The idea for this interview came while I was reading Identified Flying Objects by Michael Bartholomew-Biggs. I’ve always been fascinated by the writing/creative process, and so I came up with these questions for Michael. Different factors make various writers/poets tick, and here we get some insights about what goes into composing a poem for Michael. We also get a peek at an editor’s desk, as Michael is also the Poetry Editor of London Grip. *** SR: What is your writing practice like? Do you have a morning/evening routine, or do you write only when inspiration strikes you? MBB: Now that I am retired and have more disposable time I have become less disciplined about setting aside writing time for new poems. When I was still working I often used to have a quick review of works-in-progress in the morning before going to the office; but now I write mostly in response to inspiration (which arrives more rarely these days!). An approaching deadline for a workshop or magazine window closing may temporarily provoke me to more systematic work patterns. I do however keep up a pretty regular morning shift in the London Grip editorial office. SR: What suggestions would you have for beginners who’ve started writing poems? MBB: Read lots of other people’s poems to be reminded that there are many different approaches to style and subject besides those you can possibly imagine for yourself. Go to poetry readings if there are any in your locality and get acquainted with other poets. Signing up for courses is a good idea but can be expensive and joining an informal workshop group where a few poets read and comment on each other’s work can be really helpful. Also get into a routine of submitting work to magazines and don’t be put off by rejections (or even the fear of possible rejection!). Wide reading will give you a better insight into the current quality of your own work and hence which magazines you are more likely to get into. SR: How have your studies, or knowledge of mathematics, physics and astronomy contributed to the contents of your poems? MBB: I think that I am both helped and hindered by my mathematician’s instinct for expressing myself both precisely and economically. A taste for economy means that I tend not to overburden my poems with too many adjectives or woolly repetitions. But a poem can lose something if it is too precise and does not give room for the reader to find other meanings or be reminded of other associations. It’s also worth saying that my (fairly limited) knowledge of physics and astronomy puts me in touch with the strangeness of the universe both at large and small scale which can provide good jumping off points for poems taking unexpected views about everyday life. SR: When you’re composing poems, how aware or conscious are you that these subjects (maths, or physics) can end up, or become configured in your poems? MBB: For a time I did very consciously write poems which “used both halves of my brain” and sought to explain mathematical concepts in everyday language. I even included some of these poems in mathematical textbooks as well as published them as a chapbook. But I think I came to the end of that particular phase quite a long time ago. Some might say however that my mathematical mind still asserts itself too much because I do tend to like order and symmetry and so my poems often have regular metrical structures organised in stanzas and I seldom venture into free verse. SR: How did the inspiration for writing Identified Flying Objects come about? How long did it take to finish this book? MBB: I can remember very clearly that the first poem came to me when I was convalescing after breaking a leg in a road accident. I was reading the Bible one day – something I commonly do since I am a practising Christian – and I noticed that a verse in the Book of Ezekiel rather aptly described a present-day political situation, even though Ezekiel himself was writing some 2500 years ago. I captured that thought in a short poem which transposed Ezekiel into the modern city of London. It then occurred to me that I might be able to compose a short sequence of similar poems based on other Ezekiel quotations. That “short sequence” has been slowly growing into a full collection over the last twelve years or so! It hasn’t been a continuous project by any means. In fact, it has been set aside and picked up again several times; and I have completed and published two other full collections while Identified Flying Objects has been simmering (or going cold) on the back burner. The book has evolved quite a bit over its long period of development and the initial politically flavoured poems are now complemented by others covering a wider range of human experiences – but in each case there is a relevant Ezekiel quotation to accompany it. SR: Has the process of editing poems (for London Grip) helped to hone your own work? For example when you read certain poems, does not making certain mistakes become clearer in your own poems? MBB: As I remarked in my advice to new writers, reading other people’s work constantly reminds me that there are things to write about and ways of writing about them that go far beyond my own unaided imagination. Of course, my personal preferences mean that some poems make a stronger, or more immediate impact than others. As an editor, I have to be careful about attributing “mistakes” to a poet whose poem I don’t care for on first reading. The mistake could be mine in not paying enough attention to subtle clues in the composition; hence I might consider, say, a repetition of words as being careless when it fact it has been consciously and artfully included. So, I suppose there is a learning experience whenever I eventually “get” a poem that initially did not impress me. In the end of course, some poems are objectively “better” than others in terms of craft, depth of insight, consistency of voice, etc. and I can only hope that on the whole, my editorial judgment identifies “better” ones more often than not. SR: What is the process of choosing a few poems out of so many submissions like? MBB: It’s a process that can feel like quite a struggle as the end of a submission window approaches. Sometimes there can be too many poems vying for a space; but equally I can find myself wondering whether there will be enough to fill the coming issue. As an online magazine, London Grip need not be limited by a page count; but I do try to set an upper limit on how many poems I will accept since this does impose some editorial discipline. At London Grip we are always sensitive to the themes that emerge spontaneously in the submissions for each issue. Although we do not issue any kind of prompts regarding subject matter it is both pleasing and surprising when several contributors offer poems giving different perspectives on the same theme – for instance childhood, or loneliness. As such topics become apparent, it informs our editorial choices both in the selection and the ordering of poems. (Alongside this we do operate a sort of “second chance” procedure. Good poems that simply do not fit with the prevailing tone and themes for one issue can be held over for the subsequent one.) * As a closing note I’d like to thank Sultana Raza and say that her questions have proved most interesting and instructive in reminding me that some of my practices and attitudes to poetry may need refreshing! *** Michael Bartholomew-Biggs lives in London and is poetry editor of the online magazine London Grip (https://londongrip.co.uk/) (https://londongrip.co.uk/category/poetry/new-poetry/). He is a retired mathematician who only began writing poetry in his mid-life years. Since then he has published four chapbooks and six full collections the most recent of which is Identified Flying Objects (Shoestring, 2024). More details can be found on his website http://mikeb-b.blogspot.com/ About Sultana Raza: Originally from India, I've published numerous fiction/poems/CNF in many journals, including in Columbia Journal, The New Verse News, and Litro. I enjoy reading, traveling, walking, and watching films/TV series.