Some readings are great. Some are terrible. Some are amusing, In the wrong way. Some are completely inspiring. Some are a total yawnfest.

And, of course, there is no correlation between a good or greater writer and his/her ability to give a good, strong performance of his/her work. Some readers are interesting in their repartee. Others are terrible. I remember Anne Carson telling me (and the rest of the audience) at the onset of her AWP Vancouver reading that when she got to X that we’d be about two thirds done. This was clever, I thought. And helpful.

I also remember Robert Pinsky, after a lengthy reading at SMU one night, being asked in the Q & A what he thought of “brevity.” And he started off by saying that he thought there was much to be said for brevity. And then he proved it for going on about it for at least 10 minutes. I think he talked in those 10 yawning minutes about Saxifrage, the flower that breaks the rock. But now I’m going on. Bad Queen!  Bad Bad Queen!!! (He did, also, in talking about the revision process mention running his hand over the surface of a poem. And that I thought was kind of helpful. And on the money.)

But, what I’m getting at is: why don’t you review the reader(s) for us ???

Hey, now, we’re not looking for predatory and “mean” reviews. And we’re not looking for smarmy kiss-ass reviews either (friends reviewing friends. Pink Sno Ball reviews. or students reviewing (brown-nosing) their professors.) We’re after fair, considered and well-written reviews of readings you’ve attended or been subjected to. Here, for example, is a review that we think’s fair and interesting:

The Sterile Happiness of Our Brilliant Young People — (Greg Bem at a Steve Roggenbuck reading).

These reviews can be of famous best selling literary stars. Or they can be of lesser-known indie folk. They can be of readings you attended in the flesh. Or they can be of readings you watched on Youtube.

you can send queries and/or completed reviews to other [at] queenmobs [dot] com