Why I want to study Creative Writing even if it means being poor

As I mentioned in a previous post, I’m pretty excited to be studying Creative Writing at RMIT this year. The news of my acceptance was definitely most welcome and I’ve been riding on the confidence ever since. The news alone, that I was accepted into a course than many consider competitive and the best in the country, is a validation of my ability and future potential as a writer. That alone cannot be understated as a major reason for applying.

But I thought I’d talk a little bit more about why I’ve decided to do this, aside from the exciting prospect of student politics, and being involved in activism on campus. The choice is really a dive into the dark. In May last year, I decided I’d probably apply for uni in 2012, after I was made redundant from the office job I’d felt stuck in for around 5 years. That’s a long time for a 25-year-old to hold a full-time job, my first full-time job, and despite my anxiety about wanting to get out, the financial security kept me there until they pushed me out, out into the deep end where surviving financially is a bit daunting at the moment, even whilst working part-time.

The prospect of trying to get by whilst studying full-time is scary. I don’t know what will happen with Centrelink and AusStudy, whether I will find casual work, and how I will fit it in alongside political activism that I just cannot give up. So I thought I better have a bloody good reason for doing this.

But the truth is, the main reason I’m studying writing full-time is a signal to the people around me that this is serious. Not serious as in ‘boring’ serious, but serious as in – it is a major part of who I am and what I want to be doing with my life. It is far more important than any office job I’ve had. And I want the time I spend on writing to reflect that. This isn’t a hobby or something I do on the side. Just like my involvement in revolutionary socialist politics is not a side thing, but also a major part of who I am.

But I’m not just racking up tens of thousands of dollars in debt to convince people that this is important. The benefits of the course, the experience I will get, and the focus on improving my craft are all important. And putting my time in and getting myself into debt over this is probably a signal to myself as well, to make this a priority, alongside politics.

Sometimes I do struggle with thinking the people around me don’t realise that this, being a writer, getting published, and being read is incredibly important to me. I’m not going to give it up for anything. That said, I’m also committed to be being a socialist and not going to give it up either. Sometimes that balancing act is difficult, but it needs to be done.

Lots of good news

When it rains, it pours, or so the saying goes. Or perhaps it looks like it’s especially pouring after a drought. A fair bit of good news came my way over the last few weeks. I thought I’d share it one single self-obsessed post to update you all and wave my own banner.

From last Thursday to Saturday night, I performed poetry at the Empire Cafe as a support act for Ezekiel Ox’s spoken word show, Blowtorch. I did 5 shows, read a whole range of poems, and met a new audience outside of the usual poetry scene. And there may be more at the Empire in the future, so stay tuned.

On Monday afternoon, I found out I got into RMIT to study a Bachelor of Arts (Creative Writing) which is very exciting news. I think I mostly took the course as a signal to the people around me that for me, writing is serious business and a major part of my life, but learning and developing my skills will be a major benefit.

I had a post published on the Overland Blog looking at the hardcore band La Dispute and the links between spoken word and hardcore music.

This morning, I was on the 3CR spoken word program with Santo Cazatti where I read some poetry and answered some questions about writing, poetry and of course, politics. I’ve uploaded it on SoundCloud for everyone to listen.

Me and Santo are holding the first ever Percy Shelley Poetry Slam at Dexter Cafe/Bar in Clifton Hill on Tuesday, March 13 from 7.30pm. It’s a fundraiser for the Marxism 2012 conference in Easter and a chance to present left-wing spoken word. We’ll both be doing a few poems around the mock competition, with hopefully some new poets and some more experienced poets. It’ll be in style of the original slam originating from Chicago construction workers, where it mimicked a competition as a way to bring poetry to a broader audience.

On the growing popularity of eBooks, both personally and in Australia

I’ve had a Kindle for over a year now, and I thought it was about time I reflected on my change in reading habits as well as what I see as the growing popularity of eBooks.

Mid last year, I bought a Sony Reader, but the lack of eBooks available for it, and the complicated process of getting books both from stores like Borders and loading them onto the device, meant I didn’t use it that much and continued to read print books.

Despite the issues with Amazon, I bought the Kindle in December, and found the device was more reliable, there was a wider availability of books and the process of getting books (and other non-Amazon reading material) was so easy via emailing things wirelessly. I can now say that the Kindle has become my primary method of reading after a year.

The exception is books unavailable for Kindle, which is dwindling all the time. Finding books from the International Socialist Tendency is the hardest but Haymarket Books in the US, linked to the ISO, is releasing most of their new releases digitally now. And older Marxist texts, as well as any literature that is public domain, is available on the internet and with handy tools such as browser plugins, you can send things to read with one click.

Not only does the eReader change the way we read traditional print titles, but online text as well, removing us from the glare and distractions of computers. For me, it places the importance on making whatever you publish available in these formats.

Books, publications and journals that cling to outmoded or locked formats such as cloud readers, PDFs and print-only miss this audience.

And I don’t just say this from a position of personal preference. Over the last year, sightings on Kindles and eInk readers such as the Sony Reader and the Kobo have increased on trams, much more than iPads, and are not only replacing those seen with print books, but others as well. From Christmas onwards, this seems more so and I have heard of many friends and acquaintances receiving Kindles for Christmas. They’ve increased on retail store shelves, where as previously you had to order your Kindle from Amazon.com. All of this points to their rise in popularity.

I would speculate that these readers would be looking to purchase more books for their devices, rather than settle for print due to the convenience of having all their reading material on one device and not having to carry often heavy print books, especially for commuters travelling to and from work or uni every day.

Literary journals and Australian Publishing, courted by inferior technology such as cloud-based readers, are missing out on this audience that seems to be growing. Where as small press journals and publishing are tapping into this potential by making their publications available in all formats.

I love my Kindle, I want to use it as often as I can, so I am always sorely disappointed when publications, particularly new and exciting journals, are unavailable to me.

I’m looking forward to the day when everything I read is available on the one device.

On the first day back…

On the first day back,
office workers
shuffle aimlessly
in the ghost
of last year’s
busy streets
and corporate nightmare

And we wonder
as we arrive to empty offices
that if dooms day had arrived early
we would have liked the memo
so we could join everyone else

Online Debate: Trolls, haters, tone and content

There has been much online discussion about online discussion and heated debates about the worth of heated debates, especially following an infamous Twitter ‘flame war’/debate/discussion about rape jokes, sexism and other things that seemed to be lost as the debate went on, and turned into a debate about the debate.

In some sense, the debate has been useful, and in other ways, it’s been circular and I fear a lot of what has been said is repeating others and not adding anything new so I was loathe to comment unless I had something I thought would add something new to the debate about the debate about the debate…

As much as it is useful to interrogate that nature and tone in which debate with people, both who we agree with mostly, and those we disagree with entirely, I feel like much of the debate is more and more ignoring that content of which we are debating about. That goes for the debate of sexism, writing about women’s issues, but also for debate in general. For me, what we are responding to or debating about tends to be more important than how we say it.

In that sense, arguing that we should all be friendly to each other is both obviously true and all encompassing but at the same missing the point. I choose on how to respond to things based on a number of things, including whether or not I’m actually trying (and it is possible) to convince someone of my point of view, or and this should not be dismissed, to signal my own disapproval even though it is likely the person I’m responding to has no chance in hell of coming closer to agreeing with me.

But beyond that, there is a difference between responding fiercely and ‘rudely’ to someone who say, advocates for women’s rights as opposed to someone who says that women are to blame for rape, as well as a whole number of offensive things. If I responded to the later in a mean or ‘unproductive’ way, I make no apology. Focussing on how I responded rather than what I was responding to misses the point. The sexist commenter may put his or her opinion across in a polite way or a crude offensive way, but it doesn’t really change the content of what he said, and I would not give someone like that credit for putting across what they said in ‘thoughtful’ and ‘nuanced’ manner. The content of what this person said was offensive and that’s what I’m responding to.

For me, the problem is that the flame wars that crop up all the time on a range of different subjects can lose their original meaning when one responds in a certain tone, and becomes a debate about how you respond rather than the issues we’re responding to, which begs the question why I’m writing this in the first place, I guess.

But I think it’s useful to respond to in order to bring it back to think about the content we’re debating, rather than the tone. I have been the victim of many trolls and online haters, and attacks over the years, which is both frustrating and sometimes demoralising, but this does not mean that I hold back from responding aggressively when I think it is justified i.e. I’m not interesting in debating with Zionist commentator Ted Lapkin and so when I saw him on the street once, I didn’t stop and ask him for a cup of coffee to discuss our ideas, but let fly with a bunch of insults, which I suppose he enjoyed as much as I did, but the point was to indicate to the people around us where I stood.

Another example is often when I’ve campaigned around same-sex marriage rights, a number of times homophobic bigots and haters will come up to you and call you a whole number of things, and responding probably won’t convince that person to think that homosexuality is not wrong, but responding, often stridently, often meant passers-by who would usually just keep walking, would stop, sign the petition and become more interested in the issue because they were outraged with what the bigot was saying and agreed with my response.

The thing that gets to me about my own trolls and haters is not necessarily that they call me a worthless writer that no one reads (except them 24/7), but where they stand on the issues. I’m not just a worthless writer, but one that invites ‘hoards of refugees to invade our shores.’ I delete the trollish comments because in the end, there’s nothing to really respond to. Where as I might allow through other comments that disagree with me entirely, but this does not mean I have respect for their ideas or debating tactic, merely it is useful for the discussion to convince others around me, and not necessarily the person I’m responding to.

There may be differences in how a right-wing troll might attack me, and the exact tone I might use when attacking a right-winger, but what really should define it is the politics of the arguments and what side you’re on.

Marxism 2012: Revolution in the Air

Following such a momentous year in world politics from the Arab revolutions, to the struggle against austerity in Europe and then the Occupy movement worldwide, I feel like we are living in pretty radical times, even since ticking over to 2012. Opposition to capitalism, the possibility of revolution and visions for a new society are ideas discussed more. Even the the ideas of Karl Marx and other Marxist thinkers are appearing again, despite critics claiming again and again that Marxism is dead. It’s capitalism and its crises that are keeping it relevant.

So Marxism 2012: Revolution in the Air looks more exciting than ever. Taking place over four days during the Easter long weekend, the Marxism conference has been the biggest and most impressive left-wing political conference in Australia for some time now, boosted by the regular attendance of renowned filmaker and writer, John Pilger but also an impressive line-up of international guests that gets bigger every year.

This year it includes Leia Petty, Socialist from Occupy Wall Street, Japanese anti-nuclear activist Chie Matsumoto who was involved in Occupy Tokyo, Indigenous activist Gary Foley, plus around 70 sessions on a whole range of political topics. And there are still international speakers to be added! The program is worth checking out.

But I thought I’d take the time to highlight some of the sessions I’m looking forward to in particular.

• Thursday, 6.30pm: Opening Night – Global Crisis and Global Revolution. Featuring Leia Petty, New York teacher, unionist and socialist involved in the Occupy Wall St protests. Japanese anti-nuclear activist Chie Matsumoto, plus activists from the Middle East and Europe.
• Friday, 11.30am: Will the revolution be tweeted? Social media and social movements
• Saturday, 2pm: I love the sound of breaking glass: Riots in Australian history
• Saturday, 9pm: The poetry of Pablo Neruda with spoken word artist Santo Cazatti
• Sunday, 10am: Emile Zola’s Germinal: A novel of working class struggle

There are heaps of others that I’m looking forward to, but those are some that jump out at me, especially the session on Germinal which I’m reading now.

The conference is definitely worth coming along to if you consider yourself on the progressive side of politics. It welcomes a whole range of political tendencies and comradely debate is encouraged. You can get tickets from the website. With the world radicalising under the pressure from capitalist crisis, now is the time to grapple with the ideas and the strategy to change the world.

Grand Literary Goals for 2012

The start of 2012, as with the start of any new year, is a time for fresh starts, resolutions, goals, plans and all that. Despite the arbitrary nature of changing year, there seems to be a psychological impact which spurs on a change in our motivation. For me, it was most welcome, trying to pull myself out of a rut and a crisis in confidence, especially toward writing, but life in general.

So it’s exciting to see so many literary bloggers embracing the new year, setting goals, plans for 2012, and setting in stone writing projects. And for some of us, the main goal is change our everyday habits, the way we spend our time, and if we can change that, it seems possible to fit in everything.

2012 brings some big changes for me in my life, and some are scary, undecided and unpredictable. And there’s a good chance it could all fail. I hope not. I try not to think about it. But it could. I am definitely going to university to study writing in 2012. That is definite. What isn’t definite is where I’m going. I’m enrolled into Creative Arts at La Trobe, but there’s a good chance I could get into two other courses at RMIT, which I would much prefer.

With this, comes changes in work and income, that I have no idea about. Whether I can get AusStudy, will have to find casual work, is all up in the air, and puts into question time and the ability to dedicate to the more important things, like writing, reading and revolutionary socialism. So with this in mind, and not knowing quite what uni will throw at me yet, my goals may be vague in sections and subject to change.

Writing

• Write creatively, usually fiction or poetry, at least weekly, if not more
• Complete kind-of-secret major long fiction project for release in first half of 2012 (more details soon)
• Pitch more non-fiction op-ed type pieces, articles etc.
• Submit at least one short story every two months

Spoken word

• Organise and host two special spoken word gigs in 2012. I’ve got the ideas. Just need to put them in motion
• Organise my own solo show even if I don’t get features in 2012
• Memorise more poems
• More spoken word videos, of other poets as well
• Possible release of text, audio and/or visual book, ebook, DVD and/or CD

Reading

• Finish reading at least one book a month
• Read every issue of Overland
• Read a short story a week
• Reading group on Literature and Revolution by Leon Trotsky
• Read in preparation for socialist meetings, educationals and conferences

The Blog

• More book reviews (to fit into the focus on reading more)
• A few more interviews with other writers
• Continue posting poetry, videos, photos and other types of content
• Blog about the Emerging Writers’ Festival
• Experiment with video interviews more. Would people watch these?
• Cultivate discussion and feedback, even if it’s not in the comments section

There’s a kind of focus on education and reading, with my writing type projects remaining modest for the most part, focussing on one major writing project, outside of the poetry and short fiction.

These goals are of course subject to change, and possible suspension, especially if some kind of political event demands my attention. I hope by putting these goals online and in the public eye, that I’m held to some account to continue reading and writing regularly, to complete my projects, aim for publication and continue to publish stuff on this blog.

Photo By Hidinhumiliation

First poem of 2012

There is something really amazing about writing your first poem, the first from 2012, after writing got a bit hard and painful for a few weeks. After much anguish, including over trivial things such as stationary, I blessed a new notebook with words and instantly felt better.

I hope 2012 brings many moments like this, with perhaps less anguish. Here is my first poem of 2012. In the coming days, I’ll let you know what else is in store for this year in my writing and this blog.

—

Like a junkie
poetic withdrawals
leave you shaking
searching frantic
for exactly the right pen

like the right vein
shallow
wet and visible
except the pen is there
to release poison
cleansing

The search for release
comes at all costs
sweating in the heat
forgetting your stomach
eating at its insides
but if only you could find
that perfect pen

bleed black onto paper
then speak it
seal your fix
open and unashamed
acutely aware of a strange
addiction
only addicts really understand

unlike the judging eyes
of normal people
who bottle everything up
look at you with pity
even disdain
if you dare disclose:
“I’m a writer.”

Left with desire
to find others
not just to read or listen
but to understand the words
that split out of you
messy like heavy sobs

when finally, it is done
you feel better, calmer
sometimes a little ashamed
that you went through that
all of it
just for a poem

You know then
that you are not normal
dysfunctional amongst the functional
but normal, calm and at home
standing facing odd friends
and strangers alike
finally functional amongst
the beautifully dysfunctional
your family of poets

Blogging: Interactivity, feedback or just silence

I’ve always loved blogging for the instant gratification. It appeals to the impatient part of the writer in me. I like responding quickly, getting feedback almost instantly, and the thrill of people sharing, tweeting and all that. I think it keeps me motivated for the longer projects, the ones you write alone with no idea whether they’re any good or not. But I think blogging is changing, or at least the impact my blog is having is changing.

I wrote earlier this year about how interactivity with blogs is changing, people are commenting less on the actual blog, unless there’s some big debate, but more likely, these debates, comments and feedback take place on Facebook or Twitter, sometimes not even in the form of comments but a like or retweet. But now, often blog posts seem to be met with silence. The hits might come in when I share them, but there’s no real response. I admit that often my reaction to this is to get down about it all, that no one is reading, and starting questioning whether it is worth it. But then I remember other times, that a post seems to get a reaction when I didn’t expect it at all.

I think I need to reevaluate my expectations for blogging, and beyond that, other forms of writing. Perhaps I need to stop expecting that every blog post I write, every poem I read on the open stage, or every bit of writing that reaches out to readers, needs to have a big impact to be worth it. I speak in my upcoming Write Anything article about the allure to writing, at least partly, is having readers. And in Big Bang Theory, Leonard’s mother, who’s a psychologist, tells Penny that her desire to get into acting stems from a need for external recognition. It was meant to be a joke, but it stuck with me.

Writing online can live and die so quickly. One moment, a post is up, hits are rolling in, people see your tweet in their timeline, and then it’s all gone, and forgotten most of the time. It can be a bit frustrating putting work into a blog post that goes uncommented on, unnoticed, but perhaps sometimes that’s how they go.

Reading challenge for 2012

Reading is an essential element to developing both sides of me, as a writer and a revolutionary socialist. It’s essential for both education and inspiration. That said, no matter how modest, I always seem to fail in the reading challenges I set for myself and 2011 was no exception. I thought finishing a book a month would be pretty easy, but so far I’ve only managed half of that. Perhaps I’ll finish another one or two before the year ends. My favourites this year were This is How by MJ Hyland and Embassytown by China Miéville.

But just because I always seem to dismally fail my reading challenges, doesn’t mean I shouldn’t try. I mean, I’d read even less that way. Angela Meyer’s reading challenge has spurred me on to make my 2012 goals. I’m going to try for at least a book a month again, balancing political books and fiction, with a focus on 19th Century and early 20th Century era fiction (mostly American) and political history, plus the Miéville trilogy, some more MJ Hyland and other women writers, and whatever fiction makes an impact in 2012.

Added to that though, will be trying to read most things on my Kindle, unless the book isn’t available that way. I also want to read more journals, mostly Overland, Kill Your Darlings and Socialist Alternative’s Marxist Left Review.

Wrapping up the world changing and word making of 2011

Summing up 2011, both personally and politically, is quite a daunting and exciting experience. I fear I may miss things because so much has happened, but I think it is worth attempting because the blog would look it had a huge gap in it if I didn’t.

2011 has been one of those years, like 1917, 1968, 1989. Radical years that will stand out in history, full of struggle and momentous events that shape and inspire future struggles. I can only hope 2012 will continue in the same mood. It’s the year I stopped looking so crazy (for the most part) when I said I believed in revolution, thought it could happen, or even dared to think the world could change.

World events like the revolutions in Egypt, and the rest of the Middle East, inspired the rest of the year, and set the tone. Out of that came the Occupy movement centred in the belly of the beast, the US of A, and really reignited hope. We haven’t seen major struggle in the US for some time. And Europe, less spoken about in Australia at least, was full of riots, general strikes and occupations of their own. These were all incredibly inspiring events and revived people’s hope in a better world. It’s a great time to get involved in that active change, to become a socialist or some kind of mass world changer.

And in my writing, I became immersed in the literary world more than ever, joining in with other writers to spur us to submit more. I had my first poem published. Performed my first poetry features around the Melbourne spoken word scene. Had some short stories published, and in print no less. And wrapped up the year with some significant acceptances and project plans, that will reveal themselves in time in 2012.

All this means I’m ready for whatever 2012 will throw at me, and am prepared to throw back whatever I’ve got.

Refugees: boat arrivals need to be assisted not deterred

Debates about offshore processing and how best to ‘manage’ the refugee ‘problem’ have flared up again following the tragic boat sinking between Indonesia and Australia over the weekend. In a sickening display, both Labor and the Coalition have used the tragedy to pursue their various forms of offshore processing, (or dumping) that do not save lives, but rather ruin or kill them under someone else’s responsibility.

More disappointing though has been the response from liberals or those considered allies of the refugee movement. Both Robert Manne and Bernard Keane in their responses, have accepted the logic of the mainstream debate that we need to stop the boats through a policy of deterrence in order to save lives. They also accept the logic that there is a problem with refugees seeking asylum that we need to manage somehow, rather than help to facilitate the safe seeking of asylum, by whatever means is necessary.

The starting point should be the recognition of that fundamental right to seek asylum. And that right is guaranteed no matter how one arrives. I repeat that a lot, but I do so, because it seems to so often get missed. People have a right to arrive by boat, and recognising that right should involve helping those who do so, to do safely.

Policies that impede that right, such as offshore processing, or policies involved in stopping the boats, also do not save lives. The end result of denying someone’s right to seek asylum is to work toward preventing them escaping situations of war or persecution. People who are seeking asylum often flee for fear of their life or liberty. If they do not escape or are sent back through deportation, the logical conclusion is that they could lose their life or are imprisoned, tortured etc. and that we are partly responsible for that. This is especially the case if we are invading those countries in the case of Afghanistan, or financially or politically backing the repressive government, in the case of Sri Lanka’s persecution of the Tamils.

The other outcome is that, if they manage to flee the initial situation, they are stuck in a third country; countries that are not signatories to any refugee convention or less able to look after refugees. Or in the case of the Malaysian solution, they will be sent back to one of these third countries. In Malaysia, refugees are caned and tortured. They have no rights. They have no right to work or receive benefits and often have to work illegally or beg to eat and live, and to look after their families. These ‘queues’ where people wait for decades, effectively rotting, unable to restart their lives, driven to take a boat because it’s the only way, are not a solution to the problem that people need to seek asylum.

Manne supports Nauru, the Coalition’s alternative, but this solution too means refugees languish on another island for possibly years waiting to be resettled, and not in Australia. Detention like this destroys people. It is not a more humane option.

Manne then goes on to argue that the Left have largely ignored the danger that asylum seekers face when travelling to Australia by boat, and that we must find a policy that deters this. But my alternative, and one I think the refugee movement must be clear on, involves not stopping the boats, but by making it safer.

There is nothing fundamentally dangerous about travelling from one country to another by boat. But it is the criminalisation of people smuggling that makes it dangerous and indeed fatal. Border patrols force boats to take the most dangerous routes to avoid detection. The policy of ‘scuttling’ boats i.e. destroying them on arrival, mean only the cheapest and most unseaworthy boats are sent on one way voyages.

The alternative I envisage would involve patrols to help boats in trouble arrive at our shores. It would involve even regulating the industry so that safe and seaworthy boats could transport asylum seekers from places like Malaysia and Indonesia and allow those boats to return. This would be on top of not only dramatically increasing our intake by plane, but to also honour it.

In this respect, I agree with Guy Rundle’s response to both Keane and Manne.

We need to stop treating refugees arriving by boat as a problem that needs to be managed, but instead see that refugees being unable to safely seek asylum is the real problem, and our goal should be to help manage that, rather than deter people from exercising that basic right.

But our government, whether it has been a Labor one or a Liberal one, prefers to turn refugees into a problem, a threat, to divert attention away from other problems, such as lack of funding for health and education, and so will not change their policy unless their is political pressure put on them, and this pressure does not waver on principles in order to appease those in government, and accept the mainstream terms of the debate. The mainstream debate is focussed on other goals, not a goal that seeks to look after people’s human rights.

It is clear to me, as it does when the refugee issue flares up time and time again, that a large, vocal, public and principled campaign for refugee rights needs to be created to pressure the government. This will require arguments to be had, but also for people to mobilise on the streets.

The problem with attacking consumers at Christmas time

Christmas and the holiday season is a time of anxiety, frustration and guilt for a lot of people, and in countries like the US, it is more so in 2011, as the economic crisis hits and people’s lives become a lot harder, with wages being pushed down and prices being pushed up.

And what makes me angry and frustrated at the moment, aside from the impact of the economic crisis, is the conventional response by people who call themselves progressive, essentially attacking workers under the guise of anti-consumerism, especially around Christmas time.

I have written around this issue before but it seems to be more of an issue this year round, stemming in part out of the more conservative sections of the Occupy movement, and I’d argue, that the anti-consumerist ideas and tactics actually push the Occupy movement and the Left away from the 99% and fall into line with the agenda of the 1% seeking to maintain the exorbitant gap between the minority of rich shits with millions and the millions struggling to get by.

A quite common example this year is the image below, pitting starving people in the third world with ordinary workers in more developed countries, such as America and Australia.

The conclusion meant to be drawn from such an image is that the reason there is mass starvation in Africa is because of the ‘greedy’ desire of consumers, particularly around Christmas time, to buy ‘unnecessary items.’ I would argue though that these two groups, despite the obvious disparity in living standards, are in fact on the same side, are both denied higher living standards by a group that earn much more and spend much more than a mother wanting to buy her kid a few toys at Christmas time.

A website that makes a similar argument to the image above is globalrichlist.com which asks you to enter your income into the box before it situates you on the rich list against the rest of the world. And basically, it says anyone earning over $47,500 a year, US, is in the top 1%. I hope I’m not the only one that immediately questions the statistics and calls ‘bullshit.’

The point of the website is to argue that most ordinary workers are ‘rich’ and that we should stop complaining. But the website misleads and lies in order to make it’s point. Firstly, it calculates this based on income, which is different to overall wealth that can also include assets and money in the bank.

Counter to the stats of globalrichlist.com, the Boston Consulting Group found, as of May 2011, that the world’s millionaires, representing 0.9% of the global population control 37% of the world’s wealth and that those with over $5 million of overall wealth, representing just 0.1% of the world’s population, control 22% of the world’s wealth. These statistics point out that more wealth is concentrated in far fewer hands. The problem I would argue is these people and not workers in the developed world with far less wealth.

But the main problem lies in looking at inequality along a sliding scale of wealth. Just working out how much people are worth does not reveal how someone ‘earned’ or accumulated that wealth. Those at the top of society, ‘the 1%’ as Occupy calls them, accumulate their wealth, not through work, but the exploitation of the workers who these anti-consumerist ideas seek to blame. In the developed world, workers produce a far greater amount of the wealth, but are paid much lower than the value they produce. So the rest skimmed off the top is profit for the 1%, who already control a massive amount of wealth and assets through the cunning method of being born into a rich family.

When we look at redistributing wealth, for instance, after a revolution to overthrow capitalism, it is the wealth of the 1% that will need to be taken and redistributed, meaning that the vast majority of humanity will see their living standards increase, from those in the third world to workers in the developed world.

In this respect, there is something fundamentally wrong about seeking to blame a worker and ignoring the capitalist class that control billions of dollars. The ridiculous wealth of the 1% is either spent on luxury goods that make iPads and Christmas gifts look like junk, or their wealth sits in banks, accumulating more wealth through gambling it on the stock market.

But I’d also argue that the working class striving for better living standards, to buy ‘luxury’ goods to make their lives better, is a good thing and part of that project to redistribute the wealth and cut into the fortunes of those who control most of it.

Where as strategies to redistribute wealth by workers consuming less leaves more wealth in the pockets of big business, driving down wages, affecting the whole global labour force. And it’s not as if when better off workers consume less, that the leftover wealth is then given to those in the third world. It’s incredibly naïve to think that the 1% wouldn’t keep it for themselves especially in times of crisis, beyond tokenistic charity efforts to save their own consciences and increase their PR rating.

These arguments are especially important in the context of the economic crisis. In the US and Europe, especially, wages are under attack and prices are rising, making it a lot harder to barely live, let alone comfortably. The scenes of parents rushing around shopping centres madly trying to find bargains, so often attacked by anti-working class people far more comfortable than the shoppers they attack, stem from this downward pressure on wages. The problem is that workers don’t earn enough, not that they spent ‘too much.’

And to argue otherwise, sides with the governments and corporations trying to maintain their own wealthy position in society, by driving down wages and making it harder for us to get by, whilst pitting sections of ordinary people against each other. Instead, we need to place the blame with the real wealth section of society and take our wealth back, rip it from their greedy hands, and redistribute so we can all live far better than we are now.

Questioning the state of literary blogging in Australia

Like my own humble blog, the life and noise the literary blogging scene in Australia makes varies from times of excitement to relative silence. There are some periods where there are scores of bloggers offering their thoughts on the publishing industry, festivals, their writing process, things like NaNoWriMo – and other times, we seem to have little to say about anything. And it can heap on itself, because one blogger can inspire others, but also a quiet blogosphere leaves us with nothing to respond to. It’s a collaborative effort.

I feel like we’re in one of those periods now. Perhaps it’s post-NaNo funk, but a lot of writer-bloggers I know didn’t even do NaNoWriMo. It could be the end of the year. Or it could be there’s nothing to really talk about. Some of the spurts in lit blogging were inspired by debates and thoughts around digital publishing, events like the Emerging Writers’ Festival and the swathe of issues and questions arising out of that. More diligent bloggers or group blogs seem to produce things all year round, including reviews and interviews, seeking out content rather than just responding.

The launch of the new Crikey lit-blog, Liticism by Bethanie Blanchard gives me hope. With the new blog on the scene, and Angela Meyer reinvigorating her blog, LiteraryMinded at her own address, I’m hoping for discussion to spur me on to think and discuss my own writing and the issues I’m grappling with like the role of an editor especially when self-publishing. Don’t get me wrong, reviews and interviews have their place, but I can’t help but want more. I don’t read all reviews in my RSS feed. I often skip over them. I think I’m looking for questions or debate.

Perhaps this is just my perception, the blogs I’m reading etc. but I’m looking for a re-invigoration, probably because talking about writing usually leads me to actually do some writing (primarily fiction), because I’m thinking about it, and I’m in the right mode of thought, I guess. Whether this be through an issue, an event or whatever, I’m not sure. Perhaps this could be the start of a discussion.

What are the issues, questions, debates, concerns, etc. of the literary world at the moment?

“Christmas Island/They Kill Them”

Last month, at my favourite poetry venue in Melbourne, I was very lucky to join Amanda Anastasi on stage during her featured performance. Both Amanda and I discuss the issue of refugees in our poetry and so it was a special honour for us to combine our poems – Amanda’s “Christmas Island” and my poem, “They Kill Them” – and present “Christmas Island/They Kill Them” at Passionate Tongues at the Brunswick Hotel. Big thanks to Randall Stephens, another great Melbourne poet, for providing the footage so I could edit it and upload it to share it with you all.

Labor Conference: Protests push the Left

Over the weekend, I was part of a series of protests in Sydney outside the Labor Party’s National Conference. Left-wingers came from across the country as the Labor Party debated important issues such as same-sex marriage, refugee rights and uranium mining. With Gillard pushing Labor’s right-wing agenda, it was crucial to have thousands outside pressure the party to take decent positions, because it’s clear the ALP won’t do so willingly.

Even the Labor ‘Left’, I’d argue, have dragged their feet on same-sex marriage and putting up a decent fight to the Malaysian solution and offshore processing. Putting faith in those inside the party to change things really holds back social movements. Despite the biggest gay rights protest in Australian history, and the ongoing movement pressuring the ALP to change the Labor Party platform in favour of equal marriage rights, a deal with the Right inside the party for a conscience vote railroads the policy toward failure.

Whilst some of the Left have made excuses for why the Labor Left are too gutless to cross the floor over offshore processing, the Right threatened to cross the floor over same-sex marriage before the conscience vote deal was made. The Left, begging for credibility, yet again fail to fight for principle whilst the Right of the party do what they like. The likes of Garret prove again that the Labor Party is nothing but a graveyard for principled left-wing activists, and putting faith in them is suicide.

Though the Left, in this instance, did seem to vote in the right way on most policies on the floor of conference, I’d argue it was due to pressure from outside the party. Prior to the conference, and in previous years, deals and capitulations meant that often motions didn’t even make it to the floor.

So I took it at great offence that some were chanting ‘Thank you Labor’ on the Saturday’s Equal Marriage demo and Labor Party speakers used the opportunity to congratulate themselves and further promote the project of social democracy, so discredited at the moment, when it has been such an impediment to progressive change such as same-sex marriage. Support for Equal rights in Australia has been in the majority for some time now, but it took until this weekend for the Left to move to change the party platform.

The victories have only ever come from pressure from ordinary people, ordinary workers pressuring their union leadership, or left-wing movements outside the party forcing the party to change the position or risk irrelevance.

So there is still a fight to win same-sex marriage, to make it law, and I’d argue that it won’t be through pressuring Abbott and the Liberals, but the party in government. And the Malaysian Solution is far from dead so it will require renewed effort amongst refugee activists to bury it again and keep it that way.

For further analysis on the ALP National Conference, I’d recommend an article by Rick Kuhn, ‘Labor Party contradictions out in the open at conference’ from the Socialist Alternative website.

Note: I’ve edited some aspects of my post from last night to include the fact the Left of that party did actually vote the right way in this instance.

New priorities, upcoming blog posts and book winners

As the dust of NaNoWriMo settles, and I finally get a chance to breathe after the protests outside the Labor Party’s national conference, I thought I’d pay some attention again to the blog in a hope to hone my renewed enthusiasm for writing as well as political activity and education.

Every once and a while, I find enough energy to drag myself out of ruts of laziness with a desire to organise myself better, write and submit more as well as dedicate myself to the cause of building a revolutionary movement and fighting to overthrow capitalism. As one of my recent posts points out, sometimes these two priorities are in conflict with each other and I need to put writing aside in order to focus on activism, but now I feel like there’s a bit of room to breathe.

So this month, I hope to do the writing projects on the table, such as preparing the suite of poems for 3CR’s spoken word radio show with Santo Cazatti, my article for EWF’s The Reader, as well as work on my web serial, Robbin’ Toorak, and some poems and short stories.

Coming up on the blog is a bit about why I’m writing Robbin’ Toorak as a web serial, a post on the protests outside the ALP conference with a video, and another book giveaway.

Finally, I’d like to announce the winners of the Ocean of Blood giveaway. The runner-up, and the winner of a copy of Ocean of Blood by Darren Shan is Toni Rakestraw. And the winner, who will receive a copy of Ocean of Blood as well as a copy of the first book, Birth of a Killer is Michaela Sanderson. I’ll be in contact with the winners regarding postal details in the next day or so.

Poem: Bee in my bonnet

Some people say,
about me,
when they look at me,
that I have a bee in my bonnet
bees in my bonnet about everything

And they look at me in mock pity
with a brick in my hand wrenched back
facing at the TV screen:
Gillard and Abbott want to tow refugees back out to sea

And some people say,
I have a bee in my bonnet
as if it’s something wrong with me?

They say I have a bee in my bonnet
because bees don’t belong under bonnets
living organisms amongst machines
but perhaps
just maybe
my fucking car runs on the buzzing of bees

So,
I took my bees
put them in my pocket
swarming around underneath
and people’s eyes
would gravitate to me
standing out
buzzing
when everyone was so quiet
around me

You would have to listen, closely,
to find others
small groups,
sharing and exchanging,
noisy insects in metal pockets
making tiny swarms flying around the city

But now, we realise
it is not us, collectors of bees
that are the breeders
we are not the beekeepers
or the honey takers

But it is those
who we aim the
buzzing bees

and in their
gluttonous desire
for more
golden liquid
they’re breeding more bees
filling our pockets
not with the produce of bees
but empty, raging, hives,
pushing up against our metal tops

and now it’s not just me with
a bee in my bonnet
and we’ve all got bricks wrenched back
in front of things more real than TV screens
and we’ve come together
a swarm of millions
billions of bees
buzzing and suffocating
greedy bee keepers
who’ve kept the honey
all to themselves
for far too long

Book Giveaway: Ocean of Blood

To celebrate the release of Darren Shan’s blood-soaked vampire tale, Ocean of Blood, HarperCollins have kindly given me copies to give away to lucky readers of Blood and Barricades.

Ocean of Blood is Book Two in the Saga of Larten Crepsley series:

The epic tale of the vampire Larten Crepsley continues. The question is — how far can Larten go… alone?

Free from their mentor Seba Nile, Larten Crepsley and Wester Flack join the Cubs — wild young vampires with little respect for human life, and a taste for mindless enjoyment.

For the Cubs, everything is easy. But nothing has ever been easy for Larten, and soon fate throws his life into another spin. With dark paths to travel, Larten finds himself far from the Vampire Mountain and its rules. A long way from home, sick and alone, he must decide what kind of vampire he will be. Whether he will stand firm, be true to his master and his principles — or whether he will lose himself in blood…

To go into the draw to win a copy, email benjamin@benjaminsolah.com with your name, contact details (email, Twitter handle etc.) before Sunday, the 27th of November. First prize will receive a copy of Ocean of Blood as well as Book One, Birth of a Killer with the runner-up receiving a copy of Ocean of Blood.

On quitting NaNoWriMo, and prioritising activism around a writing routine

On day 15, at over 22,000 words, I’m bowing out of NaNoWriMo for 2011 and setting my novel aside. The amazing Baiada strike out in Laverton has taken a lot of my time that would otherwise be used writing. And despite not feeling like NaNoWriMo was a waste of time, I am happy to be throwing myself into showing solidarity with these workers and it is leading me to think again about how I prioritise political activism and a writing routine.

There always has, and probably there always will be, a tug of war between dedicating time to changing the world and fighting capitalism on the one hand and dedicating time to writing and expressing my views on the world through fiction and poetry on the other. For others, sometimes political activists drop out of politics to dedicate themselves full-time to writing, or writers feel like they cannot give time to activism – or visa versa with many activists feeling like writing or artistic expression is a distraction away from politics.

I do believe you can do both. And I’d like to see myself as leading by example, by not ditching protests and activism to write. And there are so many other things I could be foregoing in order to fit in writing that means I can still involve myself in activism too. There is a need to find a writing routine, to dedicate time to sitting down and writing, but sometimes the world throws up inspiring struggles that you cannot miss.

You cannot fit ‘the good fight’ into your busy schedule, slot it in when you’re not so busy. Things happen when you least expect them to, after months of complaining that nothing is happening in Australia. I feel like I cannot complain when hundreds of activists occupy Melbourne or workers go out on strike. These events happen in their own time.

I made a commitment to do NaNoWriMo at a time when I felt Occupy Melboure was winding down and had lost its momentum. Indeed it’s still going now, but without, I think, the defiance and resonance it firt had. I did have a window in which I could write, wake up early, write after work as well, but when the Baiada strike sprung up, and workers maintained an actual picket line, fought off police to defend it and have kept it going for a week now, it kind of compels you to put the writing away for a bit to throw yourself into it.

And I expect that, especially following such a momentous year of political struggle, that I will continue to have to do this and I am more than ok with it. These are incredible events that I don’t think I’d want to miss for anything.

Time to write will come. It might not be everyday and some weeks there might not be any, but I ought to learn to take the time when it’s there and not worry when it’s not. After all, these uplifting and energising events are inspiration for writing, providing stories, emotions and characters. There is something about experiencing these things for yourself, that I hope, will provide some authenticity and sincerity to my writing, that I think writing about something from afar, with ‘objectivity’ and neutrality cannot.

The Baiada strike has inspired me. I’m sure there is at least one poem in there. It has also revived and clarified an old short story and namely, the characters in it. And although I’m not sure I’ll return to my 2011 NaNoWriMo novel, it has helped to develop the characters and story to the novel that it was the sequel too. And I will get back to that story, when the time comes.