out of this system is not unlike what the inventor of the typewriter might have experienced had he read some of e.e. cummings’ poetry. So there is a distinction that may never be matched: anyone can build something like the Poematic, but if you can’t convince great writers to use it, you haven’t really done anything.

WPP: There’s another aspect of QuickMuse I highly admire, which is the sheer diversity of the high profile participants. Poet Laureates in the same ring with Spoken Word Kings, these bouts really run the entire gamut! Did the eclectic turnout surprise you, or was this an attribute of QuickMuse you were “shooting for”– from the outset?

Ken: We don’t have a “diversity” section in the QuickMuse business plan. We’ve always tried to enlist the most interesting writers we could. Because quality improvisers are a rather rare breed (see question no. 1), we sometimes find them in odd places. Just last month, in fact, we had two musicians, David Berman of the Silver Jews, and Brad Roberts of the Crash Test Dummies.

WPP: It would seem, to an observer such as myself, that a natural extension of your ethos might be one of venturing into the realm of You Tube applications. Are there any plans to broaden the QuickMuse horizons—with video and sound footage as an adjunct, or companion-mode, to complement the current Text-Only format?

Fletcher: Our primary interest at this point is to open up the Poematic to regular folks. People love to read, but the web being what it is, they also love to write. There have been technical obstacles to this for some while, but they are starting to disappear. So QuickMuse 2.0 is in the works, and to an extent, this will in fact be a venture into the realm of YouTube — except in terms of interactivity rather than media.

Sound and video would be fabulous, and we are working with Thylias Moss to bring some of that to bear, but one of the assumptions that went into QuickMuse — that by default everyone has a tool for entering text into a computer — is not so true when it comes to audio and video. That’s slowly changing — YouTube makes this as clear as anyone — so sooner or later I expect we’ll turn our attention to it.

WPP: By way of whetting the appetites of Ms. Spitzer’s constituency, can you drop a few hints (or names!) relative to what may be on the near horizon for QuickMuse, as you settle into your second year of operation?

Fletcher: Aside from the aims mentioned in the last question, we intend to move a bit more into live events like the one we did at The Strand. These are considerably more difficult to put together, but we’re all about immediacy, and it doesn’t get any more immediate than that.

Writer-wise, we’re looking at the possibility of snagging Etgar Keret for just such an event. Campbell McGrath will be coming up soon, Robert Pinsky will be making a return appearance, and we may also bring in a few more fiction writers and humorists. We always enjoy mixing it up.

WPP: QuickMuse has a newsletter, which runs concurrently with the website. How might a curious Writer’s Profile fan go about subscribing?

Ken: Those interested in subscribing can click

Here

WPP: Thank you, Fletcher and Ken. The Writers’ Profile Project wishes you both much quantum success– through 2008… And beyond.

Here is an Index Link to the QuickMuse site.

QUICKMUSE.com

Be sure to check the archives,
for notable match-ups such as:

Robert Pinsky & Glyn Maxwell (Oct. 17th– ‘06),

Neal Pollack & Roy Blount Jr. (Nov. 6th– ‘06),

or Kevin Young & David Lehman (Jan. 1– ‘07).

And here’s a final link, giving the low-down on various
QuickMuse social functions–including the live event
at The Strand Bookstore, NY– that Fletcher mentioned:

The Best Words In Their Best Order