Interview of A. (Author) by R. (Reader)

Monstruo by Mesándel Virtusio Arguelles

I recently had an exclusive interview with Mesándel Virtusio Arguelles (aka Ayer) about his septology of sonnet collections called Sonetoismo. The first two books in the series came out last year: Laging Patúngo and Monstruo. More books in the series are forthcoming next month. I visited Ayer in the university where he is working. The sonnet-interview that follows was first posted in Goodreads.

 

R: In Monstruo, you started breaking the mold of sonnetness and formed new sonnet-variants.

A: If you say so.

R: In "Dalawang-Linyang Soneto" (Two-Lined Sonnet), "Kalahating Soneto" (Half-Sonnet), and "[Walong-Linyang Soneto]" ([Eight-Lined Sonnet]), you broke the cardinal rule of the sonnet, that it contains 14 lines. How do you explain these monstrosities?

A: Monstruo does not mean monstrosity.

R: How do you define a sonnet?

A: A sonnet defines itself. Poetry-reading is an active reading constructivist activity. The sonnet-reader constructs meaning based on his/her prior knowledge and lived experiences. The sonneteer cannot control that.

R: I find that sonnetification, at least as exemplified in your septology project called Sonetoismo, is an emergent property of form, content, and process. Your brand of sonnetization is freedom from form and content but not from refined sense and sensibility.

A: Let's not talk about Jane Austen.

R: I meant to say that, or rather I wanted to ask if you were bored of the traditional forms of poetry.

A: Sonnetively speaking, no.

R: How can a mere couplet be a sonnet?

A: Why can't a sonnet be a grand couplet?

R: But, A., the form, remember? You have to complete the 14 stations of the cross.

A: Regardless of the number of stations, Christ would still be crucified and resurrected.

R: We are not in Golgotha.

A: Precisely, R. We are of this world.

R: Yes, there may be exceptions to the rule. But rules are not meant to be broken. So why create a rule of exceptions?

A: Rules are meant to be ruled over.

R: Is that cheating?

A: Poets are cheats.

R: Yes. In "Not the Stuff of Sonnets": Ilang Talâ sa Sonetoismo (Notes on Sonetoismo), you called a poem by Rio Alma as "malikhaing panlalalang" (creative deception) because it splits the 14 lines into more lines than required by the form. What is form for you?

A: Forms, for me, are spectral substances. I mentioned in that monograph that, beyond form and content, the writing process of and constraint in poetry are what held attraction for me.

R: You were after innovative treatments of form. You said of your entire sonnet series project that its aim is to offer linguistic innovation and formal investigation into the form. And you included as an ideal example the piece of Allan Popa called "Sonetong Lumalabis ng Isang Linya" (Sonnet Exceeding a Line"). Later on, in response to readers asking about the syllable and rhyme scheme that you are (or are not) using, you said that "Sinusubukan kong baklasin din ang soneto" (I am attempting to deconstruct the sonnet). What is it about deconstruction that appeals to you?

A: Meter is myth and rhyme is riven. Deconstruction is not escaping rhyme and reason. I will not say something grand like, "It is excavating the essence of being."

R: You favor free verse and simple words, as in the work of Jose F. Lacaba.

A: I favor freedom, delicious food, and sufficient sleep.

R: In a couple of poems called "Indise ng mga Unang Linya" (Indexes of First Lines), you splice together the first lines of each of your completed sonnet – fourteen first-lines, all told – and hence produced sonnets in the process. Is this what you mean by process-driven concept?

A: The proof is in the pandesal. Maybe I just ran out of things to say.

R: I find it a convenient way to thematize what you mean by deconstruction. In discussing a poem with 15 lines, you wrote in "Not the Stuff of Sonnets":

[I]sinusulong ang ideya ng pagbabaklas na ito ng interogasyon ng anyo sa pamamagitan mismo ng pagpapakita o pagpapamalay ng proseso ng pagbubuo-pagbabaklas ng mga soneto. Sa ganito, binibigyang-diin ang soneto o ang sonetong sunuran bilang proseso at ang anyo hindi lang bilang hubog kundi, ang mas mahalaga, bilang puwersa at politika, dahil sa pagkasangkapan sa anyo ng sunuran.

[This very idea of deconstructing form is itself promoted by demonstrating or making apparent the process of the sonnet's construction-deconstruction. With this, the sonnet or sequence of sonnets is emphasized as a process, and the form as not merely scaffolding, but more importantly, as power and politics, because of the appropriation of form in the sequence.]

A: The sonnet is lost in your translation, R.

R: I find the rule-breaking sonnet a product of a sophisticated crime.

A: I cannot confess my guilt.

R: You tend to favor the ordinary and commonplace as topics of your poem.

A: The ordinary contains the miraculous and grand narrative of our lives.

R: That is a sick line! Let me write that in my notebook.

A: Are you done?

R: The extraordinary in daily practices. Why are you after these?

A: The extraordinary turns of thought arise from the daily grind.

R: You likened sonnet-writing to writing entries in a diary. The series will contain 366 pieces. The earth revolves around the sun in roughly 365 and one-fourth days.

A: And you are overstaying your welcome.

R: Wait, I'm almost done with the interview. In "Pormularyo sa Ebalwasyon ng Manuskrito Bilang Walong-Linyang Soneto" (Formulary in the Evaluation of a Manuscript as an Eight-Line Sonnet), were you enumerating the qualities you are looking for in an innovative and rule-breaking sonnet?

Orihinal ba at kahali-halina ang akda?
Mataas ba ang antas ng pananaliksik?
Ano ang masasabi mo sa estilo? Gaano
kahalaga ang akdang ito? Kailangan ba
ng manuskrito ng rebisyon? May iba pa
kayang akdang tulad nito? Ano pang
publikasyon ang maaaring maglathala?
Ano ang iyong panlahat na mungkahi?

[Is it a work of originality and beauty?
Is the level of research superior?
What about the style? Is it a work
of great significance? Does it need
any substantial revisions? Are there
other works just like it? What other
publications might carry this piece?
What is your overall recommendation?]

A: I repeat: I do not break rules. A formulary is just a checklist. A cocktail of wine. It is not the rules but the path I'm trying to break. And this interview I'm trying to break free from.

R: Speaking of "free", is freedom the virtue of sonnets that do not consist of 14 lines?

A: Freedom is not measured by lines. Free verse is not entirely free. Was it Borges who said it is more difficult to write free verse? Free verse is shackled by not rhyming and not measuring. Virtue is overrated.

R: A sonnet, whatever the number of lines it contain, is the poet's explicit expression of existence. Do you agree?

A: I do not subscribe to these kinds of thoughts and solemnities.

R: What inspires you to write?

A: Is it anxiety? Is it celebration?

R: For my last question: Why a septology? And a follow-up, if you'll excuse me: What, in the end, makes a sonnet?

A: The septology is a means, not an end. A sonnet is nothing but an accident or happenstance. There is no sonnet that does not call itself one. A sonnet is self-determined. By poets and readers both.

R: Thank you for this sonnet, Ayer. I truly appreciate it.

A: Why do you call this interview a sonnet, Rise?

R (looking at A. very intently and not blinking): I'm calling it a sonnet, Ayer!

A: Whatever makes your day, Rise.


Note: The above "sonnet" is a work of fiction.