Now that submissions for Disappear Here have closed, we have begun looking through the Disappear Here application forms, this has sparked some curious thoughts on literary and artist bios…

Will Self once said that he enjoyed biography more than, perhaps, any other form of reading material, it being, in his warped and brilliant mind, the equivalent of literary pornography. In particular, Self cited Richard Ellman’s brilliant biography of Oscar Wilde (like Byron before him, Wilde’s life is way more interesting than the majority of his writings). Perhaps this leaves the modern industry-standardof the third-person biography of around 50 words, almost mandatory for most magazine submissions, as perhaps the most accurate form of literary masturbation – you can do it alone, a large portion of ego is attached, and afterwards it leaves one sated, but as Wilde said regarding cigarettes, only satisfied until the next one…

So why has this cropped-up? The demand and need for biographies and examples of previous work in the arts sector are a substantial part of what gets anyone anywhere. Who you’ve worked with, where, what awards/residencies/prizes/publication credits you have are, rightly so, what makes one artist stand out from the others, highlighting where you’ve come from and where you’re going to…

Indeed, they are a necessary evil, but also a form of entrapment. For Disappear Here, we invited applications from everyone, ideally artists who have already done a few things and got some projects under their belt – just so they have something to show and tell – but we also encouraged newer, most likely younger, less established artists to throw their hat into the ring – how do you get ANYWHERE – unless someone takes a chance on you.

What’s difficult for us as readers and judges, is to attempt a veil of ignorance, as with the best magazines/galleries/collaborators (use your own definition/illusion) objective quality (what the “best” people think) can easily be a subjective masquerade – and vice-versa. But it’s very hard to see past the shinier bios, as opposed to the skinniest, vaguest ones. If someone offered you your dream poets/film-makers to work alongside (we’re not naming names…) wouldn’t you jump at the chance?!

There is temptation. As with the grandest literary mags; having a cover star sells copies, it keeps things afloat and provides, ideally an instant figurehead – how can one turn that down? For once this is genuinely valuable “exposure” (not the thing where lots of people try and blag work from artists without having to pay them because “it’s not real work”) that gets a publication or project noticed.

But that won’t work with Disappear Here. We have taken a step back, we are asked for people who are just getting started in the arts ot submit ideas, and we remain committed to that. The solution is clear, sometimes you have to look past the bio, most of them are written in the past-tense, listing things that have already happened, been and gone – it’s an old adage that the great artists did some of their best work in late age, they were still going, trying, experimenting, moving forwards and evolving…

In light of this realisation, the way forward is to judge people on their ideas – the things they want to make happen, be this poems or films or the collaborative alchemy that takes place between the two. Also, there is a notion of share engagement; a mixture of artists of all levels, ages and backgrounds can learn from one another, in all directions, not just a top-down lesson from the poet with seven books and umpteen awards – instead of ticking-off “quality” artists, we will be working towards artists who have a strong desire to make quality art – great, innovative poetry-films/film-poems – see you after the judging!