At 21 Grand,
I characterized VOG as being a
section of The Alphabet unlike any
other in that it was itself "a book of ordinary poems." This
generated some speculation amid the bloggers present, so maybe I should unpack that
a little, spell out what I was thinking.
Principally
that the poems are discrete. They are relatively short & have beginnings,
middles & ends. They have enough internal integrity to have their own
titles: "Dogs Love Trucks," "Dadaquest,"
"Spiderduck." Indeed, the one task that remains with VOG is for me to go through the
manuscript and edit it down to a final version. This will certainly mean
deleting some pieces, and may mean (I'm far less certain of this) reordering
the final suite.
When I look
at The Alphabet as a whole, I'm
struck with what a small proportion of the overall text is given over to
beginnings or ends. In so many ways, the work itself is a monument to the
middle, to being "in" the poem as if there were no outside or other.
More than any other section, VOG
seems to me to address the problematics of that.
I also note
that, although I used virtually the same words to describe the project before
my reading at the
I'm reading books by Drew Gardner, Nada Gordon, John Godfrey & Jordan Davis on my trip & there is no way I would try to generalize that into "one thing," the new new New York School, any more than I would attempt the same with the authors whose books I'm reading from the Bay Area on this trip: Lyn Hejinian, Barbara Guest, Clark Coolidge, Stephen Ratcliffe or Eileen Tabios. The coherence of communities is not, of itself, aesthetic. I might as well link the work of Aloysius Bertrand, Robert Duncan, Ron Johnson & Dan Davidson into a Poetics of the Dead.