On Tuesday, I noted my
confusion as to whether Thom Don ovan’s “towards 24 Stills” in Kiosk no. 1 should be read as a complete
work or as an excerpt. In a footnote, I suggested that such confusion wasn’t
restricted to just Don ovan’s work or to my own experience as a reader.
Mulling it over further in the days since, I have been reminded of A Technographic Typography, a poem
reportedly of more than 800 pages that was being produced by Thomas Meyer back
in the 1960s when he was still a student at Bard.* Anyone who has read the
crisp, clean, short work of Tom’s mature poetry in books such as At Dusk Iridescent (Jargon, 1999) will
find it hard to believe that there was once was a sprawling, potentially
endless text, even if, line by line, it showed that same attentive care for
craft that has become Meyer’s signature. In somewhat parallel fashion, the teenager
who was the late Frank Stanford completed the 15,283 line The Battlefield Where the Moon Says I Love You – nearly five times
the length, say, of Beowulf – went
off to college & transformed into a writer of much tamer short poems by the
time he put a gun to his head at the age of 29. At some point during each of
their careers, both Meyers & Stanford appear to have shifted their idea of
the scope of a poem.
I on the other hand seem to have
gone in the opposite direction. Before I wrote the booklength prose poem Ketjak, let alone Tjanting or the on-going Alphabet
(800 pages in manuscript & counting), I published nox with Burning Deck in 1974, a collection of 60 poems that use a
total of 135 words. Here is the only poem in nox that stretches out to four lines:
cabin
quilt
river
latch
More typical are:
ease
awes
Or:
bolism
Because nox is set in a series of fifteen quadrants, four poems to a page,
I’ve heard some readers report that they could not
tell if each page was one poem or even if the book was a single work. It’s not
an unfair question, even if an answer in the negative seems transparently
obvious to me.
This question of scope or
scale is not precisely the same as the question of when (or how) a poem ends,
although I sense that the two are closely intertwined. The problem of endings,
of closure, is even more complex & difficult than that bit of magic through
which a poem begins. That fact alone accounts for any number of phenomena,
including the trouble readers, myself included, have deciding what the
boundaries of a given text might be.
At one level, one of, &
perhaps the, strongest attraction of
closed forms in poetry lies not simply in the pale pleasures of pattern recognition
(real though they may be), but in the fact that the end point is déjà toujours determined before a single
letter has been committed to paper. Since the poet knows in advance where he or
she is going – on a journey of three or fourteen or however many lines – the
opportunities for getting lost along the way are proportionately fewer.
Conversely, the old creative writing school saw that a novel is a “long
fictional prose work with a flaw,” all but
acknowledges that a major engine of flawedness is
precisely the difficulty of locating the right end-point for an indeterminate
work, a potential problem that it shares with all poetry that is not defined in
advanced by a fixed form. More than one long poem has been started only to
disappear into in an inconclusive never quite finished state: Leaves of Grass, The
Cantos, Beverly Dahlen’s A Reading,
& the long untitled prose work from which Clark Coolidge managed to rescue
“Weathers” all demonstrate aspects of this issue. Only Celia Zukofsky’s
grafted-on “A”-24 spares her husband’s epic that same fate.
The question of size or
scope impacts poems in all sorts of ways. Lines, sentence, even individual
words near the beginning or end carry a different sense of position than those
that appear to float “freely” in the middle. Indeed, one of the most
interesting moments in any poem, especially when one is reading a text on
paper, is that transition that occurs into an ending of the text, the moment at
which the logic of each word is dictated by how it will set up the final
phrase. It can occur in the last line or stanza, or even several pages from the
end, but you can almost always find it if you look closely. A poet such as
David Ignatow made a minor art form just out of this moment, the twist into the
conclusion – in some instances, it’s the only thing
happening in the poem.
An inverse transition occurs
near the start of a text, as it shifts from “setting out” to “settling in,” but
I think the reader is less apt to recognize its presence as the sense of
anticipation is quite different: it occurs at a point when the range of
reference in a text is still opening up. Most often it arrives at that exact
moment when the reader recognizes just how far & wide the text itself can
go. At the far end of the text, just the opposite occurs: possibilities are
progressively stripped away until the poem arrives at an instant that is (or
should be) unavoidable. I would argue that these moments are as true for haiku
as for epics. In this sense, even the one-letter poems of Joyce Holland’s Alphabet Anthology (Iowa City: X Press,
1973)** have a beginning, middle & end.
These are not the only
changes that take place when works are exceprted. Part : whole relations become entirely invisible. But it’s
just these transitional cues that are blurred whenever poems appear only in
part. Sometimes – though not always – other language in the excerpted text
takes over the role, assigned to it as much by a reader’s intuition as by the
text itself, surrogate transitions specific to the local occasion.
Thinking about it, it seems
entirely possible that neither Stanford or Meyer did
change their sense of completeness when they shifted away from the epic-length
projects of their youth. In Meyer’s case especially, it may have been that he
wanted (or even needed) at that point to compose without the necessity of such
closure. I know in my own case that the transition from the microwriting of nox to book-length projects, such as Ketjak, proceeded very quickly. At the
time it seemed that I was merely focusing in on the smallest elements in the
writing, without which I could not have attempted anything on a larger scale,
although in some very clear way in my head, I knew that I was a writer of long
poems almost a decade before I sat down & started to write one.
* I would
scarcely believe my own memory in this if I had not published “Fragment from
Graph 42” in Tottels 4 back in July
1971. The engineering vocabulary, in both the work’s title and segmentation, is
another radical difference from Meyer’s later poetry.
** Joyce
Holland is, or was, Dave Morice.