(no subject)
Dear Alvin,
Of course we will begin to investigate this matter as you request, but I must confess that I do not see any prima facie evidence of racism or racial discrimination.
For anyone who is not familiar with the term, prima facie is a legal term rooted in the Latin "on its first appearance," which usually describes the evidence required to prove an allegation. From my understanding, it is Marsh's opinion that the usage of the word "oppressed" has no racial undertones, even when used in a discussion between a white and a minority, and even when used in reaction to a "race poem."
Additionally, there is nothing in the EOS that will force a SlamMaster to book an act after an act has already been booked. And there is nothing that will force a SlamMaster to book an act which s/he believes will provide de facto support for someone s/he perceives as not being supportive of her/his scene, slam, city or community.
Steve is right in that Kimberly does not have to book me on the same day as Gypsee Yo.
However, the EOS (http://poetryslam.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=126&Itemid=25) does address the need for professionalism among SMs, including guaranteeing free speech regardless of race or lifestyle. If you strip all of the racial implications in Kimberly's letter, Steve still does not address how how Kimberly does not breach ..
5. To provide, to the best of his or her ability, a professional working environment for all poets and audience members;
6. To provide an atmosphere of mutual support and encouragement in which poets are invited to develop, network and grow;
7. To provide an atmosphere in which freedom of speech, self-determination, and pursuit of creative excellence is an inalienable right.
8. To endeavor to create an environment in which all poets in good standing with PSI are allowed to pursue their craft peacefully and without censure;
Though were not booked for a specific date, it is clear that we are unwelcome at the venue as a whole. This isn't about one show, it's being banned from a specific community. This is particularly alarming, as Greenville is actually my home town. I am not allowed to come home and talk about why my family left in the first place? These reasons aren't accusations, they are narratives.
Katie has some juicy comments, which I've minorly edited for clarification's sake:
"What's key here is that, acting as a representative of a PSI-registered event, Kimberly viciously retaliated against some of [Alvin's] work with a racially-toned statement -- this moves the exchange from the realm of the individual/private to the community/public sphere. By doing so, she displays an attitude that excludes important cultural criticism from her (PSI-registered) event--and potentially instigates a freezing effect (read: censorship) upon the art in her room. Would you write a poem that criticized race relations in Greenville knowing that the leadership of that reading would so easily lash out?"
I, for example, often tell Buddy Wakefield that I find his work full of ageism, that I object heartily to his painting of all people (but especially men) of a certain age as "bitter and mean." I permit him the freedom of speech to say what he believes, and I expect the same freedom of speech to tell him I find his poems sometimes offensive. Buddy and I maintain a working relationship in spite of these differences of opinion. I have never filled a complaint against him nor has he filed a complaint against me. We talk about our differences face to face.
There are numerous reasons why a parallel cannot be drawn between Steve-Buddy and myself-Kimberly, the most obvious one being the lack of a professional relationship between Kimberly and I, the second being the animosity presented in the "critique." Should Kimberly want to address grievance in my art, there are many more constructive methods which can be explored. We're not talking about a civil exchange between friends here, or a genuine request for me to accept responsibility. This is an instance of one person yelling "Yo Momma" then running away into silence.
In this complaint I see you complaining that somehow Kimberley Simms has judged your poem negatively and yet you judge her speech in the same light and ask us to place sanctions against her. In fact, she implies, I think, that she is unwilling to grant that her city, Greenville, oppresses your mother and that you have perpetuated the spread of some kind of slur against her community. She has elected not to invite you into her city to continue the perceived attack on her city. I don't see the part in the EOS statement that says she is wrong.
This obfuscates the intent of my original complaint. Let me make this clear: this complaint is not being filed in retaliation for not getting booked. I'm a working professional and am used to not getting booked for a variety of reasons. I am protesting because a representative of a PSI-certified venue said something that was perceived to be discriminatory.
The poem in question "To the Arizona State Legislature" primarily discusses English-Only legislation in the southwest, and only briefly mentions my mom's actual experiences in South Carolina, and is neither an "attack" or a "slur."
Additionally, all of these hypothetical motivations do not justify the unprofessional conduct which is in violation of the EOS. Freedom of speech does cover a poet's right to express any political viewpoint, it does not cover a violation of policy or rudeness.
Now, if she had said anything at all about your race or your mother's race, I think there might be a different argument. I think this is a case of public image of a community, not a case of racial bias or bigotry.
Greg covers this better than I can:
Since when is implying "I don't think you were oppressed." not a racial issue? Since when is it not crazy racist to call describing racism in a town as a "slur" (implying it's the same as racism) which justifies unprofessional behavior?
[Alvin] wrote a polite query, [Kimberly] responded like an asshole, [Alvin] gave her a chance
to explain and she hasn't. Even a half-assed apology would be better than
leaving you assume the worst. Not hard to understand."
That's my first take. That is the bias your allegation must overcome in my own mind. But it will be investigated by others. I'm sorry you perceive her response to be a matter of race. It is, in my mind, entirely possible (even probable) that race plays no role in her comments at all. She might just be asking you to take responsibility, in a real world way, for your allegation against her community.
Again, this is all speculation, and as does not address a personal insult made in response to a polite query.
-Steve Marsh
Executive blah blah blah