A Primer for the Small Weird Loves

Siken’s poems in Crush eschew explicit messages and resist easy interpretation. Instead, they accumulate meaning through a series of evocative phrases and images, strategically juxtaposed and reiterated, like puzzle pieces that each reader assembles uniquely. Nevertheless, some prevailing themes and emotions are likely to resonate in any reading. In an interview, Siken tells the story of a high school student who was writing a paper on one of his poems and emailed him, asking him to share significant autobiographical events that would help her understand his poetry. Siken responded that if she needed such information to make sense of the poem, then “the poem was a failure.” She responded that he was rude and that she would get a B on her paper. Siken sums up his view thus: “You get the page. I get the rest” (Russell, Legacy. “Fight Club: Richard Siken.” 2011. Bomb Magazine).

While some narratives in Crush almost inevitably originate in the poet’s own experiences, it is unnecessary, even misguided, to assume such biographical knowledge better illuminates his work. Literary critics have called this the biographical fallacy: the idea that a literary work directly reflects the author’s experience and should be interpreted in that light. This approach is limiting because it ignores two key facts: Firstly, due to the complexity of language, a work’s meaning always exceeds the author’s intention; secondly, each reader brings to the text their own thoughts and emotions—and when the reader actively engages with the words on the page, this co-constitutes their meaning.