N a p a l m H e
a l t
h S p
a : R e
p o r
t 2 0
1 2
Lesléa Newman
A Conversation with Lesléa Newman by Renée Olander
Renée Olander: As author
of nearly sixty books, including such feisty titles as Heather Has Two Mommies,
Out Of The Closet And Nothing To Wear, The
Little Butch Book, and Nobody’s Mother, among others, and subjects ranging from eating disorders to gay
and lesbian issues, you strike me as a writer of intrepid courage—courage just
to stick your neck out, write and publish for a very long time—what do you
think about courage as it relates to your writing and publishing life?
Lesléa Newman: It’s so interesting that you’d say that, because
about a year ago, I gave a commencement speech for an MFA program and I said if
I could think of only one word to give the graduating students, because as a
writer I’m always looking for that one perfect word, the word would be
“courage.” I don’t think of myself as particularly courageous; I just write
about things that matter to me. And I don’t really think about audience when I
write. I just sit down, and pray that I’ll have something to say, because
that’s a struggle for me. If I don’t feel passionate about it, then it’s not
worth putting down on paper. It never occurred to me to not write about any of
those subjects.
RO: So you
were a teenager when you began publishing poems?
LN: Well, I have been writing poems since I was very
young, probably ten or twelve years old. And I don’t know where this came from,
but I have always been very active in getting work out in the world. I read Seventeen Magazine and saw that there were poems in that magazine,
and I thought well, why not my poems? In hindsight, I think that took a lot of
confidence. But somehow I had it in me to find out the name of the editor, the
address, and what to do. Actually, it’s an interesting story. I got a letter
from the poetry editor, Hilary Cosell, daughter of
Howard Cosell, the sportscaster, and she wanted to
publish several of my poems. She invited me to come to her office, which was in
midtown Manhattan, and I still remember what I wore as I wanted to look
sophisticated—I wore a black leotard and a wraparound flowered skirt that I
bought in a used clothing store and at one time was a curtain, it was a kind of
nice Scarlet O’Hara moment. And I wore black cotton flats, those Chinese
slippers that look like MaryJanes, and I rode the
train into the city and took the elevator up to the top of a skyscraper, and
she graciously took me to her desk, to her office cubicle, whatever, and she
had a paper shopping bag she dumped out on the desk, and all these papers went
flying, and I could see some were handwritten, some had drawings on them, and
some were typed up, and she said, “As poetry editor of Seventeen Magazine, this is what I get in the mail every day, and
your poems stood out like a shining star.” So, that was the beginning of my
literary career, and I’ll never forget how kind she was to me.
RO: You were raised by your parents and your
grandmother who lived across the street—did they, or your grandmother in particular, encourage your writing?
LN: They didn’t encourage or discourage, I’m the
proverbial forgotten middle child—I was left to my own devices in many ways. I
don’t think I was taken seriously as a writer by my family
because I grew up in the 1950s and ’60s, and it just didn’t seem that important
for a girl to have any kind of career because the assumption was I’d get
married to a man and be taken care of. I did have a wonderful creative writing
teacher in high school named Miss Stern, and in fact, in 1999, when I went back
to be inducted into my high school’s Hall of Fame, she came to the assembly
with a folder where she had kept all of my poems, and that meant so much to me.
So my teachers always encouraged me, up through college—I studied at University
of Vermont with David Huddle, whom I will never forget, because at the bottom
of one of my poems, he wrote two words: “so what?” Of course at the time I was
devastated, but to this day, I put the “so what?” test to my poems.
Then I went to Naropa
Institute’s Jack Kerouac School of Disembodied Poetics, where I was Allen
Ginsberg’s apprentice. I also studied with Anne Waldman, Ted Berrigan, Alice Notley, Larry
Fagin, Dick Gallup, and Peter Orlovsky—they’re my
nurturing mentors. I also studied briefly with Grace Paley. But Naropa was really where I was taken seriously as a poet,
and when I look back at that extraordinary experience, I realize how lucky I
was. I pretty much did everything my teachers asked me to do. Anne Waldman once
said to me, “You should be writing really long poems,” so I tried to write
really long poems. My teachers were good at breaking me out of the habit of
just doing over and over what I did well—they wanted to challenge me, and they
did.
RO: You write
in many different genres and forms within them—so after you have prayed for
something to say, to what degree might you specifically consider whether you’ll
work on a children’s book versus a young adult novel, or a poem versus short
story—does audience come into your writing mind?
LN: The content really dictates the form. So I will
start writing—usually with either an image or a voice, and I follow that to see
where it is going, and at some point this is revealed to me: this is a picture
book, or, this is a poem. And then, this is a poem for adults, or, this is a
teen novel. I’m very process-oriented. I don’t outline,
I don’t plan. If I’m in the middle of a novel, then I
know that day I’m going to work on that novel. If I start writing poems pretty
regularly, then I’ll think, “Oh, I’m working on a new poetry manuscript, fancy
that!” If I’m writing a short story and then write another short story, I will
more consciously direct my writing to that form, because I want to be working on
a book. But at the beginning, it’s anybody’s guess, least of all mine.
RO: In your recent conversation with Farideh
Goldin, she asked about your use of humor, which is
prevalent in so much of even your heaviest work, and you said humor “took the
sting out” of what’s otherwise painful—is that conscious, your use of humor to
“take the sting out”?
LN:
It’s
my personality. It’s who I am. I come from a funny family. It’s also
traditionally a Jewish way of looking at the world—with humor, often
self-deprecating. It can be a defense mechanism. I think as I’ve become older
and more mature as a writer, I’ve relied on humor less, which is not to say my
work is now humorless, but it’s more balanced. The only time I’ve consciously
said, “I’m going to write something funny,” and it was one of the hardest books
I’ve written, was while I was working on Out Of The Closet And Nothing To Wear, and I think it’s because
I was trying to elicit the same emotion continuously, which was laughter, or
amusement. And there wasn’t a break from that—no trying to get a reader to tear
up, or feel enraged. I don’t know how Erma Bombeck
did that for forty years or however long she had a weekly column. It was very
difficult, and the experience gave me a lot of respect for comic writers.
RO: Do you
think writing is always partly autobiographical? After you read “A Letter to
Harvey Milk,” one of my students asked me whether you were the teacher who had
taught Harry Weinberg—
LN: While I have taught writing classes in a senior
center, I never had a student like Harry Weinberg—he is a figment of my
imagination based very, very loosely on my grandmother mainly in two ways: the
way he uses language, he speaks in “Yinglish,” or English with Yiddish phrases
and constructions, and the way he won’t talk about his past. My grandmother
would never tell me about her childhood because she said she did not want to
burden me with the pain in her life. So I felt like I had to make up those
stories. Things that are “true” in that story are the facts about Harvey
Milk—that he had big ears, liked jellybeans, and prophesized his own death, but
as far as I know, he never had a friend like Harry Weinberg.
I think
that’s the question asked most frequently of fiction writers; how much of this
is true? I knew a writer who would always say, “17%.” He’d just give a number.
In a way that question is a compliment, because the reader is saying, “You
convinced me this had to have happened,” and in a way, that question is an
insult, because it implies, “You couldn’t have made this up,” which is a
fiction writer’s job—to use our imaginations to make things up that have some
emotional truth about human nature. So it’s an interesting question, and I
wonder, what is the question behind the question? Why is this important? Why do
you need to know? Would the story move you less if you knew it was or wasn’t
“true”? And these days, we live in an Oprah culture, no offense to Oprah—people
are more interested in the writer than the writing. That’s part of the memoir
craze, people aren’t looking at the work as much as they’re looking at the
author. In fact, when I have had more than one book published in a year, which
has been almost every year since I’ve been publishing, I’ll go back to a
bookstore six months later with the second book of the year to set up a reading
and they’ll say, “We don’t want you, you just came,” and I’ll say, “But this is
a completely different book—that was a book of poetry, this is a novel,” and
they’ll say, “But people come to see you. They
don’t come because of the book.”
So what I
really meant was—it’s not an Oprah culture, it’s a People Magazine culture.
RO: Your
Harvey Milk story ends with Harry Weinberg feeling ambivalent about his own
writing before he turns his notebook over to his writing teacher—do you think
there is any responsibility to get stories down?
LN: I have a friend, a playwright named Andrea
Hairston, who said, I have this quotation up over my desk: “If you don’t tell
your story you die twice.” I think that for Harry, he had to cut off his memories
because he needed to survive and get through his day, and it was just too
painful. On the other hand, he doesn’t want to leave this earth and be
completely forgotten; I don’t think anybody does. So he is ambivalent, and I
think when he started to—I know this sounds strange, I mean, he’s a fictitious
character—nevertheless, when he started taking a writing class, as with anyone
who writes, you don’t know what’s going to happen. You don’t know what you’re
going to discover. And it was more than he bargained for. When I used to teach
women’s writing workshops, I can’t tell you the number of women who would
uncover unpleasant childhood memories, and several of them said to me, “I need
to stop coming to your class and go into therapy,” and they did, because there
were things buried that surfaced that were very painful for them, that needed
to be handled carefully. And I always say I’m not a therapist, I’m a writing
teacher—I will take care of you the best I can, but I’m there to talk about the
writing, and so when they need to go elsewhere they go elsewhere. I believe
that those memories surface when the person is emotionally, psychologically,
and spiritually ready to deal with them. And then they have to be treated very
tenderly.
RO: In your
introduction to the poem “Break the Glass,” you referred to “my spouse, Mary,”
so I wonder if readers don’t feel somewhat invited to connect the writer’s
biography and writing—
LN: I need to say something about the word
“spouse”—the problem I have is that it is not a very melodious word, and when
I’m writing, particularly poetry, I come up against it all the time. I have a
poem called “Guess Who Died?” about Grace Paley, and at the end, the narrator’s
spouse comes into the breakfast room, and that particular poem is autobiographical so I wasn’t going to use the word “husband.”
“Lover” implies a lover as opposed to someone whom the narrator is married to,
or an illicit affair. Some lesbian couples use the word “wife,” to describe
each other, but I don’t think of myself as either being or having a “wife.” So
I used the word “beloved,” which I like the sound of, and also one cannot
mistake its meaning. But it’s tricky because heterosexual couples have this
very easy shorthand that they can use and lesbian couples do not.
So back
to the whole notion of being exposed—I don’t write memoir. Consciously so,
because I don’t think my life is that interesting, and even though I write
about a lot of things that I have experienced, it’s always couched in fiction,
and even when I start a story based on something that’s happened to me, in
about the second or third sentence, I throw a lie in; it just happens, I’m a
fiction writer—I lie to make things more tragic, funnier, more intense, more
interesting, more conflicted. Because I’m a storyteller, it’s impossible for
me—not impossible, but it’s difficult to stick to the “truth” if I have an idea
that’s going to make it a better story. And that’s what I love about fiction;
you can explore characters and push them, to see how far they will go, and
what’s up with you as a writer, emotionally, when you go to a different place.
I like to live other people’s lives like in the story, “Mothers of Invention,”
which is about a lesbian couple—one of them wants a child and the other
doesn’t, and what ends up happening is the one who wants the child can’t get
pregnant so the one who doesn’t want to be a parent gets pregnant. I’ve never
been pregnant, so I had to research pregnancy and got to vicariously experience
the pregnancy through this character. Of course, it’s not the same as
experiencing a real pregnancy, but it’s bearing witness to that character’s
pregnancy, and that’s what’s so interesting about writing. And reading—you can
go all over the world and never leave your room.
RO: You are a
full-time writer—how do you approach this “job”? Do you write every day?
LN: I decided early on this was what I wanted to do.
And I never came up with a Plan B, which I learned from Barbra Streisand, who
never learned to type, because she said if “I learn to type I’ll wind up
typing,” so I like to say I never learned to sing because I’d end up singing
(that’s a joke because I can’t sing at all). But my job, I believe, and it
might sound very arrogant—I was put on the planet to write, it’s the only thing
I know how to do. Even on days when I don’t know how to do it particularly
well, it’s what makes me happy, and at this stage in my career I’ve had enough
feedback to know that some of my work touches some people’s lives, and that’s
important to me. So you can call it confidence, maybe that’s a better word than
arrogance, that I know this is what I’m supposed to
do. And because I’m a fiction writer, I could lie and say I do it every day,
but other things come up. I try to do it every day; when my beloved goes off to
work at nine o’clock, I go into my office, and, at the very least for an hour,
work on something. The times I procrastinate—and deliver us from e-mail,
please, that’s my biggest procrastinator—is between projects. As soon as I
finish something I think, “Ok, that’s it, I have nothing left to write about.”
If I’m working on something, I’m eager to go to my desk, because I can pester a
line—for instance, whether an “a,” should be “the,” for about seven hours, and
be perfectly happy doing so. Then there’s the point where the poem or the story
or the novel really is finished, and I know it’s finished, but I don’t want to
let it go because as soon as I do, I’m going to have to face a blank page
again. I call it “page-fright.” At some point, I cross a line and start making a piece worse rather than better and I know I have to stop.
So if I don’t know what to write about, I’ll do what I call kvetching on paper
for a while—I have, embarrassingly, notebooks and notebooks of this, and my
archivist will be horrified to learn that I shred much of it but I have to,
because it’s always the same: “I don’t know what to write about, I don’t know
what to do, I don’t know where all the books I’ve written came from…” It’s
boring, and then eventually I’ll come up with an image and see where it goes.
Or I’ll read—I’ll turn to poetry, which is always the thing that inspires me
the most.
But when
you say I’m a full-time writer, which I am, I don’t want to mislead people—it’s
not that I just sit for eight hours and write. I feel like I have two jobs: my
day job is being an author—so there’s a lot that goes into that, whether it’s
corresponding with my agent, proofreading a manuscript that just came back from
a copy editor, or calling back someone who wants to bring me to their school or
conference to give a workshop or reading. I also have MFA and private students
whom I mentor, so it also depends on how many of those manuscripts are sitting
in my inbox, if I need to spend the day looking at someone else’s work instead
of my own, since that’s part of what pays the bills—you know, there’s just
stuff. I try to set aside the morning for my own writing, and if I’m really
cooking, the afternoon as well, but sometimes things just have to happen
quickly. One phone call can change the whole day.
RO: You’ve written more short stories than novels—in terms of process, for
instance, with The Reluctant Daughter—did it begin as a novel, or when were you
aware you were facing the “terrifying proposition” of a novel giving “birth to
itself through you”?
LN: I knew right away. There was just too much going
on to contain in a short story. My main character had issues with her own
mother, with not being a mother herself, with what makes a family in terms of
her cousin Jack, and she also had issues going on in her romantic relationship,
that are questions of, literally, life and death—so I needed the luxury of
space and room to tell that story. Plus, I’ve always wanted to write a great
big mother/daughter novel, and when Lydia Pinkowitz
started speaking to me, I knew that the time had come.
RO: Has that
been the case with other novels where at the beginning you felt, “this is a
novel, not a short story”?
LN: Well, for example, my novel Hachiko Waits is classified as a middle grade novel though it’s really a novel
for dog lovers of all ages, but it’s about 100 pages—a short novel. I’m pretty
lazy, so I actually wanted it to be a picture book, and the first draft was
very short. Then I said, “I need to put in some more details,” and the second
draft was forty pages, and I thought, “Oh my God, you can’t have a picture book
that’s forty pages long”—the average picture book text is about three pages—and
then, of course, the terror descends, because I thought, “Oh my God, I’m
writing a novel, can I do it?” And this book was particularly challenging
because the question was, “Can I write a historical novel that took place in a
different culture, during a different time period in a country where I’ve never
been (to this day)—can I do justice to this story?”
The
gestation of that story was that after September 11, I didn’t write for the
longest time. It was the longest ever I had not written—three months—and of
course, everyone was so emotional at that time, but on top of the emotion that
was in the world, I thought, “whatever I write at this point is useless because
I wasn’t in New York when it happened, who cares about anything else, including
me, but how can I write about it, because I wasn’t there.” Then I thought, what
I really want to do is offer the world, and especially children, a small, quiet
book full of hope.
RO: Perhaps
if offering people some hope through writing was something you entertained as
you set out to write Hachiko Waits, a sense of audience is more on your mind as you write than you
realize?
LN: Well, it’s a little different with a children’s
book, because I know, once it “takes” inside me that I’m writing for children,
then I’m a little more conscious of that. But I had no idea I could pull it
off, even though this is the only book I’ve ever written that I knew the plot
of before I started. At that point in my life I was so desperate to write
something, anything—so I started with this idea, rather than the way I usually
begin, with an image. But I don’t know where the idea of this novel came from;
it’s a true story, but I have no idea when I first heard that story.
RO: So you researched to find out more?
LN:
I went
to the library and asked a librarian, isn’t there a story about a dog who
waited for ten years at a train station hoping for his master’s return? I
didn’t even know the story took place in Japan—that’s all I knew about it, this
tiny little gem inside my brain, which is something I tell my students, that we
are all walking treasure chests. We have experiences that have happened to us,
we have our memories, we have our imaginations which are limitless, we have our
sensory/direct experience, what we see, hear, et cetera, and we have stories
that have been told to us, stories that we have read in the newspaper—we just
have these fleeting things that come in and out of our consciousness, and some
of them lodge in our brain, and the part that I don’t know how it
happens—writing is 33% inspiration, 33% respiration, 33% perspiration, and 1%
magic—so part of it is that at some point, when you least expect it but need it
most, a story that’s in the back of your head travels to the front of your
head, and drops down into your heart.
Once I
was at a writing conference, sitting next to Grace Paley, and I don’t remember
who the speaker was, but he was talking about how important it is to have a
daily writing practice, and then he quoted someone who said, “Chance favors the
prepared mind.” Grace and I looked at each other, whipped out our notebooks,
and wrote that down. So as a writer, if I show up to the page every day for a
day or a week or a month or in this case three months and nothing is happening
and I just am practically in tears every day because I think I have nothing
more to say, and on day ninety-seven, the first sentence of a novel begins, I
needed those ninety-six days, to prepare my mind even though it didn’t feel
like anything was happening. Peter Orlovsky used to
say, “You’re always writing the poem.”
RO: In his
book Write
To Learn, Donald Murray said writers don’t ever really procrastinate
because what we call procrastination is useful ripening—
LN: Every writer has his or her own process. As W.
Somerset Maugham said, there are three rules to writing a novel, but
unfortunately nobody knows what they are. The most valuable thing any writer
can do is learn your own process. I know I have to go
through a certain amount of kvetching on paper before something breaks loose. I
know one writer who keeps this file of index cards of ideas, and when she
doesn’t know what to write about she just plops down an index card idea—I tried
that and it didn’t work for me, I got too frustrated because I had no ideas to
put on the index cards, so I felt even worse about myself. The most important
thing you can do is look at, “How do I write?” If there was only one way to do it someone would have told us by now and made
a million dollars. That’s why there are so many different books about how to
write. So, without sounding too judgmental, I would dismiss any writing theory
where someone says, “This is how to write.” I would say, “This might be how you
write,” and I can tell you about my process but I’m not going to claim it’s the
best way. I’ve just learned through the years that it’s the best way for me. It
might not work for you at all.
RO: About children’s
picture books—I had assumed that as writer, you would have relatively close
interaction with the books’ illustrators—
LN: No, you never do. The only reason I did with Heather Has Two Mommies is it was a co-publishing venture. What happens
with picture books is that the author sells the text, and it looks just like
the typewritten page—it’s not broken up into the thirty-two pages. The editor
takes the text and says, “Oh, I want this illustrator to do it.” They have what
they call a stable of illustrators, and they look through their file and say,
“Oh, this style really matches this text.” They get in touch with the
illustrator’s agent, and some places ask for samples, some don’t, and it
depends on the illustrator—you’re not going to ask a Caldecott winner for
samples (I should be so lucky as to be working with a Caldecott winner), so
then, the editor breaks up the text into thirty-two pages, the illustrator does
sketches, which I often see, not always—black and white, just to dummy it out.
Then the illustrator goes to work, painting or collage, or whatever, and works
primarily with the editor and art director, and after I see the sketches I
pretty much don’t see anything until the final product—I mean, not when it’s
like a book on the shelf, but the page proofs. And, depending again on the
publisher, I may or may not have much say. People are usually horrified at
this, and what I say is a picture book is like a movie. The scriptwriter
thinks, “This is my movie,” the director thinks, “This is my movie,” the star
thinks, “This is my movie,” the editor thinks, “This is my movie,” everyone
thinks, “This is my movie,” or this is my picture book—whoever’s involved.
There’s a huge amount of letting go, a huge amount of trusting your editor,
because you and your editor want the same thing—you want the best book that can
be produced, they want a book that can sell, so maybe the editor has a little
more marketing on the brain than you did when you wrote the text. But if things
were reversed, if someone gave me thirty-two paintings and said, “Write a
story,” I wouldn’t want the creator of those paintings hovering over my
shoulder saying “No, no, that’s not what I meant.” So especially with a
picture-book, more than with any other form I write in, it’s a collaboration.
RO: Is it
true you sort of stumbled into writing children’s books—that you wrote your
first one for a friend whose daughter wanted a book that showed families like
her own?
LN: I never thought of myself as a children’s book
writer. Then, after Heather
Has Two Mommies, I fell
in love with the form of picture books, which is much more difficult to write
than one might think. I find it the most challenging form of all.
RO: Before
you mentioned it I had not thought about the form, though I’ve read lots to
kids and can see they’re a standard size—
LN: They’re printed in signatures of sixteen pages,
so it’s two sixteen-page signatures. Once in a while you’ll get a
forty-eight-page picture book. But the trend is toward much shorter texts, like
300 words, 500 words, so now a picture book text of, say, 1,000 words is
considered long. People might say, “Oh, that’s hardly any words, I can do
that,” like people say about poetry, and I say, “No, you don’t get it, it’s
pretty hard to do.” In a picture book, you have to develop characters, have a
narrative arc, action—there’s got to be a lot going on that will sustain the
interest of a child, and also it’s the only form where the primary audience is
not the primary purchaser. It’s the parents or grandparents or aunts and
uncles, whoever the adults are, buying these books for the children, and the
best picture books are the ones that have some interest to the adult who is
reading as well as the child who is listening. When I think about it, with my
background in poetry and humor, children’s books are a natural form for me,
because many children’s books are written in verse.
RO: Your
earliest publishing was poetry, you studied poetry at Naropa,
yet you have also published fiction for more than twenty years—at what point
did you feel you should tell stories also?
LN: When I was an undergraduate, I took a class, an
introduction to creative writing—with the great David Huddle—so we wrote
fiction and poetry, and one day he said to me to me, “I like your fiction
better than your poetry,” which again—well, let’s just say he had a habit of
devastating me. But one of the stories I wrote for his class, “Sunday
Afternoon,” has survived and is in my collection A Letter To Harvey Milk. Then I went to Naropa
and identified as a poet. That was my primary interest and really is still my
first love. But this is what happened: I was working at a daycare center, and
at the end of the year, my contract wasn’t renewed. I needed a job, and I
didn’t know what to do, so I did something very unlike me, because you know I’m
from New York which means I have a kind of baseline of cynicism built in—I went
to a psychic, and I said, “I need a job, I don’t know what to do,” I explained
the whole thing to her, and she said to me simply, “You don’t need to find a
job; you need to go home and get to work.” And I went home that day and wrote
the first twenty pages of my first novel. That’s a true story. Well, I am a
fiction writer so I do lie, but in this case I am telling you an absolutely
true story, and I was terrified. At some point, someone said to me, you’ve been
reading novels your whole life and you’ve absorbed more than you know, you’re
smarter than you think, you know more about this than you think you do, and she
was right because I truly believe the only way to learn how to write a novel,
or poem, or short story, is by writing a novel, a poem, or a short story. I
have written a craft book on writing, so it may sound funny to say this, but
you learn a lot more from reading a good novel than reading a book about how to
write a good novel. Be a sponge, soak
it up! That’s what you need to do.
RO: You
mentioned Write
From The Heart, and you’re a teacher and mentor who’s taught
at universities and privately—could you talk about teaching privately versus in
an institutional program?
LN:
What
I enjoy best is a long, deep one-on-one mentoring relationship with a student
who wants to learn. I think that is very satisfying for the student and for the
mentor—me—definitely. I have seen a vast improvement in students when working
that way. A private student of mine recently sold her first novel, which was
thrilling for both of us. Literature is my passion, so if I’m interacting on a
regular basis with someone who shares that passion, whatever level they are on in
terms of their own writing and career, that’s a wonderful thing, and I find it
very satisfying. I probably still would teach even if I didn’t have to, because
it also forces me to think about writing, and to think about being articulate
in terms of how one makes one’s writing better. Of course the question is
always, “Can you teach someone how to write?” I always say, “You can teach
someone how to write better.” Whether they’re going to be a writer is
up to them—you can’t teach passion, you can’t teach commitment, so that has to
come from within. I’m a tough teacher, I’ve been told—of course, I think I’m a
pussycat, but if people are paying a lot of money, whether to get an MFA or
study with me privately, they deserve honesty, they deserve respect, which comes
with the honesty, they deserve to be taken seriously, and they deserve the
benefit of my expertise, of having been a professional writer for more years
than I would care to admit. Let’s just say I’ve been in the game for a very
long time.
RO: When you
read the poem, “Viet Nam,” and mentioned it was the first time you had read it,
someone asked whether you felt particularly nervous reading new work, to which
you replied it wasn’t really new because you had revised it a thousand
times. In terms of process—how much do you revise? And do you revise as much
for novels as you do poems?
LN: Everything gets endlessly revised. I enjoy
revision probably more than the act of creating. Facing a blank page and not
knowing if there will be anything on that blank page at the end of the day is
so stressful for me, and then, if something does appear, there’s so much relief
that I will just pester those words to death until I am satisfied, and that is
what I love to do. And so, with a novel, my process has changed over the
years—my first couple of novels I wrote longhand. This was before computers,
and then I would type them. Now I still start everything longhand including
novels. I sit on the couch in my writing room and work with a spiral notebook
and a Bic pen, and those tools have not changed in
thirty years, but there will be a certain point in the process, it’s almost a
physical sensation, when I have to get up and put what I have written in my
notebook onto my computer and then go further. So it’s not clear anymore
whether this is a fourth draft or a sixth draft, because I’ve been rewriting as
I’ve been going, and as I’m writing on the computer, I’ll highlight a
paragraph, open a new document, and rewrite that paragraph four or five times,
and then when I’m satisfied I’ll put that back in. And then I’ll go further,
and keep doing that, so it’s not as cut-and-dried as is this a first draft or a
third draft, or a sixtieth draft—because there will be paragraphs that have
been written sixty times, as opposed to another paragraph that I felt I only
needed to rewrite once or twice, so it’s a different process now.
RO: For The Reluctant Daughter, how much time elapsed from knowing you were tackling a novel to
the whole first draft?
LN: About four months. Once I start something and
know it has “taken,” I get completely obsessed and write very quickly. I take a
year or longer to revise (and revise and revise and revise). From first draft
to publication took about four years.
RO: And
during that time working on the novel, you also wrote poems, and you were named
Poet Laureate of Northampton?
LN: Yes. Well, in the beginning it’s a very intense
time getting the first draft of a novel down on the page. I would say the first
three drafts took about a year and a half. And then there’s kind of a lull
period when my agent is reading it, and after she read it, I got feedback and
rewrote it again for her, before she would send it out, and maybe I’d get
feedback from other people too. So once I get to the third or fourth draft, I’m
not working on it every day like I am in the beginning. Though there are times
I’m not working on it, I’m still thinking about it, but I’m not as actively
working on it so I will be doing something else, like maybe a picture book, or
writing poems. And when I was named Poet Laureate of Northampton, I felt
joyfully obligated to work on poems because I had that title.
RO: How did
you feel when your laureate term came to an end?
LN: Oh, very sad. I knew when I received that honor
it was a two-year term. I did a lot of things during those two years: I edited
a poetry column that appeared in our daily newspaper, I ran a “Lunch with the
Laureate” series, I ran a poetry contest, and I did a “30 Poems in 30 Days”
project which worked like a walkathon, except people pledged a monetary amount
like a dollar per poem to raise money for a family literacy project. More than
seventy poets participated and we raised $13,000! I met so many fabulous poets
and lovers of poetry, and people who maybe didn’t think of themselves as poets
but who participated in the “30 Poems in 30 Days” project because they just
thought it would be a cool thing to do. I did poetry
in-services for teachers, I did all kinds of things—one of my favorite projects
was called “Poetry to Wait By”—Marilyn Nelson told me she did this when she was
the Poet Laureate of Connecticut—I got poets to donate poetry books, and I
distributed them to waiting rooms all over the city of Northampton, so when you
go to get your teeth cleaned you can now read People magazine or poems by Pablo Neruda, so that was a project I
especially liked. It’s always a little sad to pass the crown, but I’m excited
to see what the next Poet Laureate does. And I got to introduce and read with
Richard Wilbur—it doesn’t get better than that.
RO: You have
said “First Death,” is autobiographical—how did this poem, reflecting a painful
early childhood experience, get written so recently?
LN: Well, I think that echoes what I said about how
we are all walking treasure chests, and who knows why that poem on that
particular date, or that memory, moved from the back of my head to the front of
my head. I just sat down to write like I do almost every day, and that poem
came out. I didn’t know where that poem was going when I first started writing
it. I remembered this little girl—well, I think part of what was happening was
recently, I have heard about so many people who are struggling with cancer,
it’s just extraordinary, and so that must on some conscious level have helped
me uncover the memory of this little girl who is the first person I ever knew
who had cancer—she was seven, and I was maybe nine—and she showed up at the bus
stop wearing a wig. And it frightened us, the other children, so much, that of
course we had to be mean to her, and I remember, and I had forgotten, this true
part of the poem, that when I found out she died, I got hysterical, and it came
out as laughter, and I was slapped, and not in a punishing, punitive way, but I
think just to get me literally to snap out of it, so that all just came back
into my mind when I was writing that poem. And so, I have been thinking of this
notion of mob mentality and what makes us join in, when we know what we’re
doing is wrong. I have a friend who said that when she heard me read this poem,
it made her think about the first time she was faced with a moral dilemma as a
child, and I thought, “Wow, then the poem has done its job.”
RO: What are
you working on now?
LN: I’m putting the finishing touches on a new book
of poems October Mourning: A Song For
Matthew Shepard. I was the keynote speaker for coming out week at the University
of Wyoming the year he was murdered, and it’s taken me eleven years to write
about being there during that awful time. The poems are told in many different
voices: the fence, the truck, the road, the moon, the wind… the book is a
poetic exploration of an unbearable tragedy. It was just accepted by Candlewick
Press and will be released in 2012. I’ve just begun a series of triolets (a French poetic form) about mothers, daughters,
and illness.
RO: Mother/daughter
issues are another recurrent theme in your work across genres—does this reflect
autobiography at all?
LN: Probably like most women, I have a complex
relationship with my mother, and I live in a community, meaning the LBGT
community, where there’s this extra dynamic, often, because most women of my
parents’ generation didn’t expect that their child would come out to them as a
lesbian, or a bisexual person, or a transgendered person, so when you are of a
certain ethnicity, let’s say, or religion, more often than not, you have that
in common with the people you are growing up with, but when you are an LBGT
person, you are often surrounded by people who are very different from you in
that way, so you are very alone in your family which can create conflict. And
so I have probed that conflict in many genres, in many forms, because it’s
interesting to me.
RO: Well,
your two most recent titles, Nobody’s Mother and The Reluctant Daughter, seem almost like a set!
LN: Along with the picture book Just Like Mama and the board book Mommy, Mommy And Me—you know what I think? I never really thought about this before,
but I think that because I don’t have children, this issue is of prime interest
to me. I have a friend who’s a writer and an only child, and she’s always
creating families with many siblings in her writing, so again, it’s a way to
live somebody else’s life.
RO: Is there
anything else you’d say to fellow writers, or the readers of the Writer’s Chronicle?
LN:
I want to get back to the
theme of courage—because at the beginning of this interview I said I don’t
really think of myself as a courageous person, but why I think you need courage
as a writer is that at every step of the way you need the courage to believe
you have something to say, you need the courage to make this a priority in your
life, because often there are the other people saying you need to get a job, or
why are you wasting your time, or whoever’s voice is in your head, so you need
courage for that. You need the courage to show your writing to someone else,
whether it’s people in your writing group, or your spouse, or a potential
agent, or a potential magazine editor. So then, you need the courage to keep
going when your writing is turned down, as it probably will be—I don’t know any
writer who hasn’t had that experience. And then, you need the courage once it’s
accepted to put it out in the world, and hear what people think of it, you’ll
need the courage to live through bad reviews, most likely, or tepid reviews,
you’ll need the courage to stand up to people who disagree with you, you’ll
need courage in the face of offending people—every step of the way, you’ll need
the inner core of strength, or what we say in Hebrew, “koach” to get you through.
[Reprinted from Writer’s Chronicle (May/Summer 2011). Used by permission of
the author and the interviewer.]