puritan-magazine.com

Amateur writing is overwrought, gilded, flowered and perfumed with words. Occasionally stories are murdered by commas, their tiny savage spikes riving sentences mercilessly. But even an elitist prick like me can admit that a story can be badly written and yet still be enjoyable. We enthuse in amateur art precisely because it is unfixed in this way, seeking the occasional gem within these loose, scaffold structures of words. This is probably the best student-run journal I've ever seen. I think it should be taken up and read. It should definitely be continued.

But watch out for the editorial comments. In fact, maybe skip them. "All art is useless" is Wilde's famous dictum, and one of the easiest ways to produce bad writing is to chain it completely to intention. The long and sometimes off-putting editorial comments included with The Puritan definitely have intention. On an initial read, they bang out like a hand grenade packed with pretentious. I'm still puzzling over "literature is the language of meaning." Does this mean that everyday speech is gibberish? (Humorous note to Mr. Willis: My spies say you should go to class more often. And not interrupt your teachers so much.)

The youthful love for literature that obviously drives these men also drives them into writing their comments "for history." I should know! I did exactly the same in my undergrad years. And while they said some things about the Ottawa literary scene that I could agree with (from the outside, local poetry is slightly more visible than prose, due to some heroic efforts by publishers), they also say some things that are incorrect (there are some prose journals in Ottawa: Front and Centre has been running for eight years, and check out the Small Press Book Fair).

But I eagerly await the second issue. And so should all of Ottawa. Every single step towards more literature is positive. The Puritan, and her creators, should be lauded and supported. Check out their website at www.puritan-magazine.com, and submit your own material to puritanmagazine@gmail.com.

 
 

		Write your comment on this article!

Literature Absent from Review     Therefore, since brevity is the soul of wit, And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes, I will be brief. --William Shakespeare, Hamlet The Puritan has been in existence for four issues now, the latest having been printed just last week, and as such this seems a good time to re-examine its merits. This review of the magazine, published concurrently with its first issue, speaks of that issue in broad, gaping generalizations, accompanied by flights of wordiness and grandiloquisms. There seems, moreover, to be a terrible inability to concentrate on the point of the journal: the stories themselves! Whether the editorial comments are lucid or pretentious seems to me a glaring irrelevancy; the Puritan is a literary journal, not a collection of opinion pieces. To condemn it for its introductory editorials--each less than two full pages, incidentally--is similar to damning a dessert for the colour of plate it's served on. Does Mr. Mesiano-Crookston comment on the social implications in Rachel Dugas' "Green Eyes," published in the first issue of the Puritan? Does he as much as mention the experimentalism in Steve Dunne's "what really grinds my gears," or Cyril Dabydeen's reflections, in "Living In Exile," on being a poet in a practical world? No. In fact, he devotes the majority of his column to the editorial comments, and does not allude to a single story within the Puritan's "spread." Writing about a 55-page journal, Mr. Mesiano-Crookston takes his time to concentrate upon eight pages of introduction and omit any mention to the forty-seven pages of content that the introductions introduced. This review disappoints me by its inability to keep to the literature; as fascinating as Mr. Willis's class life is, and as irrelevant as his editorial may be, it's not what The Puritan is about. I should hope that, in future, Mr. Mesiano-Crookston remembers that a literary journal is more than what's written about it, whether by editors or reviewers.
Stas Tikhonov		November 15th, 2007
Credit Where Credit Due     If nothing else, the heated discussion on this message board proves that The Puritan has sparked some interest in Ottawa's literary community. So much interest, it seems, that this poor reviewer is getting quite a bit of criticism. For good reason, I think. Mr. Mesiano-Crookston seems torn. He (rightly) applauds the magazine on the one hand, and then lambasts its editors on the other. Personally, I thought the statement "Literature is the language of meaning" made perfect sense. I think these Puritans are saying that in literature, amateur or otherwise, words are honed and pared to precise meaning so that the writer's point is delivered with absolute clarity. This differs from the "everyday gibberish" the reviewer describes because it weeds out clichés and mixed metaphors such as hand grenades of "pretentious" -- whatever those are. In his response, the reviewer claims to have only 400 words with which to speak with UTMOST HONESTY. Why waste those precious words urging editors to attend class more often, and more importantly why insist on honesty when "spies" are giving second-hand reports on the activities of those editors? If I were Mr. Willis I would be flattered that Mr. Mesiano-Crookston is more interested in my everyday whereabouts than the contents of my magazine. The reviewer is right about some things, however. This magazine is a giant leap toward a more balanced community of literature in Ottawa. I also agree that it should be continued; I will be eagerly awaiting the second issue. However, I feel that if Mr. Mesiano-Crookston were able to write more objectively, without so many confused personal asides, he would seem a much more capable writer, the Xpress would appear to be a much more professional publication, and the Puritan Magazine would be given the full credit it deserves.
Sam Rogan	{8 votes}	February 27th, 2007
One Happy Camper!     I don't know about amateur writing but one thing's for sure: some of these authors have real talent. I would just like to wag my finger at the reviewer for one minute for not mentioning some of the 'amateur' writers or their stories. Don't worry, I won't give any spoilers: I'm only going to mention a few of my personal favorites. Green Eyes by Rachel Dugas is a well written story of desperation and abuse that is truly touching. Reading Graves and Trains by Steve Zytveld, for anyone who's from a small town, is like coming home. An Active Creation by Sarah Gibbons is a delightful romp through a Eugenics-like future... And that's just to name a few! I will agree with the reviewer on one count: I found the editorial comments a little long and rambling. But, after all, this is the first issue, so of course the editors are going to have a lot to say. And so they should! This is a great literary magazine. Cheers to the Puritan crew and I'm one happy reader who can't wait for a new issue!
Sarah Fitzpatrick	{11 votes}	February 26th, 2007
Fine Publication     I had a good look at the first issue of Puritan on the web site and was favourably impressed. The large black text on a pristine white background made it easy to read even from a distance of over 10 feet. It was similar to the large text books geared towards the elderly and visually impaired people. So much written stuff on the internet is unfortunately in tiny font sizes with confusing backgrounds. The dozen or so articles were short at from two to about seven pages in length making it easy to finish reading each one in just a few minutes. They were all professional looking except for one with all lower case letters and hardly any punctuation making it a nightmare to try to decipher. My favourite was the one on genetic manipulation with the almost universal desire to have tall offspring. However a world class Canadian diver like Alexandre Despatie is only 5 foot 7 and his short stature has also not prevented him from starring in commercials and becoming a movie star. The last one about the World Trade Center tragedy and the many jumpers piqued my interest. I was amused at the first story about the handyman and the proper etiquette for removing one's shirt when ladies are present. I did object to the stories where the fine art of smoking was glamorized. All the stories were of such an impeccable standard that I could not tell which were written by long established writers and those who were just starting out. I will stay tuned for the second installment.
Stephen Talko	{11 votes}	February 27th, 2007
Response...     1) I admit, I could have been far more precise about my comments concerning amateur writing. Clarity is essential. I'll see if I can't revise it for the print edition next week. I don't know what else you call writing from one early in their career, people who are just getting their footing in writing. Amateur writing is exactly what it seems - writing that is unpublished in other forms, from writers who aren't professionally recognized. And aside from some experienced writers (which I pointed out), the editors set out specifically to make a mag that features mostly the writing of local, unpub. authors. I was trying to create a sense of WHY people should read amateur writing. Why they should be excited for it when some of it is really spotty. The writing isn't as skilled as in the bigger journals. But if you want to be connected to the local root of this art form, look at The Puritan. It's immediate and local. That's a positive. 2) Your accusing me of bias is offensive, baseless, and duplicitous considering you didn't mention that you were one of the authors featured in the Puritan. I've never yet reviewed a work written by someone I know personally. Pretty pathetic. 3) BTW. I consider my own writing terrible. I make serious mistakes all the time. But I feel that my job is to balance good and bad in 400 words with UTMOST HONESTY. I don't feel honest about brushing off problems and giving endlessly saccharine reviews. I'm sorry you disagree. 4) My waaay overwriting a "four-adjective" sentence to explain how lots of the writing in the Puritan is overwrought is actually irony. 5) And about "credentials"... that argument is a desperate one. Do we live in a world where you can only form opinions based on your qualifications? What gives you the right to have opinions about politics? music? art? In your world, does having written "Zombie Walk" entitle you to opinions on Shakespeare? How does anybody choose anything?
Jeremy Mesiano-Crookston	{11 votes}	February 26th, 2007
Bitterness?     Why is it that so many pictures of waifish, posing Indie bands - decked out in their hip scarves, tight jeans, or homely/vintage dresses - grace the cover of the XPress without a word concerning 'pretension', but when sincere, obviously-heartfelt writing from Ottawa locals may have a hint of confidence or (gasp!) ambition, we are advised to avoid it altogether for fear of "hand-grenade" levels of pretension? Mr. Mesiano-Crookston is right: we should congratulate and celebrate the arrival of a new literary journal in Ottawa that isn't the tame and the tired. The Puritan is a breath of fresh air in the scene. Let's own up and face it - we've ignored prose for so long. I - along with many others - can't wait for the next issue. But what the author of this article doesn't seem to recognize is that these men are doing a real service for our community. And, if you ask me, their editorials were both fitting and (at times) moving. They made me remember what it was like to be inspired and hopeful about the arts (an idyllic era before snarky, admitted "elitist pricks" get to sound off about how 'amateur' the scene is).
Christopher Pratt	{3 votes}	February 25th, 2007
And Those Who Don't Write, Snarl     While it's great that the reviewer lauds the attempts of the editors of the Puritan to publish a literary journal, it is rather odd that the review provides no specifics and merely generalizes, making derisive references about something he labels "amateur writing." What does amateur writing mean? Something that is not sponsored by the Canada Council? Something that is done for free, rather than for money? It is an odd term to be used in world of publishing where many people write without payment. Canada's literary journals, for example, don't always pay for work. Perhaps, though, the reviewer is implying that the writers published in the Puritan lack skill. This seems like an easy thing to generalize about, but it doesn't have much merit, given the source. The reviewer generalizes about amateur writing and then modifies his own (I suppose he considers it professional) writing with four adjectives in a single sentence. I think there should be a rule about reviewers. They should have to have work published in the genre for which they are reviewing. I don't see a long list of fiction credits to the reviewer's name, be they amateur or professional. Or perhaps being an amateur curmudgeon is good enough for the reviewer and for the Xpress. I hope they didn't have to pay him for this nasty bit of nonsense. I've read the reviewer's reviews before. He gives good review when he's writing about his friends. I would call that amateur.
Amanda Earl	{5 votes}	February 22nd, 2007

Write your comment! please follow these guidelines

Information requested in blue will remain confidential   [privacy policy] Please indicate your real first and last names.

First name :

Last name :

Your email :

Confirm your email :

Title of your comment (max. 150 characters)   Your comment (max. 2000 characters)  characters remaining       LIMIT PER PERSON : one comment per article per member. Thank you. Your comment will be read by our approval team and, if it is approved, will be posted on the website within 24 hours. It could also be published, along with your name, in the printed version of Xpress magazine and on any of our partner websites. In order to present the highest quality of comments, Xpress reserves the right to refuse certain submissions. Any plagiarism will entail the entire removal of the member’s profile. Xpress is not responsible for the opinions expressed by the members.