Small Press Interview: River River Books
There's another new poetry press in town.
I’m very happy to share this conversation with Han VanderHart and Amorak Huey, editors of the new small press, River River Books. They were kind enough to talk with me about how they got started, what they hope to see in their upcoming reading period, and how they plan to contribute to the poetry community. We at Belle Point Press are thrilled to see what they’ll do.
Casie: Many of us who follow you on Twitter have already enjoyed watching the origin story of your press unfold. Would you like to give readers a recap of how you decided to start River River Books?
Han: So two poets walk into a bar…really! Amorak and I had just returned from a wonderful offsite AWP reading, and it felt too early to turn in, so we decided to get a beer at the hotel bar. I knew Amorak and I got along—he’d been a guest of Of Poetry Podcast to celebrate the publication of Dad Jokes From Late in the Patriarchy—but that night, talking together, we really did find ourselves on the same page in terms of our aspirations for poetry publishing. Amorak gave me strong “work together” vibes! This was Thursday night. Then, on Saturday, I went to a National Poetry Series panel organized by Amanda Moore, which was brilliant and full of transparency about publishing with different presses (trade versus indie, etc), and afterwards I found myself excited to talk to Amorak more about our own ideas. We ended up walking to dinner Saturday evening, and over sushi in a tent on a street in Philadelphia, we had another long conversation about poetry publishing and our own ideas for how authors could be supported. At some point, I joked we needed to start a press together. And the idea had a real hook in it, despite Amorak’s (wholly reasonable) protestations. At least this is how *I* remember it!
Amorak: Yeah, this pretty much matches my recollection. I recently learned (from Traci Brimhall) the phrase “enthusiasm bully,” which maybe applies here. Han’s excitement about this idea was hard to resist.
Casie: That’s pretty amazing. It’s been interesting to see the creative opportunities that writers have continued to develop in the midst of all the radical changes we’ve weathered over the past few years. Did you encounter anything in particular at AWP in person this year that sparked this inspiration? A panel or another press, for instance?
Amorak: For me, there was this kind of giddiness in being at AWP for the first time since 2019. In being around all those writers and teachers. The conference offered a reminder of the joyous energy of community, of being in the same space with people who value what I value. And I think I was looking for a place to put that electricity. So, that combined with the conversations Han and I had about our own books—we both have collections that came out during the pandemic, which of course means a complicated blend of hopes fulfilled and unfulfilled. So Han and I were talking a million miles an hour about all these things, and we see eye to eye on so much about the community and what’s important for editors and poets, and both of us were looking for what to do next, where to focus our creative energies.
Casie: Speaking of focus, I love your vision for publishing two poetry collections per year; it reflects an awareness of how many resources really go into the publishing process to do it sustainably. I especially love how you phrase it on your website: “By limiting our press catalog to two annual titles, we commit to supporting our authors and their books with focused attention and joy.” What made you land on that number? What can authors who work with you expect this “focused attention” to look like?
Han: We chose the model of two books because we loved the neatness of two editors/two books a year and because we want to provide material support for our authors—and we recognize that attention is the most limited and valuable asset we have, as people. For example: we want each title and author to have an individualized publishing and publicity plan, and we don’t want our authors to have to rely on their own resources for reviews—or blurbs, or jacket copy. The two title model means that, as a press, we are not as interested in growth as we are in consistent quality of editing and selling books. We’ve both seen books launched (or not!) into the world with little to no care—no design consultations for the cover or interior, no readings or reviews or real support in terms of publicity. We want a different experience for River River Books authors.
Casie: That’s all great to hear, and I’m sure many poets will welcome that kind of experience. You’re both established writers and editors yourselves. What do you think your new press can add to the literary community? In other words, what do you think the publishing industry is lacking or needs more of?
Amorak: I think it would be presumptuous of us to claim we’re going to add something that doesn’t already exist. There are so many presses out there, so many caring and talented editors. You do sometimes see new lit mags come onto the scene with claims that they’re going to do something that no one else is doing, make room for unheard voices, create a new kind of space. Yes, of course, but that’s pretty much the same thing all journals are trying to do. I guess I just hope we can be one more space where poetry can exist, one more space that connects poets and poems to an audience. I don’t know that I’d say we’re doing anything brand new or unthought of. I just hope we do it well, with passion and compassion and care.
Casie: Sure, I know what you mean. I guess a better way to frame it is that it’s clear you have a solid vision for how presses and authors can support each other in more mutually beneficial ways than some poets may have experienced elsewhere, as Han points out.
Han: I’ll just add a press IS its editors. Everything about a small or micro press is shaped by the person (or two) running it. This understanding was paramount to me when I chose to send What Pecan Light to Bull City Press. I did not want to be published at any cost, and turned down offers from presses whose publishing models did not sit right with me. Rather, I wanted to publish with someone I could trust, and I knew Ross White as an active and supportive member of the literary community, both here in North Carolina as well as online. What we DEFINITELY need more of in the literary community are ethical, transparent presses who are responsive to the larger community and responsible for their authors and books.
Casie: Agreed! I feel the same way. So your first reading period opens in June. Tell us more about that: submissions, reading fees, etc.
Han: We are so excited to start reading manuscripts! We are currently finishing our contract, and will be posting it to our website for potential authors to read. I’ll say it again: transparency is a high priority at River River Books! Submission reading fee is pay-what-you-can—so you can opt to submit without paying, or you can pay $10-20 depending on your budget. We will have a two-month reading window (June and July) so hopefully that will give folks enough time to finish polishing their manuscripts.
Casie: I really like how you include specifics on your website about what you’d like to see. The Arkansan in me was especially happy to see C.D. Wright featured. Han, as a regional press editor, I’m excited to see your enthusiasm about “local and specific” writing. That said, I assume you’re not looking for an exclusively Southern perspective? Naturally, I’m a little biased here.
Han: While I am definitely hoping to read manuscripts by Southern authors, I am 100% here for any language particular to any specific person—language only they can use to describe and engage with the world around them. Whether that’s linguistic or geographic or cultural locality, I want to see that presence in the work. C.D. Wright has those beautiful lines “Peaches and fireworks and red ants. / Now do you know where you are”—and YES to that kind of specific place(ment).
Amorak: I grew up in a small town outside Birmingham, Alabama, so I’m partial to Southern poems myself. But I live in Michigan now, the state where I was born, so I’ve also got a thing for Midwestern poems. Mostly it’s what Han says: poems that feel particular to a time, a place, a poet.
Casie: Well said! Amorak, you expressed an eclectic approach to form in your notes. Would you be happy to see manuscripts that employ a variety of forms throughout or would you prefer something more stylistically cohesive, regardless of form? Does that make sense?
Amorak: I mostly want the book to make sense as a book. Like, these poems all belong between the same covers. There are lots of ways for a collection to do that, and formally it could be either unified or messy; the poems can all look the same, or every page can be a surprise. I just read Lisa Summe’s excellent Say It Hurts, which has poems in couplets, in tercets, in quatrains, single-stanza poems, prose poems, prose poems with slashes instead of other punctuation—among other structures. But then there’s Diane Seuss’s frank: sonnets, which I’m way late to the party on but finally reading, and it’s of course brilliant; I recently finished t’ai freedom ford’s & More Black, also sonnets. I guess, in short: there’s no single right answer here. I will admit one minor personal pet peeve: when a collection is 95 percent free verse but there’s, like, one sonnet, one villanelle, one sestina, and as a reader, I’m like, oh, I see you took a forms class. Even then, if the poems are great, whatever, go for it, I’m along for the ride.
Casie: Is there anything else you’d like writers to know about your press?
We are here for other writers. We see all the work y’all are doing so many years prior to book publication, and we applaud it!
We are so excited to see what’s next for you! Poets, get your manuscripts ready. Submissions open June 1; you can learn more here.
