Maeve Clarke<\/a> is now the key part of that sentence.<\/p>\nFor last night she produced the Birmingham heat of a poetry contest called Superstars of Slam and it was held at Waterstones. I went to support her and to just have a good time listening to the poets. <\/p>\n
It turns out, though, that poetry contests will apparently often want what they call a sacrificial poet. This is a new term to me but then the term \u2018poem\u2019 isn\u2019t exactly familiar yet, and Maeve had to explain. Judges will listen first to a poem that is not in the competition and to a poet who is not competing. It\u2019s like warming them up. It\u2019s like being the dull first questions in a lie-detector test, you know, where they are setting a baseline.<\/p>\n
The judges assess this sacrificial poet and that\u2019s the baseline for the night. Apparently it\u2019s better than them judging the first real poet cold.<\/p>\n
The only requirement to be a sacrificial poet, then, is to be a poet with a poem. One poem. Maeve knew I had one poem. She knew I\u2019d written one at that summer school.<\/p>\n
And she also knew that because I wrote it on my iPad, it would automatically be on the iPhone I was texting on when she called me over before the start.<\/p>\n
I feel like I\u2019m writing a Dear Diary entry here and I\u2019m grateful that you\u2019re putting up with me wibbling on, thank you. But I\u2019d like to ask you to do one more thing: make sure I keep some perspective here.<\/p>\n
I was not in competition last night. Having one poem does not make me a poet. And most of all, poetry evenings are supportive and welcoming and kind. <\/p>\n
But this was a big thing for me, made possible both by Maeve and specifically by how she sprung it on me. I wish I\u2019d shaved, but otherwise it was perfect: I had no time to get nervous.<\/p>\n
Well, there was one moment. The three judges \u2013 Maeve Clarke, Giovanni Spoz Esposito and Afshan D’souza-Lodhi \u2013 had large laminated sheets with their scores on out of 10. Like Strictly Come Dancing paddles, but with less glitter. And as I looked over at them for approval, I saw all three sheets had the number 1.<\/p>\n
That\u2019s a bit harsh, I thought: scoring 1, 1 and 1. Fair, but harsh.<\/p>\n
Then they turned them over. For content, I got a 6, a 7 and an 8. For performance I think I got a 7, an 8 and another 7. I was a bit too dazed to take it in but I believe so.<\/p>\n
I think it goes without saying that these were the worst scores of the evening but you didn\u2019t have to bring that up. <\/p>\n
Mind you, I don\u2019t have to bring up this last point but I see no possible way for you to stop me. That dastardly Maeve who needed a poet and like the producer she is knew where to get one, also filmed my performance. It\u2019s an entire 35 seconds long, which means I\u2019ve now gabbled at you about something forty times longer than the something actually took. <\/p>\n
I have no problem with that. You\u2019d best avoid me for a while or I\u2019ll tell you about it all over again.<\/p>\n
Anyway. Here\u2019s Palimpsest \u2013 about the type of ancient document where words are written over over over each other in layers because the paper was so scarce \u2013 as performed by me. Poet William Gallagher.<\/p>\n