Dialogue (that is, the Calvin art/literary magazine) came out recently, and I had some poems in it. My favorite part is the way my poem about giving blood is opposite an image about the crucifixion. Good editorial choice, dialogue. Look at the way the context is making the meaning! How postmodern!
I was given the opportunity to make an artist statement, which after much thought and anguish, I declined. I beleive in artists making their work clear to more people, and in helping people out with understanding their work. But I also beleive in respecting the intelligence of your audience. The thing that finally clinched it was that I asked myself "what could I say that would further illuminate the poems I wrote?" and I couldn't think of anything. I already said what I wanted to say in the most elegant way I could.
And I wonder how much writing about writing really does accomplish, but then there's a lot of writing about literature that I love and that really does help me understand people's works. And literary theory. So all meta-writing isn't foolishness, but what makes it useful? I'm not sure.