The superb outsider / underground / no audience music magazine TQ has just published its 50th edition. It's brilliant & I am honoured to be included. Here's an interview I've done with them. After you've read it, head to http://tqzine.blogspot.com/ to find out more -:
What was the
motivation for the magazine? And why the
name glove?
In
short, my enduring adoration of marginal and outsider art, combined with a
desire to provide an outlet for writerly voices that wouldn’t ordinarily be
heard, provided the impetus. However, the devil remains in the detail and I’d
best tell you a little bit about myself, to put everything in context and
explain how I arrived at this point, as I turn 57.
Without
question, my cultural life changed on December 24th 1976 when I
heard John Peel play two particular songs on his Christmas Eve programme;
Richard Hell’s (I Belong to the) Blank
Generation and Roy Harper’s When an
Old Cricketer Leaves the Crease. I do realise Peel also gave Anarchy in the UK its first spin on
radio during the same programme, but I’ve never been a fan of glam rock, so
we’ll move on. Instead, that night I fell in love with music that seeks not
commercial success, but artistic integrity and I remain happily besotted, by
all genres of slightly off-kilter eccentricity, though not by whimsy or
punishing extremes. Yes, I like commercial music, such as British Sea Power or
Teenage Fanclub, but even there I detect a dedication to art and an uncompromising
seam of creativity. As I get older, I find that increasingly I like my gigs to
be intimate, my pubs to be cosy and my sporting adventures (both cricket and
football) to be at a grassroots level and part of a defined community.
One
irony is that while there are plenty of outlets for cheerful obscurity in terms
of bands, pints and team games, it is the authored, tangible printed word, as
opposed to the plethora of personally created blogs and peer compiled on-line
journals, that struggles to find an outlet in this country. For the creative
amateur and artistic outsider, hammering away at keyboards in a literary
vacuum, far from the rarefied climes of agents, editors and publishing houses,
including even the likes of Rough Trade
Books, where is the printed showcase for their endeavours? We, as a species,
need the continual replenishment of the pool of written endeavour. Don’t get me
wrong, as someone who lectured in English Language, Literature and Creative
Writing to adult learners for 30 years, I have an intimate knowledge of the
canonical greats of English Literature. Most of them I love, but they are
respected mainly for their iconic status than any sense of enduring relevance.
Even recent (post WW2 in academic terms) fiction is starting to ossify. As
someone who studied the American Novel at postgrad level, I recognise that
Kerouac, Burroughs, Miller, Vonnegut, Bukowski and a thousand other brilliant,
semi-outsider writers aren’t saying much new these days as their work starts to
be categorised as being of a particular time and cultural subset. Obviously, it
is a million to one chance that I’ll have a contributor whose work will be
discussed amid such storied circles one day, but that isn’t really the point of
glove; I’m more concerned with samizdat and zeitgeist. That said, P. J. Smith from Liverpool first had
something published by me and he has just had his first collection of stories
published, by Rough Trade, ironically enough.
Having
spent three decades encouraging young and not so young learners to express their
thoughts in the best word order possible, I became aware that those of my
creative writing students who were developing an individual voice had few
options when it came to getting their stuff in print. Personally, I’ve written for an enormous range
of publications about music, football, politics and cricket since the late 70s,
so I was aware of the scarcity of literary zines, as opposed to scholarly
poetry magazines (which absolutely have the right to exist and cater for a
specific audience). Basically all we have these days is: the brilliant Razur Cuts from Falkirk, in London, the
novelist John King edits Verbal and
Sean Preston from Ninjatune compiles Open
Pen, while Jim Gibson in Nottingham, runs Low Life Press and a round of applause must go to the Farnborough
Fante, Joe England, who created the ground breaking Push. His encouragement and support for my writing ended a
decade-long hiatus from about 2002 when I didn’t write anything literary at
all. In Newcastle, it’s a long time since Basil Bunting, Allen Ginsberg and
Gordon Burn performed at Morden Tower (the first place I ever saw Whitehouse
incidentally) and there was nothing up here, not that I had any interest in
narrowing creative parameters by being a regional magazine. I just wanted to
provide a vehicle for outsider writers, both thematically and culturally, to
get their stuff read.
Hence,
after I stopped doing a Newcastle United fanzine The Popular Side in 2017, I wanted to stretch myself
administratively and creatively and so I introduced glove to the world. I did the whole thing entirely by myself, as I
had an uncompromising vision of an A5 photocopied magazine, of about 40 or so
pages, with no adverts or editorial. I found a printer who did a run of 150 for
a quid a copy. Postage in the UK is about another quid, so with envelopes on
top, selling it for £2 a copy including P&P means I lose 15p a pop, not to
mention costing me about £60 for contributor copies, but so what? The enjoyment
I get from it makes up for being a few quid in the hole twice a year. The
contributors are listed on the inside cover, with only brief social media contact
details instead of thumbnail biogs, partly to save on space, but mainly because
I wanted the words to speak for themselves. Being candid, I also worked solo on
glove as I’m a frankly cantankerous
old sod who can start an argument in an empty room.
The
name glove came from an art project I
undertook from 2015 onwards, whereby I collected every lost or stray glove I
saw on the street, or on a bus, or tied to park railings. I never went out
without a spare carrier bag to transport them home, where they’d go through the
wash, be scented by Comfort or Lenor and then, after a gentle spell in
the tumble drier, they’d stop being hand warmers and become vital parts of an
organic piece of art. I placed all the coloured gloves in one transparent
Perspex cube, calling that piece glove
box, and all the black ones in another Perspex cube, calling the other
piece black box. They were exhibited
at Sotheby’s London in Summer 2019, though both remain unsold. The front and
back covers of every issue has been one of my discoveries in the wild, as it
were. Incidentally, I no longer collect gloves.
How has the zine evolved and do you have plans for the future?
From the very outset, I was adamant that I wouldn’t have a
website. I am not a designer. I am a writer. If I tried to build a specific
on-line presence, it would look shit, because that isn’t my skill set. It’s the
same with TQ I would imagine; our
readerships are happy to consume a physical document, but would baulk at the
idea of scrolling through a PDF on a smart phone, as it would be headache
inducing. In that sense, the magazine has remained true to its roots. Being judgementally subjective, I feel issue
7# from January 2021 was the best one yet, because of the strength of
contributions. Sadly #8 is, for me, the worst. This is partly because of issues
with the layout, as the printer transposed the two halves of the booklet; what
should have been pages 3-18 are now 19-36, and vice versa, which has spoiled it
for me. I still paid the printer as he needs to eat and apologised to all my
contributors whose work has been mangled but, in all conscience, I couldn’t
charge anyone for it. If anyone reading this wants a copy, send me an email or
a message to @GloveLitZine and remember to include a postal address.
As regards plans for the future, it is all in the hands of
the current and future contributors. If they send stuff in that I like, or even
dislike if I sense it is good quality writing, there will be further issues.
All contributions are welcome; simply send your stuff by email (Word document attachment preferably) to iancusack@blueyonder.co.uk
On a personal level, I would love to do a 3-track CD single
of certain bits of my writing, with an unmusical backing. I’ve got some bass
riffs I’d like to record as unchanging, repetitive loops, over which I’d intone
my words. Some really clattering Mick Harvey Birthday Party style drumming,
Laura Logic atonal wailing sax and discordant, feedback and fuzz guitars would
be nice as well. All recorded independently of course. Anybody interested in
collaborating? Get in touch. I’d also like to do live spoken word stuff, but
I’ve never been asked. Also, I suppose I should write a novel at some point.
You have a
strong roster of contributors. How have you built that up?
Rewind
10 years. Joe England had just produced the debut issue of PUSH. I was alerted to its
existence by my mate from University, Raymond Gorman, who was the guitarist in
That Petrol Emotion incidentally, as he had a couple of poems included. I
bought a copy and came across a whole galaxy of underground literary stars I’d
never even heard of. I submitted a few poems, more in hope than expectation,
then began to tentatively rediscover a love and a compulsion for writing short
fiction, inspired by what and who I was reading.
Without
doubt, the greatest contemporary, underground talent is Michael Keenaghan, a
north London Irish James Ellroy. Read anything and everything you can by him.
He is a genius. Other fantastic talents came to my attention; TJ Corless, Fee
Johnstone, Ford Dagenham, Holly Watson, Dickson Telfer and about a hundred
others. We used and still use social media, mainly Twitter in my case, to publicise each other’s work and to support
other talented writers or new publications. As time has gone on, this has
started to include many writers from abroad, so it’s a global grouping of not for
profit prose specialists and poets. Through Twitter
and email, we correspond and swap ideas. From this growing, nebulous community,
new voices emerge and older ones are regenerated. By no means is it a closed
shop, as nothing makes my heart sing more than a quality contribution from
someone whose name is new to me. Even better, some of them have just started to
write and are searching for their own style of expression.
I
suppose the whole process is one of serendipity; I don’t know who is going to
send stuff in. I’ve often tried to put it out there that I’d like to a female
only edition, or a Scottish one, but it doesn’t happen like that. Contributions
are the great unknown. I’ve directly asked people to submit, but with limited
success; writers need to be loved, but many recoil from pressure. Therefore,
the words I’m sent always guide me, not the author or even the form. If
something has that vital spark of creative genius, I need to publish it. Sadly,
I’ve not had many lengthy stories (we’re talking 5k words plus) submitted, but
I wouldn’t rule them out, even if the length is prohibitive to other magazines.
I try to lay glove out so it consists
of a prose piece is followed by poetry and so on. I do occasionally include
several pieces of flash fiction or poems by the same writer, but that approach
is not applicable for those who submit substantial pieces. Of course, these
guidelines are not unbreakable.
One
way in which I’ve been very lucky is that I’ve not had to reject pieces from
people who actually get what glove is
about. Stuff that goes in the deleted items folder tends to be from the
equivalent of poetic Twitter bots,
who send in screeds of banal tripe about God or their grandkids, all in rhyming
couplets, to about 30 publications at the same time. All I say in reply is, sorry but this doesn’t fit with our ethos. They
don’t tend to get arsey or even reply, because they won’t have read glove or probably any of our writers
elsewhere. I have to admit that people who submit and haven’t seen a previous copy
do get on my nerves. It just seems arrogant to assume your work will fit in,
without bothering to check what has gone before. Same goes for those I publish
who accept a contributor copy but throw up their hands in horror if you ask
them to buy an extra copy to help support the magazine.
Without going
into detail, some of the subject matter covered in glove could be seen as fairly controversial and some readers (not
me) could be offended. As editor, is there a line you will not cross?
Brilliant
question, and one I could throw straight back to you. Who do you find more
offensive: Sutcliffe Jugend or Coldplay? Undoubtedly the latter for me.
Similarly, Barbara Cartland’s world view disgusts me in a way that Cormac
McCarthy doesn’t; and if you’ve read his A
Child of God, you’ll know he writes about taboo subjects in quite an
unadorned, visceral style.
Needless
to say, I won’t countenance anything racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic or
otherwise hateful. Taking that stance as a given, then if you don’t count
rejecting pieces I find banal as censorship, then I have never knocked anything
back on the basis I found it too extreme. In fact, I’ve only really worried
about two stories I’ve published; in issue #5 Derek Steel contributed a piece
about a domestic murder / suicide that troubled me, until I talked to him about
it and he explained the point of the piece. This is the crux of the censorship
debate in my eyes. As his motivation was entirely honourable and artistically
impeccable, I had no reason to think that the writing could be interpreted as
in any way immoral, whatever than means, or gratuitous. In the current edition,
Michael Keenaghan’s Ring describes
the activities of a fictional paedophile gang of rich and powerful London
politicians, ending with the central character’s execution. The worry I have is
that some people, mendaciously seeking a reason to affect outrage, are too
stupid to read to the end of Michael’s piece and will abandon the story halfway
through, completely missing the moral purpose revealed in the denouement.
This
leads me to say that I would happily publish pieces that include graphic
violence, explicit sex and other subjects some people may be offended by,
though with a proviso. I would need to be 100% certain that the motivation of
the writer in straying into such territory was justified at an artistic level
and was not for the purposes of self-gratification, as I’m not a pornographer
and have no interest in what arouses other people, or worst of all, gratuitous
and exploitative. Playing to the gallery for likes or financial reward by
engaging with the lowest common denominators in terms of style, plot or
characterisation, is truly a sin in my eyes. Similarly, anyone who sets out to
write a smash hit or a best seller is truly an enemy of art and creativity. I’d
like to think I’m a defender of them both.