I’m trying to focus on the most recent trends in Singaporean poetry, i.e. from, let’s say, 1997 to the present. As I see it (and correct me if I’m wrong) Singaporean poetry has entered some kind of critical phase, including among other things a deeper poetic insight than seen in much of the earlier poetry. But since I have only been in Singapore for a week I would much appreciate if you could give me your view on the latest developments in Singaporean poetry. For instance, what do you regard as the typical theme(s) for Singapore poetry of today? Are there any obvious differences from other poetries as you see it? Do you think that poetry in Singapore cannot be ideological even if the poem itself is not explicitly political?

I agree with you in marking 1997 as a critical milestone, for several reasons. But the events of 1997 can also be traced back to a gradual development of events, which arguably came to a watershed at the 1995 Singapore Literature Prize competition, which attracted perhaps the highest standard of entrants in the history of the competition (the SLP was discontinued after 1999). Many of the new generation of writers who have since been published had submitted their work for the 1995 competition -- this resulted in an airing of new talent and subsequent confidence to pursue publication.

1997 is a milestone year because it marked the rise of the independent small presses -- not least Ethos Books itself (my publisher -- in fact, my first book, Testing the Silence was one of their first titles). It marked the first time that an independent small player in the publishing field had chosen to take on the difficult niche of poetry in a serious way, matching good writing to quality book design and more sophisticated marketing and audience development approaches (eg readings, book fairs, book tours etc). This effort was soon matched by other small presses such as Landmark Books (who published Felix Cheong’s Temptations and Other Poems and Alfian Saat’s first volume One Fierce Hour in 1998) as well as the currently very active small press, FirstFruits.

What resulted from this flowering of small literary publishers was a sudden explosion of channels for new work to see print and enjoy a renewed readership, at a time where the internet was also making its presence felt, and a whole range of literary activities (monthly readings for instance) were being started. The result is that poetry in Singapore, almost overnight, came to enjoy a relative renaissance in public attention. More young poets have come forward with their work, expecting and enjoying publication and/or public readership since 1997 than at any other time in our recent history.

This has had an impact on the type of writing which has emerged (at least for the English language writing scene -- bearing in mind that there are similar exciting but separate developments in the other language scenes).

As I mention in NO OTHER CITY, I detect (circa 2000) a strong leaning towards urbane themes and concerns, issues of identity vis a vis modernity or globalisation (rather than say across our regional cultures). But I would hesitate to generalise too much about what is essentially still a very diverse field. There are still those who write in the vein of an earlier trope -- ie either trying to draw upon nationalistic themes (common during the early years of independence) or withdrawing into the more introspective, lyrical or even spiritual mode common to writers like Lee Tzu Pheng. But even these two approaches have had their successors : Alfian Saat of course has moved beyond the nationalistic verse, drawing upon his ethnicity and dramatic experience to project a powerfully rhetorical, polemic voice which is perhaps our most overtly successful modern political verse. Other poets like the self-styled confessional poet Cyril Wong have taken lyrical introspection to a sharper edge, interrogating issues of family, sexuality/sexual orientation and interpersonal boundaries. Still others either push the boundaries of traditional, received English-tradition forms (eg Toh Hsien Min and the sonnet or Eddie Tay and the Tang Dynasty lyric) or range restlessly across forms (such as perhaps my work) and even media (such as in Felix Cheong’s work).

I suppose one generalisation of our recent writing is that it touches on our experience of modernity as the experience of borders -- crossed or reinforced. An inevitable consequence, perhaps of a tightly regulated, physically small and restless globalised city-state. Our writers are still trying to feel their way across themes and boundaries, to develop their own appropriate idioms. It is common these days to read of conventions overturned, sexual or personal boundaries challenged or crossed, sometimes violently. Fewer affirmations of the status quo exist than perhaps before. And socio-political issues are certainly being addressed, often quite explicitly, in recent verse. The reduction of dependence on traditional establishment channels of publication has perhaps allowed this, as much as the changing tastes of readers.

I wonder also if that is not a consequence of the other unusual feature of our poetry, which is that most of our working poets are NOT full-time writers nor academics, as was the case in previous generations or in fact is the case in many other literary communities. We have day-jobs, as lawyers, doctors, engineers, managers, journalists and all manner of professions, and we bring our day-to-day experience to bear in a way which perhaps shades differently from the varsity view, for better or worse. The present generation of writers read well, broadly, and are far less beholden to particular schools of writing -- there is no one obvious movement, political or cultural, to which they claim common allegiance. In that sense, I think even our politically engaged writing cannot be said to be ideological -- in that sense -- not even in the work of Alfian Saat, our most explicitly polemic writer of the age.