========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 08:30:28 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Carla Billitteri Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: Re: W = A = R=Nblfght=I*nXQFT*g* --------------------------------------------- W = A = R = N = I = N = G A second Simulac spill has caused further disturbance in the downtime/cyberspace continuum. All messages dated Valentine's Day should be boiled before drinking. If verbal dithyrambs continue vomit drench pea bucket and spoonfeed. Repost: rapini tic mouse and barf the arrow. Dandy shift keys download Soon-Yi, Previn commensurately. Anti-Hemorhaging is projected bile radio. ***DONUT RED TAPERS MATCH EDGES.*** Rasta sure by hot shots part deux con carne. -------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 05:52:57 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ron Silliman Subject: alt.fan.silliman Sure do wish I had that kind of free time. Love & kisses, Ron The Hegemony Project ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 09:01:01 -0600 Reply-To: Sandra@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu, Braman@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Sandra.Braman@UX1.CSO.UIUC.EDU Subject: Even Shiva Does the Hokey Pokey EVEN SHIVA DOES THE HOKEY POKEY And then went down to the ice cream parlour, Set paddles to Pokey, girls & boys, a godly C, and We set up housekeeping, and sail on a sweat shirt. And thenwhen we wondered, where going, where sliding, We tankard the emblem, fran ending, forfend. Ah, for the life of it, ox carts, masks, coral.... ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:35:36 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: V386V5HX@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: Re: POETICS LIST B--in jokes (was: A LIST--outing > Rating: PG13 > From: lollipop@acsu.fubbalo.ahp (Lost Gazer) > Newsgroups: alt.fan.silliman > Subject: Exploding Fibbonaci?! > Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 00:25:10 > Organization: The Anti-Hegemony Project > Lines: 6 > > I would like to see the 'exploding fibonacci' myself. > Who do I 'finger' so that I would see it on my screen? (e-mail addr.) > > (I understand that the term. setting should be set to VT100.) > > Thank u ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:39:42 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: V386V5HX@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: Req: Silliman materials (was: > Rating: PG13 > From: nathanthew@ARIBADERCI.ARIZ.AHP (Nathan the Wiseguy) > Newsgroups: alt.fan.silliman > Subject: Desperately seeking Silliman ... > Date: 14 Feb 1999 06:06:06 > Organization: The Anti-Hegemony project > Lines: 20 > > Ok...back in '84 or '85 (when language poetry was only ten years > old or so, whatever you consider to be the movement's origin), an Ohio fan > club released among other things, a book called "The Silliman Issue" with a > picture on the cover of Silliman smoking a cigar. > > I DESPERATELY want to get hold of this item. Is there anyone > that can give me some clue/hint, etc. as to how I can purchase or swap for > this item????? > I would be eternally gratefull!!!!! THANKS. > > > "Each duck was called Cause & Effect, and > their progeny swim in the same pond today." David Bromige > > > Happiness? to all, > > Nate ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:37:54 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: V386V5HX@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: TEST--DELETE FROM DIRECTORY (FWD) > Rating: PG13 > From: barnschtei@ubvms.buffalo.ahp (The Guy Chair) > Newsgroups: alt.fan.silliman > Subject: Re: Naropa Confirms Silliman > Date: 14 Feb 1999 24:24:24 > Organization: The Anti-Hegemony Project > Lines: 28 > > Christopher Robin (CR1999@iou.albany.ahp) wrote: > > : I heard from Nate Mackey that Anne Waldman and Allen Ginsberg of Naropa > : have confirmed that Silliman has gotten the job and are pleased with the > : decision. > : This was odd because a few years ago, they considered Silliman too > : hardcore to fit in their Buddhist playhouse. > : Well, he's still hc, though nothing is signed as of yet, but AW and AG are > : pleased with the decision -- and so am I. > : > : cr > > I am glad that Silliman got the gig; this is a perfect vehicle for him. > He'll be great with the political kids. I just hope he doesn't fuck > up the rest. I love Silliman, but I cringe whenever I hear that he is > preparing another pronouncement, especially one where some sort of > historical perspective is required. He's so smirky! And he loves to > throw in some stupid fact to make himself sound like a big expert, even > though his comments are totally superficial. I simply can't bring myself to > read any of his essays (except some of the one-pagers, which are more like > poems). He is way too self-conscious as a critic; it's as if he knows the > whole world is holding its breath, waiting to see if he can successfully > deliver a simple opinion without patting himself on the back. The fact that > Naropa isn't a high-powered university makes me more confident that he can > pull it off. But is he actually going to teach a class on meditation > practice from a Frankfurt School perspective? Let's start praying now > people. > Later, > Guy Chair > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Charlie Bob Ray "The Tedlock" Sukie > > (####) > (#######) > (#########) > (#########) > (#########) > (#########) > __&__ (#########) > / \ (#########) |\/\/\/| /\ /\ /\ /\ > | | (#########) | | | V \/ \---. .----/ > \----. > | (o)(o) (o)(o)(##) | | \_ / \ > / > C .---_) ,_C (##) | (o)(o) (o)(o) <__. .--\ (o)(o) > /__. > | |.___| /____, (##) C _) _C / \ () > / > | \__/ \ (#) | ,___| /____, ) \ > (C_) > < > /_____\ | | | / \ /----' > /___\____/___\ > /_____/ \ OOOOOO /____\ ooooo /| |\ > / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ > > WE'RE THE POETICS PROGRAM AMERICA -- DEAL WITH IT!!!!! > >----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:36:22 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: V386V5HX@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: POETICS LIST B: unsubscribe! > Rating: PG13 > From: shebaz@AOL.AHP (Sheila Murphy-Brown) > Newsgroups: alt.fan.silliman > Subject: Re: going somewhere? > Date: 14 Feb 1999 18:18:18 > Organization: The Anti-Hegemony Project > Lines: 7 > > This message cam from a tightass in Buffalo, for those ofb you who aren't > familiar with this school, all the students there are required to go for > 1-2 years or so (I'm not sure on the # of years) to serve as > missionairies in foreign countries, Tell this kid to stick to the John > Taggart Fan Club. > > -------------Sheila. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:31:36 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jorge Guitart Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: decency in communications act From: IN%"jrogache@lab1.smcm.edu" "Jorge Rogachevsky" 1-MAR-1995 10:30:27.09 To: IN%"MLLJORGE@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu" "Jorge Guitart" CC: Subj: senate bill? (fwd) Return-path: Received: from oyster.smcm.edu by ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5889) id <01HNM9N5K56O8X30AK@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu>; Wed, 01 Mar 1995 10:21:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from lab1.smcm.edu by oyster.smcm.edu (NX5.67d/NX3.0M) id AA13815; Wed, 1 Mar 95 10:17:24 -0400 Received: by lab1.smcm.edu (NX5.67d/NX3.0X) id AA00355; Wed, 1 Mar 95 10:18:02 -0400 Date: Wed, 01 Mar 1995 10:18:01 -0400 (GMT-0400) From: Jorge Rogachevsky Subject: senate bill? (fwd) To: Jorge Guitart Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 28 Feb 95 12:35:00 PST From: Archer, Jane To: "Rogachevsky, Jorge" , Polly Archer , "Kendall, Gillian" , Charlie Bernheimer , Ben <73563.3275@compuserve.com> Subject: senate bill? (fwd) see way below. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ FORWARDED FROM: Archer, Jane FROM: Linchet, Dominique TO: Everyone DATE: 02-28-95 TIME: 11:57 CC: SUBJECT: senate bill? (fwd) PRIORITY: ATTACHMENTS: Although these are not my words, I thought that the essence of this message might be of interest to all E-Mail and Internet users. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ FORWARDED FROM: Linchet, Dominique Return-Path: Date: Tue, 28 Feb 1995 08:06:32 -0500 (EST) From: Lucia Binotti X-Sender: lbinotti@isisa.oit.unc.edu To: sol Miguel Prendes , carmen peraita , Dominique Linchet , dianne brain , Michael Mackert , jose miguel martinez torrejon , Ignacio Lopez Martinez , James Riely , Enrico Binotti <70630.1541@compuserve.com>, jose maria tejedor Subject: senate bill? (fwd) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII What anguish... The conservatism in this country is becoming overwhelming. Kisses to you all ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 19:03:46 -0500 (EST) From: Helen Hills To: lucia binotti Subject: senate bill? (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 08:57:54 -0500 (EST) From: Mike Savage To: hhills@email.unc.edu Subject: senate bill? (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 26 Feb 1995 22:09:58 -0500 From: Rachel A Rosenfeld To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: senate bill? ********************************************************************** Rachel A. Rosenfeld fax: 919-962-7568 Department of Sociology, CB#3210 email: RACHEL_ROSENFELD@UNC.EDU University of North Carolina office phone: 919-962-1272 Chapel Hill NC 27599 ********************************************************************** ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 24 Feb 95 12:18:28 -0600 From: Martin A. Reames To: Arty-Marty mailing list Subject: not humorous, but important Hi. This is not a normal artymarty mailing. I apologize for this email's non-humor nature, but it contains information that, in my opinion, needs to be disseminated as quickly as possible. I apologize for the length, but it's really that important, so please read it all! This is something that affects us all! Currently 13,748 people have signed the petition to stop Senate Bill S. 314. We need more! Add your voice, it'll only take a minute. **********Forwarded material******** Simply put, a couple of senators have proposed a particularly heinous piece of legislation titled the "Communications Decency Act of 1995" (Senate Bill S. 314). Basically, the bill would subject all forms of electronic communication -- from public Internet postings to your most private email -- to government censorship. The effects of the bill onto the online industry would be devastating -- most colleges and private companies (AOL, Compuserve, etc.) would probably have to shut down or greatly restrict access, since they would be held criminally liable for the postings and email of private users. [for more information, see the www page: http://www.phantom.com/~slowdog/ ] The bill would compel service providers to choose between severely restricting the activities of their subscribers or completely shutting down their email, Internet access, and conferencing services under the threat of criminal liability. Moreover, service providers would be forced to closely monitor every private communication, electronic mail message, public forum, mailing list, and file archive carried by or available on their network, a proposition which poses a substantial threat to the freedom of speech and privacy rights of all American citizens. Obviously, this bill is designed to win votes for these senators among those who are fearful of the internet and aren't big fans of freedom of speech -- ie., those who are always trying to censor "pornography" and dirty books and such. Given the political climate in this country, this bill might just pass unless the computer community demonstrates its strength as a committed political force to be reckoned with. This, my friends, is why I have filled your mailbox with this very long message. A petition, to be sent to Congress, the President, and the media, has begun spreading through the Internet. It's easy to participate and be heard -- to sign it, you simply follow the instructions below -- which boil down to sending a quick email message to a certain address. That's all it takes to let your voice be heard. Finally, PLEASE forward this message to all of your friends online. The more people who sign the petition, the more the government will get the message to back off the online community. We've been doing fine without censorship until now -- let's show them we don't plan on allowing them to start now. If you value your freedoms -- from your right to publicly post a message on a worldwide forum to your right to receive private email without the government censoring it -- you need to take action NOW. It'll take two minutes at the most, a small sacrifice considering the issues at hand. Remember, the age of fighting for liberty with muskets and shells is most likely over; the time has come where the keyboard and the phone line will prove mightier than the sword -- or the Senate, in this case. -- Here's what you have to do to sign the petition: send an e-mail message to: S314-petition@netcom.com the message (NOT the subject heading) should read as follows: SIGNED eg. SIGNED mreames@cs.wisc.edu Martin Reames YES If you are interested in signing the petition, I would highly suggest investigating the details of the situation. You can find out more on the Web at http://www.phantom.com/~slowdog/ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:38:48 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: V386V5HX@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: B LIST: "out" jokes > Rating: PG13 > From: kmlind@BRUCE.WAYNE.AHP (Katherine Morrow Lindberg) > Newsgroups: alt.fan.silliman > Subject: Re: going somewhere? > Date: 14 Feb 1999 19:19:19 > Organization: The Anti-Hegemony Project > Lines: 13 > > and this person is asking for flames! > > dont give it to him/her! > > besides...who believe in 'good' buffalonians... > *laugh* > KAT > > > /\__/\ > | o o | "RRRRROOAAAAUUGHHH!! I'm working on my > roar!" -Lion King > \__*_/ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:43:26 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: V386V5HX@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: AHP: claptrap (was: NON-AHP: trapclap > Rating: PG13 > From: Juniper Moxie > Newsgroups: alt.fan.silliman > Subject: SILLIMAN RULES!!! oh, and i'm new to this group!! > Date: 14 Feb 1999 23:23:23 > Organization: The Anti-Hegemony Project > Lines: 9 > > hi!!! > i'm June from Rhode Island. I edit a fanzine in Providence, and > i just want to say or write that I have always loved Silliman's poetry > and his attitude towards life. > > HE IS THE SHIT AS MY BOYFRIEND WOULD SAY, although he hates him. > Does anyone know when and where silly will be reading? > thanks. > Juniper > ST007@BROWN.AHP ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:42:01 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: V386V5HX@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: Re: test -- ignore > Rating: PG13 > From: elal@MINERVA.Y'ALL.AHP (Ella Al) > Subject: Re: Age of Huts: Best of/Rest of Silliman (early years) > Organization: The Anti-Hegemony Project > Date: 14 Feb 1999 07:07:07 > Lines: 15 > > In article , Mortified Botchup wrote: > >Yall know you cant sell this piece of crap to anyone, unless your some > >sort of completist. Its just a marketing ploy by that Sherry guy. Dont > >waste your money buying this, it sucks. > > so let's hear from the completists. i think you suck. > > --elal ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:42:43 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: V386V5HX@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: YOUR SUBJECT HEADING HERE > Rating: PG13 > From: pgiddy@BROWN.AHP (Pretty Giddy) > Newsgroups: alt.fan.silliman > Subject: Silliman, Spicer, Ceravolo > Date: 14 Feb 1999 10:10:10 > Organization: The Anti-Hegemony Project > Lines: 12 > > I have been a Jack Spicer and Joe Ceravolo collector for a few > years, and was tickled when Silliman's JC fixation was publicized, > whether true or not. I am interested in comments concerning > why Spicer and Joe Ceravolo fans are into Silliman as well. > Yeah, I know the pat answers...abstraction, pushing the limits, > outsiders, etc. but am anxious to get the response of others. Please > post responses. > > I love Silliman's poetry, attitude, etc...and only wish that I could > have his intellect. Maybe I need to take up poststructuralism. > > - Thanks in advance, Pretty ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:41:25 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: V386V5HX@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: Re: test -- ignore > Rating: PG13 > From: clint_bumrap@CANLIT.AHP (Clint) > Newsgroups: alt.fan.silliman > Subject: Re: Silliman Fans > Date: 14 Feb 1999 16:16:16 > Organization: The Anti-Hegemony Project > Lines: 3 > > Power to you! This forum is not meant for negative comments! People should > form their own newsgroup if they would like to complain. This newsgroup is > meant for exulting the god of poetry! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:36:55 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: V386V5HX@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: IN JOKES (was: poetics > Rating: PG13 > From: bowdler@SFU.AHP (Georgous Gorge Bowdlerized) > Newsgroups: alt.fan.silliman > Subject: Re: Nudes > Date: 14 Feb 1999 06:06:06 > Organization: The Anti-Hegemony Project > Lines: 14 > > In article , how@ACSU.BUFFALO.AHP (Billius Howe) > wrote: > > > Has anybody got some good looking nudes of silliman? If so could you > e-mail > > them to me or post them here? > > > > Thanks in advance. > > Bill > > how@ACSU.BUFFALO.AHP > > > I have some nudes of Silliman at my house which I took with my camera. > I'm forced to hang on to them, though, because I know that someday they > will be worth a lot of money. > > Georgous Gorge ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:40:31 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: V386V5HX@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: ALT.FAN.SILLIMAN: hey, this is condescending!! > Rating: PG13 > From: c.green@AUCKWORD.AHP (Cabrini Green) > Newsgroups: alt.fan.silliman,rec.arts.lang_po > Subject: Re: Naropa Confirms Silliman > Date: 14 Feb 99 20:20:20 > Organization: The Anti-Hegemony Project > Lines: 31 > > In article , barnschtei@ubvms.buffalo.ahp (The Guy > |Chair) writes: > > > Christopher Robin (CR1999@iou.albany.ahp) wrote: > > > > : I heard from Nate Mackey that Anne Waldman and Allen Ginsberg of Naropa > > : have confirmed that Silliman has gotten the job [SNIP SNIP] > > > > I am glad that Silliman got the gig; this is a perfect vehicle for him. > > He'll be great with the political kids. I just hope he doesn't fuck > > up the rest. I love Silliman, but I cringe whenever I hear that he is > > preparing another pronouncement, especially one where some sort of > > historical perspective is required. He's so smirky! And he loves to > > throw in some stupid fact to make himself sound like a big expert, even > > though his comments are totally superficial. I simply can't bring myself to > > read any of his essays > > I think "New Sentence" will probably go down as his best performance. A lot of > people say he's not good with detailed reading and therefore superficial but > if you review his essays you see he actually gets TOO detailed. (This is of > course ignoring his MLA thing but at MLA even the established > critics are horrible) His last context *The Politics of Poetic Form* > is also pretty bad, HOWEVER, Silly is quite good in it and seems relaxed for > once. I think a lot depends on his finding a topic where the relationship > between overview and detail makes sense, like "New Sentence" or the piece on > "Disappearance." When he's more abstract like in "Spicer's Language" or > "Migratory Meaning" he's embarrassing, but that's what makes him a POET > not a critic. Hey there's plenty of critics but only one Silly. Don't be > so condescending > > Cabrini ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 09:39:11 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: BLUOMA Organization: Vanstar Corporation Subject: AHP Subject: Time: 12:35 PM OFFICE MEMO AHP Date: 3/1/95 Having achieved the second level of funnel, the AHP is no longer accessible to us even through back channels. Employing a secret identity removal process, they jacked into the net some time ago. Mind you, they are not merely the binary replicating viruses that the humans call graffiti. They pinned the access server on the underside of the complex plane. Their consciousness has become vast. They are the AIs one encounters called Runt Packet, Multiple Ack, and Broadcast Storm. Yet naming them doesnUt help and they continue to worry us. But shouldnUt we be glad that the vast and fluid AIs think our group worthy of comment? They actually wish us well and want us to join them in the second level of funnel. The second level is achieved by realizing that identity is only unnatural. Now become the person in everyoneUs life. -bologna ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 13:08:51 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert A Harrison Subject: ub list Could we please get the list back into a bit of order? I don't see any reason to bash Ron Silliman's or anybody else's character or work. I regret having made any comment to the effect that we shouldn't keep some restraint in dealing with this list. This should be an e-space where people can safely and responsibly discuss poetry matters with one-up-manship kept to a minimum. Another place where a real sense of community can continue. Otherwise, it seems it will degenerate into something that most people will not be interested in dealing with. Sincerely, Bob Harrison ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 11:28:47 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gary Sullivan Subject: Community/Influence Dear Charles, Chris, Sheila, Spencer & others: I share Spencer's concerns, if not his negativity (which I appreciate nonetheless). Here: Minneapolis-St. Paul, there's the MONOLITH (The Loft, New Rivers, Graywolf, Holy Cow!, Milkweed, New Rivers, Coffee House Press) and then there's "everyone else." "Everyone else" does not constitute a community, and may never, though we might be better off if it did. What we have (partial list, and forgive how reductive this will be): Charles Alexander (Chax Press, and Exec. Dir. of the MN Center for Book Arts): Charles publishes and brings to MPLS-STPL mostly mid- or advanced-career poets, writers and bookmakers. His primary (which is not to say "only") "influence sphere" seems to be the language writers. Curt Anderson (_Exile_): Curt's interests are mostly classical; I couldn't tell you what his contemporary "influence sphere(s)" might be. Erik Belgum (starting up a cassette label which will "publish" sound/text pieces): Erik's "influence sphere" seems to be sound/text artists, mostly Canadians, such as The Four Horsemen. Jonathan Brannen (Standing Stones Press): Jonathan's primary "influence spheres" seem to be the "inland experimentalists" (U.S. & Canadian) and "exploratory" fiction writers past & present. Marta Deike (Detour Press): Marta's primary "I.S." seems to be innovative/feminist writers, such as Sarah Murphy, Kathy Acker, etc. Eliza Murphy (no vehicle): Eliza's "I.S." seems (based on reading very little of her work) to be early American and British women modernists, like Mina Loy. Mark Nowak (_furnitures_, North American Ideophonics): Mark's primary "I.S." seems to be a combination of sound/text artists and poets associated with ethno/spoken-poetics. Anthony Schlagel (no vehicle): Couldn't say what his "I.S." might be, though I think it's mostly classical and international. Gary Sullivan (Detour Press): My primary "I.S" would be the NY School and the unaffiliated/disenfranchised (Burns, Thorpe, Weiners). There are others here, too. How do we all get together, despite our different interests? Might not our getting together and discovering common ground, as well as making discoveries through each other, be more valuable to us ultimately than if we remain fully devoted to our own special interests? This, I think, is the crux of Spencer's argument. He seems to be suggesting a dialog as opposed to a number of (admittedly interesting) monologues. We're all interested in "open form" poetry, no? How about "open community"? Is that possible? Ed Foster's _Talisman_ seems to me one of the most successful attempts at creating, if not an "open community," the next best thing, a fairly open magazine, "meeting place." I'd like to see that happen here in Minnesota. Any ideas? Yours, Gary ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 17:00:49 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X From: Alan Golding Subject: ub list In-Reply-To: note of 03/01/95 16:20 Associate Professor of English, U. of Louisville Phone: (502)-852-5918; e-mail: acgold01@ulkyvm.louisville.edu Hear hear (or is it here, here?) to Bob Harrison's response to the recent slew of postings. I don't exactly object to what Bob calls the Silliman-bashing, but only because I'm not sure it's bashing--though I'm the one who can't read tone, remember, so Ron, you might feel differently. Are you being bashed? What I do object to is the sudden upsurge in the bullshit quotient. Can we at least consider an "In-Jokes and General Cutesiness" sub-list, to accommodate the folks who have all this free time on their hands to be anti-hegemonic or who want to continue the apparently endless flavors-of-New-Zealand-ice-cream thread? Frankly I'm getting just about ready to check out and head on over to the New Formalism list. Dyspeptically your-all's, Alan In Slinger, Dorn writes "Entrapment is this society's sole activity / And only laughter can blow it to rags." And Charles Bernstein, in an unpublished (I think) poem: "The shortest distance between transcendence and immanence is hilarity." Fer sure. But then those guys are actually funny. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 14:05:00 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tony Green Organization: The University of Auckland Subject: Re: Community/Influence " and then there's "everyone else." "Everyone else" does not constitute a community, and may never, though we might be better off if it did. W" "Gary Sullivan (Detour Press): My primary "I.S" would be the NY School and the unaffiliated/disenfranchised (Burns, Thorpe, Weiners)." "There are others here, too. How do we all get together, despite our different interests? Might not our getting together and discovering common ground, as well as making discoveries through each other, be more valuable to us ultimately than if we remain fully devoted to our own special interests? This, I think, is the crux of Spencer's argument." Hi, Gary, Yup, there's a lot of us on the margins/fringes of Minneapolis via this List, but surprisingly close at hand, like in London (England) Auckland, Melbourne,and, so it seems, New York, San Francisco...e t c What exactly is the difference from being ON THE GROUND? anymore. Tony Green, e-mail: t.green@auckland.ac.nz post: Dept of Art History, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand Fax: 64 9-373 7014 Telephone: 64 9 373 7599 ext. 8981 or 7276 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 09:41:40 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gary Sullivan Subject: in-jokes, flames Susan, as someone who very much appreciates in-jokes, I hate to say this, but I agree with you; at least, when confronted with a barrage (12, I think) of them all at once. I thought the first "Ron" flame was funny, the second less so, and I just began deleting the things without reading 'em by the 4th or 5th. As Gerald Burns once cautioned me (I quote from memory): "You'll never learn anything until you realize that the quality of light in a room is the same thing as the life of the mind, or the soul." (He put it more eloquently than that.) As someone who reads & writes a lot of satire, I've always been aware of the inherent paradox: You may hit the object dead on, but the subject is always, ultimately, you. In the best (most "effective") satire, your audience is almost unaware of your presence, all attention being focused on the object. In cases of overkill (like the recent 12-part "Ron" flames), you're not only more aware of the author than you should be, you begin to sympathize with the object(s) of his/her satirical/parodic communication. I don't want people to cease posting satire & parody: it's a perfectly valid (& sometimes efficient) means of getting across ideas & concerns. But be careful not to alienate what audience you do have. Thanks, Gary ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 00:26:13 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Patrick Phillips Subject: subtrafuge It appears that this list needs, not wants, a coherant amount of prattle. That the theory/truth dichotomy is not a dichotomy at all, but a revolving door that lets the social, the riff-raff in. It seems this need strikes at the heart (a prattlish metaphor) of the hinge that lets in and issues out. The thin membrane between theory and doctrine needs prattle in order to decipher, or to clarify that oscillation between love and chattle, acquaintance and stranger. I hate to appear to substantiate incoherent subtrafuge because in fact what I wish to lend credence to is coherent subtrafuge and applaud all those who relish (and undermine) the berm. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 01:12:32 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Patrick Phillips Subject: Re: subtrafuge I thought I might offer that I once climbed three stories above the street at Shattuck and University in Berkeley to "alter" a billboard above McDonald's. The billboard was advertising an Egg McMuffin and the caption was "Rise and Dine." After several Irish coffees at Brennan's (a local wursthouse cum irish pub with vietnamese cooks) a co-conspirator and I climbed the narrow ladder, he watched for cops and I spray painted "Wretch and Die" to my delight and we scurried down. (This kind of think can get you killed by vigilante's in LA.) It wasn't until a year or two later that a publication on "altered billboards" and general mayhem in the Bay Area came out that I realized that my double entendre was in fact a mis-spelling - much like subtrafuge. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 22:24:49 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Re: ub list In-Reply-To: <199503020528.VAA22749@whistler.sfu.ca> from "Alan Golding" at Mar 1, 95 05:00:49 pm Strange, I am really glad to hear a bit of humour from time to time, and really glad to read the fake newspaper stuff from, I think, Albany. Before they showed up I was struck by the earnestness, the humorlessness of most of the talk, the (pardon me) self-imp[ortance. I was thinking: is this a U.S. characteristic of the poetry crowd these days? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 22:30:28 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Re: Community/Influence In-Reply-To: <199503012002.MAA23198@whistler.sfu.ca> from "Gary Sullivan" at Mar 1, 95 11:28:47 am I want to endorse Sullivan's recent plea for openness, for dialogue as opposed to monologs bashing each other. How many times have you had to go to some "function" and talk with a poet whose work you have always felt like denigrating, and found out that she was really fun to talk with, maybe even shared some feelings about things? You dont then have to like the person's poetryt, but you can still have commerce with that person, and really, is that worthless, a person? I really LIKE the Ny school poets, but that doesnt mean I am going to bang monologue up against a LangPo guy who canyt stand, say, Ron Padgett. Sorry if this sounds skewed: I have just come bacj from reading at a Freedom To Read Week "function" with some "other" types whom I enkoyed hearing. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 10:33:39 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: WILLIAM NORTHCUTT Subject: Poetry Alive I'm surprised at the criticism directed at the Silliman flames. Well, not surprised. I agree that a lot of it is a waste of time to read, that a lot of the humorous listings here are a waste of time, but that's why we have delete mechanisms. But it also seems to me that this bullshit is a sign of a healthy discussion group as well--a bit of useless material, and there's a lot to be said about the usefulness of uselessness. Too, a lot of it seems not only tongue in cheek, but a tongue in a tongue in cheek. And do we kid ourselves that all of the "serious" material is really valuable? I do agree that the jokes are growing tired, or rather, I'm growing tired of them, even if they do show signs that poetry is alive, that it's being taken out of "serious" discussions and being bandied about. Let this group breath and stretch and scratch, produce overflow, useless, excretory overflow. --william ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 04:34:23 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jonathan Brannen Subject: Re: Community/Influence Gary, Any ideas for forming an "open community" here in Minnesota? For a start, you might discuss this idea with those people you list in your post. They actually live in Minnesota which seems relevant since you've chosen to define community as locale (not a concept that I feel entirely at home with). If you find this is too radical a notion, I'm sure Charles (Hi, to all three Charles! on this list), Chris (Hi, Chris! all four of you), Sheila (Hi, Sheila!), Spencer (Hi, Spencer!) and others (Hi, others! each of you, individuals that you are with, I hope, varied life-styles) could all provide wonderful ideas for "open communities" in Minnesota. Why not have a contest? Why not have everyone SEND PROPOSALS FOR ***OPEN COMMUNITIES IN MINNESOTA*** TO GARY SULLIVAN, GPSJ@PRIMENET.COM! Maybe, the winner could be chosen randomly in a blind reading by the members of the Minnesota Project for Contemporary Language Arts (Hi again, Gary! Hi, Marta! Hi, Curt! oops, you're not on-line are you Curt?) and announced in a future issue of EXILE (Hi, Minnesota Project for Contemporary Language Arts!). How about a selection of miscellaneous e.g. Press chapbooks as the prize? I, too, admire what Ed Foster is doing with TALISMAN. I attribute this to his editorial intelligence and his willingness to be open to various poetries rather than being governed by one narrow agenda of poetics. I don't know what "inland experimentalists" are. But if it's among my "influence spheres" then it includes all the continents, not simply North America and it's not landlocked, though it's not an imaginary coast. I grew up on the coast of Florida, I understand the difference between passing waves and solid ground. As for Standing Stones Press, I publish chapbooks of work that I like, both poetry and fiction. The writers I've published live all over approach writing in various ways. They include Geof Huth, Sheila Murphy, Dennis Barone, Curt Anderson, Stephen-Paul Martin, Michelle Murphy, Peter Ganick, Cydney Chadwick and John Perlman. Titles by Gerald Burns and Tom Ahern are in the works. I'll be posting a catalog to the list in the near future. Gary, I'm not sure which of Spencer's many well-stated arguments you're rallying in support of. If it's his notion that poetry is an art and that there is a discernable difference between art and theory, I agree. I also believe that poems can be the manifestations of theory and that poems can contain theories or anything else that finds its way into the work. Did I miss a posting from Spencer concerning the nature of dialog? The trick to successful dialog is to pay attention to one another's monologues rather than simply speaking to hear the sound of your on voice. Don't put words in my mouth and I'll listen while you speak. Best of all to all, Jonathan On March 1 Gary Sullivan wrote: Dear Charles, Chris, Sheila, Spencer & others: I share Spencer's concerns, if not his negativity (which I appreciate nonetheless). Here: Minneapolis-St. Paul, there's the MONOLITH (The Loft, New Rivers, Graywolf, Holy Cow!, Milkweed, New Rivers, Coffee House Press) and then there's "everyone else." "Everyone else" does not constitute a community, and may never, though we might be better off if it did. What we have (partial list, and forgive how reductive this will be): Charles Alexander (Chax Press, and Exec. Dir. of the MN Center for Book Arts): Charles publishes and brings to MPLS-STPL mostly mid- or advanced-career poets, writers and bookmakers. His primary (which is not to say "only") "influence sphere" seems to be the language writers. Curt Anderson (_Exile_): Curt's interests are mostly classical; I couldn't tell you what his contemporary "influence sphere(s)" might be. Erik Belgum (starting up a cassette label which will "publish" sound/text pieces): Erik's "influence sphere" seems to be sound/text artists, mostly Canadians, such as The Four Horsemen. Jonathan Brannen (Standing Stones Press): Jonathan's primary "influence spheres" seem to be the "inland experimentalists" (U.S. & Canadian) and "exploratory" fiction writers past & present. Marta Deike (Detour Press): Marta's primary "I.S." seems to be innovative/feminist writers, such as Sarah Murphy, Kathy Acker, etc. Eliza Murphy (no vehicle): Eliza's "I.S." seems (based on reading very little of her work) to be early American and British women modernists, like Mina Loy. Mark Nowak (_furnitures_, North American Ideophonics): Mark's primary "I.S." seems to be a combination of sound/text artists and poets associated with ethno/spoken-poetics. Anthony Schlagel (no vehicle): Couldn't say what his "I.S." might be, though I think it's mostly classical and international. Gary Sullivan (Detour Press): My primary "I.S" would be the NY School and the unaffiliated/disenfranchised (Burns, Thorpe, Weiners). There are others here, too. How do we all get together, despite our different interests? Might not our getting together and discovering common ground, as well as making discoveries through each other, be more valuable to us ultimately than if we remain fully devoted to our own special interests? This, I think, is the crux of Spencer's argument. He seems to be suggesting a dialog as opposed to a number of (admittedly interesting) monologues. We're all interested in "open form" poetry, no? How about "open community"? Is that possible? Ed Foster's _Talisman_ seems to me one of the most successful attempts at creating, if not an "open community," the next best thing, a fairly open magazine, "meeting place." I'd like to see that happen here in Minnesota. Any ideas? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 05:21:58 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jonathan Brannen Subject: Re: Community/Influence Sorry I mangled the line breaks last time. Hope this post can be read. Gary, Any ideas for forming an "open community" here in Minnesota? For a start, ou might discuss this idea with those people you list in your post. They actually live in Minnesota which seems relevant since you've chosen to define community as locale (not a concept that I feel entirely at home with). If you find this is too radical a notion, I'm sure Charles (Hi, to all three Charles! on this list), Chris (Hi, Chris! all four of you), Sheila (Hi, Sheila!), Spencer (Hi, Spencer!) and others (Hi, others! each of you, individuals that you are with, I hope, varied life-styles) could all provide wonderful ideas for "open communities" in Minnesota. Why not have a contest? Why not have everyone SEND PROPOSALS FOR ***OPEN COMMUNITIES IN MINNESOTA*** TO GARY SULLIVAN, GPSJ@PRIMENET.COM! Maybe, the winner could be chosen randomly in a blind reading by the members of the Minnesota Project for Contemporary Language Arts (Hi again, Gary! Hi, Marta! Hi, Curt! oops, you're not on-line are you Curt?) and announced in a future issue of EXILE (Hi, Minnesota Project for Contemporary Language Arts!). How about a selection of miscellaneous e.g. Press chapbooks as the prize? I, too, admire what Ed Foster is doing with TALISMAN. I attribute this to his editorial intelligence and his willingness to be open to various poetries rather than being governed by one narrow agenda of poetics. I don't know what "inland experimentalists" are. But if it's among my "influence spheres" then it includes all the continents, not simply North America and it's not landlocked, though it's not an imaginary coast. I grew up on the coast of Florida, I understand the difference between passing waves and solid ground. As for Standing Stones Press, I publish chapbooks of work that I like, both poetry and fiction. The writers I've published live all over approach writing in various ways. They include Geof Huth, Sheila Murphy, Dennis Barone, Curt Anderson, Stephen-Paul Martin, Michelle Murphy, Peter Ganick, Cydney Chadwick and John Perlman. Titles by Gerald Burns and Tom Ahern are in the works. I'll be posting a catalog to the list in the near future. Gary, I'm not sure which of Spencer's many well-stated arguments you're rallying in support of. If it's his notion that poetry is an art and that there is a discernable difference between art and theory, I agree. I also believe that poems can be the manifestations of theory and that poems can contain theories or anything else that finds its way into the work. Did I miss a posting from Spencer concerning the nature of dialog? The trick to successful dialog is to pay attention to one another's monologues rather than simply speaking to hear the sound of your on voice. Don't put words in my mouth and I'll listen while you speak. Best of all to all, Jonathan On March 1 Gary Sullivan wrote: Dear Charles, Chris, Sheila, Spencer & others: I share Spencer's concerns, if not his negativity (which I appreciate nonetheless). Here: Minneapolis-St. Paul, there's the MONOLITH (The Loft, New Rivers, Graywolf, Holy Cow!, Milkweed, New Rivers, Coffee House Press) and then there's "everyone else." "Everyone else" does not constitute a community, and may never, though we might be better off if it did. What we have (partial list, and forgive how reductive this will be): Charles Alexander (Chax Press, and Exec. Dir. of the MN Center for Book Arts): Charles publishes and brings to MPLS-STPL mostly mid- or advanced-career poets, writers and bookmakers. His primary (which is not to say "only") "influence sphere" seems to be the language writers. Curt Anderson (_Exile_): Curt's interests are mostly classical; I couldn't tell you what his contemporary "influence sphere(s)" might be. Erik Belgum (starting up a cassette label which will "publish" sound/text pieces): Erik's "influence sphere" seems to be sound/text artists, mostly Canadians, such as The Four Horsemen. Jonathan Brannen (Standing Stones Press): Jonathan's primary "influence spheres" seem to be the "inland experimentalists" (U.S. & Canadian) and "exploratory" fiction writers past & present. Marta Deike (Detour Press): Marta's primary "I.S." seems to be innovative/feminist writers, such as Sarah Murphy, Kathy Acker, etc. Eliza Murphy (no vehicle): Eliza's "I.S." seems (based on reading very little of her work) to be early American and British women modernists, like Mina Loy. Mark Nowak (_furnitures_, North American Ideophonics): Mark's primary "I.S." seems to be a combination of sound/text artists and poets associated with ethno/spoken-poetics. Anthony Schlagel (no vehicle): Couldn't say what his "I.S." might be, though I think it's mostly classical and international. Gary Sullivan (Detour Press): My primary "I.S" would be the NY School and the unaffiliated/disenfranchised (Burns, Thorpe, Weiners). There are others here, too. How do we all get together, despite our different interests? Might not our getting together and discovering common ground, as well as making discoveries through each other, be more valuable to us ultimately than if we remain fully devoted to our own special interests? This, I think, is the crux of Spencer's argument. He seems to be suggesting a dialog as opposed to a number of (admittedly interesting) monologues. We're all interested in "open form" poetry, no? How about "open community"? Is that possible? Ed Foster's _Talisman_ seems to me one of the most successful attempts at creating, if not an "open community," the next best thing, a fairly open magazine, "meeting place." I'd like to see that happen here in Minnesota. Any ideas? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 08:05:51 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: FUNKHOUSER CHRISTOPH Subject: alt.fan.silliman the object of the satire isn't him or his work, but the context of poetic(s) discourse in which the work appears the barrage was a tribute, as well as a comment on the flood of inanity that threatens all work (his included), or in any case threatens to destroy the distinction between poetry & inanity we're outta here, a-h g ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 09:19:47 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: James Sherry Subject: Re: ub list X-To: Alan Golding In-Reply-To: <199503020527.AAA19209@panix4.panix.com> I'd like to second the refrain that the messages are becoming an outlet for a kind of agression that I don't really want to participate in. The bleeri satires have a good resonance with the base line of discussion and include themselves in poking fun. The current rash strikes me as mean spirited although I agree with Alan again that it's not so much bashing as a kind of misplaced homage. I hope you writers will... James ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 09:39:16 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: James Sherry Subject: Re: alt.fan.silliman X-To: FUNKHOUSER CHRISTOPH In-Reply-To: <199503021307.IAA20464@panix4.panix.com> I think Chris that the flames have a tendency to consume the firestarter. I also think that you were attempting to prevent others from speaking in the way they wanted to by "shouting" them down and in that way denied them the right to speak how they wanted. There's a big difference between asking someone to modify their approach and the agression of those messages. If you are not happy with the way you yourself can address the issues, I would suggest thinking about it and coming up with a coherent response rather than with undifferentiated agression. I don't expect you to agree, but I want to say it. How is this different from the way you flamed Ron? It's more boring. It's intention is clearer in that I am trying to get you to stop attacking people and gaining control of everyone's e-mail list under the guise of parody. And I am giving you the option. There are other valid interpretations, but that is the way I felt reading those recent messages. "As Freud said about humor. I forget." paraphrase of Bernstein Jamses ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 12:50:31 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Colleen Lookingbill Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Thoughts About Engag... to all several things: 1. re: Charles Alexander's Getting back to what was a topic at the begining of the po/theor discussion, which was about whether every poem had a theory within or behind it, whether poems embodied theory in some way . . . Curious that I put in one comment about what interested me most in theory and Gary S. took that to mean something about my poetry. I discussed it with him offline, but it seems that in many minds theor/po are automatically/inextricably linked. I don't consider my writing at all to be poetry of personal experience, I have my methods which come from personal experience but does that make the writing itself that method? Not in my opinion. How does this fit into the discussion? 2. re Spencer's list of eight and the other's replies and reactions - again curious how expressing valid concerns and problems is viewed as "negativity", "frustration", etc. Egads if you aren't frustrated with the literary community you must be in serious denial, and if that constitutes negativity then so be it! Running a reading series in S.F. has made it very clear to me that no community exists here today, except as it serves the various spheres of influence. It puts me in mind of James P.Carse's Finite and Infinite Games - [The fluidity of our social and therefore personal existence is a function of our essential freedom - the kind of freedom indicated in the formula "Who must play, cannot play." Of course as we have seen, finite games cannot have fluid boundaries, for if they do it will be impossible to agree on winners... It is this essential fluidity of our humaness that is irreconcilable with the seriousness of finite play. It is, therefore this fluidity that presents us with an unavoidable challenge: how to contain the serious within the truly playful; that is how to keep all our finite games in infinite play.] Most important is to keep this list space fluid and free. From Colleen Lookingbill ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 11:12:46 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: RSILLIMA Organization: Vanstar Corporation Subject: Behavior I've received a lot of backchannel queries about how I feel about the Anti-Hegemony Project's "alt.fan.silliman" sequence (which by my count stopped at around 25 messages). I don't feel badly. I don't feel "flamed." And I don't particularly think it was directed at me except in that "homage by ambivalence" sort of way. I (or at least a fictive Ron Silliman) was usually the object of some commentary that was being ascribed to somebody else on the list (tho I think one or two "authors" might not be up on email yet). Since they were the ones having phoney words put in their mouths, I suspect that they might feel much more violated in that they were alleged to believe/say things they might not have any sympathy towards whatsoever. How does Lew Daly feel about being characterized in such a two-dimensional Elmer Gantry stereotype? It seemed to me throughout that whatever "meanness" existed in the sequence largely was involved in mangling those alleged voices. All the quotes of my work were generally accurate and so were a few of critiques. (Yeah, I do use the anecdotal as a lever in my critical pieces and it's worth thinking about the consequences of that. I've been trashed for close reading before (by Don Byrd among others), as if the practice itself were politically incorrect (rather than the uses to which it once was put a full generation ago). But no, Ketjak is not a character. The comment on barfing in K was supposed to call up questions of gender, sexual practice and power. Those lines are grounded in autobiography, but that's not the point. I can't imagine having an R. Crumb cover. I loved the dream and have in fact stolen from it for a piece in progress, thank you very much. Most serious critique of all: not one comment about any of my last 6 books. And anybody who wants a copy of The Difficulties should just write to me backchannel. I think I have a few left.) The day before it all started, a lurker (you know who you are) wrote to me that one reason she posts so little to the group is the sense she has of active hostility on the part of particularly the younger participants toward us old-fart G1 types. People seem ready to jump all over a press like Sun & Moon while nobody trashes New Directions. I responded to her at the time that this was because New Directions was irrelevant, and that this kind of response seems to me precisely an index of anxiety that people may feel about a given person &/or institution. It's ultimately a definitional process. How do we differentiate ourselves from our "elders" especially when we admire their work and can't quite say why or how we ourselves are so unalterably *different*? I told her that I thought we'd been just as bad in our 20s, although she personally denies it. (I don't: I got to really know Robert Duncan first when I wrote to the SF Chronicle in '66 saying that the bust of Lenore Kandel's Love Book gave writers and the ACLU the chance to extend the first amendment by arguing for the right to produce erotica that was not great literature or socially redeeming. Duncan went onto KQED television to read his open letter denouncing me. I was 19 at the time, an undergraduate at SF State, and a fun time was had by all. That was also the year I wrote to Pound telling him how he ought to conclude the Cantos--with a photo of the Hong Kong harbor, ancient boats bobbing in front of highrises in the smog-filled sky, carrying the poem's move to the graphic to a logical conclusion. I also wrote to Zukofsky, trying to get permission to publish The Objectivist Anthology & the Objectivist issue of Poetry as single volume. I no doubt explained to him in some very condescending fashion the importance of his own work. He sent back a very gracious note that's in the archives at UCSD: "No//but//sincerely,//LZ." I think that the evidence is clear that I was a total brat as a kid, but I only picked on poets who meant a lot to me.) E-space merely changes the dynamics a little. It gives everybody on the list equal access in a way that sitting around the feet of a pontificating Duncan at a party never did. So it doesn't surprise me at all to see a dynamic I can still remember/recognize showing up here at all. It's no different from what the Apexers are trying to do in their editorials, but that's really the only other kind of venue young writers have for such a social move. Ideally, though, e-space might actually change the dynamics over time. Maybe if all we simply acknowledge and presume the state of easy access (and, with it, the recognition that everybody's watching), we won't feel so intimidated by older writers who love to hear themselves talk. It would be interesting to see what might happen if younger poets could develop in a supportive setting and older ones wouldn't feel so threatened by difference among the next generation. How do we get there? It's actually the same question that Gary Sullivan and others have been asking. I do have one suggestion that I think would make for an improvement all around. When people send out parodies (even mean ones), have the courage to sign it or at least to send it from an email address that let's everyone know just who you are. Believe me, we don't bite. I think that a lot of the bad feelings I hear being expressed, both publically and otherwise, have as much to do with the anonymity of the project as with anything that has ever been said. It's much harder to be an object of parody if you don't know where it's coming from. Ron Silliman rsillima@ix.netcom.com rsillima@vanstar.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 08:34:13 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tony Green Organization: The University of Auckland Subject: Re: Even Shiva Does the Hokey Pokey EVEN SHIVA DOES THE HOKEY POKEY And then went down to the ice cream parlour, Set paddles to Pokey, girls & boys, a godly C, and We set up housekeeping, and sail on a sweat shirt. And thenwhen we wondered, where going, where sliding, We tankard the emblem, fran ending, forfend. Ah, for the life of it, ox carts, masks, coral, Colas of both brands, we invoke you Mousses Both Strawberry & Chocolate to enrich our lead- En mix (as occasionally you do for such as Seinfeld)... Tony Green, e-mail: t.green@auckland.ac.nz post: Dept of Art History, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand Fax: 64 9-373 7014 Telephone: 64 9 373 7599 ext. 8981 or 7276 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 17:07:34 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Wallace Subject: theory and poetry Perhaps, if it's not too late in the game on this one, I'd like to mention something that I didn't see addressed in the recent theory/poetry debates. Rather than talk about theory vs. poetry at all, might not one mention that FORM is crucial to the presentation of ideas, that it's not simply a "what" but also a "how," and in that sense, every piece of writing (theory/poetry/fiction, call it what you will) has a form that opens up or represses possibilities in words. In fact I always thought that this was one of the most interesting thing about the work of people like james sherry, ron silliman, leslie scalapino, many others--that the "what" (ideas?) was not alienated from the how (the form), but realized in it... What, that is, are the implications of a form of writing in determining its meaning? Using such a question, falling back on distinctions between poetry and theory just may not be the point at all. mark wallace ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 16:38:22 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gary Sullivan Subject: Re: Community/Influence In-Reply-To: <199503021337.GAA01412@mailhost.primenet.com> My apologies to Jonathan Brannen and others for being reductive. (You were warned.) Also to anyone who felt "left out" by virtue of my limiting myself to people in my area. It was meant as an example. I'm genuinely interested in reading about others' experiences, & thought that might prompt a few. That post, Jonathan, being a response to Spencer's well-stated ideas about the differences between "community" and "spheres of influence." If you did indeed miss Spencer's post, I'm sure he'd be happy to forward. Sorry if what I said sounded like "Say! Let's put on a play! We can use Grampa Joe's bedsheets as a curtain! and me & Sally Mae can act, swell, you bet!" Pretty much everyone here, Jonathan, those I mentioned, & others, have tried to bring everyone together on different occasions. Some attempts have been more successful than others, but I've never felt what we have here is a "community." I'm sure others elsewhere in the States, in Canada, England, New Zealand, Australia, etc., have made similar attempts. I thought it worth bringing up for that reason. My questions weren't rhetorical. I'm sorry if they came across that way. If nothing else, someone who runs a radio program e-mailed me for Erik Belgum's address; so, Erik's got at least one more place to send his tapes. And, yeah, Jonathan: You *should* tell us about your books. I'm sure your authors will appreciate it. Not to mention anyone who'd like to order them but can't w/out your address because SPD has denied you (& other new presses of your size publishing mostly younger writers) access. Anyway, your point about listening is well taken. I'll shut up & lurk for a while. Yours, Gary ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 18:03:28 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Nowak Subject: Re: Community/Influence in the recent past, Graywolf Press has published: 1.) _The Horse Has Six Legs: An Anthology of Serbian Poetry_ edited by Charles Simic. 2.) _Warrior for Gringostroika_ by Guillermo Gomez Pena 3.) _Unravelling Words & the Weaving of Water_ by Cecilia Vicuna. (& books by/of Rilke, Huidobro, Montale, etc.) in the recent past, Milkweed Editions has published: 1.) _Mouth to Mouth: Poems by Twelve Contemporary Mexican Women_ edited by Forrest Gander. (& books by/of Glancy, Neruda, Hauge, etc.) in the recent past, New Rivers Press has published: 1.) _Iron Woman_ by Diane Glancy 2.) _Wolves_ by Jim Johnson 3.) _Touchwoord: A Collection of Ojibway Prose_ edited by Gerald Vizenor Holy Cow! Press has published the likes of Diane Glancy, Duane Niatum, John Brandi, etc. Coffee House Press we all or most of us know. The question, Gary (hi!) would be, if you published a book, say, on Coffee House Press, if I published a book on Holy Cow! Press, if Chax Press won an NEA, would we enter the MONOLITH? My concern is that your call for an "open community" begins by stating, ab inition, an "division". Even the LOFT & its new competitor, SASE, have sponsored events by the Nuyorican poets. etc. I mean you know I'd be the first to agree that what is here (& most other places I've lived) could use a life-support system. One argument might be that what I've outlined above consists of "multi-cultural writing" that seems to me to have had oh so little space/discussion in this "radical" or "experimental" or "whatever" community, & has been outlined by others as explicity NOT "language writing." I don't know: Basil Johnston's tales are magnificent, Gerald Vizenor (now in Berkeley) is incredible. So much, in fact, of the Ojibwe & Ho-Chunk & Lakota & other Native writers are on par with or excel whoever else might be "out there". Perhaps it's a question of how "community" is defined, whether our litmus test is the level of semantic experiment, the level of com- pliance w/ French theory-praxis, or elsewhere. just a thought... Mark Nowak ps- also here in Minnesota are Diane Glancy, Maria Damon, & others..., Nor Hall, Robert Hill Whiteman (part-time) etc. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 21:37:47 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jim Pangborn Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: Down in flames? The mood on this list shifts like the tides. Yesterday a near-hysterical tension; today the calm of reason. The hysteria I detected was provoked by the most recent spate of AHP parodies, which moved me to write--I wanted to scold those who scolded. I wanted to defend not AHP but satire itself: it was being badly misrepresented. Thus-- Contrary to Susan Schwartz _et.al._, satire needn't be cleanly targeted to be effective as hell. Clean contrary to one particular poster (sorry, I forget who), the greatest satirists knew fully well that they made fun of themselves right along with their supposed targets--that's why Swift, e.g., is enduringly interesting. Come on, you guys. As Chris Funkhouser (et.al.?) points out, the primary purpose of those parodies was surely not to skewer Ron Silliman. (Granted, his spanking of the Apexers did generate some considerable ill will around here . . .) I thought it plainly evident that the "real" target of *all* AHP's stuff is this medium we're trying to learn how best to handle. ("We"? Is there one? Not 'til "we" found, forge, constitute an "us": an always-ongoing project.) Their satires on the forms and styles of electronic communication--wire-service reporting, vapid b-board chat, listserv intellectualizing, our labyrinthine redistribution of posts within posts within posts--ring dead-on true. I'm impressed. And I have to assume there's more than one person producing this stuff; otherwise I'm put to shame, because, even though I divide my workday the way most of you-all do--i.e. between real writing, reading, scholarly writing, reading, teaching, and reading--I too would like to have such time on my hands (see below). But I guess you had to be there. My wife kept asking me what was so funny (she was watching television two rooms away, to give you a picture of how I react to AHP when it comes across my screen), and damned if I could explain. Oh yes--let me introduce myself: Shy, uxorious WM, 40-ish poeticslistlurking gradstud (i.e. no steady job), seeking same or Other or better for serious discussion *and* serious fun (which is why I'm staying tuned). Hobbies: time is but the stream I go a-fishing in. Thanks for attending --Jim ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 21:24:18 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jonathan Brannen Subject: Re: theory and poetry Mark, I agree. Dare I say that form and content are the same? Perhaps this isn't appropriate for "poetics" discussion, but since I write fiction as well, and in writing fiction I'm very fond of using constrictive forms (somewhat re: Oulipo) precisely because it both opens and represses possibilities for narrative constructs. I tend to avoid constrictive forms (no relation to new formalism which I find unreadible) because they seem to limit possibilities, though MacLow has produced some marvelous pieces this way. Jonathan ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 15:27:24 +0900 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: John Geraets Subject: Phoney words I didn't want to rush in with just another bucket of water to toss on the "Ron Silliman" flaming. It made me think of framing.. With this talk of flaming and hegemony, I wonder if it's worth talking about the use of Names. I'm not talking about the name as the practical convenience or device that it is. Of couse, in Japan, the last name comes first: your setting, your kin/pattern, then the individual you. In the west, the first name has far greater play. As a person maybe finally I live by my first name. Where'm I headed? As well as identification, names carry privileges. Ron's (you know who) carries privileges (and maybe notoriety too?!). Lang-poets seem still to associate their writings with their names. The last time I asked to be published (in NZ) without my name, I was refused. In NZ up to the 60s a number of women writers would appear under adopted names, sometimes men's. It's this privileging of the name, as authentic, integral, with authority, that POETICS goes some way to abating. But it's the reason why so-called younger generations of writers keep wanting to move in on older (privileged) ones. It's the same game, huh. It's the power thing. Could be it's at back of the gender-talk too. ANd the posts there were concerning reading only Known (I think Marjorie Perloff was involved) Names. It leans too much on predisposition, supposition. Because the name is taken to be such an integrated circuit, something irrefragible(??), it's hard to split up or share the renown it accrues. We can have it conferred on us (get someone Big to write in my flyleaf), but it detracts nothing from the function of Bigness, merely confirms it. Same game. What to do? Allot ids? Swap names (or name-genders) once in a while, have a lucky dip? have a name amnesty for a week? Or maybe be allotted rankings as to a name's current standing. Make teams? Lousy solutions, I guess. But my point is that this happens informally now too. On my Mail List there is the sender's name and the subject. I find I'm as interested in the senders name as the subject and am aware how this (is it just me) predisposes my interest and to some extent (is it just me?) my readerly anticipations. I'm not convinced the pre-recognition and pre-eminance associated with the formalized use of proper names is so helpful. I don't likw its use as a handlebar. I think texts can have names and persons can have names but why valorize one with the other. I'm unconvinced its what best represents langpo and its poetics. Of course, I'll leave my name anyway.. John Geraets frank@dpc.aichi-gakuin.dpc.jp ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 05:38:03 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: braman sandra Subject: Re: Even Shiva Does the Hokey Pokey In-Reply-To: <199503022344.AA09087@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> from "Tony Green" at Mar 3, 95 08:34:13 am Whatever else might be said about Robert Bly, in the late 1960s and early 1970s in Minnesota it was his leadership that generated a poetry community that understood itself to be exactly that, and poetry readings and activities as means of building community. As, for example, we would have readings with multiple folks at a time -- with poets choosing to read poems one after another in a conversation mode -- one poet would start, someone would choose a poem in response to the first, and so on. Or the publishing collective in which each group of 10 in the collective chose the next 10 and then went on their way, so that the decision-makers themselves were constantly changing... Let me correct a typo in Even Shiva, the "fran" should read "frank." Three of us are now in .... Sandra Braman ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 08:13:05 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Mandel Subject: Re: Joining the arts community Nice to see mention of Artswire and tmn.com - the Metanet, one of my clients and a favorite one. I guess everything is connected somehow. Ignite yr browsers. Tom Mandel ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 09:06:58 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: James Sherry Subject: Re: Behavior X-To: RSILLIMA In-Reply-To: <199503022209.RAA20638@panix4.panix.com> I like your reply to the "flamers" although I think its over generous, but that is a quality that we value in you. I do disagree on one point though. I don't think it's up to the younger generation to create a supportive environment, it's up to the older generation to create a supportive environment, you know. These messages are testing the limits of what can be said and in that they are valuable. If they go beyond the limit of what others find acceptable, they need to be told, but the support must come from those with the surplus to distribute. Jmase ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 10:11:37 -0500 Reply-To: Robert Drake Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert Drake Subject: Re: Community/Influence >in the recent past, Graywolf Press has published: > 1.) _The Horse Has Six Legs: An Anthology of Serbian Poetry_ > edited by Charles Simic. > 2.) _Warrior for Gringostroika_ by Guillermo Gomez Pena > 3.) _Unravelling Words & the Weaving of Water_ > by Cecilia Vicuna. > (& books by/of Rilke, Huidobro, Montale, etc.) > >in the recent past, Milkweed Editions has published: > 1.) _Mouth to Mouth: Poems by Twelve Contemporary Mexican Women_ > edited by Forrest Gander. > (& books by/of Glancy, Neruda, Hauge, etc.) > >in the recent past, New Rivers Press has published: > 1.) _Iron Woman_ by Diane Glancy > 2.) _Wolves_ by Jim Johnson > 3.) _Touchwoord: A Collection of Ojibway Prose_ > edited by Gerald Vizenor > >Holy Cow! Press has published the likes of Diane Glancy, Duane Niatum, >John Brandi, etc. Coffee House Press we all or most of us know. > >The question, Gary (hi!) would be, if you published a book, say, on >Coffee House Press, if I published a book on Holy Cow! Press, if Chax >Press won an NEA, would we enter the MONOLITH? My concern is that >your call for an "open community" begins by stating, ab inition, an >"division". Even the LOFT & its new competitor, SASE, have sponsored >events by the Nuyorican poets. etc. I mean you know I'd be the first >to agree that what is here (& most other places I've lived) could >use a life-support system. > One argument might be that what I've outlined above consists >of "multi-cultural writing" that seems to me to have had oh so little >space/discussion in this "radical" or "experimental" or "whatever" >community, & has been outlined by others as explicity NOT "language >writing." > I don't know: Basil Johnston's tales are magnificent, Gerald >Vizenor (now in Berkeley) is incredible. So much, in fact, of the >Ojibwe & Ho-Chunk & Lakota & other Native writers are on par with or >excel whoever else might be "out there". > Perhaps it's a question of how "community" is defined, whether >our litmus test is the level of semantic experiment, the level of com- >pliance w/ French theory-praxis, or elsewhere. > > just a thought... > Mark Nowak > >ps- also here in Minnesota are Diane Glancy, Maria Damon, > & others..., Nor Hall, Robert Hill Whiteman (part-time) etc. also in minnesota (well, duluth) is Poetry Harbor, which published _days of obsidian, days of grace: 4 native american writers_, as well as Poetry Motel magazine, which certainly has no connection w/ French theory-praxis or langpo or whatever... but multiculti, & so not missing frm yr list on that ground... i'd guess no matter how much you/we try to enlarge our "community", there'll still be "outsiders": folks whom you/we feel you/we have little in common with. & i'm not saying that's a bad thing, but something we have to own up to, and not just ascribe to some "other" (sorry for the ungainly you/we construction here; i wrote it out w/ just "you" & then caught myself...) so i'm echoing yr question & qualm, 'bout how we identify (w/) thee MONOLITH... and to suggest "communities" emphasis on the plural-- as a self-perception & antidote to the single-partyline-poetic that seems to me at root of much of the in-fighting we've seen so much ov luigi ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 11:18:04 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ted Pelton Subject: other side I've already erased two responses to Auntie Hedge Enemy, but will make this my statement of record: It seems to me they're only interested in talking to people who get their jokes. I missed most of them myself. And I'm from Buffalo, four years removed--I can only imagine the bewilderment of an Australian (though on second thought rural Wisconsin actually doesn't seem that much closer). In any case, it's hard for me to buy the argument "This isn't inane, it's just representing inanity." As someone not in the loop, but trying to follow these conversations anyway (I'm a fiction writer but rather bored with what's been going on in the experimental vein there lately -- is it possible that Robert Coover is hot again? -- finding recent poetry more eye-popping), I wonder, am I allowed to ask a question, or do I have to study long and hard to acquire the shibboleths first? I do have a question. I saw Hank Lazer give a paper at Louisville which was down on a couple recent anthologies, including the new Messerli edited Sun&Moon, _From the Other Side of the Century_, which strikes me as a fairly good one (again I say from outside, but interested). Lo, when I arrived home, I'd been sent the book from my sister-in-law as a late birthday present, a happy coincidence. Looking at it, I take Lazer's point about the structure, that is, that the four groupings (in shorthand: "culture"/"self&society" (NYschool)/"language"/ "performance") are at least as problematic as they are elucidating. But I was more taken aback by what it seems to me are a couple of striking omissions. Ed Dorn, it seems to me, should certainly be included in any selection of recent poets in an innovative tradition concerned with (Messerli's explanation of section 1) "cultural issues and a complex of overlapping ideas about myth, politics, history, place, and religion"--I mean, that sounds like a DESCRIPTION of Dorn's work. And also Kenneth Koch, who strikes me as an integral part of the NY school. I saw him and Ron Padgett read at Woodland Pattern in Milwaukee last year. Koch was the headliner, Padgett seemed implicitly to acknowledge this; Koch read the more challenging works (to my idea of things), yet Padgett is in this anthology and Koch isn't. Now I only got onto this list in November, and it seems likely that this issue was visited some time in the past when I didn't, as they used to say with CBs, have my ears on. I have a sensitivity to not tying up the space; but then I think, shit, my screens have been clogged with fuck-all for weeks!!! (especially post-Louisville; I'm sure Steve Evans, Alan Golding, Bob Perelman and others who were there have also been very much occupied with simply getting through all the stuff that accumulated last weekend when we were otherwise engaged) Besides, it's like when you run into people who are just now seeing Pulp Fiction for the first time: I don't mind if you say "we've already had this conversation". I'd just like someone to summarize it for me. And, yes, anthologies are always a problem. But _The New American Poetry_ did reasonably important things it seems to me. This one is self-consciously coming in its footsteps. There are differences of opinion, I'm sure, about both Dorn & Koch, who it strikes me now similarly structure much of their verse around satire, for instance. Ron Silliman (never having seen him, I picture him now with singed eyebrows) spoke a couple weeks ago about the NY school and how for him, for better or worse but undeniably, Koch figured prominently. And if you're going to leave someone out, shouldn't you at least say why (maybe Messerli has in a place I haven't yet looked). Donald Allen was explicit about why T.S. Eliot was left out of _Poetics of the New American Poetry_ in his introduction to that work. Ted Pelton ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 11:16:02 CST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: eric pape Subject: Re: theory and poetry In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 2 Mar 1995 21:24:18 -0600 from The formulation that form is content, or vice versa, is helpful if only to refute the all too common idea that form is a box that somehow contains any given content. A kind of transcendental, naturalized content, which everyone knows, is common sense, contained in an arbitrary, imposed form. This kind of simple opposition I don't find too helpful. But saying simply that form *is* content, or content *is* form, is, I think a little too easy. It collapses what I think are real distinctions between the two. If nothing else it isn't true to what I think is the real struggle, the real battle, to fit what you are trying to say into how you're trying to say it. And maybe this is the most helpful way of seeing the form/content split that I know: as the record of a struggle. As form mediated by content and content mediated by form. At least, I may add, on the level of composition; as you try to write it. It may be easier, maybe neccessary, to say that there is no difference on the level of reading; in other words, once you see something in some form, it is impossible to imagine it in any other. But on the level of writing, I find it more helpful to think of it dialectically. My two cents, Eric. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 11:30:05 CST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: eric pape Subject: Re: Behavior In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 2 Mar 1995 11:12:46 -0700 from Frankly, Ron as someone spoofed, I was pretty flattered. I thought the LSUE. quite clever, but the POPE? Heard worse things about my name in elementary school. But if the implication is that the poetics list acts as a fan club for you, or at least the name SILLIMAN, then I don't agree. Actually, I'm more of a Penn Warren fan myself. That hanged woman scene in Audobon always gives me a stiffy. Thanks, Eric/Erik. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 11:35:31 CST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: eric pape Subject: Re: Community/Influence In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 2 Mar 1995 16:38:22 -0700 from I'd like to respond in an odd way to both Gary and Spencer's posts,ie, to both the idea of community and spheres of influence. I'd like to respond with the absolutely asinine question of what is poetry? I think the answer to that question, a question incidentally, that my students ask me all the time, is that poetry is what poets say it is. But that don't mean that anyone can say I believe poetry is a series of regular belches in a dark room and be taken seriously. That is, not at least until she/he comes up with a good reason why belches in a dark room are poetry, ie, a theory of poetry that is comprehensive enough to be taken seriously. To switch to science: when Copernicus came up with his theory of the solar system, what made it ultimately more compelling than the Ptolemaic theory was that it accounted for more variables. In this way, then, I think a given theory of poetry, and everyone begins to write a poem with a given theory of poetry, must compete with earlier theorizations on this level, ie, to take into account the gaps in our articulation of poetry and account for them. That's what I think NY school did, and the l-school. That's where the new group has to come in. Look for where the dominant strain can't account, and do so. This is, by the way, what ultimately made me switch from mainstream AWP poetry, to experimental/avant garde/oppositional poetry: that the notion of what poetry is is always questioned. Something, I think, we see on this list all the time and is I think the most important contribution of it. Finally, Gary, please don't lurk. I've found your voice very helpful, as well as Susan's and Jonathan's and others, if, for nothing else, we are so far out of the loop. Thanks, Eric. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 13:27:20 CST6CDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Hank Lazer Organization: Arts and Sciences Dean's Office Subject: Re: other side Not down on the anthologies but critical of them, i.e., including praise and negative remarks. The paper I read in Louisville is about half of an extended essay/review which will appear in Contemporary Literature in the Summer issue. The three anthologies I discuss are Lauter's (2nd ed.) Heath anthology of American Lit, Messerli's, and Hoover's. And my particular slant has to do mainly with issues of pedagogy--the use of anthologies in the classroom & the limitations of these particular anthologies. I also, especially on Lauter, consider multiculturalism and its relationship to aesthetic diversity. As for Messerli's anthology, I used it as a core textbook in my Fall 94 course. It IS a rich collection, but.... Hank Lazer ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 20:04:36 WET Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "I.LIGHTMAN" Subject: Re: alt.fan.silliman I just wanted to say that I found the spoof silliman lists absolutely hilarious, that, as Elizabeth Burns says in the Dec 94 issue of Poetic Briefs, one feels unwelcome thus silenced as a younger poet putting forward reasoned radical critique of the older generation right now, so all power to the anon AHP; and, above all, that the spoof as a total brilliantly conveyed the feel of being a lurker on a list of people *fascinated* by something you yourself don't love in that detail, as is evidenced in a lot of responses to it. What I loved most of all about the spoof was that it didn't do this last effect stupidly; it didn't offer people saying nothing of interest at great length, but made some very informed points about what they (and I) love about the good parts of Ron Silliman's work, and worry over in the porn of it. A point is; you probably wouldn't get this amount of spoof on a lot of the Language Writers, because few of them maintain such a lasting impact on younger readers, certainly myself, as Silliman. Above all, I want to say: the spoof showed me, at least, what a very intelligent list on a very interesting poet or poets (ie both alt.fan.silliman, *and* POETICS, this list we're now "on") looks like to outsiders. I don't myself feel "outside" nearly as much as I'd like to from an exciting margin. It makes me feel. Ira ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 14:41:57 CST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: eric pape Subject: Re: alt.fan.silliman In-Reply-To: Message of Fri, 3 Mar 1995 20:04:36 WET from Not sure that I entirely agree with precisely *what* you said, but the *way* you said it is the way. It's the form I tries to articulate earlier. Wow. Thanks, Eric. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 16:03:29 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Howard Shoemaker Subject: e-space The single most fascinating thing about this list continues to be this list, i.e. the way it morphs, mutates, grows etc. Reminds me a little of those computer games like SimCity or Civilization where your decisions have to be made as your simulated police grows--when do you invent writing and when do you just build more barracks etc etc Only the analogy immediately breaks down because in those "god games" one person makes all the rules, while this Hydra-headed list is always dispersed, always resisting the imposition of order even as "order" and self-ordering necessarily become subjects of discussion. I'm feeling inclined to celebrate the flux and chaos, the giddy sensation of sliding out of control, and i think the AHP stuff has been sort of exhilarating even when it has been tiresome too. And as someone else said, the best thing about it has been it's canny and self-self-reflexive exploration of the medium itself and all the different shifting, floating discourses of cyberspace. Of course, i can say all this from the safe standpoint of not having been the object of satire, and i can understand why others might feel assaulted. But as i say, i'm inclined these days to celebrate the mess and muck, especially as an order just came down from the Dean of Arts and Sciences that no university facilities, including computer networks, are to be used for political activity (he was responding directly to an attempt to e-organize a protest against the Contract w/ America). Now, i can understand how some rules need to be sorted out for the medium-- i mean i wldn't want my mailbox to be deluged with the propaganda of my political enemies. But i find myself experiencing a certain fear of what is to come and a sort of nostalgia for what hasn't quite passed. As big-business encroaches from one direction (e.g. Bill Gates about to launch his own MicroSoft net) and govt. from the other what lies in store? Will the chaos continue to roil and billow or will these/this be remembered as the wild frontier days and daze that subsided beneath the inevitable wave of tract housing and shopping malls (cf. America On-Line, Prodigy, Compuserve etc etc steve shoemaker ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 16:13:58 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert A Harrison Subject: Fwd> Pending Law and Pres.Order Threaten Our Work Following is some more news on attempts to seriously police the internet. Bob Harrison Robert.A.Harrison@JCI.com ***************************** This posting has been forwarded to you as a service of the Austin Comite de Solidaridad con Chiapas y Mexico. NOTE BENE: Two actions have been taken to legalize State repression of the kind of work we are doing, i.e., using cyberspace to mobilize support for resistance to Mexican government repression of those struggling for democracy. The rubric under which these actions are being taken is "counterterrorism" --a ploy which has been in use for almost 20 years now. Please note that Clinton's executive order (2nd document below) was signed on February 9, 1995, the same day Zedillo ordered the military against the Zapatistas. Believe it or not absolutely peaceful forms of resistance can be repressed using these means. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. Part I: Pending (Counterterroism Bill) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 00:33:18 -0600 (CST) From: Brad Parsons To: hmcleave@mundo.eco.utexas.edu Subject: FYI HR 896 (fwd) This is in addition to a recent Executive Order seizing authority for searches and seizures without a search warrant on matters of "national security." I'll try to find that recent EO and forward it also. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: V068GSPG@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive Subject: New FBI Charter to Investigate Political Groups Date: 2 Mar 1995 17:58:41 GMT The following was posted on Peacenet and should be of paramount concern to all activists - it looks like action needs to be taken on this bill quickly. Apologies if this has already been posted here. Please forward near and wide. Omnibus Counterterrorism Bill S. 390 and H.R. 896 New FBI Charter to Investigate Political Groups February 10, 1995 the Omnibus Counterterrorism Bill was introduced as S. 390 into the Senate and as H.R. 896 in the House. It was initiated by the FBI, and passed on by the Justice Department and the White House. Senators Biden (D-DE) and Specter (R- PA) initiated it in the Senate, Rep. Schumer (D-NY) and Dicks (D-WA) in the House. It has bipartisan support and could get expedited action. SUMMARY * THIS IS A GENERAL CHARTER FOR THE FBI AND OTHER AGENCIES, INCLUDING THE MILITARY, TO INVESTIGATE POLITICAL GROUPS AND CAUSES AT WILL. The bill is a wide-ranging federalization of different kinds of actions applying to both citizens and non-citizens. The range includes acts of violence (attempts, threats and conspiracies) as well as giving funds for humanitarian, legal activity. * It would allow up to 10 year sentences for citizens and deportation for permanent resident non-citizens for the "crime" of supporting the lawful activities of an organization the President declares to be "terrorist", as the African National Congress, FMLN in El Salvador, IRA in Northern Ireland, and PLO have been labelled. It broadens the definition of terrorism. The President's determination of who is a terrorist is unappealable, and specifically can include groups regardless of any legitimate activity they might pursue. * It authorizes secret trials fo r immigrants who are not charged with a crime but rather who are accused of supporting lawful activity by organizations which have also been accused of committing illegal acts. Immigrants could be deported: 1) using evidence they or their lawyers would never see, 2) in secret proceedings 3) with one sided appeals 4) using illegally obtained evidence. * It suspends posse comitatus - allowing the use of the military to aid the police regardless of other laws. * It reverses the presumption of innocence - the accused is presumed ineligible for bail and can be detained until trial. * It loosens the rules for wiretaps. It would prohibit probation as a punishment under the act - even for minor nonviolent offenses. IMPLICATIONS * Those who remember the McCarran Walter Act will recognize this bill, only in some ways this is broader and potentially more dangerous * This bill is highly political: the President can determine who is a terrorist and change his/her mind at will and even for economic reasons. The breadth of its coverage would make it impossible for the government to prosecute all assistance to groups around the world that have made or threatened to commit violent acts of any sort. Necessarily its choices would be targeted at organizations the government found currently offensive. People to be deported would be chosen specifically because of their political associations and beliefs. * The new federal crime: international terrorism doesn't cover anything that is not already a crime. As the Center for National Security Studies notes: "Since the new offense does not cover anything that is not already a crime, the main purpose of the proposal seems to be to avoid certain constitutional and statutory protections that would otherwise apply." * While many provisions of this bill could well be found unconstitutional after years of litigation, in the mean time the damage could be enormous to the First Amendment and other constitutional rights including presumption of innocence and right to bail. THE BILL HAS BEEN REFERRED TO JUDICIARY COMMITTEES OF EACH HOUSE. ONLY THE NEW YORK TIMES HAS AS YET NOTICED THE BILL - A 2/24/95 ANTHONY LEWIS COLUMN. OTHER PAPERS SHOULD BE ALERTED. FOR MORE INFORMATION: Kit Gage, Washington Liaison, National Lawyers Guild 3321-12th St., NE, Washington DC 20017 202-529-4225, fax 202-526-4611, e-mail: kgage@igc.apc.org Part II: Presidential Order (February 9, 1995!!!) From parsons@bga.com Fri Mar 3 09:26:00 1995 Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 00:43:53 -0600 (CST) From: Brad Parsons To: hmcleave@mundo.eco.utexas.edu Subject: Clinton Exec.Order-Warrantless Searches This apparently includes warrantless searches of online machine-readable info. of U.S. citizens in the U.S. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 11 Feb 95 05:06 EST From: Dr. Linda D. Thompson, American Justice Federation *********************** ALERT ALERT ************************ WARRENTLESS SEARCHES CAN NOW BE APPROVED BY FREEH, RENO, DOD, ET. AL. AND CONDUCTED BY ANY FED AGENCY. DUE TO THE CRIME BILL, THE FED AGENCIES ARE NOW ALL OPERATING IN CONSOLIDATED "TASK FORCES." THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER ***SPECIFICALLY*** APPLIES TO ANYONE USING COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS TO GATHER/SPREAD INFORMATION (SEE THE UNDERLYING LAW AT 50 USC 1801.) THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary ___________________________________________________________________ For Immediate Release February 9, 1995 EXECUTIVE ORDER - - - - - - - FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PHYSICAL SEARCHES By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including sections 302 and 303 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 ("Act") (50 U.S.C. 1801, et seq.), as amended by Public Law 103- 359, and in order to provide for the authorization of physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes as set forth in the Act, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Pursuant to section 302(a)(1) of the Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order, to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year, if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that section. Sec. 2. Pursuant to section 302(b) of the Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court under section 303 of the Act to obtain orders for physical searches for the purpose of collecting foreign intelligence information. Sec. 3. Pursuant to section 303(a)(7) of the Act, the following officials, each of whom is employed in the area of national security or defense, is designated to make the certifications required by section 303(a)(7) of the Act in support of applications to conduct physical searches: (a) Secretary of State; (b) Secretary of Defense; (c) Director of Central Intelligence; (d) Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; (e) Deputy Secretary of State; (f) Deputy Secretary of Defense; and (g) Deputy Director of Central Intelligence. None of the above officials, nor anyone officially acting in that capacity, may exercise the authority to make the above certifications, unless that official has been appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. WILLIAM J. CLINTON THE WHITE HOUSE, February 9, 1995. ------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------ Received: by CTGshare.Corp.JCI.Com with SMTP;3 Mar 1995 09:42:26 -0600 Received: from INTERNET.CORP.JCI.COM by mhub.corp.jci.com; Fri, 3 Mar 95 09:40:17 -0500 Received: from eco.utexas.edu (telesto.eco.utexas.edu) by interlock.jci.com with SMTP id AA03692 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for ); Fri, 3 Mar 1995 09:41:04 -0600 Received: by eco.utexas.edu (4.1/1.34/ECO 1.1) id AA09940; Fri, 3 Mar 95 09:40:51 CST Date: Fri, 3 Mar 95 09:40:51 CST From: hmcleave@mundo.eco.utexas.edu (Harry M. Cleaver) Message-Id: <9503031540.AA09940@eco.utexas.edu> To: "Robert A Harrison" Subject: Pending Law and Pres.Order Threaten Our Work ------------------ Nested Letter Follows ------------------ This posting has been forwarded to you as a service of the Austin Comite de Solidaridad con Chiapas y Mexico. NOTE BENE: Two actions have been taken to legalize State repression of the kind of work we are doing, i.e., using cyberspace to mobilize support for resistance to Mexican government repression of those struggling for democracy. The rubric under which these actions are being taken is "counterterrorism" --a ploy which has been in use for almost 20 years now. Please note that Clinton's executive order (2nd document below) was signed on February 9, 1995, the same day Zedillo ordered the military against the Zapatistas. Believe it or not absolutely peaceful forms of resistance can be repressed using these means. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. Part I: Pending (Counterterroism Bill) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 00:33:18 -0600 (CST) From: Brad Parsons To: hmcleave@mundo.eco.utexas.edu Subject: FYI HR 896 (fwd) This is in addition to a recent Executive Order seizing authority for searches and seizures without a search warrant on matters of "national security." I'll try to find that recent EO and forward it also. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: V068GSPG@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive Subject: New FBI Charter to Investigate Political Groups Date: 2 Mar 1995 17:58:41 GMT The following was posted on Peacenet and should be of paramount concern to all activists - it looks like action needs to be taken on this bill quickly. Apologies if this has already been posted here. Please forward near and wide. Omnibus Counterterrorism Bill S. 390 and H.R. 896 New FBI Charter to Investigate Political Groups February 10, 1995 the Omnibus Counterterrorism Bill was introduced as S. 390 into the Senate and as H.R. 896 in the House. It was initiated by the FBI, and passed on by the Justice Department and the White House. Senators Biden (D-DE) and Specter (R- PA) initiated it in the Senate, Rep. Schumer (D-NY) and Dicks (D-WA) in the House. It has bipartisan support and could get expedited action. SUMMARY * THIS IS A GENERAL CHARTER FOR THE FBI AND OTHER AGENCIES, INCLUDING THE MILITARY, TO INVESTIGATE POLITICAL GROUPS AND CAUSES AT WILL. The bill is a wide-ranging federalization of different kinds of actions applying to both citizens and non-citizens. The range includes acts of violence (attempts, threats and conspiracies) as well as giving funds for humanitarian, legal activity. * It would allow up to 10 year sentences for citizens and deportation for permanent resident non-citizens for the "crime" of supporting the lawful activities of an organization the President declares to be "terrorist", as the African National Congress, FMLN in El Salvador, IRA in Northern Ireland, and PLO have been labelled. It broadens the definition of terrorism. The President's determination of who is a terrorist is unappealable, and specifically can include groups regardless of any legitimate activity they might pursue. * It authorizes secret trials fo r immigrants who are not charged with a crime but rather who are accused of supporting lawful activity by organizations which have also been accused of committing illegal acts. Immigrants could be deported: 1) using evidence they or their lawyers would never see, 2) in secret proceedings 3) with one sided appeals 4) using illegally obtained evidence. * It suspends posse comitatus - allowing the use of the military to aid the police regardless of other laws. * It reverses the presumption of innocence - the accused is presumed ineligible for bail and can be detained until trial. * It loosens the rules for wiretaps. It would prohibit probation as a punishment under the act - even for minor nonviolent offenses. IMPLICATIONS * Those who remember the McCarran Walter Act will recognize this bill, only in some ways this is broader and potentially more dangerous * This bill is highly political: the President can determine who is a terrorist and change his/her mind at will and even for economic reasons. The breadth of its coverage would make it impossible for the government to prosecute all assistance to groups around the world that have made or threatened to commit violent acts of any sort. Necessarily its choices would be targeted at organizations the government found currently offensive. People to be deported would be chosen specifically because of their political associations and beliefs. * The new federal crime: international terrorism doesn't cover anything that is not already a crime. As the Center for National Security Studies notes: "Since the new offense does not cover anything that is not already a crime, the main purpose of the proposal seems to be to avoid certain constitutional and statutory protections that would otherwise apply." * While many provisions of this bill could well be found unconstitutional after years of litigation, in the mean time the damage could be enormous to the First Amendment and other constitutional rights including presumption of innocence and right to bail. THE BILL HAS BEEN REFERRED TO JUDICIARY COMMITTEES OF EACH HOUSE. ONLY THE NEW YORK TIMES HAS AS YET NOTICED THE BILL - A 2/24/95 ANTHONY LEWIS COLUMN. OTHER PAPERS SHOULD BE ALERTED. FOR MORE INFORMATION: Kit Gage, Washington Liaison, National Lawyers Guild 3321-12th St., NE, Washington DC 20017 202-529-4225, fax 202-526-4611, e-mail: kgage@igc.apc.org Part II: Presidential Order (February 9, 1995!!!) From parsons@bga.com Fri Mar 3 09:26:00 1995 Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 00:43:53 -0600 (CST) From: Brad Parsons To: hmcleave@mundo.eco.utexas.edu Subject: Clinton Exec.Order-Warrantless Searches This apparently includes warrantless searches of online machine-readable info. of U.S. citizens in the U.S. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 11 Feb 95 05:06 EST From: Dr. Linda D. Thompson, American Justice Federation *********************** ALERT ALERT ************************ WARRENTLESS SEARCHES CAN NOW BE APPROVED BY FREEH, RENO, DOD, ET. AL. AND CONDUCTED BY ANY FED AGENCY. DUE TO THE CRIME BILL, THE FED AGENCIES ARE NOW ALL OPERATING IN CONSOLIDATED "TASK FORCES." THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER ***SPECIFICALLY*** APPLIES TO ANYONE USING COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS TO GATHER/SPREAD INFORMATION (SEE THE UNDERLYING LAW AT 50 USC 1801.) THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary ___________________________________________________________________ For Immediate Release February 9, 1995 EXECUTIVE ORDER - - - - - - - FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PHYSICAL SEARCHES By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including sections 302 and 303 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 ("Act") (50 U.S.C. 1801, et seq.), as amended by Public Law 103- 359, and in order to provide for the authorization of physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes as set forth in the Act, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Pursuant to section 302(a)(1) of the Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order, to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year, if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that section. Sec. 2. Pursuant to section 302(b) of the Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court under section 303 of the Act to obtain orders for physical searches for the purpose of collecting foreign intelligence information. Sec. 3. Pursuant to section 303(a)(7) of the Act, the following officials, each of whom is employed in the area of national security or defense, is designated to make the certifications required by section 303(a)(7) of the Act in support of applications to conduct physical searches: (a) Secretary of State; (b) Secretary of Defense; (c) Director of Central Intelligence; (d) Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; (e) Deputy Secretary of State; (f) Deputy Secretary of Defense; and (g) Deputy Director of Central Intelligence. None of the above officials, nor anyone officially acting in that capacity, may exercise the authority to make the above certifications, unless that official has been appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. WILLIAM J. CLINTON THE WHITE HOUSE, February 9, 1995. ------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------ Received: by CTGshare.Corp.JCI.Com with SMTP;3 Mar 1995 09:42:26 -0600 Received: from INTERNET.CORP.JCI.COM by mhub.corp.jci.com; Fri, 3 Mar 95 09:40:17 -0500 Received: from eco.utexas.edu (telesto.eco.utexas.edu) by interlock.jci.com with SMTP id AA03692 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for ); Fri, 3 Mar 1995 09:41:04 -0600 Received: by eco.utexas.edu (4.1/1.34/ECO 1.1) id AA09940; Fri, 3 Mar 95 09:40:51 CST Date: Fri, 3 Mar 95 09:40:51 CST From: hmcleave@mundo.eco.utexas.edu (Harry M. Cleaver) Message-Id: <9503031540.AA09940@eco.utexas.edu> To: "Robert A Harrison" Subject: Pending Law and Pres.Order Threaten Our Work ------------------ End of Nested Letter ------------------ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 17:39:10 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Bernstein Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: The List Itself The List Itself 1. I appreciate discussions of the format of this discussion group, since many of the subscribers to Poetics receive the posts in different personal circumstance (at home, at the office); with different automatic formatting (headings, directories); and with different software (facilitating up and downloading, or making it impossible). Insofar as possible, I would hope the list might be able to conform to the specific needs of the participants. But I have limited knowledge of the listserve program that determines some of the choices available. 2. Please note that if your e-mail server is down, or if your personal mailbox is full, and a Poetics message gets bounced, you will be automatically unsubscribed from the Poetics listserve. When your system comes back on line or you have cleared your back messages, just subscribe anew. It should be easy enough to tell if you subscription has been "auto-deleted": a day will pass with no Poetics posts! 3. The DIGEST option is working and that is clearly useful for those who want all the Poetics messages from one day sent as one single e-mail post, or for those whose systems set limits on individual messages. (To get DIGEST, send a one-line message with no subject line to listserv@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu: set poetics digest; to remove digest send a message that says: set poetics mail.) I have no control over the format of the DIGEST: the listserve program generates the daily digests automatically. If you use the reply option to respond to a message sent in the Digest, the subject line will be the Digest subject head; if possible, send such a message direct to Poetics so that you can write the subject line yourself. 4. To some extent, the Digest option resolves the problem for those for whom the volume of messages is difficult to handle. My commitment is to keep this space open and unregulated -- indeed, I suspect it is the unregulated aspect of the listserve format that is particularly appealing for a list like Poetics. There are no circumstances under which I would consider formally "moderating" this list; though this is an option for other lists because the listserve program makes it possible for messages to be sent to the listowner _before_ they are distributed. In any case, rest anxious, "moderation" has never been considered here at Poetics@UBVM! 5. I am interested in continuing to explore what formats and styles of posting encourage, rather than simply allow, participation in this "virtual uncommunity". The volume of messages is certainly a useful measure of list activity; but volume itself may be an obstacle for some to participate, just as it may encourage others. Who subscribes is a crucial element: both subscriptions and posting on Poetics are unrestricted, which allows participants to subscribe and unsubscribe themselves at will. When people send me inquiries about the list, I send them the "welcome" message and, generally, ask them to subscribe themselves. The list remains "private", which means that our address will not be found in Guides to the Internet; word-of- mouth (or word-of-net?) seems a better way of including individuals who have a commitment to our multiple areas of investigation. I believe that without some sense of limit, albeit constructed in process, the always fragile sense of intimacy or relatedness that fosters some forms of conversation can easily be lost. But then again, maybe I am resisting the sheer magnitude of the net, as if an imaginary seawall can ever hold back the sea? In any case, different lists and bulletin boards and newsgroups will approach the limits of participation in different ways; no one list can possibly embody all the possibilities. Even as it gets bigger, I still think of this list as "small-scale". 6. As listowner, I spend a certain amount of time dealing with list maintenance. That remains my primary commitment here, even when it prevents me, given drastically limited time, from participating in other ways. There are many posts that I would like to respond to, but to which I am only able to compose responses in my head. I suspect this is true many participants, for several different reasons. I am particularly conscious of this when someone notes a lack of response to their post: I want to call out that it wasn't lack of interest but lack of time!; and I know this is a common feeling. 7. I think of the listserve as a distinct medium, but what characterizes this medium? My question is partly, what does this medium make possible that is not possible in other language media? Cris Cheek and Kali Tal have both offered elucidating descriptions of the medium as improvisatory and I suspect that their thoughts on the matter come close to answering my questions. But just as TV was filled with content from older media, such as movies, so listserves will also be filled with older genres: letters, essays, catalogs, etc. I have found it difficult to leap into the specifically listserve space, and my own contributions, like a number of others, have tended to be composed offline and over fairly long periods of time. I hope that those like me who are still squeamish about the immediacy of this space will participate in less immediate, but no less performative or theatrical, modes: for a theatrical space like this can also be used in refractory and constructed manners. ******8. Amidst the discussion, I want to reiterate the value of information postings by presses and magazines. Full catalogs of small press publishers are always welcome and will be separately listed at the Electronic Poetry Center site. Please also send notices of new books or magazine issues! Individuals are also encouraged to send information on their own new books or other publications. Recommended reading, with ordering information, is also welcome. ************************ 9. The Poetics list was started in January 1994. Since then there have been over 1600 posts. As of today, there are 192 subscribers to Poetics. I thought some of you might like to see a copy of a post I made one year ago. It's called "Hermits Crabs Don't Cry." I will send it as a separate post following this. --Charles Bernstein ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 17:43:57 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Bernstein Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: Hermit Crabs Don't Cry (Annals of Poetics 3/5/94) HERMIT CRABS DON'T CRY On one of my frequent trips to the Folded Place inside the Ethernet's Thirteenth Passage, with the new translation into Idiophone of Moses Maimonides's Guide for the Perplexed in my left hand, I had occasion to jot down some rules of conduct (not so much community standards as uncommunity striations) into my Blake's Newton Feelpad (TM pending) (a pad is after all a kind of home, or used to be). The Feelpad, as many of you will know (and I use the word "you" carelessly), is able to convert inner feeling processes into linguistic signs. The protocols of the Blake's Newton Feelpad do not allow me to review the file before downloading directly onto your screens (and I also use the word "your" carelessly): All of these proposed Listserve Rules will be enforced through a fully automated new version of the Youngman Listserve Program (Henney 33.95). As I am sure you will agree (and I use "you" loosely), Total Automation of rule enforcement is the only way to ensure fair and impartial Rule Maintenance: 1. Postings on Poetics@UBVM shall be neither in prose or verse. Rather, all postings shall conform to shifting character/line formats, announced periodically on the list. Initially, lines shall have at least 43 and no more than 51 characters; hyphenation is discouraged. 2. No messages shall be posted between :43 and :52 minutes after the hour. 3. All postings shall be made from "Dos"-type platforms; Apple users may post from "IBM"-type computers but the graphic orientation of Macs make these environments inappropriate for Poetics postings. 4. You have to sound 30 or show ID. 5. On the third Friday of every month, only short "chat" messages to friends on the list may be posted. For those without, or who no longer have, friends on the list, a message service will be available to provide names of friends as well as appropriate messages. 6. The Listowner will provide a name purging service to permit anonymous postings. Purged names will remain strictly confidential, although, at the Listowner's discretion, they may be sold, on condition of continued confidentiality, to benefit the outreach services at Poetics@UBVM provided by Whitewater Development Company. 7. Subscribers to Poetics@UBVM agree to end all "back channel" communication. All communication among subscribers shall be sent to the list as a whole: no individual e-mail or conventional mail may be exchanged, no face-to-face verbal communications will be permitted (nonverbal communication is in no way restricted by this rule). At first, this may be difficult for those who live in the same area. But, over time, the enormous advantages to community-building will become apparent. 8. In order to cut down on those repulsive smile icons that are used on Other Lists to indicate humorous intent (as we used to say in Method Acting class -- DON'T INDICATE) [Remember the one about the actor who asked the director what his motivation was to walk across the set and light a cigarette, to which the director replied, "your motivation is, that if you don't, you'll be fired"?] -- where was I? even when I write I lose track of where I am -- oh yeah, in order to cut down on those smile icons, and for other reasons that should be obvious to all of you (I use the word "you" inadvisedly), all irony (including sarcasm, schtick, mocking, jokes, and comic innuendo) will be prohibited from the list. This is a particularly difficult rule to enforce automatically, but recent, unpublishable, research, indicates that there may be genetic markers of sarcasm and our team of crack(ed?) computer experts are working around the clock to find programs to detect this "irony gene" in linguistic expression. >FINALLY< For those who have asked that this listspace move toward *reality* rather than float in talky virtuality, the following rule implementation procedure will be adopted: If there is significant sentiment on the list in favor of these rules, they will not be adopted; if, in contrast, there is strong opposition to these rules, they will become effective immediately. In addition, to bring even more reality into the system, between three and five Listserve Rules will remain concealed from all subscribers AND about one percent of all messages will be randomly deleted before delivery. ****** PS Our public relations team at Hungadunga, Hungadunga, and McCormack is currently considering two campaigns. They will be making their decision in the next few weeks: POETICS@UBVM -- we're taking the unity out of community! Unsubscribe today! or Not getting enough community at home? Subscribe to POETICS@UBVM. Yours in virtuality, C * h * a * r * l * e * s B * e * r * n * s * t * e * i * n [originally posted to Poetics 3/5/94] (rest area) --Boundary (ID aXbsCtXW+EAcNXFasdGCGw)-- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 19:11:52 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Sheila Murphy Subject: Form As Discussion Point I would be interested to know (lurking taken to a deeper level?) what kinds of things various people on this list think about relative to form (or not) when you are in the "thinking about" stage of creating a text. Or, when you are making something, at what point form entered the picture. I guess I'm asking for some seminarish exploration with you, your work (whoever you are out there) as the subject. This is just an open question, not a "guess what I'm thinking" game of any kind. It would seem there are multiple possibilities. As with so many things, there are seemingly infinite ways to do this right. But that's not the point anyway. Eager to hear. Sheila Murphy ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 21:37:22 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Alan Sondheim Subject: Re: Form As Discussion Point In-Reply-To: <199503040216.VAA28613@panix4.panix.com> Almost all my current writing is completed on the Internet, published and distributed on the Internet; hard-copy, magazines, etc. are secondary. So I am aware always of the form of email itself - the reading environment, the nature of the headers, the attention-span of readers, and in particular, the very _appearance_ of ascii text and its "scroll." (I tend to write about "scroll" itself as a form of vision, envisioning. So for me, the text exists in a mobile field, a field of movement, and I have seen film-scripts on the Net that in fact take advantage of this. Beyond that, there is a sense of ransacking traditional literature and its values, in a manner consistent with my notions of dissolution. And there is always a sense that my work is archived at a web site and elsewhere, and how the individual components string together. Finally, I've learned enough about the TCP/IP protocols to understand _how_ transmission occurs, what battles are being fought in the protocol suite itself, and among its designers. And that affects the surface content as well. Alan On Fri, 3 Mar 1995, Sheila Murphy wrote: > I would be interested to know (lurking taken to a deeper level?) what kinds > of things various people on this list think about relative to form (or not) > when you are in the "thinking about" stage of creating a text. Or, when you > are making something, at what point form entered the picture. I guess I'm > asking for some seminarish exploration with you, your work (whoever you are > out there) as the subject. This is just an open question, not a "guess what > I'm thinking" game of any kind. It would seem there are multiple > possibilities. As with so many things, there are seemingly infinite ways to > do this right. But that's not the point anyway. > > Eager to hear. > > Sheila Murphy > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 21:59:08 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Sheila Murphy Subject: COMMUNITY/LURKING Gary, I hope that you DON'T shut up. Keep those posts coming. You contribute to the vibrancy of the list. I am interested in several people's comments about community. I think that I've found in the postal system for many years a vehicle for community. Or of creating intimacies (several micro-communities). I know a number of writers in Arizona and care very much for a number of friends in what might be called a community. But the way I've always functioned is to commune a bit more directly on paper or one-on-one in the mails with certain people in the writing world (whatever one would call it) than I do face-to-face with people who are geographically near. And both kinds of relating are wonderful in their way. Now, with the net (funny word; in addition to conjuring up webbed-ness, it seems to suggest catching, as in fish or butterflies), there's a different way (some might say better, but certainly quicker, whatever your position on that point) to commune. Maybe one of the things I'm leading to or discovering as I tap is that community can't be pushed, although a number of things are catalytic to creating it. For example, projects. Projects are the most wonderful catalysts. Certain people function that way, too. But, again, it sort of happens. I don't quite know what to make of the discussion about Minnesota, so I'm not sure I would ever presume to be of direct help. Mostly, the message might be, though, that certain (sequences of) projects will shape into the community they desire (even if ad hoc) very quickly. Projects that people care about deeply. Once again, not unlike the world of earnings. In Phoenix, we are known for not having a very strong poetry community, but we surely have a number of poets. And a number of people know one another very well. Personally, I'm quite satisfied with what we have, as I sort of like having the freedom to work on my own, but then to have a positive spirit among a number of people whom I've known and cared about for years. I guess that some definitions are necessarily quite demanding, even unrealistic. Enough for one sitting. Sheila ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 00:27:32 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Blair Seagram Subject: Re: DIGEST option: how to get less messages In-Reply-To: <199502131639.AA12344@panix4.panix.com> listserv@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 02:32:02 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Chris Stroffolino Subject: Re: Form As Discussion Point At the risk of being accused of being "wishy washy" (or "worse," "Derridean,") I begin in what may seem like a "middle" (of undifferentiated nothingness) in response to Sheila Murphy's thought provoking "open question" of the "'thinking about' stage of creating a text... (and the idea that..."the seeming inifinite ways to do THIS right" is "not the point." The question of what one considers "better" writing, "publishable" is related to the question of "getting lost in the writing" and the question of being suprised by one's "own" writing, of trying to avoid paralyzing self-consciousness, of the desire "to get all of life in the text" and keeping attentive and not getting carried away on romantic pipedreams that may be the kind of distractions that are necessary for the piece of writing to seem to "take off" as it were (though there must be a pre-airplane way of saying that)...and the question of POLITICAL RESPONSIBILITY in the writing act, of editing out the POLITICALLY IRRESPONSIBLE points, as if you in "recollections of tranquility" you actually know what is politically responsible... and the question of various discourses, of the text explaining itself, of the THEME AS THE THING, and the whole socio-historical allegory of text circulation as if composition is explanation...Not all of these things always matter, but the question of "theory" and "practice" can be expressed "poetically" as easily as "theoretically" and so evey every debate is also a "meta-debate" and maybe is only a meta-debate in an anti-essentialist world in which "having bodyguards but no bodies" (Perelman) is an attractive metaphor, just like Shakespeare's "putrified core"--Anyway, this ties in with ALAN SONDHEIM'S assertion that there is IN HIS WORK "a sense of ransacking traditional literature and values, in a manner consistant with (his) notion of dissocation"--But what ARE these "traditional literatures and values"? The WESTERN CANON is not set in stone as purely aestheticized...What I thought I once wanted to subvert is not necessarily "traditional literature" but "traditional criticism" that has lent "respectibility" and aesthetical-object status to certain writings by misreading it in such a way as to make one want to turn to the "avant-garde" (studd not taught in schools, the whole "auto-didact" cult from which I learned much---correction "studd" is "stuff"), to make one want to turn to a mere inversion of "traditional" values, an inversion that is no better than the so-called "tradition"-- In fact, one could say the "tradition" NEEDS THE ANTI-TRADITIONAL to prop itself up...and this binary view of culture is only interesting as a starting point one may return to again and again on the level of seeming, though of course you'll be accused of being some mere spinning your wheels ORC-CYCLE maya/karma being by those who seem to stand so completely in some "desolation row" of visionary rhetoric they put all their emotions in the PAST--this, too, is an interesting "rhetorical strategy" and may reach a point in which it becomes more, or at least OTHER, than a "rhetorical strategy"--but whether or not this POINT is THE POINT OF NO RETURN is a question i leave to anyone who wishes to take it up...Chris Stroffolino ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 20:27:59 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: cris cheek Subject: Community / Influence X-To: Multiple recipients of list POETICS Briefly to Mark, Sheila, Gary, Charles, Kali, Eric and others re Community and Spheres of Influence. This is a community in formational flux. What's workable is who's here now rather than necessarily who those people who are here presently reference. This community will or rather might inconsiderately replicate its existing character preferences unless its behaviour positively embraces both its own and others diversity. Learning ways to be welcoming - to find the touch that's otherwise too carefully thought out from this e-space, bristled and defensive. It's they who fear who feel the need to attack. Challenge is not necessarily struggle. Struggle can too easily become binary dogma. What's present can all too easily become resent. Our (unpack baggage) behaviour (unpack baggage) or tone can (what is a tone can?) too easily (unpack baggage) disperse (unpack baggage) or repel (unpack baggage) that community (unpack baggage) which we (unpack baggage) imagine (unpack baggage) we (deconstruct unpacked baggage) could (post to Utopia) be (and tell Zeno it explains everything and so tells us nothing (unpack baggage)). and scroll cris ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 15:48:36 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Howard Shoemaker Subject: caught in the Net? Reading over my recent posting on e-space, i see that i typed "police" for "polis." I guess that wld be a Foucaultian slip. steve shoemaker ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 00:33:39 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: cris cheek Subject: Re: form and content X-To: eric pape xf ox xr mx a n d tx xh ex xo rx xy p o e t r y a n d c o n t e n t i t ' s n o t i n t e n d e d c r i s ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 00:33:46 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: cris cheek Subject: CALL: Sound and Language RE: - Submissions I'm editing (and got the money to do) a series of 5 books (each about 70pp and featuring between 3 - 6 writers) which are going to be produced by Sound & Language from May/June this year. The issue is to cast the most provocative net into: - writing either made for performance - or developed / constructed through performance - or directly related to performance Some notes and photographic documentation (b/w I'm afraid) will be included. Get in touch direct with me if you've got something that might open that net. To give some idea I'm already on the case (and have some work) by some of the following with more coming: Carla Harryman, Jean Binta Breeze, Aaron Williamson, Fiona Templeton, Gary Stevens, Forced Entertainment, Brian Catling, Steve Benson, Caroline Bergval, Deborah Levy, Fiona Wright Nancy O'Reilly, Charles Stein, Jackson MacLow, Guillermo Gomez Pena David Antin and many others I'd welcome any leads if it's not your own particular. I'm keen to present work from across art-forms and so by artists making challenging writing but who aren't primarily known as writers. Multi-voice texts - dark-side monologues - documentation of improvisation / compositions - texts from videos / installations 'performance poems' - photographic poems - explorations of the book as a site (for performance) It's taking shape now and over the coming months. Issues 1 and 2 will be available by mid-summer. The whole project is hoped to be over within 18 months and there's a potential development into (groan) anthology or just collecting it all into a pleated reprint. Please get in touch with any suggestions / submissions / questions, and Please pass this on if appropriate best wishes cris ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 18:51:08 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gary Sullivan Subject: e-community Cris, your well-stated post re: community dragged me out of lurkdom to respond. >This is a community in formational flux. Definitely. >What's workable is who's here now rather than necessarily who those people who are here presently reference. I exist by virtue of my mother and father; therefore, my existence references them. To deny their existence is to deny my own. >This community will or rather might inconsiderately replicate its existing character preferences unless its behavior positively embraces both its own and others['] diversity. Agree. >Learning ways to be welcoming - to find the touch that's otherwise too carefully thought out from this e-space, bristled and defensive. Agree, though time and thought unbristle, too. >It's they who fear who feel the need to attack. Not always. Fear stifles more than it incites. Attackers are more often angry than fearful. & some anger is justified. >Challenge is not necessarily struggle. Not until it's resisted. >Struggle can too easily become binary dogma. A single, unchallenged dogma can just as easily become fascism. >What's present can all too easily become resent. Resentment is a response to lack, as well as surfeit. What's not present might just as easily foster resentment. >Our (unpack baggage) behaviour (unpack baggage) or tone can (what is a tone can?) too easily (unpack baggage) disperse (unpack baggage) or repel (unpack baggage) that community (unpack baggage) which we (unpack baggage) imagine (unpack baggage) we (deconstruct unpacked baggage) could (post to Utopia) be (and tell Zeno it explains everything and so tells us nothing (unpack baggage)). Our (deny feelings) behavior (stuff shirt) or tone might (tone + might = ?) also incite discourse (spray armpits with chemicals) which might ("Let the machine get it, honey") give rise to (repeat to remove accent) greater understanding (send paranoid message backchannel) of who we (tell Diogenes you can't debase debased coinage) are (strike "genuine desire to positively change things" and insert "negativity"; stamp folder "miscreant"; file under "mudslinging"; close drawer; open mind; insert air freshener; close mind). Those caveats aired, I do agree, and appreciate your post. Sincerely, Gary ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 12:43:38 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: cris cheek Subject: e-community X-To: Gary Sullivan Gary, thanks for responding and thanks for qualifying some of my over- simplistics, necessary business. Please Don't Lurk (sounds like it should be a pop refrain). Yes, Denial or rejection of the past are 'classic' fascist characteristics. There are also the boorish Buff type impositional tyrannies of competitive knowledge and the denial of the present through continual deflection. A kind of unfocussed peevishness, sometimes at becoming oneself misunderstood. It's been read that way and that's my shoddy peripherality. And Between - My States of Attention. But then this country is a capital of the heartlands of denial. A six year old boy just came into the house with the figure of a man who transforms into a rock. respect cris p.s. I'd like to suggest that 'lurking' be valued as a positive rather than a negative aspect. But it can go so cold it freezes. Certainly attention focussed onto activating and facilitating rather than dominating and controlling 'conversation'. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 09:38:15 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: braman sandra Subject: Community In-Reply-To: <199503051244.GAA19082@argus.cso.uiuc.edu> from "cris cheek" at Mar 5, 95 12:43:38 pm I get a little nervous with extensive discussions about formation of community, actually, for it often seems to take the place of engaging in the activities in the doing of which we become one... There are of course cultural aspects to the net community thing, as elsewhere. Native Americans (who are seeking sovereignty in cyberspace as well as in material space), for example, are concerned about the clash between net culture and their own. In most Native American societies, the most important people are those who are silent in public and sit at the back of the room, while it is the younger and less influential folks who make the noise. Obviously, this would be problematic in the effort to sustain their culture within the net. (There are many examples, actually, of the use of new information technologies in the sustenance of traditional cultural forms, but there are other examples, as well, where this is problematic.) About four years ago, after attending a string of 7 conferences from Moscow in the former USSR through eastern and western Europe and Eastern and Middle US (winding up in Urbana), I was quite struck by the difference in terms and conceptualizations used to talk about what were often the very same matters facing the formation of communication policy. In the former Warsaw Pact countries, there is great and explicit concern about the possibility of civil society; in Western Europe, concern over the sustenance of the public in a time when media were becoming privatized; in the US, it's all audience and, as individuals, we've moved from citizens to consumers. In the case of this list, from my perspective, one of the things that makes it a community is a sense of shared substance, including sharing with those who may not be speaking much. Silence and listening are the undervalued communications practices of our time.... Sandra Braman ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 09:58:45 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Thomas Bell Subject: Re: e-community [DThis may well belong under _boys, but also fits here I think: "Few men understand how important femininity is in their lives, both inner and outer. Almost all of a man's sense of value, worth, safety, joy, contentment, belongingness, and happiness derive from his inner feminine nature.....Men, in their arrogance, generally think it is their strength, possessions, and dominations that bring them happiness. But it is not so. Happiness is feminine in a man, a feeling quality, and generally mysterious to him" (pp. 4-5. _Lying with the heavenly woman_, Robert Johnson) --Thomas Bell tbjn@well.sf.ca.us NOTE: (I suspect that this might have been posted by a lurking female posing here as a male, or... ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 12:18:50 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gary Sullivan Subject: Form, etc. Sandra Braman, Sheila Murphy, Mark Wallace, & all Sandra, what you say about Native American culture can't be denied by someone like myself, whose primary, direct experience with Native American culture has been mostly through my work at the Legal Aid Society of Minneapolis/Housing Discrimination Law Project. My interaction with both NA clients and NA lawyers has been mostly instances where indigenous and non-indigenous cultures in the U.S. interact, or as is often the case, clash. I've attended a few readings and other events featuring Native American writers, and the audiences for these events have been of mixed race. So, I do appreciate what you have to say about how (some of) these cultures behave publicly, within their specific social groups. (I'd like to get more of that, actually, which is why I appreciate Mark Nowak--a "younger" poet--'s lists of work so much; want more from him.) But, Sandra, I do think younger poets have been listening to, mainly by reading, older poets; I came to poetry not out of a desire to write it, which came later, but to read it. I spent many years reading poetry (if not as "intensely" as I do these days) before I wrote my first poem. I think most of us began, first, by reading, or "listening to," our elders. Relative to that: In response to both Sheila Murphy and Mark Wallace's questions about form, & the "how" & "why": The first poem I wrote that "mattered" to me was written in direct response to work I'd been reading in an early issue of _avec_ that my wife Marta & I had typeset. As John Geraets (I believe) pointed out, one of the things younger poets respond to are "lacks"--and I felt a definite "lack" in the poetry I found there, which I was forced to read very slowly, if not always as carefully as I should've, as I was typing it into the computer; specifically, I was in love (still am), but having difficulty verbally expressing that emotion to my wife without it being corny, reductive and cliche, and none of the poetry in that _avec_ *seemed* to include this most basic of human instances. I thought I might take phrases and lines from what (at first) seemed to be the very abstract language in _avec_, and somehow use that language, re-presented, to speak, as directly as I could, to my lover. Much of the language I "ripped off" was language having to do with the difficulties of communication, and so my concerns, as it turned out, where not altogether different from my elders'. But it took writing something, working on it for six months, for me to really understand that. What began out of an apparent difference of "concerns" developed into a further understanding, for me, of the nature of the work in _avec_. What began as resistance, struggle, which wasn't resolved by my reading the work, ended, by virtue of my active participation with it (re-using the language, "against" its apparent context), in my reaching a point where I began to appreciate writing I'd at first mistrusted. Participation isn't necessarily noise, and I do hope that other younger or less-established writers will respond to Mark W.'s and Sheila M.'s questions (I've enjoyed that by those who have). Bill Luoma, how did you come to write _My Trip to New York_? Is your work--as I'm reading it--predominantly "speech- based"? Mark Nowak, how do you use, specifically, all of the diverse material you read? What are the difficulties you've faced in doing that, if any? Erica Hunt, can you take what Mark Nowak addressed in his last post further by talking about your own work, influences? Ira Lightman, "No Things But in Ideas," the work of yours I read in _Mirage_; would you be willing to talk a little about how the form (a brief excerpt) FOUR O'CLOCK, LIGHT IN THE HOUSE, STREET TWELVE BRIT NIGHT SLEEP LEE, STREE T BRUSH, MORN GONE, BRITAIN A PPROACH ... addresses, if & as it does, that very provocative title? I'd like to read more of what younger or less-often published writers have to say about their work, about poetry, specifically or generally. (Questions above not being rhetorical, or necessarily limited to those addressed, or even to "younger" poets.) Shy poets (though, as John Weiners says, there's maybe no such thing), you can e-mail instead of post, if you prefer. (Don't mean to put anyone "on the spot.") Yours, Gary ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 13:38:16 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: Community sandra and others: i recently had the pleasure of reading a dissertation that brings theories of complex systems to bear on the composition process, via three case studies, to yield "ecologies of composition"... the diss. is by margaret a. syverson, entitled "the wealth of reality: an ecology of composition" (university of california at san diego, 1994)... i believe it to be a brilliant work, one that provides a much richer account of reading, writing and textuality than i've seen to date within the composition field per se (and whatever local reservations i might have)... i find this pertinent to the discussion hereabouts for two (general) reasons: one, that the first of syverson's case studies consists of examining the various factors surrouding the writing/revision/publication of charles reznikoff's "early history of a writer"; and two, that the last of syverson's case studies consists of a discourse-analysis-based account of conflict that emerged in an electronic forum during the gulf war... in short, i found the theoretical claims made by syverson to jibe well with my own sense of how complex writing and reading and corresponding in fact are... whether the model, if you will, that she employs is found by some in these parts to be a bit restrictive (or reductive) is less to the point, i think, than that there *does* in fact exist theoretical speculation, if you will, that attempts at least to advance in methodological terms a view of process that perhaps, just perhaps poet s too may find useful/enlightening... anyway, if any of you do manage to have a look-c, i'd be much interested in what you think... in any case, i don't believe folks in the humanities should resist ipso facto empirical claims, and i do believe that 'we' have something vital to add to more methodologically-centered fields... and that 'we' includes poets, i'm trying not to speak solely as what i in fact am in part---an academic... joe ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 08:55:57 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tony Green Organization: The University of Auckland Subject: Re: Community- apology? Dear Gary, Apology accepted re- inclusion of distant remote and unknown persons and places. But not quite what I was after. I wanted to point to possibilities of support and assistance thru the net now from anyplace not only ON THE GROUND and not necessarily requiring backchannel chat. I'd like to think that operates reciprocally. Tony Green, e-mail: t.green@auckland.ac.nz post: Dept of Art History, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand Fax: 64 9-373 7014 Telephone: 64 9 373 7599 ext. 8981 or 7276 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 15:05:09 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Blair Seagram Subject: Re: Leonardo on theory In-Reply-To: <199502220145.AA23708@panix4.panix.com> Having opened my mailbox to the tune of over 400 messages, I'm taking a reading break around Feb 22nd to respond to the theory vs.art question with this quote from Leonardo da Vinc: "The supreme misfortune is when theory outstrips performance." Blair Seagram (blairsea@panix.com) PS Leonardo had lots of the female in him. As we all know he had an inquiring mind that was scientific, emotional and highly structured. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 15:31:54 CST6CDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Hank Lazer Organization: Arts and Sciences Dean's Office Subject: Re: CALL: Sound and Language RE: - Submissions chris cheek-- your call for leads leads me to suggest Jack (& Adelle) Foley, whose work definitely exists doubly as text and performance, often being issues simultaneously (as with GERSHWIN and, more recently, ADRIFT, also work-in-progress such as STANZAS FROM DJERASSI) as text and audiotape. they performed here (in tuscaloosa) this past december--poems, songs, dance, two-voice pieces. jack is a great resource, fine connection to the writing/performings of others. (jack & adelle, for example, are recorded on lou harrison's most recent cd, a 77th birthday celebration from musical heritage society--they read, with lou, three-voice versions of some of lou' s poems). enough blurb. you can reach jack, if you're interested, at 2569 maxwell avenue, oakland, california 94601. your proposed series sounds great. please keep the group posted as it progresses. hank lazer ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 16:36:22 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: braman sandra Subject: Re: Community In-Reply-To: <199503051940.AA17368@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> from "Joe Amato" at Mar 5, 95 01:38:16 pm In response to Joe Amato's posting re a dissertation involving self-organizing systems theory and poetics -- It's clear to me, at least, that non-linear causality is the only way to get at what's happening in the area of communications, yet an approach that desperately needs those with mathematical tools, etc., in order to develop it in a useful way.... "Commnications effects" is a field that keeps trying to understand things by multiplying intervening variables, yet there simply ain't enough variables to account for what are essentially non-linear relationships.... Sandra Braman ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 16:50:39 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: Community sandra, what's fascinating about syverson's dissertation is the extent to which she manages to employ concepts such as distribution, embodiment, emergence and enaction (across social, psychological, material, spatial and temporal constraints) in her approach to different writing situations WITHOUT a rigorous mathematical model and WITHOUT generating more metaphorical platitudes... that is, she shows how such a model can be put to practical use in the educational arena proper... for a lot of artists, such concerns are strictly ex post facto, and while it is true that syverson is primarily concerned not with the particular writing or corresponding activity or practice but with the extent to which such inquiry informs the sorts of ecologies we contribute to (willingly or otherwise, no determinism implied or intended) i found much in her sense that such practices are intrinisically *historical* (i.e., time-(inter)dependent and dynamic) as opposed to simply structural (and cause-effect based) to help breathe some reflexive life into my own meanderings of late... joe ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 20:10:54 -0600 Reply-To: quarterm@unixg.ubc.ca Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: peter quartermain Subject: Close Reading Can someone please tell me exactly *why* the "close reading" of texts is such a reprehensible practice? I notice it came up in an oblique sort of way in the Silliman Fan Club brouhaha, and I'm probably showing my complete and utter ignorance and stupidity. On 2 March Ron said that "I've been trashed for close reading before (by Don Byrd among others), as if the practice itself were politically incorrect (rather than the uses to which it once was put a full generation ago)." However one reads Silliman's prose I would not think he's instructing his reader how a text ought to be read, but recording how he himself reads it (and what he thinks &c &c) on one particular occasion in a particular context. I'd assume that the opposite of a "close" reading is not so much a "distant" one as a "vague" or "inattentive" one (though I'm not at all sure exactly what those words mean in this context). Is there a point at which a "vague" reading gets to be reprehensible, or preferable? (And so on.) This is not a facetious question. I like reading, and I'm really interested in the sorts of strategic decisions people actually make when they read; I'm interested in *how* they read (I'm not all that sure how *I* read, either, come to that, and if I have a method at all it sure changes a lot, day to day, book to book, poem to poem). I'd have thought "close reading" would be less rather than more reprehensible, so I ask the question in all seriousness. Peter __________________________________________________________________________ Peter Quartermain 128 East 23rd Avenue voice and fax (604) 876 8061 Vancouver B.C. e-mail: quarterm@unixg.ubc.ca Canada V5V 1X2 __________________________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 09:04:40 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michael Boughn Subject: Re: Close Reading Dear Peter: Good question, re: "close reading". I certainly can't speak to the specificity of the reference to Ron Silliman and Don Byrd. Generally though, my experience is that "close reading" has become demonized by association with "New Criticism", and entered the panoply of sins connected with formalist concepts of the poem. The opposite of "close reading" (in this demonology) would be "contextual reading" rather than "inattentive". So that "close reading", having been politicized in this binary opposition, is now short hand for reactionary, agrarian, humanistic reading, as opposed to progressive historically, socially, economically, racially contexualized reading. Any serious reader, it seems to me, would laugh at such a distinction. But whole careers are built on it. Alas. Best, Mike mboughn@epas.utoronto.ca ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 10:13:12 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: keith tuma Subject: Re: Close Reading In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 6 Mar 1995 09:04:40 -0500 from Dear Peter, It seems to me that Michael Boughn's "demonology" is largely accurate as an account of the use of "close reading" in many circles today--many in the academy do seem to set up "close" and "contextualized" reading as (false) binaries, attributing the former to the now vanquished practices of New Criticism. But there are other attacks on "close reading" coming from other directions, within and without the academy. Here "close reading" seems really to mean something closer to "controlling reading" or "controlled reading." Charles Bernstein's poetics of "errant singularity"--Altieri's phrase--seems to use the phrase "close reading" in that second way, for instance. Thus in _Artifice of Absorption_ we have the following: "The obvious problem is that the poem said in any other way is not the poem. This may account for why writers revealing their intentions or references ('close readings'), just like readers inventorying devices, often say so little: why a sober attempt to document or describe runs so high a risk of falling flat. In contrast, why not a criticism intoxicated with its own metaphoricity, or tropicality: one in which the limits of positive criticism are made more audibly artifical; in which the inadequacy of our explanatory paradigms is neither ignored nor regretted but brought into fruitful play." Or one might look at the recent _Exact Change_ interview with Michael Palmer, where, discussing "voice in Stevens" and the appropriation of Stevens by New Critics Palmer says, "I think the reason that finally--after initially ignoring Stevens, perhaps because of his difficulty--the New Critics began to attend to him was because they could finally see the control of tone, etc., as susceptible to close reading. And I think I've always tried to undermine close reading, to make it unreadable from that point of view." It seems to me that we have two problems then--how to dismantle the binary Michael Boughn refers to, and how to present a model of close reading which would allow for openness, uncertainty, and generosity to stand in for the desire for "mastery" always--perhaps falsely, it's been so long since I read them--attributed to the New Critics. But this is not really a problem, as we have no shortage of such models, your own excellent work included. Not that many in the academy are paying attention anymore (I'll echo Boughn's "alas"). Anyway, that's my two cents worth of banalities from your local dimestore on this Monday in the Year of Newt and His Company of Lizards. --keith tuma ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 12:10:27 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert A Harrison Subject: A REAL Political Poet /* Written 4:07 PM Mar 5, 1995 by moonlight in igc:reg.mexico */ /* ---------- "Marcos Communique (3/5 Jornada)" ---------- */ Jornada March 5 pg. 17-18 *Amazing that the government denies its taking the military road, it says* *The retreat is making us almost scratch at the sky: Marcos" To the national weekly magazine, Proceso To the national newspaper El Financiero To the national newspaper La Jornada To the local newspaper in San Cristobal de las Casas, Chiapas, Tiempo To the national and international press; February 20, 1995 Dear Sirs: Here are the communiques. As things are becoming black, it's almost night. The cynicism is amazed with the negation of what is evident: the decision to seek a military solution. Us? Well, but almost scratching at the sky. The first time that something falls the sky, it will fall on me. Let's go. Health and and a well-equipped boat to break through so much darkness. From the mountains of southeastern Mexico. Subcomandante insurgent Marcos Mexico, February 1995 P.S. Writing on February 15, 1995, sixth day of the retreat (we recommend that it be read before each meal; it is an excellent diet aid). "The morning of the 15th we were going to drink our urine. I say "we were going to" because we didn't do it as we all began to vomit after the first swallow. Previously there had been a discussion. Although all of us had been in agreement that each person should drink his/her own urine, Camilo say that we should wait until night came so that the urine gets cold in the canteens, and we can drink it thinking that it is a soda. In defense of his position, Camilio argued that he had heard on the radio that imagination made anything possible. I opposed the idea, suggesting that time would only make the odor stronger, as well as mentioning that the radio had not been recently known for its objectivity. My other self alleged that a time of rest could help the ammonia settle on the bottom. " It will be the adrenaline"--I said, realizing strangely that the skepticism was my own and not my other self. Finally we decided to take a sip, all at the same time, to see what would happen. I don't know who began the "concert", but almost immediately all of us began vomiting what we had ingested, and also what we hadn't. We were left even more dehydrated, lying on the ground. Like dunces, stinking of urine. I think that our image was hardly soldier-like. At these hours, before the sun comes up, a sudden rain pelted us and alleviated our thirst and our spirits. With the first light of the sixth day we continued walking. In the afternoon, we came upon the outskirts of a small village. Camilo went near to ask for something to eat. He returned with a little fried pork, hard and cold. We ate it right there without any modesty. In a few minutes the cramps began. The diarrhea was memorable. We were tied to the foot of a small wooded hill. A patrol of federal troops passed by about 500 meters away. They didn't find us because God is grand. The smell of shit and urine could be smelled kilometers away..." PS Reiterating their rebellion They can bring more. To do in all of the villages what they did in Guadalupe Tepeyac, where, for each resident, child or adult, they brought in 10 soldiers, for each horse a war tank, for each chicken, an armored vehicle. In total 5,000 soldiers who patrol a deserted village and "protect" a whole slew of dogs, in all of the areas, in all of the ranches. The whole state of Chiapas full of soldiers.. On top of everything and everyone, the mountains of southeastern Mexico will continue to be rebel territory against the bad government. This will continue being Zapatista territory. It will be forever... P.S. Clarifying and rectifying It was not the EZLN who broke off the dialogue and reinitiated the war. It was the government. It was not the EZLN who feigned political willingness while preparing a military attack and betrayal. It was the government. It was not the EZLN who detained and tortured civilians. It was the government. It was not the EZLN who murdered. It was the government. It was not the EZLN who bomed and strafed communities. It was the government. It was not the EZLN who raped indigenous women. It was the government. It was not the EZLN who robbed and plundered the campesinos. It was the government. It was not the EZLN who betrayed the will of an entire nation to find a political solution to the conflict. It was the government. P.S. Pointing out incongruencies in the investigations of the Attorney General If the "Sup" had received political and military training from the Sandinistas, he would have already organized a "pinata" with the recovered properties and he would have expelled those who have criticized from the organization. If the "Sup" had received training from the Salvadoreans, he would have already given his weapon to Cristiani. If the "Sup" had received aid from the Russians, he would have already bombed Chechenia, excuse me, Guadalupe Tepeyac. In addition, what other guerrilla army, " of the millenium", "fundamentalist", and directed by "white university people" has carrried out the military actions that the EZLN has done in January 1994 and in breaking through the military blockade in December 1994? What other guerrilla force has agreed to sit down and dialogue only 50 days after having taken up arms? What other guerrilla force has appealed, not to the proletariat as the historical vanguard, but to the civic society which struggles for democracy? What other guerrilla force has put itself aside in order not to interfere in the electoral process? What other guerrilla force has convened a national democratic movement, civic and peaceful, so that armed struggle becomes useless? What other guerrilla force asks its bases of support about what it should do before doing it? What other guerrilla force has struggled to achieve a democratic space and not for power? What other guerrilla force has relied more on words than on bullets? Note: Please send the responses to the, supposedly disappeared, CISEN so that it can help think in a "modern" way. Yes, to the CISEN. The Attorney General is only the pimp paying the ruling class. P.S. Calling myself the "special investigator on the case of the Sup" and inviting the national and international civic society to be the jury and pronounce the sentence. "Being such and such hour on such and such day, of such and such month, in the current year, see before this P.S. a man of indefinite age, between 5 and 65 years old, with his face covered with one of those garments that appears to be a sock with holes in it (and which the gringos call "ski mask", and the Latin Americans call "pasamontanas--mountain passes"). Among the particular signs of a face, two enormous protruberances emerge, one of which, which was supposedly deduced after several sneezes, is the nose. The other, judging by the emanations of smoke and the smell of tobacco, could be a pipe, like the ones used by sailors, intellectuals, pirates and fugitives from justice. Exhorted to say only the truth and nothing but the truth, the individual in question said that he was called "Marcos Montes de la Selva", son of Old Anthony and lady Juanita, brother to young Anthony, Ramona and Susana, uncle to Tonita, Beto, Eva and Heriberto. He of the voice declared himself to be in full control of his physical and mental faculties, and, without any pressure (other than the 60,000 federal soldiers who are looking for him dead or alive) declares and confesses the following: First. That he was born in the guerrilla camp called "Agua Fria" in the Lacandon jungle, Chiapas, in the early morning one day in August 1984. The man with the voice says that he was reborn the first of January 1994, and born again, succesively, the 10th of June 1994, the 8th of August 1994, the 19th of December 1994, the 10th of February 1995, and each day and each hour and each minute and each second since that day up to this moment in which I am making this declaration. Second. That, in addition to his name, he has the following aliases: "Sub", "Subcomandante", "Sup", "Supco", "Marquitos", "Pinche Sup", "Sup son of a ...", and others that the power of this PS Agent prevents from writing. Third. He of the voice confesses that, since having been born, he has conspired against the shadows which cover the Mexican sky. Fourth. He of the voice confesses that, before being born, being able to possess everything in order to have nothing, he decided to possess nothing in order to have everything. Fifth. He of the voice confesses that, in the company of other Mexicans, the majority Mayan Indians, they decided to make a paper live up its words, a paper that they teach about in school, which lists the rights of the Mexican citizens and which is called, "The Political Constitution of the United Mexican States". He of the voice pointed out that, in article 39 of this paper, it is said that the people have the right to change the government. Coming to this point, the P.S., jealous of his right, ordered the very subversive paper confiscated, and ordered that it be burned with giving it a glance, and having done this, continued to take the statement of the individual with the obvious nose and the contaminating pipe. He of the voice confessed that, not being able to exercise this right by peaceful and legal means, he decided, together with his accomplices, (these whom he of the voice calls "brothers"), to take up arms against the supreme government and to shout "Enough!" to the lie that, says he of the voice, rules our destinies. The P.S. could not help but be terrified in the face of such unusual blasphemy, and was fixated on the idea of leaving him without "a bone". Sixth. He of the voice confessed that, put to choosing between comfortableness and responsibility, he of the voice always chooses responsibility. This statement merited the disapproval of the people present to this preparatory statement and the instinctive reflex of the P.S. to put his his hand on his wallet. Seventh. He of the voice confessed that he has been irreverent with all of the truths that are called supreme, execept those that emanate from being a human being and that they are, to declare clearly, dignity, democracy, liberty and justice. A murmor of disagreement ran through the Holy Inquisition, excuse me, the office of the special investigator. Eighth. He of the voice confessed that they had tried to threaten him, to buy him off, to corrupt him, to put him in jail, and to murder him, and that they had not intimidated him nor bought him off, nor jailed him, nor killed him (up until now, he added, threateningly, to the Investigating P.S.). Ninth. He of the voice confessed that, since he was born, he decided that he preferred to die before turning over his dignity to those who have made lies and crime a modern religion. A thought that was so impractical earned a cynical look from the people present. Tenth. He of the voice confessed that, since then, he had decided to be humble with the humble, and to be arrogant with the powerful. The P.S. added "irreverent" to the charges that were being made against him of the voice. Eleventh. He of the voice confessed that he had believed and believes in human beings, in their capacity to try indefatigably to be a little better each day. He confessed that, among the human race, he has a special affection for the Mexican race, and that he had believed, believes and will believe that Mexico is something more than six letters and a underpriced product on the international market. Twelfth. He of the voice confessed that he believes, firmly, that the bad government has to be brought down by all means and by all parts. He confessed that he believes that a new political, economic and social relation has to be created among all Mexicans, and later on, among all human beings. These promiscious intentions gave shivers to the P.S. investigator. Thirteenth. He of the voice confessed that he will dedicate himself to the absolute last second of his life, to struggling for what he believes. Fourteenth. He of the voice confessed that, in a small and egotistical act, he will dedicate his last second of his life to killing himself. Fifteenth. He of the voice confessed that he was completely bored with this interrogation. This earned him a severe reprimand from the P.S. Interrogator, who explained to him of the voice that the case will continue until the supreme government finds another tale to entertain itself. After these confessions, he of the voice was exhorted to spontaneously declare himself innocent or guilty of the following series of accusations. To each accusation, he of the voice responded: The whites accuse him of being dark. Guilty The dark ones accuse him of being white. Guilty The authentics accuse him of being indigenous. Guilty The treasonous indigenous accuse him of being mestizo. Guilty The machos accuse him of being feminine. Guilty The feminists accuse him of being macho. Guilty The communists accuse him of being anarchist. Guilty The anarchists accuse him of being orthodox. Guilty The Anglos accuse him of being Chicano. Guilty The antisemetics accuse him of being in favor of the Jews. Guilty The Jews accuse him of being pro-Arab. Guilty The Europeans accuse him of being Asiatic. Guilty The government officials accuse him of being oppositionist. Guilty The reformists accuse him of being ultra. Guilty The ultras accuse him of being reformist. Guilty The "historical vanguard" accuse him of calling to the civic society and not to the proletariat. Guilty The civic society accuses him of disturbing their tranquility. Guilty The Stock Exchange accuses him of ruining their breakfast. Guilty The government accuses him of increasing the consumption of antiacids in the government's Departments. Guilty The serious ones accuse of being a jokester. Guilty The adults accuse him of being a child. Guilty The children accuse him of being an adult. Guilty The orthodox leftists accuse him of not condemning the homosexuals and lesbians. Guilty The theoreticians accuse of being a practitioner. Guilty The practicioners accuse of being a theorist. Guilty Everyone accuses him of everything bad that has happened. Guilty Not having anything else to declare in this first preparatory statement, the P.S. Investigator ended the session and smiled imagining the congratulations and check that he would receive from his bosses. P.S. Talking about what was heard on February 16, 1995, on the afternoon of the seventh day of the retreat --And why don't we attack instead of retreating?--Camilo threw at me in the middle of a hill, precisely when I was concentrating most heavily on breathing and on not falling into the ravine at our sides. I didn't respond immediately, I made signs that he should continue climbing. At the top of the hill we three sat down. Night comes to the mountain before it comes to the sky, and in the semi-darkness of this indecisive hour in which light isn't the same, and the shadows waver. Something is heard, far away... I say to Camilo who is listening with attention. "What do you hear?" Crickets, leaves, wind-- responds my other self. --No--I insist--. Pay attention. Now it is Camilo who responds:--Some voices...very far away...a boom--boom--boom...like a drum...from over there...--Camilo points to the west. --This exactly--I tell him. --And?--intervenes my other self. --It is the civic society. Yelling that there can't be war, there has to be dialogue, that words should talk and not weapons...--I explained. --And the boom-boom-boom?--insisted Camilo. --That's their drums. They are calling for peace. There are many people, thousands, dozens of thousands, hundreds of thousands. The government is not listening to them and is confronting them. We, all the way over here, we have to listen to them. We have to respond to them. We can not turn a deaf ear like the government is doing. We have to listen to them, we have to avoid the war until there is no other choice... --And then?--muses my other self. --Then we fight--I responded to Camilo. --When?--he insisted. --When they fall, when they tire. Then that will be the black hour in which we will have to talk... --Fight--says my other self I insist: "We do everything for them. If we fight, it is for them. If we stop fighting, it is for them. In the end they will win. If they annihilate us, they will have the satisfaction of having done everything possible to avoid it, to avoid the war. For this reason they rose up, and now they are not being held back. In addition, they have in their hands a flag that they are responsible for. If we live, they will have the satisfaction of having saved us, of having avoided the war and having demonstrated to us that they are better and that they can handle the flag. Whether we die or live, they live and will become stronger. For them everything, for us nothing..." Camilo said that he preferred his version: "For them nothing, for us everything". P.S. Reigniting his nocturnal delirium Forgetfullness, a faraway lark, is the cause for our going around without face. To kill forgetfullness with a little memory, we cover our chests with lead and hope. If, in some improbable flight, our stay in the wind coincides, you will take off so many clothes and mask of sweet trick, and with lips and skin make the memory better, that of tomorrow. For this reason, a message goes from the earth to the concrete. Listen well! As an unperfect actor on the stage, Who with his fear is put besides his part, Or some fierce thing replete with too much rage Whose strength's abundance weakens his own heart; So I, for fear of trust, forget to say The perfect ceremony of love's rite, And in my own love's strength seem to decay, O'ercharg'd with burden of mine own love's might. O, let my books be then the elocuence And dumb presagers of my speaking breast, Who plead for love, and look for recompense More than that tongue that more hath more express'd. O, learn to read what silent love hath writ; To hear with eyes belonge to love's fine wit". Sonnets William Shakespeare. Sonnet XXIII Good bye, amber lark, don't look for us under your flight. Up above yes, where our pain takes us up, to the sun, where hope rains... P.S. Not being able to give anything on this birthday Heriberto has a birthday on the March 5th. They say he will complete 4 years and start on his fifth. Heriberto walks the mountains, while in his home soldiers live and a tank is on his patio. The toys that a "Operation Toys" brought him for the Three Wise Men's Day, are now in the hands of some general or being analyzed by the Attorney General in search of some secret organization. Heriberto, as much as he prepared for what happened the 10th of February (the invasion of the federal soldiers), at the actual moment, he left behind his best toy: a little car that Heriberto, inside it, played at being a driver around the patio where the coffee was dried. They tell me that Heriberto consoles himself saying that in the mountain his little car couldn't go. Heriberto asked his mom if he ever was going to have his car again, and if the Sup was not going to give him chocolates. Heriberto asked his mom why the war from last year returned, why his car was left behind--Why?--asks Heriberto. His mom does not respond, continuing to walk with the boy and the pain weighing on her shoulders... P.S. Remembering and I recite from memory, verses from Antonio Machado? which refer to distinct things, but which are coming. I In the heart I have the thorn of a passion I was able to pull it out one day Now I don't feel my heart. Sharp golden thorn who will again feel you in the stopped heart... II At night I dreamed that I heard God yelling to me: Watch out! later it was God who slept and I was yelling "Wake up"! P.S. Bleeding unstoppably An injury I carry in my chest Of bloody wheat and there is no bread to alleviate the desire... The Sup at the top of a hill, seeing how the sun goes down, in the west, a twinkle that is going out... (translated by Cindy Arnold, volunteer, National Commission for Democracy in Mexico) ====================================== Harry Cleaver Department of Economics University of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas 78712-1173 USA Phone Numbers: (hm) (512) 442-5036 (off) (512) 471-3211 Fax: (512) 471-3510 E-mail: hmcleave@mundo.eco.utexas.edu ====================================== ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 12:29:51 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert A Harrison Subject: more on NEA [*********PNEWS CONFERENCES************] From: JagDes Subject: NPW: NEA cuts and race Color-coded culture cuts? by Kevin Cartwright Congressional budget hearings on the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) opened in January to ominous forecasts of NEA's demise as a vital funding source for the arts. The political right delights in flogging the NEA for allegedly promoting left-wing ideology and cultivating debased and marginalized art that most Americans don't care about. In fact, "the work that is controversial represents less than 1% of the funding of the endowment," says Vanessa Whang, fundraiser and program developer at La Pena Cultural Center in Berkeley. "But for smaller organizations [the NEA] is their lifeline. They're supporting the meat and potatoes of being able to stay in business for groups like La Pena that are working in communities of color," she says. The NEA has an operating budget of $176 million, a minuscule amount compared to the military budget or even to allocations for military bands, which many have pointed out exceed NEA funding. Many community-based arts groups which serve minority communities receive funding from NEA's Expansion Arts program. If proposed cuts are enacted, this program could be in danger. Federal grants to arts groups and individual artists have been reduced to $24 million, a decrease of $54 million from last year. Though La Pena received a $30,000 grant this year, Whang is concerned that cuts could cost jobs and jeopardize La Pena's ability to offer a range of cultural programs, classes, and events at low ticket prices (or free) to people with few resources. "La Pena and some smaller and mid-size organizations that are working primarily in communities of color are going to be hit really hard by this," Whang says. The Galeria De La Raza opened in San Francisco's Mission district in 1970, and has been committed to showing the art of Chicano, Latino and indigenous cultures. Their NEA funding accounts for 20% of their budget. The lack of funding would severely affect how they approach programming and the needs of the community. According to Liz Lerma, Executive Director of Galeria, the cuts would undermine the power of cutting-edge art. "A lot of the dynamism that you find here comes from us being able to present the art in a timely fashion, you know, when something is happening we allow the artist to respond to it essentially. We would be crippled in that effort," says Lerma. "The politicization of NEA funding is rooted in the right- wing efforts to silence opposition and further marginalize communities of color," Lerma says. "Places like the Galeria are known to show varieties of art that aren't afraid of what the artists are saying. We support it. We're the forum where it can be said," she adds. Whang, Lerma and other cultural activists are collaborating with the San Francisco Arts Democratic Club in an effort to fight the cuts. At the News ' deadline, the club planned a Feb. 18 town hall meeting to strategize and set up a letter- writing and phone campaign. For info: (xxx) xxx-xxxx. ***************************************************************** This article came from News for a People's World, an independent monthly newspaper by and for Northern California activists. You can read more of the News or write to us by visiting our conference, news4people@igc.apc.org. or http://garnet.berkeley.edu:3333/.mags/NPW/NPW.html We can be reached by snail-mail at 522 Valencia St., San Francisco CA 94110, phone (510)548-3642, fax (510)843-5877. ################################################################ PEOPLE BEFORE PROFITS! ################################################################ There are 4 -*PNEWS CONFERENCESs*- [P_news on FIDONET], [p.news and p.news.discuss on PEACENET] & [pnews-L on INTERNET]. ***Conferences are gated together*** -------------------------------------------------------------------- PNEWS CONFERENCES are moderated. If you wish to subscribe to a PNEWS list on InterNet, send your request to: ################################################################## ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 14:01:03 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Chris Stroffolino Subject: Re: Close Reading Dear Michael--THough I know what you mean about "close reading" and its debased form (as in X.J. Kennedy intro to literature anthologies)... there's no need to associate it with "agrarian" in some pejorative way. We do not need some city-country division. If, for instance, there is to be some viable way of dealing effectively with culture, there's no point isolating ourselves against the "agrarian"--which can also be the "tenement migrant farmer" etc...Also, the hegemony of the "contextual" the "new historicist" reading in much "hip" avant-garde discourse that claims to be a reaction to "close reading" goes too far in the opposite direction--like Stephen Greenblatt talking about Renaissance sex-operations for 55 pages and then quoting one line in a Shakespeare play, and saying "A HA, now you know the meaning of it..." and of course the essay is allegedly and ostensibly ABOUT SHAKESPEARE...and though I believe some kind of fruitful "balance" can be achieved, the "cultural studies" aspect of literature seems to be a dinosaur now, and can only have any value if it's ASSUMED that "close reading" is instilled--thus, one generation of academics are teaching a younger one to unlearn the things they never learned (I speak as one who received an M.A. in english without having ever read Shakespeare, for instance), and then there's also the question that is seems the symbiotic relationship of GRADUATE and UNDERGRADUATE ENGLISH departments can be reduced to this--the undergraduates learn exactly what they're suppossed to UNLEARN in grad school....Chris S. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 14:22:23 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Bill Luoma Subject: Tony Door Speaks Dear Friends, I would like to retract my earlier TEXT: "I am the only 2A's, an E, 2G's, an L, an N, & a U Poet." The AHP as a body has produced the first & only, to my knowledge, Authorless TEXT. As virtual as they may be, their texts can either investigated in a rather dull, petty, & ultimately uninteresting but gossipy way; the "search for the author." Or, one can read these texts as the products of the chat-line's collective poetic sub-something. . . . Well, this is getting boring. There is work to be done, & I have my farm to tend to. Tony Door Calabria, Itallia 4/3/95 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 14:38:43 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Bill Luoma Subject: Re: Form, etc. >>Bill Luoma, how did you come to write _My Trip to New >>York_? Is your work--as I'm reading it--predominantly >>"speech-based"? Gary, My prose has lately been slouching toward speech and transparent narrative. I also do visual stuff, and am working on a sound poem, so make what you will of that. I appreciate your asking me how I wrote My Trip to NYC. But the fact is I dont know how I wrote it. It just happened, as if I tuned in a certain radio station in a certain cocteau movie. When I re-read it, some of the sequences continue to astonish me. Like, please let me write like that again. Is it arrogant to say this? I wish I knew how to get into the zone on a regular basis. Waffles? But I remember that Shiva says there are too many variables to formulate a guaranteed methodology. And I agree (what then?) I can only talk around its writing. I was living in San Diego. I visited my friends in NY and Providence that I hadnt seen for years. Jennifer Moxley had just started the Impercipient and published Douglasses poem about the car: if the car is broken, & we cannot go to get it, who will? if the car is broken, & no one can go to get it, who will? if the car is old & broken, wounded like the street, broken like the broken parts of these our broken lives, & we remain? When I got back to San Diego, Scott Bentley wanted me to send him some slides. I was on unemployment so I had time to write. I tried to immitate Douglasses poem because I thought it was the greatest. But I couldnt write beautiful lyrics like Douglass. I started again. I described my trip so Scott could see how his pals were doing on the east coast. I had never written about myself and friends before, so it was fun. I remembered that Helena Bennett was dead. When your mate dies, you lose your keys, forget where youre going, cry in public, miss exits on the road, have moments of aphasia and anemone. The deadpan spacy voice I could feel in my head got put down on paper long hand. I could feel the instances/scenes/slides I was remembering (to describe to Scott) as short paragraphs. I could feel that I loved my friends. Thus the form was born. I wrote 80 paragraphs in two days and revised for a few months. I sent it to Geoff Young at the Figures and he published it. Bill Luoma ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 18:39:11 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michael Boughn Subject: Re: Close reading Dear Chris: I wasn't being pejorative, actually, being someone who, along with Peter Quartermain, believes in the continued importance of teaching the practice of something called "close reading", as in reading closely. The "agrarian" in that list of attributes was a perhaps too arcane reference to the fact that the originators of what came to be called "The New Criticism" were originally known as the Southern Agrarians. This group included Cleanth Brooks (still, in my books, one of the most astute and careful readers I've encountered), Allen Tate, Robert Penn Warren, and Laura Riding (yes folks, no jive). They considered themselves "agrarians" in that they felt they represented traditional, agrarian, humanist values in the face of the degradations of urban, capitalist, commodified culture. Their theories about "the poem" as a formal object reflected their desire to find an uncontaminated space in which to locate those values. The later contraction of those fundamentally conservative (and I do not use that word here pejoratively, but rather descriptively) values into the kind of mastery Keith Tuma (and via him Michael Palmer) refer to is an interesting story, that has a lot, I think, to do with the institutionalization of the American intellectual. But it's another story. Best, Mike mboughn@epas.utoronto.ca ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 23:42:28 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Marc Nasdor Subject: Re: E - speration and Communit - E I'd like to responding to James's reposting of his Feb. 27 comments: > ... The effective limits of community are not yet clear, but from > several people's perspective they relate to the number of messages one > can get through considering the available time. This obviously differs > for different people, so the quantifying of community is not possible at > a single value for all participants. What I am looking for is a > suggestion how to "customize" each person's community according to their > capacity and interest... We should look at community formation relative to the LISTSERV phenomenon. First, let me say that anyone who participates is a de facto member of this community; and maybe even full-time lurkers as well. I imagine some (myself, sometimes) get into a routine of subscribing and unsubscribing according to the general tenor of the discussion threads, not to mention volume of mail, as James notes. Some threads (Experiwhat?, Boy Talk, Apex of the M, etc.) were at times as satisfying as a good Monster Truck demo. I haven't a clue about that Hokey Pokey business. I suggest that self-restraint is the only kind of customization that is possible here, otherwise people start to vote with their bozo filters. After all, the object of the game is to create a climate that encourages participation. As for the subject of splitting the list, worse things have happened. It would be nice if there could be some general agreement not to engage in chain-jerking, personal attacks, or "reading" someone out of a discussion, the rest will take care of itself. Or maybe we should just apply chaos theory and see if we *can* quantify community after all. Cheers, Marc ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 23:42:43 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Marc Nasdor Subject: Re: Close Reading Chris Stroffolino writes: >...there's no need to associate it with "agrarian" in some pejorative way. > We do not need some city-country division. If, for instance, there is > to be some viable way of dealing effectively with culture, there's no > point isolating ourselves against the "agrarian"--which can also be > the "tenement migrant farmer" etc... . . . > Also, the hegemony of the "contextual" the "new historicist" reading > in much "hip" avant-garde discourse that claims to be a reaction to > "close reading" goes too far in the opposite direction... Good points. In any case, I assume "agrarian" is this usage refers mainly to those New Criticism poets who have been associated with the term for several decades. Without acting on the urge to drive out to the nearest hacienda to bond with the first tenement migrant farmer within hugging distance, it seems to me that much of the "city/country division" in American poetry stems from a kind of urban arrogance that, unfortunately, has been characteristic of some members of the poetry avant-garde (of several ideological persuasions). For me, writers who obsess on literature of "the coasts" are guilty of that kind of arrogance . A slight digression: Try arguing with an art critic/historian about the validity of contemporary painting in small cities with active arts communities and innovative artists (e.g., Cleveland, Baltimore, Austin, etc.). Artists from these areas are punished both critically and economically for such transgressions as refusing to move to NY/SF/LA.... A friend of mine who writes for _Art News_ once insisted to me that writers and artists who remain in these "minor" communities are perpetually discovering what has already been discovered, an attitude that is ignorant at best. From where does he suppose most "New York artists" originate. Does literary and artistic knowledge/ vision/accomplishment come into being only after exposure to "major" communities? I don't think so. Regards, Marc Nasdor nasdor@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 23:03:35 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tenney Nathanson Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 5 Mar 1995 to 6 Mar 1995 In-Reply-To: <9503070531.AA87286@aruba.ccit.arizona.edu> talkin' bout my generation, I guess, but: re: close reading, and who unlearns, supposedly, what they learned as undergraduates, and so on. (I don't mean to rant but): after teaching poetry/theory grad courses the last few years, I finally decided to cash in on a gathering hunch and teach, at the grad level, the kind of course I sometimes offer at u.g. level and that used to be offered all the time: "close reading" that is. I'm having a great time (some students are, some probably aren't) but so far the results are pretty staggering. We're doing the course as a workshop, in which a poem and its explication, xeroxed in advance, are discussed concurrently. And (to me) it's just staggering what the generally bright and able students don't have a clue about and don't (yet) by and large have much knack at all for doing. Just on the very basic level of poem as speech act or Burkean symbolic action; or when it comes to thinking about trope as somehow functional in a reasonably sophisticated way: it's a great big blank by and large (w a couple of stunningly smart exceptions). I dunno whether it was always that way (that is, contra Richards, whether no matter how many classes everyone takes basically 10% of the people have an ear and the other 90% can't buy one) or not, but I suspect that not so much deconstruction & all as cultural studies is partly responsible. I don't mean it as a discipline (or non discipline) so much as how it gets filtered into the brainpans of the undergraduates who end up applying, at least, to Arizona, where the students are quite good but it's obviously not Berkeley, say. Even at the next level up--reading the essays on poetry that come in to Arizona Quarterly, say, it's really just themes themes themes. So this doesn't continue to sound like only a dispeptic rant, I guess I'd want to say that the course is a whole lot of fun (for me anyway), that I intend to offer it every couple of years, and that I think the old close-reading staple has pretty much disappeared from the u.g. curriculum and needs re-instating. But it really is astonishing to me, still, the extent to which grad students in the course write essays/explications tht have virtually nothing to do w wht I understand reading poetry to involve. must be time to power down here. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 10:00:27 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steve Evans Subject: Espousing 3/7 FREELY ESPOUSING UPDATE * 7 MARCH 1995 + DEFENSE OF INDIVIDUAL GRANTS? + ADVOCACY DAY / AMERICA FOR THE NEA: LIST OF STATE COORDINATORS + PROTESTING CUTBACKS TO STUDENT AID + MARCH CALENDAR +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ DEFENSE OF INDIVIDUAL GRANTS As many of you know, the main target of proposed rescissions to the NEA's FY 95 budget are individual grants: $4m out the $5m targetted for cut-back comes from that area. In this regard at least, the rescission process offers just a foretaste of what future appropriation battles will look like. If you have a cogent defense of individual grants, now is the time to air it. We will include any comments on this matter in future *FE* updates. AMERICA FOR THE NEA: STATE COORDINATORS Here are some people to contact if you are interested in traveling to Washington D.C. for "Advocacy Day" on 14 March 1995. STATE: NAME-ORGANIZATION/PHONE NUMBER: ARIZONA Ms.Sam Campana-Arizonans for Cultural Development/602-990-1664 CALIFORNIA Susan E. Hoffman-Calif. Confederation of the Arts/916-447-7811 CONNECTICUT Jeffrey M Siegel-Hassett, George, and Siegel/203-296-2111 FLORIDA Ms. Sherron Long-Florida Cultural Action Alliance/407-848-6231 GEORGIA Shelley Rose-Georgia Citizens for the Arts/404-876-1720 ILLINOIS Alene Valkanis-Illinois Arts Alliance/312-855-3105 INDIANA Carol Darst-Advocates for the Arts/317-638-3984 IOWA Ruth Nash-Iowa Citizens for the Arts/319-588-9751 KANSAS Ellen Morgan-Assoc. of Community Arts Agencies/913-825-2700 KENTUCKY Jean Perry-Kentucky Assembly of Local Arts Agencies/502-875-7206 Cecilia Wooden-Kentucky Citizens for the Arts, Inc/502-589-3116 MARYLAND Sue Hess/Susan Eubinag-MD Citizens for the Arts/410-244-3278 MASSACHUSETTS Ival Stratford-Kovner of M'Assembly/ 617-329-5691 MICHIGAN Maryland Wheaton-Concerned Citizens for the Arts/313-961-1776 MISSISSIPPI Ms. Thalia Mara-U.S. Int'l Baller Competetion/601-362-9158 NEW HAMPSHIRE Byron Champlin-Arts 1000/603-226-5554 (day), 228-0097 (eve) NEW JERSEY John McEwan-ArtPride NJ/201-379-3636 x2623 NEW MEXICO Mimi Roberts-Arts New Mexico/505-984-2180 NEW YORK America for the NEA/212-245-4802, x146 NORTH CAROLINA Elizabeth Taylor-Arts Advocates of NC/919-821-3712 OHIO Michael Robinson-Kent State U/216-672-3765 PENNSYLVANIA Raymond M. Flynt-Citizens for the Arts in Pa./717-234-0587; or, Melissa Birnbaum-Greater Philadelphia Cultural Alliance/215-440-8100 SOUTH CAROLINA Betty Plumb-S.Carolina Arts Alliance/ 803-324-8296 SOUTH DAKOTA Janet Brown-S.Dakotans for the Arts/ 605-578-1783 TENNESSEE Becky Craft-Tennesseans for the Arts/901-664-5838 UTAH Cary Stevens Jones-Utah Cultural Alliance/801-461-6617 VIRGINIA Daisy Portuondo-ProArt Assoc/703-328-0156 (day), 328-2174(eve) WEST VIRGINIA Pamel Parziale-Arts Advoc. Committee of W.Va/304-725-4251 PROTESTING CUTBACKS TO STUDENT AID The following information is taken from a "Call to Action" released by the National Association of Graduate-Professional Students. You can contact NAGPS at nagps-interest@netcom.com: > A broad alliance of national student groups have issued a call > to supporters of student financial aid to cooperate in communicating > a "Save Student Aid" message to Congress March 13 to 20, 1995. These > dates have been selected because of the need for this message to get > to the Budget Committee as they work on the FY96 Budget. > > Calls and letters are needed. For the first time on this issue, > NAGPS will provide a central e-mail address to which you can send > letters to Congress. We will print them out and deliver them to > Congress March 17 and 20. > > TALKING POINTS > > * The interest exemption makes student loans affordable to millions > of students. Graduate & professional students, in particular, > would suffer tremendously if the interest payments made on student > loans while those students were in school were to stop. The > average undergraduate would have an increased debt of $4,000 to > $5,000. Graduate debt could be increased as much as $35,000. > * Our nation must continue to invest in education if we are to > successfully absorb other budget cuts. Cutting the budget while > also cutting student aid will reduce our ability to compete in > world markets, and reduce US research & development. Making school > more expensive will reduce enrollments. Education can be the > cushion that keeps budget cuts from harming our economy. > * More expensive student aid will result in fewer people choosing > lower paying, but critical, jobs. Many simply won't be able to > afford to be teachers and family medical practitioners. > * Talk about your own situation. How would you be affected with the > loss of the interest exemption? > * Don't forget to explain your position carefully to staff people. > Many are newly hired and need to have the issues explained to them. > BE A RESOURCE! EXPLAIN, DON'T ACCUSE! > > E-MAIL CONGRESS? > > Conventional wisdom says that e-mail to Congress doesn't have the same > weight as a letter or phone all. We've figured a way around that! The > special e-mail address to which people can send letters to Congress is: > > SAVE-STUDENT-AID@NETCOM.COM > > Those e-mail letters will be printed out and delivered to Congress. Make > sure the letters are in standard letter form with the complete name, > address and phone of the person writing. > > Address Letters to: > Name > US House of Representatives > "Location" > Washington, DC 20515 MARCH CALENDAR IN PROCESS 1 Mar Senate Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, Rep. Slade Gorton (R-WA), chair. Witnesses: Sheldon Hackney and Jane Alexander 2 Mar NEH reauthorization hearings continue in Senate Labor and Human Resources Subcom on Education, Arts, and the Humanities 3 Mar House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee (FY96 funding), Rep. Ralph Regula (R-OH), chair. Subject: National Gallery of Art and Kennedy Center ---- 13 Mar FY95 Rescission Package expected to be considered on House floor (includes $5m cut to NEA among its proposed $17b totals) 13 Mar The National Association of Graduate-Professional Students is calling for a week of messages to Congress in defense of Financial Aid, Interest Free Loan Deferments, and other components of federal educational assistance 14 Mar National Advocacy Day 21 Mar House Interior Appropriatons Subcommittee (FY96 funding), Rep. Ralph Regula (R-OH), chair. Subject: NEH and IMS 29 Mar Day of Campus Action Against Contract on America (alternate date for campuses not in session on the 29th is 23 March). ********** Permission is granted to freely copy this document in electronic form, or to print for personal use. *Freely Espousing* is an ongoing project aimed at protecting and further democratizing access to the arts, humanities, broadcast media, and emerging forms of communication. For more information, please contact: Steve Evans & Jennifer Moxley 61 E. Manning St., Providence RI 02906-4008 401-274-1306 Steven_Evans@Brown.Edu ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 10:06:39 -0500 Reply-To: David McAleavey Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David McAleavey Subject: Teaching close reading In-Reply-To: <199503070606.BAA07861@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu> This thread may have more relevance on the T-AMLIT list, or perhaps on some other, but I have to agree with Tenney Nathanson that the university's emphasis on theory & cultural criticism takes both undergrads and graduate students away from close reading. How crucial is close reading to writers, to poets particularly? The students I teach who have most interest in close reading are those who take as many creative writing courses as they can. But the different types of reading -- pertinent to different types of writing -- a "close reading" of works by most of those subscribing to this list might not much resemble, task by specific task, a close reading appropriate to poems written by those in that other, dominant, not-precisely-parallel tradition (as can be found discussed, say, on the CAP-L list). But it could be that NT's point is that no matter the difference in poetic ideology or practice, a critical reading strategy which involves reading-with-a-purpose (i.e., to explore cultural or economical conditions imbedded in various texts) may not _need_ to include close reading strategies. Reading for "pleasure," however, or reading to "understand the author's meaning or purpose" -- those tasks do involve close reading (no matter the poetics, I suspect). The grad-level seminars I've been teaching the past two years make me think students haven't learned much about close reading; but most find it valuable to get an introduction. Minds are malleable.... -- David McAleavey ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 16:57:01 WET Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "I.LIGHTMAN" Subject: for, m etc Gary, thanks for your posting asking: > "Ira Lightman, "No Things But in Ideas," the work of yours I read in _Mirage_; would you be willing to talk a little about how the form (a brief excerpt) FOUR O'CLOCK, LIGHT IN THE HOUSE, STREET TWELVE BRIT NIGHT SLEEP LEE, STREE T BRUSH, MORN GONE, BRITAIN A PPROACH ... addresses, if & as it does, that very provocative title?" The thing is having a number of theoretical and personal and aesthetic enthusiasms/beliefs, and not being able right now to set them all in relation in a complex formal structure, longpoem etc. So nothing will get worked out or mapped in this poem, but "disparate" things (ie with unexplained connections) will appear in the poem, in this case because the title was in my head when the poem was going down on the page. So no go on the form of this poem being shown to address the title, but perhaps a few remarks about strains: 1) the title; I spent two years in New Zealand working by myself on the prosody of the first seven Cantos of Ezra Pound; there is a music that quite formally follows through (not free verse at all) *if* the words can be read with the emphasis, investment, background reading and thinking and feeling that I hypothesize Pound had. There are the equivalent too of dilemmas and paradoxes, just as there would be in well-argued piece of philosophical prose (musically monotonous), in this "music that quite formally follows through". So "no things but in ideas" in the sense that all objects, and musics, to me depend on seeing or meeting the composer or a wonderful interpreter, or reading good texts about or by the author, with huge empathetic imagination, so that one has a world of similar ideas and emphases (the word "incest", for example, scans very differently depending on your take on Freud). And then the pay-off; hearing the most wonderful formal complexity, accepting the ideas in one's head in an act of being the composer (intentionality!) that is not so just intentionaliy, in the sense of "you can only get it if you agree with it", but *negative intentionality*, like Keats' negative capability. Oh and maybe some of the author's soul is left in you after.... 2) specific poetic in this piece; my biggest influence is a painter and muralist called Betty Schlesinger, from South London. She is the only avant-garde muralist I know, in the sense that she works with the primary weapon of the muralist, trompe l'oeil (mislead the eye), but where other muralists do this by (thinking they are) misleading you into thinking there is a mantelpiece on the wall or a window looking out onto a garden, Schlesinger does this by taking the lines of a room and painting against them eg a diagonal bridge painted around the corner of a room so that if you look at it hard you can't see the right-angle; in other words, working with people's unchallenged expectations that a wall in a house will always have another wall at right-angles to it, or a door of such and such a height or a room with a sloping ceiling will slope always in a particular way. Her murals work with those expectations (like some avant-gardists work with expectations of left-to-right reading across the page and tug at them, Carla Harryman, for example) and tug at them. She uses her skills as a representational painter (her canvases are usually still-life, which "accounts" for her utter neglect by a London art scene) to do something genuinely avant-garde, when so many lazy conceptualists with no draughtsmanship abound. 3) I often read texts as trompe l'oeil, seeing other words within or rhyming with the real words in the text; we don't know ourselves, perhaps the mistake word or phrase was the real one. 4) In this poem there is a specific narrative line unfairly split often in mid-word, sometimes for musical value, sometimes to open the text to others and me to read "subconscious trompe l'oeil". 5) There's also a lot of very personal references eg to the subway stop "Osterley" on the Piccadilly Line on the London Underground. The London Underground has too much of a mythic status and too many connotations for most readers to use it in other than a hidden and secretive way. The whole poem is about flying from London to San Fransisco, seeing Osterley from the plane, but that isn't needed; I was putting myself in at least two frames of mind, one gives a music to those who know the personal and theoretical ideas (as in my reading of Pound I think I did) and the other gives a music to those who want to read it as flat surface (I hope). Some of the words in the text don't resolve into a narrative at all, though, of any sort. 6) It was basically an improvisation, leading to the fragment I nudged the editor towards putting on the cover: me/an/in g = t-cells This tends towards my favourite form: the mnemonic. Where lots of rhythms and ideas flow into and out of the captured moment, just as a painting selects a moment, suggests the past leading up to it, indicates in the texture and light some of where it is all going. I wanted to say, as an AIDS activist, how "me" is a thing, so needs an "an", and not a "the" as the thing it is decided by different ideas, sometimes many at once. To emphasis the "in", that we are all "in" this epidemic, whether HIV positive or friends of a PWA or none of the above. And we are "in" some kind of self, "it p ills self hood", and need to act energetically to see others' constructions on us and counter-act. And also to figure us and parody us, in the vision of medicine, as sums and algebra (and also to bring in some maths, on a personal level, because I liked it at school and it was a major boost of my self-esteem to be good at it, but is that "in" the poem or not, doesn't have to be). I'm doing lots of mnemonic type paintings of words now, in homage to Johanna Drucker, but I don't know that "me/an/in g = t-cells" worked without all the other improv energy around it, personalising it, making it less slogan-like, as I prefer to do mnemonics that aren't slogans. What I do now is live these improvs in my head until I come up with a little phrase or letter-cluster I want to paint. Sorry to bore everyone else, but I wanted to answer you, Gary, in public like you addressed me, Best Ira 2) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 12:42:59 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Chris Stroffolino Subject: Re: Close Reading Right on, Mark, to hell with big city snobbery fascism, etc, etc.... I mean even "cleveland," etc--is BIG compared to certain art communities not on the map.... But then i wonder if what you're talking about to some extent isn't already a done dea, i mean the "decentralization" of the art world---somebody wrote about there not being a SCENE any more in SF, and NYC is not THAT happening anymore (etc. etc.) and a lot of this has to do with MONEY, and JOBS and FEAR. And I myself wanna move to NYC soon i think (even though...) and I realize how the conservatives have been highly anti-city since the whites could afford to leave in the 50's and 60 ' 's and up to now...and then I find "my people" more in a place like NYC than in the little town I grew up in (I went to a 10th year highschool reunion 5 years ago and saw most of my "hood" friends with their split- level babies and surbaban ties and potbellies and smug boring etc...or ) and so we RUN to the city in an attempt to find something where you DON'T NEED A CAR...Now, perhaps an unfortunate consequence of this then is defensive city snobbery. I too succumb to it (here in SMALLBANY--see what i mean)...I guess I consider the SUBURBS te big enemy....Once Jeff Hansen (who is a dear friend) said in a "POETICS BRIEFS" that the ego is certainly worse than the SUBURBS (i'm paraphrasing)...well, I disagree but I guess if I'm preaching a kind of Marxist unity of cities and agrarian should take the republicanburbs into "account" as well... Best, CHris Stroffolino-----and sorry I SHOULD CHANGE THE TOPIC TO "TOWN & COUNTRY" as opposed to "CLOSE READING"--though the name of the small town I was born in s "READING" and Wallace Stevens was from there and Palmer says the NEW Formalists like READING him, so maybe there is POETIC LOGIC if not poetic justice.... ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 12:37:31 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: more on close reading forgive me if i came in too late on this subject and missed important opening salvoes (i just joined the list y-day) --but it seems that when people refer to "close reading," they have in mind a very particular and historically circumscribed set of concerns --not only foregrounding the materiality of the text itself (words) but a certain vocabulary that is, indeed, inherited, relatively recently, from the agrarians/new critics. but there has always been "close reading" and an hermeneutic/exegetical/interpretive process --in the sense of careful attention to the material structures of a work-- of one kind or another --whether from a rhetorical (medieval) perspective or other --many people read religious texts, the bible or koran, with a close attention that would put prosodists to shame --and that there's no need to fetishize the kind of close reading we learned in poetry classes as the only close reading that enables intimacy and respect for a text. much good cultural studies work --for example, see daniel boyarin's writing on talmudic traditions --combines a close and charged relationship with the structural/formal elements of a work with broader concerns. that's all folks--maria damon ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 13:29:50 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Patrick Phillips Subject: cloze reading The notion of close reading, parsing, fakes an ideological neutrality that we've all come to know as a right-wing excision of the social because it relegates the poetic act to an independent linguistic domain. This embrace of the idea beyond the motivation of it is a close (cloze) reading - a cold embrace. The fold, or moment of discovery, comes when we are not parsing "The Idea of Order at Key West," the lay of the land/sea as described by a resolute metaphysician. This is par - the task of close reading as an encounter with the independent idea is equal to the face, or aspect of the writing. It seems to me the real moments of discovery lie in the friction between the practice of distilling and a poem that refuses, or complicates that distillation through, for example, it's linguistic opacity and/or cultural "position." In these contexts, close reading becomes an engagement with that friction, the totality of languaging, the rubbing up against the social, the motivation of the poem cutting in one direction, while the idea of the language tumbles in another. It is here that there is a determination of reading as a process of the social, because here our belief in the distinction between language and motivation is tried. So, in this trial, close reading becomes a passionate exchange of the social and the linguistic; the linguistic becomes/is the social. Close reading in this case is really close. We begin to parse, or closely read ourselves. Patrick Phillips ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 18:16:10 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Edward Foster Subject: Re: more on close reading in fact, "close reading" is a deeply authoritarian idea. why not just advocate misreading? why not fail students with the right answers? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 19:34:55 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Sheila Murphy Subject: Response to IL's Response to GS For the record, I found Ira's response to Gary's question quite enlightening. This is the kind of thing I'd like to see more of in this discussion (Thus, my previous question about how people handle/locate/imagine form in their own work). Thanks, guys! Sheila ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 06:10:43 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gary Sullivan Subject: Re: Form, to Ira & Bill Ira & Bill, Wonderful to be off-line a couple of days, come back, & discover both of your responses, talking around & about your work, interwoven with (in contrast to, which is not to say "opposed to") this simultaneous discussion of close reading. Appreciated, very much, both of your thoughts; and, no, Ira, it wasn't at *all* "boring"; as Sheila notes, she'd been asking for such material to be posted, as had Mark Wallace. Would like to see, if anything, *more* of this kind of material here, actually. Anyone else? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 05:58:18 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ron Silliman Subject: Re: more on close reading Ed Foster wrote: >in fact, "close reading" is a deeply authoritarian idea. why not just advocate misreading? why not fail students with the right answers? > I don't get the connection between close reading, as a critical interrogative practice and the implicit sense of right/wrong that Ed is suggesting. I never met a reading of one of my poems that wasn't also a misreading, and that "mis" has often been instructive. One is not after "right" readings, I hope. But I would love to hear Ed or Don explicate the authoritarian impulse they feel lurks behind the practice. Similarly, David McA, I've always felt that the turn away from close reading via theory was a diminution of theory itself. We're all impoverished thereby. Ron Silliman rsillima@ix.netcom.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 08:53:28 -0600 Reply-To: quarterm@unixg.ubc.ca Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: peter quartermain Subject: Re: more on close reading Ed Foster wrote: > in fact, "close reading" is a deeply authoritarian idea. why not just > advocate misreading? why not fail students with the right answers? I'm not so sure that *mis*reading is a very helpful term because it suggests right readings. my own flip response here (I'm supposed to be on the bus on the way to work) is simply that some readings are more interesting than others, but I guess that's another whole can of worms. I'll have to think some more on that. As for those "students", well, they are why I have to catch the bus, but I'm not sure what the connection is between "students" (presumably working for grades) and close reading (presumably done for, well, call it "pleasure"). Some of my students come up with admirably "correct" and appallingly DUMB or should I say dull readings because there's no delight in them. They read out of duty. But when I asked my original question, I was not thinking pedagogy, I was wondering about my own reading practice -- which is what I take to the classroom anyway -- and is, I'd say (or tries to be), well, attentive. I'm not entirely sure how "students" got into __________________________________________________________________________ Peter Quartermain 128 East 23rd Avenue voice and fax (604) 876 8061 Vancouver B.C. e-mail: quarterm@unixg.ubc.ca Canada V5V 1X2 __________________________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 08:53:57 -0600 Reply-To: quarterm@unixg.ubc.ca Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: peter quartermain Subject: More on close reading Oops! I hit the wrong key in my reply to Ed Foster and sent the message before I meant to, Now I've forgotten the rest I meant to say. I'm sorry hurried message closes so abruptly. Now for the bus, in the warm rain. Peter __________________________________________________________________________ Peter Quartermain 128 East 23rd Avenue voice and fax (604) 876 8061 Vancouver B.C. e-mail: quarterm@unixg.ubc.ca Canada V5V 1X2 __________________________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 13:43:46 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: John Shoptaw Subject: Re: More on close reading X-To: peter quartermain In-Reply-To: <199503081754.MAA08192@panix4.panix.com> I'm happy Peter Quartermain raised the vexing question of close reading, also one of the intersections between poetry and theory. In recent critical history, close reading took a nose dive when De Man's wartime journalism was uncovered. Deconstruction, I think, really became close reading for most of us in the eighties. Then, nobody I knew (like Barbara Johnson) knew just what to do, except perhaps stop. I totally agree with Chris Stroffolino that post-deconstructive tendencies tend to slight or ignore texts altogether. I also think that what I've been calling "textually specific" reading can be what Patrick Phillips calls "a passionate exchange between the social and the linguistic," one which overcomes the isolation with the materiality of the poem. Yet if we continue to read, I don't think we can read just like Brooks, Bloom, or de Man have been doing (when "misreading" began to be prized). I'm now at work on a book tentatively called "Reading Poetry Now." Have any of you any suggestions about innovative readings, or reading theories, out there? I'd appreciate the help. John Shoptaw ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 15:37:10 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mn Center For Book Arts Subject: Re: Teaching close reading X-To: David McAleavey In-Reply-To: <2f5c899d2d52008@maroon.tc.umn.edu> I've had a lot of interruptions reading the list lately, but I recall that Tenney Nathanson made at least a tangential connection between close reading or the lack of it in schools and the lack of an ear by students. I know that I did a lot of close reading as a grad & undergrad in the 70's, but I don't recall that such practice helped much in hearing the work. I also don't recall that the professors teaching such close readings had much of an ear. Whereas listening to Monk & Miles (the sounds & the silences), as well as Cage, and reading Pound & H.D. & later Niedecker, & always Dickinson, helped a lot. Reading for pleasure -- is that connected to close reading? charles alexander ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 09:50:12 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tony Green Organization: The University of Auckland Subject: close=intimate It is interesting to see that Close-Reading can be such a hotly contestable term. ( I suppose that this is a problem not of poetics at large simply, but of a pedagogic situation for poetics.) What are we talking about? Reading, re-reading, reading again & again, over & over; reading through, reading around & as Ron was saying mis-reading (traduire=trahir)....putting into relief this & that for the sake of the other, (the Other).... Working with images (pictures &tc) what is often wanting is a good stretch of time for what is on, in and around the image to come to light. Call this close-reading & spectres of "fascist" practices associated now with the sins of New Criticism (oh boy! these -isms again) appear! Call it the slow careful detailed intimate & thoughtful reading or viewing of a "work" or "piece" or " ". The question then arises how much of the extensive critical, aesthetic, theoretical, historical literature in any of the arts is grounded in this process? Or even better, the question might be how little. I suppose that reactions posted recently to the close-reading of New Critics is grounded in readings of New Critical texts. I must "confess" that I thought F.R.Leavis's practical criticism lectures were among the most exciting and stimulating events of the 1950's in eng.lit. at Cambridge, because there was a widespread lack of close-up attention to texts in respect of "values". Whether he was right or wrong was not consequential, because he always insisted that questions of value were always open-ended. The usual alternative attention to texts was that of annotation of detail. (But I suppose that is not what the objection to "fascist" New Criticism is about, given the American Agrarianism argument. But then I wouldn't want to take up the positions of Michael Fried in relation to the values of Abstraction, while I still admire the persistence and specificity of his critical writing). There is a problem in "higher" education that stems from the difficulty of close or intimate reading (I too like "Density" and "Difficulty" and "Opacity" as points d'appui). It is easier for students to sidestep it and get rewarded for translating theory instead (for many younger academics) or (in art history) to do iconography and annotation and cataloguing (for older academics). There is resistance to taking time and space for the specifics of a "work" from both directions (new & old, so to speak). Radical and Subversive is what it may well be in 1995 to do close, intimate reading. Call it perhaps "description", description of artworks. "Describe a picture", as an exercise for students, immediately raises the problems barely sketched above. It is probably impossible to specify with any precision (the too many variables in communication processes, Sandra Braman?) how to do this exercise. Lack of specification is interesting: it allows for students to determine specifications in the actual occasion of writing. (This kind of work is best carried out as far as possible from university grade systems, because the protocols for description are so unspecific). Tony Green, e-mail: t.green@auckland.ac.nz post: Dept of Art History, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand Fax: 64 9-373 7014 Telephone: 64 9 373 7599 ext. 8981 or 7276 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 18:28:15 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: braman sandra Subject: Re: close=intimate In-Reply-To: <199503082349.AA22730@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> from "Tony Green" at Mar 9, 95 09:50:12 am Shiva confesses that precisely the reason she never studied literature either as an undergraduate or graduate, the reason she isn't doing literature as a professor -- though she persistently and passionately continues to read and write and read and write and read and write -- was being TOLD how to read.... Somehow, for this poet, it took the life out of it.... Sandra Braman ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 18:28:02 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jonathan Brannen Subject: Re: Response to IL's Response to GS Yes, Sheila, Gary, and Ira! As someone more interested in process than theory, I'd like to see a lot more of this type of discussion. Jonathan ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 18:56:11 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jonathan Brannen Subject: Re: Community-apology? Dear Gary, Having returned from a few days off line and having now read your post beginning: "My apologies to Jonathan Brannen and others for being reductive." I have to echo Tony Green's "Apology accepted... But not what I was looking for." I wasn't complaining because you were reductive. My complaint was that you were inaccurate and that I felt your characterizations of other writers and presses in Minnesota had perhaps performed a disservice to them. The point I had hope to make was that it's better to ask questions than to assume. You elicit marvelous responses when you do ask. Keep up the good work. I think you and Sheila and Bill and Ira have introduced a needed and useful new direction to the discussion on this list. Thanks, Jonathan ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 23:20:23 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David McAleavey Subject: Re: Teaching close reading X-To: Mn Center For Book Arts In-Reply-To: Most of my teachers, I think, were excellent, so maybe my experience differs from the norm. Still, I did have some losers thrown in there, and surely some of them were just being tendentious under the guise of doing "close reading." From such you wouldn't learn much of anything, of ear or eye. We've all had enough bad teaching to know what it's like to feel stepped on. The best writers, theorists or poets, have paid a lot of attention to things -- for example, to the prosody of the first seven Cantos. "Close reading," the way I intended it, is just a subset of "paying attention." Reading page after page of "close readings" of poems, on the other hand, wears thin pretty quickly. Let's just read the poems, I want to say! In my earlier post I spoke simplistically of teaching strategies of close reading pertinent to different types of writing. That's not right. We certainly can learn strategies for reading, as we can learn strategies for finding our way through the woods; but we can't know in advance the "type," if there is such a thing, of a piece of writing. We really do have to read it, I guess. I had tried to suggest by using "scare-quotes" that I understand "reading for pleasure" to be a complicated if not illusory notion, but yes, as a practical matter, people who read poetry frequently will tend, I think, to read it carefully. That doesn't mean that everyone is open to poetries which do things differently from what they like to have done, or what they are used to liking. Pound's problem with Whitman may have been that Pound didn't see carefulness in Whitman's work. Or maybe he just didn't like it and so couldn't read it carefully. And now I'll tiptoe back to the shadows.. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 22:56:57 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Eric M. Gleason" In-Reply-To: David McAleavey "Re: Teaching close reading" (Mar 8, 11:20pm) David McAleavey: "Reading page after page of "close readings" of poems, on the other hand, wears thin pretty quickly. Let's just read the poems, I want to say!" I just joined this list last week, and the first messages I saw led me to belive the discussion would soon turn to crop rotation. I was relieved when I saw the posts about close reading, then disillusioned when I wasn't taking the time to read most of the posts! My background in poetry is severely limited...(read: they made me write haiku and limerick in grade school) and find myself almost overwhelmed at the content of my first undergrad poetry class. When I first started reading for the course, I had no choice but to slow down and try to immerse myself in the poems, reading closely (almost drowning myself). There have been many times when I instinctively wanted to "just read the poem" but it would all just turn into a jumble of words. For comfort, i would often trun to Dr. Seuss and read aloud. Chanting "Fox in Socks" while stomping around a dorm room can be very liberating and soothing when Olson becomes frustrating. Let's just read the poem! -i want to say it to, but it gets me nowhere. -- ________________________________________________________________________________ "I was a teenage monkey wrench Eryque "I know I spell my name wrong but that's no reason to hurt me!" Gleason gleaeri@xtreme2.acc.iit.edu ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 01:29:39 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kenneth Sherwood Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: Intimacy and intimations of a micropoetics 1. Confusions of terminology: "close reading" v. intimate reading as if theory and 'to read' can nae share the same bed. And deconstructions be damned, there is not a spirit of MIS-READING (in the academy anyway) despite the prevalence of misreadings there. 2. Fact is "close reading" as method gallops toward singularity, imperial resolution of the chord and production of the cadence. So to Charles A., if only "close reading" could be for pleasure. How would we name it? 3. Within the hallowed halls if prophylactic theory promotes safe texts and declining intimacy, our loneliness may not be quelled through explication. Brooks and Warren are at peace and the students don't read, agreed, but the spirit of "close readings" climactic S&M mastery over the poem lingers. 4. "I can't read this poem; I don't understand it at all." Sure if anecdotal evidence of an authoritarian effect of close readings ethic of closure. 5. Good to talk about the "pleasures" of "textually intimate" readings. Of course the risk of accumulating first a mass and then a theory. In fact to talk so (as some have begun to do) would perhaps bridge the gap (an imagined gap as Ron Silliman (will the real Ron please stand up) demonstrates in various theoretical yet intimate readings in _New Sentence_) between the two threads on this list and between theory and "just reading the poem." 5b. Just Do It? 6. Pleasure this week of hearing Ric Caddel (from NE England) read and give a reading of Bunting, an intimate reading complete with overhead projector that gave intimate elucidation, made it possible to hear with the ears 7. Suppose the theory monolith has turned the academy's ears away from particulars of reading, strayed from the text ye little lost lambs; causal--coincincident correlation with with the fading of poetry (however read, misread, or unread-but- theorized in the past) in general from the sanctified syllabi? Ken Sherwood ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 01:04:37 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tenney Nathanson Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 7 Mar 1995 to 8 Mar 1995 In-Reply-To: <9503090743.AA129713@aruba.ccit.arizona.edu> Charles ("Alexander"): re re close reading and ears ("they fling their speech by means of it" & etc?): agreed, very much, that courses in close reading don't teach ear possession (which I think I said or meant to say): I dunno whether I learned my poetry ear at Monk's knee (though Wallace Shawn has a great Monk story) or not, or whether, finally, you did--that may be a romanticized account--but I do agree I didn't learn mine in grad school. Going to grad school I instead felt by and large that those professing didn't have much to teach me since I had developed my ear by writing (and reading, in a non-academic contxt--Cantos on way to teach elementary school on long subway rides to Brooklyn w refugees from the all night Third World Club etc etc--though some notable exceptions, re different KINDS of poems I wasn't equipped to hear having cut teeth or whatever on Olson's earnestness--so mannerism had to be TAUGHT. NEVER the less sitting there in classroom with both 1) PhD students whose ears are full of lead, AND have never been taught even the most rudimentary elabling terminology for poetry explication (strange but true) AND w CW students (MFA) some of whom are very good poets BUT, I continue to be intrigued by the notion that in some basic way I might get some/several of them by term's end to be seeing/doing something they are not doing yet. and I guess here wd be the gist: if I can't do THAT, then what on earth am I doing at the more "advanced" levels talking about Ashbery and Baudrillard, or Charles B and Benjamin, or whtever I think I do: I mean they are then simply not operating on a level where what I take for granted as enabling details are even within their perceptual pardon the expression universe. meanwhile, having helped me teach a course here (there; where: Tucson) a few years ago, you would I hope exempt my ear from general professorial ineptitude as I would exempt yours from whatever. Or we could play Duelling Ears? T. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 01:11:45 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tenney Nathanson Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 7 Mar 1995 to 8 Mar 1995 In-Reply-To: <9503090743.AA129713@aruba.ccit.arizona.edu> meanwhile a VERY hearty assent to Ron Silliman's assertion or whatever that: But I would love to hear Ed or Don explicate the authoritarian impulse they feel lurks behind the practice. McA, I've always felt that the turn away from close reading via theory was a diminution of theory itself. We're all impoverished thereby. I'd add that the turn away from close reading has an authoritarian aspect to it as well.... Tenney ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 01:21:07 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tenney Nathanson Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 7 Mar 1995 to 8 Mar 1995 In-Reply-To: <9503090743.AA129713@aruba.ccit.arizona.edu> was I the one who brought students into it? Sorry if so, I guess; am busy teaching a close reading course to grad students for first time is why, I guess. but: the sort of non-academic or non-instructorish obsessive weird hovering over details of a text. P. Quartermain, is just what I had in mind by bringing students in: whatever I think it is I did sitting on subways as a would-be writer reading Pound and Olson obssessively, has NOTHING (almost) to do w what any of my students do, so far, when they read poems and write on them, in the sense that their habits of attention by and large are incredibly clotted up w Big Ideology questions--or perhaps as non-writers mostly getting weened or warned in the academy of the 80s-90s they are being offered a whole set of questions which while meant to supplement close reading skills are instead replacing them wholesale (cf. Kenner on EP and foibles of presumed "classical education" as background "which he proceeded to modify" in ABC & etc.). anyway I was just responding to I don't anymore remember whose suggestion that close reading was authoritarian, w the suggestion or perception or grouse that dealing w students makes me feel just the reverse: that quirky attention to quirky details would in fact be whatever the non-twelve-step word for "enabling" used to be..... ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 03:51:20 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Eliot Katz Subject: more on close reading In a lecture I once heard on tape, a terrific Rutgers University left political theorist, Stephen Bronner, talked about artworks as having "internal dynamics" and "external dynamics," both of which deserve consideration. He attributed the phraseology, which I have found really helpful, to a contemporary German philosopher whose name I'd have to look up. As I understand it, the major critique of New Criticism's way of close reading is that it too often ignored the external dynamics of poems--the relationship of texts to important matters (historical events, human lives, political ideologies, etc.) outside the text. In so doing, the New Critics priveleged certain poetic elements (e.g. textual ambiguity and indeterminacy), and unfairly marginalized others (e.g. more determinate explorations, often radical explorations, of the social world). In *Repression and Recovery*, Cary Nelson does a good job of looking at poetry from the first half of the 20th century that was marginalized by New Critical standards, without denying the quality of the poetry which New Critics championed. It seems to me that, by considering both internal and external dynamics, it becomes easier to talk about the literary value, as well as the radical potential, of a wider range of poetic styles. Up the Rebels, E. Katz ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 11:00:21 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Chris Stroffolino Subject: Re: Teaching close reading Another related issue it seems Peter Quatermain and Sandra Braman and Charles Alexander (and others probably) to this question of reading and teaching is what can be called the issue of "breadth" over "depth"-- Increasingly, it's becoming obvious that, although I certainly do not wish for a narrow and restrictive canon, that as a teacher the idea of teaching less poems (or whatever) or more SHORTER ones probably is more effective FOR ME (if not for everyone) in the classroom...Last semester i spent a week and half on one Ashbery poem and people would have most likely got not nearly as clear an understanding had I devoted that time to say 5 or 6 of his poems. I also devoted a whole class to a very short Weiners poem and another one to a very short Fanny Howe poem (etc. etc.). Some say this is irresponsible, and though i do not wish to simply say that reading 23 books a semester is irresponsible, I do hope that such academics allow room for people like me to keep our jobs--though what we do may seem "claustrophobic"..Chris Stroffolino ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 10:21:05 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: More on close reading ok, i'm gonna be persistent and once again recommend that dissertation i mentioned to those of you who are sweating out the implications of close reading (which i sweat out myself): margaret a. syverson, "the wealth of reality: an ecology of composition" (university of california at san diego, 1994)... syverson is attempting to take into account factors that reach *beyond* the individual (i.e., the individual reader, writer, text)... so from the diss., p. 31: We need to discover *who* and *what* are the agents interacting in an ecology of composition; how these agents organize themselves into a more or less coherent whole---a word, a sentence, a poem, a literary genre, a collaborative writing group, a movement such as "romanticism" or "modernism"; how they situate themselves; how they interpret their environments; and how they use their interpretations to engage in purposeful activities and interactions. And specifically, we need to better understand how composing systems are *distributed, embodied, emergent, and enactive* across physical, social, psychological, temporal, and spatial dimensions. anyway... though syverson's rhetoric may strike some of you as functionalist, fact is the strength of her READINGS (close? intimate? or distant? systemic? or both? etc.) of (again) reznikoff, a collaborative student essay, and a flame war convince me that there is something valuable in her 'approach'... joe ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 10:29:43 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: the list hello, i just want to comment briefly, because it seems a bit parasitic to be learning so much from others' conversation and not saying something every once in a while, that i'm enjoying the quality of people's engagement with the "close reading" issue. i'm glad to have contributed to a concept of textual intimacy and i'm glad there hasn't been any further cultural-studies bashing. i've enjoyed esp. sandra braman and ken sherwood, but everyone else as well, but was puzzled by what i took to be ?irony? on ed foster's part? but others have addressed that. what happened to the questions of community and poetry's "utility" , of which several were forwarded to me by charles b (thanks)--whoever introduced the poem about cocaine, could i please get a copy? over the e?--maria damon ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 11:19:39 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mn Center For Book Arts Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 7 Mar 1995 to 8 Mar 1995 X-To: UB Poetics discussion group In-Reply-To: <2f5eb69d71f6002@maroon.tc.umn.edu> Tenney, you are absolutely right to take me to task. In some sense I learned ear from father reading poetry to me, and from constant reading, with a sense of sounding, from an early age. Yes, Monk helped, as did various other sources, but most likely I could never have heard Monk without having heard much else before. My guess is there's some strange sources that went into this ear, including southern baptist preaching, Tennessee Ernie Ford (a paternal favorite) & more. Yes, I exempt your ear from criticism directed at the professorial realm, although I exempt it after hearing your poetry & hearing you talk about poetry informally over the years -- I can't entirely remember if concepts of sounding and hearing came up in the class I helped you teach (my couple of hours against your dozens of hours in that class, which I enjoyed, and which, I remember, had a few ears in it). Merton Sealts (Melville critic) oversaw my graduate teaching experience, and commented that he thought what I did best for the students was read poems aloud. I was shocked to think that other beginning level (this was a freshman sophomore intro to lit class on 19th & 20th century lit -- one century each semester) teachers (grad & faculty) did not do this. all best, charles alexander ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 13:24:06 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "H. T. KIRBY-SMITH" Organization: University of NC at Greensboro Subject: History of Close Reading Like many others, I did encounter "close reading" as a shared presumption amoung the critics who are lumped together under "New Criticism." It seems to me that the most important document that encouraged "close reading" was I. A. Richards's PRACTICAL CRITICISM. For Richards, this was a revolutionary and experimental way to proceed--he gave copies of poems to Cambridge University students, or attendees at his elctures, who were supposed to know a lot about poetry. He found that many could not look at a poem and see what was there in front of them. He found that the elite were not very bright, unable to talk about a poem unless they already knew something about the poet and had learned the right things to say. Richards's experiment paralleled the teachings of T. E. Hulme and Pound, the emphasis on the sharp, clear, image. Later, along came all the careful explications of poems; Donne was read with understanding by many people for the first time in hundreds of years. To read Donne you have to keep your nose to the page. After neing trained in this "New" thing, I discovered that the French had been doing it in their lycees and universities for years. It was known as explication de texte. But to learn to read poetry this way makes it almost impossible to read poetry that requires that the reader submit to a vague evocativeness. For example, you have F. R. Leavis's famous demolition of Shelley's "Ode to the West Wind. " You cannot read Shelley that way. You have to read Shelley as if he were at least part Language Poet. That is even more true of certain poems by Rossetti, William Morris, and Swinburne. You have to loosen up. One cannot study clouds with a microscope. The same is true of good Language Poetry. And of many French Symbolist poems. Gerard de Nerval and much Mallarme. Poetry can be many things, but vague evocativeness has been out of fashion for a long time, perhaps because a hundred years ago there was entirely too much of it. Funny how at the same time there was too much overt didacticism--which the New Criticism also disdained, and which the Beats and the anti-war poets of the sixties and seventies brought back in. or so it all seems to me ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 09:50:14 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: on the chiapas.... (fwd) I hope this isn't inappropriate to post here. Thought there might be among us interested. Gabrielle >>Sorry to bring this news to you but I just received this and thought I >>should pass it on. This sounds serious to me, and some of you may want >>to do something with respect to this news. >> >>>>Subject: Massacre in Chiapas >>>>> >We've just recevied an emergency call from friends in Mexico. They tell us that the Mexican army has surrounded the city of San Cristobal in Chiapas, and that the hospital in the nearby city of Comitan is flooded with casualities. The press is being excluded from the area. The people being attacked are the Myan Indians, and other poor farmers, who've been denied land and food since the conquest. They've asked that we try to get word about this out via email. While we have no further information beyond this one call I ask you to pass this message on, or tell anyone you think relevant via any means so that this does not occur in silence. --- from list postcolonial@lists.village.virginia.edu --- ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 15:03:58 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: More on close reading in the composition studies vein, and again, methinks, pertinent to this question of close reading/pedagogy, i recommend the following: derek owens, _resisting writings (and the boundaries of composition)_ (southern methodist up, 1994)... derek's book is the only one i know to situate writing instruction over and against work by h.d., cage, stein, s. howe, olson, davies, duplessis, brossard, etc... the pluralism he calls for is, imho, a welcome relief from so much in comp. studies that relegates "creative writing" to reductively expressivist theories... joe ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 13:27:58 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Watts Subject: THE RECOVERY OF THE PUBLIC WORLD Forwarded message: > Announcing: > > > > The Recovery of the Public World: a Conference and Poetry Festival in Honour of Robin Blaser, his poetry and poetics, June 1-4, 1995, on the occasion of Robin's 70th birthday and the publication of his major work, The Holy Forest, at Emily Carr Institute of Art and Design, Vancouver, B.C., Canada. > > > "Poets have repeatedly in this century turned philosophers, so to speak, in > > order to argue the value of poetry and its practice within the disturbed > > meanings of our time. These arguments are fascinating because they have > > everything to do with the poets' sense of reality in which imagery is > > entangled with thought. Often, they reflect Pound's sense of 'make it > > new'or the modernist notion that this century and its art are > > simultaneously the end of something and the beginning of something else, a > > new consciousness, and so forth. It is not one argument or another for or > > against tradition, nor is it the complex renewal of the imaginary which our > > arts witness, for, as I take it, the enlightened mind does not undervalue > > the imaginary, which is the most striking matter of these poetics; what is > > laid out before us finally is the fundamental struggle for the nature of > > the real. And this, in my view, is a spiritual struggle, both philosophical > > and poetic. Old spiritual forms, along with positivisms and materialisms, > > which 'held' the real together have come loose. This is a cliche of our > > recognitions and condition. But we need only look at the energy of the > > struggle in philosophy and poetry to make it alive and central to our > > private and public lives." > > > > Robin Blaser, from "The Violets: Charles Olson and Alfred North Whitehead" > > Panel discussions will be held on the mornings and afternoons of the four conference days. There will be an opening night welcoming and reading on Thursday evening, June 1st; a banquet Friday evening, June 2nd; a reading featuring many of our invited guests Saturday evening, June 3rd; and a closing night reading Sunday, June 4th. What follows are some details about the panels and other conference and festival events: > > The Panels & Their Chairs > > > Composition & Performance > > Daphne Marlatt and Phyllis Webb > > > Eros & Poiesis > > Bruce Boone and Sharon Thesen > > > Ethics & Aesthetics > > Lisa Robertson and Jery Zaslove > > > Heterologies > > Susan Howe and Nathaniel Mackey > > > Poetics, Theory & Practice > > Charles Bernstein and Miriam Nichols > > > Translation & Poetry > > Norma Cole and Michael Palmer > > > > The Festival > > A Gala Series of Readings > > Thursday, Saturday and Sunday, > > June 1, 3 and 4 > > > > The Exhibition > > In Search of Orpheus: > > Some Bay Area Poets & Painters > > Works from 1945-1965 by Robin Blaser, Jess, Fran Herndon and many > > others; curated by Scott Watson and Greg Bellerby at the > > Charles H. Scott Gallery. June 1 - 25 > > > > The Banquet > > A Feast of Companions > > Hosted by Kevin Killian and Ellen Tallman; prepared under the culinary > > supervision of Chef Brian DeBeck. Friday, June 2 > > > > Some Invited Guests > > > Charles Bernstein, E.D. Blodgett, Bruce Boone, George Bowering, David > > Bromige, Colin Browne, Don Byrd, Norma Cole, Peter Culley, Michael > > Davidson, Rachel Blau DuPlessis, Clayton Eshleman, Deanna Ferguson, Peter > > Gizzi, Robert Hogg, Susan Howe, Pierre Joris, Paul Kelley, Kevin Killian, > > Joanne Kyger, Steve McCaffery, Karen MacCormack, Michael McClure, > > Nathaniel Mackey, Daphne Marlatt, Miriam Nichols, > > Michael Ondaatje, Michael Palmer, Peter Quartermain, Jed Rasula, Lisa Robertson, Jerome Rothenberg, Leslie Scalapino, > > Andrew Schelling, Aaron Shurin, George Stanley, Catriona Strang, > > Ellen Tallman, Nathaniel Tarn, Sharon Thesen, Lola Tostevin, > > Pasquale Verdicchio, Fred Wah, Anne Waldman, Phyllis Webb, Jery Zaslove, > > Zonko, > > > and Robin Blaser. > > > > Sponsored By > > The Institute for the Humanities, Simon Fraser University * The > > Vice-President Academic, Simon Fraser University * The W.A.C. Bennett > > Library, Simon Fraser University * The Canada Council * The Charles H. > > Scott Gallery, Emily Carr Institute of Art and Design * The Fine Arts > > Gallery, University of British Columbia * The University College of the Fraser Valley * The Kootenay School of Writing * > > The Western Front * The Charles Olson Society > > > > Inquiries > > Phone (voice mail) (604) 291-5854 > > Fax (604) 291-3023 > > > > Registration Fees > > Entire package $100 > > (including Panels, Readings and Banquet) > > > Panels and Readings only $80 > > > Students and fixed incomes $60, $40 > > > Banquet only $25 > > > Please pay in Canadian funds. Depending on registration, tickets to > > individual readings will be available at the door of each reading. > > > > This event is being organized by volunteers; > > if it is to be everything we hope for, we're going to need a little help > > from our friends. Tax receipts will be issued on request for all > > donations and each donor will be listed in the program as > > > A Companion donating $500 or more: your name will be listed in the program; > > you'll receive a signed limited edition poster > > designed by the artist, Christos Dikeakos, > > all publications resulting from the conference and preferred seating at all > > events. > > > An Ideal Reader donating $250: your name will be listed in the program; > > you'll receive a signed poster and preferred seating at all events. > > A Friend donating $150: your name will be listed in the program; you'll > > receive a pass to all events and an unsigned poster. > > > A Pal donating $50: your name will be listed in the program and you'll > > receive a pass to the banquet. Smaller donations are also welcome; you'll > > have the satisfaction of knowing you've helped make this festival > > possible. > > > > > For a brochure giving information about some recommended hotels > and a tear-off registration form, please send your name and regular > mail address to: > > The Recovery of the Public World > The Institute for the Humanities > Simon Fraser University > Burnaby, B.C. Canada V5A 1S6 > > or send an e-message to cwatts@sfu.ca > > > > A reminder: Please note that seating is limited at this conference. If you plan to register, please try to do so by May 1, 1995. Some Late Additions: We have added two panels to the conference schedule, names of the panels and their chairs to be announced. The conference will thus begin on the morning of Thursday, June 1st. We're in the process of notifying those whose papers have been chosen for a panel. We're now working out the scheduling of panels and other conference events, and we'll publish a conference/festival programme when we have these details worked out. I'll post the programme information on this list at the same time. Inquiries can also be sent to me at cwatts.sfu.ca. If you have sent us a proposal (and you're wondering what happened to it), we should be able to let you know whether or not it has been accepted for a panel in about a week's time. Please be patient: the process of selecting panelists has been complex and lengthy, but some remarkable panels are coming out of it. Charles Watts for the conference/festival organizers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 15:57:55 CST6CDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Hank Lazer Organization: Arts and Sciences Dean's Office Subject: close reading I've thoroughly enjoyed the postings of the last several days. I find the list taking more and more of my time, but I am learning and engaged. Thanks to all. When I was at the conference in Louisville, it was great to meet a number of you that I'd had only known via e. Of the current discussion, probably winding down?, on close reading, I wanted to raise a related issue. Peter had asked what would be the opposite of close reading. Inattentive reading? Non-intensive reading? As others have pointed out, the allegedly conservative nature of close reading has to do with its institutionalization via a textbook: Understanding Poetry. (It's my mpression, that Jed Rasula's forthcoming? just released? book will discuss this history.) In my opinion, recent theory "advances," particularly those stemming from deconstruction, have, in a different context, reiterated "close reading" methodologies, but with much greater play and with different metaphysical stakes. But the issue that I would like to raise is the relationship of close reading to theme-based reading. It seems to me that much close reading ultimately gets down to a process of unification of the explanation of the poem by means of a thematized understanding. While much (most? all?) newer/innovative/experimental (take your pick) poetries have to one degree or another overthrown such habits of unification and closure, many discussions of poetry end up defending "new" poetries as having rather traditional modes of meaning (as theme). As various of y'all have pointed out, cultural and contextual readings DO lead in different directions (and sometime away from a close consideration of that great new critical polestar, the text itself). But even so, especially in the domain of the multicultural, many readings boil down to assertions about "content" (a close cousin of "theme"). In one of my poems in Doublespace, I had written that to be "thematized is demonized." Is close reading inevitably tied to "theme"? Is "thematizing" inevitably associated with retro modes of mastery--a kind of strip-mining of the text? More later. Hank Lazer ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 16:14:09 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Eric M. Gleason" Subject: Re: Teaching close reading In-Reply-To: Chris Stroffolino "Re: Teaching close reading" (Mar 9, 11:00am) >From a student's point of view...reading one or two shorter poems and discussing them for an entire class (or more) can be much more effective than parsing longer works. Although part of this is because I started as an engineering major and have an attention span accordingly...i find it easier to become intimate with a shorter work, especially when the author or style is new to me. After I get a couple pages into a poem i start to remember less and less, and have more trouble discussing and understanding the discussion of the work. -- ________________________________________________________________________________ "I was a teenage monkey wrench Eryque "I know I spell my name wrong but that's no reason to hurt me!" Gleason gleaeri@xtreme2.acc.iit.edu ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 17:54:03 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Edward Foster Subject: Re: more on close reading if "close reading" indicates "correct reading," it is authoritarian. but then, who's to say what's "close"? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 13:20:14 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: Lobbying for the NEH/NEA (fwd) A message some of you may not have seen. Gabrielle Tell me if I'm steaming up the airways... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- I'd like to share with all of you a letter I received this week. I wonder if you will find it as disturbing as I did. Because of my participation in the NEH Summer Seminars for Teachers (I studied William James' _Varieties of Religious Experience_ at FSU last summer), I'm on the NEH mailing list, and this week I got a letter from NEH which said, in part, the following: "In recent testimony before the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee former Chairman of the NEH William J. Bennett singled out the Summer Seminars for School Teachers as an example of one of the ways the NEH has had 'a deleterious effect on our culture.' This criticism was unexpected. Nothing we have seen in the program's thirteen years of existence had suggested that these seminars were anything other than successful by any measure." The letter went on to ask former seminar participants to comment on the validity of the criticism based on our experience. It also included the text of Mr. Bennett's comments on the subject, and those are what I really want you to see, since you may not have been aware of them. Mr. Bennett, by the way, is also the author of the bestselling _Book of Virtue_. Here is what he had to say about the seminars in a general attack on NEA and NEH: "...how could the two Endowments hope to serve a larger civic role when they have not improved the quality of the arts and humanities since 1965? There is no question in my mind that things have gotten much worse in these realms during the last three decades.. Some of the dominant movements that have swept through the arts and humanities world include the radical nihilism of post-modern art; homosexual and lesbian self-celebration; Marxism; neo-Marxism; radical feminism and multiculturalism; deconstructionism; and var ious manifestations of political correctness. "When I was chairman of th National Endowment for the Humanities, at my direction the NEH staff, in order to counteract some of the modish projects that were swamping NEH, devised a summer program where high school teachers would devote themselves to the study of a single great work of philosophy, literature, or history. The program worked admirably the first year ...[but] by the third it was obvious that this program was going the way of all the others. The books were being Marxised, feminized, deconstructed, and politicized. High school teachers, far from being exposed to "the best which has been taught and said in the world" (in Matthew Arnold's phrase), were being indoctrinated in the prevailing dogmas of academia." Among other things, I resent the implication that high school teachers, some of the best educated and, frankly, most opinionated people I know, can be unwillingly "indoctrinated" into anything in a few weeks of classwork. Further more, I think that Bennett has a naive view of culture if he believes that encounters with the "dominant movements of thought" of one's milieu can or should be avoided by thinking people. The Declaration of Independence is a product of a "dominant movement" of eighteenth century thought, for God's sake! And, while one would probably not want to adopt any of them as the whole of one's philosophy of life, and one might indeed have valid grounds for rejecting their theoretical bases, the movements he mentions, such as multiculturalism, gay self-celebration, and feminism, have contributed much to humanizing our culture and have produced _some_ excellent scholarly work. I think a valid case could be made (in terms of the proper role of government, for example) for the dropping of federal funding for NEH and NEA, but the idea that such funding should be discontinued because of the dele terious effects of those agencies' programs on our culture is ludicrous. People and cultures are nourished, not diminished, by knowledge and the challenge of new ideas and fresh thought. Lisa Pearson, MRE +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ (2) From: IN%"Chersav@aol.com" 21-FEB-1995 14:20:35.92 Subj: RE: Lobbying for the NEH/NEA ... I'm writing in response to the question of why funding the NEA is important. I am a poet, and have been a recipient of NEA money in several different ways during the course of my career. I am working class, the first of my family to go to college out of high school (my father did go to college nights over the course of 15 years, and finally got a degree the year I graduated from high school). People in my community mostly worked in factories or in the trades. When I found myself writing poetry, it was not out of an academic tradition, but rather out of the desire to tell stories that I could not find in the literature, stories of working class people. My heritage is mixed blood, French-Canadian and Abenaki. Again, not found in the literature. My writing is not a matter of fashion or aesthetic play, but has to do with cultural survival, of being represented in the literature. My training as a poet was not in MFA programs, but in the community, and with the generosity of older poets such as Etheridge Knight and Sam Cornish - poets who were working in the communities, sometimes receiving some funding from the city/state that dribbled down from NEA sources. I worked for several years as a writer-in-residence in public schools in Massachusetts. What does that mean, exactly? I taught three or four creative writing classes a day, in programs that lasted from one day to several months at one site. I did readings of my own work and that of other contemporary poets, bringing poetry as a living tradition into the classroom, reading poets who were writing out of the students' own communities, latino, african-american, arab-american, Native American, Asian American, as well as poets from the Anglo tradition, and poets in translation from all over the world. It was important to students that I was a real person in the community, telling stories about my own community and life. When I was a child, no one ever told me that my stories were important, worthy of literature. I know my example encouraged students to see their own lives and stories as important, as well as introducing them to the vitality of poetry, and encouraging their skills as writers. Students in my workshops were drawn from all populations, not from honors or "gifted" programs, and teachers were often amazed (though I was not) at the writing done by students with fair or poor academic records. Every residency also included teacher workshops, where I shared ways of teaching poetry and creative writing, and introduced teachers to contemporary poetry they were not familiar with. These artist-in-residence programs were largely funded with money from the NEA. In 1990, I was awarded a Fellowship from the Massachusetts Artists Foundation, a $10,000 award. This was funded largely by NEA money. This award allowed me to take the time needed to finish my first book of poetry, which was accepted for publication by a small press that receives, you guessed it - funding from the NEA. With a book out, I was eligible to apply for a Fellowship from the NEA. Individual Fellowships are granted to artists in the amount of $20,000, and in 1993, was awarded a Fellowship from the NEA. The award gave me the time needed to work on a second book of poetry, which will be out this spring. The award has also been seen as a credential, and I with that and my publication record, I have begun teaching on the college and university level. Without NEA funding, I would have done next no work in the schools - I simply wouldn't have been able to afford it. (As it was, the most I made as a writer-in-residence during the years 1985-1992, working four to five days a week from early October to June, was $12,000 - well under the beginning salary of public school teachers - and I was considered one of the busy and successful artists in the program. This of course, is before taxes and without any benefits. I would say the community was getting it's money's worth and then some. It's important also to understand that all money received by artists is considered and taxed as regular income, so those $20,000 dollar grants actually amount to approx $13,000. When you see the figures allotted to the arts remember they are highly inflated by these omissions.) Without NEA funding it would have taken me much longer to get my first book in print, if indeed, I did it at all. The impact of a Fellowship in the arts is more than just monetary, it is a great affirmation of the importance of one's work. As the arts are so undervalued in our society, it is crucial to have one's work affirmed. This is especially true for the beginning artist, but is true for artists throughout their career. Poets are not generally paid for writing their poetry. They're paid for teaching writing, doing readings, teaching literature, and sometimes though rarely, for editorial work. Receiving a fellowship is one of the few times when a poet/writer/artist is told: just do the work. That is invaluable. For a working class artist, who does not automatically have the support of a university environment, the NEA support is crucial. For marginalized communities, who are by definition under-represented, the NEA support is crucial. Many of the small journals that are publishing some of the most vital writing going on in America are NEA funded. Literary writing has been largely pushed out of the trade publishers. Without NEA funds, many small presses would fold. If you care about literature, you should care very much about NEA funding. The move is to push all funding into private foundations. This system moves money away from the working class and marginalized communities, to where it's least needed. It encourages a good ol' boy system of grant-giving. (I knew no writers on the panels of any funding organization that has given me moeny, so I know it is possible to be funded without being part of a good ol' boy network.) Public funding is crucial. The benefits do not end with the individual artists, but reverberate throughout the community. I hope others on the Net will share stories of how NEA and NEH funding has effected them, programs they've been a part of, or know about, etc. Please forgive the haste with which this note was written, as I'm doing it on line. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 18:50:34 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kathe Davis Subject: Re: more on close reading In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 9 Mar 1995 03:51:20 EST from "External dynamics" is perhaps a more expressive way of referring to what most of us have been calling "context" for lo thesemany years. I heard Cleanth Brooks years ago stand up at an English Institute meeting at which the New Criticism was being slammed, and say strongly if in a rather quavery voice that it had never been his intention, or that of anyone he knew, to ELIMINATE considerations of biography, history, etc., (that is, context, or "external dynamics"). They merely wished to call fresh attention to the specificities of the language(s) of poems, since those were being badly neglected. I very much like the notion of close reading as simply a subset of paying attention. Anything can be TAUGHT tyrannically, but there is nothing INHERENTLY tyrannical in being urged to be more aware. On the contrary. k. davis ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 20:10:07 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Loss Glazier Subject: Re: Intimacy and intimations of a micropoetics In-Reply-To: <199503091342.IAA23375@terminus-est.acsu.buffalo.edu> from "Kenneth Sherwood" at Mar 9, 95 01:29:39 am Subject: Intimacy and intimations of a micropoetics 1a. Close reading, closet reading, closet reading, closed reading. Do we impale texts or are they, constituted as texts, offered within a defintion of closure, as closed? 2a. Galloping toward singularity but for a single "reader," no? Is not the singularity (or single array of possibilities) particular to this reader and only trots to "resolution" when a singularity is imposed on others? As to pleasure, it is true in fact that tidying up is a pleasure to some. Does the text differ from a disorderly kitchen? 3a. Yes, possibly the pressure of history. Hallowed halls, etc., have taken their toll and do cast their monolithic shadows by restricting textual terrain. Does close reading equal explication? The former is a kinder phrase but carries the tenor of the latter. Is it my schooling? Did anyone get graded on explication? Does this mean there is a right answer? Time for a little alto? 4a. Maybe not an ethic of closure but a fear of elevation? Is not any "formal" writing elevated? If it's not, "Hey, buddy, can you spare a rhyme," then what is the entry point for someone not conversant with the conventions of the elevation? Walk for ten minutes then rest five... 5a. The mass _does_ turn to theory and this perhaps is the most difficult moment. (Some might say after theory it continues to a consumer product.) But this is not "theory" as a district attorney (we are speaking about law here) would use the word rather the fear of imposed consent. But do not our means of production offer a route out? Or am I under a delusion? 6a. At the reading thinking - this was a break away from what constantly overwhelms me: daily work - "What I need to hear is some elevated language." (Also dialect.) And boy did I need to hear some elevated words. It _is_ elevated: physically, of course, there is a stage - in this case a podium. But the reading voice offers words that are _set_. That is, written in some other frame of place and activity, transported, and delivered as if encased, framed, "on the crispest sheet of white paper," I think I noted. Setting up the dilemma perhaps instantly. 7a. Most probably that the monolith has penetrated through original texts to secondary and the teriary. For the syllabi of the lambs a lullaby. If poetry were to fade from the academy should it not be carried on by word of mouth? Is _any_ comment on text theory? Or close? Loss Glazier ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 21:38:44 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ted Pelton Subject: Re: Form I really liked Bill Luoma's description of his compositional process when writing My Trip to NYC. I'd never heard of this work, but I'll be on the lookout for it from now on. That sense of the wonderful accident, followed by the fear one will never be able to repeat the moment; not knowing how it happened, the feeling if one only knew it could be repeated, but then knowing that each new text creates each own success story as it were; unreproduceability part of the uniqueness of the text, its genius--don't mean for this to become blather, but the uncertainty Luoma describes struck me as exactly right, or exactly my own experience. I'm a fiction writer, so-called, but very influenced in my writing process by Olsonian "field" notions, every moment in the writing a new decision in a continually revised field, ever reformulating itself with each new decision. Yeah, when it works, there's nothing like it, but it also leads to a lot of garbage. But it's the way I write, I can't do it any other way, a fact which has come clearer to me as I've been working on a so-called novel. I tried to figure out a plot, even if just to get me another step into the book. But I found as soon as started trying to follow it, I'd mess it up. Intentionally. In prose, there's the example of Poe, who said that everything should be figured out to the least little detail before ever setting pen to paper. I used to think Poe was making it up, perversely creating a counter-myth to prevailing romantic theories of composition. I don't think so anymore (about Poe) but it's still a very foreign method to my own. I get too bored with just filling in the blanks of a pre-planned piece. Nor do I think lively writing can be accomplished unless there's a sense it's renewing itself all the time, turning over and over again. I forget who said it, but I've also found oulipo-style formally rigorous experiments engender work well. Again, at times. "Either it works or it doesn't," as I seem to recall Spicer saying somewhere. But knowing you only get so many lines here, so many there, and letting that become something that hadn't been there before is a nice way of having constant and variant, that play between which can be fruitful. Now, in this "novel," I am working one episode at a time. I have a loose idea of where I'm going, but want no more than that because when I do, like I said, I fuck it up. I'm also reading a lot, letting ideas or even just images set me off. I remember hearing once (it may be apocryphal, and I'd like to be corrected by someone with better information) that in Olson's library, volumes would have copious notes, starting in the beginning and up until a certain point, where the marginalia would just stop. Presumably this is where he'd start writing. I'm committed to a long form on this work though, and its tru I do have some tricks I'm keeping around for later (but it's also true they might not fit; they're in the field as I see it now, but may be abandoned later). I'd like to hear from people who have written things that couldn't be completed in one sitting, or even a couple -- extended works -- yet are committed to a similar improvisatory approach. I'm suffering long droughts in between successful episodes. Ted Pelton ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 00:28:12 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: kathryne lindberg Subject: Re: the list In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 9 Mar 1995 10:29:43 -0500 from can anyone help with a name, location? I simply cannot remember who told me about a poet, at Fresno State, I think, who is working on/with/ within the Volga Deutsch community in Central California. Anybody know? I'd like to be in touch with this person. Believe she is a woman. What a well of ignorance I am this late evening. This query is prompted by the death of another of my fast disappearing and tangle-rooted or rhizomatic family leaves. Never thought I'd be rooting around in this a/A/ohm-poetics. Sorry to break into the meditation onclose reading which y'll are pounding out. Thanks indeed for the enlivening discourse, of course. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 23:21:50 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Marjorie Perloff Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 8 Mar 1995 to 9 Mar 1995 In-Reply-To: <199503100506.VAA22114@leland.Stanford.EDU> I was delighted to read some of the "close reading" commentaries triggered by Peter Quartermain's great query, especially Tenney Nathanson's because I've had the identical experience. The fear of close = closed which began as a needed response to the New Criticsm (which, incidentally, performed mostly thematic rather than really close readings) has now produced the opposite: students confronted by, say, Beckett or Aime Cesaire, ignore what's on the page and jump off to some ideological position. When asked why a line breaks in a certain place or what the relationship of some item to another is, they are absolutely at a loss because no one has ever asked them to just plain really read or reread, that is look empirically at what's actually there, materially. So I'm delighted that the tide is finally turning, as it seems to be judging from this week's discussion. Marjorie Perloff ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 07:08:44 PST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom White Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 8 Mar 1995 to 9 Mar 1995 >> > >> > The Recovery of the Public World: a Conference and Poetry Festival > in Honour of Robin Blaser, his poetry and poetics, June 1-4, 1995, on > the occasion of Robin's 70th birthday and the publication of his major > work, The Holy Forest, at Emily Carr Institute of Art and Design, > Vancouver, B.C., Canada. >> > >> "Poets have repeatedly in this century turned philosophers, so to speak, in >> > order to argue the value of poetry and its practice within the disturbed >> > meanings of our time. These arguments are fascinating because they have >> > everything to do with the poets' sense of reality in which imagery is >> > entangled with thought. Often, they reflect Pound's sense of 'make it >> > new'or the modernist notion that this century and its art are >> > simultaneously the end of something and the beginning of something else, a >> > new consciousness, and so forth. It is not one argument or another for or >> > against tradition, nor is it the complex renewal of the imaginary which our >> > arts witness, for, as I take it, the enlightened mind does not undervalue >> > the imaginary, which is the most striking matter of these poetics; what is >> > laid out before us finally is the fundamental struggle for the nature of >> > the real. And this, in my view, is a spiritual struggle, both philosophical >> > and poetic. Old spiritual forms, along with positivisms and materialisms, >> > which 'held' the real together have come loose. This is a cliche of our >> > recognitions and condition. But we need only look at the energy of the >> > struggle in philosophy and poetry to make it alive and central to our >> > private and public lives." >> > >> > Robin Blaser, from "The Violets: Charles Olson and Alfred North Whitehead" >> > > Panel discussions will be held on the mornings and afternoons of > the four conference days. There will be an opening night > welcoming and reading on Thursday evening, June 1st; a banquet > Friday evening, June 2nd; a reading featuring many of our invited > guests Saturday evening, June 3rd; and a closing night reading > Sunday, June 4th. What follows are some details about the panels > and other conference and festival events: >> > > The Panels & Their Chairs >> > >> Composition & Performance >> > Daphne Marlatt and Phyllis Webb >> > >> Eros & Poiesis >> > Bruce Boone and Sharon Thesen >> > >> Ethics & Aesthetics >> > Lisa Robertson and Jery Zaslove >> > >> Heterologies >> > Susan Howe and Nathaniel Mackey >> > >> Poetics, Theory & Practice >> > Charles Bernstein and Miriam Nichols >> > >> Translation & Poetry >> > Norma Cole and Michael Palmer >> > >> > The Festival >> > A Gala Series of Readings >> > Thursday, Saturday and Sunday, >> > June 1, 3 and 4 >> > >> > The Exhibition >> > In Search of Orpheus: >> > Some Bay Area Poets & Painters >> > Works from 1945-1965 by Robin Blaser, Jess, Fran Herndon and many >> > others; curated by Scott Watson and Greg Bellerby at the >> > Charles H. Scott Gallery. June 1 - 25 >> > >> > The Banquet >> > A Feast of Companions >> > Hosted by Kevin Killian and Ellen Tallman; prepared under the culinary >> > supervision of Chef Brian DeBeck. Friday, June 2 >> > >> > Some Invited Guests >> > >> Charles Bernstein, E.D. Blodgett, Bruce Boone, George Bowering, David >> > Bromige, Colin Browne, Don Byrd, Norma Cole, Peter Culley, Michael >> > Davidson, Rachel Blau DuPlessis, Clayton Eshleman, Deanna Ferguson, Peter >> > Gizzi, Robert Hogg, Susan Howe, Pierre Joris, Paul Kelley, Kevin Killian, >> > Joanne Kyger, Steve McCaffery, Karen MacCormack, Michael McClure, >> > Nathaniel Mackey, Daphne Marlatt, Miriam Nichols, >> > Michael Ondaatje, Michael Palmer, Peter Quartermain, Jed Rasula, > Lisa Robertson, Jerome Rothenberg, Leslie Scalapino, >> > Andrew Schelling, Aaron Shurin, George Stanley, Catriona Strang, >> > Ellen Tallman, Nathaniel Tarn, Sharon Thesen, Lola Tostevin, >> > Pasquale Verdicchio, Fred Wah, Anne Waldman, Phyllis Webb, Jery Zaslove, >> > Zonko, >> > >> and Robin Blaser. >> > >> > Sponsored By >> > The Institute for the Humanities, Simon Fraser University * The >> > Vice-President Academic, Simon Fraser University * The W.A.C. Bennett >> > Library, Simon Fraser University * The Canada Council * The Charles H. >> > Scott Gallery, Emily Carr Institute of Art and Design * The Fine Arts >> > Gallery, University of British Columbia * The University College > of the Fraser Valley * The Kootenay School of Writing * >> > The Western Front * The Charles Olson Society >> > >> > Inquiries >> > Phone (voice mail) (604) 291-5854 >> > Fax (604) 291-3023 >> > >> > Registration Fees >> > Entire package $100 >> > (including Panels, Readings and Banquet) >> > >> Panels and Readings only $80 >> > >> Students and fixed incomes $60, $40 >> > >> Banquet only $25 >> > >> Please pay in Canadian funds. Depending on registration, tickets to >> > individual readings will be available at the door of each reading. >> > >> > This event is being organized by volunteers; >> > if it is to be everything we hope for, we're going to need a little help >> > from our friends. Tax receipts will be issued on request for all >> > donations and each donor will be listed in the program as >> > >> A Companion donating $500 or more: your name will be listed in the program; >> > you'll receive a signed limited edition poster >> > designed by the artist, Christos Dikeakos, >> > all publications resulting from the conference and preferred seating at all >> > events. >> > >> An Ideal Reader donating $250: your name will be listed in the program; >> > you'll receive a signed poster and preferred seating at all events. >> > A Friend donating $150: your name will be listed in the program; you'll >> > receive a pass to all events and an unsigned poster. >> > >> A Pal donating $50: your name will be listed in the program and you'll >> > receive a pass to the banquet. Smaller donations are also welcome; you'll >> > have the satisfaction of knowing you've helped make this festival >> > possible. >> > >> > >> For a brochure giving information about some recommended hotels >> and a tear-off registration form, please send your name and regular >> mail address to: >> >> The Recovery of the Public World >> The Institute for the Humanities >> Simon Fraser University >> Burnaby, B.C. Canada V5A 1S6 >> >> or send an e-message to cwatts@sfu.ca >> > >> >> A reminder: Please note that seating is limited at this conference. > If you plan to register, please try to do so by May 1, 1995. > > Some Late Additions: > > We have added two panels to the conference schedule, names of the > panels and their chairs to be announced. The conference will thus > begin on the morning of Thursday, June 1st. We're in the process > of notifying those whose papers have been chosen for a panel. We're > now working out the scheduling of panels and other conference > events, and we'll publish a conference/festival programme when we > have these details worked out. I'll post the programme information > on this list at the same time. Inquiries can also be sent to me at > cwatts.sfu.ca. If you have sent us a proposal (and you're wondering > what happened to it), we should be able to let you know whether or > not it has been accepted for a panel in about a week's time. Please > be patient: the process of selecting panelists has been complex and > lengthy, but some remarkable panels are coming out of it. > > Charles Watts for the conference/festival organizers > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 15:57:55 CST6CDT >From: Hank Lazer >Subject: close reading > >I've thoroughly enjoyed the postings of the last several days. I >find the list taking more and more of my time, but I am learning and >engaged. Thanks to all. > >When I was at the conference in Louisville, it was great to meet a >number of you that I'd had only known via e. > >Of the current discussion, probably winding down?, on close reading, >I wanted to raise a related issue. Peter had asked what would be the >opposite of close reading. Inattentive reading? Non-intensive >reading? As others have pointed out, the allegedly conservative >nature of close reading has to do with its institutionalization via a >textbook: Understanding Poetry. (It's my mpression, that Jed >Rasula's forthcoming? just released? book will discuss this history.) >In my opinion, recent theory "advances," particularly those stemming >from deconstruction, have, in a different context, reiterated "close >reading" methodologies, but with much greater play and with different >metaphysical stakes. > >But the issue that I would like to raise is the relationship of close >reading to theme-based reading. It seems to me that much close >reading ultimately gets down to a process of unification of the >explanation of the poem by means of a thematized understanding. >While much (most? all?) newer/innovative/experimental (take your >pick) poetries have to one degree or another overthrown such habits >of unification and closure, many discussions of poetry end up >defending "new" poetries as having rather traditional modes of >meaning (as theme). As various of y'all have pointed out, cultural >and contextual readings DO lead in different directions (and sometime >away from a close consideration of that great new critical polestar, >the text itself). But even so, especially in the domain of the >multicultural, many readings boil down to assertions about "content" >(a close cousin of "theme"). > >In one of my poems in Doublespace, I had written that to be >"thematized is demonized." > >Is close reading inevitably tied to "theme"? Is "thematizing" >inevitably associated with retro modes of mastery--a kind of >strip-mining of the text? > >More later. > >Hank Lazer > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 16:14:09 -0600 >From: "Eric M. Gleason" >Subject: Re: Teaching close reading > >>From a student's point of view...reading one or two shorter poems and >discussing them for an entire class (or more) can be much more effective than >parsing longer works. Although part of this is because I started as an >engineering major and have an attention span accordingly...i find it easier to >become intimate with a shorter work, especially when the author or style is new >to me. After I get a couple pages into a poem i start to remember less and >less, and have more trouble discussing and understanding the discussion of the >work. > > >-- >_______________________________________________________________________________ >_ >"I was a teenage monkey wrench > >Eryque "I know I spell my name wrong but that's no reason to hurt me!" Gleason > >gleaeri@xtreme2.acc.iit.edu > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 17:54:03 -0500 >From: Edward Foster >Subject: Re: more on close reading > >if "close reading" indicates "correct reading," it is authoritarian. but then, >who's to say what's "close"? > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 13:20:14 -1000 >From: Gabrielle Welford >Subject: Lobbying for the NEH/NEA (fwd) > >A message some of you may not have seen. Gabrielle > >Tell me if I'm steaming up the airways... > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >I'd like to share with all of you a letter I received this week. I wonder if > you will find it as disturbing as I did. Because of my participation in the >NEH Summer Seminars for Teachers (I studied William James' _Varieties of >Religious Experience_ at FSU last summer), I'm on the NEH mailing list, and >this week I got a letter from NEH which said, in part, the following: >"In recent testimony before the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee >former Chairman of the NEH William J. Bennett singled out the Summer Seminars >for School Teachers as an example of one of the ways the NEH has had 'a >deleterious effect on our culture.' This criticism was unexpected. Nothing we >have seen in the program's thirteen years of existence had suggested that >these seminars were anything other than successful by any measure." > >The letter went on to ask former seminar participants to comment on the >validity of the criticism based on our experience. It also included the text >of Mr. Bennett's comments on the subject, and those are what I really want >you to see, since you may not have been aware of them. Mr. Bennett, by the >way, is also the author of the bestselling _Book of Virtue_. Here is what he >had to say about the seminars in a general attack on NEA and NEH: > >"...how could the two Endowments hope to serve a larger civic role when they >have not improved the quality of the arts and humanities since 1965? There is >no question in my mind that things have gotten much worse in these realms >during the last three decades.. Some of the dominant movements that have >swept through the arts and humanities world include the radical nihilism of >post-modern art; homosexual and lesbian self-celebration; Marxism; >neo-Marxism; radical feminism and multiculturalism; deconstructionism; and var Tom White Phone: (510) 814-2837 Fax: (510) 522-1966 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 10:17:40 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Bill Luoma Subject: Re: More on close reading Joe, I'm glad to you you being persistent. I'm interested. Where can we get a hold of more of margaret a. syverson's work? Also, have you ever heard of Vivian Zamel, a composition theorist? Bill Luoma ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 10:46:06 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Lisa Samuels Subject: close reading Hank's question about the thematizing of close reading prompts me to make a point which partly echoes Keith Tuma's posting of earlier this week. though 'experimental criticism' allows, or anyway tries to allow, for uncertainty, for embracing 'the inadequacy of our explanatory paradigms' (Charles B's =Artifice=), the majority of =published= readings of literature aims -- must aim, for respectability if not for very publishability -- to demonstrate that its readings & therefore its conclusions are the BEST way of seeing particular texts. (which seems to come, in some dark past way, from religious methods of textual explication: in order for us to be right, everyone else has to be wrong, but must also have to do with the human desire to have a right answer, & to be the one who provides it.) that's obvious enough, but it made me think that the academy has two types of close reading: one publishable and one pedagogical (or speculative, say). the latter may be the realm of free play, the one we happily teach to students, the 'isn't it interesting to consider what happens when we pay attention to these lines in this way'; but the former is still mostly stuck in the justifying, & therefore almost inevitably thematizing (line 'meanings' lead to poem 'meanings' lead to thematic meanings lead to historical, contextual, &c meanings, to sew up everything), mode of close reading, the one in which 'when we say of something that it is true, we say that it has stopped' (to use Alan Davies' formulation, in =Signage=, of how static the notion of truth is for us moderns). the published realm of close reading, then, has an off-putting rigidity, =historically=, while the pedagogical one is a beautiful & permitting part of reading language. isn't this fun? Lisa Samuels ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 11:17:06 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Edward Foster Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 8 Mar 1995 to 9 Mar 1995 "what's actually there, materially"? oh, come on, marjorie. it's a game, sometimes serious, with its own rules. "empirically," "actually," "materially." all these absolutes! ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 07:22:48 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 27 Feb 1995 to 28 Feb 1995 In-Reply-To: <9503010526.AA01107@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu> Ah, no. Don't put the extended in-jokes on another list. I'm in the middle of the Pacific too. And I like them. Maybe it's because I used to live in Albany...? (Sorry Susan :-)...) Gabrielle ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 11:40:07 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: close reading if this discussion re close reading is polarized twixt 1) anything goes and 2) only an unidentified number of "best" readings goes, then i guess i'm forced into category 1... but as a member of same, i'd want to push for a general recognition that "anything goes" is only a theoretical, or better, hypothetical assertion... in (pedagogical, publishing, communal and other) actuality, there are some "readings" that just ain't gonna fly, period. i do believe, further, that a few of the more professorial among us (tenney, marjorie, myself), and not to privilege this latter category AT ALL, are struck by how few rhetorical skills are actually learned by undergrads. these days... for the sake of simplicity, let's just say that a general level of syntactic awareness, say, constitutes a rhetoric (that is, that grammatical analysis constitutes a rhetoric)... perhaps this is desirable in some situations, undesirable in others... but to argue against same, again, as a member of category 1 above, just doesn't make sense to me... i.e., category 1 does not preempt the usefulness of this particular rhetoric... but to abandon my binary altogether: i must confess to being somewhat perturbed when faced with folks who are incapable? or just unwilling? EVER to deal with a text in whatever terms "close reading" implies... just kinda bugged, is all, and i certainly wouldn't want, esp. in these academic climes, to position myself *agains* ideological readings... lord knows this plays into the hands of some folks i'm in utter(ance) disagreement with... that was *against*, of course, damn line editor... anyway, close reading or not (of this post), you all follow me here i'm sure... why not admit to the usefulness of close readings, however defined, at a general rhetorical level?... joe ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 12:50:13 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: More on close reading bill, no, i don't know zamel... i don't know where peg syverson is at the moment, i'll try to find out (though i'm certain *somebody* at ucsd knows)... some of her work was published in _sagetrieb_, but am on a captain video terminal at the moment and don't have any resources around... hey, my system goes down at 6 pm this eve., so if you respond and i don't, it's not that i'm not responding... er, i mean, i'm not responding, but--- thanks for the kind words... best, joe ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 13:03:05 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Eric M. Gleason" Subject: Re: more on close reading In-Reply-To: Edward Foster "Re: more on close reading" (Mar 9, 5:54pm) Edward Foster>if "close reading" indicates "correct reading," it is authoritarian. but then, who's to say what's "close"? Who's to say what's "correct"? Mebbe we all have a similar idea of what's "authoritarian"? Eryque -- ________________________________________________________________________________ "I was a teenage monkey wrench Eryque "I know I spell my name wrong but that's no reason to hurt me!" Gleason gleaeri@xtreme2.acc.iit.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 14:33:11 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Edward Foster Subject: Re: more on close reading i don't know the answer, eryque, but the candidates announce themselves, all the time. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 15:55:20 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Eliot Katz Subject: more on close reading, theory, politics, etc. Before I go off on different tracks, I'd like to ask those who've noted a lack of undergrad ability to do close reading whether they think that correlates with an increased student understanding of history, current events, political theory & other matters of social context, or whether they find it part of a more overarching crisis in U.S. education? I'm also assuming there are many thousands of exceptions, am I too naive? Regarding close reading, Kathe Davis wrote: "Anything can be TAUGHT tyrannically, but there is nothing INHERENTLY tyrannical in being urged to be more aware." I totally agree. (Perhaps contemporary critics exaggerate the New Critics' lack of concern for social context? Were New Critics also exaggerating predecessors' lack of attention to textual matters?) Overall, I don't really think any particular style of literary criticism, nor any particular style of poetry for that matter, is inherently progressive or reactionary. For instance, among deconstructionist literary critics, as among the modernist poets, politics ranges from democratic left to fascist. I think we always have to try to avoid *a priori* assumptions based merely on form or style, and take an actual look at the particular work (again, both its internal & external dynamics) & make a case for our reading or judgment of it. (Re the matter of attaching inherent political qualities to literary styles, let me begin to walk out on what is definitely a tangent & possibly a limb...) I think one tendency that can lead to imposing *a priori* political labels, often used to dismiss certain styles of criticism or poetry out-of-hand, is a tendency to conflate conceptual categories. This seems pretty common today. One of my favorite contemporary examples is the post-structuralist theorist, Lyotard's (highly influential, I think) conflation of the philosophical concept of totality with the political system of totalitarianism. Besides conflating categories, that equation also seems mistaken on the practical level, since the concept of totality was used (among others) by some marxist thinkers who were clearly theorizing the extension of democracy into all spheres of public life (e.g. extending democratic rights to the working class) to ensure that no leaders could remain unaccountable or outside the rule of law & in order to safeguard diversity. As Daniel Singer has pointed out: during Rosa Luxemburg's day, using the phrase "democratic socialism" would have been like saying "buttery butter." No matter what other disagreements one might have with some of these theorists (e.g. problems with teleology, orthodoxy, etc.), many were clearly working for a *more* democratic society, not a less democratic one--and it seems silly to blame these theories of extending democracy for the eventual and often-horrific development of "actually existing socialism" in the Soviet bloc. (Walking further out toward the limb's edge?...) This conflation of categories also seems to me to occur in some language poetry theory where traditional narrative & syntax structures are sometimes conflated with the rules of the existing state--rules that interconnect with language structures, of course, but that aren't reducible to language structures. (I'd appreciate corrections here, since I'm still trying to learn this stuff...) In this argument, as I understand it, breaking the dominant rules of syntax (or creating non-narratives or anti-narratives in Jerome McGann's formulation) is seen as an inherently radical act. But it seems to me that both narratives and anti-narratives can be used for different purposes--both potentially able either to help promote notions of progressive social change or to help protect the status quo. (Re the latter, I think of TV commercials that appropriate techniques of modernist juxtaposition; corporate paper shredders; government documents & speeches that are filled with huge gaps in narrative & logic, sometimes foregrounding language at the expense of content, in order to mystify the public or maintain plausible deniability; etc.) I think part of the tendency among poets (myself included) & literary theorists to conflate conceptual categories (esp. the literary & the political) is the result of some part of us hoping that our writings might by themselves transform the often-distressing political reality of our day. But, as much as I wish as a poet that I could believe in "magic bullet poems," or, more to my political preference, "magic nonviolent civil disobedience poems," or even "magic post-structuralist deconstuction of oppressive state apparatus poems"; and as much as I think terrific poems often derive a good deal of their energy from their attempt to achieve such a magic transgressive political ability; it seems to me more helpful & honest to think (heuristically) of categories like poetry, politics, economics, etc. as distinct spheres that interrelate in complex and mediated ways--i.e. spheres that are not conflated but not autonomous either. The fun & challenging part then is to explore the ways they do (& might possibly) interrelate under particular (past, present or future) circumstances. For example, one can consider ways in which particular poems might interconnect with social context by raising an audience's political consciousness, inspiring alternative ways of thinking, urging commitment, offering shrewd historical critique, envisioning healthier social reconstructions, etc. I don't think contextualizing precludes "close reading," since I don't really think it's possible to talk about a poem's relation to social context without looking at the text's internal dynamics. Poems, then, written in a wide variety of forms and styles, including poems that explode traditional syntax & also poems that use traditional syntax, can potentially be seen to contain emancipatory elements which a reader or critic (using a variety of critical styles) can draw out. That doesn't mean that all poems will contain emancipatory elements, but just that one has to be open-minded enough about questions of form & style to actually look. One nice thing about avoiding the conflation of literature & politics is that different criteria for evaluating poetic and political realms become possible. (I guess I feel post-structuralism & langpo theory have done a valuable job in helping to correct what may have been an overly determinate way of reading literary texts, but added a not-very-helpful overly indeterminate criteria for judging politics.) Poetry is free to eXpeRimeNt without getting called petit-bourgeois, too esoteric (or too didactic) or some such *a priori* label often meant to dismiss a poem so that one doesn't need to read it. (Poetry is also free to explore lots of areas besides politics, and also to offer pleasure, etc.) At the same time, more determinate and normative judgments are possible in the realm of politics in order to arrive at (to even debate) bases for united actions, common principles & platforms, agreed-upon strategies & democratic structures, etc.--all the stuff required to build the sort of organized political movements that are ultimately needed (along with raised public consciousness) to create lasting radical, truly democratic & egalitarian social change. Sorry for the ridiculous length of this post. I'll go back to sitting on the sidelines for awhile. Sincerely, E. Katz (If anyone's interested, re my last post, Stephen Bronner attributes the internal dynamic & external dynamic phraseology to an Austrian philosopher, Max Adler, whose book in German on Marx and Kant hasn't yet been translated into English.) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 15:57:44 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mn Center For Book Arts Subject: Re: close readings X-To: UB Poetics discussion group In-Reply-To: <2f6000630348002@maroon.tc.umn.edu> Marjorie Perloff refers to the difficulty of students in talking why the line breaks where it does, where something is placed on a page and what that means, and the like. I have wanted, in reent years, to turn a part of the discussion concerning poems to their contexts. For me, as a bookmaker as well as reader & writer, this means the physical context. That may mean that everything the author puts in the work has a meaning, which is particularly evident in recent readings of Emily Dickinson's manuscripts. But is authorial intention everything? What about choice of paper/type/spacing? What about sky poems? What about poems in public places? What about the sound of the page turning? Is there such a thing as the physicality of meaning? These issues are certainly crucial to the book arts and to the design arts (not the same thing, by any means), and both of these arts may be in partnership with literary texts in various ways. Is there any reality to the literary text outside its actual physical manifestation? If so, what, and is that different than the physical presence, and that would be exciting to talk about as well. I'm afraid I have many more questions than answers here, but I do wonder if these are issues others wish to talk about. And is this just an extension of close reading? really close reading . . . charles alexander ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 17:27:24 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kathe Davis Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 8 Mar 1995 to 9 Mar 1995 In-Reply-To: Message of Fri, 10 Mar 1995 11:17:06 -0500 from What's absolute about the empirical, the actual, the material? But here we are, now, and we have to play it as it lays, play things as they are, on the blue abso lute. k davis ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 00:27:19 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: cris cheek Subject: the berm X-cc: Patrick Phillips I've looked at Patrick Phillips' subtrafuge massage several tomes and each has read like (I misquote) "relish (or undernourish) the berm" is being spoken by Peter Sellars (in upper crust pronouncing of bomb - and so on to labours that point). As we say in England 'who's got hard shoulders? Who's for 'the central reservation'? Wow (or whew), that was close! The irony is that was raised. cris ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 15:16:39 GMT+1300 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Wystan Curnow Organization: English Dept. - Univ. of Auckland Subject: Re: close readings X-To: mcba@MAROON.TC.UMN.EDU 1. I,too, thought Marjorie (hello, Marjorie) had particulars in mind. Not absolutes, and yes some of the writing which engages me because of its relation to my own writing concerns draws 'the support' into the text. 2. Close reading. Have we yet had information on the origin of the phrase? Who, if anyone, used it first for the purposes we think we recognise? 3. Close reading is not close listening. The New Critical education I received, which I have to say I am grateful for-- at l8 I was a pretty capable reader of Donne, of Stevens ...-- was entirely semantic in its approach. I only learnt to HEAR poetry later, and from the poet's read- ing work in public. There was no voice. And then I found out about the Formalists (Russians) who did listen, but no one at my graduate school knew anything of them. 4. Other particulars: close reading in what context? Or, is it ONLY the classroom context that's at issue? I mean is the concept useful, meaningful, when discussing our own reading. At any rate, IF that's so, what of that context? Among other things it is a place where good ideas get ruined. Including methods of reading. I remember Mel Bochner (remember Mel Bochner?) saying teaching was throwing fake pearls before real swine! 5. A note re. theory. I'm for the close reading of theory, of for theoretical texts which demand it. (demand?) Wystan ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 00:22:20 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kenneth Goldsmith Subject: Lang Po Top Ten List What are the ten most important Language Poetry books and why? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 23:36:15 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jonathan Brannen Subject: Re: close readings My experiences teaching poetry were not unlike Marjorie's (hello, Marjorie). None of the students had ever previously been expected to actually look and listen to the poem and consider it own its own terms. They were all experienced at translating English into English (thematic discourse, what the poet might have said if s/he had a more limited vocabulary and a pressing desire to please an instructor) or they were eager to place the work in a theoritical context and then discuss that context rather than the poem. They had all caught the mysterious fear of poems disease from prior instructors. I suggested that they read poetry the same way they listen to music (college students listen to a lot of music). I was amazed, but this actually worked better than I could have expected. When presented with the poem as an experience, and something with a event with the potential to alter perception, they related to it that way. The poem ceased to be a trick question on some future exam and became a work that they could enter into. I'm mentioning this because when they realized that a poem was an act of language and they were at liberty to be affected by it rather than jumping through somebody else's hoops, they became fascinated by how the poem created that effect, the mechanics of the piece. When they figured out for themselves in class how John Ashbery's line breaks work, you could almost literally see the cartoon lightbulbs coming on as they explained it to each other. s*%w D] 2 _. JGj3P Vx2T4 -fpo/ Op [A [A ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 00:44:24 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Sheila Murphy Subject: Text and Sounds and Words and... I'm very much interested in pursuing what Charles Alexander has raised beginning with physical context, and then listening and watching for all of the "beyonds" that come from that. There seem to be so many experiences possible with the sharing of words and the ranges of intimacy or of widest co-experiencing seem deliciously infinite. It seems that as we increasingly venture into the virtual, the more physical experiences (of, say, reading and touching a beautifully made physical book) seem more to be savored. I guess that what is happening for me is that simultaneously a multiplex of experiences become possible. And I need to be more fluent to be able to appreciate as I'd like all the different way things reach me and the ways that I might participate in these vehicles. All the modes are different, no one better or worse inherently, but each requiring procedures, approaches appropriate to it.. Add to that the challenges of an instructional setting, and the plot thickens! As all of the possibilities change, so have the students' expectations/level of preparation/predispositions. Thinking aloud on this one, simply. Level of casualness about how a thing, a word, a message is offered probably is connected to how it is valued, too, further complicating the issue. Well. It's late enough. I'm enjoying what I hear on the list more and more these days. Enriching. Sheila ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 22:45:18 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gary Sullivan Subject: Re: Charles Alexander's post Thanks, Charles, for bringing up the physical context (or manifestation) of the poem as carrier of meaning. The first books of poetry I responded to (after college) were those Kulchur Press editions, often with drawings, cartoons, scrawled things, the books themselves of a particular bulk, very "present" *as* books, without actually being (necessarily) "artists' books." Looking back, I'm not so sure it was the poetry itself I was enjoying so much (though I did, especially _Bean Spasms_ and _Album_) as the fact that these books were not "transparent" in the way that many (uniformly produced) books are. Reading _Defenestration of Prague_ in the Kulchur edition (which I stupidly sold, thinking I'd re-find it) was more of an experience, more memorable to me, than reading the piece in the Sun & Moon reprint, "down-sized," uniform with most other S&Ms. (Whether it matters to Howe how the work appears or not.) Someone told me that Olson wrote, or at least "set," _Maximus_ for the page, that his attention to the page as unit (at least in this instance) was as intentional as that of his line. (Anyone with better info, again, please jump in.) This person also told me that he thought the poems could be reset for a smaller page (as in the New Directions _Selected Writings_) with different, but equally satisfying effects. Whether or not my friend's correct about Olson's intentions, it *is* a wholly different effect reading the work IN LARGE in the UC edition. Then, of course, there are the people like Sir Walter Ralegh or Donne, many of whose poems were, originally, scored as letters, were (so I'm told) considered *published* as letters. Publishing, in the strict sense, was (again, so I'm told, please correct or expand) considered, by some, "professional," & that in an almost purely derogatory sense. As much as I like it, I wonder sometimes, reading Frank O'Hara's _Collected Poems_, if I'm not doing the poor guy something of a disservice, that book seeming to exist in near- absolute opposition to O'Hara's (another letter-poem writer) *intention* for those poems. But, this was something that didn't come up for me until I'd found (very luckily) first eds of _Love Poems (Tentative Title)_, _Lunch Poems_, _Second Avenue_, the material he'd seen in print in his lifetime. That's obviously speculation on my part, but it is true that reading these things as "originally published" (already one step removed from hand or typewriter), especially _Love Poems_, I get more of a sense of *how* he was a "personal" poet (however tongue-in-cheek "Personism" may have been). Much of what's most powerful in _Love Poems (Tentative Title)_ seems (to me) washed out reading those same poems in the _Collected_. There's something "authoritarian" about that giant book, an odd thing for someone who'd put "(Tentative Title)" into a title of a published volume of poetry. So, yes, I do (personally) agree there's meaning in a poem's physical manifestation. Poetry is largely "about" presence (even conscious attempts to distance oneself from or remove altogether "ego"--well, that's an issue of "presence"), so consideration of a poem's presence seems not only perfectly valid, but worth further exploration. In a way--maybe something of a leap--some of the earlier posts about community or lack thereof, about the nature of the poetry "world" itself, seem equally germane with respect to considerations of poetry's "meaning." Books of poetry, magazines, even discussions of poetry, never simply "arrive." The question, I guess, might be: at what point do you lose rather than gain in drawing in all of these other variables? I don't know, but think the net can be larger than we often allow. Yours, Gary ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 23:57:27 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mn Center For Book Arts Subject: Re: Lang Po Top Ten List X-To: UB Poetics discussion group In-Reply-To: <2f6133e839cb002@maroon.tc.umn.edu> On Sat, 11 Mar 1995, Kenneth Goldsmith wrote: > What are the ten most important Language Poetry books and why? > Most important, in what sense? Best to prop a window open with? Keeps a fire burning longest, in which case the quality of the paper used may plan a part? My choices as a writer may be different than another's, certainly different than someone else's as a teacher, & my choices as a bookmaker may take into consideration limited editions which bring the visual into the verbal in books of such small circulation that there may be none or at most a few on this list who have seen them -- in my mind that makes them no less "important" than an edition which sells 20,000. Also it seems to me that only someone not particularly involved with so-called Language Poetry would put the request in such a way. To poets who make up the enlarged group, many of whom detest the moniker, our reading of Beowulf or Christopher Smart may provide as much generative energy as our reading of Rae Armantrout or Carla Harryman. I'd be more interested in such lists which are expansive rather than reductive, although I'll admit it might be nice to see a list or lists of people's favorite ten little-known-but-once-discovered-not-to-be-missed tomes. But "most important?" Read, she sd, and by all means DON'T look out where yr going. charles alexander ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 00:13:05 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mn Center For Book Arts Subject: Re: Charles Alexander's post X-To: UB Poetics discussion group In-Reply-To: <2f6138cd42eb004@maroon.tc.umn.edu> Gary, you are getting into rich territory concerning what it means "to read," i.e. that there is always a context, and that certainly not limited to the physical book or page, but yes, involving how one came to the work, real people, and more. I don't have time to get into this tonight, but wanted to say that I found your comments on O'Hara lovely and stimulating. Also to add that even reading Olson in the big California edition is a far cry from reading the original editions which, while they don't gather as many pages, are printed on pages with more bulk, with covers which have real texture, so that, altogether, they seem to occupy more territory. This, too, would be quite different than coming across those Olson poems in letters and manuscripts. But certainly one reads into the New Directions Selected the black & white aesthetic of that press, which seems quite foreign to Olson, and one reads into the California edition, despite the spacious size of the book, a slick jacketed university/corporate packaging, getting even farther from that "excessively rough moraine" (Letter #41) which, in its bulky and shapely manifestation, is the Olson I always hear (interesting how even the physical book or context of reading remains, as do the texts, in one's memory, which is where the work remains, as books are closed for more than 99% of their lives). charles alexander ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 22:48:12 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Thomas Bell Subject: Re: Text and Sounds and Words and... Two comments: One of the interesting things about poetry posted on the net is that it can be downloaded and manipulated: fonts, size, spacing, etc. This allows the reader to be an active reader, indeed. In the course of rereading some of Charles Olson's work and writings I came across two items of interest. 1.) In "Projective Verse" (_Poetry New York_, 1950) he wrote: "If a contemporary poet leaves a space as long as the phrase before.he means that space to be held, by the breath, an equal length of time. If he suspends a word or syllable at the end of a line (this was most cummings addition) he means that time to pass that it takes the eye - that hair of time suspended - to pick up the next line. If he wishes a pause so light it hardly separates the words, yet does not want a comma - which is an interruption of the meaning rather than the sounding of a line - follow him when he uses a symbol the typewriter has ready to hand: "What does not change/is the will to change" Observe him when he takes advantage of the machine's multiple margins, to juxtapose: 'Sd he: to dream takes no effort to think is easy to act is more difficult but for a man to act after he has taken thought, this! is the most difficult thing of all' Each of these lines is a progressing of both the meaning and the breathing forward, and then a backing up, without a progress or any kind of movement outside the unit of time local to the idea. ...by this emphasis on the typewriter as the personal and instantaneous recorder of the poet's work...as though not the eye but the ear was to be [poetry's] measure, as though the intervals of its composition could be so carefully put down as to be precisely the intervals of its registration. For the ear....can now again, that the poet has his means, be the threshold of projective verse." Thomas Bell tbjn@well.sf.ca.us ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 07:42:54 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: John Cayley Subject: Re: charles alexander's post <-- form >to turn a part >of the discussion concerning poems to their contexts. For me, as a >bookmaker as well as reader & writer, this means the physical context. >Is there such a thing >as the physicality of meaning? These issues are certainly crucial to the >book arts and to the design arts, and >both of these arts may be in partnership with literary texts in various >ways. Is there any reality to the literary text outside its actual >physical manifestation? If so, what, and is that different than the >physical presence, and that would be exciting to talk about as well. While skimming the 'form' discussion, wished to reiterate that there is an obligation to engage at a =low level= (in the programmer's sense of the term) with form as it is modulated by the technology which we are all now using. Isn't it still the case that we accept these tools handed down to us from on high and then continue to try and carry out our various forms of piracy in the ways we are used to? Isn't there still too much simulation on the literary net and not enough new form? Now charles alexander's words prompt posting of a short piece written for another context (general readership?): [ The book is not just a physical object, the essential, definitive icon of our material culture. It is the pre-eminent medium for the storage and delivery of linguistic creation and information. As such it is supremely effective and remarkably convenient. Books are elegant and often beautiful. However, the book is also a metaphor which may invoke any or all of its qualities in order to create new ways of understanding the self. Everyone in the modern world, even those people who share our culture but who were never or are no longer people of the book, everyone must accumulate written paper throughout their lives-- scraps, certificates, lists, deeds, forms, letters, and so on -- and may sometimes long to see these fragments organized, made sense of, bound together. For others this longing is central to their existence. The book is, potentially, a body of work, a summation of what you have to say and, finally, of what you are. 'This book is my life's story, the sum of all I know. I put everything into it, body and soul. It's my life itself, and before I pass on I must close it, leaving it behind for others to read and interpret.' The meaning created by this metaphor is determined by the physical characteristics of the book. This has not been static although its predominant form -- the codex or collection of paper-like leaves bound together so that it can be opened at any point -- has been with us since the second century of our era. Book artists and others have challenged this dominance, but however creative and inspiring the resulting dialogue has proven, it has not undermined the shape of the vital book-as-metaphor in our culture. Now, later than many predictions would have led us to believe, the book is changing. The word is applied to bodies of text which are stored in electronic libraries, on the ever-spinning magnetic or optical disks of programmable machines. Millions of these machines are already linked on the InterNet. 'Books', 'libraries' -- the use of these words, the inability to find others, demonstrates that the irreducible, defining quality of a book is that it should be a body of work recorded in language without regard to physical form. Thus the metaphor survives but its shape and significance change forever. There is no longer the sense that a book -- as electronic book -- is bound or bounded, that you can see all of it at once, hold it, pick it up, that it has a physical location. It is more difficult to believe that the words of the book are fixed and stable, its author's definitive statement on its subject. Although there is general familiarity with the tools that conveniently allow us to write and edit bodies of text, some people will be less content with the realization that these same tools will allow others to appropriate and even alter what they have created. Many will be unwilling to apply a metaphor to themselves, as once they did, which begins to suggest unboundedness, indeterminacy, openness to the electronically interleaved books of anyone else on the InterNet. The codex will live on. It is not a question of either or. Both old and new books will coexist. Some writers and book-makers will wish to explore new opportunities offered by the less familiar qualities of unbound, coverless books. Some readers will welcome new ways of understanding themselves in the ghostly, fragmentary, drifting leaves of an evolving metaphor. ] btw: In one understanding Quakers quake at Friends' meetings (a metaphor for these discussions?) as a physical manifestation of the tension, vacillation, radical self-questioning which arises when a friend realizes s/he has something to say in the context of profound silence. Are you, virtually, quaking? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 02:49:40 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Spencer Selby Subject: Re: request In-Reply-To: <199503080030.QAA17593@slip-1.slip.net> My unix server's been down for the past several days, but now I think it's OK. Messages that were sent to me, but returned, can now be re-sent. Thanks. Spencer Selby ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 08:54:51 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "H. T. KIRBY-SMITH" Organization: University of NC at Greensboro Subject: Close Reading; Authoritarian? Close reading certainly need not imply an authoritarian interpretation of a text, but close readings which attempt to impose something on the text which is not there certainly are authoritarian--as are any readings which claim for themselves exclusive and complete accountings of a poem. If you give a group of people a poem, for example, Williams's "The Yachts," to read closely, you will find that a certain number of them agree that it is about the Race of Life, the competitiveness encouraged by American free enterprise, and the indifference of the winners to the losers, the "horror of the race." But different readers will express this in different ways and will see patterns of imagery, transitions in point of view, rhythmic effects, sound patterns, associations of all kinds. There is an authority, and the authority is the poem itself, but any good poem is rich enough to allow an immense variety of reponses. Some, for example, might even point out that "The Yachts" starts, very uncharacteristically for Williams, in terza rima--a form that he hoped to emulate with his triadic, or "step-down", lines in later poems. But the rhyme pattern is immediately abandoned and the poem itself seems a criticism of established patterns of authority--the initial strict form being emblematic of this. But what about the person (this has actually happened) who thinks that "The Yachts" is an account of a caesarian section? And adduces evidence from the poem to prove this? Is that person flouting the authority of the poem? Such a reading would, to me, seem authoritarian and arbitrary and I would want to escape from that reading and go back to a free perusal of the poem. Which, it seems to me, is about what really goes into the creation of the yachts, how "The Yachts / contend." And there are good poems that close reading doesn't do much for--poems that depend on evanescent, tangential, indirect, and possibly musical effects. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 08:00:14 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gary Sullivan Subject: Re: Text and Sounds and Words and... In-Reply-To: <199503110545.WAA15882@mailhost.primenet.com> Sheila, Since this is related, would you mind maybe talking a little bit about the form of your published booklet, _Criteria for Being Touched_? Was this a collaborative project? I ask because the crayoned cover, and the slip of sandpaper (is that what it is?) stapled to the back of the book, and even the way you have to unfold the pages themselves to read the poems, all seem to further engage your reader, forcing him/her to be aware of "touching." I love what Jonathan Brannen says about getting his students to be aware of the poem as an *experience*, and this, the way your book was manifested, seems to help ensure a reader's fullest participation with that work as experience. At first, I'd thought it was the publisher's idea to do these things, but I'm beginning to suspect that you'd been the one to do this. Could you verify and, if you've time, expand? It's my favorite of the half-dozen or so books of yours I have, would love to read what you might say about it. Thanks, Gary ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 08:37:55 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gary Sullivan Subject: More in re context When learning about Bach in music school, it was explained to me (& anyone with better info, please correct or clarify) that keyboard instruments were, by necessity, only *approximately* in key, not only with wind instruments, but with themselves. (A low "G" not being quite "in key" with a "G" higher up, & this on the same keyboard; to say nothing of how a keyboard interrelated with previously extant instruments.) In a sense, assuming that music on the page isn't music, but music's map, the map itself, with the invention of the keyboard, became even further distanced from the physical territory itself. The actual pitch of "G"--even a "specific" "G" carefully drawn onto a specific place on the staff--would be different depending on whether a keyboard or wind was playing it. (& this doesn't even bring in timbre, accent, attack, etc.) To clarify the above, the keyboard literally "flattens" the notes as you go up the scale. Interesting that the keyboard and the printing press were inventions that both came into existence around the same time period. (Not sure which came first, though I suspect it was the printing press.) In a way, what the keyboard does to music (or, to "actual pitch") the printing press does to the word, both written & spoken word. Published books do have a "flattening" effect similar to that of music played on the keyboard. I was a terrible music student, but I took away from it this sense that the meaning of work has everything to do with its "physical" manifestation. So, reading poetry where everything hinges on the "meaning" of the words themselves, where everything is focused down to "language"--it's less satisfying to me. Meaning you can be didactic without having anything, necessarily, to prove, or wanting to do that, but by limiting yourself to an understanding of "meaning" in a poem being determined solely by the words, the extent to which those words, taken together, mean this or that. Charles, you are absolutely right to consider the context of the UC printing of _Maximus_; I think so many of us (including myself) can be very shortsighted, or blind, to all of the other levels of meaning radiating from a published (however published) work. Whenever I review Sun & Moon books, for example, for _City Pages_ or other journals, I want, always, to say something about how the press itself goes about promoting, or contextualizing the work, which is almost always very dissatisfying to me, it seeming so often to be in direct opposition to a poet's intentions with a particular work. (I don't make fun of S&M's "Classics" series just because I'm cantankerous.) Yes, as John Caley says, publishing is largely about "convenience"--which immediately sets up a tension between work written *against* convenience of any sort. And what poetry--besides the purely didactic--has ever been written *for* convenience? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 10:59:02 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Patrick Phillips Subject: Re: the berm chris - I jest want to think you for sentimenting the echo. patrick ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 11:11:00 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ron Silliman Subject: Re: close readings I hesitate to reply to a message when I have 22 unread messages (many from this list) still waiting on my machine...but Charles Alexander's comments are too delicious to let pass by. Jerome McGann & Cary Nelson have both addressed, quite usefully in somewhat different ways, the role of the page in its relation to the text, and I would imagine that most people on this list would agree that it's an active one. Poetry is full of attempts on the part of poets to dictate the final physical look of a work on the page. (I can remember how very strange I I felt the first few times poems of mine were published in little magazines back in 1965, sort of like a "primative" seeing himself in a polaroid for the first time or my lingering dislike of my voice on videotape.) From Grenier's box to his more recent scribbles to Duncan's typewriter, these attempts generally never worked because the tools (and goals) of the poet and those of the printer and book designer were not identical. I had one publisher (Jim Orsino-Sorcic) who once broke my own lines in places more convenient to his page size! Ah well, Faulkner couldn't get them to publish Sound & the Fury in multiple colors either. The poets who have succeeded at this have been printers/graphic artists themselves (Blake being the Big Example). Now with DTP, however, more people have access to some rudimentary form of that knowledge. I controlled every possible element in Toner (designed the cover myself) and in the forthcoming (R) -- where Bill Luoma did the cover. But I know my limits when contrasted w/ a Chax Press. So, yes, a Big Yes, on every element on the page being a part of the experience of the poem (the poem as an experience). It's pouring outside right now, another day of near Biblical torrents here in California, and I'm reminded of the passage in Brautigan's In Watermelon Sugar (a great little novel), in which he says something like if it's raining outside when you read this poem, then that's the title of this poem, Ron Silliman rsillima@ix.netcom.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 14:23:22 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Loss Glazier Subject: FYI (March 24) Internet Conference in Buffalo Info about an upcoming conference, FYI: _________________________________________________________________ THE CONVERGENCE OF SCIENCE AND THE HUMANITIES: INTERNET TECHNOLOGIES AND SCHOLARLY RESOURCES _________________________________________________________________ Friday, March 24, 1995 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. The Buffalo Marriott 1340 Millersport Highway Amherst, NY 14221 This conference is sponsored by the Conversations in the Disciplines Program of the State University of New York with support from the University Libraries and Computing and Information Technology, Academic Services, of the State University of New York at Buffalo. _Note_: For a complete online brochure of the program, use the World-Wide Web to go to: http://writing.upenn.edu/internet/library/e-journals/ub/rift/documents/ conversations About the Program: The Internet's impact on scholarly research and communication is the subject of this Conversations in the Disciplines Program, which brings together a group of people involved in applying Internet technologies and resources to studies in the humanities, social sciences, arts and letters, and the sciences. The conference will include a demonstration of Mosaic, Internet radio, and the UB Electronic Poetry Center, as well as an RIF/T poetry reading. Program Schedule: 8:30 - 9:00 a.m. Registration and Continental Breakfast 9:00 - 9:30 a.m. "'Our Words Were the Form We Entered': Towards a Theory of the Net," Loss Glazier, University at Buffalo 9:30 - 10:00 a.m. Paper: "Electronic Scholarship," John Merritt Unsworth, University of Virginia 10:00 - 10:30 a.m. Coffee Break 10:30 - 11:00 a.m. Demonstration: MOSAIC, Jim Gerland, University at Buffalo 11:00 - 11:30 a.m. Paper: "Gender and Democracy in Computer-Mediated Communication," Susan Herring, University of Texas-Arlington 11:30 - 11:45 a.m. Event: "Internet/Radio/Communites: Social Relations and the New New Media" Martin Spinelli, Independent Radio Producer 11:45 - 1:00 p.m. Lunch 1:00 - 1:30 p.m. Paper: "I Don't Take Voice Mail" Charles Bernstein, University at Buffalo 1:30 - 1:45 p.m. Demonstration: Electronic Poetry Center and "Textual Spaces: The Formal Structure of Published On-line Writing" Kenneth Sherwood, University at Buffalo 1:45 - 2:15 p.m. Event: Poetry Reading Charles Bernstein, Loss Glazier, Kenneth Sherwood, and Katie Yates 2:15 - 3:00 p.m. Afternoon Coffee and Poster Sessions: Internet Art, Internet Music, and "Collage" 3:00 - 3:30 p.m. Paper: "E-Journals and Preprint Servers In Mathematics and Science," Professor Neil Calkin, Georgia Institute of Technology 3:30 - 4:15 p.m. Issues: "Continuing the Conversation: Internet Issues and Concerns" Stuart Shapiro, Valerie Shalin, and the Audience. Stuart Shapiro, "Graphical User Interfaces: A Critique." 4:15 - 4:30 p.m. Closing Remarks About the Main Speakers: Charles Bernstein is David Gray Chair in Poetry and the Humanities at the State University of New York at Buffalo and co- editor of L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E, a literary magazine often credited with founding a well-known and highly visible school of contemporary poetry. He has recently been influential in founding the Poetics Program in English at the University at Buffalo. He is the author of twenty books, including A Poetics, published by Harvard University Press, and has given papers in the U.S., Canada, and Europe. He is editor of the Poetics listserv on the Internet, one of the most vital electronic discussion groups in contemporary literary theory. Neil Calkin, Professor of Mathematics at the Georgia Institute of Technology, grew up in England, where he studied mathematics at Trinity College, Cambridge, before earning a Ph.D. in Combinatorics and Optimization from the University of Waterloo, Canada, in 1988. He was Zeev Nehari Assistant Professor of Mathematics at Carnegie Mellon from 1988 to 1991. Since 1991 he has been a member of the mathematics faculty at Georgia Tech. He is co-founder and managing editor of the Electronic Journal of Combinatorics, one of the first WWW journals in mathematics. Susan Herring is Associate Professor of Linguistics at the University of Texas at Arlington. Since 1991, she has been investigating the language of discussion groups on the Internet. She is the author of eight papers on the subject, including "Gender and Democracy in Computer-Mediated Communication," which appeared in the _Electronic Journal of Communication_ in 1993 and is scheduled to be reprinted in _Computerization and Controversy_, 2nd edition, edited by Robert Kling. She has given numerous talks on gender differences in on-line communication in the United States, Europe, and Asia. She is the editor of a forthcoming interdisciplinary collection entitled _Computer Mediated Communication_ (Amsterdam: John Benjamins), and will guest-edit a special issue of the _Electronic Journal of Communication_ on "Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis" containing papers presented at a one- day symposium by the same name to be held at Georgetown University this March. It will be the first symposium and the first publication devoted exclusively to linguistic approaches to computer-mediated communication. John Unsworth is Director of the Institute for Advanced Technology in the Humanities and Associate Professor of English at the University of Virginia. He is co-founder and co-editor of _Postmodern Culture: An Electronic Journal of Interdisciplinary Criticism (published by Oxford University Press) and editor of the highly acclaimed Research Reports of the Institute for Advanced Technology in the Humanities. He has taught "Theory and Practice of Hypertext," "the Information Superhighway: An Interdisciplinary Introduction to the Internet," as well as courses in contemporary literature and theory. He is currently working on "Postmodernism and Information Theory," a book-length study of information theory withint the context of postmodern literature, literary theory, and social history. His paper, "Electronic Scholarship," will appear in the forthcoming collection, _The Literary Text in the Digital Age_, edited by Richard Finneran (University of Michigan Press). About the Program Planners and Participants: Librarian and poet, Loss Pequen~o Glazier is English & American Literature Subject Specialist at Lockwood Library, SUNY Buffalo. He assists in the maintenance of Internet resources for the Libraries, co-administers the Electronic Poetry Center, and co-edits the electronic journal RIF/T. His most recent book is _Small Press: An Annotated Guide_ (Greenwood Press, 1992). Nancy Schiller is the Engineering Librarian at the University at Buffalo. Her research focuses on the impact of networked computer and communications technologies on academic libraries. She is co-author of "Creating the Virtual Library: Strategic Issues" in _The Virtual Library: Visions and Realities_ (Meckler, 1993). Stuart C. Shapiro is Professor of Computer Science and a Fellow of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence. His research has included work on intelligent multimedia interfaces. Kenneth Sherwood, also a doctoral student in English at UB, is co-editor of the electronic magazine RIF/T. Martin Spinelli works with National Public Radio and Pacifica as an independent radio producer. He is a Ph.D. student in English at the University at Buffalo. Poet Katie Yates presently lives in Colorado. Her most recent book, "So Difficulty," was issued by Rodent Press. Assistant Professor of Industrial Engineering at UB, Valerie Shalin's research is in the area of human-computer interaction, specifically human bahavior and information technology. _________________________________________________________________ Conference organizers: Loss Pequen~o Glazier and Nancy Schiller To register for the conference please contact Nancy Schiller (schiller@acsu.buffalo.edu) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 13:28:45 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: cloze reading X-To: POETICS%UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU@vm1.spcs.umn.edu In message <2f5cd7fb2b56036@maroon.tc.umn.edu> UB Poetics discussion group writes: > The notion of close reading, parsing, fakes an ideological neutrality that > we've all come to know as a right-wing excision of the social because it > relegates the poetic act to an independent linguistic domain. This embrace > of the idea beyond the motivation of it is a close (cloze) reading - a cold > embrace. The fold, or moment of discovery, comes when we are not parsing > "The Idea of Order at Key West," the lay of the land/sea as described by a > resolute metaphysician. This is par - the task of close reading as an > encounter with the independent idea is equal to the face, or aspect of the > writing. It seems to me the real moments of discovery lie in the friction > between the practice of distilling and a poem that refuses, or complicates > that distillation through, for example, it's linguistic opacity and/or > cultural "position." In these contexts, close reading becomes an engagement > with that friction, the totality of languaging, the rubbing up against the > social, the motivation of the poem cutting in one direction, while the idea > of the language tumbles in another. It is here that there is a > determination of reading as a process of the social, because here our > belief in the distinction between language and motivation is tried. So, in > this trial, close reading becomes a passionate exchange of the social and > the linguistic; the linguistic becomes/is the social. Close reading in this > case is really close. We begin to parse, or closely read ourselves. > > Patrick Phillips ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 13:37:44 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: more on close reading, theory, politics, etc. X-To: POETICS%UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU@vm1.spcs.umn.edu the new critics/agrarians were indeed political reactionaries, as walter kalaidjian's forthcoming essay in Marketing Modernisms (Duke UP, ed. Watt and Dettmar) demonstrates; allen tate defended lynching, etc. so any attempt to make them sound noble in their pleas for political "neutrality" is just plain naive. however, that does not mean that any close attention to a text, esp. as people have been delineating those multifarious practices on this list, is fascistic. --maria damon In message <2f60d3500438429@maroon.tc.umn.edu> UB Poetics discussion group writes: > Before I go off on different tracks, I'd like to ask those who've noted a > lack of undergrad ability to do close reading whether they think that > correlates with an increased student understanding of history, current > events, political theory & other matters of social context, or whether they > find it part of a more overarching crisis in U.S. education? I'm also > assuming there are many thousands of exceptions, am I too naive? > Regarding close reading, Kathe Davis wrote: "Anything can be TAUGHT > tyrannically, but there is nothing INHERENTLY tyrannical in being urged to be > more aware." > I totally agree. (Perhaps contemporary critics exaggerate the New > Critics' lack of concern for social context? Were New Critics also > exaggerating predecessors' lack of attention to textual matters?) Overall, I > don't really think any particular style of literary criticism, nor any > particular style of poetry for that matter, is inherently progressive or > reactionary. For instance, among deconstructionist literary critics, as among > the modernist poets, politics ranges from democratic left to fascist. I think > we always have to try to avoid *a priori* assumptions based merely on form or > style, and take an actual look at the particular work (again, both its > internal & external dynamics) & make a case for our reading or judgment of > it. > (Re the matter of attaching inherent political qualities to literary > styles, let me begin to walk out on what is definitely a tangent & possibly a > limb...) I think one tendency that can lead to imposing *a priori* political > labels, often used to dismiss certain styles of criticism or poetry > out-of-hand, is a tendency to conflate conceptual categories. This seems > pretty common today. One of my favorite contemporary examples is the > post-structuralist theorist, Lyotard's (highly influential, I think) > conflation of the philosophical concept of totality with the political system > of totalitarianism. Besides conflating categories, that equation also seems > mistaken on the practical level, since the concept of totality was used > (among others) by some marxist thinkers who were clearly theorizing the > extension of democracy into all spheres of public life (e.g. extending > democratic rights to the working class) to ensure that no leaders could > remain unaccountable or outside the rule of law & in order to safeguard > diversity. As Daniel Singer has pointed out: during Rosa Luxemburg's day, > using the phrase "democratic socialism" would have been like saying "buttery > butter." No matter what other disagreements one might have with some of > these theorists (e.g. problems with teleology, orthodoxy, etc.), many were > clearly working for a *more* democratic society, not a less democratic > one--and it seems silly to blame these theories of extending democracy for > the eventual and often-horrific development of "actually existing socialism" > in the Soviet bloc. > (Walking further out toward the limb's edge?...) This conflation of > categories also seems to me to occur in some language poetry theory where > traditional narrative & syntax structures are sometimes conflated with the > rules of the existing state--rules that interconnect with language > structures, of course, but that aren't reducible to language structures. (I'd > appreciate corrections here, since I'm still trying to learn this stuff...) > In this argument, as I understand it, breaking the dominant rules of syntax > (or creating non-narratives or anti-narratives in Jerome McGann's > formulation) is seen as an inherently radical act. But it seems to me that > both narratives and anti-narratives can be used for different purposes--both > potentially able either to help promote notions of progressive social change > or to help protect the status quo. (Re the latter, I think of TV commercials > that appropriate techniques of modernist juxtaposition; corporate paper > shredders; government documents & speeches that are filled with huge gaps in > narrative & logic, sometimes foregrounding language at the expense of > content, in order to mystify the public or maintain plausible deniability; > etc.) I think part of the tendency among poets (myself included) & literary > theorists to conflate conceptual categories (esp. the literary & the > political) is the result of some part of us hoping that our writings might by > themselves transform the often-distressing political reality of our day. > But, as much as I wish as a poet that I could believe in "magic > bullet poems," or, more to my political preference, "magic nonviolent civil > disobedience poems," or even "magic post-structuralist deconstuction of > oppressive state apparatus poems"; and as much as I think terrific poems > often derive a good deal of their energy from their attempt to achieve such a > magic transgressive political ability; it seems to me more helpful & honest > to think (heuristically) of categories like poetry, politics, economics, etc. > as distinct spheres that interrelate in complex and mediated ways--i.e. > spheres that are not conflated but not autonomous either. The fun & > challenging part then is to explore the ways they do (& might possibly) > interrelate under particular (past, present or future) circumstances. For > example, one can consider ways in which particular poems might interconnect > with social context by raising an audience's political consciousness, > inspiring alternative ways of thinking, urging commitment, offering shrewd > historical critique, envisioning healthier social reconstructions, etc. I > don't think contextualizing precludes "close reading," since I don't really > think it's possible to talk about a poem's relation to social context without > looking at the text's internal dynamics. Poems, then, written in a wide > variety of forms and styles, including poems that explode traditional syntax > & also poems that use traditional syntax, can potentially be seen to contain > emancipatory elements which a reader or critic (using a variety of critical > styles) can draw out. That doesn't mean that all poems will contain > emancipatory elements, but just that one has to be open-minded enough about > questions of form & style to actually look. > One nice thing about avoiding the conflation of literature & politics > is that different criteria for evaluating poetic and political realms become > possible. (I guess I feel post-structuralism & langpo theory have done a > valuable job in helping to correct what may have been an overly determinate > way of reading literary texts, but added a not-very-helpful overly > indeterminate criteria for judging politics.) Poetry is free to eXpeRimeNt > without getting called petit-bourgeois, too esoteric (or too didactic) or > some such *a priori* label often meant to dismiss a poem so that one doesn't > need to read it. (Poetry is also free to explore lots of areas besides > politics, and also to offer pleasure, etc.) At the same time, more > determinate and normative judgments are possible in the realm of politics in > order to arrive at (to even debate) bases for united actions, common > principles & platforms, agreed-upon strategies & democratic structures, > etc.--all the stuff required to build the sort of organized political > movements that are ultimately needed (along with raised public consciousness) > to create lasting radical, truly democratic & egalitarian social change. > Sorry for the ridiculous length of this post. I'll go back to sitting > on the sidelines for awhile. > Sincerely, E. Katz > > (If anyone's interested, re my last post, Stephen Bronner attributes the > internal dynamic & external dynamic phraseology to an Austrian philosopher, > Max Adler, whose book in German on Marx and Kant hasn't yet been translated > into English.) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 14:09:51 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Nowak Subject: Silliman's "primative" (sic) Dear Dr. Silliman, I found your post, in which you compare how it felt to have your first poems published in little magazines back in 1965 to ... "...sort of like a 'primative' seeing himself in a polaroid for the first time..." truly moving. Do you have any other such engaging similes for us young & older white poets who predominate this list? Mark Nowak ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 20:52:00 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Bernstein Organization: University at Buffalo X-To: poetics@UBVMS.BITNET quiet del poetics mlljorge ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 21:25:47 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Pierre Joris Subject: Re: close readings In-Reply-To: <199503111914.OAA08829@sarah.albany.edu> from "Ron Silliman" at Mar 11, 95 11:11:00 am yes, the page... Ron's examples from right now are indeed examplary. the thing goes, however,back a long way. One of the finest examples of poet's will re page left hanging was Mallarme's COUP DE DE. It came out in 1897, & not according to M's design instruction. In fact the very first edition published according to M's instructions came out in the late 70ies (this century) when Mitsou Ronat & Tibor Papp did so. Pierre ======================================================================= Pierre Joris | He who wants to escape the world, translates it. Dept. of English | --Henri Michaux SUNY Albany | Albany NY 12222 | "Herman has taken to writing poetry. You tel&fax:(518) 426 0433 | need not tell anyone, for you know how email: | such things get around." joris@cnsunix.albany.edu| --Mrs. Melville in a letter to her mother. ======================================================================= ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 16:03:04 GMT+1300 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Wystan Curnow Organization: English Dept. - Univ. of Auckland Subject: Re: Silliman's "primative" (sic) I love what somebody says about something. I like it best when some people use abstractions and meaningful generalisations. I'm really enjoying the net these days. Before, I was hurt by the fascistic postings of some people, and I relate strongly to those posts about some people being left out of something, or being kept out more likely. Let's have more of those. But really all the posts are different and not one is better or worse than any other. Everybody is doing their best to be very good and change the world as quickly as possible. Let's hear it for the net effect! love, Wystan Curnow ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 22:20:52 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Bernstein Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: WARNING: Poetry Area--Publics Under Construction {long post/essay} The following is most of the essay I presented at the Twentieth Century Literature Conference, at the University of Louisville, on February 25, at a panel entitled "Constructing Publics", organized by Robert von Hallberg; Maria Damon also spoke at this session. --Charles Bernstein ********* WARNING ~ POETRY AREA: Publics Under Construction Do publics construct poetry or does poetry construct publics? Not so fast, where's the shell under those nuts, the nuts under those texts, the texts under those author-functions, the author-functions inside those periods, the periods inside those stanzas, the stanzas inside those ever-loving tats for ticks, quantums for particles, buzz saws for heliotropes, missionaries for bugle boys? The public does not and cannot exist until it can find means to constitute itself; to convene in, on or about the precincts of language; to explore its multiple, overlapping or mutually exclusive, constituent parts, elements, components, units, fractions, links, bands, conglomerations, alliances, groupings, configurations, spheres, clusters, divisions, localities; to find means of conversation without necessitating conversion, among and between these constituent parts, allowing that these parts shift and reconfigure in response to changing circumstances. Poetry explores the constitution of public space as much as representing already formed constituencies; risks its audience as often as assumes it; refuses to speak for anyone as much as fronting for a self, group, people, or species. In the process of recognizing new communities, new audiences, and new publics for poetry, as well redressing the previous exclusion of groups from our republic of letters, I want to honor the complexity of contemporary American poetic practice over and above its representativeness. Within universities in the 1990s, contemporary poetry is increasingly being taught for the ways it marks, narrates, and celebrates ethnicity, gender, and race. To fit this curricular imperative, some poems may be selected for their explicit and positive group representations. Other poems (by the same poet or by other poets) may seem less useful if they are found to complicate representation because of their structural or formal complexity -- their contradictory, ambivalent, obscure, or mixed expressions or inexpressions of identity; or because of their negative or skeptical approaches to fixed conceptions of self or group identity. For poetry may wish to question, rather than assume, group identity as much as self identity -- not to deny that selves and groups exist, or have voices, but to take their description and expression as a poetic, as much as an epistemologic, project. Like many developments in education, the trend toward a representative poetry is as much market or consumer-driven, not to say demographic, in origin as it is ideological. The gorgeous mosaic of students in the classroom, to use former New York City Mayor David Dinkins's term, puts an enormous, and appropriate, pressure on teachers to create syllabuses that reflect the various origins of our students as much as their multiple destinations. Yet, like in electoral politics, not every group is recognized as equally significant in the often schematic, not to say gerrymandered, patchwork of multicultural curricula. Similarly, some subject areas such as contemporary poetry are being used to front for the far more static approach to issues of gender, race, ethnicity and sexual orientation in other areas of the humanities and in the social and natural sciences. There are good reasons for this unequal development, since contemporary poetry remains an indispensable site for the exploration of the multiplicities, and multiplicitousness of, identities. TV and Hollywood movies continue to provide inadequate, or nonexistent, representations of many groups in our culture. This may help to explain why poetry and the small press are a _central_ place for such representations, given the independent press's ability to serve what can as easily be called small or niche markets as "marginal" communities. For some groups in our culture, poetry may be a primary site of basic cultural exchange in a way that is hard to comprehend for those who identify with the cultural representations of the mass media. This is why it is crucial to differentiate share-driven mass media from popular and local and folk-cultural activities whose lifeblood is their low market share -- their small scale, let's emphasize, rather than their "unpopularity". But it is not only sociologically identified "groups" that are unserved or underserved by the majoritarian, market-share- driven, mass media, but also "outsiders" of every sort and kind, of every stripe and lack of stripe, as Maria Damon eloquently argues in _The Dark Side of the Street_. In an increasing intolerant American cultural landscape, nonmajoritarian cultural activities are stigmatized as elitist and as "special interests" even though these activities are the last refuge of local and particularistic resistance to the big government and big media claimed, by the right, to be the source of our problems. The current attacks on public television and public support for the arts and humanities are a sharp warning that intellectual complexity, aesthetic difficulty, and non-mega-market-driven cultural production have become "minor" art activities that cohabit the same shadow world of poetry and the small press as do group- and outsider-identified cultural practices. For if commercial culture is increasingly dominated by entertainment products that are developed, through the use of focus and dial groups, to evoke maximum positive response at every unit of exposure; then art that is not just figuratively but literally untested, art that evokes contradictory and confused initial response, or simply appeals to a statistical minority of targeted readers, will not be circulated through commercial channels. It should be no more a surprise to us in the USA, than it has been for the past few years to citizens in the former USSR, that market forces create different, but not necessarily desirable, cultural values compared to those imposed top down by the old-guard of cultural arbiters or commissars. In the post-Pantheon world of book publishing, the diversified companies that own the major trade publishers are charged with publishing not simply profitable books but the most profitable books. Works that appeal to minor or micro publics, that is to say small constituencies, are excluded from this system in favor of works that appeal to macro publics, which is to say a substantial market share of the targeted audience. The circumstance is somewhat analogous to a TV show with millions of enthusiastic viewers being cancelled for its failure to garner an adequate public. Yet unprofitable cultural product does continue to be manufactured in the commercial sector and not simply as a result of the inevitable market failures of the entertainment industry. The question is, why are some works published despite their relatively poor profit potential in preference to other works with a similar profit profile? It isn't just nonprofit arts organizations that lose money supporting their particular cultural agendas. Indeed, as far as losing money in an effort to construct a public, the independent and alternative presses are no match for such mainstream magazines as _The New Yorker_, which, despite a circulation that has recently surged to 750,000, appears to be losing as much as $10 million a year (that's something like $13 per subscriber) -- an amount that could finance a good part of the annual cost of the alternative poetry presses and readings and magazines. _The New Yorker_'s parent company, S. I. Newhouse, is apparently less concerned with profit than with cultural dominance -- legitimating the cultural product that forms the basis of its media empire; for this exercise in hegemony, circulation and publicity are more important than profit. Of course, publishing statistics are notoriously unreliable, especially when they concern the amount publishers are willing to lose -- less to obtain cultural legitimacy, let me correct myself, than to establish cultural values. According to _The New York Times_ (3/2/94, p. C20), Harold M. Evans, the publisher of Random House's adult trade division, told an audience at the PEN American Center that "the 29 books he published that made it on to _The New York Times_'s 1993 list of Notable Books lost $680,000" and the eight books that "won awards from the American Library Association lost a total of $370,000." Evans went on to say that three of these books had advertising budgets of $71,000 to $87,000 each and that these books lost from $60,000 to $300,000 each. Innovative works of literature or criticism or scholarship that challenge the dominant cultural values of institutions such as Random House are not the most likely candidates to receive this type of support; yet without such subventions they stand little chance of being reviewed or recommended in _The New York Times_, whose reviews are closely correlated to its advertisers. The point is not that official "high" culture, just as alternative-press poetry, requires subsidies; but that a system of selection and support favors certain works over others; it is this system of selection and promotion that allows the media conglomerates to control cultural sectors that they have written off as largely unprofitable. Note, however, that the content of the selections is less important for this system of dominance than the system of selection and promotion itself, since the alternative presses can never afford to lose _as much as_ these corporations. It should be no surprise that it is neither the public nor accessibility that creates official literary product, nor that much of official "high" culture is a loss leader. Advertising and promotion of targeted "loss leaders" are evidently worth the price in influencing literary and critical taste, specifically by fostering a cultural climate in which genuinely profitable products may thrive. Now should be the time to pull the hat out of the rabbit, the bottle out of the genie, the tree out of the paper, the riddle out of the problem. For example to extol the emerging electronic gateway as the balm for poetry, which will soothe our wounds of poor capitalization and shrink-wrapped publics of long-term outsiders, far-out insiders, subaltern-centric rhapsodes, and other statistical anomalies from the upper west side of Manhattan to the Castro district of San Francisco to the vacant lots behind the Galleria mall in Nowhere, USA. ............ I don't believe that technology creates improvement, but rather that we need to use the new technologies in order to preserve the limited cultural spaces we have created through the alternative, nonprofit literary presses and magazines. This is a particularly important time for poetry on the net because the formats and institutions we are now establishing can provide models and precedents for small-scale, poetry-intensive activities. At the same time, the new interactive environment suggests new possibilities for every aspect of poetic work, from composition to visualization to display to performance to distribution to reading, and indeed, to constructing publics, this afternoon's putative subject. (You say subject, I say object; you say focus, I say associate: subject, object, focus, associate, let's call the whole thing art. But oh, if we call the whole thing art then we must part and oh if we must part -- I'd be the object and you'd be the subject or you'd be the subject and I'd be the object: let's call the art part off.) An enticing thing about today's internet environment is the spirit of innovation and engagement that prevails. A poem with a sound file electronically published by _PMC_ (_Postmodern Culture_) will get many more "hits" (user connections) than a poem published in a comparable print journal because so many people are cruising the net looking for new material. Poetry enters into a performance space on the net, providing text-based content -- something poetry is particularly good at! -- to an audience hungry for it. There is some general interest, from an internet-focussed public, in the new formats being created, including those by poets and poetry editors. The result is that for the moment the public of poetry on the net is unusually eclectic, even open, in their specifically poetic or literary interest. That is, a range of people will read and listen to poetry, or participate in poetry-based discussion groups and bulletin boards, who would not be interested in this genre in its print- or performance-based forms (a claim that also could be made for performance versus print and vice versa). At the moment, we have on the net something like a general audience for poetry -- a claim that rightly will alarm those people conscious of how restricted physical access to cyberspace is. (Of the poets I know in New York, less than 10 percent have e-mail accounts; while in Buffalo, in a university based environment, about 90 percent of the poets I know have e-mail accounts.) But I would argue that it is the current limitation of access and programming that gives poetry its particular edge on the net and as the information superhighway is put in place, the public that will be constructed by it will return poetry to its hard-core. Poetry on the net is very small-scale: I am not talking about big numbers so much as a certain fluidity of audience. At the University at Buffalo, we have set up an Electronic Poetry Center, designed by Loss Glazier, a poet and our humanities librarian, and Ken Sherwood, a poet and a doctoral student in our Poetics Program. The EPC, still under the construction, provides gopher and WWW access to extensive listing of small press catalogs and addresses, electronic versions of print journals and archives of electronic magazines and our Poetics listserve discussion group, plus alphabetically arrayed poems and essays, recent obituaries, sound files, etc. A related project is _Rif/t_ magazine, a electronic poetry magazine (publishing poems, essays, reviews, and chapbooks) edited by Glazier and Sherwood. _Rif/t_ itself has 1,000 subscribers. As to EPC, the number of connections or hits per month has been increasing: we estimate something over 600 connections per month. Some of these hits may be the same user going back for more; at the same time the statistics do not account for all modes of access to EPC, so the number of sessions is actually higher. In any case, over 600 hits in one month compares favorably to the public for an establish literary magazine. Luigi-Bob Drake's _Taproot_ magazine provides the most extensive and useful listing of small -- press magazines available -- providing short reviews of over 300 different magazines and chapbooks in the last issue. _Taproot_ is also available on line, minus its feature articles. The hard copy version of the magazine has a print-run of about 2500, of which 500 are distributed free in Cleveland, its home base. The e-mail version goes out directly to 500 subscribers and is also redistributed to an additional 1,000 e-mail accounts as part of _FactSheet5 Electric_, which in turn is available from over 20 archive and gopher sites with undetermined additional "hits". _Taproot_ itself is also available via the EPC. More startling, and more informative as to the potential for electronic distribution of "literary-niche" audience material, is the incredible success of the electronic journal _Postmodern Culture_. According to co-editor John Unsworth, in the approximately six-month period from May 18, 1994 to Dec. 8, 1994 there were over 40,000 requests for the table of contents of all issues of the journal. In total, more than 358,000 items have been requested from the PMC archives during this same period. Poetry on the net is not so much a positive development as a necessary one. The internet will become increasingly central for poetry because of the economy of scale it provides, given the high cost of printing and paper, the increasing expense for unreliable postal service, the shrinking of the presently tiny public support for literary publishing, and the absence of poetry-committed bookstores in most localities. Poetry editors and publishers often have few alternatives but to use the cheapest means of reproduction available: mimeo in the 60s, xerox and offset in the 70s and 80s, and electronic publishing in the 90s. In the words of Joe Hill, Don't mourn, organize (though there is plenty to mourn over). A crucial prerequisite for that organizing is understanding how this new space will affect the composition and presentation of our work, especially insofar as we respond in our work to this new electronic medium. We also need to explore the implications this emerging space has for the composition and disposition of the publics for poetry. Unlike poetry on the net, poetry in print and live formats presents few physical limits to access and user-interface given the prevalence of hard-wired body systems for processing spoken language and broad familiarity with alphabetic technologies. Our limits are more conceptual and ideological: the very niche-based, specialized, focussed, small-scale, often non-overlapping readerships that are a fundamental and vital and source of poetry's aesthetic and social value. Many people say that the university, with its captive audience of mostly 18-24 year-olds, has become the primary site for the distribution of poetry. I don't think this is quite true, but few can fail to recognize how much of poetry's public consists of students. This reflects badly neither on poetry nor universities, quite the contrary; rather, it reflects the appalling lack of public cultural space outside the narrows confines of the literary academy. It is bad for poetry, and for poets, to be nourished so disproportionately; for the sort of poetry I care for has its natural habitat in the streets and offices and malls and parks and fields and farms and houses and apartments and elevators and stores and alleys and parades and woods and bookstores and public libraries. Sometimes I imagine the kind of audience contemporary poetry would have if it were on the radio on a daily basis: say a new half-hour program every night at 8. The public for this programming would be small, although larger than our current publics for poetry. At the turn of this now turning century, radio promised to revolutionize the distribution of poetry, making widely accessible, at no cost, the new the new acoustic riffs of the language arts. For, of all our technologies, radio has the greatest potential to create a democratic listening space. Without access to the public soundwaves, subsidiary, privately available, spoken art media (tapes, CDs) cannot flourish. The exclusion of contemporary language arts from the public air, from radio, is a stark warning about what we can expect from the upcoming merging of cable TV, radio and the internet. If contemporary poetry is able to construct only a series of disconnected publics, then poetry is banished from that virtual republic that we aspire to, all the more, knowing it unattainable. For all the utopian promise of technological optimists, the answer is not in our machines but in our politics. For we see in this society a constant erosion of public space -- space not privatized for maximum profit, but made available for common use. And so it seems we can only imagine the public square, the town green, a Central Park of our poetries, where, leaving the solitude or sustenance of our rooms or communes, we might jostle against one another, unexpectably mingle, confuse our borders: refigure ourselves, reconstitute our affiliations, regroup. There is no education in the arts equivalent to having art works available in open channels -- public spaces -- to intrigue, befuddle, and engage those unfamiliar and familiar, but especially unfamiliar. Such initial points of public access to art must not be abolished; neither should they be privatized, through the restrictions of pay TV or high admissions prices. For such sites to have a democratizing function they must be maximally accessible from a physical, technological, and financial point of view, just that what they exhibit may not be so immediately accessible in other ways. We must resist the idea that difficult art is elitist, any more than that science is elitist or that learning is elitist. Such arguments breed demagoguery not populist empowerment. By denying the value of the labor necessary to become linguistically and culturally informed, we encourage the maintenance of an uninformed, indeed, ignorant, citizenry. If the arts are denied public support, it is not the artists or dedicated readers and viewers who will suffer, for one way or another their commitment will keep them working and they will be prepared to find art in out-of-the-way places. But for the uninitiated, the decline of public space for art can be devastating, for they will have no common place to find non- market driven art production. Public radio and public television, despite their manifest inadequacies, are, like public arts funding through the NEA and other agencies, a fundamental point of intersection between the public and the arts. They are the town square of art. In a society that has few such points of access, any diminishment of our public spaces for culture is a catastrophe. Don't lament, or don't lament only: construct. NOTES 1. Elizabeth Kolbert, "How Tina Brown Moves Magazines," in The New York Times Magazine, Dec. 5, 1993, p. 87. I lift this paragraph and the following one from the footnotes of an essay in which I discuss some closely related issues -- "Provisional Institutions: Alternative Presses and Poetic Innovation", which is forthcoming in Arizona Quarterly (Spring, 1995). 2. More on this in "I Don't Take Voice Mail", in M/E/A/N/I/N/G #16. 3. EPC connections through the main menu are as follows: July, 1994: 614; September, 367; October, 429; November: 573. Perhaps an additional ten percent accessed the server through Veronica searches or direct gopher connections. 4. "The WAIS-based search function for PMC, which operates through a WWW fill-out form, is heavily used, with more than 6,000 requests for that. The table of contents for the May 1994 issue (our most popular recent issue) has been requested over 6,000 times. Our most popular single item has been the popular culture column on Krazy Kat, with roughly 2,500 requests for the opening page. By the way, the page of information and archives on PMC-MOO has been requested almost as many times (5,700+). PMC-MOO, by the way, is now the second largest virtual community on the internet, with 2,718 "citizens," over half of whom have been active on the MOO in the two weeks [prior to this tabulation]. And we've had close to 900 requests for the table of contents of the PMC book of collected essays. I should add that none of these numbers reflect the non-WWW distribution channels; I don't have stats for gopher or ftp use, but we do have over 3,000 subscribers to the listserv distribution list for the journal's table of contents and calls for reviewers." -- John Unsworth, personal communication, January 31, 1995. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 22:47:11 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Viet Nam Generation web site I've just set up a web site server on Viet Nam Generation's macII. Our book catalogue is on-line now. I'll be putting up selections from the books themselves in the next couple of weeks. The site also describes the Sixties Project. The web address is: http://kalital.polisci.yale.edu Enjoy, Kali ________________ Kali Tal Sixties Project & Viet Nam Generation, Inc. 18 Center Rd., Woodbridge, CT 06525 203/387-6882; fax 203/389-6104 email: kalital@minerva.cis.yale.edu ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 23:15:19 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Joe Amato's volume of poetry now available... Several months ago we announced Joe Amato's forthcoming volume of poetry, _Symptoms of a Finer Age_. It's just come back from the printer, so next week we'll be sending out copies to those of you who ordered it. If you didn't order it, but want to, here's the info.... Joe Amato, _Symptoms of a Finer Age_, 96 pages, perfectbound, $12, White Noise #5; ISBN: 1-885215-12-6. You can order directly from Viet Nam Generation, Inc., 18 Center Rd., Woodbridge, CT 06525. Add $1.35 for shipping and handling. I've been following the form/content discussion--my opinion as an editor and book designer is that the physical medium should, ideally, work with the poetry. For example, the standard size for books in the White Noise Series is 8.5" x 5.5", a pretty standard paperback size. Joe's poetry has long lines, though, and sometimes he has right-justified lines which have the feel of marginalia. He also has a couple of pages which make use of a mixture of fonts and type sizes to create a particular visual effect. I felt that in order to create a book which would carry Joe's work, I had to change sizes and go to 8.5" x 6", giving the text a broader look and shifting the proportions somewhat closer to square. Our cover designer, Steve Gomes, created an "outside" for the package which is in dialogue with the contents: Joe's brother had taken a B&W picture of the New York World's Fair globe; the globe appears in one of Joe's poems and is an integral image for the book. We reversed the image so that it looks like the globe is hanging in space, flipped the negative so that the continents appear as they would appear on a map (convincing, but completely wrong, as any architect would--and did--catch immediately) and then had the photo hand-tinted in the style of 1930s photo labs, in blues and tans (exactly matching the colors of the earth from space). Steve then got a flat, black mat on which he laid out the hand-painted photo, holding it in place on the front cover with those little old-fashioned black photo corners. He similarly set up the B&W author photo on the back cover. Then he went to our page layout program and set up the titles, which he printed on paper of exactly the color that newspaper turns when it gets, oh, say about 40 years old. He printed them in 150dpi resolution instead of the 600dpi our printer is capable of so that they would look just as blurry as newspaper type. Then he cut them out, carefully, by hand and glued them on the black mat board, folding the corners of one piece to crease the print and give it a more "authentic" look. Then we shot the whole board so that we could get a vivid 3-D effect. The result is that the cover looks like pages out of a carefully kept scrapbook. To keep the scrapbook feel, we had the printer run the black background in a seperate pass through the press in a *very* flat matte black. Then they ran the four-color passes in regular gloss inks. Finally, we did a double pass with liquid lamination--gloss lamination just on the photographs, and matte on the rest of the cover. The result is that the photo-corners look like they come off the page, a remarkable illusion which resonates perfectly with the images in Joe's poetry. We could have gone to less trouble, I suppose, but then, the poet could also have taken it easier. The result in either case would have been less pleasing. I like computers and I am very into writing HTML documents, but there is something different about manufacturing a book--I really like that particular interaction between message and medium. Kali _______________ Kali Tal Sixties Project & Viet Nam Generation, Inc. 18 Center Rd., Woodbridge, CT 06525 203/387-6882; fax 203/389-6104 email: kalital@minerva.cis.yale.edu ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 22:58:25 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mn Center For Book Arts Subject: Re: close readings X-To: UB Poetics discussion group In-Reply-To: <2f625baf1bd2002@maroon.tc.umn.edu> I certainly respect Ron's examples, and his own design of TONER, and Pierre is right to call attention to Mallarme, but I think that, if the discussion of space is limited to the page and its typography, something is missing. Gary Sullivan wisely called attention to the context of publication for O'Hara. I have got the first edition of Maximus IV, V, VI down from my shelf, and in that book the weight of the volume, the texture of pages and cover, all contribute. This is about paying attention to what and how we read and what effects that reading, and the field is much broader and more complex than "the page." I also have a sense that books today are very restricted in how they might convey the sense of the poem. By that I mean that I suspect Ron designed TONER according to at least some of the conventions of the marketplace. I'm not certain a book with the size, uncoated paper, and other charateristics of that second Maximus volume would find shelf space in any but about four bookstores in the USA, if the book were by a poet with about the same exposure as Olson had at the time that book came out. In 1995 more and more of the smallest presses are conforming not only to size standards, but also to paper standards, often to the 4-color processes marketing seems to call for, and including bar codes. How does an individual text, and a publisher, maintain a distinctive physical manifestation? How will they do so in electronic publishing? Do the advantages of the current means of distribution outweigh what is lost? charles alexander ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 22:45:10 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tenney Nathanson Subject: reading against (the) against the grain In-Reply-To: <9503120504.AA26567@aruba.ccit.arizona.edu> contra (as per usual lately, oddly) my friend Charles (A), I guess I'd want to suggest that: 1) while, when dealing w a chunk of poetry (poetries) by various authors where the going wisdom has to do w irreplaceable signature (17-C mannerist; modernist--eg) it's interestin (a la Bob Perelman book I've not yet bought/read?) to dispute the category of the "master work) 2) when dealing w something like Lang Po 1 which so insistently insists on textuality and discourses etc etc, it might be, exactly, (most?) interesting to focus (or insist) instead on the grain of the (non) voice and the category of the would-be masterwork: of all the many-hundred (?) (or couple hundred, it must be) books by so-called so-called G-1, which of them, (if the books itself or "itself" sruvives another 50 years) will survive as THE books from Lang Po - 1 that one needs to read? sinc the question itself is inimical, in important ways, to the ethos of the movement (or non-movement), it's THERFORE interesting. or so say all of us .... Tenney ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 11:21:30 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: John Cayley Subject: Re: close readings >In 1995 more and more of the smallest presses are conforming not only to >size standards, but also to paper standards, often to the 4-color >processes marketing seems to call for, and including bar codes. As a small publisher I conform to book trade standards, of necessity to make it *possible* for a book to exist in the trade context, even if it is unwelcome and may languish in a distributor's warehouse. There are always constraints. >How does >an individual text, and a publisher, maintain a distinctive physical >manifestation? Surely that is a function of the creative effort some or all put in. Dancing in chains? >How will they do so in electronic publishing? Do the >advantages of the current means of distribution outweigh what is lost? We've already crossed the Rubicon. The hype is all true, except that it is not possible for us to predict or even conceive of the final physical forms in which the medium we are currently using will manifest itself. It is very hard to believe that it will not have at least the flexibility and degree of material articulation as does print/paper. It's likely that sooner rather than later it will have acquire many 'sensual' characteristics which will be as pleasing to us as those associated with productions of the finest paper/print practioners. (Remember when screens of texts were little green dots on a black void? That was when Ted Nelson invented hyperText.) ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 11:01:35 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "H. T. KIRBY-SMITH" Organization: University of NC at Greensboro Subject: Poetry and the Page Concern with the interraction of poetry and its appearance on the page coincides with periods of adventurous experimentalism in poetry writing. But first you have to have a page. That was difficult before the printing press, but not impossible. A few poems in Greek, the "technopaignea," survive--shaped poems that resemble an egg (a poem about a nightingale), panpipes, a few others. In the later 1500s there was a lot of experimentation with accommodating the poem's appearance on the page to its content--a mixture of graphics and print, and in the 1600s there were emblem poems. The irregularity of line lengths, too, could be advertised by conspicuous indentations, and there were poems that bordered on free verse--in fact, given the context of the times, were free verse. Beginning about 1680 and continuing to about 1780, typographical devices were scorned and avoided for the most part. The page was simple a place where the poem could be recorded. There are exceptions to all the generalizations offered so far, but on the whole there was this rhythm of experimentation and reaction. Then with Blake and continuing with the Pre-Raphalites there was renewed experimentation with typography, graphics, advertised expressiveness or irregularity, etc. Surely Whitman, a printer himself, realized the typographical impact of his lines--as opposed to what was generally expected in the nineteenth century. Mallarme pointed to the future with the typographical extravagances of "Un coup de des," and Pound and Amy Lowell certainly used typography for formal purposes. It has been argued that Williams's "triadic" line was really a typographical device, and that Olson's distribution of his lines appeal to the eye more than serving as a transcription of his "breath." Imagist doctrine (Ford, Hulme, Pound, Lowell, Aldington, etc) emphasized the visual over the audible, and that included the appearance on the page. e. e. cummings used the typewriter for witty purposes that involved exact placement of letters and words, and of course Olson insisted even more grandiosely on that tool's usefulness. The visual media available for recording poetry always affect the poetry, especially in periods of experimentation. First came moveable type, then after a long time, the typewriter, and now all the graphic possibilities--the fonts, etc--available in word processors. Actually Mallarme went a long way very early; his poem was so hard to set in type that it was not published in correct form until some years after his death Neoclassicists, from Joseph Addison (who called shaped poems "false wit") to the present tend to be unsympathetic with the notion of typographical poetry. This is another of the issues contributing to the bifurcation of American poetry. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 14:06:55 -0600 Reply-To: Mn Center For Book Arts Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mn Center For Book Arts Subject: Re: reading against (the) against the grain X-To: UB Poetics discussion group In-Reply-To: <2f628abc043b002@maroon.tc.umn.edu> Yes, Tenney, I do have some objections to a listing of the "masterworks" of langpo, although part of the problem I had with that request was that it did not ask for the ten "masterworks" or "best works" (about which you could give your list, I could give mine, etc.), but for the ten "most important." What does important mean in this sense? I may find works which are most influential are not works which I consider the most accomplished. I may argue that the most accomplished are not the most generative or courageous. I also may believe that a book issued in 200 copies (or even 50) by a very small and independent press in northern California is more of a masterwork than the best distributed langpo book published by Sun & Moon (arguably the most "successful" langpo publisher, but "successful" by what standards -- aesthetic, marketplace, other? -- & this is not to argue against Sun & Moon, Douglass, as I love your work). So, first, make clear for me your definition of a masterwork, then I'll be glad to suggest how I might fill in the blanks in the top ten. But I suspect your definition may be more interesting than my list (or someone else's). all best to you & all the list, charles alexander ps -- to John Cayley, yes I still believe there's lots of room for creativity in bookmaking, even for the wider marketplace, although I sometimes feel bad that some of the tools are lost or made difficult. Interesting that some of the most exciting developments in commercial papermaking are in the issuing of exciting (visual & textural) recycled papers, and that these particularly lend themselves to book covers, except for the fact that they are uncoated, which means some bookstores don't want them and that their suitability for 4-color printing (without going to great expense, although the results can be dramatic) is not great, which means that sales reps have a harder time marketing them. I am currently driven to design books for the market which do conform (at least enough to make them work, but not enough to make them absolutely "regulation") to trade standards, but also to keep making books whose devotion is to the union of bookmaking excellence & innovation with literary works, even though the labor to produce such works is great and the market is tiny. As to the possibilities of sensuality in the electronic realm, I am excited and fairly ignorant, but hopeful. To H.T. Kirby-Smith, thanks for the brief history, it's helpful. But I don't think "typographical poetry" is the extent of what we're talking about. As a poet who makes books, certainly, the shape of poem on page, the kind & shape of page, the double-page spread, the conception of sequencing in turning the page, as well as other aspects of color and form, are all part of the artistic composition, yet these are not "typographical poems" in any sense I recognize that term. I know there are other poet/bookmakers on this list, and I wonder what they have to say about this issue, whether they are printing/designing their own works or works by others. I am interested in the possibilities of design/book art, while being a "presentation" of texts, at the same time being a "reading" or "interpretation" of texts, and even, when possible (and this is tricky) being a "collaborative partner" with texts. Among texts some would consider as language poetry (getting back to possible masterworks, Tenney), I would point to the first edition of Susan Howe's DEFENESTRATION OF PRAGUE (Kulchur Foundation,1983), Charles Bernstein & Susan Bee's THE NUDE FORMALISM (Sun & Moon, 1992), and Lyn Hejinian & Kit Robinson's INDIVIDUALS (Chax, 1988), as three books which enact such a partnership in three dramatically different ways. I sometimes wonder, though, if future scholarship will keep such presentations/partnerships in mind, or pay attention only to the texts, which I find limiting. On the other hand, I am not a proponent of some masterwork notion of bookmaking, rather that such partnerships are illuminating while not being the only artistic possibilities, yet maintain some eminence when they are the first printed editions of texts. charles alexander ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 10:37:37 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tony Green Organization: The University of Auckland Subject: Re: close readings Thanks, Jonathan Brannen, for your post on close reading(s). I agree the context of university classes can be destructive in just the ways you indicate. Content dis-formed is what the system produces, because at the place where your poetry-as-music or (as-for-music) gets found, so discourse re-theme and content gets dis-abled. Equivalent in painting and other "visual" arts discourse is: taking painting exclusively as picture, where picture is reduced to a small selection of nameable objects, each of which can then be drawn into theme-content discussion (and "theory") but with no regard for questions of how in the medium all that can be seen. (Classic much anthologised example is Louis Marin reading Poussin's Et in Arcadia ego. ) The level of the working by which the work has had to be constructed (constituted as image) disappears from view, where the work in the medium and the resulting figuration (or absence of it) makes picture visible. Tony Green, e-mail: t.green@auckland.ac.nz post: Dept of Art History, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand Fax: 64 9-373 7014 Telephone: 64 9 373 7599 ext. 8981 or 7276 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 16:22:41 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Sheila Murphy Subject: Re: Text and Sounds and Words... Gary, What a welcome question (concerning form and physical presence of my small chap called CRITERIA FOR BEING TOUCHED) ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 16:40:26 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Sheila Murphy Subject: Re: Text and Sounds and Words... Excuse, please, folks, the premature sending that just occurred. I'll begin again: Gary's question (about the form and physicality of my small chap called CRITERIA FOR BEING TOUCHED) is most welcome. Much of the credit must go to C.L. Champion, the publisher, who lives in Tucson. I had sent Champion a small grouping of poems, many of which seem now to me to have a quality of casualness about them that may have inspired the publisher to present them together with wonderful drawings crayoned in and showing childed printing on the front cover, using the space as children do, with the word "Sheila"'s taking up the whole horizontal space, necessitating a move to another place to the right of the drawing of figures and sun and a house on the left of the page, just to get in the middle initial "e" (to distinguish, some of you know, from another Sheila Murphy in the lit world - I did this a long time back, knowing what a common Irish name I have - and there indeed turn out to be several by my name). Anyhow, the little stub of sandpaper on the back of the book does several things as far as I can see. The suggestion of sand itself is there, as in sandbox (the recollective aspects of the work, notably the first piece about my now late father, called "I Could Ask Anything," which youngs its way along to mirror, as happens, the naive art concept on the cover), and as in rough cut of feelings almost unconsciously released as they are from childhood. There's mention of physical things in that first poem (a haibun, by the way) about my father's making our lunches and placing them in brown manila envelopes he would recycle from the office (long before this sort of thing was done). The style of the book seems to be perfectly tuned to the moment the experience it talks about was born. A primary reader of what I do, who responds to many things before they leave me, also loved this book, Gary. Bev Carver immediately perceived the link and loved what C.L. Champion had done. I have had this hunch concerning serendipity that keeps proving itself true: one of the most exciting aspects of writing comes at the point at which an editor who really cares can leap with the work to the physical place at which it needs next to occur (for many other people to perceive). I'm constantly lucky in this. And notably in small, small press efforts that come directly from garages. This is the best example I know of where something boundlessly and simply beautiful occurs when I've completely let go of something I have written. For me, the physical imagination of the other person comes as a gift that enriches the experience of making. While I love direct collaboration (I do a lot of that with John M. Bennett (in text) and with Megha Morganfield (on Celtic harp with text) and some others, THIS is collaboration of another kind. Thanks, Gary, for asking. Sheila ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 10:44:51 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tony Green Organization: The University of Auckland Subject: Re: close readings Hi Wystan, cd you say more abt the demand of texts to be read close. I can think of paintings like that, and some that do best with a quick take.cturee Tony Green, e-mail: t.green@auckland.ac.nz post: Dept of Art History, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand Fax: 64 9-373 7014 Telephone: 64 9 373 7599 ext. 8981 or 7276 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 16:46:34 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Sheila Murphy Subject: Re: More in re context Gary and others - A beautiful example of physical form has just arrived in the slow post. AVIDLY PERPLEXING by Meg Davis has been newly released by Sun/Gemini Books in Tucson (Clint Colby, publisher). PO Box 42170 Tucson, 85733. $9.95. This is Meg's first chapbook. (A large chap with nothing spared re: expense, by the way, and 39+ pages). The poems are WONDERFUL. Charles A. knows some of Meg's work, and I hope still more others will soon. Splendid, fresh stuff. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 16:51:00 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kenneth Goldsmith Subject: Apologies and new thoughts re: Top Ten Folks, Please excuse my first post. It was dashed off hastily and being a first-time poster, I wasn't sure if it was going to even go through. I certainly didn't mean to imply verticality or canonization. Rather, what I meant was that it would be helpful to begin a list and commentary of important, influential, provocative, or simply favorite books centered around The Language Poetry dialogue--let's call it a community bibliography of sorts. Hopefully, in the future it be compiled into a coherent resource that could be deposited at the E-Poetry Archive as a signpost for net wanderers or other interested parties. As a very side discussion in this group, if people would occasionally post their choices and reasons, I would begin to compile (being a natural compiler) a resource. Kenneth Goldsmith - ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 10:56:58 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tony Green Organization: The University of Auckland Subject: attacks on funding Defenders of public funding against attacks of such as W.Bennett cd well note W.Spanos The End of Education University of Minnesota Press 1993 which is an elaborate defence of positions in education against such as Bennett Intro p xiv "In the aftermath of the Vietnam War, a massive educational reform movement was initiated in 1979 by Harvard University....Such reform was theorized by prominent American humanists, by conservatives such as William Bennett, Walter Jackson Bate, and Allan Bloom, and by liberals such as E.D.Hirsch and Wayne Booth. This reform movement has as its purpose the recuperation of not only the humanist curriculum that was "shattered" by the protest movement in the 1960's but also the discourse of disinterestedness now called into question by the theoretical discourses that have come to be called "postmodern" or "poststructuralist", but which this book prefers to call "posthumanist". a wsTIVSA Tony Green, e-mail: t.green@auckland.ac.nz post: Dept of Art History, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand Fax: 64 9-373 7014 Telephone: 64 9 373 7599 ext. 8981 or 7276 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 23:46:35 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gary Sullivan Subject: Re: Goldsmith's Top 10 request Kenneth, here's one: TOP TEN LANG NOs "We are forever deceiving ourselves with names and theories." --Charles Lamb "Benjamin Franklin [was] the only president of the United States who was never president of the United States." --Firesign Theater 1. Aristotle's _On the Art of Poetry_. Section 20, focussing on linguistic definitions. 2. Charles Lamb's _Selected Prose_. As Adam Phillips notes in the Introduction: "[for Lamb] great art was unfinished in the sense that it relied on the imaginative involvement of the audience to complete it. It was not something that by virtue of its perfection diminished its audience. It was not an idol but an invitation." From Lamb's essay on Hogarth: "*imaginary work*, where the spectator must meet the artist in his conceptions half way; and it is peculiar to the confidence of high genius alone to trust so much to spectators or readers." (cf. "reader-response writing.") Lamb's essay "On the Tragedies of Shakespeare" is the first instance of someone suggesting a preference for *reading* Shakespeare over viewing the plays performed. An excellent, intelligently stated argument, with all the panache (& thrice the wit) of Grenier's "I HATE SPEECH." (You'll have to read Lamb's essay to see whether or not you agree--and to what extent--Lamb's & Grenier's concerns are related.) 3. Gertrude Stein. No need to explicate. Richard Bridgman's _Gertrude Stein in Pieces_ includes a (complete?) bibliography, with actual & well-guestimated dates for each work, if you want to read her chronologically. 4. Samuel Beckett, esp. _How It Is_, _Stories and Texts for Nothing_, _Fizzles_, _Ill Seen Ill Said_, _Worstward Ho_, _More Pricks than Kicks_, _Company_ and _Stirring Still_. A big influence on Coolidge, who seems a big influence on lang pos. 5. Jack Spicer, _Language_. (cf. Silliman on this in _New Sentence_.) 6. Clark Coolidge, esp. _Space_, from 1970. The spine of this book claims it was published by "Harper & Row"; I think they did that with mirrors. 7. J.G. Ballard, _The Atrocity Exhibition_. Originally published in 1972 by Panther; reissued (expanded edition?) recently by Re/Search. His notorious "Why I Want to Fuck Ronald Reagan" (there's an Andrews title for you) orig. appeared in 1968 in _Ronald Reagan, The Magazine of Poetry_, edited by John Sladek and Pamela Zoline. (Includes groovy, Brainardesque line-drawings by Zoline.) Andrews is funnier, but Ballard stays with you longer. (Well, okay, "has stayed with *me* longer.") 8. Ad Reinhardt. It's been too long since I've read him to explicate, but I remember, first coming across journals like _Ottotole_ and _Poetics Journal_, that the Ad-man'd covered some of that conceptual ground with respect to the visual arts. His art-world satire collages (including a horse-racing form with the names of various abstract expressionists substituted for horses) are not to be missed. He may or may not prove relevant. 9. The Firesign Theater, _Don't Crush that Dwarf, Hand Me the Pliers_. If anything can be said to've prepared me to read (& appreciate) Bernstein, it was this record. I'm constantly amazed by the lack of (serious) critical attention these guys have received. One of the members, David Ossman, did the interviews of New American Poets published in _The Sullen Art_. (Corinth published that, I think.) There are several e-space "whatchyoucallems" devoted to the F.T. I've discovered using Gopher. Can't remember where they are, how I got there. At least one site includes the F.T. "lexicon," which might be valuable for the un- or recently initiated. 10. Alan Davies, "Peer Pleasure," just published in _Cyanosis_ #2 (e-mail cyanosis@slip.net for info). Any serious study of a movement, group, clique or tendency might include a well-stated, serious critique. "Peer Pleasure" is an example. --Gary Sullivan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 09:09:06 -0500 Reply-To: Robert Drake Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert Drake Subject: Re: Apologies and new thoughts re: Top Ten >I certainly didn't mean to imply verticality or canonization. Rather, what >I meant was that it would be helpful to begin a list and commentary of >important, influential, provocative, or simply favorite books centered >around The Language Poetry dialogue--let's call it a community >bibliography of sorts. > >Kenneth Goldsmith ken-- im not sure its possible to avoid the implications of verticality or cannonization; the AUTHORity of this list ("owened" by bernstein, and regular contributors including a substantial part of the langpo movement) militates against such... & id suggest, (related to the forms of publication thread) that the kind of centrally compiled list yr suggesting is a holdover from pre-electronic publishing ideas--if the e-network has any advantage at all, its the possibility of decentralized multiplicity, where all participants lists are equally available, w/out the added "legitimization" implied by being added to a maintained list... id be _very_ interested, on the other hand, to have random postings by any and all participants of what they're reading & enjoying this week... lbd ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 16:03:21 GMT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "R.I.Caddel @ durham.ac.uk" Subject: Juhan Viiding This isn't the first message to this board I'd hoped to send: Just back from the visit to Buffalo referred to by Kenneth Sherwood, where I read my "Baltic Coast" sequence, and I've just got this mail. Viiding was one of the activists of Estonian poetry, emerging in the sixties along with Kaplinski, Ehin and others, sustaining his oppositional craft for years: %%%%%%%% Forwarded message %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Date: Tue, 07 Mar 95 15:02:30 EST >From: "Aili Aarelaid-Tart" Subject: inf To: R.I.Caddel @ durham.ac.uk Reply-to: aarelaid @ iiss.ee Dear Ric, We have now sad news: two weeks ago Estonian poet and actor Juhan Viiding (Elo Vee's father) made a suicide. His cry against the brutality of contemporary life, its stupidness and dullness is still breaking our hearts. Funerals were last act of lifelong desires to make the world differ real and false. New times were too hard for him to bear. Indrek ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 13:37:30 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jonathan Brannen Subject: Re: close readings I can't recall off-hand whether Maximus IV, V, VI was published by Jargon, Cape Goliard/Grossman, or perhaps someone else. In any case, I wonder how widely distributed it actually was at the time it was published. I know that Olson personally placed copies of the previous volume of Maximus in bookstores, probably by towering over the owner. I share your concern about the pressures to conform to publishing standards. Reading books is an intimate experience. And all aspects of the book contribute to that experience. I treasure both ends of the publishing spectrum that are disappearing, those amazingly textured, inventively designed, carefully executed, letterpress, handbound editions (such as Chax "non-trade" editions, though the trade editions are lovely too) AND the xeroxed (in earlier days memeographed) books done as cheaply as possible just to get the work out. I value my disentigrating copies of books from presses like Doones and Angel Hair. The quirks and ecentricities of the handmade (homemade) book on both ends of the spectrum are a delight. I'm wrestling with these issues now. Standing Stones Press publishes chapbooks. They're attractive, carefully made and reasonably inexpensive. I do everything myself in order to keep the costs down because I want them to be affordable. I fantasize about breaking even someday but this is not a capitalist venture. I think it's psychologically important for younger writers and writers that are not as well known as they should be to have collections of their work printed. The The problem, of course, is that don't meet the shelf and profit needs of all but a few bookstores. Small Press Distribution won't carry them. The reasons I was given is that they're not taking on any new publishers of chapbooks because they don't make enough money from them to make it worthwhile and that they're moving toward carrying only trade editions because that's where the market is. Now, I can understand their desire to increase sales and stay financially solvent, and I can more-or-less ignore the irony of a non-profit corporation complaining about not making enough profit. But here's the conundrum, I can do a trade edition annual in which I essentially publish the chapbooks I would have, but the psychological boost that comes from having what may be your first collection published has been denied you. Instead you're lumped together with other writers with whom you have little in common and there's a higher price tag for all involved. So, if I capitulate a spectrum of distinctions get lost. Now I confess a certain nostalgia for the book. They're portable, tactile, don't require hundreds of dollars of equipment to read, and can be read when the power's out. But I'm also considering electronic publication. Until the frontier aspects of the net are squashed by government interests, you have spontaneous distribution and minimal overhead. I suspect that electronic publications will evolve into collaborative efforts due the level of expertise required to utilize the wide media available through the computer. Electronic journals will contain animation, "films," music, voice, text and who know's what all thrown in the mix together. Who can foresee how it will evolve? The problem I see at the present is that the net is a realm of the priviledged. You have to have the equipment to access it and you have to have an entrance point. Public sites are scarce. This is less an issue for those of you associated with universities where limitless net access usually the norm. If you're not, it gets expensive quickly, even when you can make connection without racking up long distance phone charges. I throwing the above out for consideration. Jonathan Brannen ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 15:30:26 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "B. Cass Clarke" Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: Re: close readings > > I can't recall off-hand whether Maximus IV, V, VI was published by > Jargon, Cape Goliard/Grossman, or perhaps someone else. In any case, > I wonder how widely distributed it actually was at the time it was > published. I know that Olson personally placed copies of the previous > volume of Maximus in bookstores, probably by towering over the owner. > Dear Jonathan: Maximus Poems IV,V,VI was published in 1968 by Cape Goliard Press in association with Grossman. When I was a student studying Olson, in 1973, it was most difficult to find a copy. Students searched used bookstores in the hope of finding a copy. Until Butterick com- pleted his heroic task of the Collected Maximus, I believe IV, V, VI was out of print. As to the idea of Olson pressing his work on any bookseller, it is my impression that Olson cherished, and hoarded his copies. I recall vividly Harvey Brown and Jack Clarke fondly describing Olson's hospital room - and the stack of IV,V,VI prominently displayed and referred to by him - it was a treasure. The literal fact of its accomplishment and material presence was no small feat - it signified a labor of love by Olson and the many friends who believed in his work. Its "success" measured by sales - was never the point. B. Cass Clarke V080g6j3@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 14:37:36 CST6CDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Hank Lazer Organization: Arts and Sciences Dean's Office Subject: reading now In response to luigi-bob drake's request to mention what we're reading & enjoying now: biography of Coltran by Nisenson; poetry manuscripts by Charles Bernstein and Lisa Samuels; books of poetry by Bei Dao and manuscript materials by an amazing poet (from Suzhou) - Che Qianzi; music by Coltrane & Monk (for classes I'm teaching later in the week); and work by Norman Fischer, Precisely the Point Being Made (a joy of a book) and subsequent manuscripts.... Hank Lazer ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 16:00:56 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jonathan A Levin Subject: SUNY-Buffalo talk In-Reply-To: <199503131624.AA15497@mailhub.cc.columbia.edu> To list subscribers at Buffalo: I'm going to be giving a talk at Buffalo on Friday March 31, sometime in the afternoon (2, 3, or 4:00, I believe). The talk is titled "Wallace Stevens and the Pragmatist Imagination" and is a part of a book I'm writing on Pragmatism and American Literary Modernism (the literary part being, for the most part, devoted to Henry James, Gertrude Stein, and Stevens). Some in the audience (students in Art Efron's Pragmatism and Literature seminar) will, if I'm not mistaken, have read my recently published "The Esthetics of Pragmatism," in American Literary History, Winter 1994 (not, however, "required reading"). This, for those of you interested, doesn't really cover any poetry, though Stevens sneaks in near the end: you'll have to wait for the book! (Not long, I hope.) The talk, on the other hand, is full of close reading, of the best kind. I'll post the time and place in a couple of weeks. Hope some of you can make it-- Jonathan Levin ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 16:38:55 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Edward Foster Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 8 Mar 1995 to 9 Mar 1995 re: k davis and the absolute: "play things as they are"? who's in charge of that? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 17:54:10 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: James Sherry Subject: Re: Apologies and new thoughts re: Top Ten X-To: Kenneth Goldsmith In-Reply-To: <199503122152.QAA27506@panix4.panix.com> Several poetry lists have been compiled by the poets of whom you speak. A group of us compiled a yearly list in the Segue distribution catalog. I can give you this which consists of 300 titles. A list of ten as has been suggested is, as others have suggested, like asking which dozen eggs makes the best omlette. Any eggs will make the omlette you choose to make. The works of the poets of the past 20 years compose matrix of poems, themes, and strategies and to isolate any in a list is to miss the point of the matrix structure. Can we begin to isolate works in this overall and complex way rather than a string of titles and justifications? James ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 19:32:35 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tenney Nathanson Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 11 Mar 1995 to 12 Mar 1995 In-Reply-To: <9503130500.AA119558@aruba.ccit.arizona.edu> back to the masterworks. The topic, that is (not like "back to the things themselves!"). I don't know that the criteria (would) come first, Charles; just (perhaps) after a while (20-30-50 years say) some books, and writers, will rise, or stick, or whatever your trope is (maybe the spaghetti on the wall is best). And I think that that's gonna be interesting, for Lang Po in particular, just because it goes against the grain of the enabling rhetoric (not so for modernism) and is therefore likely to show unexpected things about Lang Po, and to shed interesting light on it. I'm not really invested or even interested in arguing canon right now. There are just so many truisms about discourse, and textuality, and enabling of readers and etc etc that it's nice to contemplate a meaningful (let's hope) engagement w some of the poetry that comes at it from a stance quite different from its own. (the obverse and less interesting--but satisfying!--case is to watch Charles Altieri take Worshop Poetry w its pride in Craft and The Well Made Poem and The Individual and cook it all down to a suet (sp.?) w maybe 3 ingredients). ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 20:59:16 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jonathan Brannen Subject: Re: close readings Dear B. Cass Clarke Of course, Maximus's success measured by sales was never the point, nor did I intend to imply that it could be measured in sales. I was addressing Charles Alexander that only about four bookstores would carry a comparable ahem, I was addressing Charles Alexander's observation that no one would stock a comparable book today (comparable in terms of size and needed shelf space for a poet now at a similar point in her or his career). My notion of Olson towering over bookstore owners comes from reading Jonathan Williams' account on Olson personally placing the Jargon edition of Maximus I - III in bookstores in small towns in North Carolina, stores so unlikely to sell them that Williams claimed copies were still in stock in the mid-1980s (for the original list price). I can't vouch for the accuracy of the story or the accuracy of my recollection of it, other than to say I think it's fairly accurately. I think I gleaned this from an interview with Williams in Vort in the early 1980s. I don't personally placing books in bookstores precludes the possibility of later hoarding copies. Having watched a couple of my own books go out of print, I tend to be generous with copies and aggressive about placing them in stores when they first appear and considerably more parsimonious when there are only a few copies left. I think Butterick's labors are profoundly admirable. Nor do I find Olson's personally trying to make copies of his books available to a potential audience less than admirable. The unignorable fact, though, is that booksellers measure the success of a book in terms of sales, which is why you had such difficulties in finding copies of Olson's book. Thanks for clarifying the issue of the publisher for me. Best regards, Jonathan ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 00:03:18 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert Kelly Subject: Re: close readings a quiet emendation---Olson was a very shy man, and for all his loud palaver, would hardly have hovered over a bookseller. In the sixties when he was back in Gloucester, there was never a book of his to be seen in local shops (though here and there you'd see books of Ferrini and others), and his frequent letters to the Gloucester Times were on matters of public import other than poetry. You're right in thinking MAX IV/V/VI did not have huge distribution, but it was around, and more available for a while than most books of poetry, so those who had any interest in such matters could and did find it. (As you'd find Content's Dream now, for instance.) It is interesting to recall the late George Butterick's conscientious even desperate attempts to decipher certain later Olson scripts, where decipher really meant to enpage, let me use such a word. Those who heard Olson rread out loud know that the domain of the page and the domain of the voice seldom coincided, and were not, I think, meant to in any obvious illustrational way. The way of the page was the man's cry. RK ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 22:16:52 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kenneth Goldsmith Subject: You can't make an omlet if you can't get your hands on the eggs X-To: James Sherry James, =20 Thank you for your helpful comments. I would very much like your list of 300 titles and would like to use it as a jumping off point for a "matrix" or "galaxy" oriented resource. Of course, as I implied in my last post, ten seems like a ridiculous number for all the reasons you mention. But, if we can think non-hierarchically and in a horizontally spread manner concerning this project, it could prove to be a valuable resource for=20 many people who haven't been in this dialogue for as long as you have. It= =20 seems like the contributors to this list are growing every day and I feel= =20 that an archive like the one we're discussing could be essential to=20 laying a groundwork for those unfamiliar with much of the reading=20 material (which is, unfamiliarity through poor access). Many books have=20 fallen out of print and many people are so new to Language Poetry, that=20 they don=D5t even know that many of these titles have ever existed. Access= =20 to resources has been limited. I can't tell you how many authors and=20 publishers in the scene complain to me that their books aren't known=20 about due to poor distribution that in turn, creates a lack of interest.=20 It's really a shame. For example, access to your Segue list is limited. I= =20 live in the same city as you, I speak on the phone with you, and see you=20 at readings, but it never crossed my mind that such a thing was in=20 existence (I've never, quite honestly, until recently known what Segue was= =20 or how get at it. To this day, I've never seen the Segue catalogue of=20 which you speak. I do, btw, consider myself a media-savvy New Yorker, and= =20 not much escapes my attention.) No fault of anyone' s except we're dealing= =20 with a different mode of communication here on the net (which is also new= =20 for many people) that has the potential to point people from all over the= =20 world in the direction of the ideas that you and several other poets have= =20 been working on for many, many years. You might not be aware of it, but=20 you sit on a trove of information that remains relatively inaccessible to= =20 people entering the dialogue at this much later date. If we were to begin= =20 with your list, the base for an excellent resource would be solid. If we=20 could continually update it, add to it, and revise our opinions of the=20 contents of such a resource (via this list), something wonderfully=20 organic and less resistant to definition might emerge. You can't make the= =20 omelet if you can't get your hands on the eggs. --Kenny ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 01:06:20 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "B. Cass Clarke" Organization: University at Buffalo Subject: Close readings X-cc: jbrannen@infolink.morris.mn.us Dear Jonathan, Thank you for your courteous response. However, I was reacting to your easy use of Olson's mystique, promulgated mainly by folks who disliked, envied or otherwise had reason to misread and misrepresent Olson's person. The time is not too far off when his living memory will be dead and when those who knew him and know the distortions that are used to discredit him, are exhausted. I'm certain that was not your intention, but you'll pardon my using the occasion to lament. Truly, Cass Clarke B. Cass Clarke V080g6j3@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 02:49:27 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jonathan Brannen Subject: Olson From jbrannen Tue Mar 14 02:18:17 1995 Received: by infolink.infolink.morris.mn.us; (5.65/1.1.8.2/12Dec94-0135PM) id AA20120; Tue, 14 Mar 1995 02:18:12 -0600 Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 02:18:12 -0600 From: Jonathan Brannen Message-Id: <9503140818.AA20120@infolink.infolink.morris.mn.us> To: V080G6J3@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu Subject: Re: Close readings Cc: jbrannen@infolink.morris.mn.us Status: RO Dear Cass, I certainly had not intended to misrepresent Olson's person. I view the image of Olson in this perhaps apocryphal bookstore with a degree of warmth because I've talked to enough trade managers in bookstores to understand that it can be awkward trying to get them to stock poetry. I relished the human element of the tale. And I confess to braking for bookstores in North Carolina on the chance it might be true. I don't know what to say about my or anybody else's easy use of the Olson mystique. There's no denying that there is such a mystique, unfortunately images can never be accurate and with even the best intentions they distort the reality of the person. I don't wish to be perpetuating falsehoods when I mention Olson, but never having met Charles Olson, I have to take somebody's word for truth. The alternative is to refrain from mentioning him, and he's too important a figure not to be mentioned. I hate to use the term figure in reference to anyone, but for me he can never be the complex human being that you interacted with. If it's any comfort, Olson's detractors are fighting a losing battle. There's no doubt in my mind Olson's poetry will continue to be read. I'm sorry if you feel I've done him an injustice. I had not meant to. His work and literary reputation are both strong enough to withstand even the most spurious attack. Since he's one of the writers to whom I keep returning, I'd rather not be construed as contributing to such an attack or perceived as participating in it. I'll try to mend my wicked ways. How did you meet Charles Olson and what was your initial impression of him? I kind of excited to be "talking" with someone who knew Olson. Please excuse my gracelessness that brought it about. Best regards, Jonathan ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 08:29:08 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "H. T. KIRBY-SMITH" Organization: University of NC at Greensboro Subject: Jonathan Brannen's messages Dear Jonathan Brannen, If you have not done so, I hope you will write up everything you know about the progress of small-press publishing from Jargon Press to the present, along with accounts of the personalities involved. As best I can tell all your own book publications are poetry. Is Jonathan Williams still alive? I never met Olson, but Williams gave me a hard time about not arranging a poetry reading for him years ago--and then we got onto the more agreeable subject of the Appalachian Trail. I was in Black Mountain just the other day--stopped off while heading to Tennessee. There's a historical marker on old Route 70--no reference to any poets by name. If I got to the right place in the end, the campus is now occupied by the Western Division of the Department of Human Resources, including an Altzheimer's treatment center. Only postcards available in town were general views of the Black Mountains, except for one of the drugstore itself, Black Mountain Drugs, which is probably much like it may have been if Olson bought aspirin there. Has anybody thought of a poetic guidebook? Walden Pond, City Lights, Jeffers's tower if it's there, the academic computing center at Buffalo... Tom Kirby-Smith ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 10:51:29 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kenneth Goldsmith Subject: bedside reading My favorite part of Vanity Fair is when they ask celebrities what they are reading before they go to bed. Imagine how much better it would be if we were able to hear what people were reading whose tastes and minds we actually respect? Kenny ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 10:47:27 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kenneth Goldsmith Subject: You can't make an omelet if you can't get yr hands on the eggs James, Thank you for your helpful comments. I would very much like your list of 300 titles and would like to use it as a jumping off point for a "matrix" or "galaxy" oriented resource. Of course, as I implied in my last post, ten seems like a ridiculous number for all the reasons you mention. But, if we can think non-hierarchically and in a horizontally spread manner concerning this project, it could prove to be a valuable resource for=20 many people who haven't been in this dialogue for as long as you have. It= =20 seems like the contributors to this list are growing every day and I feel= =20 that an archive like the one we're discussing could be essential to=20 laying a groundwork for those unfamiliar with much of the reading=20 material (which is, unfamiliarity through poor access). Many books have=20 fallen out of print and many people are so new to Language Poetry, that=20 they don't even know that many of these titles have ever existed. Access=20 to resources has been limited. I can't tell you how many authors and=20 publishers in the scene complain to me that their books aren't known=20 about due to poor distribution that in turn, creates a lack of interest.=20 It=D5s really a shame. For example, access to your Segue list is limited. I= =20 live in the same city as you, I speak on the phone with you, and see you=20 at readings, but it never crossed my mind that such a thing was in=20 existence (I've never, quite honestly, until recently known what Segue is= =20 or how get at it. To this day, I=D5ve never seen the Segue catalogue of=20 which you speak. I do, btw, consider myself a media-savvy New Yorker, and= =20 not much escapes my attention.) No fault of anyone's except we're dealing= =20 with a different mode of communication here on the net (which is also new= =20 for many people) that has the potential to point people from all over the= =20 world in the direction of the ideas that you and several other poets have= =20 been working on for many, many years. You might not be aware of it, but=20 you sit on a trove of information that remains relatively inaccessible to= =20 people entering the dialogue at this much later date. If we were to begin= =20 with your list, the base for an excellent resource would be solid. If we=20 could continually update it, add to it, and revise our opinions of the=20 contents of such a resource (via this list), something wonderfully=20 organic and less resistant to definition might emerge. You can't make the= =20 omelet if you can't get your hands on the eggs. --Kenny ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 12:58:50 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jonathan Brannen Subject: Re: Jonathan Brannen's messages The informal "history" of small press publishing is a long term interest of mine, but it's progress is too mercurial for me to do justice to. And I'm sure there are others on this list more knowledgible than I am. I'd love to hear some of the "war stories" that the various people who have been involved in literary publishing might have to share. Having recently "made easy use of Olson's mystique" I'm hesitant to speculate about the existence and whereabouts of anyone. To the best of my knowledge, though, Jonathan Williams is alive, and my understanding is that he has taken up full-time residency in Great Britain, I believe in Devonshire, though I'm not certain. Perhaps someone reading this can provide you with a current address. Best of all possible but progressively improbable worlds, Jonathan ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 19:14:22 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: cris cheek Subject: open and close books (longish post) 'It is not that we go into the past, live in the past, to find her, but that her print, her traces, are around us. Indeed, if one searches the past for her, the search will lead to fiery details, a stroke here and then an airy space, another stroke of what is now called fact, and then something obliterated, drowned, burned, lost. And then another stroke, until an entire structure of a life begins to rise, brilliant, with long reaches, venturesome, airy, full of risk, moving in a way that speaks to us in our century. She is a rebel who appears to fail at every climax of her life. She can be seen to go deeper at these times.' (Rukeser 'The Traces of Thomas Hariot') I've often referred to Muriel Rukeyser's terrific book 'The Traces of Thomas Hariot'. It seems to encapsulate some of the problems lurking in premature disussions about book objects, publishing formats, top tens and 'readings' / 'refluences' - intriguing though I've found recent posts on such subjects. It talks about the processes of 'history' of how what survives survives and how what is lost is sometimes that which is most valuable. An ammended quote from a short, slack and unsatisfactory snippet written for the L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E issue of Open Letter locates part of my own feelings (hard to believe I could say that), some of which I retain, about the political economy of the cultural production and consumption of the book: ' "Perfection - Constancy - Consistency are terms applicable to a static state of affairs that this writer would wish to be considered outside of" (allen fisher 'A Sketch Map of Heat') The size of the page that work is made on, the page as a site, the texture of the paper to be printed on and its class pretentions towards promoting substantiable meanings, its color (if any), the choice of typography and more - all such active choices inform the work and such choices form part of what can be read. . . Words are actions, they are part of a physical process. . . to extract one element of this processual space and reproduce the same extraction, say in a re-print or anthology is to re-present rather than present. This is effect amounts to translation.' Not that translation should be anything other than encouraged, but acknowledged, have its own process incorporated, be sensitized to the poet's choice of presentation as some recent posts have carefully, documented. Thanks for those. Also consider the ambience of the reader's location - like Tenney's tale of reading Olson on the A Train or whatever - works written to interfuse with environment or encouraging expansion of consciousness. Consider the likening of the potential of these e-spaces for re-integration of word and image - (yeah I know the arguments re- Caxton primacy of print out of economic and technological imperatives and the connections being made both positively and negatively regarding e-Medivalism (sic)). Check out the work that John Cayley, and I hope others are (I just don't know you), making for this environment. And the somewhat stalled but clearly related, soon hopefully becoming more stimulating, discussions on hyper-text composition on ht-lit. One thing that irks at present is the relative normalising influence of electronic presentations in spaces such as these. I printed out RIF/T when I clocked on here and found the layout (not the writing) dull (no disrespect to the editors who must be slightly frustrated in their ambition as yet) - with all the typographical possibilites available for DTP innovation we speak here in a 'normalised', formally relatively controlled and limited e-space. That's part of the problem with it's strained physicality (how comfy is your chair and does your screen periphereyes your vision?). Consider the possible inter-relations between printed matter and e-publishing? I haven't got far yet but am currently improvising, in short takes, from postings (including those on this list - issues of ownership anyone?) into a dictaphone which I also carry when out driving or walking and whatever. The materials are then written (by hand) in notebooks with keen attention given to emphasis and re-invented when necessary. These materials become typed onto word processing formats and transferred into DTP packages (I use Claris and Quark). I then print out and sometimes (not always) blu-tack the printed pages (large font size) up on a wall in a kind of grid which is then re-improvised from onto cassette and re-transcribed. I use choices from all stages of such a process to compose the 'poem'. Sometimes these texts go on to form elements of performance work. Some is printed - other versions are released on CD in spoken word or soundwork contexts - other versions might be appropriate for electronic presentation. The point is process and version. Somehow that leads back to the top of this post and 'The Traces of Thomas Hariot' re - issues of posterity and the market forces which exxxxcercise their imperatives onto choice and 'what remains' or 'residues' its presence. (that's my quid's worth on personal working processes - well actually I'm thinking more in peso's now since a lot of my time over the past week's been taken up with followng the unravelling of events in Mexico re Chiapas after being alerted by Robert Harrison's extraordinary post 'A REAL Political Poet') o when the sandwich has been cut e and when the architect arrives we will go boating you and i upon the same love cris ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 14:18:13 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Bill Luoma Subject: Re: close readings & . . . Notice how the disscussion of close reading has led us to Blakean picture books and away from themes. We moderns are so easily led to privilege sight. Or, not wanting to be seen privileging anything, we claim that means of productions, physicality and sight are bonus themes and theme enhancers. Spencer Selby's fine new book (thanks Spencer!), Malleable Cast--Generator, might be a good thing to discuss in this context, for it carries the moniker Art/Visual Poetry on the jacket. Everyone please buy this book, look at it, and have your close reading prepared for class next monday. The thesis statement must contain the following words: advertising, early modern, DPT, Charles Alexandrian, seepage, and icon template. Bill Luoma =========================================================================