Blog tour

Egad. I find myself on tour, of blogs.

My friend and fellow student Liz Lefroy – a fine poet who you can actually google – asked me to do this. She’s a very good poet so I said yes. I mean, maybe by doing what she says, I’ll catch some of the sensitivity and precision of her language.

I can catch viruses online, so why not good things, or virtuous viruses? You see? Already I have a lot of alliteration. This makes savvy sense, no?

For this blog tour I have to answer questions. They’re quite hard.

What am I working on? I could tell you, but then I’d have to kill you. As I have about a quintillionish readers, tracking you all down would take a long time and might get in the way of my top secret project.

Suffice to say ‘gaze’ and ‘perception’. Sort of like esse and percipi with a bit of digital topspin. But I’m keeping the tree, yeah, no what I mean?

How does my work differ from others of this genre? Um. All poets are special and unique. We’re sort of like people in that regard, but with rhymes. And alliteration.

Why do I write what I do? Because I like doing it and doing it makes me feel happy.

How does my writing process work? It’s not clear yet that it does work. It might be broken or malformed, something to do with switching in the worker files, I gather, which is, horribly, a reference to one of my very own poems. Which Liz says might not be a poem.

I’m having a little tut at that idea, Liz.

I write when something nags at me or interests me strangely, as they say. Then I try to be exact. Then I fall in love with what I’ve written. Then people I trust say it could be better. So I have another go.

Then it gets published. Okay, one thing has got published in Verse Kraken. Or two if you count my poem on which I only submitted to because I misread it as women poets swearing – wet pants and then I found out they took all submissions, which spoilt it a bit for me.

And it is all about me.

If you’re completely perplexed, then so am I. You can be in my perplexed poets posse.

Yes! I’m catching it, I’m catching it.

Anyone who wants to have a go – go for it. It’s really, really fun.



Posted in Writing
6 comments on “Blog tour
  1. plethiproject says:

    Cathy, Liz, Bobby,

    I find myself being a Blog Tourist; and that is like a Liz first person poem. Except I’m being a third person.

    Three writers with one mission. Talking, or its online analogy typing, about writing. I’m not sure that the writing that gets talked about and the writing itself are the same thing. There’s an ineffable thing that happens when the thought becomes word. If that ineffable-ness gets taken away I’m not sure I at least would enjoy writing so much.

    “I write because I enjoy it” feels like one of three reputable motives (the other two being Liz’s and Bobby’s) it reminds me that as a taker of pictures I’m taking them to see, as a famous photographer once said, what things look like photographed. By implication I’m writing to see what things look like written…

    The question that feels less useful is the genre question. It implies that everything lives in neat boxes and I’m sure no writer ever wants to be that narrowly defined…

    What catches a writer’s attention is the area that most interests me. I see all three of your attentions being caught in different ways and that looking in as a blog tourist is compelling.

  2. Cathy Dreyer says:

    Well, I’m so flattered that you’ve really read my post and want to know more.

    If you really want to know why I write poetry it’s because my other half noticed that I am happier when I’m writing poetry than when I’m not. I think that’s because when I’m writing poetry I’m attempting to articulate feelings which matter to me and any therapist will tell you that that’s good emotional hygiene.

    If you want to know more about what specific areas I like to attempt to articulate (in general) then it is what I say above – the gap between what the culture tells me about something, whether that’s the countryside or motherhood or anything else, and my own experience of it – esse and percipi.

    (The complicating factor is, of course, that we only experience things as humans through our human perceptual equipment. But I put that on one side, largely, and just go with what we can perceive, rather than what is actually there. I take myself as an average human and I also value partialness.)

    Is this making any sense?

    I think what I’m doing has overlap with the little that I know of your blog, especially in the way you interrogate colour.

    If you want to know why I’m interested in reality v culture then I think it stems from growing up in a family within which reality seemed only ever a point of view. My parents still don’t agree how long they were married, to take one small thing which can stand for everything.

    I’m not very interested in my family, which is the same as any other, really, but it has left me wondering about the nature of reality, about what’s really there, about my experience as opposed to the polemics of one aspect of culture or another.

    In the early posts of my walking project I noticed that I was editing (actually moving my eyes around) to conform to some kind of template for Rural Idyll. But my ears picked up the roar of aeroplanes, traffic, heavy agricultural machinery. I had to change my approach to play fair with any readers.

    There’s a congruence with my thoughts about being a mother, too. That’s all over my other blog as well, if you’re still interested!

    Some of my poetry is somewhat experimental. I’m looking at texts in the same way as I look at landscapes, these days. There’s a very interesting article by Peter Barry [Placing Poetry, Davidson/Skoulding] demolishing the arguments for reading as a specific act, saying that it’s all just looking. I’m not quite sure how this aspect of my work fits in with the rest. But it is something about ‘received wisdom’ or what we think text is doing as opposed to what it is doing. I’m really muddled about this at the moment.

    Thanks again for your interest.

    Cathy x

    • plethiproject says:


      Your words make a lot of sense and are an enjoyable read.

      A central part of the Plethi ‘method’ is to weave different elements and techniques together into something that is integrative. When I was little it would have been called collage or multi-media. I can strongly identify with the ‘writing makes me happier’ sentiment.

      I have regular debates with bloggers like Naomi Racz and Astrid Bracke about how we should approach writing about culture and nature. Should we be more like Robert Macfarlane or Kathleen Jamie; is nature writing gendered? Should we be more eco-critical and avoid objectifying, othering or anthropomorphising nature.

      I’ll have a wander through the wunderkabinett of your blogs and comment when something catches my eye..


  3. Cathy Dreyer says:

    Thanks David, collage and juxtaposition are important to me too. I think it’s something again about disputing.

  4. I did this a few months ago and found the questions really hard to answer, but you made me laugh out loud with your description of your publishing history. I needed that and good luck with the top secret stuff

  5. Cathy Dreyer says:

    Thanks Bridget – glad you like it 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,638 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: