We control the content of our dreams.
As humans we look at things and think about what we've looked at. We treasure it in a kind of private art gallery.
We tend to put poems into factions. And it restricts our reading.
When I first started teaching at Berkeley in 1958, I could not announce that I was gay to anybody, though probably quite a few of my fellow teachers knew.
When I first started to write, I was aware of being queer, but I didn't write about it. Queer poems would probably not have been accepted by the editors I sent them to.
When I was an undergraduate I had very badly annotated editions of Shakespeare's sonnets, all of which left out the important fact that will has a sexual sense in Shakespeare's sonnets.
I deliberately decided to write a kind of guide to leather bars for straight people, for people not into leather, so that people could see what it was all about.
I admired what my students were writing, but I think their improvement doesn't directly result from me but from being in a class, being with each other.
Ginsberg's Collected Poems contains a wonderful poem about making it with Neal Cassady.
Deep feeling doesn't make for good poetry. A way with language would be a bit of help.
There have been two popular subjects for poetry in the last few decades: the Vietnam War and AIDS, about both of which almost all of us have felt deeply.
While I don't satisfy my curiosity about the way I work, I'm terribly curious about the way other poets work. But I would think that's true about many of us.