Having praised Joseph
Massey’s Minima St., one aspect of
the book continues to haunt. If its truest predecessor might be George Oppen’s Discrete Series, what does that mean? Discrete Series was published 68 years
ago; Oppen himself has been gone for nearly 20. Do my sardonic comments
comparing “mainstream” poets with Bing Crosby* not apply if, in fact, the
writing from the 1930s happens to be work within my own literary tradition?
I was mulling this over when
I came across the first sonnet in Anselm Hollo’s most recent collection, So the Ants Made it to the Catfood (Samizdat,
2001), which begins:
now
that some of the young ones
have
taken to writing
like
Eugene Jolas and Elsa von Freytag again
(if not quite as vigorously)
(pass the thesaurus, said the dinosaurus)
we may
once again enjoy the “oh I see
(s)he just found out about that” experience
My own first book, Crow (Ithaca House, 1971), was composed
largely under the spell of William Carlos Williams’ Spring & All, which Harvey Brown’s Frontier Press had
re-released in 1970. Williams’ book, which had first appeared in 1923, was more
radical than almost anything appearing in print in the 1960s. But it was
radical not in the Jolas/von Freytag sense of a
circus of typographies – Williams’ essay in action was revolutionary in its
common sense about the nature of writing & its relation to the world.
Forty-seven years after its first publication, Spring & All was still revolutionary.**
If the history of poetry is
ultimately a history of change, any model of such a history would account not
only for the movement of poetry, the elaboration of new devices and forms, the
perpetual redefinition of literature itself, but also for the capacity of all
forms to carry onward from whatever point they become socially established as
viable. For forms linger indefinitely.
Consider this. Poetry Daily’s
directory of current articles and reviews in web-accessible media (http://www.poems.org/news.htm) lists
the following, as the sum of what was being discussed this week:
<![if !supportLists]>·
<![endif]>Seven pieces on
British poets, including two each on Auden and Motion and one review of a
Wilfred Owens biography – the bulk of these come from The Guardian, perhaps the only English-language publication in the
world that would consider running more than two pieces on poetry in one week
<![if !supportLists]>·
<![endif]>Two pieces on
Dana Gioia’s Can
Poetry Matter? including one by Adam Kirsch in the
militantly conservative New York Sun that
characterizes the book as “"one of the most important American books of
poetry criticism of the last 50 years."
<![if !supportLists]>·
<![endif]>Two pieces on
poet laureate Billy Collins from the Indianapolis
Star and Seattle Weekly
<![if !supportLists]>·
<![endif]>An obituary of
William Phillips, founder of the Partisan
Review, the journal that proved central to the career of Robert Lowell and
his group of Brahmans
<![if !supportLists]>·
<![endif]>A review of Mona
Van Duyn’s Selected
Poems from the New York Times
<![if !supportLists]>·
<![endif]>Seven items on
poetry in relation to the commemoration to the September 11th
attacks
<![if !supportLists]>·
<![endif]>One seasonal
item – Edward Hirsch’s column from the Washington
Post – on Yom Kippur
<![if !supportLists]>·
<![endif]>An article on the
nominations process for the poet laureate position in Louisiana from the New
Orleans Times-Picayune
<![if !supportLists]>·
<![endif]>A piece on the
poet Susan Firer from the Milwaukee
Journal Sentinel that actually mentions Allen Ginsberg, Frank O’Hara, Ted
Berrigan, Kenneth Koch and Alice Notley, “whose thorny work is a strong
influences [sic] on her right now.”
Is it any wonder that a
general reader might come away with the impression that American writing is, at
best, a tributary of the most reactionary British literary tendencies? In this
context, a work that demonstrates an affiliation with George Oppen’s early
writing most definitely gets a pass – Discrete
Series is in many ways more current and relevant than at least 14 of the 15
“non-911” items that appeared in the past week. Spring & All is beyond imagining.
But I worry that I/we fail
to do ourselves justice if we merely settle for the perpetuation of our own
favorite genres of the past. In my own case, it is true that I needed to go through the writing of Williams in order
to begin my own work. It is also true that today there are
at least a half dozen different versions of post-Objectivism about. Those that
merely replicate the surface features of the poems seem to me radically at odds
with what Oppen, Zukofsky, Rakosi, Reznikoff, Niedecker and Bunting were up to
some 70 years ago.
*See my
note for September 2 in the archive. What this question regarding Minima St. highlights, however indirectly, is
that normative mainstream poetry really is the literary equivalent of something
that comes before Bing Crosby! Thus
Robert Pinsky might be thought of as the contemporary
of, say, Scott Joplin, rather than of Anthony Braxton or John Zorn.
** & 32
years after the Frontier Press edition, it still is.