Live readings: beautiful and brooding, or short and snappy?
Every Wednesday in Spokane, local writer Mark Anderson hosts an all-ages open mic, known as Broken Mic (curiously titled, since the microphone works just fine, but no matter). 96% of what is read aloud is poetry, and in fact, host Mark Anderson calls the event Poetry Broken Mic when he goes through the introductory song-and-dance before welcoming the first reader to the stage. I write essays and not poems, though – ergo, I read essays at Broken Mic (typically essays that my thesis adviser has dismissed as too underdeveloped and sophomoric for my thesis). I read at Broken Mic every week because I like to practice reading aloud in front of an audience I like to have my writing applauded. (Oh, relax – writing is rarely a gratifying experience at the desk, and it’s nice to have some positive reinforcement, even if the audience is just being polite.) A few weeks ago, during the intermission of the two and-a-half hour long event, young and hot and up-and-coming local slam poet, Tim Johnson, came up to me and said something like, “Sam, your shit’s hilarious, but it’s never about anything whatsoever.” I responded by saying, “Huh-huh – yeah dude, that’s how I roll,” or something boneheaded like that, but he did have a point – I hardly ever, at live readings, read anything that comes around in the end, or “accesses the heart of the human condition,” or whatever pithy clause I’m sick of hearing. The truth is, I rarely know what I’m writing about in essays, anyway, until like the third or fourth draft, and once I make that discovery, it’s usually depressing and full of sentences that work on the page but sound ho-hum when spoken aloud, and who wants to go to readings to be bored and depressed? What I’m trying to get around to is this: essays or short stories at readings need to be kept short and light, and don’t necessarily need to take the audience members somewhere new and unexpected in the same way print writing does.





