Peter Ganick is an extremophile of
American letters. Extremophiles, as any ten-year-old addicted to the science
shows on the Discovery Channel can tell you, are those amazing creatures that
thrive in extreme conditions, such as in the lightless & chilly depths of
the ocean or in fire-orange lips of lava at the edge of a live volcano, even
conceivably on asteroids or other planets sans atmosphere. These include (but
aren’t just limited to) anaerobes, thermophiles, psychrophiles,
acidophiles, alkalophiles, halophiles, barophiles, and xerophiles. Fun folk one
& all.
In poetry, an extremophile would be
someone whose interest in the dynamics of his or her own work are intense, detailed
& radically distinct, but which develop with only the most passing concern
or correlation with whatever else might be going on in the world of poetry.
Extremophiles have been around for some time: Bern Porter, Bob Brown & Ian
Hamilton Finlay all qualify as examples of
extremophile literature at its finest. Alan Sondheim is another contemporary
example, but it is characteristic of extremophile writing that although
Sondheim & Ganick are relatively like-minded souls practicing at the same
point in time who live within only a few hours of one another, no one would
suggest that you might make a group phenomenon out of this ensemble of
impulses.* The closest you could come in recent U.S. poetic history to an
extremophile grouping would be the collaborative projects of Stanley Berne
& Arlene Zekowski, who also demonstrate the
principle that extremophile writing need not be interesting just for being
extreme.
Ganick hasn’t always been perceived as an
extremophile in part because there are some aspects of his poetry that, if you
were draw it up as giant circle in a Venn diagram, would slightly overlap some
other things going on in post-avant poetics, for example in the most purely
prosodic pieces of Clark Coolidge’s writing. And by virtue of having been one
of the major publishers & promoters of post-avant poetics, Ganick has been
in the thick of things now for a few decades. But his best work, which is to
say the poems in which he seems to be most fully himself, are longer works in
relatively constant forms where the language builds only to be itself. Read
aloud, books such as No Soap Radio,
Agoraphobia, Rectangular Morning Poem or <a’ sattv> lead a reader toward
trance-like states that are not meaning-invested, but rather ultimately
meaning-liberated. These states are zones unique to Ganick’s poetry. & I
suspect that you or I could not conceivably come close to duplicating them if
we tried.
tend.field
is Ganick’s most recent
project, a PC CD of a single 223-page paragraph that exists both in PDF format
and as a self-scrolling text, that appears to run literally forever. There is
also a series of related abstracted line drawings, although I could not explain
to you how they’re related to the
text if my life depended on it.** But it’s the
self-scrolling text to which I really want to call your attention. Subtitled in
parentheses a philosophy, the text
itself is pure Ganick – no capital letters, just streams of sentences such as:
which sly in recanting olé yesterday’s
impasse the memorized cloister, ailing with which one seeks a decent paradigm
for annuity. rendered universal, saving which adrenaline blister, on as much to
repent with glaringly thought of hidden discomfort in otherness’ pileation, so major as nodule perhaps riddance to
evidential gleams. of which in constriction the
abolished shoulder of roadway calling out in an advent of persuasion, trial
size formalization so regaled those predicated on hopefulness’ factuality
restructured. some sleeping window nest, gravity of
expanse the time of for which name naïvely preoccupies the margins of a destiny
modeled after waiting’s insurgency not breathing -
less. when as constricted from address, to pull into a
gossamer flange more the parade solar aspects in huddle remotely isolationist
as caveat, not the advantage the blessing-with that mandalas
implicate formally. on as one could seek, permission
granted that being on a folder to be wrenched infotainer’s
materializations aside the curious name-calling’s prudence. some
so gained as to merit wideness of pertinence, well into scrambler’s official
derangement, more fleshy that wilted on haphazard notification elsewhere
sandwich. lanyard on the motionlessness, one creates
out of a camera to beaten down shut as orange to skimmer flood the feeling in
leggings more mundane as permitted. schismatic
retaliation of sic with-in a space in documentation maternally the fullness of
bluntness talking at hula horrors, the emptiness of wishful gradients. some other specimen of tangibility in other packages merely
lionized. scholiast. venerable
mistral, with garble and chain-song, reurged in the
camped-over, where wit as synergy tempts an icy startling of vestigial prosody,
the celebrated more than which with an announcement of negotiation, somewhere
out inside the temporary. while affording in selected
retentions -ive the merging ogre to blemish with not
haggling out of the shoebox named for a full salute here to befriend of pranams why thresholds flail. some rendered which has not startled
invasively premonition therefore unsold or sold, that beginning from endgame in
parlance therefore to be else in fact. whose
elementally curious not wished failure, template on-site the having which
affords one’s explanation of culpable secretion, manicure where aspects remove
tiles longing for beatitude. not recognizable from one’s clangorous monotone,
that being as hidden rend on prior tear to the millefleur
grail-proof in derivation of parlance’s emulsified feverishness, something
addicted to scramble, with whose affording one classes others’ notions
therefore something else to be headless in reminder.
This represents less than one half of one
percent of this paragraph. In book format, or even in
a PDF file on a screen – on a PDA for example – this is rough going, even
though phrase by phrase it’s always of some interest. But the use of the
scrolling text –Macromedia Projector is the underlying program – transforms a
very difficult slog through language into something else altogether. Line by line
the language rises from the bottom of the screen only to exit at the top.
Roughly twenty lines are visible at any given moment, but they’re moving very
quickly – a line stays on the screen for its entire journey for no more than 7
seconds on my Pentium 4 1.8GHz Windows XP system. This means that it’s
impossible even for a speed reader to do more than pick out phrases as they flash
past.
This is where I think that subtitle comes
into play. Ganick is in fact arguing here for a new way of reading, one that can
be understood as glimpsing (or perhaps “registering”) data as it flashes past.
In practice, this means that no longer how many times you run the program, tend.field will never yield the same poem twice.
Not in the sense of a random language generator working with a set vocabulary –
the computer-written poems of David Benedetti like Ideas Imagine Passion would be an example – but rather in the sense
that you will never notice the same things as you proceed through this forest
of language.
Reading around in a text has, of course,
existed as a process for centuries, mostly unspoken about, undescribed
as a process, treated rather as a form of not reading or of inferior reading if
it shows its head in college lit class. But it occurs constantly in “real life”:
as one walks down any commercial street in America, for example, Canada
included, one is inundated with signage & figures out how best to absorb
(or not) the onslaught of commercial speech in public display. Ganick’s
innovation is to identify just how far beyond pure Burma Shave poetics we have
actually advanced & to develop a text – and the means for presenting it –
that turns this “alienation from nature” in on itself until, in fact, it truly
becomes a new nature. Which is why my trope of a “forest of language”
in the paragraph above was not accidental.
If there is a process that is anything
like the experience of reading tend.field – note
the pastoral terms welded together (but also kept separate) by punctuation here
– it is exactly a walk in the country. But an exceptionally frenetic one – you
realize very rapidly that you will never be able to take in more than a
fraction of what is scrolling by & you then have to decide just how
copasetic you are with this as a reader. It’s a new country alright, one driven
& occupied by language – bureaucratic, commercial & manipulative “where
wit as synergy tempts an icy startling of vestigial prosody.” Exactly!
I’m on record as a skeptic on the subject
of new media – I’ve expressed a concern that the applications and software
platforms on which they’re mounted will prove increasingly short-lived – and
nothing here really alters my overall assessment of that. But even if tend.field proves
as temporary as the Macintosh & Windows operating systems on which it is intended
to operate, it makes a substantial contribution to our understanding of what
reading & writing might be right now.
* Theoretically, Robert
Grenier’s relationship to langpo, which has been profound, complicates the
issue of placing him fully into the extremophile category, although everything
from the “Chinese box” Sentences to
the more recent scrawl works suggests that Grenier is just such a critter.
** One drawing is
vaguely visible as the background to the scrolling text