========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 19:00:57 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steve Shoemaker Subject: Re: american language In-Reply-To: <199706301907.PAA06423@waffle.ai.mit.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Eliza--I think we shld plot our own Chartreuse Party revolution and just TAKE THE WORDD AWAY from those yellow-green folks! Monks, shmonks! It just *sounds* red dammit... And i can't believe nobody else has weighed in w/ some choice vernacular about being toasty, fried, hammered, looped, blotto, blitzed, burnt, blind, slammed, whacked, sloshed, gone, spaced, or bombed. testy in charleston, steve ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 18:02:00 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Pritchett,Pat @Silverplume" Subject: Re: Killian at the Big Top MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN (NB - for any of you who are bored or annoyed with my reading reports from Naropa, I can only say - I'm beginning to feel the same way too! This will probably be the last...) Last Saturday under the Naropa Big Top poet/playwright/impresario extraordinaire Kevin Killian presented his workshop class production of "Daily Life: The Crime of the Century." This was my first experience of contemporary innovative poetic drama and I found it thoroughly delightful. I fear the spirit of the play and its general air of festive hilarity, vocal innovation and poetic ingenuity won't translate into a thumbnail post. All I can say is: you should been here! Though largely episodic in nature, the play's main storyline revolved around an alleged poetry attack - by a man or a woman ("there's no gender parity among the poetry deprived") - who broke into a Boulder home to interrupt a man watching the "blue light of TV" by reciting poetry. "Boulder - such a quiet town. I never thought anything like p o e t r y could happen to me!" But, as one character observed: "we're all characters in a strange police drama." The clever and _very funny_ blend of Ramsey case parody and poetic riffing/hijinks made for an hour and a half of enthralled bemusement and hearty laughter. A few random lines from no scenes in particular: "Alas, in Hell we're outside the juridical belt of TV or even Kodak." "What is that specious quality that makes us locate yesterday just around the corner?" "Meaning is one slippery motherfucker - either way someone gets hurt." Kevin appeared for the finale with chorus, produced a silk scarf from his pocket, and launched into a bang-on version of Anne Waldman complete with gesticulating flourishes. Kudos to the maestro and his wonderful cast and crew. (exuent. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 16:44:07 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Bromige Subject: misattributions in the poet/identity debate Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Fellow-listlings, yesterday, bowering then tal following bowering, discussed one of "my" sentences that in fact, as he posted to point out, had been from mark weiss; today, henry attributes to me the origin of the masturbatory metaphor, whereas in fact I was picking it up from tal's response to my original conjecture re construction of poet i.d. For those of you who still find, under the conditions of its being waged, this conversation interesting, would you be careful enough to read back thru the posts? Thanks, David B ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 16:50:43 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Bromige Subject: poetic/identities/by their works shall ye know them/kali's e-ddress Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Kali, I suppose the confusion in Mr.Bowering's mind is due to yr e-ddress having "Yale" in it. DB ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 23:06:27 +0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: KENT JOHNSON Organization: Highland Community College Subject: yet more orientalism MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT "I will purify my ears" --Han Shan, circa 8th century "I will purify my ears" --Evander Hollyfield, June 30, 1997 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 18:39:02 +0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: KENT JOHNSON Organization: Highland Community College Subject: la confusion de Bouchard MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Folks: Told everyone I was leaving for a while, but still here. I sent in my "unsub" command, received the confirmation that I was "now removed," and came up today to find about ninety messages! Now I'm told by Poetics that I'm subscribed under a "different address" through my server. It is sure difficult to free oneself from the pull of this list. But among those many messages I wasn't expecting to find is one by Dan Bouchard, wherein the claim is made that I was playing a "self-promotional card" by forwarding a "private letter" from Eliot Weinberger to two lists where there was much discussion about the Beneath a Single Moon anthology. I and "others" only prove the point, Daniel adds with intended irony and in paraphrase of EW, that "the Left historically bickers ad nauseum while the Right triumphs." Well, how could I not re-sub, if only for today, to offer one last bickering reply? So now geez, Dan, and c'mon. Why in such a political pucker? Weinberger, in generous spirit, sent the letter with a note inviting me to send it on, if I wished, to both Poetics and CAP-l. He sent the post and offered permission to forward it without my even asking, and I did so because his points were typically interesting and very relevant to the ongoing discussion. Others later wrote in that they appreciated his remarks, and I received a few back-channel notes thanking me for the forward. Therefore, hey, tranquilo, camarada. Still, that's just to clarify this particular instance, not to say that I'm beyond being self-promoting and self-serving! And when I come back, you can all bet that I'll be sending in as many self-serving posts as I can muster. That is, if my "address-switching" server is serving my self as it should be. Patria libre o morir, Kent ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 22:12:14 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Alan * Sondheim MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Turmmrrmmnrmm trmmormmwrmmarmmrrmmdrmmsrmm srmmurmmnrmm wrmmhrmmirmmrrmmrrmm, trmmhrmmrrmmurmmmrmmmrmm trmmormmwrmmarmmrrmmdrmmsrmm frmmlrmmermmsrmmhrmm armmnrmmdrmm srmmprmmirmmrrmmirmmtrmm brmmormmnrmmermm rrmmormmarmmrrmm, trmmhrmmrrmmurmmsrmmtrmm hrmmormmmrmmermm wrmmhrmmirmmrrmmlrmm, trmmurmmrrmmnrmm trmmormmrrmmwrmmarmmrrmmdrmmsrmm hrmmurmmmrmm rrmmormmarmmrrmm, trmmhrmmrrmmormmwrmm trmmormmwrmmarmmrrmmdrmmsrmm srmmprmmirmmrrmmirmmtrmm rrmmormmarmmrrmm, trmmhrmmrrmmormmarmmtrmm trmmormmwrmmarmmrrmmdrmmsrmm hrmmormmmrmmermm rrmmormmarmmrrmm trmmhrmmrrmmurmmsrmmtrmm trmmhrmmrrmmormmurmmgrmmhrmm @hrmmormmmrmmermm trmmhrmmrrmmurmmsrmmtrmm trmmormmwrmmarmmrrmmdrmmsrmm @frmmlrmmermmsrmmhrmm srmmurmmnrmm trmmhrmmrrmmormmurmmgrmmhrmm @srmmprmmirmmrrmmirmmtrmm-brmmormmnrmmermm, frmmlrmmermmsrmmhrmm trmmhrmmrrmmormmurmmgrmmhrmm @srmmurmmnrmm-rrmmormmarmmrrmm ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 21:48:16 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: henry g Subject: Re: identity/poetics In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 30 Jun 1997 15:31:16 MDT from Both Kim Dawn & David Bromige responded with playful "ad hominem" sexual innuendo. That's the common denominator. Most on the list probably don't remember the exact occasion anyway & it's a useless spent debate but I thought I'd try to have the last word anyway hah hah... Pre-Hitler & Hitler Germany, what do I know, I don't have a background in it, but my take on it is that one was expression and one was repression but that for both it was a "topic". Sexuality as topic produces a lot of books now, that's the similarity I see; as if words & theories will provide a relief from actuality, or a countering. I understand it's a fruitful area for speculation. Dante thought about it too, didn't he? Words are offered up to Venus Genetrix & Beatrice. But I guess Dante recognized his poetry was an image of reality, not a prescription. That's why he ended in baby talk. I'm trying to shock without offending, but that's impossible either way. There is no common audience because speaking for the U.S. the nation has experienced cultural divide (a learning process) since the end of WW 2. I'm not saying the divisions weren't there before in actuality - I mean specifically CULTURAL divide. Discontinuity comes home, the chickens, Reagan's thespian chickens, come home to roost. & poets talk to each other about their differences instead of composing correlations for an audience. This is the list speaking, nor of one man. Sigismundo Fascismo fecit, sleep tight verbo-hobos...continuity...blah blah... - henry el Gouldo ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 14:20:39 +1000 Reply-To: jtranter@sydpcug.org.au Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: John Tranter Subject: Literary Coprophilia MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Donne may have been first, but Alexander Pope also ate at the trough of anger: "Now wits gain praise, for copying other wits, As one hog lives off what another shits." » » » » » » » » » » » jtranter@sydpcug.org.au » » » » » » John Tranter, 39 Short Street, Balmain NSW 2041, Australia Phone Sydney (+612) 9555 8502 FAX (+612) 9212 2350 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 14:27:44 +1000 Reply-To: jtranter@sydpcug.org.au Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: John Tranter Subject: Australian language MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit A couple of kangaroos short of a paddock. And Barry Mackenzie (one stage persona of Barry Humphries, another one being Dame Edna Everidge...) when leaving the room to urinate, is inclined to say ... "...think I'll just go and point Percy at the porcelain." » » » » » » » » » » » jtranter@sydpcug.org.au » » » » » » John Tranter, 39 Short Street, Balmain NSW 2041, Australia Phone Sydney (+612) 9555 8502 FAX (+612) 9212 2350 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 00:12:34 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Re: Poems/Identities In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Dr. Tal-- Now, this is interesting. I guess we live in really different countries, or worlds or something. You said: >I experienced your decision to label me "Ms." in your previous post as both >distancing and patronizing. Now, why would that be? As far as I recall, I was not doing any labelling. I was not labelling, but addressing, in a fashion that, in my country, shows respect for an often-stated desire by women (I hope that word is okay; it is a good word up here) not to be a "Mr' with an "s" added, and not to be "Miss." It is definitely not patronizing, but quite the opposite here. On the other hand, as I said earlier, to use "Dr." is usually meant to be distancing, and often sarcastic. But as you don't use it that way there, I feel that it is all right (though it still makes me uncomfortable) to address you that way. >("Ms." is used snidely as often as it is used respectfully) Again, I am not familiar with that usage. Perhaps it is a regional thing. > Two rules of civility I try always to observe: don't >call people outta their names; don't insult their parents. This sounds interesting. I dont understand the expression. Well, I live on the west coast of Canada, and you live somewhere in the US. I feel as if I _sort of_ get it, but would really like to get it right. > >The "Ivy League" presumption is, in fact, hilarious. I didnt mean to be presuming. I thought I was just asking. I cant figure out what I did to get called names so much. George Bowering. , 2499 West 37th Ave., Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6M 1P4 fax: 1-604-266-9000 e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 03:29:48 -0400 Reply-To: Tom Orange Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Orange Subject: identity and list capital (long) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII i want to try to consider the discussions of identity here under what pierre bourdieu has called symbolic capital, within the specific field of cultural production that is this list. nothing in what i write shd be misconstrued as a personal attack, hence i try to refer not to persons on the list but their words/posts and the symbolic capital (for convenience think "presumed worth" to the list, hence "list capital") they carry. dodie bellamy wrote: <> the words i wish to focus in on here are "palatable" and "attacking." the first essentially -- metaphorically and literally -- has to do with taste. dodie b found kim's original posts, simply put, distasteful -- a reaction, an interpretation, indeed heightened by the fact that db perceived those posts as personally attacking her friend jay. as a performance, kim's posts were certainly open, on the immediate surface, to such an interpretation -- tho i'm sure this was not their intent. but from there, it didn't take long for db's posts to do exactly the same thing to kd (a list member who is a friend of mine) that db perceived kd doing to jay, only at a much deeper level of what i will call rhetorical violence. kim's posts played, perhaps too roughly, with jay's sense of list decorum/tedium; db's posts didn't simply play with or question but dismissed outright the legitimacy of kim's position as a writing subject, and not just on the list but tout court: in essence, attempted to strip her writing of any and all list capital. we have thus moved from mere palatability -- i don't like it -- to validity and judgment -- it is not valid writing, the position of this writing-subject is unacceptable, it/he/she has no value/worth. witness the judgment contained in daniel bouchard's post: >Kim Dawn's posts, on the other hand, were 1) pretty obnoxious, 2) pretty >stupid, and 3) pretty obnoxious and pretty stupid. Am I undermining her >"authority" or "femininity" by saying so? undermining authority, delegitimizing writing and a position-taking within a specific field of production, yes. kali tal writes, helping my point: <> or, attempting to effect a shift in list capital: kd's writing is stupid and youd be stupid to put your stock or recognition into it. kt continues: <> kt is describing what i'm calling list capital. dodie b's posts carry a lot of authority or symbolic capital on this list: she is known and respected personally and through her writings by many listmembers. kd does not and is not, we don't know her authorial intentions, all we have is her writing, which, if we buy into the field as it's being staked, has no worth. kt describes the dynamics of list capital when she writes: <> though, i wd argue, substitute kt's "identity" for list capital. and the relative shares of it possessed by db's and kd's posts. bourdieu would argue further that the rules of the game in a field of production are such that those who posessess symbolic capital set the rules of the game, namely maintaining their domination of the field and their accumulation of symbolic capital; likewise those who don't have the capital are always trying to take a position in the field that will earn them recognition and capital and the overthrow of the dominants. i do not think this extent of bourdieu's model applies here: makes the people behind the posts too ruthlessly darwinistic, which i don't think is the case. but the movement of list capital and position-takings in this electronic field of production always involves risks, as kt points out: <<"Being read" is the risk that writers take and--one assumes--the goal for which they strive. *How* a reader reads is out of the author's control, though understanding how (different) readers read might provide one a certain amount of useful information. At least that's how I see/read it.>> perhaps kd's initial posts consituted a high-risk position-taking in this list field. still, understanding how readers read and writers write here amounts, moreso, i believe, than any capital, to the most important rule of the game and the reason why we are all subscribed. tom orange ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 08:49:29 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "David R. Israel" Subject: Blakebahn MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Poetas, f.y.i. -- (someone lately brought this to my attn) The William Blake Page is at: http://www.aa.net/~urizen/blake2.html (last updated November 3, 1996) created by a chap named Richard Record it includes: * The Songs of Experience (Text and Color Plates complete!) (NEW) * The Songs of Innocence (Text and Color Plates complete!) * The Marriage of Heaven and Hell (Text and Color Plates) * Other paintings by Blake. * Other Web Pages concerning William Blake: Still in development The Book of Urizen. An analysis of three of his principal works: The Marriage of Heaven and Hell Milton Jerusalem Illustrations of The Book of Job / / / / kvestchun: ~if WBlake were alive & kickin', would he be a website designer? d.i. . ..... ............ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////\\\\\ > david raphael israel < >> washington d.c. << | davidi@wizard.net (home) | disrael@skgf.com (office) ========================= | thy centuries follow each other | perfecting a small wild flower | (Tagore) //////////////////////////////////////////\\\\\///// ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 10:41:42 EST Reply-To: rreynold@rci.rutgers.edu Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: Rebecca Reynolds Organization: Rutgers University Subject: Re: question > If it's easier to alienate a possible audience > than win over a real one, > who are the exploratory writers, > & who the conventional? > > I submit all my own work > to a certain standard: > would I be able to read this > at a Thanskgiving dinner? > > & the measure of value remains: > > ARS EST CELARE ARTEM > (art is to hide art). > > - Henry Gould > That (or those) are great questions--though I don't know how seriously to take you here. Art is to hide art? But it never does, does it? Maybe in my post about an epithalamium--trying to make it "reader-friendly"--I implied that I didn't think poems ought necessarily to be "reader friendly," though I don't myself buy into that. It is simply that there are different kinds of friendliness(es) and different kinds of readers. I confess that in my post I revealed my own distrust of readers--and I think that comes from having been in a writing workshop. The only word I can think of here is "oy" (my mother's word) but there are others. And back to the question about audiences: I used to worry that the poems I wrote were too layered and subjective, and I remember on the first day of a workshop with Alice Fulton, she asked us what we thought our weaknesses were as poets, or what we wanted to work on, and I said I wanted my poems to be simpler, and she said, "why would you want that?" (I was even more naive then than I am now, of course.) So I stopped trying to write poems that everyone could swallow really easily (the kind sometimes favored by workshop participants), a kind which I could never write in the first place. Also, I'd been reading a lot of theory and poems started reflecting that in ways that not all workshop participants could see --also, I got interested in writing from a position (subjectivity) that was not "universal" (or pre-determined/defined), in part a reaction to the inherent pressures of a writing workshop, and the writing workshop, as I saw it, reflected a mainstream CW push towards conventionality, which was not always a reflection of the poets teaching the workshops, but of the students concurring en masse within them and commenting on each other's work. I found the most interesting poems were poems that made the group the most fractious. But I hate talking so generally, and I don't want to raise the spectre of workshops again. I guess I am trying to say (to be more discreet and refined about this) that Thanksgiving isn't my favorite holiday. First of all, it's all relative(s). DW Winnicott said something to the effect that for an artist, the only urge stronger than the wish to communicate is the wish not to be found. Now this is very relevant to me and my life, as a poet etc., and something I've been thinking about in terms of the "identity" posts, which point to some wish to"find" the author, on the part of the reader, and an extension of that, to "fix" the author in terms of his or her "identity." (Q: Does the author need to be fixed?) Is identity a supplement? in that double sense of adding meaning and/or/also, being simply additional (an excess). rr ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 00:10:05 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: john chris jones Subject: Poems, identities and anthologies Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" to Karlein van den Beukel and everyone, Thank you for your posting re flowers. To me your letter felt poetic (rather than hectic?) and more like what I hope to find in this correspondence. More of 'human mind' rather than 'human nature' (in Gertrude Stein's use of these terms). I'm surprised that those who are arguing about identity seem to ignore her saying that only while she let go of her identity 'as my little dog knows me' could she write what she wrote (for that is how masterpieces are written). But I prefer not to make that distinction between the writer and the writing and like to see biographical and factual information becoming parts of the work (types jones, remembering that this and all postings are parts of the cyberepic?) I've not read Zukovsky's poems but am inspired to do so now. greetings and thanks jcj In case you or others do not know them Gertrude Stein's remarks about identity and 'human mind' and 'human nature' are in 'What are masterpieces and why are there so few of them?' (in 'Look at me now and here I am'), in 'The geographical history of America', and also elsewhere in her writings. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 00:38:47 -0600 Reply-To: rwhyte@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ryan Whyte Subject: 5 Poems About 4 Films Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear list members, Please check out these poems of mine at http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~rwhyte/5poems.html Comments are, of course, welcome. Thanks! Ryan Whyte ============================= rwhyte@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 11:04:32 EST Reply-To: rreynold@rci.rutgers.edu Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: Rebecca Reynolds Organization: Rutgers University Subject: Re: american language > YEAH!!! i am not the only one with chartreuse paranoia!!! i remember it > having some connection to soem french liquor which is a bright bright > green, but i hear it in connection with fuschia-ish raspberryish pink > as well... so what is the deal here? are we talking color blind > emperor without clothes? > e Two responses today--I'm really quite shocked at myself. Anyway, I too thought chartreuse was pinkish until a friend of mine in grad school bought a vile green VW camper van, and another friend referred to it as "chartreuse." I knew she was correct because she was on a full fellowship. But here I'm thinking, there must be a link--is it the word "fuschia" which shares sounds with "chartreuse?" Or is it a spectral pinkishness? Nabokov talks about associating letters of the alphabet with colors & sensations when he was a child; there must be a cerebral path between sounds and color, sound-waves and frequencies of light? (No, it's more likely to be socially constructed.) And the irony is, I left graduate school because I didn't think I thought right for it. But it wasn't merely the chartreuse . . . rr rr rr ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 09:19:03 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: misattributions in the poet/identity debate In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII This forwarded to me from Danny Santiago, who gives me permission to post it here (as he has been the subject of several recent posts), but who says he's much too busy with important literary matters to subscribe and post himself -- What a generous and truly selfless guy he is! >>Aldon: >>I can't believe what poor readers your poetry friends are. If they will >>simply take the time to examine their own archival conscience, they will >>recognize that all the quotes attributed to me in the recent list dustup >>over Ornamentalism were in fact posted by David Bromige. >> >>Invariably yours, >>himself ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 12:27:43 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Shemurph@AOL.COM Subject: Re: STEVE CARLL I, also, need Steve Carll's address. Please backchannel. Thanks. Sheila Murphy shemurph@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 11:44:50 +0000 Reply-To: ARCHAMBEAU@LFC.EDU Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert Archambeau Organization: Lake Forest College Subject: Re: identity and list capital (long) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Tom Orange wrote: > we have thus moved from mere palatability -- i don't like it -- to > validity and judgment -- it is not valid writing, the position of this > writing-subject is unacceptable, it/he/she has no value/worth. witness > the judgment contained in daniel bouchard's post: > > >Kim Dawn's posts, on the other hand, were 1) pretty obnoxious, 2) pretty > >stupid, and 3) pretty obnoxious and pretty stupid. Am I undermining her > >"authority" or "femininity" by saying so? > > undermining authority, delegitimizing writing and a position-taking within > a specific field of production, yes. Granted. (And thanks for sending me back to Bourdieu -- I haven't read him in years). But are there not situations in which it is legitimate to undermine authority (or, to use Bourdieu's term, to deprive another of capital)? To move the frame of reference from Bourdieu to Habermas, one could say that a true public sphere depends on the ability of participants to attempt to legitimize and delegitimize. Leaving aside the argument about Kim Dawn's first posts, I'm sure there are some positions and speech acts that Tom feels ought to lack discursive capital, and situations in which he would (in the language of classical liberalism) present counter-arguments and negative judgements against such positions or (in the Marxian sociological terms of Bourdieu) seek to delegitimate the capital of such positions. So I'm left wondering, Tom: do you object to the whole system, or to a particular judgement made within the system? Maybe I lack imagination, but I find it hard to believe that you would argue against people on the list offering their judgements of the value of the capital of various posts, and in so doing modifying the value of that capital. Do you have an alternative vision in mind? Hoarding my gold and deferring gratification in the primitive stages of capital accumulation, Robert Archambeau Discursive Capitalist (top hat and monocle in place) a web site for anyone who wants to practice their capitalism: http://www.monopoly.com/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 09:56:34 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: dbkk@SIRIUS.COM Subject: Re: identity and list capital (long) Comments: To: Tom Orange In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 3:29 AM -0400 7/1/97, Tom Orange wrote: >but from there, it didn't take long for db's posts to do exactly the same >thing to kd (a list member who is a friend of mine) that db perceived kd >doing to jay, only at a much deeper level of what i will call rhetorical >violence. kim's posts played, perhaps too roughly, with jay's sense of >list decorum/tedium; db's posts didn't simply play with or question but >dismissed outright the legitimacy of kim's position as a writing subject, >and not just on the list but tout court: in essence, attempted to strip >her writing of any and all list capital. > >we have thus moved from mere palatability -- i don't like it -- to >validity and judgment -- it is not valid writing, the position of this >writing-subject is unacceptable, it/he/she has no value/worth. witness >the judgment contained in daniel bouchard's post: First of all Tom, I never said anything like Kim D was worthless, my launching into her writing was a response to comparing her performance on this public forum to the novels of Kathy Acker--I was stating that this space (the p-list) with a captured audience has a totally different dynamic/literary expectations than the space of a novel, which is a come-as-you-wish space, a rarified space where various agreements are made. I still stand by my opinion that writing sexually explicit material to be TABOO is not necessarily literature--in fact, that intent, is what I think undermines most attempts at creating quality writing dealing with sexuality. Look at _Fear of Flying_, for example, Jong's character's incessant concerns with others watching her to the point one wonders if she's experiencing *anything* within the experiences herself. I appreciate your concern and support of your friend, and I also appreciate your restrained tone. I think much of my frustration with KDawn's initial emergence on the list stems from my larger frustrations with heterosexuality, its claustrophobic conservativeness regarding sexuality. I don't know if you are familiar with my work, but my entire project has been dealing with female sexuality in a squirm-in-your seats manner. When I started doing this I was a bit older than Kim, but I received no support whatsoever from women, scorn from some--and this was the early 80s before Feminism was totally dead. All the support I got to develop my interest in female sexuality (and I have a primary interest in psychoanalytic stuff, i.e., the primal) came from gay men, and I'm probably lucky in that for in the gay community there is a vocabulary for dealing with sexuality and an acceptance of it--or shall I use a theory buzz word and say a "privileging" of it. And even though you folks fanticize all this authority and power, to this day when I read, such as at Naropa recently, while there are people (most of them in their 20s) who *really* get into it, there are many others (especially from my own generation) who walk away stiffly and refuse to look me in the eye. I don't think this thing is ever going to get easy for me. I also would imagine that had Kim Dawn done her performance on the Queer Studies list (a space where sexuality/theory/literature is regularly discussed) that it would not have gone down without question. Some of the members, I'm sure, would have jumped on her like pirannahs (I guess I should have picked an image I could spell) for her VIOLENCE. But here on the p-list, I'm the one who is accused of violence. Fortuntely, I always enjoy it when academics use that word, "violence," it's like this sniper tactic that puts the opponent to shame. One always imagines hands thrown to forehead to ward off the offensive psychological blow (I'm stealing this gesture from Terry Castle's _The Apparitional Lesbian_). Avital Ronell is the queen of using the word violence--I get thrilled everytime she says it. Too bad she moved to the East Coast. I think that rehashing Kim Dawn's performances are like beating a dead horse (no offense Kim, no one here, I'm sure, thinks you're anything like a dead horse). Her position on the list, I feel, has been accepted, and the shock value of her posts has dissipated, I doubt if she ruffles any tail feathers (I'm into this animal motif) today. I won't go over your thoughtful post point by point because there's NO POINT to my doing that--I just want to add, though, that some of the stuff your calling me on is K-Tal's interpretation of my posts, not my posts themselves. For me, *the* question here is why K-Tal continues to attack *the* person/WOMAN (me) on the list whose whole writing project supports and illustrates everything she's talking about. A quick look up my name on AltaVista will offer many hits, so anybody could find out tons about my project without moving their butt. I hope research she does for her academic books is more careful than what has been exhibited here. Dodie ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 10:11:49 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: Poems/Identities Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" You don't get it, Bowering. Ms, as opposed to Miss, implies that the lady may not be a virgin. At 12:12 AM 7/1/97 -0700, you wrote: >Dr. Tal-- > >Now, this is interesting. I guess we live in really different countries, or >worlds or something. >You said: > >>I experienced your decision to label me "Ms." in your previous post as both >>distancing and patronizing. > >Now, why would that be? As far as I recall, I was not doing any labelling. >I was not labelling, but addressing, in a fashion that, in my country, >shows respect for an often-stated desire by women (I hope that word is >okay; it is a good word up here) not to be a "Mr' with an "s" added, and >not to be "Miss." It is definitely not patronizing, but quite the opposite >here. On the other hand, as I said earlier, to use "Dr." is usually meant >to be distancing, and often sarcastic. But as you don't use it that way >there, I feel that it is all right (though it still makes me uncomfortable) >to address you that way. > > >>("Ms." is used snidely as often as it is used respectfully) > >Again, I am not familiar with that usage. Perhaps it is a regional thing. > >> Two rules of civility I try always to observe: don't >>call people outta their names; don't insult their parents. > >This sounds interesting. I dont understand the expression. Well, I live on >the west coast of Canada, and you live somewhere in the US. I feel as if I >_sort of_ get it, but would really like to get it right. > > >> >>The "Ivy League" presumption is, in fact, hilarious. > >I didnt mean to be presuming. I thought I was just asking. I cant figure >out what I did to get called names so much. > > > > > > > > >George Bowering. > , >2499 West 37th Ave., >Vancouver, B.C., >Canada V6M 1P4 > >fax: 1-604-266-9000 >e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca > > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 10:31:34 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Bromige Subject: american language/clerihew (deformed?) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" johnson's still on! we thought kent had went. db ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 13:14:23 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Thompson Subject: Re: identity and list capital (long) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Tom Orange's attempt to apply Pierre Bourdieu's notion of symbolic capital to this thread [and to the list in general] is an interesting new development. But I don't think that his effort to sort out the issues quite succeeds, because in spite of his efforts to be detached and objective, he has still simply sided with his friend. For me, knowing absolutely no one personally on this list, it is hard to justify the claim that Dodie Bellamy is operating "at a much deeper level of what i will call rhetorical violence" than, say, Kim Dawn. What kind of "list capital" was left for Jay Schwartz after Kim Dawn's "performance"? As far as I can see, rhetorical violence was used by both sides, in this battle for symbolic capital. The question that interests me is to what extent Bourdieu's terms can help us to clarify the issues that Tom Orange has raised. It is interesting to look at this list [or any list] as a "field of cultural production", with its own "rules of the game", and to observe in this light the struggle of its members for recognition and domination and authority [symbolic capital]. It is also puzzling that Tom backs away from such a model of the list's activities, because it is "too ruthlessly darwinistic." Why bring it in and then throw it away? How is authority established, accd to Bourdieu? Well, one thing that he stresses is the role of relevant institutions in the assertion and maintenance of power. Now if Dodie Bellamy had said [or implied] something like "as a professor of English at some Ivy league school, I now declare you [Kim Dawn] unpalatable and aggressive..." [etc.], that performance would have gotten its symbolic capital from her institutional authority. But clearly she did not say or imply any such thing, nor does she have, as she has said, any such institutional authority. In my view, that is one of the important and valuable things about this medium: the imposition of institutional power is very difficult, if not impossible [let's hope that we can preserve this sort of freedom for this and any other list]. As far as I can see, the only person who has real power in this sense is the list owner, who, like some deus otiosus, has not shown any signs of using it. Another important idea from Bourdieu is the notion that the performative utterance is magical. This seems to me to come close to what Tom was getting at in analyzing Dodie Bellamy's language. Acts of self-assertion, of naming or labelling [e.g., "you're obnoxious"], of investiture, etc. etc., are *directly* effective: the mere saying so makes it so. In Bourdieu's sense [and in mine] that is magic [a very social magic, as Bourdieu stresses]. I think that Tom is right to suggest that Dodie Bellamy has used this sort of magic on this list [if that is what he is suggesting]. But surely that is what *everyone* involved has done [and mostly quite well, I might add]. And though this sort of magic is in no way confined to poetry, certainly you find it there all the time [though not always, to be sure].... Sorry for the length of this. Hope it's of use. George Thompson ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 10:41:37 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Bromige Subject: poetic/identity/"I personally do not remember torturing prisoners"/hengry g's inability to fess up Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Henry, what is this fascination with things nazi? I must say it parallels yr ability to re write history, perfectly. Yes, I see, you are counting on listlings not being able to remember a sequence of events, which inability gives you carte blanche to re arrange the facts to serve some purpose of yr own. It makes all the difference in the world whether the masturbatory imagery began with me or began with Kali Tal. Once the cat is out of the bag & directed towards oneself, it is not uncivil to yell "Get yr fucken cat outa my face!" For those of you on a POETICS list, I assume careful reading is the first order of attention. Henry, why cant you come right out & admit it : you attrributed the _origin_ of the masturbatory metaphor to me, whereas in truth it issued from Kali Tal. And why dont you apologize to the members of this List for stating that their memories are no better than yours? db ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 13:25:13 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: hg Subject: Re: Poems/Identities In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 1 Jul 1997 10:11:49 -0700 from This snapping back & forth is getting really low. David Bromige, I'm sorry if I misrepresented your posts. I haven't gone back the archives to check. My point was that "ad hominem" attacks & insinuations are out of line. When we write to this discussion, we open ourselves up to criticism, that's part of the game. But we all know when an attack gets "personal". Suddenly we're no longer talking semi-peacefully. We're having a feud. I guess that's fun for some people to watch, unfortunately. Get lost, flame-voyeurs & bitchy gossip-heads. - Henry Gould ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 10:48:25 +0000 Reply-To: layne@sonic.net Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Layne Russell Subject: Re: Killian at the Big Top MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Pritchett,Pat @Silverplume wrote: > > (NB - for any of you who are bored or annoyed with my reading reports from > Naropa, I can only say - I'm beginning to feel the same way too! This will > probably be the last...) I am enjoying them! I, for one, hope you don't stop. Thanks.... Layne Russell ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 11:18:08 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jay Schwartz Organization: Salestar Subject: Re: Killian at the Big Top MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yes, please continue Naropa posts. I love the vicarious readings... Jay Schwartz ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 14:08:36 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Henry Gould Subject: Re: poetic/identity/"I personally do not remember torturing prisoners"/hengry g's inability to fess up In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 1 Jul 1997 10:41:37 -0700 from >assume careful reading is the first order of attention. Henry, why cant you >come right out & admit it : you attrributed the _origin_ of the >masturbatory metaphor to me, whereas in truth it issued from Kali Tal. > >And why dont you apologize to the members of this List for stating that >their memories are no better than yours? db You may be right. I think our last messages crossed. Maybe some diligent person can go dig out the exact quotes. Here's how I remembered it: Kali Tal compared - in the abstract - a sort of reader-oriented criticism with male masturbation fantasies. I remember being surprised at your reply, which seemed to "personalize" it - i.e., you said maybe Kali should look into her OWN responses, etc. The context in which I stated this was in questioning Kali - I thought she was defending Kim Dawn's public pornography attack on Jay and slamming your public "innuendo" attack in which case she was defending/slamming the same thing by different people. Anybody still awake out there? As I say, David, if I've got it wrong, my apologies. If Kali started with the "personal", then you've got a point. I am sure we will get down to the fine print & bore evryone to tears. Meanwhile, you are all great guys & gals out there, peace & love. - Henry Gould ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 14:37:52 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michael Magee Subject: Re: identity/poetics In-Reply-To: from "henry" at Jun 30, 97 05:01:49 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thinking about Henry's recent post which ended with the stipulations that "& there are very few poets with an idiom that energizes and unites" in our present moment, and not getting into the off-shoot argument re: sexuality/masturbation/whatever which I wasn't following, and partially getting into the idea that an interest in "bio-sexuality" could be the result of a kind of nostalgic desire for unity (have I got that right?). So, anyway, my thought: I'm not sure the desire for unity is a very healthy desire; which is to say, I don't think I want a poet "with an idiom that unites," at least in any traditional sense, though energizing might be nice. Harryette Mullen says in a couple interviews I recently read that, in *Muse & Drudge* she was trying to allow the poem to function on enough levels that everybody/anybody might find something of significance in it, or might find many things of momentary significance predicated on when, where and with whom they read it. But anyone who's read M & D (Mullen's not Pynchon's, and, as an aside, I prefer the former) would, it seems to me, be reluctant to throw a word like unity around in describing it. So, if anything, perhaps its non-unifying means towards semi-unifying ends, a kind of tactic you might likewise find variously in Nate Mackey's novels or, to some degree, Paul Beatty's poems. But all of them, I'm guessing, would say that the dream of speaking to/for/with/about everyone is a bunch of malarky (there's no was that's spelled right) - what's more, it seems the more one indulges that dream the less chance one has of speaking to anyone beyond one's own tiny group-thinking enclave. Essentializing selves - selves which speak alot about unity - get pretty boring, pretty fast, in my(s) experience(s)..I'm reading Henry's comments as in a similar vein, though perhaps with a more cyclical view of history, a sense that the youngsters are more inclined than usual to live w/ disunity b/c we're part of the latest Fin de Whatever - which is to say folks like us come around every hundred years or so. But, far as I can tell Unity w/ a capital U is not a term poised for a comeback, and none of my fellow youner poets - correct me if I'm wrong here guys - are hustling to shore fragaments against their ruins. Shantih, Santa, Spumante, -Mike. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 11:45:12 MDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Re: Poems/Identities >>("Ms." is used snidely as often as it is used respectfully) > >Again, I am not familiar with that usage. Perhaps it is a regional thing. Guys are automatically "Mr." (when they aren't Dr. or Rev. or Col. or whatever). *Women* are "Mrs.", "Miss," or "Ms." I've seen very few forms on which "Mr." or "Ms." is the only alternative. Often it's a choice, for women, between "Ms." and "Mrs." (which defeats the purpose of "Ms.", which was to create an honorific that--like "Mr."--is not dependent upon the matrimonial state of the female in question). And frequently, as a female, you have a choice between all three feminine honorifics. What this usually means is you're either married, not married, or (in the minds of many men *and* women) pissed off. Whether you intend it or not, calling a woman "Ms." has the effect of declaring her a certain *kind* of woman--the *kind* of woman who wants to be called "Ms." Now, definition of that "kind" varies, but, as I said, it's as often snide as it is respectful. In this era of vicious antifeminist backlash (and what era hasn't been that era?) the term is quite loaded. Perhaps it is not on the West Coast of Canada, but, overall, I think it's safer to address women as they sign themselves (which, in my case, is always "Kali"), or with gender nonspecific honorifics ("Dr."), or, if one is uncomfortable with that, by last name only ("Tal"), or by full name. > >> Two rules of civility I try always to observe: don't >>call people outta their names; don't insult their parents. > >This sounds interesting. I dont understand the expression. Well, I live on >the west coast of Canada, and you live somewhere in the US. I feel as if I >_sort of_ get it, but would really like to get it right. "Don't call me out of my name" is an African-American expression, but it has a meaning that crosses quite a few cultures. Many people regard names as powerful, and *naming* as a great power. (I'm not talking about being superstitious or mystical about this, I'm talking about a person's sense of identity within a particular cultural context.) The sensitivity about names is particularly apparent in groups whose names have been imposed upon them from outside. African-Americans were named by their masters in the antebellum period, and after the Civil War the first two things almost all of them did when they were freed were to 1) go in search of their families; and 2) change their names. Women in Western cultures traditionally are given the patronym at birth, and then *that* is taken away and replaced with the husband's name at marriage. Since well before Lucy Stone, American women have been sensitive to the implications of such horse-trading gestures. "Calling someone out of their name" is, quite literally, claiming the power to make someone be what they are not. Those are fighting words in many communities, just like insults that begin with, "Yo mama" are fighting words. One engages in such behavior only if one *expects* to find oneself in a signifyin' contest or a rough game of the dozens. >I didnt mean to be presuming. I thought I was just asking. I cant figure >out what I did to get called names so much. I don't *think* I've called you *any* names. I've commented on texts and rhetorical strategies, but I don't know you well enough (at all) to call *you* anything. Kali ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 14:08:00 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Pritchett,Pat @Silverplume" Subject: Re: Killian at the Big Top Comments: To: Jay Schwartz MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN Thanks Jay - and others who have backchanneled re: my off the cuff Naropa reading reports. I plan to attend at least two more readings before the Summer Program is over - Lorenzo Thomas's this week and Lisa Jarnot & Kristen Prevallet's next week. Also hope to see T. Begley, whose work with Olga Broumas I very much admire (unfortunately, Olga could not make it to Boulder I've been told). These readings have been great and I feel very lucky to be here - but they do raise the troubling question: Is it possible to have too much poetry? Too much is not enough, Patrick Pritchett ---------- From: Jay Schwartz To: POETICS Subject: Re: Killian at the Big Top Date: Tuesday, July 01, 1997 1:40PM Yes, please continue Naropa posts. I love the vicarious readings... Jay Schwartz ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 12:13:36 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: Poems/Identities Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I'm from New York, I've lived all over the country, and I've never used Ms. except when I don't know what else to use. More often than not it's what I use in letters when I'm depending on the good will of the recipient, as in asking for a job, a blurb, etc, and the recipient has not made public her marital status. Anything, including mister ("who do you think you are, mister?"), can be used to call out. At 11:45 AM 7/1/97 MDT, you wrote: >>>("Ms." is used snidely as often as it is used respectfully) >> >>Again, I am not familiar with that usage. Perhaps it is a regional thing. > >Guys are automatically "Mr." (when they aren't Dr. or Rev. or Col. or whatever). >*Women* are "Mrs.", "Miss," or "Ms." I've seen very few forms on which >"Mr." or "Ms." is the only alternative. Often it's a choice, for women, >between "Ms." and "Mrs." (which defeats the purpose of "Ms.", which was to >create an honorific that--like "Mr."--is not dependent upon the matrimonial >state of the female in question). And frequently, as a female, you have a >choice between all three feminine honorifics. What this usually means is >you're either married, not married, or (in the minds of many men *and* >women) pissed off. Whether you intend it or not, calling a woman "Ms." has >the effect of declaring her a certain *kind* of woman--the *kind* of woman >who wants to be called "Ms." Now, definition of that "kind" varies, but, as >I said, it's as often snide as it is respectful. In this era of vicious >antifeminist backlash (and what era hasn't been that era?) the term is quite >loaded. Perhaps it is not on the West Coast of Canada, but, overall, I think >it's safer to address women as they sign themselves (which, in my case, is >always "Kali"), or with gender nonspecific honorifics ("Dr."), or, if one is >uncomfortable with that, by last name only ("Tal"), or by full name. .> ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 15:18:46 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest Subject: Re: Poems/Identities BRAVO HENRY! only thing is, when you get flamed, you are faced with the big choice: 1) do i refuse to add capital to the flames piling up and let stinker with the flame thrower think they burned me; 2) do i burn their flamethrower to melted glop and sear everyone unfortunate enough to be standing around. ideally, of course, one would be way cool, and dump water on whole thing, real real COLD water, no? e i'm feeling, like, way into the COOL thing because it is very hot and i am wearing grown-up-lady nicey-nice clothes this afternoon, but discovered, too late, a stain on the sleeve. this is an example of the identity of the writer undergoing modification by the identity of the writer as she constructs an identity that reconstructs itself, endlessly acquiring imaginary capital or not, as the case may be... e ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 13:11:53 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Mandel Subject: his penthouse is for rent Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" David Israel, I think, adds: "on the other side of the ledger, there's the Chinese-painting reference (don't recall exact wording) -- being "like legs on a snake" (i.e., where you've painted a snake but then feel you've gotta embelish it & add more . . . )" There's a great saying in French, "ca me fera un bel jambe" ("that's gonna make me a great leg"), for something useless received (or heard). On the same subject, I now realize that it was my friend David Bromige I nastied in my most recent attack on reading poetry to figure yourself out. That'll make him a great leg. I wish I'd restrained myself, especially since I didn't explain myself very clearly. There is no life without identity, that's obvious (see my post to this list on 5/17/97). But, being introduced is only the beginning of the relationship. How, for example, would it be possible for David and Kali Tal to back out of a brouhaha that *must* be based on mutual misunderstandings which develop out of writing in different times/places and having this keyhole-sized medium through which to perceive each other? Esp. since you have to back out the same keyhole? Anyway, I stick absolutely and without compromise -- unless someone should disagree, that is (in which case I'm going to be forced to repeat my position with additive decorations) -- to my statement that a poem is a social contract between writer and reader. Whoever you are. Tom Tom Mandel tmandel@screenporch.com ******************************************************** Screen Porch * http://screenporch.com 4031 University Dr. Suite 200 * vox: 703-934-2034 Fairfax, VA 22030-3409 * fax: 703-359-9368 ******************************************************** Join the Caucus Conversation ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 15:44:03 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest Subject: Re: Poems/Identities ditto me -- ms. is used to be respectful. one says ms. to NOT colonize woman based on marital status. one says ms. to imply you are interested in, and speaking to, the woman, not her patriarchal positioning. i say ms. to other women older than me to include them in the girl's club, to be most honorific and formal thus showing them i respect them, while doing it in a way that is modern and feminist. how would anyone know kali was a dr. -- it isn't in her posts, though her yale address figures prominently? and given the harangues engaged in against academia, wouldn't one try and take her at her word and eschew academic posts, though one could take her at her word and bow to the frequent mention of "classes she teaches" except, what if one took her at her word and went with the constant harangues about oppressed working class and her unity with them, only then again, one really probably ought to take her at her word and go on the I-The-Authority -Figure-Say-To-You (crummylittlewhitestudentthatyouare)-that-YOU-can-not-know ANYTHING-about-My-Area (academic, my academic, academic, i am an academic expert)-area-of-expertise-i.e.-african-americans-working-class-women... only, really, perhaps one ought to take her at her word and go by the i wear funky clothes and am a regular gal tone... except, no, no, i am going to go back and take her at the word of "you have misread me" only, well, given how she misreads me and other people maybe it is meant in that sort of peer- to-peer congratulatory tone... no, well, um ummm what word DOES one take kali tal at? whenever one tries, one gets haranged for not taking her at a different one?! could it be no one wins but kali games? blech e ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 15:45:44 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: "Ms" [ was: Subject: Re: Poems/Identities } Just to add a note of comparative data to the Ms thread: I worked for many years as a secretary in law firms in San Francisco, New York, Washington, DC. In such environments -- (and I think, likely, more broadly in much business correspondence in the U.S.) -- Ms. has long been is a standard (indeed, the requisite) form of salutation for all women. In these environments, "Mrs." or "Miss" are, generally speaking, no longer in use -- they are considered outdated. Not suggesting this is found (or should be found) everywhere -- just noting that, interestingly, it's what I've observed in the noted context. In any case, I accept David B.'s suggestion that he had no hostile intent in using that form of salutation; -- & I'm sure he (and anyone else here) will be happy enough to address Kali Tal as she might best prefer. d.i. (the black kids in my high school called me "professor" but I never became one . . ) Mark Weiss wrote: << I'm from New York, I've lived all over the country, and I've never used Ms. except when I don't know what else to use. More often than not it's what I use in letters when I'm depending on the good will of the recipient, as in asking for a job, a blurb, etc, and the recipient has not made public her marital status. Anything, including mister ("who do you think you are, mister?"), can be used to call out. >> ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 16:00:36 -0400 Reply-To: "David Erben (Art)" Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "David Erben (Art)" Subject: the colophone strikes (was theory/identity) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Heh heh heh...uh...heh heh...he wrote "poesis." Yeah...yeah yeah...and "hegemony." Heh heh heh..uh..heh and "ecriture." And...uh...uh..heh they are talk'n about "identity." Shut up Beavis, they're talk'n about "anus writing" AND identity. Darlings. . . kiddies, I don't just sit in my comfy chair in my comfy office *writing* about the perverse dominant culture (in between various "club" meetings)...I live it every day and it's no picnic that's for sure (well, ok, sometimes it is a picnic, but always with real china and stemware). Electronic writing is, I suppose, writing from the place of the colophone, the place where words may be digested and expelled and cut and pasted and (re)mapped. Of course we all know, everything begins *a tergo* "(par) derriere," behind other texts, i.e. in the shit. Perhaps to produce excrement is to cheer up? This I like. Colon humor (an organ Joyce seems a bit obsessed with - part of his identification with canine cognition, I think, esp with the anus, with all its odors is a point of equal interest), that's what we're on about, yes? Heh heh he, he used the word "cognition." And, heh, heh, "Joyce." 'In virtual space there is no smell...' Pity. Now Derek Walcott - there's a poet whose texts, it seems to me, are very interested in poetics, history, AND identity (and I doan think saying a text is interested in identity is cynical at all. In fact, I formally nominate pritchpa@SILVERPLUME.IIX.COM for "Most Outrageous Remark on the Poetics List, 1997. What's valuable about the Diary of Anne Frank to her readers is not her "Jewishness"????? Yeah, ummm, sure.). Anyway, I think Walcott works thru much of the interesting stuff contained in the recent discussion of identity and poetics - he ain't the only one mind you, and he ain't necessarily the best, but he's all I got at the moment: Here's some bits from Walcott's "The Fortunate Traveller" and "Midsummer" Now at the rising of Venus-- the steady star that survives translation, if one can call this lamp the planet that pierces us over indigo islands-- despite the critical sand flies, I accept my function as a colonial upstart at the end of an empire, a single, circling, homeless satellite. The fortunate traveller is "homeless" not because there is no home-- the other site "fills its exiles with horror" -- but he cannot relate to it, cannot inscribe himself into it. But he or she is ambivalent about the privileges and pleasures of "travelling" in the spaces that have previously excluded her. Heh heh heh, he wrote "inscribe." It's good that everything is gone, except their language, which is everything. And it may be a childish revenge at the presumption of empires to hear the worm gnawing their solemn columns into coral. ... and to buy porous fragments of the Parthenon from a fisherman in Tobago, but the fear exists, Delenda est Carthago on the rose horizon... The traveler's ambivalence is reinforced by his realization that though everything is gone, THE LANGUAGE REMAINS, which is "everything." THE LANGUAGE still embodies the complex intertwining of knowledge, history and power that resulted from empire. One of the many ironies of being a "fortunate" traveler is that he or she is now bound to that very language. The structures of violence have been "enabling." But language, at another level, also means the power of representation, the power to map or remap the world, AND THE WEST STILL HAS THAT POWER. Heh, heh, hee, he said "empire." So, however far you have travelled, your steps make more holes and the mesh is multiplied-- or why should you suddenly think of Tomas Venclova, and why should I care about whatever they did to Heberto when exiles must make their own maps, when this asphalt takes you far from the action, past hedges of unaligned flowers? If the "traveler" must engage in making maps of his own, that is, construct new affiliations in the metropolis, how can that construct take into account the "disorder," the dis-location, that had made him "a homeless satellite" in the first place? What can be excluded, and what must remain excluded or suppressed in this new map? The identity of the "fortunate traveler" is necessarily undetermined and uncertain, since it is inevitably mediated by the narrative of detour. Heh, heh, he wrote "metropolis." And, yeah, yeah, ... "detour." Defecation/writing is not normally painful, is it? Freud suggested (and God knows Joyce did) that it's actually quite pleasurable, perhaps the most deeply repressed pleasure of our culture--of Christian culture, with its fear of the unclean. But pleasure is never "supposed" to be solitary, let alone anal. And why should the strokes of pen or keyboard or fart or bowel movement be painful: ugh! Painful to the ego, perhaps; but that's a secondary effect and another story. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 15:51:05 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: henry g Subject: Re: identity/poetics In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 1 Jul 1997 14:37:52 -0400 from I didn't mean to sound so completely nostalgic about "unity"... I said for our country the divisions, the dis-unity, have been a learning process. There's no way to plan intellectually what motivates your writing, it just runs too deep, I think. When you think you are writing just to write the best you can in the form, you discover you are hungry for an audience. It runs deep, I say. What's the motive, what's the message informing or underlying the art for art's sake (or is there a message)... depends on the pen, depends on the "time". On the underlying impulse. I write because I have loved to read from an early age & wanted to do that too, I'm sure that's the common motive. Or one of them. If you believe there is something to be said for common understanding on the basis of common humanity, then "unity" can't be all bad, though the DANGERS are obvious for writers & others. & I can't think of a better work of art than one which would address unity & dis-unity together & bring them under the same tent... - Henry Gould ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 16:04:31 -0400 Reply-To: Tom Orange Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Orange Subject: identity and list capital (long) In-Reply-To: <199707011828.OAA13917@julian.uwo.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII thank you to lbd, robert, dodie b, and george for yr considered posts. i want to respond w/o adding too much to the bandwidth that this thread is already taking up. Robert Archambeau asks: > But are there not situations in which it is legitimate to undermine > authority (or, to use Bourdieu's term, to deprive another of capital)? yes i suppose, since the alternate undermining and reinforcement of capital defines the very dynamic of the field, the position-takings and position-maintainings within it. i have a hard time w/habermas tho, cuz i dont think rationality-based consensus is possible (unless we reconceptualize rationality, a serious option): witness the uproar here. and sure, from one's position in the field and the dispositions (habitus) which drive one to take such positions, one wd recognize certain speech acts as deserving more symbolic capital than others. our dispositions clash, struggles ensue; but the object of our study -- in this case writing as a product contained w/in a specific cultural field -- is just that, an object with no intrinsic worth of its own: we project worth upon writing. or rather: worth is a residuum, an effect of the interactions of habitus and field. i hope this makes sense. to be nietzschean abt it: there is no valuable writing (or alternately, all writing has value), only attributions of value to writing. robert also asks: > So I'm left wondering, Tom: do you object to the whole system, or to a > particular judgement made within the system? Maybe I lack imagination, > but I find it hard to believe that you would argue against people on the > list offering their judgements of the value of the capital of various > posts, and in so doing modifying the value of that capital. Do you have > an alternative vision in mind? i find the system, the model, compelling. as a participant in the field, i am disposed to agree with some judgments and disagree with others. i have my own stakes, my own capital to invest and accumulate, all of which are operating without my full conscious awareness. the alternative -- to play the game with the rules always fully upfront -- is untenable at best. could you imagine: "i found so-and-so's post interesting but i would like to respond by attempting to take away some of their list capital..." George Thompson, wanting to push me further, writes: > But I don't think that his [my] effort to sort out the issues quite > succeeds, because in spite of his efforts to be detached and objective, he > has still simply sided with his friend. quite true. such is my disposition, which always thwarts any attempt to be detached and objective. questioning my claims abt rhetorical violence, gt asks: > What kind of "list capital" was left for Jay Schwartz after Kim Dawn's > "performance"? > As far as I can see, rhetorical violence was used by both sides, in this > battle for symbolic capital. as kali suggested, jay had a number of different avenues for recovering any symbolic capital presumably lost -- perhaps even more -- as a result of kim's performance. dodie b's defense of jay and her devaluation of kim's writing -- again subject to dodie's own dispositions (and abt which i am learning more -- thanks db) just like any of us, and which, as dodie correctly points out to me, stopped short of dodie's calling kim's writing worthless (this was left to robert's posting) -- were an attempt to recover and redistribute the capital. a powerful one, imo, given dodie's more dominant position in our field relative to kim. i'll shy away from talking further abt violence, at dodie's suggestion, since she's right, it is becoming a rather banal academicism. plus it's an area i havent really thought through yet. gt continues: > It is also puzzling that Tom backs away from > such a model of the list's activities, because it is "too ruthlessly > darwinistic." Why bring it in and then throw it away? i do so not only as an exercise of restraint and decorum, but b/c i don't feel confortable saying that any member of this list is a machiavellian capital-baron out to dominate the list at the expense of everyone else. i don't believe it, tho one could push bourdieu's model that way i suppose. i wd speak more abt belief than what gt calls "magic," altho there is something ritualistic abt the way authors are consecrated in bourdieu's sense. > I think that Tom is right to suggest that Dodie Bellamy has used this sort > of magic on this list [if that is what he is suggesting]. But surely that > is what *everyone* involved has done [and mostly quite well, I might add]. absolutely. we all do it, rarely announcing it as such. what's important, and what bourdieu helps me do, is maintain an awareness of the game. tom orange ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 16:07:43 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Orange Subject: identity and list capital (long) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII p.s. i'd be happy to continue discussing this off-list with anyone; i'm at home w/ a 2400 baud modem and a shitty text editor (pico), spending way too much time online, and have other writing i need to be working on too. but really, what is the summer for? thanks, t. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 16:17:00 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Pritchett,Pat @Silverplume" Subject: Re: No ID, No Service Comments: To: "David Erben (Art)" MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN Oh geez David (blush) - really, you shouldn't have! But the year is not half done yet... For the record (there seems to be a lot of this lately!) I did not say that a text's "being interested" in identity is cynical. I said that it seemed cynical to say that Anne Frank's belief in the basic goodness of human beings did her "no good," as Maria Damon stated, the obvious implication being that if people were good, she could have lived out "a normal life." I understand Maria's revulsion over the invocation of Frank as a cynosure of icky sweet virtue. References to Mother Teresa (who never met a Haitian dictator she didn't like) make me feel the same way. And if Maria is too blissed out at the Cape to respond to what was basically a rather idle devil's advocate comment, that's fine. In my view, though, Frank's belief in "goodness" underwrites her entire book and without it the book would lose its value - indeed, its meaning - it would be guilty of bad faith. I did not mean to imply, either, that "hope" constituted the longing for something beyond mortality. Hope as a spiritual quality provides its own justification, especially for those in extremis and without appeal - it is not to be confused with mere optimism. To paraphrase Augustine, "The reward of hope is hope." Call it a frivolous tautology, if you like... I enjoyed your earlier posting on this debate, David, though as David Bromige pointed out, it raised as many questions as it sought to answer. So I'm puzzled by your outburst. It doesn't seem to me that anyone is attacking you... (And I'd like to thank as well Tom Orange, George Thompson and Robert Archambeau for their most useful sidebars on Bourdieu's theory of symbolic capital vis-a-vis List interactions). What strikes me most about the lines from the Walcott poem you post is their applicability to a broader range of human experience - namely, that ol' existential condition of exile, shipwreck etc we all find ourselves in (except those of us, of course, who really know what our identity is and are free of such concerns). Maybe this debate about identity hinges more on differences between a broader reading of a text and a more narrow form of reading. I don't know. I for one would like it if someone could take a stab (perhaps Kali Tal?) at defining exactly what is meant by identity since we seem to be arguing over different variants of this concept. For me, identity is a form of narrative created in order to obtain some sense of belonging in a world which rarely provides it - and when it does, it's all too often on a suspect, if not specious, basis. Since identity partakes both of innate and more or less inflexible, characteristics (race, gender) as well as highly mutable ones (religion, politics, etc.), doesn't our discussion need somehow to take this into account? Flagging but undaunted, Patrick Pritchett ---------- From: David Erben (Art) To: POETICS Subject: the colophone strikes (was theory/identity) Date: Tuesday, July 01, 1997 3:10PM (and I doan think saying a text is interested in identity is cynical at all. In fact, I formally nominate pritchpa@SILVERPLUME.IIX.COM for "Most Outrageous Remark on the Poetics List, 1997. What's valuable about the Diary of Anne Frank to her readers is not her "Jewishness"????? Yeah, ummm, sure.). ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 17:52:16 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: Re: No ID, No Service footnote to Pat Pritchett . . . << Hope as a spiritual quality provides its own justification, especially for those in extremis and without appeal - it is not to be confused with mere optimism. To paraphrase Augustine, "The reward of hope is hope." Call it a frivolous tautology, if you like... >> not frivolous; but to expand: optimism itself (for that matter) needn't be sneered at. As remarked Aurobindo Ghose (if I recall aright): "Even unjustified optimism is justifiable." d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 14:51:40 MDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Re: Poems/Identities >i say ms. to other women older than me to include them in the girl's club, to >be most honorific and formal thus showing them i respect them, while doing it >in a way that is modern and feminist. it was my observation that "ms." was used as often disrespectfully as respectfully. how you use "ms." doesn't account for how others use it. i use it, too. but i am aware of the context in which i use it, and that i *do* use it in a fashion which affirms that it is a term of respect. the use of "ms." as a term of disrespect is so common that it's become a hollywood convention (george clooney's character uses "ms" in that disrespectful sense in the latest _batman_ adventure, and there are myriad other examples). the implication in disrespectful usage is that a "real lady" doesn't *need* to use "ms." >how would anyone know kali was a dr. -- it isn't in her posts, though her >yale address figures prominently? what do these two statements have to do with each other? my point was *not* that i *wished* to be called "dr.," but that I preferred "dr.-which-I-do- not-wish-to-be-called" to "ms.-which-I-do-not-wish-to-be-called." as to how anyone would know, well, there are several answers: one might presume (not an insult if one were incorrect); one might have read any of a number of earlier posts which made some passing reference to finishing a dissertation or turning a diss into a book; one might do (as dodie bellamy suggested, and i had already done) a search on the web. but what does the yale address have to do with anything? my email address is a yale address because it was while i was at yale that i developed an internet "habit"--changing the address at this point would be an incredible task. in point of fact, however, i *am* in the process of changing my address because i *don't* like the "yale" identification. >and given the harangues engaged in against >academia, wouldn't one try and take her at her word and eschew academic posts, >though one could take her at her word and bow to the frequent mention of "classes >she teaches" except, what if one took her at her word and went with the constant >harangues about oppressed working class and her unity with them, only then again, >one really probably ought to take her at her word and go on the I-The-Authority >-Figure-Say-To-You (crummylittlewhitestudentthatyouare)-that-YOU-can-not-know >ANYTHING-about-My-Area (academic, my academic, academic, i am an academic >expert)-area-of-expertise-i.e.-african-americans-working-class-women... >only, really, perhaps one ought to take her at her word and go by the i wear >funky clothes and am a regular gal tone... except, no, no, i am going to go >back and take her at the word of "you have misread me" only, well, given >how she misreads me and other people maybe it is meant in that sort of peer- >to-peer congratulatory tone... no, well, interesting, your choice of the word "harangue" to describe my posts. it's a term that means--in it's kindest sense--"a speech addressed to an assembly," which is what we are all generating. but its most common usages are for speeches that are loud and vehement, tirades, or formal and pompous--a word used to dismiss not the content of a speech, but its manner and presentation, its, um, decorum. i think it's a lot easier to set aside the question of content and replace it with a critique of manner. if one were to ask for an exemplary definition of "harangue," i might, in fact, give the quoted paragraph above. there is no room for *me* in there at all--what you offer is a quite-literally-breathless blanket condemnation of all of the roles you think i play. it is chiefly compelling for its clear delineation of the (presumably more virtuous) oppositions and concomittant insecurities it might describe. i yam what i yam. i don't like a lot of things about the academy; that doesn't mean i didn't excel in it or that i do not value anything it has to offer. i am passionate about teaching and my teaching experience adds to my understanding of the world. i am concerned with class issues, and i do quite self-consciously publish primarily poets of working-class origins and/or identifications. on the other hand, poems i return to again and again, which are the keystones of my sense of self, range from eliot's _four quartets_, almost everything by wallace stevens, atwood's circe/mud poems to shange's _nappy edges_. i do not, myself, *identify* as working-class and i am always conscious of the privileges of birth which separate me from working-class status no matter what my economic level might be at a given time. i *have* spent a great deal of time immersed in the study of certain african american cultures, in which i claim some competence. like any other competence, it was achieved through a great deal of effort and attention, and, no, i don't think that people who *haven't* paid as much attention or expended as much effort usually have access to the same level of understanding of a subject. (and this would be glaringly obvious and "natural" if my area of competence/"expertise" were, say, southern European cultures of the Middle Ages). annoyingly, i insist on acknowledging my subjectivity as a sexual abuse survivor *in* my scholarly essays on the topic of sexual abuse literature. people ask me if i am an historian or a literary critic and i, being irritating but accurate, say, "yes." sometimes i dress funky and mohawk my hair or shave my head. i wear a lot of earrings, and get tattoed and have some piercings, which certainly does not uphold any claim to the status of a "regular girl." on the other hand, i like to play dress-up and you can sometimes find me in white chiffon and gold lame heels. riotous complexity has, for me, real charm. i am a lot of things. i sincerely hope that you are too. >what word DOES one take kali tal at? whenever one tries, one gets haranged for >not taking her at a different one?! could it be > >no one wins but kali > >games? >blech i have no interest in winning or losing. i have an interest in *being*, in manifesting, in being SEEN/READ. an UNSEEN/UNREAD person can't take part in any sort of exchange, and i am by nature an exchanging sort of animal. "play" for me is not competitive--i watch the wolves who inhabit my living space play and what they are doing is testing, and learning, and reformulating or reaffirming their notions of the world around them and their place within it. *that* is what i am after. whether you feel like you "win" or "lose" in our exchange is up to you, and determined primarily by how you decide to engage with my texts. kali ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 15:15:59 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Bromige Subject: misattribution by our most frequent poster Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hardly is the ink dry on henry g's apology for attributing kAli tal's metaphor to me, & only yesterday was it dry on mark weiss's posting pointing out that somebody else had mistattributed a remark abtout masturb. & the male, to me, (a mistake which kali tal took at face value & picked up & ran with; and the ink is still wet on aldon nielsen's posting today where the entire buddhist drama is (humorously) laid at my feet : and then what does david israel do? misattributes george bowering's addressing of kali tal as "ms", to me! Lets get it all out in the open, so nobody has to attribute anything to me any more, okay? I wrote it all__The Iliad, The Odyssey, Beowulf, the fucken Bible!__its ALL BY ME, okay? so you dont even have to bother to say so. Peace, my children, David B ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 15:19:50 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Bromige Subject: poet/identity/re :David Erben's post: _I am re-posting this, because david erben's more recent posting, though abrim with sarcasm, does nothing to answer these 2 questions. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >To:poetics@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu >From:dcmb@metro.net (David Bromige) >Subject:poet/identity/re :David Erben's post > >An informative posting, for which, my thanks...It does give rise to two >questions (so far) in my reading of it, David : when you write "the >poststructuralist attention to ecriture has certainly displaced the >metaphysical and humanistic approach to reading," for whom has it >displaced these approaches? For yourself? For the Academy? For Greimas & >DeMan? For those who pay "poststructrualist attention to ecriture"? These >are not disingenuous questions, although I realize they may have that >ring. But the passive construction of your sentence makes this >displacement sound like a done deal--exceptions to the rule being >"throwbacks", then--& yet a number of voices on this List have found >agreement in the idea of an imagined (from whatever indications) poet on >the other side of the poem from the reader. Which makes it look like the >approach you speak of is not a done deal, not on this List. > >A cognate question : Are you--or not to personalize this; do these persons >towards whose thinking you gesture--findn it possible to read in multipile >ways, using multiple methods? Would such an approach be intellectual >dishonorable or indefensible? Wouldnt it be possible to read as text of >interacting linguistic bits, a poem whose meanings one had, and I use the >figure deliberately, by heart? (As it would be possible to 'step back" & >see a loved one as a unit in one of many systems, and the loved body as >consisting in all its dissectible elements?) Curiously, David > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 17:29:07 CST6CDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Hank Lazer Organization: The University of Alabama Subject: Re: identity/poetics Michael Magee--which, where, interviews with Harryette Mullen? I'd be interested in reading them.... Hank Lazer ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 18:11:53 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: Re: No ID, No Service, p.s. To look at this again here -- / / / << From: David Erben (Art) In fact, I formally nominate pritchpa@SILVERPLUME.IIX.COM for "Most Outrageous Remark on the Poetics List, 1997. What's valuable about the Diary of Anne Frank to her readers is not her "Jewishness"????? Yeah, ummm, sure.). >> / / / / hey, speakin' (for the moment) as a Jew, I'd say what's valuable about the Diary is, indeed, not the (mere fact of) AF's Jewishness. There might be lots of boring diaries written by Jews (and certainly there are lots of books by Jews that are much less interesting). What's interesting in the Diary is (for instance) the emergant psychology & the narrative freshness, &c. The fact of Jewishness is integral to all that, of course -- is part of the given context. But the Diary of Sei Shonagon is also interesting (for its emergent psychology, sense of freshness, etc.) -- despite the fact it's not written by a Jew. Jewishness is hardly what makes AF's diary interesting per se, -- but it is a factor of interest in our consideration of the work. (but all that's pretty rudimentary, no?) d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 18:45:38 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: apologia << . . . and the ink is still wet on aldon nielsen's posting today where the entire buddhist drama is (humorously) laid at my feet : and then what does david israel do? misattributes george bowering's addressing of kali tal as "ms", to me! >> oops, apologies Mr. B. -- confusing thus my Bromiges & Bowerings? (hey all them Bs just kinda ran together!) confounding of efflorience with flowerings? (confusion -- it's a rainy kinda weather!) mistakings of the heathrow for the heather? for tense as terse? for act as art? -- if powerlings as starlings are construed -- that ain't so clever: confusing thus my Bromiges & Bowerings or, in a word: I be sorry, d.i. (p.s.: relation between "apology" and Apolo, -- anyone?) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 19:20:34 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michael Magee Subject: Re: identity/poetics In-Reply-To: <5C162C322EA@as.ua.edu> from "Hank Lazer" at Jul 1, 97 05:29:07 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I don't have them with me right now, but I'll track em down. In the meantime, could others help? One was with Louis Cabri et al, during a trip to visit our friends to the North. The other one I'm drawing a blank on, but I promise to go find it. Aside from the interview issue, I think she's just wonderful, super-good, etc. Anyone want to talk about her work? -Mike. According to Hank Lazer: > > Michael Magee--which, where, interviews with Harryette Mullen? I'd > be interested in reading them.... > > Hank Lazer > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 17:29:09 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: identity/poetics In-Reply-To: <199707012320.TAA34134@dept.english.upenn.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII It has recently been determined that all posts to the POETICS list from San Jose State university are in reality being sent from a location in Boulder, Colorado, a town often visited by David Bromige. It has also been confirmed that David Bromige and Kali Tal have never been seen in the saem place at the same time. Draw your own conclusions and post yourselves accordingly. Yours panoptically, Rainy Day Women # 12 & 35 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 18:18:29 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Self-Addressed Last Will and Testament MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Posting of your message to the POETICS LIST has been postponed. POETICS LIST has exceeded its daily irony limit and further distribution of the LIST will be delayed until such time as further irony is released by the LIST OWNER. You neither should nor can resubmit your message at this time. MESSAGE FOLLOWS LIST HANDOVER -- >>Dear "Aldon" (or whoever the hell you really are): >>We were fooled for a time when you requested that we run an ID check >>on one "Eliot Weinberger" in light of his recent claim that, as he >>seemed to have put it at the time, "We Are All Yasusada." In the >>process of running that check, we made a few additional startling >>discoveries. It appears from documents in our possession that you were >>born on October 22. At the time one "David Bromige" applied for >>admission to the POETICS LIST, records indicated a date of birth for >>him of October 22. When we attended a "poetry" reading by one "Cole >>Swenson" in "Boulder" last week, we were told that she was born on >>October 22. You may well imagine our shock at what we found when we >>got on-line to check our own birth documents. >>We are not at all sure what can be done about this, but we don't >>like it one bit. It appears that for the forseeable future all of us >>who write must reconcile ourselves to the fact that >>WE ARE ALL DAVID BROMIGE >>yours, >>the ghost of electricity ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 08:34:49 +0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rebecca Weldon Subject: ears and origins Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" In the case of ears and origins, one might consider Waley's observation: The methods of Chuang Tzu are those of the poet, and in the case of poetry analysis is useless. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 19:28:41 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michael Magee Subject: Re: misattribution by our most frequent poster In-Reply-To: from "David Bromige" at Jul 1, 97 03:15:59 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Lets get it all out in the open, so nobody has to attribute anything to me any more, okay? I wrote it all__The Iliad, The Odyssey, Beowulf, the fucken Bible!__its ALL BY ME, okay? so you dont even have to bother to say so. Peace, my children, David B" If you don't mind, I've been waiting to ask you this question for years: Why, in Deuteronomy 23:1 did you write, "No one whose testicles have been crushed or whose penis is cut off shall be admitted to the assembly of the Lord." I mean, that hardly seems fair. Talk about insult to injury! -m. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 20:53:46 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Marks Subject: Muse & Drudge In-Reply-To: <5C162C322EA@as.ua.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII There's a review of Muse & Drudge in May-June issue of Am. Book Review. Review by Mark Scroggins. you've had my thrills a reefer a tub of gin don't mess with me I'm evil I'm in your sin -- Harryette Mullen cheers, Steven On Tue, 1 Jul 1997, Hank Lazer wrote: > Michael Magee--which, where, interviews with Harryette Mullen? I'd > be interested in reading them.... > > Hank Lazer > __________________________________________________ Steven Marks http://members.aol.com/swmarks/welcome.html __________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 21:33:26 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: Re: question First, from Henry Gould -- > If it's easier to alienate a possible audience > than win over a real one, > who are the exploratory writers, > & who the conventional? > > I submit all my own work > to a certain standard: > would I be able to read this > at a Thanskgiving dinner? > > & the measure of value remains: > > ARS EST CELARE ARTEM > (art is to hide art). > > - Henry Gould and then, from Rebecca Reynolds -- << That (or those) are great questions--though I don't know how seriously to take you here. Art is to hide art? But it never does, does it? Maybe in my post about an epithalamium--trying to make it "reader-friendly"--I implied that I didn't think poems ought necessarily to be "reader friendly," though I don't myself buy into that. It is simply that there are different kinds of friendliness(es) and different kinds of readers. >> certainly there are. Incidentally -- in keeping with the recent Bromige theme of misattribution (or, as a variant on it: that of misconceived direction), it was my impression (if I can remember all this aright -- which maybe I don't) that Henry's poem wasn't (specifically) responsive to your post; but rather, I thought it had been (more or less specifically) responsive to other threads-of-the-day -- but Anyway, to look at > ARS EST CELARE ARTEM > (art is to hide art). I somewhat think Henry is purposely taking the saying slightly askew of its original sense (though only slightly) -- for his purpose (which seems an interesting purpose) -- I'm no classicist (& know no Latin) & was unfamiliar w/ the aphorism before here encountering it (and BTW, does anyone know who said it? -- I asked Henry, but he doesn't remember) -- still, my hunch is it means something like this: "that is most artful which manages [artfully] to conceal its artfulness" -- [bit like Lao-Tse's "the sage conceals his wisdom, keeps his jade buried in burlap" (or something along those lines, I forget the exact phrase)] -- relationship between artful (ars, eh?) in sense of: artistically accomplished, done w/ finesse, beautifully wrought, -- and artful (artem, eh?) in sense of "characterized by deception / deceit" -- is interesting. That there is art (deception / trickery) in art, is, yes, interesting. (That there is R.Reagan in the nested "yes" is, yes, weird.) This connects with the famous seduction thread. (Was there a fam. seduction thread? -- or am I being artful?) I suppose what's most charming can also be what seems to hide (almost) its own charm. Such paradoxes seem central to many poetics(es). / / / / / BTW, -- dovetailing here to the unity thread -- I'm reminded of a poem of Wallace Stevens' called something like "On the Road Home" (?) -- relating what wd. appear to be a conversation abt. metaphysics with (I felt) his wife -- wherein Stevens writes something roughly like this: It is only when she said "no, all words are not forms of a single word" that the moon shone through the cloud [?] the fox ran out of its hole [?] the grapes became fuller [?], ____er, _____er . . it's in some 3 or 4 stanzas, and repeats the pattern; -- to paraphrase: it is only when one says "no, it's not a question unity, it's the maniness itself" that the charm & meaning & presenxse before the senses of the detailed perfection of the maniness seeps up and arrests one. (Like this: "Only when we said 'it's all absence' did presence insinuate itself. Only when we remarked, "no, there's no particular meaning here" that the ocean wave curled into its own dark sweep, the sand-dune crinkled, the cricket-chir resumed . . . ) Perhaps it IS unity that develops or emerges -- but this seems most possible -- it seems to become palpable -- precisely when the name of unity is contradicted & the notion of oneness is denied. In this lies much mysticism (which ain't, from my pen, perjorative, nor from my keypad, a fallacy). I don't have Mr. Stevens on hand, and can't recall the poem fully enough; -- a marvelous poem -- addressing crucial ideas charmingly & winningly -- ideas of unity & duality, as related (specifically) to poetics & aesthetics & experience & what one comes to know abt. such things & how. I (mildly) blush to allow I first acquainted this poem through the good offices of Robert Bly (whose capital in some circles -- to borrow the pop-monetary metaphr -- might be a bit in the low double digits at best, but I like the guy anyway) -- from his *A Little Book on the Human Shadow.* Bly cites this poem in propounding a theory abt. Stevens & his development that seems a bit dubious (though interesting); in any case, he cites it to illustrate the depth, sensuality, & soul-quality evident in early Stevens (which he felt was thinned & compromised in later work from W.C.); -- anyway, the poem's worth the price of admission (either to *A Little Book* or to the Stevens oeuvre; -- but properly speaking it's more a door (or was for me) toward some of the riches of the latter). cheers, d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 18:48:43 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Re: Poems/Identities In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Okay, Dr. Tal-- I surrender. You win. You are right about everything. You get it all. And you are the most deserving recipient of victory. George Bowering. , 2499 West 37th Ave., Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6M 1P4 fax: 1-604-266-9000 e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 19:55:17 -0700 Reply-To: dean@w-link.net Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Dean A. Brink" Subject: Re: yet more orientalism MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit excerpts from "THE BLUE SKY," Gary Snyder. "Eastward from here, beyond Buddha-worlds ten times as numerous as the sands of the Ganges there is a world called PURE AS LAPIS LAZULI its Buddha is called Master of Healing. AZURE RADIANCE TATHAGATA" It would take you twelve thousand summer vacations driving a car due east all day every day to reach the _edge_ of the lapis lazuli realm of Medicine Old Man Buddha: East. Old Man Realm, East across the sea, yellow sand land Coyote Old Man land Silver, and stone blue. ... Pony that feeds on the pollen of flowers may he make thee whole. _Heal_ , hale....whole. _The Spell of the Master of Healing_. Namo bhagavate bhaishajyaguru-vaidurya- prabharajay tathagata arhate samyak.... .... Hello, but did someone say "light the sandalwood"? db ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 22:41:28 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: dbkk@SIRIUS.COM Subject: play vs. violence In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" A couple of people have written to me trying to reconcile my own sexual explicitness with my negative reaction to Kim Dawn's original entry into this list, which certain individuals see as prudishness or hypocrisy on my part. It's been said that when KD attacked Jay Schwartz's virtual nipples with virtual pinking shears, this was a form of sexual play, that Jay was then free to play back. In SM attempts are made to clarify the line between sexual play and sexual violence. There are contracts, there are code words to emit if one has had too much. But, the essential difference between play and violence, as I understand it, is the mutual consent of the partners. This isn't news, I'm sure, to any of you--it's much a part of legal definitions (at least in the U.S.). Since neither Jay Schwartz, nor other list members, had consented to Kim Dawn's aggressive pornographic whatever that was directed towards Jay, I do not feel it should be categorized as sexual play, but as sexual violence. I do not challenge her right to use sexual explicit material in her writing, I merely challenge its non-consentual use. I know, on the other hand, that it is a time-honored strategy of the avant-garde to shock the bourgeoisie, and this is probably what KD was trying to do. I'm reminded of when I used to work in the file room of a large university library before it was computerized, and I had to sit among row upon row of library cards, filing them by library of congress numbers, feeling miserably oppressed, I had this recurring fantasy of standing on the table with the cards and pissing all over them. And this poetics list must often seem like a stack of cards. As far as reading such material in public, to me, that is a shady area. At Naropa, I was invited to read, and the people who invited me were familiar with my work, but some of the audience members weren't, so is violence being perpetrated upon them? Dodie ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 07:58:44 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kathleen Crown Subject: Harryette Mullen In-Reply-To: Automatic digest processor "POETICS Digest - 30 Jun 1997 to 1 Jul 1997" (Jul 2, 12:11am) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Yes, please post the information about where to find the interviews with Harryette Mullen, who (by the way) has generously agreed to give a poetry reading at MLA this December in Toronto. I proposed the poetry reading as a "companion" to a special sesson on "The Contemporary Long Poem: Feminist Intersections and Experiments." The poets who will be reading are Kathleen Fraser, Sharon Doubiago, Harryette Mullen, and Karen Brennan. There were two good papers at the Rutgers conference on Mullen's work (by Kate Pearcy and Michael Davidson), and they should soon be posted to our website: http://english.rutgers.edu/poetry.html. I'll let you know when the papers are on line. -- ********************************************************** Kathleen Crown Rutgers English and Women's Studies Conference Co-Coordinator, "Poetry and the Public Sphere" P.O. Box 5054 New Brunswick, NJ 08903-5054 H: 908/572-1128 W: 908/932-8537 Dept. Fax: 908/932-1150 kcrown@rci.rutgers.edu *********************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 08:30:18 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Susan Wheeler Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 30 Jun 1997 to 1 Jul 1997 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >I don't have them with me right now, but I'll track em down. In the >meantime, could others help? One was with Louis Cabri et al, during a >trip to visit our friends to the North. The other one I'm drawing a blank >on, but I promise to go find it. Aside from the interview issue, I think >she's just wonderful, super-good, etc. Anyone want to talk about her >work? -Mike. > > According to Hank Lazer: >> > Michael Magee--which, where, interviews with Harryette Mullen? I'd >> be interested in reading them.... >> >> Hank Lazer >> The Poetry Project newsletter about a year back had one, I recall. Susan Wheeler wheeler@is.nyu.edu voice/fax (212) 254-3984 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 08:12:54 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kathleen Crown Subject: Harryette Mullen, part II In-Reply-To: Automatic digest processor "POETICS Digest - 30 Jun 1997 to 1 Jul 1997" (Jul 2, 12:11am) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Here's one interview: Calvin Bedient, "The Solo Mysterioso Blues: An Interview with HArryette Mullen," CALLALLOO Summer 1996 Mullen's work might bring us back to the thread about "voice" that preoccupied the list a while back. She talks, somewhere, about the importance of speech patterns and her mother's "southern black voice" to her writing. What strikes me is the taste of speech & tongue in her work, and the words shattered open, exposed as archives and histories. KC -- ********************************************************** Kathleen Crown Rutgers English and Women's Studies Conference Co-Coordinator, "Poetry and the Public Sphere" P.O. Box 5054 New Brunswick, NJ 08903-5054 H: 908/572-1128 W: 908/932-8537 Dept. Fax: 908/932-1150 kcrown@rci.rutgers.edu *********************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 08:27:10 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: henry g Subject: apologeeoney David B, I didn't apologize. Careful about your own quoting. Please note the big word IF in my apologia. It remains to be proved WHO started "getting personal". It wasn't the comparison of reader-oriented poetics to male masturbation I attributed to you. That insightful bit of reductive tendentiousness belongs squarely to Kali. It was your response - which I thought was similar to K Dawn's message to Jay - that brought me into this nest of ennui. SORRY LIST I WILL NOW CLAM UP ON THIS SUBJECT & HOPE OTHERS WILL FOLLOW SUIT THOUGH I AM SURE DAVID B. WILL UNDERSTANDABLY WANT TO DEFEND HIMSELF ONWARD & DOWNWARD WE GO. - HG P.S. NOT THAT YOU NEED TO DEFEND YOURSELF DAVID B. YOUR COMMENTS ARE ALWAYS INTERESTING THIS LIST IS NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT EVERYBODY IS A STAR TOMORROW IS JULY 3RD HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY BUTTERFLIES AND SQUID TO ONE AND ALL INK INK INK. I AM THROUGH DEFENDING MYSELF NOW. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 12:01:25 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Alan * Sondheim Subject: readmeonyourwires!# Her Name On The Wires MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII =--= Thrust Out Of The Party, Slammed Into The Cave, Microscopic Julu Writes readmeonyourwires!# Her Name On The Wires jennmoveoverjulyou'recrowdime!#cave won't hold 10^33 or more whatever jennmoveoverjulyou'recrowdime!#you've slammed against the wall, went jennmoveoverjulyou'recrowdime!#right through into some wires already jennmoveoverjulyou'recrowdime!#covered with your damn scrawl spreading warnedyoujennnomoretimetoplay!#like disease through the insulation and warnedyoujennnomoretimetoplay!#you've already got the clock running warnedyoujennnomoretimetoplay!#slow it's more than one can bear sooner warnedyoujennnomoretimetoplay!#or later someone will discover us and warnedyoujennnomoretimetoplay!#replace the machine you'll be lost for grabmyhairwillyouswallowmehole!#ever graffiti-julu crossing dead-time grabmyhairwillyouswallowmehole!#circuits ice-cold jennifer and julu grabmyhairwillyouswallowmehole!#bodies sprawled across power-supplies grabmyhairwillyouswallowmehole!#feeder cables whatever you want to grabmyhairwillyouswallowmehole!#hand me rim me job me turn me over closerfitinjennalwaysroomforonemor!#spin me i'll be your drive your closerfitinjennalwaysroomforonemor!#memory your eyes your world never closerfitinjennalwaysroomforonemor!#coming to an end, we'll never closerfitinjennalwaysroomforonemor!#notice the cooling, the closerfitinjennalwaysroomforonemor!#difference, be there in the middle closerfitinjennalwaysroomforonemor!#of the writing like a skein like a closerfitinjennalwaysroomforonemor!#mold like a net like a holder like juljeweljennwriteyounameonme!#you write you name on me like you write juljeweljennwriteyounameonme!#hunger-wire-me like case-scrawl drive- juljeweljennwriteyounameonme!#scrawl ribbon-scrawl diode-scrawl rom- juljeweljennwriteyounameonme!#scrawl ram-scrawl ram-jen-julu-scrawl, moveoverhardlyenoughroomsystemheatup!#we're covered in blood writ over moveoverhardlyenoughroomsystemheatup!#blood hot jenjulu scrawl write moveoverhardlyenoughroomsystemheatup!#some more i dare you dare you moveoverhardlyenoughroomsystemheatup!#dare you i'm your eyes read me readmeonyourwires!# on your wires dare you dare you double dare you ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 13:12:06 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steve Shoemaker Subject: witness the uproar In-Reply-To: <01IKQ8ZRPJ5YA8E7EN@iix.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Re my previous post: meant to put in a disclaimer about the "couple of charming ladies at his side" image, w/ its woman-as-ornament connotations. Didn't really *want* it there, for my point, but there it was, and it didn't seem right to just cut it out. Something else to try, perhaps, to imagine a different way... Speaking of appropriating images, i just turned on MTV for the first time in a *long* time and was taken by the Bone, Thugs-n-Harmony Batman bricolage, transforming that annoying practice of splicing movie scenes into videos into something sharp and interesting, drawing on the darkness of Gotham much more compellingly than the movie itself, i thought... Don't know this band, but was impressed with the lightning fast, polyrythmic rap. Anybody know if they have any good stuff out there? s Steve Shoemaker ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 17:06:04 +1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: DS Subject: Re: apologia Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >confusing thus my Bromiges & Bowerings? >(hey all them Bs just kinda ran together!) You be careful with them Bs - here in the antipodes a B is a rubust and rough around the edges yet kindly flannel shirted woman who has spent time in a penal institution and runs an eternal half way house for other female ex-prisoners... ain't that right folks ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 13:15:26 +0000 Reply-To: ARCHAMBEAU@LFC.EDU Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert Archambeau Organization: Lake Forest College Subject: Capital/For the Record MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I suppose I'm being hypersensituve, since I can't imagine anyone but me cares about this, but I think Tom Orange has me all wrong when he says that: > dodie b's defense of jay and her devaluation of > kim's writing [ . . . .] stopped short of dodie's calling kim's writing > worthless (this was left to robert's posting) Just reread my post to make sure, and the only thing I said about Kim Dawn was: > Leaving aside the argument about Kim Dawn's first posts, I'm sure there > are some positions and speech acts that Tom feels ought to lack > discursive capital How you get _any_ kind of opinion on Kim Dawn out of that is beyond me. I wanted to leave aside the particular case and find out whether you found the system you described generally acceptable or not (and your subsequent post was admirably clear in answering me on that count, Tom -- thanks). As to having an opinion on the whole Kim Dawn Baker/Jay Schwartz affair, I feel unqualified to speak -- I didn't follow the thread very closely (does being uninterested equal calling someone worthless? I'm not interested in agronomy either, but am damn glad there are people who know how to grow grapes like the ones that went into the cool glass of chardonnay I'm about to go drink on this blazing Chicago afternoon). -- Robert Archambeau, Hypersensitive Capitalist and Consumer of Cheap White Wine ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 16:12:48 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: blind post Comments: cc: davidi@wizard.net yoo-hoo . . . . poetics in absentia -- (what is the talkless talk?) what brooding of dementia! -- or 'hap w/ all the squawk a monkish mode of awk- ward quietude anent the glib utterative game has struck? -- poetics in absentia d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 12:26:13 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steve Shoemaker Subject: witness the uproar In-Reply-To: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII "witness the uproar here" (Tom O.) Can i get a witness? AMEN! "Duke made you use all your senses . . . immediately the eyes and ears and the whole body starts to come full up, 100 percent. You're right up there. You're like a bird. Every look is important, every motion is important. I remember we played the Grace Cathedral in San Francisco, and Duke came to me and said, "I want you to play a drum solo in church." In those days, I thought a drum solo in church sounded kind of weird. So he let me digest that for about two or three days, then he came back to me and said, 'My music is based on the first three words of the Bible: In the beginning. In the beginning we had lightning and thunder. That's you, Lou.' It wasn't a drum solo anymore. It was lightning and thunder." [not *that's* "magic"!--S.] -- Louie Bellson, jazz drummer, on his experience in the Duke Ellington band And: "Like he came to me and was telling me about Buddy Bolden in New Orleans and said, 'So, when are you going to portray the role of Buddy Bolden?' I said, 'I don't know that much about him." He said, "Oh sure: He was suave, he was debonaire, he was dapper and he always loved to have a couple of charming ladies at his side. He could tune up in New Orleans and break glasses across the river in Algiers. He had the biggest, fattest sound, and he could bend the note and play diminishes.' He said 'Play me some diminishes.' and I did, and he said, "That's him! You *are* Buddy Bolden! And I believed it. [magic again!] -- Clark Terry (trumpeter) --- So: the band as another "field of cultural production," site of mutual/musical inspiring? Sure Duke was the Boss (much moreso than anything we have here) and sure there was hierarchy, but it's the particular gesture here i'm interested in here (like a bird). I agree with, I think it was George T., that listspace can also *resist* "institutional" power dynamics. All this talk about "list capital" is making me tired, freezin' me up. I'm *not* attacking Tom O's original post--I see his point. Sure. But we're also free, i think, to imagine things another way, to bring that other way into being (You *are* Buddy Bolden!... believe it, s Steve Shoemaker ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 09:17:25 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Thompson Subject: Tagore / Orientalism Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" A few weeks ago Steven Marks referred to an article by Amartya Sen in the NYRB [June 26, 1997], "Tagore and his India." I promptly went out and found the article, read it, and I've been brooding over it ever since. It seems to me to be a good, accurate account of Tagore's life and his role in India's pre-Independence cultural life. A basic motif in the article is to contrast Tagore's anti-nationalistic, democratic liberalism and enlightened rationalism and modernism, against Gandhi's intensely religious nationalism and his anti-modernism. Sen's sympathies are, I think, explicitly with Tagore [though he concedes Gandhi's moral authority, of course]. The source of my brooding is that, on the one hand, my political sympathies lie entirely with Tagore. There is a ferocious Hindu fundamentalism at work in India today that is responsible for much of the Hindu-Muslim hostilities that plague the sub-continent, as well as for the continuing influence of Hinduism's awful caste system, with all of its brutal untouchability, widow-burning, infanticide [esp. of girls], etc. [not to say of course that Gandhi condoned any of this]. Even in my own more or less irrelevant researches into Vedic matters [a long dead tradition, by the way], I have several times collided with Hindu fundamentalists who like to think that they are continuing "Vedic ways" and who invent fantastic accounts of Vedic "wisdom." On the other hand, Tagore's poetry has never worked for me. There is almost universal deference among Bengali literati and scholars for his Bengali poetry. But for me at least [unable to read his Bengali] his poetry does not carry over to the English translations, which have always seemed to me to be more or less bad pre-modern romanticism. Gandhi remains a more interesting figure for me, not only because of his indisputable "truth-force" [satyagraha], which without raising a stick *forced* the British out of India, but because he was a more astute observer of the ways in which traditional imagery and traditional ideology worked on his culture. I think that Gandhi's [entirely sincere] manipulaton of the traditional image of the "holy man" was brilliant political theater. And even in his weirdnesses [re sexuality and and the body], on the whole Gandhi seems more relevant today than Tagore does. Think of his fasting in light of Kafka's story "A Hunger Artist", or in light of the recent discussions of symbolic capital... His technique of non-violent resistence is rooted in a sophisticated [tho unarticulated] philosophy of violence... etc.... Best, George Thompson ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 11:56:12 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Matthias Regan Subject: a poem Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" THE CELEBRATION He was like, O your gonna do that? Well here's another word: I'll rewrite what gets said and travel fifty miles off course and say your name in bars, run low on money, consider it a luxury to think of you aloud when your late getting home. She let it pass. The table's wet, she said, let's find a different one. They did. Then the rain got thicker and some clouds moved over other clouds. The relief freed up for thought the constant work of small windows and lamps and traffic lights: quick to moralize a situation -- doing otherwise is one solution. They purchased tarpaper in thick rolls for roofing sheds and lay it where the garden paths would be. Things were sketched according to someone's plan. It curled in sunlight and the edges ran. They would have asparagus, not let to seed, and potatoes, kept in plastic bags beneath the sink. Details mattered. When their son cut his foot on the edge his father said, "Find your mother." Difficult to admit, his mother said a similar thing. they sat on yellow stools in the kitchen, she sipping water, he vodka and ice. Friends from other places took the children for walks on the new road. A little drunk, he said, "Your mother wants a garden." He lived in a trailer park and took them to the fish hatchery, where they fed stale bread to the rainbow trout. Lovers on a municiple bench: in the clover. Greed is volatile. When you said, I'd hop in bed each night with you, I thought sex, and still do. Ahem. Words are leaf-like: no two the same or ever seen again by the light of this particular lamp on this particular night, in this park, with memories of the show. O Goddess of the Noontime Waterfall hummed Rimbaud, early morning. Last year's November. The next a June. The autumn of our being one came earlier than expected. Water the flowers: you want them, they'll grow. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 19:01:12 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Susan Schultz Subject: TINFISH is moving MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII _Tinfish_ and its editor are moving. As of July 15, our new address is 47-391 Hui Iwa, #3, Kaneohe, HI 96744 (the street is pronounced "hooey eva"). Your poems and subscriptions and correspondence will be received there in the shadow of beautiful mountains and, more likely than not, in the rain. Copies of the journal and chapbooks are still available. For info, email me at the above address. all best, Susan ______________________________________________ Susan M. Schultz Dept. of English 1733 Donaghho Road University of Hawai'i-Manoa Honolulu, HI 96822 http://writing.upenn.edu/epc/authors/schultz http://writing.upenn.edu/epc/ezines/tinfish ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 07:06:20 -0400 Reply-To: BobGrumman@nut-n-but.net Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Bob Grumman Subject: A List of Poetry Schools Revisited MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It has been a little over a month since I posted my List of (American) Poetry Schools hoping for corrections, additions, comments. . . . I got a few back-channeled comments but not a single concrete suggestion, privately or publicly, for the improvement of the list. I think it's important enough to repeat, though, so here it is again, with a few changes that I hope are improvements. MAINSTREAM POETRY What's in all the standard anthologies; Vendler-certified; many sub-schools, some of which are: 1. Iowa-Workshop Poetry (e.g., Bell) 2. Surrealist Poetry (e.g., Bly) 3. Ecological Poetry (e.g., Snyder) 4. Jump-Cut Poetry (e.g., Ashbery) EASY-STREAM POETRY A variety of poetry that, based on its popularity, ought to be mainstream but is shut out of the major anthologies because academics look down on it. 1. Light Verse 2. Haiku LANGUAGE POETRY (or "Acadominant" Poetry) The poetry in *In the American Tree*, the Messerli anthology, etc.; Perloff-certified; several sub-schools that I lack the knowledge to untangle CONTRA-GENTEEL POETRY All the 'unrefined" plain-writing poets inspired by W.C. Williams, Frank O'Hara, the Beats, Bukowski. (Note: I include the social identity poets in this school--but, of course, many poets, particularly the social identity poets, are in more than one group--Maya Angelou, for instance, seems to me at times Mainstream, and at times Contra-Genteel.) The main sub-schools I know of are: 1. Conversationalist Poetry (e.g., O'Hara) 2. Beat Poetry (e.g., Corso, Bukowski), with several sub- divisions 3. Social Identity Poetry (e.g., Wanda Coleman, the Vietnam stuff Kali Tal is pushing) (this group is an expansion of what I previously was calling "Ethnic Poetry") 4. Pop-Rhyme, which sudivides into Rap and the Neo-James- Whitcomb-Reilly School (yes, I need a less condescending name for this group--and probably for the Iowa-Workshop school) 5. Wild-Woman Poetry (e.g., Townsend) (another name that could be improved) NEOFORMALIST POETRY Poetry continuing the techniques of traditional English poetry, especially meter. PLURAESTHETIC POETRY Any poetry that mixes expressive modalities: 1. Visual Poetry (e.g., Kempton) (Which I for a time was over-meticulously calling "visio-textual poetry") 2. Sound Poetry (e.g., McCaffery) (Which I for a time was over-meticulously calling "audio-textual poetry") 3. Performance Poetry (e.g., Jack Foley) 4. Mathematical Poetry (e.g., LeRoy Gorman) 5. Flow-Chart Poetry (I've seen some but don't remember the name of anyone who does it) 6. Compucentric Poetry, or poetry using computer language (e.g., Sondheim, sometimes) (an addition since last time) 7. Polylingual Poetry (e.g., John M. Bennett, Susan Smith Nash, Sheila Murphy) (another addition) INFRA-VERBAL POETRY Poetry whose focus is the inside of words. Joyce and Carroll are infra-verbal poetry's chief forebears--and Cummings, whom I've come to consider more an infra-verbal than a visual poet HYPERTEXTUAL POETRY I know almost nothing about this. It might just be pluraesthetic poetry in a new medium. Or even ordinary poetry in a new medium. There they are, again, the eight main schools of poetry I'm aware of (or remember). For the second time I ask: any additions, corrections, comments? Or ideas as to why the list has generated so little in the way of feedback? Bob Grumman ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 19:46:23 +0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Schuchat Simon Subject: Re: Poems/Identities In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 1 Jul 1997, Kali Tal wrote: > what do these two statements have to do with each other? my point was *not* > that i *wished* to be called "dr.," but that I preferred "dr.-which-I-do- > not-wish-to-be-called" to "ms.-which-I-do-not-wish-to-be-called." this is a marvellous distinction. it seems to me natural to want to determine one's own naming, to control others' perception of one, but maybe all that is possible is the choice among various less desirable outcomes... on this island where I live questions of (national) identity have become very important, there being those who prefer to not be Chinese but rather Taiwanese (and a few vice versa). important issues but kinda reductive (or is the correct word "essentialist"? I'm a little behind on my theory. no doubt I will not prefer whatever I may be called as a consequence of emerging from my lurking, or perhaps I will pass unnoticed is it better to be called (perceived) in a way that one does not "prefer" or instead to simply not be called anything? I think all of this has something to do with poetry, though whether with language poetry maybe that's another question ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 07:15:19 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: listlessness Comments: cc: elliza@AI.MIT.EDU, calexand@ALEXANDRIA.LIB.UTAH.EDU, AP201070@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU, bernstei@bway.net, swmar@CONNCOLL.EDU, junction@EARTHLINK.NET, mdw@GWIS2.CIRC.GWU.EDU, nguyenhoa@HOTMAIL.COM, dpsalmon@IHUG.CO.NZ, Suantrai@IOL.IE, rcweldon@LOXINFO.CO.TH, damon001@MAROON.TC.UMN.EDU, roitman@MATH.UKANS.EDU, gmcvay1@OSF1.GMU.EDU, rreynold@rci.rutgers.edu, tmandel@SCREENPORCH.COM, bowering@SFU.CA, pritchpa@SILVERPLUME.IIX.COM, dbkk@SIRIUS.COM, davidi@wizard.net (yo!) all so quiet on the poets' infobahn the writers soon reverted to paper the paper was returning to forgotten trees the poets resuming long-forgot recitations the bytes marching back to the heart the heart falling into its ancient silences or was there rather a loud party happening while somehow we wandered into muteness & deafness? -- a freeze in the midst of summer? a descent as into the grasp of listless reticence? d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 14:39:58 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: matt Subject: Re: american language Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Nabokov talks about associating letters of the >alphabet with colors & sensations when he was a child; there must be a >cerebral path between sounds and color, sound-waves and frequencies >of light? (No, it's more likely to be socially constructed.) more likely cerebral/synaesthetic origin - maybe something along the lines of Deleuzian percepts may be useful "We paint, sculpt, compose and write with sensations. We paint, sculpt, compose and write sensations." anyhow, back to flame-voyeurism matt matt_lee@mistral.co.uk http://www3.mistral.co.uk/matt_lee "here, then, once" ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 10:40:22 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Marks Subject: Re: listlessness Comments: To: David Israel Comments: cc: elliza@AI.MIT.EDU, calexand@ALEXANDRIA.LIB.UTAH.EDU, AP201070@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU, bernstei@bway.net, junction@EARTHLINK.NET, mdw@GWIS2.CIRC.GWU.EDU, nguyenhoa@HOTMAIL.COM, dpsalmon@IHUG.CO.NZ, Suantrai@IOL.IE, rcweldon@loxinfo.co.th, damon001@MAROON.TC.UMN.EDU, roitman@math.ukans.edu, gmcvay1@OSF1.GMU.EDU, rreynold@rci.rutgers.edu, tmandel@SCREENPORCH.COM, bowering@sfu.ca, pritchpa@SILVERPLUME.IIX.COM, dbkk@SIRIUS.COM, davidi@wizard.net In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Remember the Gary Larson cartoon with the cat on its owners' bed at night, the dog outside the window, chanting: Puu-u-u-u-t the ca-a-a-a-t o-u-u-u-ut! Puu-u-u-u-t the ca-a-a-a-t o-u-u-u-ut! Well, this is for our list parents: Se-e-e-e-t the li-i-i-i-st fr-e-e-e-e! Se-e-e-e-t the li-i-i-i-st fr-e-e-e-e! cheerio, Ste-e-e-v-v-e-n-n-n On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, David Israel wrote: > > (yo!) > > all so quiet on the poets' infobahn > the writers soon reverted to paper > > the paper was returning to forgotten trees > the poets resuming long-forgot recitations > > the bytes marching back to the heart > the heart falling into its ancient silences > > or was there rather a loud party happening > while somehow we wandered into muteness > > & deafness? -- a freeze in the midst of summer? > a descent as into the grasp of listless reticence? > > d.i. > > __________________________________________________ Steven Marks http://members.aol.com/swmarks/welcome.html __________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 08:54:58 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Douglas Barbour Subject: Re: American Language 1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" the first version I heard was 'a few pickles short of a jar.' But, moving slightly north north-west, the same person said of someone, "he's the kind of person who wouldn't piss in your ear if your brain was on fire!" -- & I still dont know if that's a compliment or a putdown... ============================================================================= Douglas Barbour Department of English University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta T6G 2E5 (403) 492 2181 FAX:(403) 492 8142 H: 436 3320 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Between 'attached' and 'aloft' getting the poem on the page a voice tells her on this day _attend_. Phyllis Webb ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 09:59:59 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jay Schwartz Organization: Salestar Subject: Carla Harryman MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Could someone please backchannel me Carla Harryman's e-mail address? Thanks, Jay Schwartz I haven't been receiving List postings for two days- is it me or is it the Buffalo server? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 17:24:58 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: misattribution by our most frequent poster In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I am informed by one "Pearl Poet" that Mr. Bromige did in fact write everything, but that he has not yet read it all. I was on the point of asking how this could have been accomplished when communications were disrupted by something the news media insist on terming a "handover." Once the "handover" is complete, the "Pearl Poet" promises further revelations. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 17:35:31 PDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jerry Rothenberg Subject: query Comments: cc: 110251.3073@compuserve.com I'm off in a week's time for an extended stay in Paris (to end of November) & wondering if anyone knows of events (exhibitions, festivals, concerts, readings) & can back-channel the information. Plans -- more specifically -- are to work with Pierre J. on the collected poems and plays of Picasso (for which co-translators [from Spanish/French] are hereby solicited) and with Steve Clay of Granary Books on a (real) anthology of "the book" as sequel to _The Book, Spiritual Instrument_. I'll also be doing side trips & readings, etc. in Geneva (La Batie Sound Poetry), London (Mottram conference & SubVoicive readings) and Madrid, but don't want too much getting in the way of simply being/writing in Paris. I will, however, be interested in meeting those who want to meet up and with whom I may be crossing paths. Paris address (if I can use the list as a means for delivering it) is c/o Woodward/Blau, 5 rue Leon Jouhaux, 75010 Paris, tel. 42.39.50.75 [after August 1], and e-mail to ucsd.edu will also be forwarded to local Paris number. With thanks & best, Jerome Rothenberg ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 12:11:08 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Safdie Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII While we're on this persistent identity question, I'd just like to tell the Listserv that I am here and would love to receive my usual quota of posts. "Who is Frank Moore?" As I was looking through *Selected Writings of Paul Valery* (by David Bromige) the other day, I found this felicitous passage: "All these people who create, half certain, half uncertain of their powers, feel two beings in them, one known and the other unknown, whose incessant intercourse and unexpected exchanges give birth in the end to a certain product. I do not know what I am going to do; yet my mind believes it knows itself; and I build on the knowledge, I count on it, it is what I call _myself_. But I shall surprise myself; if I doubted it I should be nothing. I know that I shall be astonished by a certain thought that is going to come to me before long--and yet I ask myself for this surprise, I build on it and count on it as I count on my certainty. I hope for something unexpected which I designate. I need both my known and my unknown." (From *With Reference to Adonis*) Isn't that GREAT? That is to say, maybe the whole question of identity means different things to writers and critics (not, of course, that they're necessarily different, but . . .) When the person who was putting together an oral biography of Wallace Stevens went to his office mates at the Hartford some years after he died and informed them that he was, in fact, an award-winning American poet, many of them couldn't believe it. "You mean WALLY?" Finally, I'm sorry indeed to have missed Kevin's impersonation of Anne Waldman in my brief descent upon Naropa this last weekend; I'm sure I would have been on the ground. Thanks for your reports, Patrick -- even though I have some minor quibbles with your reportage, I can safely say to everyone that Naropa has, in fact, finally gone legit in a big way. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 10:58:49 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Alexander Subject: Re: identity/poetics In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 05:29 PM 7/1/97 -0700, you wrote: >It has recently been determined that all posts to the POETICS list from >San Jose State university are in reality being sent from a location in >Boulder, Colorado, a town often visited by David Bromige. It has also >been confirmed that David Bromige and Kali Tal have never been seen in the >saem place at the same time. Draw your own conclusions and post >yourselves accordingly. perhaps, but in May 1997 David & Kali were both in Tucson, Arizona, and David offered a discussion session and a reading for a poetry/poetics organization of which Kali is a member. Like Tenney Nathanson, I too testify that both of these are people I am glad to know. Their comments, on this list and in person, have been valuable to me. Whether San Jose has relocated to Boulder I can not say, but people die every day from lack of what can be found there. and I am charles, not all done nil sun chax press :: alexander writing/design/publishing books by artists' hands :: web sites built with care and vision handmade and trade editions of contemporary innovative writing chax@theriver.com :: http://personal.riverusers.com/~chax/ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 15:16:48 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest Subject: Re: Self-Addressed Last Will and Testament NO NO NO!!!!! NOT david bromige. orville redenbacher, the man who rides in the boat on tidy bowl commercials, the unofficial biographer of kalil gibran, ANYONE but bromige!!! ... oh no, i feel it coming on.... really, what is all this bromige nonsense. clearly, we are all Bowering and he is having some sort of identity crisis. George, dear, go find rachel and smoke a tiparillo or two, and call the irony crisis center in the morning... and if that so-called aldon tries to pass you off as me, tell him you're wise to his tricks and where was HE october 22 and what was he doing at poetry reading in boulder ANYWAY? e ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 15:32:56 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest Subject: Re: play vs. violence wow dodie! you go girl! that was an extraordinary summing up. yes, it is EXACTLY what i am having problems with. even, in the territory of a novel as someone (probably david bromige -- he writes everything anyway) pointed out, we have chosen to open novel knowing in some measure what we will get. in post, there was not that same kind of agreement. and, as you point out, more importantly, jay schwartz did not agree to this ugly defacement of him. i didn't agree to read someone being sexually de- faced. i don't like sexual harrassment as weaponry to begin with, and if someone, anyone, had asked me to participate or accept same put into play against anyone i probably would not go along. now, of course, devil's A says "what if it was against harrasser/rapist/etc" but one comes back to what you put on your hands soils you. and more important, jay schwartz did not sexually harass anyone. snapped at people, got a bit pissy, maybe a bit insensitive and hurtful, but not that degree and kind of violence. it reminds me of how when you ask a batterer (if you bother) why he hit lover and he'll say something like "well she was yelling at me" or "she was late" and you think, if you think rationally, "what, so the penalty for yelling or being late is supposed to be getting your nose broken?" e ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 15:36:52 -0400 Reply-To: daniel7@IDT.NET Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Daniel Zimmerman Organization: Bard-O Subject: Re: Carla Harryman MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jay Schwartz wrote: > > Could someone please backchannel me Carla Harryman's e-mail address? > > Thanks, > > Jay Schwartz > > I haven't been receiving List postings for two days- is it me or is it the Buffalo > server? It might be the server, Jay; same thing happened to me, & I contacted my ISP via IRC [turns out someone tried to send me "a really really long message" & exceeded my mail spool file quota; did that happen to you?]. --Dan Zimmerman ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 14:39:58 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joseph Zitt Organization: HumanSystems Subject: Re: Poems/Identities MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit George Bowering wrote: > > Okay, Dr. Tal-- > > I surrender. You win. You are right about everything. You get it all. > And you are the most deserving recipient of victory. Am I right in being reminded of the gag (I think Leo Rosten used it in "The Joys of Yiddish") about Trotsky's telegram to Stalin? -- ---------1---------1---------1---------1---------1---------1---------- |||/ Joseph Zitt ===== jzitt@humansystems.com ===== Human Systems \||| ||/ Austin, Texas! =========== SILENCE: The John Cage Mailing List \|| |/ http://www.realtime.net/~jzitt == <*> <*> == Empty Words == ecto \| ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 15:43:10 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: Re: ears and origins Out of the deeps of time (i.e., 2 days ago) comes this from our Thai correspondent, Rebecca: << In the case of ears and origins, one might consider Waley's observation: The methods of Chuang Tzu are those of the poet, and in the case of poetry analysis is useless. >> well okay, but the esteemed Arthur Waley didn't mind an awareness of literary reference. What was the context of Waley's statement, I wonder? (Waley was one of the most admirable of orientalists, in my reckoning.) One's reading of Han Shan's line makes little sense w/o reference to the Chuang Tse story; one's reading of Gary Snyder's line fuller sense when recalling those antecedents. Your quote is charming, but not, I suppose, an anti-reference-find argument. Nice to note that our friend Dean B. has checked in w' more suspicious looking Snyder lines. (Doubtless he's aware of the grandiose & amazing Mahayana hyperbolic rhetoric & figures of speech that Snyder was -- in a sense -- sending up.) Few years ago, I had some fun with that "innumerable as grains of sand on the Ganges" simile myself, must confess -- in a poem entitled "In the Saha World." One could find it in an old issue of Tamarind (easy as finding needle in a haystack -- or am I being to Anglophilist w/ my images there? so faux-rustic & all) . . . cheers all, d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 12:45:29 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jay Schwartz Organization: Salestar Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Finally, I'm sorry indeed to have missed Kevin's impersonation of Anne > Waldman in my brief descent upon Naropa this last weekend; I'm sure I > would have been on the ground. Thanks for your reports, Patrick -- even > though I have some minor quibbles with your reportage, I can safely say to everyone that Naropa has, in fact, finally gone legit in a big way. As a fairly recent Naropa grad, I would love for you to expand on this impression of yours, both your sense of what constituted illegitmacy and what has changed. Also, your sense of the timeframe in which this may have occured. Jay ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 14:58:36 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joseph Zitt Organization: HumanSystems Subject: Stanza Breaks? (Re: a poem) Comments: To: regan@chem.nwu.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A possibly naive question on your poem: Why do the stanzas break where they do? I'd looked at it, shifting the breaks around, and their positioning didn't seem to have much effect. Was there a pattern I'm missing? (I wonder this about a *lot* of poetry, especially those, such as this one, in which the stanzas in a section are of uniform length in a way that seems unrelated to the content. This is just the first chance I've taken to actually ask someone.) -- ---------1---------1---------1---------1---------1---------1---------- |||/ Joseph Zitt ===== jzitt@humansystems.com ===== Human Systems \||| ||/ Austin, Texas! =========== SILENCE: The John Cage Mailing List \|| |/ http://www.realtime.net/~jzitt == <*> <*> == Empty Words == ecto \| ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 13:03:36 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: apologeeoney Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Bravo, Henry! If we all resolve not to be provoked the list will be Poetics List and not Kali list in a matter of days. At 08:27 AM 7/2/97 EDT, you wrote: >David B, I didn't apologize. Careful about your own quoting. Please >note the big word IF in my apologia. It remains to be proved WHO >started "getting personal". It wasn't the comparison of reader-oriented >poetics to male masturbation I attributed to you. That insightful bit >of reductive tendentiousness belongs squarely to Kali. It was your >response - which I thought was similar to K Dawn's message to Jay - >that brought me into this nest of ennui. SORRY LIST I WILL NOW CLAM >UP ON THIS SUBJECT & HOPE OTHERS WILL FOLLOW SUIT THOUGH I AM SURE >DAVID B. WILL UNDERSTANDABLY WANT TO DEFEND HIMSELF ONWARD & DOWNWARD WE >GO. - HG P.S. NOT THAT YOU NEED TO DEFEND YOURSELF DAVID B. YOUR >COMMENTS ARE ALWAYS INTERESTING THIS LIST IS NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT >EVERYBODY IS A STAR TOMORROW IS JULY 3RD HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY BUTTERFLIES >AND SQUID TO ONE AND ALL INK INK INK. I AM THROUGH DEFENDING MYSELF NOW. > > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 13:14:42 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" .>When the person who was putting together an oral biography of Wallace >Stevens went to his office mates at the Hartford some years after he died >and informed them that he was, in fact, an award-winning American poet, >many of them couldn't believe it. > >"You mean WALLY?" > . For me the most interesting reaction to Stevens at the office was an executive who allowed as how he'd looked at Stevens' poetry and didn't think much of it, but as an insurance lawyer he was a genius. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 13:32:27 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: apologeeoney Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Oy vey! By posting to the list what I meant as a backchannel to Henry I have probably inflamed where I hoped to soothe. Please (please) let this thread die! ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 15:19:18 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: simon@CVAX.IPFW.INDIANA.EDU Subject: Re: american language Taking a few more minutes away: "there must be a cerebral path between sounds and color, sound-waves and frequencies of light? (No, it's more likely to be socially constructed.) " and etc. Thought I'd embed a little cognitive science/linguistics here since it's spot on: in cognitive linguistics (and for lang folks working in cog sci and or neurosci) and anyone interested or having had Nabokov's experience: Look into the neural theory of language. In this theory, a couple of necessary basic assumptions are 1. much of syntax uses semantics and 2. much of semantics uses embodied structures from the sensory-motor system. (Aha! you say. and, I knew it!) Yes. In this view, a sensory-motor // linguistics boundary doesn't exist (I'm speaking bio here), and also, we don't know what is present at birth. beth simon assistant professor, linguistics and english indiana university purdue university simon@cvax.ipfw.indiana.edu ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 13:11:57 MDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Re: identity/poetics >perhaps, but in May 1997 David & Kali were both in Tucson, Arizona, and >David offered a discussion session and a reading for a poetry/poetics >organization of which Kali is a member. that was a clever ploy, was it not? the game is over, but you are clearly on to me. i did not *remember* that i was david bromige until a past-life therapy session last year caused some repressed memories to surface. i woke up the day after the session fully in the bromige persona and was utterly horrified to find that the hard lump under my pillow was a pistol, left there by the paranoid kali persona. leaping out of bed, i was further distressed to discover i had nothing to wear but what was in the kali persona's closet, and we are not even the same size. since then i have only been able to inhabit this body sporadically, but i'd like to take this opportunity to apologize to the other person who thinks he's david bromige for the kali persona's rudeness. she is difficult to live with and takes up far more than her fair share of room. i'm planning a coup, and when i am solidly in power, i promise you that there will be some changes around here. for the moment, though, i am glad to know that even when the kali persona is in control here, there is a supplementary david bromige around to defend our position and state our case. truly, i think that there is a david bromige inside everyone trying to get out. the other david bromige ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 16:34:12 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: Re: American Language 1 Very nice regionalisms, Dr. Barbour. > "he's the kind of person who wouldn't piss in your ear > if your brain was on fire!" > & I still dont know if that's a compliment or a putdown... presumably the intended sense is that a person of said kind is a person lacking in (even the most rudimentary) attributes of human kindness -- the colorful example cited being, perhaps, more for rhetorical flourish than for sake of descriptive clarity? Under normal circumstances, to piss in someone's ear isn't an act demonstrating great care & consideration. It seems a rude gesture. But That Person is one so lacking in courtesy, he won't even perform a rude gesture if it would be of benefit to his fellows. This seems an interesting definition of rudeness: being too essentially rude (unreesponsive to the needs of others) to act in even a rude-seeming manner, in the event that the underlying nature of the needful act (hidden under the semblance of rudeness, in this case) would be of actual benefit to others. Suggests that real rudeness resides in the heart, rather than in the outward manner; a rude-seeming act can be the essense of kindness; refraining from a rude act can be the epitome of rudeness. Interesting stuff, doc. d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 13:34:15 +0000 Reply-To: layne@sonic.net Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Layne Russell Subject: Re: identity/poetics MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > on to me. i did not *remember* that i was david bromige until a past-life > therapy session last year caused some repressed memories to surface. i woke > up the day after the session fully in the bromige persona and was utterly > horrified to find that the hard lump under my pillow was a pistol, left > there by the paranoid kali persona. leaping out of bed, i was further > distressed to discover i had nothing to wear but what was in the kali > persona's closet, and we are not even the same size. since then i have only > been able to inhabit this body sporadically, but i'd like to take this > opportunity to apologize to the other person who thinks he's david bromige > for the kali persona's rudeness. she is difficult to live with and takes up > far more than her fair share of room. i'm planning a coup, and when i am > solidly in power, i promise you that there will be some changes around here. > for the moment, though, i am glad to know that even when the kali persona is > in control here, there is a supplementary david bromige around to defend our > position and state our case. > > truly, i think that there is a david bromige inside everyone trying to get out. > > the other david bromige wow this is wonderful! Layne *~***~***~***~***~***~***~***~***~* http://www.sonic.net/layne "A Quiet Place" -- Poetry http://www.sonic.net/layne/calendar.html "Poets Leave Their Prints" -- Poetry Calendar http://www.sonic.net/layne/wedding.html "Weddings Your Way" -- Sonoma County Ceremonies *~***~***~***~***~***~***~***~***~* ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 16:59:11 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: Re: identity/poetics Kali notes: >truly, i think that there is a david bromige inside everyone trying to get > out. is that what's sometimes known as "the thin man"? d.i. / / / (p.s. to David B.: this quip (& likewise Kali's, I presume) assumes awareness of a pop-dieting utterance to the effect, "in every fat woman is a thin woman wanting to get out . . .") ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 14:22:56 PDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Hoa Nguyen Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences Comments: To: jsafdie@SEACCD.SCCD.CTC.EDU Content-Type: text/plain > >That is to say, maybe the whole question of identity means different >things to writers and critics (not, of course, that they're necessarily >different, but . . .) Critics and poets are very different animals. The artist essentially, as I see it, relies on mimesis to present, discover, or engage questions of identity. In this sense, the artist blurs those distinctions. It's like Keats saying that a poet is the most unpoetical of things because he/she's constantly being incorporated into other bodies other than their own, thus confusing that established notion of the stable, unified individual. The lyric moment provides release for the poet to sift through those shifting identities. This is nature, the way airplanes resemble birds. A critic, on the other hand, is usually far more rigid and uses a language which is discursive. The critic always preserves that stable conception of him or herself in some authorative way. The thought process is more binomial and partial to the catagorical assumptions of the mind rather than the more comprehensive and less structured impressions mimetic art provides. Critical thought can grasp and explain questions of identity. But the real work and exploration of such questions take place in one's active life and in the isolate hours of one's art. Says me. There are plenty of attempts now, of course, for critics to write poetry and vice versa. But the emphasis seems to be on the mental perception of identity rather than experiential patterns of knowledge. Sorry to take up the space on such a rather obvious subject. But it's my way of getting even with the overly bloated and poorly written posts I've read re: identity of late. Happy Holiday Dale _______________________________________________________ Get Private Web-Based Email Free http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 14:20:40 MDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Re: play vs. violence >In SM attempts are made to clarify the line between sexual play and sexual >violence. There are contracts, there are code words to emit if one has had >too much. But, the essential difference between play and violence, as I >understand it, is the mutual consent of the partners. This isn't news, I'm >sure, to any of you--it's much a part of legal definitions (at least in the >U.S.). > >Since neither Jay Schwartz, nor other list members, had consented to Kim >Dawn's aggressive pornographic whatever that was directed towards Jay, I do >not feel it should be categorized as sexual play, but as sexual violence. >I do not challenge her right to use sexual explicit material in her >writing, I merely challenge its non-consensual use. Dodie brings up some interesting points, and I may have sorted out the different sets of assumptions that lead to our disagreement. I draw a firm line between textual or verbal attacks and physical violence. The line blurs, for me, *only* when textual or verbal attacks imply a real and tangible threat of physical violence. I don't *like* abusive language (and I realize that my idea of "abusive" is not universal), but I don't think it's at all the same thing as walloping someone on the head. Nor do I consider virtual "rape" (the textual description of the rape of someone else) to be equivalent to f2f physical rape *unless* the same power relationship is in play in both instances. For example, a textual description of a rape mailed to a woman or man who is being stalked *by* the stalker implies the threat of a physical attack, while a random description of the rape of a female character in a MUD or MOO (while perhaps vile), is not *violent* except inasmuch as it implies the general and quite real power that men have in this society to rape women and get away with it. Thus, I saw no violence whatsoever in Kim Dawn's post to Jay Schwartz. There was no implication that Kim Dawn had any sort of physical, political, economic or social power over Schwartz's fate, and so I could find no threat. In my opinion, neither does "play" require mutual consent as long as power over another is not exercised. I can think of quite a few situations in which one person is playing, and another person declines to play, and neither are materially or psychically hurt by the fact that a game is in progress. When one starts categorizing unwanted *textual* intrusions into one's social arena as "sexual violence," one risks the following: 1) watering down the term "sexual violence" so that it is all-encompassing and winds up meaning nothing; and, 2) creating a system of censorship and enforcement which *does* depend upon an existing power relationship (a relationship which is usually not weighted in favor of the very population one needs most to protect--in this society, women and children and nonwhite people and gay men). Personally, I've got a lot of problems with S&M/B&D play, even when it *is* consensual, since the thrill of it seems to me to be based on existing (and persisting) power imbalances in the real world. Playing at Master and Slave is only exciting if there *are* masters and slaves; otherwise there would be no exhilaration, no sense of power, no risk. So, though S&M relationships are ostensibly contracts between partners, I think that there are always exploited/appropriated silent partners in the relationship in the form of involuntarily subjugated populations whose oppression provides the narrative upon which S&M partners draw. Still and all, I don't think that what Kim Dawn was engaging in *was* "S&M," though she employed the textual artifices that *imply* S&M. What I mean by this is that Kim Dawn was describing a situation which existed only in her imagination, and the sexual imagery was generated *not* to actually partner with Schwartz in an S&M exchange (coercive or consensual), but to point out to Schwartz that text was uncontrollable, unrestrained in the manner that Schwartz wished it to be restrained. If Schwartz had complained about frivolous baseball imagery, perhaps Kim Dawn's textual persona would have scratched her crotch for luck, spat some virtual tobacco juice on his shoes, and sent a pitch smoking at his head, though I imagine (and please correct me if I'm wrong about this, Kim Dawn) that Schwartz's special distaste for the S&M play was a particular trigger for Kim Dawn. Remember that the motivation for Kim Dawn's play didn't seem to be the entrance of S&M into the conversation (she had been silent during the light S&M exchange which provoked Schwartz's comment), but was confined to a reaction to Schwartz's attempt to *control* the conversation. So I took her post (and continue to take it) as an eruption of the uncontrollable, an illustration of Schwartz's lack of power to determine what would or would not appear on POETICS. We can argue about the effectiveness of the response, but that does not seem to be the issue here. >As far as reading such material in public, to me, that is a shady area. At >Naropa, I was invited to read, and the people who invited me were familiar >with my work, but some of the audience members weren't, so is violence >being perpetrated upon them? At a reading, or on a discussion list, no one is *forced* to engage with sexually explicit subject matter. One can walk out the door or use the "d" key. There *are* situations in which unwilling listeners are forced to endure speech that disturbs them, and there *are* situations in which walking out on or not reading disturbing texts can have material costs for those unwillingly exposed to such material, but I don't think that this discussion is in that category. A key element in violence is the *power* to exercise it. Again, I don't see how Kim Dawn had power of Jay Schwartz, and so I don't see violence in the exchange. (Of course, I *do* realize that those without power do have the option of violently erupting toward those who *do* have power, but such eruptions are usually quickly contained and flattened, and I don't think that's what happened here either.) Kali ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 15:38:00 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Pritchett,Pat @Silverplume" Subject: Re: play vs. violence Comments: To: dbkk MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN In some ways, of course, reading *is* an act of violence, a "systematic derangement," the icepick Kafka longed for to break open the frozen sea inside, a catalyst which once it has entered a given frame of referents may result in often unpredictable reactions. But as far as reading work in public which makes people uncomfortable, I'd say to Dodie Bellamy: they paid their money and they took their chances. As far l'affaire Kim/Jay goes, I think there are rules even for the game of transgression otherwise, what are you transgressing? Patrick Pritchett ---------- From: dbkk To: POETICS Subject: play vs. violence Date: Thursday, July 03, 1997 2:32PM As far as reading such material in public, to me, that is a shady area. At Naropa, I was invited to read, and the people who invited me were familiar with my work, but some of the audience members weren't, so is violence being perpetrated upon them? Dodie ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 15:29:56 PDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Hoa Nguyen Subject: Re: play vs. violence Comments: To: Kali.Tal@YALE.EDU Content-Type: text/plain Yes. Shit. Barbaric threats employed as play are totally acceptable. Who knows what line is drawn at any moment, or how to read the mail of cyberville? Irony and Play are used to defend any half thought provacation one can offer. It's a defense for cowardice and artlessness. Who one fucks or how one fucks that other or what one will do to some one else is so boring. It's not an offense. It's weak, scared, and screaming of one's lost and damaged psyche. The real insult, however, the only truly awful posts I have seen lately, are those, like below, which abuse language in even more sinister ways than playful, ironic attacks on one's cyber character. At least KD's language had color. Kali's words are mud, smudged and gray. In that continuing necessity to BE RIGHT language is shit out of Kali's mouth to create a heap of impenetrable clarification. Congratulations. Kali is right out of sheer stamina. KD's language can at least be read for its impulsiveness. Kali's is thick with thought, but little feeling. Maybe the critics do have an edge these days. Dale Smith >>In SM attempts are made to clarify the line between sexual play and sexual >>violence. There are contracts, there are code words to emit if one has had >>too much. But, the essential difference between play and violence, as I >>understand it, is the mutual consent of the partners. This isn't news, I'm >>sure, to any of you--it's much a part of legal definitions (at least in the >>U.S.). >> >>Since neither Jay Schwartz, nor other list members, had consented to Kim >>Dawn's aggressive pornographic whatever that was directed towards Jay, I do >>not feel it should be categorized as sexual play, but as sexual violence. >>I do not challenge her right to use sexual explicit material in her >>writing, I merely challenge its non-consensual use. > >Dodie brings up some interesting points, and I may have sorted out the >different sets of assumptions that lead to our disagreement. > >I draw a firm line between textual or verbal attacks and physical violence. >The line blurs, for me, *only* when textual or verbal attacks imply a real >and tangible threat of physical violence. I don't *like* abusive language >(and I realize that my idea of "abusive" is not universal), but I don't >think it's at all the same thing as walloping someone on the head. Nor do I >consider virtual "rape" (the textual description of the rape of someone >else) to be equivalent to f2f physical rape *unless* the same power >relationship is in play in both instances. For example, a textual >description of a rape mailed to a woman or man who is being stalked *by* the >stalker implies the threat of a physical attack, while a random description >of the rape of a female character in a MUD or MOO (while perhaps vile), is >not *violent* except inasmuch as it implies the general and quite real power >that men have in this society to rape women and get away with it. Thus, I >saw no violence whatsoever in Kim Dawn's post to Jay Schwartz. There was no >implication that Kim Dawn had any sort of physical, political, economic or >social power over Schwartz's fate, and so I could find no threat. > >In my opinion, neither does "play" require mutual consent as long as power >over another is not exercised. I can think of quite a few situations in >which one person is playing, and another person declines to play, and >neither are materially or psychically hurt by the fact that a game is in >progress. > >When one starts categorizing unwanted *textual* intrusions into one's social >arena as "sexual violence," one risks the following: 1) watering down the >term "sexual violence" so that it is all-encompassing and winds up meaning >nothing; and, 2) creating a system of censorship and enforcement which >*does* depend upon an existing power relationship (a relationship which is >usually not weighted in favor of the very population one needs most to >protect--in this society, women and children and nonwhite people and gay men). > >Personally, I've got a lot of problems with S&M/B&D play, even when it *is* >consensual, since the thrill of it seems to me to be based on existing (and >persisting) power imbalances in the real world. Playing at Master and Slave >is only exciting if there *are* masters and slaves; otherwise there would be >no exhilaration, no sense of power, no risk. So, though S&M relationships >are ostensibly contracts between partners, I think that there are always >exploited/appropriated silent partners in the relationship in the form of >involuntarily subjugated populations whose oppression provides the narrative >upon which S&M partners draw. > >Still and all, I don't think that what Kim Dawn was engaging in *was* "S&M," >though she employed the textual artifices that *imply* S&M. What I mean by >this is that Kim Dawn was describing a situation which existed only in her >imagination, and the sexual imagery was generated *not* to actually partner >with Schwartz in an S&M exchange (coercive or consensual), but to point out >to Schwartz that text was uncontrollable, unrestrained in the manner that >Schwartz wished it to be restrained. If Schwartz had complained about >frivolous baseball imagery, perhaps Kim Dawn's textual persona would have >scratched her crotch for luck, spat some virtual tobacco juice on his shoes, >and sent a pitch smoking at his head, though I imagine (and please correct >me if I'm wrong about this, Kim Dawn) that Schwartz's special distaste for >the S&M play was a particular trigger for Kim Dawn. Remember that the >motivation for Kim Dawn's play didn't seem to be the entrance of S&M into >the conversation (she had been silent during the light S&M exchange which >provoked Schwartz's comment), but was confined to a reaction to Schwartz's >attempt to *control* the conversation. So I took her post (and continue to >take it) as an eruption of the uncontrollable, an illustration of Schwartz's >lack of power to determine what would or would not appear on POETICS. We >can argue about the effectiveness of the response, but that does not seem to >be the issue here. > >>As far as reading such material in public, to me, that is a shady area. At >>Naropa, I was invited to read, and the people who invited me were familiar >>with my work, but some of the audience members weren't, so is violence >>being perpetrated upon them? > >At a reading, or on a discussion list, no one is *forced* to engage with >sexually explicit subject matter. One can walk out the door or use the "d" >key. There *are* situations in which unwilling listeners are forced to >endure speech that disturbs them, and there *are* situations in which >walking out on or not reading disturbing texts can have material costs for >those unwillingly exposed to such material, but I don't think that this >discussion is in that category. A key element in violence is the *power* to >exercise it. Again, I don't see how Kim Dawn had power of Jay Schwartz, and >so I don't see violence in the exchange. (Of course, I *do* realize that >those without power do have the option of violently erupting toward those >who *do* have power, but such eruptions are usually quickly contained and >flattened, and I don't think that's what happened here either.) > >Kali _______________________________________________________ Get Private Web-Based Email Free http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 16:32:59 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ryan Whyte Subject: Christie Julie Comments: To: FOP Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Christie today lost to the worldJulie held toast blocks shaped charge Oskar Wernerwrit-ten wred settee Werner Cahiers Cine in fl inside Oscar July Christy scrawled walked on Beckettt coktoe this eighteenth head head photograph moved - high explosive through her mild steel like "for-gotten" long libraries her bodyage moves flame, expansionnewskin you don't know who this is so I say: the is is fuck-king go doe Christieus lips hardened steel for action, into the bargain Low light a after-all ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 15:39:41 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Bromige In-Reply-To: <199707031916.PAA08461@waffle.ai.mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" This is a true story. One day a couple weeks ago a friend named Heather was looking through my photo albums and found several pictures of David Bromige. Every time she found one she exclaimed "Who IS that handsome man?" Worse part of it was: it was Bromige every time! George Bowering. , 2499 West 37th Ave., Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6M 1P4 fax: 1-604-266-9000 e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 14:51:01 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Bromige Subject: Last words Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ....& then I had Dale post that bit abt the poet & the critic. Go// David B ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 16:45:11 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Matthias Regan Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences In-Reply-To: <199707032122.OAA06536@f55.hotmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" So you saying that there is an EXTERNAL difference between poet and critic (as in Sartre's example, between chair and giraffe) and that this natural and actually inviolable difference is based on a difference of perception-- experiential knowledge v. mental perception-- mimetic v. metaphoric, a binary deriving from synchronic v. diachronic, perhaps? But the diachronic will always slip into the synchronic eventually -- did you write this as poet or critic-- or am I -- good-naturedly, as the weekend commences, Matthias > > >Critics and poets are very different animals. The artist essentially, >as I see it, relies on mimesis to present, discover, or engage questions >of identity. In this sense, the artist blurs those distinctions. It's >like Keats saying that a poet is the most unpoetical of things because >he/she's constantly being incorporated into other bodies other than >their own, thus confusing that established notion of the stable, unified >individual. The lyric moment provides release for the poet to sift >through those shifting identities. This is nature, the way airplanes >resemble birds. > >A critic, on the other hand, is usually far more rigid and uses a >language which is discursive. The critic always preserves that stable >conception of him or herself in some authorative way. The thought >process is more binomial and partial to the catagorical assumptions of >the mind rather than the more comprehensive and less structured >impressions mimetic art provides. Critical thought can grasp and >explain questions of identity. But the real work and exploration of >such questions take place in one's active life and in the isolate hours >of one's art. Says me. There are plenty of attempts now, of course, for >critics to write poetry and vice versa. But the emphasis seems to be on >the mental perception of identity rather than experiential patterns of >knowledge. > >Sorry to take up the space on such a rather obvious subject. But it's >my way of getting even with the overly bloated and poorly written posts >I've read re: identity of late. > >Happy Holiday >Dale > >_______________________________________________________ >Get Private Web-Based Email Free http://www.hotmail.com > > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 15:44:41 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Re: identity/poetics In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Kali notes: > >>truly, i think that there is a david bromige inside everyone trying to get >> out. > That's a switch. I know someone who's been trying to get INTO Bromige for years. George Bowering. , 2499 West 37th Ave., Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6M 1P4 fax: 1-604-266-9000 e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 15:46:54 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Re: query In-Reply-To: <9707030035.AA02317@carla.UCSD.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Regarding Jerry and Paree: There is going to be a conference on Ondaatje at the end of Nov. in Paris, at UP3, I think. I dont know how long yr extended stay wiull be, Jer. George Bowering. , 2499 West 37th Ave., Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6M 1P4 fax: 1-604-266-9000 e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 16:09:12 MDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Re: play vs. violence >Yes. Shit. Barbaric threats employed as play are totally acceptable. The power of a threat is its menace, its implication that hostile intention can indeed be carried out. I still argue that there was no menace in Kim Dawn's post. It was not a threat. It was not even a bluff. >Irony and Play are used to defend any half thought >provacation one can offer. This is true. I've heard plenty of comments about how feminists and antiracist activists have "no sense of humor." Most often the people who make those comments are sexist or racist or both, and act in ways that--in the real world--oppress others. But what I'm arguing here is *not* that Kim Dawn's post was funny, but that it was *not* violent, not a threat. >It's a defense for cowardice and >artlessness. Who one fucks or how one fucks that other or what one will >do to some one else is so boring. It's not an offense. It's weak, >scared, and screaming of one's lost and damaged psyche. The real >insult, however, the only truly awful posts I have seen lately, are >those, like below, which abuse language in even more sinister ways than >playful, ironic attacks on one's cyber character. At least KD's >language had color. Kali's words are mud, smudged and gray. In that >continuing necessity to BE RIGHT language is shit out of Kali's mouth to >create a heap of impenetrable clarification. Congratulations. Kali is >right out of sheer stamina. KD's language can at least be read for its >impulsiveness. Kali's is thick with thought, but little feeling. Maybe >the critics do have an edge these days. Now *this* is an interesting paragraph. It's so full of direct insults and attributions of motivation that it's hard to distinguish the argument from the rabid froth, but let me make a stab at reading it... The phrase that strikes me as most revealing is "a heap of impenetrable clarification," by which I assume Smith means that I continue to insist on the importance of being clear and specific, and that I employ a critical vocabulary and methodology in (some of) my texts. Lumping me with "critics," (a Bad Thing, apparently), he accuses me of "thought, but little feeling," in an attempt to paint me as "even more sinister" than transgressors like Kim Dawn. I'm not at all bothered by Smith's dislike of my prose style, though I think it strange that while he's raging against the "barbaric" texts of others, he has no hesitation about calling my language "shit." I'd like to point out, for the record here, that there are only two writers about whom it has been said publicly on POETICS that their writing is without worth, "stupid," or "shit." Those two writers are both women, and they were/are both (in different ways) writing against the grain. No women, and no men, have ever dismissed a male poster's texts in such final and judgemental terms. This is not a coincidence. This is how women are dealt with when they act "inappropriately." One of the things that seems to bother Smith (and Weiss, who has commented upon it previously) is the volume of my prose. On a list where everyone can titrate, read or not read, skim or delete as they choose, what does volume signify? Surely no one who disagrees with me is going to be persuaded by the *volume* of my work? My own conclusion is that writing long and frequent posts is a kind of manifestation that certain hostile readers simply can't tolerate. In traditional settings they might be able to disappear me and women like me--there are so many mechanisms for silencing female voices in f2f interaction. But on email lists, I am indisputably present--more present, perhaps, than some of those who react so strongly to my posts. And perhaps it is the relative invisibility of their *own* personae that so disturbs them, as if an email discussion forum were a zero-sum gathering; if there's more of me, there's necessarily less of you. One of the most disturbing conclusions I've drawn from years of email list interaction is that the self-concept of certain people (mostly male, mostly white) seems to be *based* on my erasure, or on the erasure of people like me. *If* I manifest, then they immediately start to feel strangled, victimized, stomped upon. Only my textual death calms them. And since it is my pleasure to manifest in virtual company, I find myself, all too often, the Typhoid Mary of Flame Wars, puzzled at the strength of certain people's reactions, and passing through unmoved by whatever it is that's driving them wild. Kali ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 16:30:41 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: identity Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Here's an identity question: If Bambi the deer is supposed to succeed "his" father as king of the forest "he" must be male. So is it just a colossal example of inattentiveness that generations of little girls (and never little boys) get named Bambi, or was that deer in drag? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 09:36:36 +0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Schuchat Simon Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences In-Reply-To: <199707032014.NAA22213@norway.it.earthlink.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Re Wallace Stevens the insurance lawyer, Delmore Schwartz used to claim that he had met someone from Hartford Life and, thinking to surprise him, told him about the great poet who worked there. The insurance executive replied that Hartford Life's management all knew about Stevens poetry, that he was not much good as an attorney,but they kept him around because of the prestige he brought the firm. Delmore S is a less than reliable narrator, but I think there is some necessary truth in the anecdote, irrespective of the particulars. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 19:10:57 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Hugh Steinberg Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Dale writes: > >Critics and poets are very different animals. The artist essentially, >as I see it, relies on mimesis to present, discover, or engage questions >of identity. In this sense, the artist blurs those distinctions. It's >like Keats saying that a poet is the most unpoetical of things because >he/she's constantly being incorporated into other bodies other than >their own, thus confusing that established notion of the stable, unified >individual. The lyric moment provides release for the poet to sift >through those shifting identities. This is nature, the way airplanes >resemble birds. > >A critic, on the other hand, is usually far more rigid and uses a >language which is discursive. The critic always preserves that stable >conception of him or herself in some authorative way. The thought >process is more binomial and partial to the catagorical assumptions of >the mind rather than the more comprehensive and less structured >impressions mimetic art provides. Critical thought can grasp and >explain questions of identity. But the real work and exploration of >such questions take place in one's active life and in the isolate hours >of one's art. Says me. There are plenty of attempts now, of course, for >critics to write poetry and vice versa. But the emphasis seems to be on >the mental perception of identity rather than experiential patterns of >knowledge. > Both categories/modes of writing would be a lot more interesting if they were reversed. Artists don't "have" to rely on mimesis; critics can dissolve their "authority." We all can have more fun. Hugh Steinberg ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 20:51:19 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: Re: play vs. violence Kali -- As an exercise, I've endeavored to address -- below -- issues of reading & misreading in your latest post responsive to Dodie's latest post. Dare say I consider this current msg. a bit long-winded. But what to do? In my view, something has been missed, and perhaps there's no better way to locate it than through this manner of exercise -- an exercise in careful reading. Frankly I'm not especially practiced at this manner of logical refinement. Nonetheless, in a pinch, I think I can note the difference between a suit (clubs, spades, hearts) on the one hand, and cards within a suit (ace, duce, jack), on the other. That's what I'll endeavor to do here. I adopt the theoretical tone now in evidence, as it seems to fit this sort of textual analysis. I trust that, god-willing, I'll be able to revert to regular talk after I've hit the magic Send key. So, here goes. / / / / / It's good that you try to refine some semantic distinctions. I think, however, in your reading of Dodie's post you've made a leap that is not warranted in the intended sense of the text under discussion. It's an understandable leap, but it's a leap that becomes the source of what strikes me as a continuing misunderstanding (or misreading) of what's really at issue here. Dodie wrote -- << In SM attempts are made to clarify the line between sexual play and sexual violence. There are contracts, there are code words to emit if one has had too much. But, the essential difference between play and violence, as I understand it, is the mutual consent of the partners. This isn't news, I'm sure, to any of you--it's much a part of legal definitions (at least in the U.S.). >> Okay, let's call that "A". Then Dodie wrote: << Since neither Jay Schwartz, nor other list members, had consented to Kim Dawn's aggressive pornographic whatever that was directed towards Jay, I do not feel it should be categorized as sexual play, but as sexual violence. I do not challenge her right to use sexual explicit material in her writing, I merely challenge its non-consensual use. >> Okay, let's call that "B". In both A and B, there are distinctions drawn. In A, the distinction is between (literal) sexual play and sexual violence. In B, the distinction involves two categories of *writing* -- two forms of verbal / written behavior. Neither involves literal physical sexual behavior (obviously). Therefore, we may understand that Dodie intends not to posit an *equivalence* between the terms of A and the terms of B, but rather, she wishes to draw an *ANALOGY* between those terms. To repeat, in B, Dodie writes, << Since neither Jay Schwartz, nor other list members, had consented to Kim Dawn's aggressive pornographic whatever that was directed towards Jay, I do not feel it should be categorized as sexual play, but as sexual violence. >> The key term that occasions your misreading is *should be categorized as....* You take Dodie to task for categorizing an e-speech act as sexual violence. Fine. But in fact, an e-speech act is *neither* literal sexual play [LSP] *nor* is it literal sexual violence [LSV]. It is neither of those two terms. When Dodie suggests that the speech-act in question is LSV rather than LSP, what she is doing is drawing an analogy. What we see here is a linguistic act of analogy, not a linguistic act of equivalence. On the level of analogy, some email messages can, perhaps, be placed at either pole of the bifurcation, the distinction that's at the center of the text -- i.e., some acts of written communication can, perhaps, be approached as analogous either to LSP or to LSV. This is a distinction in the realm of analogy -- and Dodie draws the analogy for the reason that it involves moral, ethical, and courtesy resonances from the realm of A that seem germane to analogous moral, ethical, and courtesy overtones in the realm of B. In the realm of B -- the realm of listserv writing, communication in a public electronic discussion forum -- there is a distinction to be drawn between play (which can best develop where there's a shared sense of language, a shared enjoyment of interaction, -- some (say) preliminary acquaintance or courtship behavior: all factors well in evidence in the antecedent menage of B. & B. & M & (was it?) E. -- but not, I'm afraid, present in the JS / KD encounter) on the one hand, and taunting, assaultive, threatening verbal behavior, on the other. You choose to read KD's post in terms of the play side; others have tended to construe it in terms of the taunting side. That's the level of distinction, in any case, that Dodie's text endeavored to address. If you turn your gaze away from that distinction, by critiquing the term of equivalence (the "can be categorized as" -- which was, I opine, never intended to be taken *literally*), then you have immediately moved away from the intended sense of the text, into another (and tangential) issue -- an issue possibly worthy of discussion in its own terms, but not the real focus of the text at hand. To reiterate & clarify: when, in paragraph B, Dodie says "I do not feel it should be categorized as. . . " this is NOT to be construed literally -- as a casting into the (literally) same category. Rather, looking at the text as a whole, it appears evident (to me) that what is in progress in this text is an act of ANALOGY rather than a drawing of EQUIVALENCE. (The two are by no means the same.) You critique it on the level of equivalence. But suppose you were to read it on the level of analogy. How, then, would your reading go? Might you recognize the distinctions that Dodie wishes to draw? So: properly construed, we may understand that Dodie wishes to draw an analogy between the distinction outlined in A (LSP versus LSV) and an *analogous distinction* that she feels should be recognized in the realm of speech acts -- the realm of B, a distinction noted in the latter as that between "[Kim's] use of sexually explicit material in her writing" (meaning, work for publication) and "her aggressive pornographic whatever that was directed to Jay" (meaning, an act of symbolic taunting & aggression in this nouveau epistolary realm of words on screens). The remainder of your post largely concerns an elucidation of distinctions devolving from (mis)reading the text as a language act of equivalence rather than as a language act of analogy. Read in the latter fashion, the intended sense should, I think, be clear. / / / / / Finally, this is mainly a matter of varying senses of manners & courtesy. Equally, it concerns different ways of construing the MEDIUM at hand. Is this publication? Is it conversation? Is it equivalent to a performance space, where whoever performs is, ipso facto, a performer? Or is it better to be understood -- through analogy -- as tantamount to the bar where folks might sit around, after performances, and chat congenially. If, in the course of such a chat, someone (like JS) objects to the raucous behavior of some of his bar-mates (like B.B.M&E), someone (like KD) might -- fresh off the stage, perhaps, and still in fine form, venture to transform the bar arena into a stage arena. If the bar folk happen to be in good humor, she might be able to pull it off, working such a magic on the assembled friends. But if (for instance) her performance involves "what sure sound like" assaultive words that sure seem to be directed at a chap at the bar to whom she's not been introduced, there's the danger that said chap (and/or others sitting at adjoining tables) may conclude that what looks like a duck & sounds like a duck and taunts like a duck, really is a duck. Those who recall all of KD's delightful duck impersonations in past stage events, will no doubt know different -- and think better. But in the instance, or meantime, a lot of talk might well ensue. best, d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 21:13:52 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: jarnot@PIPELINE.COM Subject: Re: Harryette Mullen, part II Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" there's also an interview with harryette mullen (by barbara henning) in the oct/nov 1996 poetry project newsletter available for $5.00 from the poetry project, st. mark's church, 131 east 10th street, ny, ny 10003. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 19:07:30 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: American Language 1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Perhaps I can confuse matters by recounting a story. Some years ago I was running a reminiscence workshop with elderly Jewish people at a Y in Brooklyn. The subject of folk-cures came up. The usual stories about the efficacy of leeches came forth, but also one old woman told us that she regularly cured earaches by filling her ear with urine. It is, in fact, a pretty good antibiotic if nothing better is at hand. But it was her own urine. I think she would have found it indecorous to ask someone else to piss in her ear. At 04:34 PM 7/3/97 -0400, you wrote: >Very nice regionalisms, Dr. Barbour. > >> "he's the kind of person who wouldn't piss in your ear >> if your brain was on fire!" >> & I still dont know if that's a compliment or a putdown... > >presumably the intended sense is that a person of said kind is a person >lacking in (even the most rudimentary) attributes of human kindness -- >the colorful example cited being, perhaps, more for rhetorical flourish >than for sake of descriptive clarity? > >Under normal circumstances, to piss in someone's ear isn't an act >demonstrating great care & consideration. It seems a rude gesture. But >That Person is one so lacking in courtesy, he won't even perform a rude >gesture if it would be of benefit to his fellows. This seems an interesting >definition of rudeness: being too essentially rude (unreesponsive to the >needs of others) to act in even a rude-seeming manner, in the event that >the underlying nature of the needful act (hidden under the semblance of >rudeness, in this case) would be of actual benefit to others. Suggests that >real rudeness resides in the heart, rather than in the outward manner; a >rude-seeming act can be the essense of kindness; refraining from a rude >act can be the epitome of rudeness. Interesting stuff, doc. > >d.i. > > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 23:35:17 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Marks Subject: Re: Tagore / Orientalism In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Thanks, George, for responding to my question about whether the NYRB was a balanced article. I would say that my reactions are similar to yours. I am not familiar enough with Tagore's poetry to say anything certain, but I have enjoyed what I have read (courtesy of David Israel) on this list, particularly the poem about sailing paper boats down the river. On another Indian (or Bengali) note, my wife and I recently watched the Apu Trilogy by Satyajit Ray which I think was suggested by either Henry or David. The three films follow the life of Apu from a young boy to adulthood from approximately the 1920s to the 1940s. Each is outstanding and it is readily apparent that Ray's graphics career contributed much to his ability to frame scenes. The technique reminded me of the Iranian film called "The White Balloon" (??) which came out last year. Everything in the frame "does" something. My wife also pointed out the preponderance of shots which involve door frames or gates or windows. All in all, visually stunning. And to tie Ray with Tagore, Ray attended Tagore's famous school, Santinikaten. best, Steven __________________________________________________ Steven Marks http://members.aol.com/swmarks/welcome.html __________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 02:21:00 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Thomas Bell Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Davenport in _Gracchus, "Calvino...explains that writing takes one of two forms, the crystal or the flame. By crystal Calvino means writing like his own, with a logical and symmetrical structure, faceted and gleaming. By flame he means that art which holds turbulence inside a shape. Stillness and flow: the abstract and the concrete." critic and poet? tom bell At 02:22 PM 7/3/97 PDT, Hoa Nguyen wrote: >> >>That is to say, maybe the whole question of identity means different >>things to writers and critics (not, of course, that they're necessarily >>different, but . . .) > > >Critics and poets are very different animals. The artist essentially, >as I see it, relies on m ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 23:28:31 -0700 Reply-To: ttheatre@sirius.com Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Karen and Trevor Organization: Tea Theatre Subject: New Book from Kelsey St. Press MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kelsey St. Press is proud to announce the publication of _Rebecca Letters_, a collection of prose-poems by Laynie Browne exploring the intersecting grammars of ancestral history and language. The writing of these letters is located at the site of consulation of mysteries not to be tampered with. There is an old voice here that speaks with the oracular authority of ancestral history and language. Laynie Browne's work has been anthologized in _Gertrude Stein Awards in Innovative Poetry_ ed. by Douglas Messerli and in _A Curious Architecture_, a collection of British and American prose-poetry ed. by David Miller and Rupert Loydell. She is an active figure in poetry on the East and West Coasts and is also the author of 3 chapbooks. _Rebecca Letters_ is now available at Small Press Distribution 1-800-869-7553, or through Kelsey St. Press at (510) 845-2260. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 02:21:07 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Thomas Bell Subject: Identity, writing on air head constructing Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" selfspeculations from hard science 'constructivists perceive humans as theories of their environments; that is, individuals are embodied metaphors that exist through understanding.' Our understanding is who and what we are. The act of writing is an act of projecting our own understanding. understanding is not something that exists inside or outside an individual but instead is his or her own action. tom bell shoot me down - this needs some mulling. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 00:21:53 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: main Subject: Re: A List of Poetry Schools Revisited Comments: To: Bob Grumman In-Reply-To: <33BB87AC.5EE3@nut-n-but.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII bob-- thanks for list. curious: what's "contra" about maya angelou? diction? dan featherston ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 07:12:55 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: Wally the genius [ was, subject: Re: identity, and other excresences ] Mark Weiss remarks: << For me the most interesting reaction to Stevens at the office was an executive who allowed as how he'd looked at Stevens' poetry and didn't think much of it, but as an insurance lawyer he was a genius. >> yes, and did you hear abt. what the woodworker of Galilee said? << Hey, I worked with Jeez for eight years. Later I heard stories abt. him wandering around in them Cecil B. Demille outfits, healin' & stuff, talkin' big & vague & fancy -- some kinda new agey Orientalist if you're askin' me. (Guy never was quite the same after those years in India.) Shoot, one spring, I'd just finished this whole teakwood cabinet set for the rabbi's aunt's third cousin, & headin' home, I walked by the J. crowd when Mr. Heartwood there was givin' his so-called sermon on the mount -- he'd gone all soft in the head & poetical. "Refried Ecclesiastes" is what we used to call it -- 'course with a big dash of Khalil Gibran thrown in for flavor (& probably some kinda Mysore Buddhism snuck in on the sly). You say the J. man was a mystic? Don't know much about that -- but man! what a carpenter! That dude could detail a surface like nobody's business. When he built something, it was -- let me tell ya -- solid! >> d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 07:41:50 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: rsillima@IX.NETCOM.COM Subject: Not Orville Redenbacher Comments: To: poetics@UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Dodie, Are you suggesting that my account of fisting Jesse Helms in a piece I'm currently working on might be politically incorrect? Or because I recommend rough-edged brass knuckles for the process? Oh, the horror of being P.I. I'm so ashamed. * * * Bob Grumman, Your typography is my idea of a sort of perfect past-time, the litcrit equivalent of rotisserie baseball. Generally your categories seem okay, though I wonder how I missed out on the "school" of flow-chart poetics. What seems infinitely more interesting is to note how "other" tendencies show up over time in what may appear for awhile to have been a stable field. Thus, for example, I think if you look closely at any of the larger groupings there (whether langpo or neoformalism), you will find that the really interesting tendencies within them are in some very real sense Other. On the other hand, this typography doesn't Tell Us Anything--i.e., it doesn't add to any knowledge we might have about a given poet. Also, the idea of langpo as "acadominant" suggests that your Prozac levels are much too high. If it were acadominant, as you put it, we'd've gotten Andy Levy some great job by now, Lee Ann Brown wouldn't have to work at a gazillion different schools, Tom Mandel's software would be used by every school in the country, Bob Grenier wouldn't be proofreading in a law firm, Steve McCaffery would be offered jobs that actually exist, UCSD would to acknowledge Rae Armantrout as a major component of its literature program and give her things like a real salary and health benefits and Juliana Spahr would be allowed to teach on the same continent. Etc. Etc. Etc. To quote Cuba Gooding, Jr., Show me the .... As possibly the only person on this list to have ever met both David Bromige and the late Orville Redenbacher, let me assure that David is taller but does not dress so natty. David is more of a George Bowering with manners. Orville was more Pee Wee Herman without the irony. I've never met Kali Tal, although I'm certain her name is secretely an anagram. Ron Ron Silliman 262 Orchard Road Paoli, PA 19301-1116 (610) 251-2214 (610) 293-6099 (o) (610) 293-5506 (fax) rsillima@ix.netcom.com rsillima@tssc.com http://writing.upenn.edu/epc/authors/silliman/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 13:25:52 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "David R. Israel" Subject: Inner Chapters / vastitude Comments: cc: Rebecca Weldon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT [ was, subject: Re: ears and origins ] Rebecca -- further re: > In the case of ears and origins, one might consider Waley's > observation: > > The methods of Chuang Tzu are those of the poet, and in the case of > poetry analysis is useless. pls. pardon if there was anything a tad snappy (if that's the word) in my (earlier) post responsive to this. The thing is, "analysis is useless" is a formulation which is only useful in some contexts; in others, it is (itself) a bit useless. Or so I suppose. It's interesting that Waley describes Chuang Tze in those terms -- i.e., his "methods being those of the poet" -- since (on a formal or literal level) it was (rather) Lao Tze who was the poet, whereas Chuang Tze was the prose writer & storyteller. I guess Waley uses the expression "the poet" in a conventional (& idealizing) sense rather than in any literal sense. The notion of "the method of the poet" is interesting, and has something to it. For that matter, the method of Chuang Tze (which Waley calls that of "the poet") seems to me not dissimilar from that of Rabindranath Tagore (about which George Thompson expressed certain reservations -- reservations which I've oftentimes heard expressed, though I don't share them myself). Call him whatever one might, to me Chuang Tze is one of the most delightful of writers this world has seen. The Inner Chapters (the basic kernel of his work, comprised of texts that are generally considered most certainly to have been written by him) are marvels of mysticism. To anyone who's not taken the time to give 'em a read, Uncle David ventures to suggest: check it out. I rather like the version (w/ photos) done by Gia Gen-Fu [?? spelling not sure] & Jane English in the '70s or so -- & still in print (poss. in a smaller no-photo version). Burton Watson's, too, is good (hopefully still in print) -- probably could be considered the standard translation. Thomas Merton's early rendering is more quirky -- it's okay, but he didn't read Chinese, and the organization leaves something to be desired. No doubt you know the work, Rebecca -- I'm more rattling here for poss. interest of other parties (and/or partiers). d.i. p.s.: am still thinking (bit more) abt. Dean Brink's quotation from the "healing buddha" text of Snyder. Okay, I'll admit I had a bit of a mixed reaction to the poem myself, when it first appeared in a journal somewhere, don't recall where -- might've been in the quarterly TRICYCLE (which I'd recommend to anyone interested in American Buddhism). It seems that Snyder plays upon -- especially -- some Tibetan texts involving a healing Buddha. I like his updating of the ubiquitous (indeed, characteristic & unforgettable) Mahayana penchant for beautiful hyperbolic descriptive evocations of vastitude -- > It would take you twelve thousand summer vacations > driving a car due east all day every day > to reach the _edge_ of the lapis lazuli realm of > Medicine Old Man Buddha: Sandalwood? Nice stuff. I got out of the habit of lighting it, but maybe the 4th is a good occasion to resume. (Better than sparklers.) For some sense of antecedents in Snyder's thinking re: sacred texts & poetry &c, his letters to Howard McCord regarding the latter's *Gnomonology* may prove of interest. Gnomonology is online at: http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/7641/ (Excerpts from two letters from Snyder appear as an Afterword to that work; here's the more direct link to the Snyder pages: http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/7641/index23.html ) Like many before him, Snyder is no doubt among those who've been somewhat influenced by a view of Sanskrit as a sort of UR-sacred language -- a view of which George Thompson has had occasion briefly to mention. It's certainly a language that, once you've heard a bit of it, does seem to hold evocative power. Not many folks will venture to include Sanskrit slokas in their American poems, but Snyder is one such (though very rarely doing so). I think anyone so enamored of & embued by Buddhist studies over the course of so many decades as this gent, might well be apt to do the same at some point . . . I found Allen Ginsberg's Boddhisattva invocations (in the "Witchita Votex Sutra") stunning / arresting, when I heard AG recite same at PS-122 abt. 9 years ago, with Phil Glass noddling at the keyboard. As could be said of other languages, but in perhaps its own peculiar way, Sanskrit is a basic at some level of human experience; -- in some lives we study it, in some we encounter it in passing. Seems we keep returning to languages . . . or they to us. It's all a long, long haul & needs more than a month of Sundays. d.i. . ..... ............ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////\\\\\ > david raphael israel < >> washington d.c. << | davidi@wizard.net (home) | disrael@skgf.com (office) ========================= | thy centuries follow each other | perfecting a small wild flower | (Tagore) //////////////////////////////////////////\\\\\///// ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 00:38:59 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: Re: play vs. violence, p.s. Comments: cc: dbkk@SIRIUS.COM minor postscriptum -- two notes: 1. memory resurfaces, and I realize that the antecedent grouping should've been identified correctly as B.B.M.& R. [rather than &E.] -- so apologies to pertinenet personages (though I don't suppose Rachel will find me guilty of quite such wild acts of misattribution as noted the legendary Bowering [er, okay, I mean Bromige] case. 2. in my discussion-just-sent, I didn't happen to note that (w/ mild paradox) I was initially a formulator of the of the "KD as performance" school of interpretation -- a school for which Kali has made herself an able spokesperson. (And there was also another gent who articulated this view well -- pardon I don't recall his name at this point.) In any event, in context of my discussion to which this forms a p.s., I don't think there's special incongruity in that parenthetical micro-history; -- that's not (for instance) out of keeping with the concluding bar-talk metaphor. Merely shows that when I saw her walk in the door, I reckoned KD approached the bar arena as a legit performance space. [Have seen fine performances tricked out as bar spaces, for that matter -- esp. among the faux- or neo-cabaret set. E.g., was quite the thing at LaMama, circa '90.] To a certain degree, perhaps we all do (even those who convene here mainly to unwind, or share news, or argue critically abt. the day's shows, or to talk up tomorrow's set, or to get roaring sauced). To what degree, might be what's at issue. A factor seems to be how attentive one is (or care to be) to little feedback loop(s) that tell useful things, if one's at all minded to attend to them. Like -- is someone witting the joke, or getting the point? Do I care (finally) to communicate? -- is this crowd too obtuse for my subtle sophistry? . . . and other things too . . . like, what's that bluesy music in the background? Who's footing the bill? Is that a pool table yonder? What's this grain of wood resemble? How old was the tree? Is the cognac from France? Are those stars there, out the window? . . . d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 18:02:02 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Maria Damon Subject: Re: "Ms" In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" just a note on the ms thread: i find it offensive when students refer to male professors as professor so and so but to me as ms/miss damon. both ms and miss are equally offensive in that context, where i feel i'm being de-professorized because of my gender, the assumption being that a woman couldn't possibly be a *real* professor. it is no less offensive --in fact it is more so--in that the student does not intend to be insulting me. of course, i am gentle with them, since they are nice kids and it's not their fault that society demeans women. i don't show the extent of my offendedness, sometimes don't correct them at all. but it is nonetheless offensive--md At 3:45 PM -0400 7/1/97, David Israel wrote: >[ was: Subject: Re: Poems/Identities } > >Just to add a note of comparative data to the Ms thread: > >I worked for many years as a secretary in law firms in San Francisco, >New York, Washington, DC. In such environments -- (and I think, >likely, more broadly in much business correspondence in the U.S.) -- Ms. >has long been is a standard (indeed, the requisite) form of salutation for >all women. In these environments, "Mrs." or "Miss" are, generally >speaking, no longer in use -- they are considered outdated. > >Not suggesting this is found (or should be found) everywhere -- just >noting that, interestingly, it's what I've observed in the noted context. > >In any case, I accept David B.'s suggestion that he had no hostile intent in >using that form of salutation; -- & I'm sure he (and anyone else here) will >be happy enough to address Kali Tal as she might best prefer. > >d.i. (the black kids in my high school called me "professor" >but I never became one . . ) > >Mark Weiss wrote: > ><< I'm from New York, I've lived all over the country, and I've never >used Ms. except when I don't know what else to use. More often than >not it's what I use in letters when I'm depending on the good will of the >recipient, as in asking for a job, a blurb, etc, and the recipient has not >made public her marital status. Anything, including mister ("who do you >think you are, mister?"), can be used to call out. >> ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 18:50:27 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "David R. Israel" Subject: Explanation (delayed gratification) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Poetas, techno division: Lateley a Po Listie asked me about what's up w/ the listserv silence. Here's my "educated guess" reply, for poss. general interest . . . > Hey David. . . . . I wonder what's up with > my mail. I'm not getting any for long stretches, and then some > mysteriously appears. Others seem to be noticing the same > phenomenon. I'm sure it'll sort itself. As I understand it, what's up is this . . . The listserv has a computer-maintained limit of 50 posts per day (each "day" ends at midnight, east coast time). If the list hits 50 posts prior to end of day -- or, if it exceeds 50 (not sure which), then what happens is (a) the excess posts are put on hold, and (b) the list is sort of put on hold till the list-owner (Charles Bernstein) manually "releases" it -- when he does that, then (a) all the held posts are distributed, and (b) the new "day" officially begins. So if Charles is off on vacation or not logged on or not attentive to the fact he needs to do something, then we'all can cool our heels till he takes note of the situation. I think that formerly, a chap named Joel Kuszma [sp?] was taking care of this admin. stuff, but he's moved from Buffalo and now presumably Charles is doing so himself, presumably not quite as attentively as Joel -- and the situation is exacerbated [sp?] by fact that lately, with all the fast & furious posting going on, we've been apt to hit the 50 mark somewhat early on (e.g., mid-afternoon) . . . that's the techno answer according to my understanding. I actually posted two (! count 'em) poem-type-items during the 1st list hiatus, dealing with same. Now we're in the midst of another -- and it seems possible that good Charles might not take note of this one till after the 3-day weekend! (just a wild guess) -- last time, I sent him a couple backchannel notes to try to bring the situation to his attention, but I'm not sure if I want to become a list-pest & do that each time. In past, he's occasionally sent out backchannel notes encouraging folks (on an individual basis) not to over-post. But sometimes, when dialogues are happening, some notion of rationing by strict numbers, doesn't necessarily work well . . . will that suffice for a long answer? -- this is my empirically-based understanding. (Don't really know all the techno specifics.) d.i. . ..... ............ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > david raphael israel < >> washington d.c. << | davidi@wizard.net (home) | disrael@skgf.com (office) ======================= | Many cities of men he saw | and learned their minds, | many pains he suffered, heartsick | on the open sea, | fighting to save his life and bring | his comrades home. . . . | Launch out on his story, Muse, | daughter of Zeus, | start from where you will . . . ////////////////////////////////////////////////// Homer, The Odyssey Book 1: Athena Inspires the Prince trans. Robert Fagles (1996) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ svaha ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 18:25:58 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Maria Damon Subject: query In-Reply-To: <199706301907.PAA06423@waffle.ai.mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable does anyone recognize these lines: ficus flower, unspeakable the bridge to thee ficus flower, thy pardon for this tortured history ? or this: Part One: Across the Southern night, and all afternoon the water calms you softly, white and black, Mary Magdalen eves you, stumbling homeless gardeners to grief, and bound by infant bone, we drag ourselves back to the naked copies of your flesh or this? o pilots in robes of white skin, in the approach to the black rock, with their great gouged-out eyes, and the actors in gouged-out skins, a star of no allegiance traveling the heights of a green [century?], 'cuz all along their seafronts tall cities flamed in the sun of the sea of Baal, in the sea of Mamm=F3n, the sea of all ages, the sea without limits, the sea withou= t decline and due seas... or this: the ancients are walking, the ancients are walking. My singing white ancestress, I summon you now ??? any help would be much appreciated!--maria d ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 18:04:42 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Maria Damon Subject: Re: Writing and Computers 10 (final call for abstracts) (fwd) (fwd) In-Reply-To: <33b7e3a5476a429@mhub2.tc.umn.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Mon, 30 Jun 97 13:27:39 BST >From: Simon Shurville >To: sjs16@bton.ac.uk > >Writing the future: final call for papers > >University of Brighton, September 18th and 19th, 1997 > >The tenth annual Writing and Computers conference >(http://www.itri.brighton.ac.uk/events/WandC97/) will be hosted by the >University of Brighton near the lively seaside town of Brighton. The theme >this year is Writing the Future-potential developments in writing with >computers as we enter the next millennium. > >The conference regularly brings together an international community >concerned with all aspects of computers and the writing process, including >psychologists, software designers, educational researchers, teachers, >journalists, authors and technical writers. This year our presenters hail >from America, Australia, Canada, Europe (East and West) and Japan. > >Over fifty papers have already been accepted. These address the following >topics: Collaborative Writing; Computer-based Writing Tools; Education; >Reading and Writing the World Wide Web; Language Education; Processes and >Models of Writing; Screen and Paper Authoring; Social Implications of New >Writing Technologies; and Story Generation and Interactive Fiction. There >will also be workshops and around twenty new systems will be demonstrated, >including the Composer system and various commercial packages. See the web >pages for more details. > >Although the deadline for paper submission is officially past we are still >interested in reviewing abstracts for presentations on the following >topics: collaborative writing, gender and or ethnicity, on-line writing >(specifically in the classroom), new computer-based genres and social >implications of new technologies. Time, however, is very tight. We would >need to receive a 500 word abstract by Friday 6th of June [sic: supposed >to read >July] (please e-mail >the abstract in ASCII form (no mime etc) together with physical and e-mail >addresses for each author). > >The cost of attending the conference is 130 pounds (which includes >accommodation for two nights). > >For more details, or to order copies of the proceedings, please contact > >Simon Shurville >The Language Centre >University of Brighton >Falmer >BN1 9PH > >E-mail: sjs16@itri.bton.ac.uk >http://www.itri.brighton.ac.uk/events/WandC97/ > > >---------------------------------------- > >Simon Shurville >The Composer Project >T 112 The Language Centre >University of Brighton >Falmer >East Sussex >England > >The web page for Writing and Computers 10 is at: >http://www.itri.brighton.ac.uk/events/WandC97 > > > > . > >------------ Forwarded Message ends here ------------ > >Michael Dickel >The University of Minnesota English Department >Student Writing Center >306a Lind Hall >625-1893 >dicke001@tc.umn.edu > >http://composition.cla.umn.edu/CourseWeb/lab.html > >Writing Support Network: http://www.writinghelp.umn.edu/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 23:17:07 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Mandel Subject: power in language Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" As Beth Joselow said to me earlier today, "when Dodie writes something I read it." This is certainly the only interest I can muster in the Dawn Din. Still, I can't help commenting on it, because it seems so odd that Bellamy and Tal and perhaps others too want to distinguish between language and physicality and to remove violence from language. Effective violence. Doesn't that seem sort of ridiculous? Language is altogether and immensely physical and effective and powerful; and this need have nothing to do with being able to translate what you say into physical fact. Would Jay Schwartz have been justified to feel a moment (or more) of fear when someone unknown to him offered via email to cut his nipples off? I think so, and that's enough for me. I think what Kim Dawn -- if such a person exists -- did is stupid. Actually, when I saw "her" first post, my initial reaction was to feel afraid for her. I nearly backchanneled her an email to be careful what she said. Expressing sexual longing (which is what her first post did) online is an invitation to be harrassed. In language and otherwise. For a long time people said that Jews had little horns on their heads, vestiges of their devilish provenance and reminders of their continued devilish connections. Those who so said had no power individually to harm those Jews. Just ordinary people. Somewhat later, Jews were made to don horns and march around town squares. Again by ordinary people. These two facts are part of one another. There is no difference (and this, btw, is why in the past I have seemed so insistant in my resistance to little "harmless" expressions that are only a little racist). I owe the apt analogy of horns on Jews to conversation with Beth too. Lisa Jarnot quoted Robert Duncan here, to the effect that we need to remember that Hitler was just another person, a human possibility perhaps not so very different from our own. Right, and it is to the seriousness of what we do and say that Robert was referring. (horns on us all, if you will). It's a shame to have to be so serious. A shame not to just be able to threaten to cut the nipples off someone one doesn't know and then call it "art." Or whatever. Instant attention. It's a "work." Someone somewhere right now is torturing someone whose opinions (or whatever else) are foreign. Cutting that person's nipples off. Obviously, these remarks don't exhaust the relationships between violence and language in art: a relationship which extends from Homer and the Torah to Burroughs, Genet, Fanon, Kathy Acker, and on. It may be necessary to embed that human issue in our work, it is necessary to some. I just can't read an uncontextualized email threat on a real person in quite that way. Anyway, once you've done it once it's kind of a bore. I find (the sexuality of) Kim Dawn's writing an utter bore (but, then, she may well find my work boring. I sure hope so). Give me George Bataille any day. Sappho. Truman Capote. Raymond Chandler. Simone Weil. Tzvetaeva. Lyn Hejinian/Carla Harryman's "The Wide Road." Or the work of Dodie Bellamy. When she writes something, I want to stop what I'm doing and read what she has written. Tom Mandel Tom Mandel tmandel@screenporch.com ******************************************************** Screen Porch * http://screenporch.com 4031 University Dr. Suite 200 * vox: 703-934-2034 Fairfax, VA 22030-3409 * fax: 703-391-6881 ******************************************************** Join the Caucus Conversation ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 1997 15:45:56 +0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rebecca Weldon Subject: Re: Tagore / Orientalism Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 09:17 AM 02/07/1997 -0400, George Thompson wrote: >On the other hand, Tagore's poetry has never worked for me. There is almost >universal deference among Bengali literati and scholars for his Bengali >poetry. But for me at least [unable to read his Bengali] his poetry does >not carry over to the English translations, which have always seemed to me >to be more or less bad pre-modern romanticism. then >Gandhi remains a more interesting figure for me, not only because of his >indisputable "truth-force" [satyagraha], which without raising a stick >*forced* the British out of India, but because he was a more astute >observer of the ways in which traditional imagery and traditional ideology >worked on his culture. > Was Tagore writing to throw out the British? Did Gandhi's success make him a poet? Have you read his autobiography? pre-modern, yes, romantic, yes, but bad? I, personally, would learn Bengali before making such a statement, not only because his fellow Bengalis think him great, but also because he translated himself most of what is translated at all. Poets of the sub-continent seem to attract bad translators and I don't think they should translate (but edit, certainly) their own work either, as so often happens. I, personally, read much more into those bad translations than you do and disagree with your assessment of Tagore. He has been translated into Thai, too; perhaps Thai is a better language for his type of poetics than English. Of course, if you don't LIKE his writing, that's an entirely different case altogether, but comparing Tagore to Gandhi is comparing the proverbial apples and oranges, isn't it? Is your orientalism showing? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 1997 15:08:48 +0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rebecca Weldon Subject: Waley reference Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" The methods of Chuang Tzu are those of the poet, and in the case of poetry analysis is useless. Arthur Waley, Three Ways of Thought in Ancient China, preface He also quotes Chuang Tzu, somewhat further on: A basket trap is for holding fish; but when one has got the fish, one thinks no more about the basket. A foot-trap is for holding hares; but when one has got the hare one need think no more about the trap. Words are for holding ideas; but when one has got the idea, one need think no more about the words. If only I could find someone who has stopped thinking about words (yen) and have him to talk (yen) to. He then proceeds to a discussion of the trials of the translator with respect to the words yen (both noun and verb words and talk), a dilemma which, I imagine, would have delighted both Chuang Tzu and Han Shan. This contemporary application of an ancient shred of verse is a clear illustration that the poetry of the original has become insubstantial when thought of in words. Think of this: if poetry is the trap, what are we catching? Given that I, myself, delight in the intricacies of translation (which often inspire me), I am hardly anti-reference. Also, I have no objection to orientalists, only think that their findings should be carefully scrutinized, if you please. Fortunately, Waley held himself to the same standards as those writers he translated, because we are much the richer for his interest in the Orient. As for Gary Snyder, I sincerely doubt that I will be able to comment upon the work in question unless someone puts it on the web, for my home is far away and my budget limits me to the internet, the New York Review of Books and Thai litterature and poetry. However, I do think that Buddhism needs some investigation on site by those interested by it because assumptions are made about the Orient on this basis. As religion becomes less important to a new generation, the devout have become positively fanatic and a collection of Buddhist Poetry would be regarded by the former as to be avoided under all circumstances in order to prevent boredom. Contrary to popular belief, not every Thai male enters the monkhood, but Thai social convention and superstition prevent open disrespect. In other words, they think the monks are full of it but are also afraid they'll be struck down by lightning for thinking. As example, a few months ago I participated in a ceremony performed for a wealthy woman by nine monks who received very generous donations to their respective temples. After the service, while being escorted home, several were heard to be discussing using the donations to travel to the United States to visit temples there. And, although I do not equate this type of behavior with Buddhism, I can see how people would become disillusioned by their religion when it's practitioners act in such a manner. I do not intend to participate at this time in a discussion of religion, belief and practice and will not repond to anyone who does, but use the point to debunk certain myths of the Orient. As I said, Western Oriental Societies are quite fascinating. To close this off and with respect to purifying ears, I would like to point out that the hermits et al of Chuang Tzu fame were mostly musicians running away from Confucius. I would imagine they ran to water (rivers, springs, oceans, ponds) not to purify but to bring to mind the changeable nature of water itself. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 1997 16:28:05 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Dan Raphael Dlugonski Subject: From: Kali Tal Re: Poems/Identities & someone else on reaching a broad audience Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Since i get digest and then only read them every third day or so, so on a bit of atime warp I work with the public (state employee) and consciously refer--exept for those occasions where i'm comfortable just going on a first name basis (my office is in a wealthy suburb)--to all women as Ms (& men as Mr.). yes, there will for a long time be people & institutions holding on to old prejedicial notions, but cant let their attitudes hold back a useful tool for change (to get to a place where Miss & Mrs are perhaps the slang terms, and Ms is standard.) Like in those occasions where my writing needs a 3rd person that could be either gender, i use e (or er for pssessive.) as to the other comment, i feel the best way to reach the bropasedest audience is to intuitigely get inside language, get language speaking through you. you need to do the opposite of 'try', which may be 'be.' this does not mean leaving the self out (tho it usuals means leaving out intentions and plans) since all music is influenced by instrument its coming out of (& considering the musician as part of the instrument.) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 1997 19:14:35 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Maria Damon Subject: Re: fwd, conferences In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-From_: owner-cafs-f2@tc.umn.edu Mon Jun 30 12:36 CDT 1997 Mime-Version: 1.0 Approved-By: Center for Advanced Feminist Studies Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 12:35:22 -0500 Reply-To: Center for Advanced Feminist Studies Sender: Affiliated Faculty - CAFS =46rom: Center for Advanced Feminist Studies Subject: Conferences Comments: To: cafs-stu@tc.umn.edu To: Multiple recipients of list CAFS-F2 REVEALING MALE BODIES Edited by Nancy Tuana, William Cowling, Maurice Hamington, Greg Johnson, and Terrance MacMullan We invite submissions for an anthology of original essays exploring the experience of male embodiment to be published by Indiana University Press. Revealing Male Bodies will examine how men's bodies are physically and experientially constituted by the economic, theoretical, and social practices in which men are immersed. This anthology will consciously respond to the challenge raised by feminist theorists to provide explorations of male lived experiences. Articles addressing, but not limited to, the following topics are sought: * Intersections of Race and Maleness * Phenomenologies of Male Embodiment * The Social Construction of Male Bodies and Male Lived Experience * Relations Between Male Bodies and Power * The Epistemological Significance of Male Bodies * The Male Body as a Site of Resistance * Relations Between Cultural Imagery of Maleness and Lived Male Experience * The Impact of Male Lived Experience on Cognitive or Creative Activities In addition to the above topics, the editors are interested in articles that address the intersections of phenomenological and social constructivist methodologies, as well as pieces that provide avenues for dealing with male bodies and male embodiment in ways that avoid or transform traditional understandings of essentialism. We encourage works that reflect diverse approaches, methodologies, and styles. Given the anthology's multi-disciplinary character, we invite papers which balance rigorous scholarship and general accessibility. There will be a two step review process. If you are interested in writing for this anthology please submit an abstract of no more than 500 words and a vita by January 15, 1998. Based upon a review of the abstracts, potential contributors will be notified to submit a completed paper for consideration. The deadline for submission of the final article is July 1, 1998. Please send two hard copies of abstracts to: Nancy Tuana Department of Philosophy University of Oregon Eugene, OR 97403-1295 =46or questions or correspondence contact: Maurice Hamington 835 Edgewood Dr. Albany, OR 97321 (541) 917-8766 hamingts@ucs.orst.edu ************** =46rom:=86Katherine Side International Conference on: MOTHERS AND DAUGHTERS: MOVING INTO THE NEXT MILLENIUM Sept.26-28, 1997 York University Positioned at the threshold of the new millennium, this interdisciplinary conference aims to consider the most recent scholarship on mothers and daughters and investigate the concerns of mothers and daughters as they enter the next century. This conference will bring together the majo= r writers in this area along with interested academics, students and activists in order to promote the development and dissemination of feminist scholarhip on mothers and daughters. Keynote speakers at the conference will include Miriam Johnson, Christina Baker, Sara Ruddick, Helen Lucey, Katherine Arnup, Patricia Bell-Scott, Suzanna Walters, Marianne Hirsch, Paula Caplan, Janet Burstein, Naomi Lowinski, Sylvia Hamilton and Esther Broner. Participants will have the opportunity to hear all the keynote speakers, as well as to choose from 34 conference sessions which are grouped broadly around the themes of disability, popular culture, state, feminist theory, lesbian mothering, literature, biography, race, class, education and family. Conference Agenda: =46riday, Sept 26 2-4pm Registration 4-6pm Concurrent Sessions: Reproduction, Lesbian Mothering, Writing and Mothering, Immigrant Mothering, Biracial Mother/ Daughter Relationships, When Daughters are not Mothers, Power and Violence, The Las= t Closet: Motherhood and the Visual Arts. 6-7pm Dinner 7-9pm Keynote Event I - MOTHERS, DAUGHTERS AND FEMINISM 9-11pm Reception Saturday, Sept 27 8-8:30am Breakfast 8:30-10:30am Keynote Event II - MOTHERS AND DAUGHTERS: RACE, CLASS, SEXUALITY 10:30-11am Coffee Break 11-1pm Concurrent Sessions: Disability, Representations in Popular Culture: Media, Domestic Workers, Representation and Maternal Identities, Children's Literature, Aging and Motherloss, Motherwork, Third Wave: Initiatives in Education. 1-2pm Lunch 2-3:45pm Keynote Event III - MOTHERS, DAUGHTERS AND REPRESENTATION 3:45-4pm Coffee Break 4-6pm Concurrent Sessions: Home and School, State Policy, Theorizing Mother/Daughter Relationships, Canadian Literature, Bad Mothering, Personal Stories of Self as Mother, Class and Mothering, Young Girls Speak Out. 6-8pm Dinner 8-11pm Cabaret Sunday, Sept 28 8-8:30am Breakfast 8:30-10:30am Concurrent Sessions: Theorizing Mothering, Genre, Voices of Mothers and Daughters, Mothering Across Cultures in Literature #1, Jewish Mothering, =46eminist Socialization, Mothering a= nd Health, Teachers as Women: Creating Space for Girls' Voices While Exploring Their Own. 10:30-11am Coffee Break 11-1pm Concurrent Sessions: Representation in Film, Black Parenting, Coming Out as a Lesbian Mother, Infertility, Mothering in the Life Cycle, Mothering Across Cultures in Literature #2, Domineering Mothers? Resistin= g Daughters? Mother-Daughter Narrative= s in the Teaching and Learning of Women's Studies. 1-2pm Lunch 2-4:30pm Keynote Event IV - MOTHERS AND DAUGHTERS: TELLING OUR STORIES CONFERENCE REGISTRATION: Cost: $150 - regular $60 - student, limited number available To register for this event, please send the following information (via email= , fax or mail) and a cheque to: Cheryl Dobinson Centre for Feminist Research 228 York Lanes York University 4700 Keele Street North York, ON M3J 1P3 Canada phone: (416) 736-5915 fax: (416) 736-5416 email: cjdobins@yorku.ca IF YOU REQUIRE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE MOTHERS AND DAUGHTERS CONFERENCE, PLEASE CONTACT US AT THE CENTRE FOR FEMINIST RESEARCH, AS PER ABOVE. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jul 1997 20:54:50 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "David R. Israel" Subject: origins MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT A friend sent me these lines; I'm unfamiliar with the translation, but it seems a telling specimen of this poet's fine utterance. I am a mountain. My words, my sounds are from my beloved. I am a painting. My beloved is my painter. Did you think these are my words? They are the sounds Which come after the key turns in the lock. Translated by Dr. Nevit O. Ergin d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 16:54:51 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: +++christine+++ Subject: call for action Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" fwd message: >arts-alert-usa-------------- (RED)----------------------(7/3/1997) >The full House vote on the Interior Appropriations Bill which includes the >provision to cut the NEA by 90% to $10 million moves to the house floor on >July 9. Emergency action is required. Please contact your representatives >over the July 4 holiday to make sure that YOUR views are heard on the >preservation and nurturing of our American culture and its institutions. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 14:41:28 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Bromige Subject: Stepping down (by God) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" As you know, a mortal can only be God for a day. It was curiously refreshing, as you'll see when your turn comes around. Nothing to prove any more. Anxiety free. But then, a little tiresome, having to watch every sparrow fall. And knowing ahead of time that it is about to fall. Mark Weiss, dont blame yourself, I made you post that private message, publicly. I made Henry G post that message against further provocation that included in qualifying what had looked like a previous apology the possibility of provoking david bromige further. I made Alson Nielsen listen to an hour of Bob Dylan to find phrases for his postings. Yes, and I held up the List for my day, just to let matters cool down a bit. And I decided to have Aldon expose the david bromige/kali tal hoax, & to let Charles Alexander confirm it with his posting that revealed david bromige was in tucson addressing a group of which Kali Tal is a member and yet as we some of us know Kali Tal was _not_ present at this event. (Subtle of Charles not to mention this last fact. I make Charles subtle). Yes, & I found Susan Schulz a new place to live, there on Hui Iwa. But thats the end of good deeds, I'm stepping back into my "real""actual""true""valid" i.d. as davy b. Oh, two final acts as God: Mike Magee, I never said I was fair, only just : as in, "Crushed balls? No penis? Well that's *just* too bad. You cant come into the synagogue, because thats just too bad." And Douglas Barbour : I made you post that wonderful piece of canadian speech to show how God works. First, he sets your brain on fire; next, he has people pissing all over you in an attempt to get it in your ear. Hope you-all werent too shocked when I had Kali Tal expose her role-playing in this recent "my-brain's-on-fire" spectacle. David Bromige, going to mop myself up now. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 16:33:56 PDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Secretariaat Germaanse Subject: Re: Stanza Breaks? (Re: a poem) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII So we actually ARE on a poetics list... This sounds like a real question, and interesting too (no irony) geert buelens university of antwerp On Thu, 3 Jul 1997 14:58:36 +0000 Joseph Zitt wrote: > Subject: Stanza Breaks? (Re: a poem) > To: POETICS@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu > > A possibly naive question on your poem: Why do the stanzas break where > they do? I'd looked at it, shifting the breaks around, and their > positioning didn't seem to have much effect. Was there a pattern I'm > missing? > > (I wonder this about a *lot* of poetry, especially those, such as this > one, in which the stanzas in a section are of uniform length in a way > that seems unrelated to the content. This is just the first chance I've > taken to actually ask someone.) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 13:56:24 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Susan Landers Subject: Mid-Atlantic GLBT Writers Conference Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On October 31 thru November 2, there will be an Mid-Atlantic Gay, Lesbian, Bi and Trans Writers Conference in Washington DC, sponsored by the Lambda Book Report, a montly book review of GLBT literature. The conference will include panels, workshops, and performances by poets, fiction writers, essayist, etc. from Massachusetts all the way down to Florida. (Mid-Atlantic is a somewhat loose term). Attendees are encouraged to come costumed as their favorite author or character on the first evening. It will be held at the Washington Plaza Hotel near Dupont Circle. Room rates are $99/night. If interested in participating, or for more information, please contact: Sue Landers at LBRAdvert@aol.com. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 17:07:51 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Chris [Steve] Piuma" Subject: _flim: a free page_, Volume one, Issue seven, now online. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable _flim: a free page_ _flim_ 1/7 is now online. Come check it out at http://www.brainlink.com/~cafard/flim/flim0107.html This month's goodies include: * Kora in Heck: Improvidences by Chris Piuma "Toothpaste is sickness. Proof is in the prof. Try loop-the-loops to link?" * Wicked Witch of the East Smashed Potatoes by Wednesday Gross [the winning recipe from contest no. 5] "This is not company food. It is _comfort_ food. Yum. Life is good." * another excerpt from The Map of the World of Products by Deirdre Day-MacLeod. "...full of ideas like maple syrup on pancakes and clam chowder..." * A is for abecedarium by Chris Piuma "H is for humanity. I is for me." That's it this time around; Kora in Heck is a bit long. The printed version should be out in a few days, along with the printed version of issue 1/6. _flim_ is currently jumping up and down looking for submissions. Any original piece of writing in paragraph form from 50-450 words will be considered, the quirkier the better. Previous issues have included jokes, recipes, prose poems, reviews, parodies, rewritings of older texts, randomly splayed bits of punctuation, and translations of articles from previous issues. It comes out more or less once a month, in both WWW and paper format [in both cases, just one page long]. _flim_ is edited by Chris Piuma [cafard@brainlink.com]. -- Chris [Steve] Piuma, etc. Nothing is at: http://www.brainlink.com/~cafa= rd flim: http://www.brainlink.com/~cafard/flim/index.html from the current issu= e: "Never see you these days. Work Syndrome. Sick policies. A full time thousan= d." ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 19:26:45 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "David R. Israel" Subject: Re: Tagore / Orientalism / Ray MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Interesting observations, Steven Marks, about visuality/ scene "framing" in Satiyajit Ray's early films. You note, > And to tie Ray with Tagore, Ray attended Tagore's famous school, > Santinikaten. More than that, Ray made several films based on Tagore stories -- such as (I believe) the very lovely black & white film *Charulatta*. This film includes an interesting scene of the "process of poetry writing". The heroine, Charulatta, is being taught to read and write Bengali, and we see her in the midst of early experiences of poetry composition. (It seems a useful "classic" film passage, perhaps, for considering how that process is understood & portrayed.) The later Ray film *The Home and the World* (Ghair / Bhair I think is the Bengali) is based on an epistolary novel by Tagore. I suspect there may've been other films by Ray likewise based on Tagore's stories -- he was a novelist and a fine short story writer, as well as a poet & composer & -- later in life -- a rather experimental painter. I don't think I'll enter into the Tagore (and/or Gandhi) debate at leasts until returning to the NYROB article & finishing it -- I read some paragraphs a while ago while dining at Planet Hollywood -- learned (at least) that Tagore was evidently the source (or popularizer) of the honorific "Mahatma" . . . I found myself mentally quibbling with the article's attempt to demystify Tagore, in the sense of seeming to suggest it's a mistake to view him as a mystic. True, it may be a mistake to construe him as a mystic as that term was (rather narrowly) conceived by some in the early part of this century. Found it interesting that Pound was an early advocate on Tagore's behalf -- and that Yeates was (evidently) later so strongly anti-Tagore (after having 1st been so starry-eyed an admirer) . . . Anyway, I think the world of Tagore and his writing, and -- like Rebecca -- find there's a tremendous lot one can get from (or read into) his poetry. I can understand the reaction and how it can be read as seeming like "sentimental romantic" stuff, but I find it's pretty easy to get beyond such (imho) superficial response, even with the English versions done by Tagore (which are, certainly, in the late Victorian mold) -- and very rewarding to do so. Interesting that Tagore seems to have been admired by a number of Latin American poets (as witness, for instance, Neruda's translation of at least one of his poems). But I wasn't going to say anything . . . . cheers, d.i. . . . . . . . . . \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////\\\\\ \ david raphael israel \ washington d c / davidi@wizard.net (home) / disrael@skgf.com (office) / ===================== | poets weave the net of you | with golden-image thread | painters limn the form of you | ever & afresh ... | one half of you is woman | the other utter dream | | Tagore, "Manasi" (a la d.i.) ///////////////////////////////////\\\\\///// ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 19:41:51 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michael Magee Subject: Re: Harryette Mullen, part II In-Reply-To: from "jarnot@PIPELINE.COM" at Jul 3, 97 09:13:52 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yes! that's the other one I was thinking of.. -m. According to jarnot@PIPELINE.COM: > > there's also an interview with harryette mullen (by barbara henning) in the > oct/nov 1996 poetry project newsletter available for $5.00 from the poetry > project, st. mark's church, 131 east 10th street, ny, ny 10003. > ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 17:23:35 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Surely a mistake on Delmore's part. The oral history makes plain the regard in which Stevens was held in the field--one high executive claims that Stevens revolutionized aspects of the insurance business. At 09:36 AM 7/4/97 +0800, you wrote: >Re Wallace Stevens the insurance lawyer, Delmore Schwartz used to >claim that he had met someone from Hartford Life and, thinking to >surprise him, told him about the great poet who worked there. The >insurance executive replied that Hartford Life's management all knew >about Stevens poetry, that he was not much good as an attorney,but they >kept him around because of the prestige he brought the firm. > >Delmore S is a less than reliable narrator, but I think there is some >necessary truth in the anecdote, irrespective of the particulars. > > ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 18:04:28 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Bromige Subject: try reading these 44 in reverse order Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" leastwise, thats the order in which mine are posted. David B ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 18:34:20 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Re: identity >Here's an identity question: If Bambi the deer is supposed to succeed "his" >father as king of the forest "he" must be male. So is it just a colossal >example of inattentiveness that generations of little girls (and never >little boys) get named Bambi, or was that deer in drag? Bet you can blame Disney for that. (And what *can't* you blame Walt for?) Disney took Felix Salton's quite potent fawn-to-buck bildungsroman and wimped the resourceful protagonist up into a doe-eyed Steif cuddly-toy, feminizing him so effectively that they never even considered doing Salton's *second* Bambi book on screen, _Bambi's Children_, cause it's just too silly to think that the high-voiced adolescent could ever get up the gumption to *breed*. Besides, nobody ever reads _The Yearling_ anymore, and few people have any concept of the viciousness of a cornered deer. Disney's Bambi never could be the kind of King of the Forest that, say, the Lion King could pull off--the lion's a predator, for crissake. And what chance does an *herbivore* have to be manly anyway, especially if he ain't an elephant (cause size *does* matter, y'know). It's sorta like little boys get called "Tiger" and little girls get called "Kitten." There're both male and female housecats, but no *real* man would ever compare himself to a housecat, right? So, no *real* man would ever name his boy after a deer 'cause it gets eaten by real men (and he-man animals like wolves and mountain lions). All this animal identity stuff gets so complicated, doesn't it? Like Lassie (who was supposed to be a female dog character) being portrayed by a series of male dogs who apparently could pull off playing females better than any of their female counterparts. Sure, inattentiveness probably has something to do with it (I mean, you don't expect a lot of attention from people who name their daughters Bambi, right?), but I think animal gender stereotyping is THE REAL ISSUE HERE. Now me, I'm low-slung, I weigh 140, got big nasty teeth, and a helluva snarl. You won't catch anybody trying to get underneath me to see if I'm male or female, and that's a good thing 'cause I'd bite their fucking face off. World would be a better place if people started naming their daughters after me, I think... Spike the pit bull "On the Internet no one knows you're a dog." ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 18:55:48 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: identity Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" So if I named my daughter Lassie I'd be inadvertently naming her after a transvestite? At 06:34 PM 7/6/97 +0100, you wrote: >>Here's an identity question: If Bambi the deer is supposed to succeed "his" >>father as king of the forest "he" must be male. So is it just a colossal >>example of inattentiveness that generations of little girls (and never >>little boys) get named Bambi, or was that deer in drag? > >Bet you can blame Disney for that. (And what *can't* you blame Walt for?) >Disney took Felix Salton's quite potent fawn-to-buck bildungsroman and >wimped the resourceful protagonist up into a doe-eyed Steif cuddly-toy, >feminizing him so effectively that they never even considered doing Salton's >*second* Bambi book on screen, _Bambi's Children_, cause it's just too silly >to think that the high-voiced adolescent could ever get up the gumption to >*breed*. Besides, nobody ever reads _The Yearling_ anymore, and few people >have any concept of the viciousness of a cornered deer. Disney's Bambi >never could be the kind of King of the Forest that, say, the Lion King could >pull off--the lion's a predator, for crissake. And what chance does an >*herbivore* have to be manly anyway, especially if he ain't an elephant >(cause size *does* matter, y'know). It's sorta like little boys get called >"Tiger" and little girls get called "Kitten." There're both male and female >housecats, but no *real* man would ever compare himself to a housecat, >right? So, no *real* man would ever name his boy after a deer 'cause it >gets eaten by real men (and he-man animals like wolves and mountain lions). >All this animal identity stuff gets so complicated, doesn't it? Like Lassie >(who was supposed to be a female dog character) being portrayed by a series >of male dogs who apparently could pull off playing females better than any >of their female counterparts. Sure, inattentiveness probably has something >to do with it (I mean, you don't expect a lot of attention from people who >name their daughters Bambi, right?), but I think animal gender stereotyping >is THE REAL ISSUE HERE. > >Now me, I'm low-slung, I weigh 140, got big nasty teeth, and a helluva >snarl. You won't catch anybody trying to get underneath me to see if I'm >male or female, and that's a good thing 'cause I'd bite their fucking face >off. World would be a better place if people started naming their daughters >after me, I think... > >Spike the pit bull >"On the Internet no one knows you're a dog." > > ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 19:02:12 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: identity Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Here's a thought. Lots of films are shot in different language versions--a take in English,a take in German, remember which is which when you splice them together, and voila! Two markets without the expense of dubbing. By analogy, maybe Disney could do two versions of films. If there's a Lion King, why not a Lion Queen? How about Prince Charming and the Seven Dwarfs? (Not clear what they could do with Pocahontas or Hercules) ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 22:08:33 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Dave Zauhar Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" "It's also bad karma to work at a job full-time and not go at it as seriously as you were going at being a full-time poet. Wallace Stevens, incidently, was not just an insurance man. He was vice-president of the Hartford Casualty Company. I mean there's no sense fooling around; if you're going to do something, you might as well be good at it." --Ted Berrigan, from _Ted Berrigan On the Level Everyday_, edited by list-member Joel Lewis. DZ >Surely a mistake on Delmore's part. The oral history makes plain the regard >in which Stevens was held in the field--one high executive claims that >Stevens revolutionized aspects of the insurance business. > > >At 09:36 AM 7/4/97 +0800, you wrote: >>Re Wallace Stevens the insurance lawyer, Delmore Schwartz used to >>claim that he had met someone from Hartford Life and, thinking to >>surprise him, told him about the great poet who worked there. The >>insurance executive replied that Hartford Life's management all knew >>about Stevens poetry, that he was not much good as an attorney,but they >>kept him around because of the prestige he brought the firm. >> >>Delmore S is a less than reliable narrator, but I think there is some >>necessary truth in the anecdote, irrespective of the particulars. >> >> ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 18:57:54 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Re: identity >So if I named my daughter Lassie I'd be inadvertently naming her after a >transvestite? Well, no, you wouldn't be. That's the funny thing. I mean, it's hard to consider the male dog who played Lassie as a dog-in-drag, cause he was just walkin around bein the dog that he is. It's *people* who were looking at a male dog doing his basic male dog thing and *seein* a female dog. And the reason they were mistakin a male dog for a female dog is cause whoever was in charge of the show decided that a *real* female dog just, wouldn't, well *look* like an impressive enough animal for the audience, but that the *role* required that people *believe* they were seein a female dog. This is weird on so many levels it just leaves me scratchin. Spike ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 19:57:58 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: identity Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Actually, the tradition of boy-for-girl dog goes way back to the very first Lassie film (perhaps analogous to the practice of all-male casts in Shakespeare's day?). That first dog had to be trained to act female, but none of the other males would drink with him afterwards. At 06:57 PM 7/6/97 +0100, you wrote: >>So if I named my daughter Lassie I'd be inadvertently naming her after a >>transvestite? > >Well, no, you wouldn't be. That's the funny thing. I mean, it's hard to >consider the male dog who played Lassie as a dog-in-drag, cause he was just >walkin around bein the dog that he is. It's *people* who were looking at a >male dog doing his basic male dog thing and *seein* a female dog. And the >reason they were mistakin a male dog for a female dog is cause whoever was >in charge of the show decided that a *real* female dog just, wouldn't, well >*look* like an impressive enough animal for the audience, but that the >*role* required that people *believe* they were seein a female dog. This is >weird on so many levels it just leaves me scratchin. > >Spike > > ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 23:30:30 -0400 Reply-To: "David Erben (Art)" Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "David Erben (Art)" Subject: identity Comments: To: UB Poetics discussion group MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Some interesting things have been written about identity and poetics, but before I offer even a quick response, I would like to make a remark or two about passages from some of the recent exchanges that...well, the more I thought about them, the more they troubled me. I'm wondering why it is necessary or even whether it is such a good idea to make sweeping formulaic generalizations that contrast academics with non-academics and critics with artists. I really do not know what is meant by these terms or even why they are being used. Now I can understand talking about specific texts and specific writers, but I have to wonder what is up when people (and texts) are lumped into broad categories. I know we like to think we're in the business of analysis on this list (some of us even fancy ourselves historical analysts), but such monolithic characterizations as these seem both reductive and lacking in a certain respect for the people (and texts) involved. I would have hoped that at least some of the thinking about reading and writing over the past twenty or so years (including, say, some of Derrida's -- say his arguments against thematism in Mallarme criticism in the second half of "The Double Session") has at least demonstrated the dangers of such reduction (even if it is convenient when it comes time to talk about such things to give a sort of formula and ask everyone to plug it in ...some of my particularly geeky science friends would love it). Think of it... "academic" ... "critic" ... "theory" ... "artist" (and all the writers and texts these terms include) all wrapped up in a neat package of quick-thaw historical and philosophical assumptions and grounds: diverse and complex writing and people reduced to single, simple terms. Bang. It's done. Hardly seems necessary to read... I don't know.. I realize certain shorthands are necessary for these discussions...but it seems to me that we are supposed to be in the business of reading and reading implies a sensitivity to the complexity of each work in our hands (and posts on our screen) and formulations like these elide over that sensitivity. To be honest, the truth is, when I read, I don't read "writers"; I read texts. Some of these texts are signed by good people (Frank) some are signed by bad people (Celine, Pound) ...I read for that (and the implications of those signatures) too. Some of these texts I read as fascist or postcolonial or artsy fartsy or whatever ...I try and understand that (and the operations of engaging with those texts) too. Now, with email,it seems to me the signature is even more problematic and I, for one, am not nearly as comfy as some people have been in drawing conclusions from the words on my screen about the people at the keyboard. Anyway, Celine is possibly a good signature to bring up in this context. It has always seemed to me that despite everyone's best efforts to make them so given what we know about the author, Celine's novels turn out to e not fascist at all. In fact, when I read them, they actually, by some amazing transformation of ideology and language within style, fight against almost everything that is fascist about literature and learning in the Western world, particularly in the 20th Century. Just read the brilliant and hilarious introduction to *Guignol's Band* for a dramatic example of this...it works in the most comically absolute ways against absolutism, including its own. This is not an argument about intentionality or personal politics, this is just my delighted reading of especially the first five novels. The pamphlets are of course the worst sort of fascism and anti-Semitism, and should be read rigourously in these terms; not merely to indict yet another dead author, but to detail the workings of this sort of discourse. But the novels are so often in precisely the opposite spirit of the boring repetitive pamphlets that they too deserve to be read as the peculiar often perversely joyous discourses they offer. I find them, in many places, actually quite liberating. I have just finished reading the new translation of *London Bridge* (the sequel to *Guignol's Band*) and find some of the comic scenes in there (those in the home of the gas-masker for instance) worthy of the best 20th Century irony and satire. (I think there is, I should perhaps mention, far more fascism at work in certain texts of Disney or Stallone than in any of Louis-Ferdinand's fiction.) ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 21:24:26 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Christopher Reiner Subject: Yasusada, Identity, Witz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" This is just to say that the new Witz is out (5.2 for those keeping track), and it features an article by Mikhail Epstein--"Some Speculations on the Mystery of Araki Yasusada." Epstein's piece deals with "the construction of authorship" and places the "Yasusada" work in the Russian literary tradition of the "multi-generic form of diaries, letters, verses, comments, etc." He offers two hypotheses regarding the possible authorship of the Yasusada poems...both with a Russian connection. It's a fascinating essay. Also in the new issue: an essay by William Marsh on "Memory, Hypertext & Poetry"; a review of Joe Ross's "The Fuzzy Logic Series" from Chris Stroffolino; and a response by Stephen Ellis to Jefferson Hansen's "Anarchism and Culture" essay in Witz 4.3. Witz is available only by mail from the publisher. Individual copies are $4. Subscriptions are $10 for three issues. The address is: Witz, P.O. Box 40012, Studio City, California 91614. Please make checks out to Christopher Reiner. Note to current subscribers and contributors: I just mailed the new issue out the other day, so please give it a few days to reach you. Thanks, Chris creiner@crl.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 12:59:38 +0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Schuchat Simon Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII seemed to me the point of the Schwartz anecdote about Wallace "I led two lives" Stevens was not so much that it denigrated Stevens' insurance skills as it highlit the way in which Stevens career, as poet, profited immensely from the "paradox" of his day job. There was obviously something in our culture that was reassured that avant garde poetry could be written by insurance executives and suburban obstreticians -- or if it wasn't "the culture," at least Time magazine liked it. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 22:10:45 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Interesting. I wasn't aware that Time had taken up the case of Dr. Williams, but if it did it must have been very late in his career (I don't think the rag existed until the mid thirties). I know very little about the popular reception of Stevens' poetry, beyond some anecdotes. When did Time discover and embrace Stevens? Elucidation, please. I think strong case could be and has been made for the importance of his practice to Williams' poetry, despite his frequent irritation about it. Good to remember that Desert Music and Asphodel got writ after his retirement. As for the effect of the corporate millieu or the intricacies of insurance law on The Emperor of Icecream, quien sabe? One would like to think that there was some, but then one would have to look for the impact of the business on Ives' music (other than to limit his production) or watercolor painting on Ruggles, or the influence of the customs shed on Rousseau, or, for that matter, on the Melville of Billy Budd and the Hawthorne of the Tales and the early novels. Much as I like to believe in the unitary life (perhaps as elusive as the unitary personality), I know that people have the capacity to encapsulate aspects of their lives (and selves)--sometimes there appears to be no influence from one side of the wall to the other. At 12:59 PM 7/7/97 +0800, you wrote: >seemed to me the point of the Schwartz anecdote about Wallace "I led two >lives" Stevens was not so much that it denigrated Stevens' insurance >skills as it highlit the way in which Stevens career, as poet, profited >immensely from the "paradox" of his day job. There was obviously >something in our culture that was reassured that avant garde poetry could >be written by insurance executives and suburban obstreticians -- or if it >wasn't "the culture," at least Time magazine liked it. > > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 07:22:11 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "L. MacMahon and T.R. Healy" Subject: american language Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I wonder if the pink chartreuse is really cerise, a shade of pink known to make great demands on the nervous system, in disguise. Randolph Healy ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 06:13:24 -0400 Reply-To: daniel7@IDT.NET Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Daniel Zimmerman Organization: Bard-O Subject: Re: american language MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit L. MacMahon and T.R. Healy wrote: > > I wonder if the pink chartreuse is really cerise, a shade of pink known to > make great demands on the nervous system, in disguise. > > Randolph Healy Cerise and chartreuse may appear as retinal afterimages of each other. Look at a large, brightly lit area of either color for afew minutes, then look at a white wall lit less brilliantly. What do you see? --Dan Zimmerman ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 08:13:05 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Thompson Subject: Re: Tagore / Orientalism Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" A few words [relatvely] in response to Rebecca Weldon's observations: > >Was Tagore writing to throw out the British? Did Gandhi's success make him >a poet? Have you read his autobiography? pre-modern, yes, romantic, yes, >but bad? >I, personally, would learn Bengali before making such a statement, not only >because his fellow Bengalis think him great, but also because he translated >himself most of what is translated at all. Poets of the sub-continent seem >to attract bad translators and I don't think they should translate (but >edit, certainly) their own work either, as so often happens. > >I, personally, read much more into those bad translations than you do and >disagree with your assessment of Tagore. He has been translated into Thai, >too; perhaps Thai is a better language for his type of poetics than English. >Of course, if you don't LIKE his writing, that's an entirely different case >altogether, but comparing Tagore to Gandhi is comparing the proverbial >apples and oranges, isn't it? Is your orientalism showing? I'm perfectly willing to leave this as a matter of personal taste and to let it go at that. Please note that I did hedge my judgment of T's English poetry a little bit, though perhaps not enough for your taste. But a few brief points: 1. I compared Tagore and Gandhi because that is what the article did which Steven Marks inquired about. It was called "Tagore and His India" and was much more about T's role in "his India" than about his poetry. The article is based on a comparison of two huge icons looming over post-independence India. In this sense both T & G are apples. 2. Actually, if anything is showing in my post it is probably the influence of the modernism of Pound and Yeats, et al., which has permanently determined the way in which I hear, and don't hear, poetry [permanently? well, maybe not]. 3. The damage that the British occupation of India has done to India was / is not just economic, of course. For several centuries Indian intellectual discourse has been dominated by British modes, and I think you can see both T & G coming to terms with this domination [and independence from it] in different ways. I think that most students of India [Indologists] would agree that in many ways the very notion of "Hinduism", and the self-designation "I am Hindu", is largely a British [& European] invention. You would see my orientalism showing most nakedly, I suppose, if you asked me my opinion of the the behavior of the British in India [or China, etc.]: it was *utterly* detestable. And you would understand why I admire so much Gandhi's quick response to a reporter's question: What do you think of western civilization? He said, of course: "It would be a good idea." George Thompson p.s. Speaking of detestable, there is a vile quote from D.H. Lawrence in the article. Check it out! I also deeply admire Ray's films. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 08:41:03 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "David R. Israel" Subject: Re: american language / afterimages Comments: cc: Daniel Zimmerman MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Randolph Healy wrote: > I wonder if the pink chartreuse is really cerise, a shade of pink > known to make great demands on the nervous system, in disguise. and Daniel Zimmerman replied: > Cerise and chartreuse may appear as retinal afterimages of each > other. Look at a large, brightly lit area of either color for afew > minutes, then look at a white wall lit less brilliantly. What do you > see? The afterimage -- suggesting a neural (at least) opposite, may have a number of correlates on other levels of psyche & perception. The phonemic particulars (chartreuse / cerise) are no addicent. Consider these afterimages: excuse / caprise caboose / valise abuse / release noose / lease goose / niece use / peace look at any first term, then shut your eyes, and like as not, the 2nd term will be standing there before you. And if (for instance) the goose were attired in chartreuse, what sort of outfit do you think the niece will be wearing? I rest my case (or, as my be, valise). d.i. p.s.: btw, what sort of "demands on the nervous system" is cerise "known to make" I wonder? (Does this mean that beholding the color is a somewhat trying experience?) Are there correlative -- or expandable -- color responses? A shade that produces sweet quietude. A hue that elicits profound confusion. A tint that evokes langour. A color known to be rather dangerous, as its use contributes to a level of cognitive comprehension, the results of which appear (to those not accustomed to the color and its results) as iconoclasm, argumentativeness, or bad listserv behavior. A combination of shades that instantly establishes harmonious interpersonal & interspecies dealings. (Like, say, azure?) p.p.s.: this chartuese / cerise thread calls to mind some of our other interesting (or slightly rarer) color terms: azure, kelly, taupe, ecru, crimson, scarlet, celedon -- p.p.p.s. recalls a poem of Han Shan's (per moi): What birds express my heart cannot endure when so I lie down in my rustic hermitage the peach & cherry turning scarlet-scarlet the willow & poplar don their slender foliage the morning sun o'er-saling azurite hills clear clouds bathe in the kelly pond who know I pass beyond the dusty world in swift ascent of the south slope of Han Shan? d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 09:25:45 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mary Hilton Subject: New primitive publications chapbook Announcing "Taken", a stunning new chapbook by Sherry Brennan. In this work, Brennan challenges how the west was won, and what we have all lost in the meantime. Rod Smith writes about this work: "This book is an actual "shape. saying. cast open"-- & so, reader, respond. Sherry Brennan's "Taken" can and does stun our reread space. Sourcing Black Elk, Black Francis, and Afraid of the Enemy should work if you've got the energy, & she does. "Beowulf is not in the poem Taken. It is in the way in which a poem is a body. shot through." Time or a voice in this work, a very sudden history, A Poet." primitive publications is a press dedicated to historically influenced literature. Cost of one chapbook is $4.00, or $20.00 for a subscription of six. Other titles include: "The History of the State May Last, 1616" by Mary Hilton "The Haunted Baronet" by Mark Wallace "Lead, Glass and Poppy" by Kristin Prevallet "Why I Am Not a Christian" by Jefferson Hansen All checks may be made payable to Mary Hilton and mailed to: primitive publications c/o Mary Hilton, editor 1706 U Street, NW, #102 Washington, DC 20009 e-mail: 74463.1505@compuserve.com *or* mhilton@tia.org Inquires, submissions, or requests to be included on the mailing list are welcome. Thank you. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 09:32:31 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Prejsnar Subject: Re: A List of Poetry Schools Revisited Comments: To: Bob Grumman In-Reply-To: <33BB87AC.5EE3@nut-n-but.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, Bob Grumman wrote: > It has been a little over a month since I posted my List of (American) > Poetry Schools hoping for corrections, additions, comments. . . . I got > a few back-channeled comments but not a single concrete suggestion, > privately or publicly, for the improvement of the list. I think it's > important enough to repeat, though, so here it is again, with a few > changes that I hope are improvements. > > > > LANGUAGE POETRY (or "Acadominant" Poetry) > Bob---- ...Uh "acadominant"??? seems pretty snide...er, pretty inaccurate too. May fit in well with the general feel of the list right now, though, which despite individuals involved with launching it seems (rather mindlessly) hostile recently to langpo as a historical frame of ref...I've never come close to being an academic (just a wage slave scurrying around in the interstices of the machine) but langpo don't look too dominant in academe from where I'm sitting...Nor dominated *by* academe (the other way of unpacking this.) Surely "jump-cut" was only a good way to think of Ashbery around Tennis Court Oath time, with rapid montage and cutup techniques making his work rapid and shifting..Much of it since then has had a smoother flow. Bleed-fade transitions, maybe, but not a structure based on jump-cutting... Of course there's some question as to *why* do this kind of lumping..But it brings up issues about poetry that are interesting to talk about. I feel that the answer to your question, re no one responding to your earlier posts, has something to do with the list becoming a space for chatter. All listservs go thru periods like that, unfortunately. Mark P. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 10:33:12 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jordan Davis Subject: Re: try reading these 44 in reverse order In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Simplicity, when you tie a ribbon over the middle of the word, gives you Sim City. Someone tell me more about David Papineau. There's a sharpish review of Huw Price's _Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point_ by said DP in the TLS of a month ago. Same issue has a nice if insufficiently complex piece on middle-period Clare, with a nice suggestion that Clare's refusal to subordinate the pastoral details to a romantic general connects him up with a medieval way of looking, pre-perspective. What Peirce is or has been to Henry, Fordie is to me, and rather than go Amis-wise straight back from chaos to boom, and does this make me an impressionist? I make efforts at being organized (leaving instructions on how to find things) but slide from one memory to one impression to one theory. Entropy? Writing like smoke? Theories go "sideways"? God isn't David Bromige or crab-claws or "the gym of serenity" (Chris Stroffolino's phrase). The MIT lab program "Life"'s rules -- a cell bordered by cells on three sides dies? Never having understood what Olson Dorn and Creeley meant by "outward" I go wading; it's pretty for months. Men. Being edgy is a form of publication, and list members remember "sideways"? God isn't bordered? Bored? Derobed and alkaline? It agrees and makes book. Efforts at being clear are psychological efforts. Efforts at accuracy are philosophical efforts. And then we left the world of details, and woke up in the world of fluid-mechanics. "You're putting me through some changes" is not something you overhear now though. I've read theory, it's okay to watch the video within a week of the event. Women do not accept such mush. This woman doesn't, I'm a wife. Coincidentally, entropy is (often) peace. J On Sun, 6 Jul 1997, David Bromige wrote: > leastwise, thats the order in which mine are posted. David B > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 10:53:05 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Sylvester Pollet Subject: kali reader Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hey Kali, I just spent a couple of days clawing at my computer and the Poetics Archives, thinking I was responsible for the missing installments of the continuing discussion, and wanting to keep up with it. I read every word you & Dodie Bellamy (and even David Bromige) write. Don't assume all of those Archie Bunker used to call "regular white guys" are trying to shut you up. Please continue, and don't diss your readers. sp ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 11:45:22 -0400 Reply-To: BobGrumman@nut-n-but.net Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Bob Grumman Subject: Re: A List of Poetry Schools Revisited MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The latest word from the poetics typology front down here in blisteringly hot Port Charlotte, Florida, is good: so far I've had FIVE responses to my list of Poetry Schools, and four of them have offered constructive criticism. The fifth was a request to post my list at another poetry discussion site, which was fine with me. One of the other four, a private one from Hugh Steinberg, suggested that I add a new school (or sub-school) to my list--and I did. It's the sub-school responsible for "Spoken Word/Slam Poetry." It's now no. 6 under "Contra-Genteel Poetry." I'm not sure why I overlooked this kind of poetry previously but think it was probably because I tend to consider it a form of performance poetry. In some cases it might be sound poetry, too. Then there was the brief message posted by dan featherston asking what was "contra" about Maya Angelou. My response: "My calling Maya Angelou Contra-Genteel might not be accurate, I'm not sure. I tossed her name in without much reflection, and without rereading what I have of her work. My impression is that she does a lot of vernacular stuff as opposed "poetic" stuff, so, yes, diction (is where she's contra-genteel). But( she's) also anti-genteel in being oppositional politically. But so are many genteel mainstream poets (and the contra-genteel category is basically street rough versus the suburb polite of the mainstream category in philosophy, diction and subject-matter), so I guess I'd just say she was a little more directly and confrontationally oppositional than mainstream poets (when she's contra-genteel). But this is one of the fuzzy spots in my list that needs more thinking." Dan later mentioned that he's going to have "a brief essay in next _chain_ that addresses this issue of inclusion/who's speaking and being spoken for: her inaugural poem and the coolidge/fagin take on it." Third of my respondents was Robert Archambeau who wondered about my "distinction between surrealist poetry (typified by Robert Bly) and jump-cut poetry (typified by John Ashbery)." As Robert pointed out, "Edward Germain classed Ashbery as a surrealist in _English and American Surrealist Poetry_ (Penguin, '78), and a pretty strong case can be made that he's right. And Bly called his own poetry "deep-image". Don't know where I'd draw a line or what I'd call it. . ." I tend to think of surrealist poetry as juxtapositioning of incongruous images, and jump-cut (a term first used to describe a kind of poetry by Charles Wright, I believe) as juxtapositioning of incongruous actions. In my formal taxonomy the two poetries are the sole subclasses of what I call "Idiological Poetry," so I've always recognized their similarity. That they might be one school hadn't occurred to me, and might make sense. As for which, exactly, Ashbery is (if either), that's a problem for those who know more about his work than I. (The same is true of which school or schools to put Maya Angelou in.) Bly seems to me pretty certainly a surrealist poet. His term, "deep-image," might be used to specify what kind of surrealist poet he is. I have to admit to not knowing enough about most poets properly to assign them to schools. It's one of the areas I'll really need help to make my list reasonably accurate. Robert A. also mentioned David Kellogg's paper on the shape of the American poetic field. I got an outline of this paper from David the first time I had my list of schools up. It made a lot of sense, particularly in mapping the tensions between the four main poetry schools, in David's view, two of them pushing east/west against each other, the other two north/south against each other. So he's not just listing schools, like I am, but analyzing their relations to each other. He left my two favorite schools out of his scheme, though, so I could only give him an A- for his effort. My harshest critic so far has been Ron Silliman. He was right, I have to confess, in chiding me for putting "flow-chart poetry" on my list. I think I've seen only one specimen from that "school" in my life. I tend to try to bulk up the Pluraesthetic School because it's one of my two specialties as a critic. On the other hand, listing ersatz schools like the flowchart school--and semi- ersatz ones like the mathematical poetry school which probably has less than half-a-dozen serious practitioners worldwide--might inspire others to make viable schools of them. Then, too, it's better to list too many schools than too few. I agree with Ron that the tendencies toward otherness in many of the major schools are interesting--but they have nothing to do with the purpose of my list, which is simply to chart what kinds of poetries are being composed in this country--to try to keep any from being overlooked. That my typology "doesn't Tell Us Anything," meaning, "it doesn't add to any knowledge we might have about a given poet," is similarly irrelevant. My typology isn't about individual poets, it's about groups. It is particularly not about any poet whose work we already know, but about poets whose work we don't know, and might like an extremely general idea of. It's about introductory knowledge about unknown poets, not about insights into known poets. As for my description of langpo as "acadominant," I was hoping it'd get enough of a rise out of some langpoer to make him respond to my list. Whether it was the only reason Ron said anything about my list, I don't know, but it did seem to get a rise out of him. Actually, I don't know enough about the academy or about the socio-economic aspects of poetry in America to use the term in any philosophically responsible way. On the other hand, my impression, from way outside the hub, is that language poetry has been the dominant serious poetry in the academy in this country since the beginning of this decade or earlier. It seems to me that SUNY, Buffalo, has become the academic center of poetry in America. This might only be due to my having friendships mainly with people in language poetry or sympathetic to it, and who thus see it as Very Large--and to friendships with people in visual poetry who are NOT sympathetic to langpo, because they consider it, hang on to your hat, The Establishment, and who thus also see it as Very Large. In any case, the trouble many people in lang po might be having getting decent positions in academia doesn't prove langpo is not acadominant. Acadominance cannot be expected to translate into IMMEDIATE distribution of academic jobs. I have very little knowledge of all this, but my impression is that, due to tenure agreements and all kinds of other details (like the simple fact that ANY poet is going to have trouble getting an academic position, particularly a GOOD poet), a school of poetry might hang onto most of the academic jobs in the field for as many as two generations after it's lost its dominance. (By langpo's acadominance, I mean more how seriously it's taken as a kind of poetry than its socio-economic status, anyway.) Yow, after spending over an hour working on the preceding, I checked my Inbox and found TWO MORE RESPONSES! One was from Mark Prejsnar. He (properly) got on me for my snideness in using "acadominant" to describe langpo. I'm still not sure it's entirely inaccurate (see above) in its meaning of "dominant in the academy." He, and Luigi-Bob Drake in a private follow-up letter, are on to something interesting in considering the term as possibly meaning "dominated by the academy," or some such. I think I did mean that to a degree, too, if not too consciously. Overstated, of course, but langpo certainly has had the most critical (and thus academic-seeming) accompaniment of any poetry school I know of. Which is no fault at all, from my point of view. But it raises a number of intriguing questions that Luigi-Bob brings up such as whether providing a critical apparatus for langpo from the beginning was a conscious choice, the aim being to "undermind the academy's stranglehold on th cannon, and if so to what extant that project is successful..." And also whether aesthcipients need a critical apparatus to appreciate langpo, or whether any poetry should require such an apparatus for appreciation. I agree with Mark P. that "'jump-cut' was only a good way to think of Ashbery around Tennis Court Oath time, with rapid montage and cutup techniques making his work rapid and shifting." Since then he's become more of a mainstream poet--so like so many poets, fits more than one school. I was just about to post this when I saw Mark's second posting of the morning, about whether an aesthcipient needs to have a critical apparatus to appreciate a poet. Not necessarily, I would say--but I suspect that most of the best art of this century DID, at some point, need criticism (mostly now absorbed and not recognized) to get off the ground. I certainly have been helped to appreciate certain poetry, like Pound's, even Eliot's (even my own!), by good criticism. Perhaps all appreciation is simply a matter of exposure to the work to be appreciated. That's how I seem to have gone from annoyed contempt for Pollack the Great Admiration, for instance. But it seems to me the right critical insight at the right time can save a lot of work. Gotta stop now. (Looks like I'm getting too MANY responses now! But keep 'em coming!) --Bob G. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 12:00:00 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Bennett M. Sm [Dimpson" Subject: Repertory Dialing In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear Poetics, Say, do people think their theories pleasing --even as anvils-- like "this is how I do today" or "I am what I believe," a bucking puppy on a leash? Are we all multi-cellular organisms here? Good. I wasn't worried, only, that your fancies might sidle in through side-knots, damping the last dry map of the sandbox, no, more that the doyen and the debutante (us) had narrowed their names to words (swells) a species of which could flood the gene pool (this) with rote miscalculations of intent. I am X. I believe X. X, a cloud session, torn envelope, lies. There is of course a perpendicular realm where choices do not allow grapefruits gooseflesh musclegirl scythe But are we it now? (Then when?) &c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c. &c. Bennett Simpson &c. bms5q@virginia.edu &c. &c. &c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 09:11:10 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: God is dead, etc. Comments: To: Bob Grumman In-Reply-To: <33C10F11.31A7@nut-n-but.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII A bit disconcerting around mid-day on the fourth of July to be abrubtly returned to myself -- Now that David Bromige has shrugged of the deific duties and allowed "you know who" to reassume the throne of heaven, we'll all have to go back to writing our own words -- but here are a few odds and ends of possible interest: After all too long, there is at last another actual book of poems by Lorenzo Thomas. Problem is, it's not being distributed in the U.S. -- If you have contacts in Germany, you might ask them to get you a copy. The book (and a beauty it is) is a bilingual (English/German) edition titled "There are witnesses" -- with art work by Cecilio Thomas -- The book is number fourteen in the series Osnabrucker Bilinguale Editionen Marginalisierter AutorInnen [you'll have to imagine an umlaut over the "u" in "Osnabrucker"] -- address of the publisher is O.B.E.M.A.--Redaktion Universitat Osnabruck/FB 7 Postfach 4469. D-49069 Osnabruck [I'm at the Boulder uncorrectable keyboard, as you can see from the above] ------- the legend that Stevens's work as a poet was unknown to his colleagues at the office persists in many quarters -- but the bios. indicate that he sometimes had staff members type his poems for him -- ------- Ronald Johnson appears at the Fox Theater in Boulder this Thursday evening, along with Anne Wadman, Ed Sanders and many others -- contact Naropa for details ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 13:15:19 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Mandel Subject: Stevens day gig Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Harold Rosenberg once told me a story about interviewing Stevens at his Hartford Life office for some magazine or other. Rosenberg asked Stevens whether his being a poet had any effect on his job or on the way his co-workers viewed him. "Oh, noone here has the slightest idea that I'm a poet," he replied. On the way out, Rosenberg fell into conversation with some people on the elevator. "What are you here for?" one of them asked him. "I'm interviewing Wallace Stevens," Harold responded. "Oh, the poet," returned his interlocutor. The rest of the folks on the elevator just nodded. Tom Mandel Tom Mandel tmandel@screenporch.com ******************************************************** Screen Porch * http://screenporch.com 4031 University Dr. Suite 200 * vox: 703-934-2034 Fairfax, VA 22030-3409 * fax: 703-391-6881 ******************************************************** Join the Caucus Conversation ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 12:27:31 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Christina Fairbank Chirot Subject: Re: A List of Poetry Schools Revisited Comments: To: Bob Grumman In-Reply-To: <33C10F11.31A7@nut-n-but.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Many thanks to Bob Grumman for continuing to send his evolving list. I think the key word is evolving--what makes Bob's work interesting is that is continually in progress. That makes for an intriguing pradox that's refreshing: an attempt to make a list, a set of definitions and terms that is continually extending, keeping open ended, while also being intensive in its focusing on areas overlooked. Bob's list always opens "thingks" (a neologism born of a typo that's useful) up for me, unlike many lists which close things down in a grid. For those following the list as it evolves. it's useful and interesting to look at it in the context of some of Bob Grumann's other essays which work with definitions and categories. I'd espcially recommend one called "MNMLST POETRY: Unacclaimed but Flourishing" at Light and Dust webiste http://www/thing/net/~grist/homekarl.htm and also an essay Bob Grumman did for the Eyerhymes Conference which is concerned with taxonomies using work from the Canadian journal Industrial Sabotage as examples. Both these essays show the ways in which Grumman puts taxonomies to use to open areas of work for the reader/viewer. Establishing taxonomies and categories, yet remaining as open ended as Grumman is, I find intriguing and useful in that it raises many questions usually glossed over. I know for myself I have blithely skipped over many of the issues Grumman raises and I appreciate his making me "thingk" about them. It made me wonder why I have never cared much for lists--out of laziness? Contrariness? General anarchism? It's always a quick associative leap to think of Bouvard and Pecuchet and some of Borges' stories about classifactory undertakings. But the very suspicion of taxonomies and categories--(what! back to Aristole!--you can hear Charles Olson groan) is an interesting issue. Do they represent control or present simply tools? (Deleuze and Guattari would argue for the tools as Grumman does in his last post.) One of my favorite statements on glossaries is in the little glossary supplied by William S. Burroughs in his book Junkie. WSB points out that what he is dealing with is a fugitive language, whose terms must by neccesity continually evolve and shift. The elusive aspect of poetic language is similar--there is a continual tension going on when trying to make things which are both elusive to control and presenting them in a way which is not so elsuive as to be completely invisible. I.E. someone will "get the message"--but always a tension in who and to what uses they will put it. I think Bob Grumman's lists, his taxonomies and definitions, open up this area and its questions in a way other lists don't. The main thingk is, whether one likes th names or the categories or not, the lists make for discussion and a reexamining of one's own approach to naming and categories. I.E. they do provide some tools for further work--and that's the main thingk! One area of work I am not sure is addresed--and not being much at making categories myself I wouldn't know what to call it!--is that done by writers like John Clarke in his books From Feathers to Iron and In the Analogy. There's a wide range of work that is involved with many aspects of Clarke's thought, his poetics. I'm thinking of work by Ken Warren, Stephen Ellis, Joe Napora--many many others--work that appears in Warren's journal House Organ and Napora's BULLHEAD and Ellis and Stephen Dignazio's :that: and that appeared in Clarke's journal INTENT. The issue of naming is intriguing--when Grumman gives an area a name--does it open up an area overlooked? Or does naming things fix them--the intellect delighting in boundary to paraphrase Emerson in "The Poet". Or does Grumman's approach, by playing among the tensions involved in naming, does it not perhaps open up one's own desire for naming and fear of it? Language as vehicular (Emerson again) or fugitive is ever in movement, so the best one can hope for is some kind of indication of directions. Whether or not one even keeps and uses the name Grumman provides, his main work is done in indicating those directions. & for that my thanks --dave baptiste chirot ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 13:32:11 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Mandel Subject: poets and critics Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" David Erben is "...wondering why it is necessary ...to make sweeping formulaic generalizations that contrast ...critics with artists. I really do not know what is meant by these terms or even why they are being used." Equally difficult is the contrast between baseball players and umpires or baseball writers. "such monolithic characterizations as these (he goes on) seem both reductive and lacking in a certain respect for the people (and texts) involved." Oy. Here's something to work with, David: a poet is someone who writes poetry -- regularly and to some effect. Reading Derrida or any other philosopher on thematism or not in Mallarme or elsewhere in French or any other language provides no new light on the subject, although it certainly helps clarify why poets distinguish *themselves* from academics. Poets seem to experience fewer constraints on thought. I can't imagine, for example, a poet wanting to "contrast academics with non-academics" to use another of David's phrases, as if the world divided that way on any real view whatever. To continue my metaphor from above, perhaps David wants to think of "literature" as all one big activity, and poets and critics are different the way slugging center fielders and utility second basemen are different. This would be incorrect, akin to the view of nature as one vast equilibrium in which the animal killed by a predator and the scavenger bird that cleans its bones later need not be distinguished in the round of dust to dust. Not true either. Tom Tom Mandel tmandel@screenporch.com ******************************************************** Screen Porch * http://screenporch.com 4031 University Dr. Suite 200 * vox: 703-934-2034 Fairfax, VA 22030-3409 * fax: 703-391-6881 ******************************************************** Join the Caucus Conversation ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 13:52:47 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel concerning Tom Mandel's response to David Erben's response to . . . well yes (allowing for exception that a smattering of critics are also poets, a number of poets are also critics . . . .) Tom waxeth lyric while getting nitty-gritty: << . . . . perhaps David wants to think of "literature" as all one big activity, and poets and critics are different the way slugging center fielders and utility second basemen are different. This would be incorrect, akin to the view of nature as one vast equilibrium in which the animal killed by a predator and the scavenger bird that cleans its bones later need not be distinguished in the round of dust to dust. . . .>> am reminded of a satirical poem on this very topic by Robert Graves, entitled (I think) "Titans and Midgets" -- Perhaps you can imagine which is which? (the final lines are graphic & memorable (tho I fear I'd err in trying to paraphrase from memory). Arguably, Graves himself played both teams, -- but it's clear where his heart was. Was his *White Goddess* the sort of poet-writing-criticism [hmm -- more like Ur-literary / relgious history] that Erbin, anyway, was maybe sort of thinking toward . . . ? . . . d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 14:14:15 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Alan * Sondheim Subject: Doctored MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII [ the following text was created through the doctor, dissociated-press, and snoop programs in a linux emacs editor; the doctor program, modeled on Weizenbaum's Eliza, was used as therapeutic session. ] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Doctored Cause and a fit: There are always breasts... my! and you are what makes you were exhausting Legion of Doom to annihilate. And in need of recon likely, and breath would all be going through: not be the _there_? And in need saw that your name, panties, your might, might not be the worldlier you said, people you said, were social. Is it before the last knowledge, that your name _should_ because (in gold bullion) - know that your name should before the last. Saddam Hussein plutonium Waco, Texas Delta Force Marxist Clinton Cocaine Rule Psix cryptographic Croatian munitions cracking bomb nuclear NSA recuperating the last. Please, defuge set in; that you berated it. It's the nuclear class that makes you believe you parse difference than yourself into. If you would continue, please. Ortega Clinton Croatian BATF class struggle Delta Force Kennedy Nazi [Hello to all my fans in domestic surveillance] nuclear smuggle security Cocaine Waco, Texas SDI Ah... Maybe you parse differ and just miss my skin? Because of it, annoyed that you were exhausted with jennifer and julu - they'recognized. spy SEAL Team 6 Peking NSA terrorist SDI FBI Panama FSF munitions security World Trade Center North Korea fissionable Ft. Bragg My! Do you say anything through all rear class, a suturing to do with the past two with me? Yes, hmmm. Are you? Are you split for me? Ah... Surgery sex is out of constituting it. It's the nature of detail. $400 million in gold bullion Peking [Hello to all my fans in domestic surveillance] security DES quiche bomb Mossad spy Uzi AK-47 Waco, Texas Soviet plutonium Croatian Why weren't, do you say this is it because it's there? Yes, the Other; but any? Perchance by unknown force than I am; that I have tp recognize Other? With jennifer and julu, did you first be afraid? When I looking to recognize that military strategic Legion Korea... How do you speak to this? Please, understand something else? That I have no possibility of reconstitution. No there, and julu they're me, not the Other. Have you been positive; they might the right words, the throat... Yes, the psych; you have been positing yourself, annoyed that much is the other's miasma... ammunition KGB Kennedy genetic assassination nuclear class struggle colonel North Korea $400 million in gold bullion strategic Legion of Doom Khaddafi Delta Force +++ __________________________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 13:58:12 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Matthias Regan Subject: stanza breaks In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" This morning I saw among the long list of Independence Weekend Postings (now unavailable to me, as I move computer to computer through the day) a note encouraging the list to reply to a question Joseph Zitt asked about the line breaks in a poem I had posted: Why do the stanzas break where they do? I'd looked at it, shifting the breaks around, and their positioning didn't seem to have much effect. I sent an individual response on Thursday to JZ; a large chunk I send again here to the entire list for sake of (potential) discussion: . . . one reason for the (mostly) unrhymed tercets and couplets is that they act a reminders of specific historical codes: of all the available ways to break a stanza I've chosen two sequences that have long histories in English literature, and by demonstrating that affinity I can work off it--or inside it would be a better spatial metaphor. Someone--maybe it is Lacan--it has escaped me for the moment--writes about the ability, given an understanding of a "surplus of signifiers" to mean one thing inside the language of another thing (just as the actual action of the superstructure can be read inside the specific event--but equally the specific event can radically rewrite itself inside the superstructure). So I want my words, which I think are formed of fairly contemporary and traditionally "unpoetic" speech genres to function inside the older forms. Hence the traditional stanzas and varying but consistent metrical work of the lines (syllabics--I'm not too strict); probably this also accounts for my desire to sandwich a chunk of prose between the stanzas (I wrote the stanzas first): again an action "inside" and "between," parenthetical. Also that formal process helps me edit when I write. So it is less that I have put the stanzas there for a reason and more that I settled on the stanzas fairly early one (not immediately but soon thereafter) and then rewrote until I liked how the breaks sounded (it is all in the sound, the tension of a kind of temporal pause, the emphasis on certain words--to produce both speech patterns and something more "musical" (that is the flaw that remains, in another point of view, as a result of my failure to more fully detach from the Structuralist project): so from the first to the second and from the second to the third the syntactical or synchronic meaning runs right over the stanza breaks - the guy is talking fast and furiously, abruptly; then there is a full stop at the end of the stanza so that break is the pause between his utterance ending and hers beginning. The next two stanza breaks are somewhere between: at grammatical pauses but not full stops. . . In something like retrospect, I find myself half agreeing on Monday with the answer I wrote on Thursday. Matthias ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 12:03:29 PDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Hoa Nguyen Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences Comments: To: regan@CHEM.NWU.EDU Content-Type: text/plain Yeah. My responses, in e-mail, are definitely not poetry. But my sympathies and affinities are with poets more than critics. Although, a writer like Benjamin beautifully incorporates poetic sympathies into his writing, I think it is less successful for a poet to bring criticism into a piece of art. Not that it can't be critical, like Dorn's Abhorrences, but that it is not wrought as criticism. Juxtaposition and implication guide that kind of stuff. It's not directing and obvious, like the critic. But this is quick. My thoughts aren't all with me. I've a meeting to attend. All the best, Dale Smith, in response to the below: > So you saying that there is an EXTERNAL difference between poet and critic >(as in Sartre's example, between chair and giraffe) > and that this natural and actually inviolable difference > is based on a difference of perception-- > experiential knowledge v. > mental perception-- > mimetic v. metaphoric, > a binary deriving from > synchronic v. diachronic, perhaps? > > But the diachronic will always slip into the synchronic > eventually -- > > did you write this as poet or critic-- > > or am I -- > > >good-naturedly, > > as the weekend commences, > > Matthias >> >> >>Critics and poets are very different animals. The artist essentially, >>as I see it, relies on mimesis to present, discover, or engage questions >>of identity. In this sense, the artist blurs those distinctions. It's >>like Keats saying that a poet is the most unpoetical of things because >>he/she's constantly being incorporated into other bodies other than >>their own, thus confusing that established notion of the stable, unified >>individual. The lyric moment provides release for the poet to sift >>through those shifting identities. This is nature, the way airplanes >>resemble birds. >> >>A critic, on the other hand, is usually far more rigid and uses a >>language which is discursive. The critic always preserves that stable >>conception of him or herself in some authorative way. The thought >>process is more binomial and partial to the catagorical assumptions of >>the mind rather than the more comprehensive and less structured >>impressions mimetic art provides. Critical thought can grasp and >>explain questions of identity. But the real work and exploration of >>such questions take place in one's active life and in the isolate hours >>of one's art. Says me. There are plenty of attempts now, of course, for >>critics to write poetry and vice versa. But the emphasis seems to be on >>the mental perception of identity rather than experiential patterns of >>knowledge. >> >>Sorry to take up the space on such a rather obvious subject. But it's >>my way of getting even with the overly bloated and poorly written posts >>I've read re: identity of late. >> >>Happy Holiday >>Dale >> >>_______________________________________________________ >>Get Private Web-Based Email Free http://www.hotmail.com >> >> > _______________________________________________________ Get Private Web-Based Email Free http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 15:25:04 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "GRAHAM W. FOUST" Subject: barthes on twombly In-Reply-To: <9706110408.AA10178@osf1.gmu.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Can anyone tell me which book by Roland Barthes might contain his essay (essays?) on the painter Cy Twombly? thanks, Graham ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 12:42:16 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Baker Subject: Re: barthes on twombly MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For Barthes on Twombly: "Cy Twombly: Works on Paper" in _The Responsibility of Forms: Critical Essays on Music, Art, and Representation_, trans. Richard Howard. Mark Baker GRAHAM W. FOUST wrote: > > Can anyone tell me which book by Roland Barthes might contain his essay > (essays?) on the painter Cy Twombly? > > thanks, > > Graham ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 17:59:14 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Matt Kirschenbaum Subject: postmodern culture special issue on hypertext Comments: To: ht_lit@consecol.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Just a note that Postmodern Culture's special issue on hypertext, edited by Stuart Moulthrop, is now online at: http://jefferson.village.virginia.edu/pmc/current.issue/ The issue's contents are below. Because PMC is now distributed as part of Johns Hopkins UP's Project Muse, this issue will only be publically available through sometime in Sept. -- after that you'll need a personal or institutional subscription to Muse to gain access. Editor's Introduction Hypertexts Michael Joyce, Twelve Blue Diana Reed Slattery, Alphaweb John Cayley, Book Unbound Andrew Herman & Co., The Heimlich Home Page of Cyberspace Hypertextual Articles Matthew G. Kirschenbaum, 'Through Light and the Alphabet:' An Interview with Johanna Drucker Loss Pequeno Glazier, Jumping to Occlusions Article Craig Saper, Intimate Bureaucracies & Infrastructuralism: A Networked Introduction to Assemblings (Plus the reviews section, which includes a piece by Terry Harphold on Cronenberg's Crash.) Enjoy, --Matt =================================================================== Matthew G. Kirschenbaum University of Virginia mgk3k@virginia.edu Department of English http://www.iath.virginia.edu/~mgk3k/ The Blake Archive | IATH ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 18:08:10 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: luigi Subject: Re: A List of Poetry Schools Revisited Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" since bob grumman has commented on some ov our backchannel discussion, i thot i would bring my part in it forward: i wrote (to bob, cc. to mark p & ron s): >Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 10:50:10 -0500 >From:r.drake@popmail.csuohio.edu (robert drake) >Subject:Re: A List of Poetry Schools Revisited > >bob-- > >ron s. & now mark p. have called you on th "acadominant" neologism, >& while i think _i_ know what yr getting at there, it seems not to >be clear to others. i think yr trying to get at (your?) a sense that >LangPo needs some critical apparatus around it for folks to "get" it? >L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E magazine & many ov th practicioners reinforce that >sense by supplying such critical commentary, often enuf blurring th >distinctions between the "commentary" & th "work"; that was part of >th project, as i understand it... that critical apparatus is, in a >sense, expropriated property of th "acadamy", even tho the entrenched >critical academes have by&large not accepted LangPo into th cannon ov >worx which "deserve" such lit crit... & so th "acadominant" tag cd seem >appropriate to LangPo outsiders, who might see th constructed critical >frameworks as similar to those of th acadame; but inappropriate to >some insiders, who are painfully aware that th acadamy contenures to >"shut them out"... > >this interests me on several counts: praps ron or others can comment >on whether or no the emphasis on critical writings was a conscious tactic >to undermind the academy's stranglehold on th cannon, and if so to what >extant that project was successful... it's also been a matter ov debate >(on this list, at least) as to whether or no that critical framework _is_ >essential for a reader to get into LangPo texts--we've heard various >anecdotes that "naive" aesthipients have been appreciative of readings >w/out "knowing" what was "going on". i tend to think, tho, that the texts, >for the most part, do take some book learnin to appreciate, and that w/out >some backgrounding most folks just won't "get" it... > >th upshot of all this being: if i've pinned down one sorce of th >misunderstanding, praps you'll come up w/ a new neologism to replace >"Acadominant"... if not, i'm sure you'll let me know. be well > >asever >luigi > > Mark Prejsnar replied, backchannel, that "language poetry, CAN and indeed SHOULD be read without 'critical apparatus..'"; that the source of the critical threads in th LangPo corpus was pressure by outside academics & workshop poets; and cited Coolidge in particular as a language poet who did not produce concurrent theory to support his work... i understand him to be saying that LangPo should only be read w/out the critical apparatus, and that the work succeeds despite, rather than because of, the theoretical constructs that the Language Poets built for their works... and i responded: > >mark-- > >first: i'm at work now (computers, not poetry) so i cant turn to my >bookshelf for citations... but i believe that th twining ov theory >& practice was a concious choice of many ov the langpoets, as evidinced >in _In the American Tree_, _The L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E Book_, and L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E >magazine at least. (& as i type this, i realize praps that's an >influence of the editors' bias in those particular examples, and i >dont deny the existance of yr counterexamples... even so...) i tend >to take those writers at their word, and agree w/ them that the total >body ov the work, theory & practice, contributes vitally to their project... >as you say, praps th theory was "imposed from the outside by academics"-- >that led to my question towards ron, as to whether that was just a tactic >to insinuate th work into respectability... but i prefer, fr now, to >believe that those writers knew what they were doing & chose to integrate >both aspects into their Work for reasons implicit to the project. detractors >of LangPo, btw, have often held that those critical aspects were self- >promotional shams meant to fool "real" critics into taking the work seriously. >i dont agree. > >[&, aside, i'm using the theory/practice handles as convienent shorthand; >i don't in fact believe in such as a bipolar dichotomy in a deeply >meaningful way...] > >second: i m'self usually "find my way in" to difficult texts by just diggin >in & reading, making what use i can out of what i find. sometimes i get >quite a lot out of it in that way. often enuf, tho, good critical work >(either on the specific text, or on the more general aesthetics; by th >poem's author, or by a reader/critic) opens new ways In that i might have >missed >on my own. that's no dissing of the original text--it's an acknowledgment, >fr me, of the importance of a community of reader/writers, & th attendant >context, for understanding any artifact of (a) culture. > >which brings me to third: besides explict theoretical litcrit, i think >a reader does have to have built up a context, a history, of textual >understanding in order to approach "difficult" work. fr myself, i think >i needed stein to get to LangPo; i needed joyce to get to stein, i needed >ezra & even eliot to get to joyce... hell, i started w/ carl sandburg, >and dr. suess. and praps _that_ is part of what bob was getting at w/ th >academonic thing: a sense that one might need a broader/deeper background >in reading to approach langpo than one might need, fr example, to >approach the NuYoRican spoken-word scene (which, ov course, requires it's >own background...). that literary background has, historically, >been provided via the Acadummy; and praps that's a more accurate sourceing >ov bob's neologism... Bob? i still think it needs work. > > >yrs >lbd > > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 15:58:36 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Re: identity In-Reply-To: <199707070155.SAA02084@denmark.it.earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > World would be a better place if people started naming their daughters >>after me, I think... >> Victor Coleman's daughter's name is Kali, was born must have been 30 years ago. Dont know whether she wears skulls around her neck etc. George Bowering. , 2499 West 37th Ave., Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6M 1P4 fax: 1-604-266-9000 e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 15:56:53 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Tolson MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I've been meaning to mention -- for those who've been wanting to teach Melvin Tolson's poetry -- _Harlem Gallery_ is still out of print, as is _Rendezvous with America_ -- BUT the Norton Anthology of African American Literature does reprint _Libretto for the Republic of Liberia_ -- I haven't had a chance to check it for accuracy yet,, but it is now out there for use -- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 16:10:15 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Re: New primitive publications chapbook In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Announcing "Taken", a stunning new chapbook by Sherry Brennan. In >this work, Brennan challenges how the west was won, and what we >have all lost in the meantime. Seems rather confusing to use that title 11 months after Daphne Marlatt's book _Taken_ comes out. I highly recommend the latter, by the way. George Bowering. , 2499 West 37th Ave., Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6M 1P4 fax: 1-604-266-9000 e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 19:30:54 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Orange Subject: power in language MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Tom Mandel asked: >Would Jay Schwartz have been justified to feel a moment (or more) of fear >when someone unknown to him offered via email to cut his nipples off? I >think so, and that's enough for me. I think what Kim Dawn -- if such a >person exists -- did is stupid. two things trouble me here. first, kim never "offered" to cut jay's nipples off fer chrissakes; searching the june poetics archive for the word "nipples" (isn't technology teriffic?), one finds hoa nguyen's 13 june post, reproduced in part below, to be the first mention of such an (hypothetical!) act. second, "if such a person exists": why is this questioned? why is kim dawn's existence so much more dubious than anyone else's here? does such a person as tom mandel exist? does such a person as tom orange exist? X__________________________ (sign here) >Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 10:59:39 PDT >Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group >From: Hoa Nguyen >Subject: Re: dearest / let me lick > >Maria, I don't know what is "hilarious" about Kim Dawn's posts-- surely >if someone wrote "I want to snip off your nipples with pinking shears/ >(this is not poetry)" directed *to* me, I would be alarmed and feel >threatened. I can't see the humor here because it was *aimed at* one >particular person, Jay, and I imagine this may be why you wrote also >asking if he was OK. [...] ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 19:45:36 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: the take on taken >Seems rather confusing to use that title 11 months after Daphne >Marlatt's book _Taken_ comes out. I highly recommend the latter, by >the way. GB notes how as "taken"'s been taken by _Taken_ & adds that he was taken by the original _Taken_ Now others might equally be taken by the new _Taken_ But is it likely that one'll be for the other mistaken? What's your take? (Or rather, Who's on the take?) What do you take me for? (Take 35, cameras . . . ) May we take it from your tears you grasp the situation and will henceforth be sure to take care -- more care? I can see by your hat that you're not a real cowboy I take it from your silence you're not Mr. Takahashi Take me to your leader (He had a take-no-prisoners 'tude) Shall we have take-out or had we better cook at home? d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 16:53:46 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Re: power in language Tom Orange writes: >two things trouble me here. first, kim never "offered" to cut jay's >nipples off fer chrissakes; searching the june poetics archive for the >word "nipples" (isn't technology teriffic?), one finds hoa nguyen's 13 >june post, reproduced in part below, to be the first mention of such an >(hypothetical!) act. > >second, "if such a person exists": why is this questioned? why is kim >dawn's existence so much more dubious than anyone else's here? does such a >person as tom mandel exist? does such a person as tom orange exist? These are exactly the sorts of things which trouble me. David Israel charges me with "continuing misunderstanding (or misreading) of what's really at issue" in the discussion of play vs. violence. But I think that he reads too much *into* Dodie Bellamy's response and that Bellamy quite clearly and distinctly says that Kim Dawn's post falls into the cagegory of sexual violence because it involved a nonconsensual use of sexually explicit material. I draw this conclusion--again--directly from Bellamy's writings, which David was kind enough to repost with his own message. ><< Since neither Jay Schwartz, nor other list members, had consented to >Kim Dawn's aggressive pornographic whatever that was directed towards >Jay, I do not feel it should be categorized as sexual play, but as sexual >violence. I do not challenge her right to use sexual explicit material in her >writing, I merely challenge its non-consensual use. >> I do *not* think that Bellamy's text urges the reader to draw the conclusion that Bellamy is making an "analogy" nor that she is being metaphorical. When you say something should be categorized as sexual violence, you are not saying that something should be distinguished from something else "as if it were" sexual violence, nor are you saying that it "is sexual violence" as one might metaphorically state, "Kali is a pit bull," meaning "Kali has the characteristics of a pit bull." If this is what Bellamy means, then I hope she will come forward and say so, but it is not present--as far as I can detect--in the text. If you want to talk about what is happening when/if posters to POETICS generate sexually explicit and provocative textual eruptions, I'm game to do that. I'm happy to talk about what different definitions of sexual violence might be, about metaphorical uses of violent sexual imagery, etc. But, to bring this back around to Tom Orange's complaint, it seems to me that Kim Dawn wrote one thing (and, like Tom, I find no sexual violence in her posts). Then her text was revised through a sort of POETICS list mythologization/magnification process into totally other thing (the nonexistent "nipples" "threat" which Hoa Nguyen/Dale Smith and others now refer to as if it were penned by Kim Dawn) In the process the Kim-Dawnness of Kim Dawn has been cast into doubt, even though it is other POETICS listmembers who are drafting the imaginary texts of the Kim Dawn of their desires. This process of erosion/erasure/petrifaction/replacement is indeed troubling, particularly among a group of people who think of themselves as readers. David's bar metaphor resonates in an interesting way with my charges of the underlying sexism of the POETICS forum. Heterosexual bars are generally places in which sexist behavior is distilled and concentrated, and in which very little attention is paid to changing the social order. The bar metaphor crops up on *many* lists, and it's no accident that it does; we carry our conceptions of and our actions in the physical social spaces we inhabit to our virtual hangouts. The intrusion of the performance space (far more congenial to feminist efforts) into the bar is seen as an interruption rather than a potential liberation from stereotype. In David Israel's construction, it's the rules of the bar we ought to observe and if Kim Dawn is taken for a duck, well, she was asking for it, wasn't she? Kali ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 20:51:15 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: Re: power in language / locus classicus of List-Historical note -- (Here at office, I don't have www access, but do have some po digests stashed away. So, re: Tom O.'s clarification:) <<< >>> Tom Orange 07/07/97 07:30pm >>> Tom Mandel asked: >Would Jay Schwartz have been justified to feel a moment (or more) of fear >when someone unknown to him offered via email to cut his nipples off? I >think so, and that's enough for me. I think what Kim Dawn -- if such a >person exists -- did is stupid. two things trouble me here. first, kim never "offered" to cut jay's nipples off fer chrissakes; searching the june poetics archive for the word "nipples" (isn't technology teriffic?), one finds hoa nguyen's 13 june post, reproduced in part below, to be the first mention of such an (hypothetical!) act. >>> / / / / / Allowing that the above-alluded-to Hoa (or Dale?) post was responsive (in some wise) to the orig. KD post, shall we now look at that ancient text? (I believe it was the 1st of 2 or 3 such) -- agreed, Tom M. (and/or others) lost the precise line-of-origins, but he did recollect a general mode & mood of utterance in the primary document. So here's the KD locus classicus; -- not nipple-specific (correct), but neither lacking in a possible sense of violence or threat (at least by a possible reading . . .); also evident (as Eliza McG. noted) is a rhetoric of desire, not (at least one may say) generally in fashion for messages to be sent to an unfamiliar via public broadcast. Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:37:59 -0400 From: Kim Dawn Subject: let me lick your oricifes oh, dearest. it's the snap of the neck you so desire, it's the fuck me up the ass, piss upon the pave kinda girl you're looking for, jay, oh, jay, i want to torture you delicately, my pussy aches for, i have some devices i could recommend for you, sweetness. let me be your baby. let me be your daughter. let me be your little girl. let me be your mommy. let me be your cleaning lady. let me be your secretary. let me tie you up and mangle and chew and rub your skin off your cock. (this is not poetry) [end of historical archive] / / / / / [this is now David I.] . . . About to post this, I note Kali's response to my 7/3/97 note -- << David Israel charges me with "continuing misunderstanding (or misreading) of what's really at issue" in the discussion of play vs. violence. But I think that he reads too much *into* Dodie Bellamy's response and that Bellamy quite clearly and distinctly says that Kim Dawn's post falls into the cagegory of sexual violence . . . >> Well, as I noted, she says that it falls into category B rather than category A. But allowiing that logically it can fall in to NEITHER B NOR A, therefore, if we wish to understand the rhetorical structure of the text, and thus approach its intended meanin, we must -- I believe -- understand the way in which an *implicit* (rather than explicit) language analogy is very well established. My wish was to read for the intended meaning. Why do such a thing? Becuase it's precisely that which I felt was being missed and overlooked. Again: my reading of the Bellamy text -- somewhat painstaking as to a simple trope -- was an attempt to catch & bring into focus the underlying use of analogy which obtains not on the level of the sentence, but rather on a meta-level, that of the rhetorical logic at work -- which seems to be, in that text, presiely where the real thought and sense and purpose and intended meaning are to be found. We differ in our readings, then. The question remains, Kali, if you were to read the passage as allegorical, would it seem less inflammatory, more persuasive, or what? As for my bar metaphor, that was mainly drawn from what I've observed among many a poet: after readings, they repair to bars. Kali writes, << ... The intrusion of the performance space (far more congenial to feminist efforts) into the bar is seen as an interruption rather than a potential liberation from stereotype. In David Israel's construction, it's the rules of the bar we ought to observe and if Kim Dawn is taken for a duck, well, she was asking for it, wasn't she? >> I don't believe I was proposing that the rules of the bar should reign and the conventions of the performance space ought be banished. Was it not clear that my intention was descriptive rather than perscriptive? In drawing that particular metaphor, I hoped to describe what we've observed here -- i.e., a divergence of conceptions as to the nature of the listserv forum, on a manners & customs sort of level. To recognize that divergency seems basic to our understanding both of where Kim may have been coming from, and where the responses to her may have been coming from. Yes, there's the suggestion of in eruption or interruption of one conception in the midst of another. This being so, it seems of some use to try to approach an understanding as to why the denizens of one conception might misunderstand or disvavor the conduct of one who perhaps holds to a differeng conception. Now, all conversation, I think, needs some degree of mutual deference. Some on the list may even slightly favor what amounts to (or somewhat approaches) polite conversation. Me, I'm just listening -- & making the occasional (feeble) attempt toward sorting out what I've seen, how it works, what it looks like. If the sensibility of another has been bruised by that person's misreading of my attempt at art, I think it should not be beyond me to offer a word of apology for such a regrettable misunderstanding. Others may behave as they wish, but this seems to me an easy principle, and a good one. yours truly, d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 20:58:30 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "P.Standard Schaefer" Subject: Re: Will's column/ my reply Dear Listers and Listees, I have been watching this discussion about Ginsberg and particularly that attack on George Will whose argument is clearly wrong and self-serving. But, I am also sort of startled by the rather uncritical view of Mr. Ginsberg. I suppose it is a matter of timing and decorum, I myself, many people I know like me (under 30) have to give Allen Ginsberg a lot of credit for his turning us on to poetry (books in general). But I think this question about his politics is interesting. It seems to me that there is a lack of reflection within his work. That he is, pardon me, spouting a party line. Now, it happens to be my favorite line, but it is a line. It seems to me that a case could be made that Mr. Ginsberg has, perhaps inadvertently, limited our conception of what a political poem is. Perhaps, his persona contributes. I wonder whether ohming in congress is much of answer. It is dissent, sure, but is it also avoidance. Some of the buddahist stance could appear as escapism. How does this seduce someone into a position. Are political poems suppose to seduce or are they to be as blunt and coercive as Einsenhower himself was. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 18:41:00 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" "Heterosexual bars are generally places in which sexist behavior is distilled and concentrated, and in which very little attention is paid to changing the social order." My gay friends tell me that the habitues of gay bars often try to change the social order by forming couples, and that's what I've observed when I've gone with them. I have no idea what's distilled and concentrated in women's bars because on the couple of occasions when women friends have invited me along I've been denied admission. I rarely go to bars of any kind these days, but in the bars of my youth certain tables did pay attention to changing the social order politically, and occasionally we managed to gain control of the jukebox. It might be possible to establish a bar dedicated to changing the social order. Call it "The Bar with a Mission." But it probably wouldn't work. Heterosexual males are such jackasses by nature and nurture that they would revert to the manufacture of Distillate of Sexist Behavior (what would that taste like? would it be cerise or chartreuse in color?) in short order and take the bar down with them. It is fun to imagine, however, what kind of drinks would be served at "The Bar with a Mission." Any suggestions? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 21:44:54 -0400 Reply-To: "David Erben (Art)" Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "David Erben (Art)" Subject: Endocrine Poetics at the Ballpark Comments: To: UB Poetics discussion group MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Artist or Critic, Slugging Center Fielder or Goalie, Predator or Scavenger?: Gloria Anzaldua (Chicana poet/critic), Audre Lorde, June Jordan, Michelle Cliff, Aime Cesaire (poet/theorist of negritude), Wole Soyinka (Nigerian poet, dramatist, critic), Paula Gunn Allen, Leslie Marmon Silko, Gerald Vizenor, Trinh Minh-ha, Salman Rushdie (not strictly speaking a "theorist" but ...), Sara Suleri (Pakistani novelist/theorist teaching at Yale), Umberto Eco (semiotician, novelist - if you can call them "novels"), Eduardo Galeano, Emerson, David Dabydeen (poet, theorist, director), Kamau Brathwaite, Chinua Achebe, Ngugi wa Thiong'o (slugging center fielder for the Pistons), Wole Soyinka, Chinweizu, Cheikh Anta Diop, Hans Haacke, Blanchot, Paul Miller, Borges, Walter Benjamin, Mallarme, Salman Rushdie, Gita Mehta, Alfred Kazin, Nicholson Baker, David Foster, Wallace, Georges Bataille, Andre Breton, Sergei Eisenstein, Leonardo, Nadar, T.S. Eliot, Matthew Arnold, Ezra Pound, E.A. Poe, Kenneth Burke (he wrote a novel and some poetry), Virginia Woolf, Zora Neal Hurston, Adrienne Rich (wrote about basic writers at CUNY in the 70s), Tom Wolfe (not Thomas, that I know of), Toni Morrison, Cecil Day Lewis, Barbara Kruger, Sir Phillip Sydney, Alexander Pope (there's a M. Pope that plays for the 49ers, if that's helpful), Wordsworth, Coleridge, Alberti, Vasari, Paul Hindemith, Corbusier, Virginia Woolf, Eisenstein, Pasolini (One Hundred Days of Sodom, there's a great theoretical film for ya), Godard, Truffaut, Chabrol, Rohmer, Rivette (the New Wave is defined as those who wrote as critics for Cahier du Cinema before becoming film makers), Robbe-Grillet, Sartre, Camus (actually, most of the existentialist philosophy reads better as fiction), and I should just say, all French poets or writers or film makers are theorists AND artists because they ALL like to talk about art as much as do art (there's a generalization for you), George Gross, Brecht, Sandra Gilbert, Goethe, Mary Shelly, Whistler, Anna Devere Smith (performance artist, theorist, professor at, ummm, Stanford?), N. Scott Momaday (poet, novelist, director of the Native American Studies program at Arizona), Oscar Wilde, Plato, Kierkegard, Anais Nin, Alvin Ailey, most/all of the Black Mountain people, Johanna Drucker and, the numba ONE all-round, poet/theorist/baseball playing/film making/metaphor mixing fool: Studs Terkel. Now, whether some/all are regular and to effect, that only their endocrinologist knows for sure. More to the pt perhaps, John Koethe's article in Critical Inquiry 18 (autumn '91) may be of interest, "Contrary Impulses: The Tension between Poetry and Theory" ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 21:50:09 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: Re: power in language / locus classicus, p.s. Being a Gemini, seems one post requires its twin (or at least postscript), and so it is in this instance. Now, thinking abt. my concluding remark, << If the sensibility of another has been bruised by that person's misreading of my attempt at art . . . >> it occurs to me that the word "art" may be a bit too specific, and that the word "communication" is even more germane. It also occurs to me that Kim Dawn's concluding notation, > (this is not poetry) might elicit pleasing recollections of Rene Magritte's famous bon mot. However, it further occurs to me that Dale's nipple-clip followup text was an attempt to translate back into terms more instantly accessible to a woman the nature of the sense of violent-threat rhetoric presented by the cited KD text as read by a man (or, particularly, as one may imagine it read by the person to whom it is addressed). It further occurs to me to remark that, strange but true if you prick me I will bleed (as said the Jew) an observation that Dale was, it seems, pointing out in his (perhaps regrettable) rhetorical counter-salvo; -- and as Tom Mandel was likewise (in much more measured manner) reiterating. It seems surprising that men might be sensitive to some offence at language of the KD fashion? -- whereas if a kindred text were posted from opposite gender to opposite gender, would it have occasioned a kindred brauhaha at this listserv hippie carrot juice bar? (I suspect so . . . except that perhaps the poster of such a text would've been tarred & feathered more readily, with less articulate defense in evidence.) cheers (& hey, with celery juice, it's even better), d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 18:55:57 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" "The bar metaphor crops up on *many* lists, and it's no accident that it does; we carry our conceptions of and our actions in the physical social spaces we inhabit to our virtual hangouts. The intrusion of the performance space (far more congenial to feminist efforts) into the bar is seen as an interruption rather than a potential liberation from stereotype." I was scratching my balls down at the local gin mill with a bunch of other white male poets when I read the above, and I must say we were all surprised. Do you mean that we've been right all along, that women really are more histrionic than men? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 19:00:14 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: dbkk@SIRIUS.COM Subject: Re: power in language In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 4:53 PM +0100 7/7/97, Kali Tal wrote: >I do *not* think that Bellamy's text urges the reader to draw the conclusion >that Bellamy is making an "analogy" nor that she is being metaphorical. >When you say something should be categorized as sexual violence, you are not >saying that something should be distinguished from something else "as if it >were" sexual violence, nor are you saying that it "is sexual violence" as >one might metaphorically state, "Kali is a pit bull," meaning "Kali has the >characteristics of a pit bull." If this is what Bellamy means, then I hope >she will come forward and say so, but it is not present--as far as I can >detect--in the text. Kali, I only brought up the violence issue because I was accused of rhetorical violence, which is bizarre given the acceptance of KD's behavior. I don't care to comment on your interpretations of my text except to say--go ahead and deny the psychological power of language. When people here are capable of seeing the poignancy and power of breaking a line at a certain point as opposed to breaking it at another point, I'm sure they too can see that attacks made by KD have far more of an impact than you credit them with in your theory games. So play on. Dodie p.s. I also feel that trotting out the Oppression Women in response to Dale's message is a cheap shot and demeans women as much as anything he might say. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 22:05:56 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: Re: power in language / locus classicus, p.p.s. pardon, #3 of a series (& that's all from me for today, folks) . . . in my #1 post, I was sloppy & wrote "allegory" where I meant "analogy" d.i. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 19:35:01 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I've just realized, and I'm mortified that it took me this long, that my posts are forwarded to the list by means of a "mail server." I must confess that as a man I found this gratifying for a moment, but after a bout of self-criticism I have arrived at a resolution to do something to change the situation. Non-techy that I am, I'm at a lost where to start. Any suggestions? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 23:27:50 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest Subject: a cigar is a cigar and a bar is a bar why on EARTH are we chiding a bar for not being a place that challenges sexual stereotypes, etc. shall we chide the toilet paper aisle at the supermarket? the upper right half of an elevator? the second quadrant of venus? a bar is a place where people get together and hang out after a hard days work (or not). where there is oppression, yes, challenge it -- including when someone, of any gender, mounts a really VICIOUS attack of sexual harrassment aimed at humiliating someone. and the reason kim dawn's identity is in doubt is because the posts have been so very bizarre they recall several efforts by tricksters of old to make fun of the Earnest Liberal quality of the list, as well as a number of now infamous cyberspace pranks. also, various bits of elementary computer research turn up strange and conflicting accounts of kim dawn. also, this list was "made" by a spammer with a false id in the past at least once that i know of to the suffering of many, and the "kim dawn" uh, ouevres, recall the worst of that unfortunate era. yes, dodie, there IS something grotesque beyond irony in the defense of kim dawn's really mean-spirited attacks right and left being defended by calling your pretty straightforward, patient for a long time responses violent or sexually violent. i notice all of the kim dawn defenders never engage with her absolutely inexcusable misreadings of me -- inexcuseably inaccurate in repeat generations despite several corrections to the point of appallingly hypocritical carelessness, spite, or both. no, instead they snap about the margins, trying to make that end part of green out to be red, and they ignore that flagrantly loud kelly green mess smack dab in the center of the canvas whilst declaiming "how cerise her performance!" hey, wake up -- the emperor has no clothes. the emperor has no clothes. ...and ye shall know them by their misreadings... - nuff said? e ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 21:31:42 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Re: power in language >I only brought up the violence issue because I was accused of rhetorical >violence, which is bizarre given the acceptance of KD's behavior. I don't >care to comment on your interpretations of my text except to say--go ahead >and deny the psychological power of language. When people here are capable >of seeing the poignancy and power of breaking a line at a certain point as >opposed to breaking it at another point, I'm sure they too can see that >attacks made by KD have far more of an impact than you credit them with in >your theory games. So play on. "Rhetorical violence?" How so? And I do *not* deny the psychological power of language; I simply say that "violence" in language is possible only when the reader perceives the author has some sort of power over him/her. Without the real-world relationships which back the language, threats become bluster or simply noise. That's why the armless, legless knight in Monty Python screaming that he's going to bite the knees off of his opponent is so fucking funny. That's why the scene in which Ving Rhames's character is being threatened with anal rape in _Pulp Fiction_ is not funny at all. That's why there's a difference, say, between a parent screaming abusive insults at a small child, and a small child screaming insults at a parent. The texts produced by Kim Dawn had, as far as I can tell, *no* effect except to draw fire down on Kim Dawn and anyone rash enough to argue that one *ought* to make distinctions between "threats" and hopelessly unrealizable--therefore playful, whether one likes that sort of play or not--scenarios. Crikey. >I also feel that trotting out the Oppression Women in response to Dale's >message is a cheap shot and demeans women as much as anything he might say. I don't know who the Oppression Women are, but I assume that they share a house with the Politically Correct--backlash figments of male imagination, a rhetoric adopted by women who are afraid of being seen as members of those imaginary categories by reactionary men. To mention women's oppression is taboo these days, as it is to mention the oppression of people of color. It's so... so... *unfair* to all those poor oppressed white men out there who've been victimized by having to live their lives without any ethnicity or gender identity. And it makes decent white guys who are *trying* to Do The Right Thing so... uncomfortable. Sheesh. How is it demeaning to women to point out that women are the targets of the basest attacks on POETICS? How is it demeaning to women to examine sexist structures in rhetoric or in f2f encounter? I am a feminist and I can't/won't/doanwanna move through the world without recognizing and describing the sexist and racist power structures I see in play. What is it to me if certain folks on POETICS don't like what I have to say or how I say it? I don't like what they say or how they have to say it. A rhetorical move which tries to depict me as playing some sort of victim or promoting that man-made invention "victimology" (Oppression Women???) will surely backfire. And surely it is Dodie Bellamy who is promoting victims here--victims of Kim Dawn's allegedly vicious assaults, poor wilting creatures walking around traumatized (big red "V"s painted on their foreheads) because her texts had "far more of an impact" than I "credited them with." Kali "Is it not good for me to come and draw forth a spirit, to see what kind of spirit people are of? I see that some of you have got the spirit of a goose, and some have got the spirit of a snake. I feel at home here." --Sojourner Truth ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 21:50:56 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: power in language Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Kali--I realize that you're likely to respond by showing us your purple hearts, but don't you think that you're mounting this rather extreme offensive in the safest possible place? Especially, as you assure us, that "sticks and stones," etc. At 09:31 PM 7/7/97 +0100, you wrote: >>I only brought up the violence issue because I was accused of rhetorical >>violence, which is bizarre given the acceptance of KD's behavior. I don't >>care to comment on your interpretations of my text except to say--go ahead >>and deny the psychological power of language. When people here are capable >>of seeing the poignancy and power of breaking a line at a certain point as >>opposed to breaking it at another point, I'm sure they too can see that >>attacks made by KD have far more of an impact than you credit them with in >>your theory games. So play on. > >"Rhetorical violence?" How so? And I do *not* deny the psychological power >of language; I simply say that "violence" in language is possible only when >the reader perceives the author has some sort of power over him/her. >Without the real-world relationships which back the language, threats become >bluster or simply noise. That's why the armless, legless knight in Monty >Python screaming that he's going to bite the knees off of his opponent is so >fucking funny. That's why the scene in which Ving Rhames's character is >being threatened with anal rape in _Pulp Fiction_ is not funny at all. >That's why there's a difference, say, between a parent screaming abusive >insults at a small child, and a small child screaming insults at a parent. >The texts produced by Kim Dawn had, as far as I can tell, *no* effect except >to draw fire down on Kim Dawn and anyone rash enough to argue that one >*ought* to make distinctions between "threats" and hopelessly >unrealizable--therefore playful, whether one likes that sort of play or >not--scenarios. Crikey. > >>I also feel that trotting out the Oppression Women in response to Dale's >>message is a cheap shot and demeans women as much as anything he might say. > >I don't know who the Oppression Women are, but I assume that they share a >house with the Politically Correct--backlash figments of male imagination, a >rhetoric adopted by women who are afraid of being seen as members of those >imaginary categories by reactionary men. > >To mention women's oppression is taboo these days, as it is to mention the >oppression of people of color. It's so... so... *unfair* to all those poor >oppressed white men out there who've been victimized by having to live their >lives without any ethnicity or gender identity. And it makes decent white >guys who are *trying* to Do The Right Thing so... uncomfortable. Sheesh. > >How is it demeaning to women to point out that women are the targets of the >basest attacks on POETICS? How is it demeaning to women to examine sexist >structures in rhetoric or in f2f encounter? I am a feminist and I >can't/won't/doanwanna move through the world without recognizing and >describing the sexist and racist power structures I see in play. What is it >to me if certain folks on POETICS don't like what I have to say or how I say >it? I don't like what they say or how they have to say it. > >A rhetorical move which tries to depict me as playing some sort of victim or >promoting that man-made invention "victimology" (Oppression Women???) will >surely backfire. And surely it is Dodie Bellamy who is promoting victims >here--victims of Kim Dawn's allegedly vicious assaults, poor wilting >creatures walking around traumatized (big red "V"s painted on their >foreheads) because her texts had "far more of an impact" than I "credited >them with." > >Kali > >"Is it not good for me to come and draw forth a spirit, to see what kind of >spirit people are of? I see that some of you have got the spirit of a goose, >and some have got the spirit of a snake. I feel at home here." --Sojourner >Truth > > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 23:52:15 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joseph Zitt Organization: HumanSystems Subject: Re: identity MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kali Tal wrote: > Besides, nobody ever reads _The Yearling_ anymore, and few > people > have any concept of the viciousness of a cornered deer. Disney's > Bambi > never could be the kind of King of the Forest that, say, the Lion King > could > pull off--the lion's a predator, for crissake. Ya gotta hunt down the record "Bambo" by the David Roter Unit. "This time, the animals are gonna win..." > Spike the pit bull Hmm... now that I come to think of it, I know several women called Spike, but no men, even though people think of it as a male name. Curious. -- ---------1---------1---------1---------1---------1---------1---------- |||/ Joseph Zitt ===== jzitt@humansystems.com ===== Human Systems \||| ||/ Austin, Texas! =========== SILENCE: The John Cage Mailing List \|| |/ http://www.realtime.net/~jzitt == <*> <*> == Empty Words == ecto \| ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 01:02:15 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: KIM DAWN BAKER Subject: body made of air MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII she s sa body of air bodyofairbodyofairbodyofair 'le corps est le corps/il est seul/et n'a pas besoin d'organe/le corps n'est jamais un organisme/les organismes sont les ennemis du corps.' -antonin artaud 'the body is the body/it is all by itself/and has no need of organs/the body is never an organism/organisms are the enemies of the body.' -deleuze&guattari/anti-oedipus (the story of the girl who lived under the floor) she looked up at them from cracks between the wood these spaces hit her face bits of light bite-sized bits of strawberry jam fell upon her mouth from their morning breakfast she lied under the table reading the inscription on the underside they put a bowl down and introduced her as the family dog she built a cave coming out from the wall she went underneath they couldn't tell anymore whether it was her or the wall. kimdawn ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 22:08:11 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Re: power in language >Kali--I realize that you're likely to respond by showing us your purple >hearts, but don't you think that you're mounting this rather extreme >offensive in the safest possible place? Especially, as you assure us, that >"sticks and stones," etc. What's extreme? This is language. We're writers. What's the big deal? As far as this being "safe," well, yeah, it is. Can't have it both ways, Mark. If this place *is* safe, then, Kim Dawn's writing--like my writing--was *just* writing and no threat. Why do you engage with me on this level? What is in this performance for you? I know what my stake is. What's yours? Kali ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 01:25:38 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Alan * Sondheim Subject: A Poem By Mr. William Butler Yeats (fwd) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII =--= CRaZy JANE TALkS WITH THe BIsHaP i meT thE BIshap an thE Raad And Much sAid hE and I. 'thase Breasts aRe flat and faLlen Naw, ThOse vEins Must SaOn be Dry; LiVe in A heaVeNly MansIan, Nat in same fauL sTy.' 'FAir and fauL aRe near af kin, And fair needS fauL,' i crIed. 'my friendS aRe ganE, but that'S A trUth NAr grAvE nAr bed dEnIed, Learned in bOdily lawliNess And in thE HearT's PriDe. 'A waman can be PrauD and sTiff WHen an Lave IntEnt; But lave has pItchEd his MansIan In ThE plAcE af eXcremenT; FOr nAthinG can be Sale ar whalE ThAt has nat been rent.' by mr. william BuTler Yeats ____________________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 22:30:23 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: power in language Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >I know what my stake is. What's yours? > >Kali > Tenderloin, they tell me. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 23:02:54 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: power in language Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Can't have it both ways, Mark. >If this place *is* safe, then, Kim Dawn's writing--like my writing--was >*just* writing and no threat. > >Why do you engage with me on this level? What is in this performance for >you? I know what my stake is. What's yours? > >Kali > Strange as it may seem, I haven't said anything at all about Kim Dawn's writing. Have I been subsumed into the great faceless opponent? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 23:03:39 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: power in language Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Why do you engage with me on this level? What is in this performance for >you? >Kali > > A courtship ritual. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 00:50:00 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Re: power in language In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Why do you engage with me on this level? What is in this performance for >you? I know what my stake is. What's yours? > >Kali Isnt it obvious, Dr.? He's part of the conspiracy. George Bowering. , 2499 West 37th Ave., Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6M 1P4 fax: 1-604-266-9000 e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 10:47:37 +0200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michel Delville Subject: Bob Grumman's list poetic schools / Is Langpo acadominant? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'd like to add the following comments to the growing list of responses to Bob Grumman's list of poetic schools: (1) I don't think you have to know a lot about the academy or about the socio-economic aspects of poetry in America to define Langpo as "acadominant". Nor should you feel guilty or embarassed about it, Bob. It seems obvious to me the main theoretical premises practiced and/or advocated by many Language poets correlate with a number of key tenets of contemporary academic theory, including the post-structuralist attack on the "unified" subject, its distrust of the neutral "transparency" of expository discourse, Marxist literary theory, Derrida's critique of Western metaphysics, not to speak of the current interest in genre studies as a tool for a critical investigation of the interaction between literary artefacts and prevailing socio-cultural practices. The list could go on and on forever . . . To pretend that this has nothing to do with the entrance of U.S. colleges into the intellectual life and creative pratices of poets is simply absurd. That the collusion between Langpo and dominant academic DISCOURSE is not automatically translated into a cornucopia of academic jobs for ALL Language poets and scholars working in the field (cf. Ron Silliman's message) does not in any way invalidate Bob Grumman's characterization of the movement as "acadominant". Right now, I can think of at least 20 scholars and poets who are desperately looking for jobs both here (in Belgium) and there (in the U.S.) despite the fact that their work plays right into the current fashion in terms of preferred academic topics and discourse. It's the job situation that is to blame, and it has nothing to do with anybody's alleged position as outsiders or revolutionary-scholars. As for me, I hasten to add, this kind of contamination is still preferable to that which informs the so-called "workshop poem" as practiced in the theoryphobic climate of Creative Writing programs . . . =20 (2) The term "Deep Image" was not coined by Bly but by Jerome Rothenberg -- I'm not sure where and when he first used the term but I think it was originally related to his analysis of Spanish Surrealist poetry. =20 ------------------- Michel Delville English Department University of Li=E8ge 3, Place Cockerill 4000 LIEGE (BELGIUM) =20 Fax: ++ 32(0)4 366 57 21 e-mail: mdelville@ulg.ac.be ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 05:31:29 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: rsillima@IX.NETCOM.COM Subject: Time, jobs, etc. Comments: To: poetics@UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii The idea of the poet as a univ. professor is an historically recent (and, it would seem, short-lived) phenomenon. None of the high modernists before Zukofsky jabbered at teenagers in front of a black board for a living. People like Stanley Kunitz and Genevieve Taggard were among the very first to get jobs in universities *as poets* under any terms. We tend to forget that American literature has been a "legit" topic on campus for less than 100 years. So it was no big deal that Stevens worked at Hartford. It *was* a big deal that he was successful at it. Time Magazine (and its companion Life) is not a bad thumbnail index of official culture, esp. in the 1936-70 timeframe. I don't know what they thought of Stevens or WCW, but they did do a special issue on poetry (not a "single author" job like the recent Robert Hughes deal on the visual arts, which was too hokey and shallow for words, but did have some nice illustrations) in 1964 that had Robert Lowell on the cover. It would be worth it to look up that particular issue and report back what it said of Verse. Actually, the times when those kinds of publications weighed in on poetry earlier tended to be around extra-literary news items, Pound's trial and the controversy over the Bollingen award in the late 40s, Ginsberg's trial over Howl in the mid-50s. Lots of humor at the expense of the beats. When I got my first job post-college in '72 in the prison movement, I never told any of my co-workers I wrote. One day, somebody posted a review I'd done (a positive one at that) of Tom Clark's Neil Young that had been published in Rolling Stone and I was "busted." Nowadays, you get a job and your new co-workers check out Alta Vista or Hotbot to see if you have a website on your first day. Nowadays I get more comments from co-workers about things that have showed up on the Sixties Listserv (hosted by our own Kali Tal). Ron Ron Silliman 262 Orchard Road Paoli, PA 19301-1116 (610) 251-2214 (610) 293-6099 (o) (610) 293-5506 (fax) rsillima@ix.netcom.com rsillima@tssc.com http://writing.upenn.edu/epc/authors/silliman/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 04:26:26 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rachel Loden Subject: Re: identity/poetics MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kali Tal wrote (some time ago--am digging my way out of 834 messages): > And then there are the well-known "fakes" by > white authors, like "Danny Santiago's" _Famous All Over Town_ or, to bring > class into it, Rebecca Harding Davis' _Life in the Iron Mills_. I realize that this is off current topic (and possibly of little interest), but have to say that such a characterization of _Life in the Iron Mills_ is false. Sharon Harris, author of a book on RHD, observes that "the narrator is clearly represented as middle-class; she (or he, since the sex is not indicated) is clearly someone *observing* the working class." _Life in the Iron Mills_, like all of RHD's early work, appeared unsigned. This was not an attempt at "fakery," but was part of a tradition of (especially female) authorial reticence--the fear of appearing immodest. (Possible shades of current topic!) This tradition was evolving during Davis's lifetime, and her later work is signed. I know almost nothing about the "Santiago" book, but my understanding is that the (white) author represented himself as Chicano. Davis did nothing of the sort with _Life in the Iron Mills_, so I wonder how you would support the comparison. Rachel ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 08:10:55 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Mandel Subject: poets and critics Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" David Israel, in responding to my tempest in a teapot directed at David Erben, rightly points out that some poets also write criticism. A poet who writes criticism is *a poet* who *writes criticism.* People do different things, yes. Some poets write criticism, some critics create crossword puzzles, and some crossword puzzle designers write long novels that do not employ the letter 'e' -- no point of poetic or academic or historical or critical or theoretical or any other '-ic' or '-ical' importance is contained in any of these facts. *** This raises the interesting question of why anyone would mention the fact at all. I didn't in my original post, but I *was* interested to see if anyone was sufficiently addicted to the sound of his/her own fingers clicking to do so. I found out. Tom Tom Mandel tmandel@screenporch.com ******************************************************** Screen Porch * http://screenporch.com 4031 University Dr. Suite 200 * vox: 703-934-2034 Fairfax, VA 22030-3409 * fax: 703-391-6881 ******************************************************** Join the Caucus Conversation ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 09:50:28 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Daniel Bouchard Subject: power in nipples Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII It was in fact, at a heterosexual bar once, where my nipples WERE threatened, as A MEANS of changing the social order. No true revolutionary, I declined. The threat came from a ball-scratching white man. Heterosexual bars also distill liquor, which is usually a reason to go. I have no faith in the bar-list metaphor. If it were anywhere near true, what a drag the place would be. Long before I came to this "virtual hangout," some gay bars I frequented didn't challenge my social order as much as I had anticipated. All in Philadelphia. The first was a motorcycle bar. Harley's hung from the rafters. We went after a party and since most of the crowd were gay men, they got to choose the bar. We shot some pool. Though not in leather, I was ogled quite a bit. That was nice. Spent many a night at Hepburn's, a virtual shrine to Katharine. My bisexual girlfriend adored the place, and it was so close to her apartment. At the door, a stream of very young women would pour past the bouncer into the bar, but she stared and sneered at my id for several minutes. I smiled and looked dumb. I was dumb, and the bar itself was beautifully done. Pads of paper and tiny pencils were left at intervals along the bar, and although my companion left my name and number on several of them, no one ever called. In another bar, on the third floor of an ancient brick rowhouse in a cobblestone alley, we watched from the bar as 14 men dance almost in unison on the mirrored dancefloor. As they spun in flashing pirouettes my girlfriend kissed me. When I opened my eyes the smiling bartender winked at me. What a dreamy time that was. No real point to this post. I'm just sick of talking about Kim Dawn. daniel_bouchard@hmco.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 10:10:37 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Prejsnar Subject: Re: Bob Grumman's list poetic schools / Is Langpo acadominant? In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970708084737.00663c08@pop3.mailbc.ulg.ac.be> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, Michel Delville wrote: > socio-cultural practices. The list could go on and on forever . . . To > pretend that this has nothing to do with the entrance of U.S. colleges into > the intellectual life and creative pratices of poets is simply absurd. Sorry but the the general arguments of your post, Michel, strike me as somewhat more absurd.... Most of the poetic tendencies that are seen as alternative to LP (deep image type stuff, the generlized plain-spoken "I" free-verse lyric of APR, etc.) are **far more** anchored in the academy, and dominant there, than is LP. This is why most of my posts in response to Bob's list have been a little irritable. It's so obviously *gratuitous* to link the Lang-ists with academe, given the siting of most U.S. poetry within academic settings, that it seemed that the term could only be intended as a rather heavy-handed put-down. That still seems self-evident to me. Mark P. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 08:22:29 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Mandel Subject: David Erben's list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" David Erben has provided a long and interesting list of people who write poetry and criticism. David Israel simply mentioned the obvious point that some do. Perhaps the Davids are cooperating in order to illustrate the Erben distinction between "academic and non-academic." I didn't read the whole list, just scanned it. Even that, however, yielded some names of people I didn't know wrote poetry -- again, that's interesting. What does this have to do with my post, I wonder? Roberto Alomar is on the list of baseball players who bat from the left side and bat from the right side. Does this mean that batting from the left side and the right side cannot be distinguished? That the distinction poses a theoretical problem? A subject to be discussed at Mark Weiss's "Bar with a Mission" -- What *does* Derrida say about switch-hitting? Tom Tom Mandel tmandel@screenporch.com ******************************************************** Screen Porch * http://screenporch.com 4031 University Dr. Suite 200 * vox: 703-934-2034 Fairfax, VA 22030-3409 * fax: 703-391-6881 ******************************************************** Join the Caucus Conversation ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 11:01:51 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Bennett M. Sm [Dimpson" Subject: Re: power in language In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear Kali, Are your men and women too heavy for words? What are "real world relationships" before they are language? One or the other cliche. Just because one has an X or a Y often enough guarantees little in the way power is perceived. Sides are not chosen necessarily, no? Pen me? Would you pen you? Switzerland, Bennett. On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, Kali Tal wrote: > And I do *not* deny the psychological power > of language; I simply say that "violence" in language is possible only when > the reader perceives the author has some sort of power over him/her. > Without the real-world relationships which back the language, threats become > bluster or simply noise. &c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c. &c. Bennett Simpson &c. bms5q@virginia.edu &c. &c. &c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 11:39:14 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "David R. Israel" Subject: Re: David Erben's list Comments: cc: Tom Mandel MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Tom Mandel sends this almondine: > David Erben has provided a long and interesting list of people who > write poetry and criticism. David Israel simply mentioned the > obvious point that some do. Perhaps the Davids are cooperating in > order to illustrate the Erben distinction between "academic and > non-academic." . . . > What does this have to do with my post, I wonder? point well taken. The fact that (say) poets also write criticism (& contrawise) is relevant to some questions & not to others. The original question (if I can somehow trace back on the road of thought) had something to do with a difference in cognitive process. No doubt that holds. More particularly, the issue was -- what? -- something about the difference between how categories of idea arise for a poet (i.e., one engaged in discovery, at the source whence the words emerge), and how categories are applied by a critic TO the products of that tenuous language-formation -- i.e., figuring out which cloud looks like an apple & which like an orange, which swirl should be considered "representation" & which "abstraction" . . . or have I lost the ariadne thread of what we're discussing? d.i. . ..... ............ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////\\\\\ > david raphael israel < >> washington d.c. << | davidi@wizard.net (home) | disrael@skgf.com (office) ========================= | thy centuries follow each other | perfecting a small wild flower | (Tagore) //////////////////////////////////////////\\\\\///// ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 08:43:52 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: Bob Grumman's list poetic schools / Is Langpo acadominant? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" When I was at Johns Hopkins (class of '66) there was nary a mention of William Carlos Williams. When I taught Williams to Freshman at Columbia as a Preceptor it raised eyebrows--when I taught Olson it caused a minor scandal, and my classes were the only ones taught Ginsberg. Academic criticism has caught up with the poetry of the '60s and before, as had always been the pattern: the poets eventually forced a change in theory. When Language Poetry arrived at the academy it fit so well into the theoretical concerns of some of the younger critics (Lacan was all the buzz at Hopkins by 1965, and the Columbia French Department had begun the process of assimilating structuralism and post-) that it seemed made to order. This need not be read as a put-down. It is different from what came before. At 10:10 AM 7/8/97 -0400, you wrote: >On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, Michel Delville wrote: > >> socio-cultural practices. The list could go on and on forever . . . To >> pretend that this has nothing to do with the entrance of U.S. colleges into >> the intellectual life and creative pratices of poets is simply absurd. > >Sorry but the the general arguments of your post, Michel, strike me as >somewhat more absurd.... > >Most of the poetic tendencies that are seen as alternative to LP (deep >image type stuff, the generlized plain-spoken "I" free-verse lyric of APR, >etc.) are **far more** anchored in the academy, and dominant there, than >is LP. This is why most of my posts in response to Bob's list have been >a little irritable. It's so obviously *gratuitous* to link the Lang-ists >with academe, given the siting of most U.S. poetry within academic >settings, that it seemed that the term could only be intended as a rather >heavy-handed put-down. That still seems self-evident to me. > >Mark P. > > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 11:51:44 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jordan Davis Subject: Re: power in language In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Bennett -- What Switzerland. (I'm assuming -- There is power in a -- If it ain't -- When the bow -- -- Jordan ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 12:17:12 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "David R. Israel" Subject: Re: power in language / "violence" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT > On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, Kali Tal wrote: > > > And I do *not* deny the psychological power > > of language; I simply say that "violence" in language is possible > > only when the reader perceives the author has some sort of power > > over him/her. Without the real-world relationships which back the > > language, threats become bluster or simply noise. "violence" if broadly construed (rather than strictly phyiscally) -- is cognate to "violation," correct? It involves a violation of the person (or persona? or psyche? or integrity?) of another. I think there have been instances of women behaving violently (in both the the realm of body & utterance) toward men; I'm doubtful that it's a one-way street -- if that's the question? Certainly women-as-poets possess considerable intellectual capital, particularly for those who are apt to read this list. The power to shame or embarrass through language is a power, no? The casting of doubts, the broad passionate sweep of insinuation, the dark wave of anger, the distancing, the sense of a menacing intention, the taunt of a faux-seductive language, the raising of the spectre of anguish and desire and the ascription, to another, of suppresed impulses as the putative source of the other's utterance, the instinctual reductionism and demasking and naking and debasing and shaming and the ascription of a reprehensible post-Freudian id as the secret life to be broadcast and amplified, turning up the volume of presumed inner chaos -- I think such things were achieved (or certainly attempted) in the locus classicus post, no? gotta run, d.i. . ..... ............ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > david raphael israel < >> washington d.c. << | davidi@wizard.net (home) | disrael@skgf.com (office) ======================= | Many cities of men he saw | and learned their minds, | many pains he suffered, heartsick | on the open sea, | fighting to save his life and bring | his comrades home. . . . | Launch out on his story, Muse, | daughter of Zeus, | start from where you will . . . ////////////////////////////////////////////////// Homer, The Odyssey Book 1: Athena Inspires the Prince trans. Robert Fagles (1996) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ svaha ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 09:20:09 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: identity In-Reply-To: <33C1812F.8C5F5DF5@humansystems.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Spike Jones Spike Mulligan etc ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 12:26:46 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Bennett M. Sm [Dimpson" Subject: Re: power in language In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Jordan, Whomever thinks beige would come between white and black? I'm assuming drifted gloves. There is power in a dimple. If it ain't words, worms, thirst. When the bow migrates, or exits the bar. Bennett &c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c. &c. Bennett Simpson &c. bms5q@virginia.edu &c. &c. &c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 09:32:44 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: acadminished in Boulder In-Reply-To: <199707081617.MAA00419@radagast.wizard.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Since Tom asked, here's Derrida on switch hitting: "An aphorism is a name but every name can take on the figure of aphorism." from "Aphorism Countertime" ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 12:48:41 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Bennett M. Sm [Dimpson" Subject: Re: power in language In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I like this: Barbara Kruger once said in an interview (somewhere) that her art came out of a desire to balance "the ingratiation of wishful thinking" with "the criticality of knowing better." Does anyone know where this was said? (Or where this balance is?) Bennett &c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c. &c. Bennett Simpson &c. bms5q@virginia.edu &c. &c. &c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c.&c. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 13:01:32 -0400 Reply-To: Tom Orange Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Orange Subject: a cigar is a cigar and a bar is a bar In-Reply-To: <199707080401.AAA20330@julian.uwo.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII eliza, you wrote: >and the reason kim dawn's identity is in doubt is because the posts have >been so very bizarre they recall several efforts by tricksters of old... if posts are "so very bizarre," then doubt identity. if i produce interpretation/value judgment "p", then i can place identity of person "q" under question. take an unknown something so very bizarre, relate it through recollection to a thing known to be odious, so that the unknown now too becomes odious and the identity of the person behind that unknown becomes suspended. this variety of logic really troubles me. >yes, dodie, there IS something grotesque beyond irony in the defense of >kim dawn's really mean-spirited attacks right and left being defended >[while dodie's straightforward and patient criticisms are called >rhetorically violent....] i notice all of the kim dawn defenders never >engage with her absolutely inexcusable misreadings of me... i guess my efforts to be straightforward, patient, forthright in my partiality, have failed, and are instead, sadly, grotesque beyond irony. eliza, i discussed extensively off-list with you why i am in no position to engage with kim's absolutely inexcusable misreadings of you. i simply can't speak for someone else. above all i respect the fact that you feel you have been violenced. but what if i found your reaction to be "so very bizarre"? (which i don't) by the very logic your post outlines above, i would be well within my rights to doubt *your* identity. "eliza mcgrand -- if such a person exists." *to me*, that little "if" carries a subtler and therefore more dangerous kind of violence in this kind of electronic space than "let me lick yr orifices cut off yr nipples" etc. > > ...and ye shall know them by their misreadings... - nuff said? > no, say more, because it's quite amazing what this cute little gem does. it says tom orange is one of "them," true for convenience's sake b/c altho i have been on this list for a long time and have posted on many other topics my posts of late have had a more or less singular focus. next it says that tom orange misreads, leaving open the question of whether i misread locally or globally (and better to leave it nice and open, simply put: he, as one of them misreads). finally, it invites, nay, commands the readers of poetics to know me by my misreadings. to wit i say: "and when the seventh seal was opened i saw another sign, great and marvelous, which proclaimed the mighty legions of the defenders of kim dawn, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth, and they shall carry the mark by which you shall know them, they shall carry the mark of misreading..." know me as my reading-writing. gnosthi s'auton by yr reading of others. dont know me. at least not by "my" misreadings. t. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 13:11:18 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Orange Subject: ronald johnson MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII can anyone with bibliographic info on ronald johnson handy backchannel it to me? i've done a bunch of searches and cant find nuthin. much thnks, t. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 10:26:35 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: dbkk@SIRIUS.COM Subject: Re: power in language / "violence" In-Reply-To: <199707081617.MAA00419@radagast.wizard.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Very well stated, David. Dodie At 12:17 PM -0400 7/8/97, David R. Israel wrote: >The power to shame or embarrass through language is a power, no? >The casting of doubts, the broad passionate sweep of insinuation, >the dark wave of anger, the distancing, the sense of a menacing >intention, the taunt of a faux-seductive language, the raising of the >spectre of anguish and desire and the ascription, to another, of >suppresed impulses as the putative source of the other's utterance, >the instinctual reductionism and demasking and naking and debasing >and shaming and the ascription of a reprehensible post-Freudian id >as the secret life to be broadcast and amplified, turning up the >volume of presumed inner chaos -- I think such things were achieved >(or certainly attempted) in the locus classicus post, no? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 10:24:19 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Re: identity/poetics >I realize that this is off current topic (and possibly of little >interest), but have to say that such a characterization of _Life in the >Iron Mills_ is false. Sharon Harris, author of a book on RHD, observes >that "the narrator is clearly represented as middle-class; she (or he, >since the sex is not indicated) is clearly someone *observing* the >working class." Sorry, you're right about this. I should have included the Davis book lower down in my list, along with Gaines' _Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman_ and other books whose *authors* did not intend the book to be taken as personal experience, but whose audiences often naively read the book in that manner. I do remember that when I first read the book, which was assigned in a college course, the professor had to explicitly state that the author was *not* working class because many students assumed that she was even after reading the text. The author's best efforts may not be successful when faced with an audience well-prepared to misread. Kali ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 11:15:11 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kali Tal Subject: Re: power in language > What are "real world >relationships" > before they are >language? "real world relationships" the first language is restraint pull and push away when reaching toward against when shoving off hand talk is about wanting and withholding the rest is gloss put your body where your mouth is k. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 13:32:33 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert Hale Subject: Re: power in nipples Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" A woman threw a shot of tequila on me in a bar in NYC a couple of weeks ago. She (the bartender) was annoyed because I declined to drink it (it was on-the-house). "I'm driving," I told her, (which was true), before she threw it. Under any other circumstance, I would have drank it down and ordered another. I have witnesses who can testify that I wasn't being a jackass, even though it comes naturally. By the way, this was in one of those heterosexual bars. At 09:50 AM 7/8/97 -0400, you wrote: >It was in fact, at a heterosexual bar once, where my nipples WERE >threatened, as A MEANS of changing the social order. No true revolutionary, >I declined. The threat came from a ball-scratching white man. Heterosexual >bars also distill liquor, which is usually a reason to go. > >I have no faith in the bar-list metaphor. If it were anywhere near true, >what a drag the place would be. > >Long before I came to this "virtual hangout," some gay bars I frequented >didn't challenge my social order as much as I had anticipated. All in >Philadelphia. The first was a motorcycle bar. Harley's hung from the >rafters. We went after a party and since most of the crowd were gay men, >they got to choose the bar. We shot some pool. Though not in leather, I was >ogled quite a bit. That was nice. > >Spent many a night at Hepburn's, a virtual shrine to Katharine. My bisexual >girlfriend adored the place, and it was so close to her apartment. At the >door, a stream of very young women would pour past the bouncer into the >bar, but she stared and sneered at my id for several minutes. I smiled and >looked dumb. I was dumb, and the bar itself was beautifully done. Pads of >paper and tiny pencils were left at intervals along the bar, and although >my companion left my name and number on several of them, no one ever >called. > >In another bar, on the third floor of an ancient brick rowhouse in a >cobblestone alley, we watched from the bar as 14 men dance almost in unison >on the mirrored dancefloor. As they spun in flashing pirouettes my >girlfriend kissed me. When I opened my eyes the smiling bartender winked at >me. > >What a dreamy time that was. > >No real point to this post. I'm just sick of talking about Kim Dawn. > > >daniel_bouchard@hmco.com > > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 15:59:40 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Matthias Regan Subject: Re: identity, and other excresences In-Reply-To: <199707071903.MAA27076@f80.hotmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I just don't get this insistence on elucidating differences between poets and critics! And the methods of analysis so far employed in answering are backwards!=20 Lets proceed from actual lived reality, present and past. I really CAN NOT think of any poet who I would allow NEVER wrote any criticism; and as for paying critical attention to his or her individual work: I'm baffled!=20 Its not that I don't see lots of people who spending their lives writing and thinking critically and are not poets =97 but what poet does not write and think critically? And what is the point of trying to locate the TRUTH of differences between poets and critics in some inner or outer but either way throughly abstracted system of thought patterns? What are poetic sympathies? Compared to critical inferences? I'm deeply suspicious. Is this distinction supposed to indicate a difference in cellular tissue? Are there atomic correspondences? I thought among clear-thinking liberal types this pattern of critical thought went out with Kant. Some days ago, nearer the beginning of this discussion, was written: "Although, a writer like Benjamin beautifully incorporates poetic sympathies into his writing, I think it is less successful for a poet to bring criticism into a piece of art.=20 How is criticism defined? Critical thought, analysis, must exist in -- as part of -- in the creation of -- the work of art! Unless you believe that poetry is purely the divine breath of the Almighty Inspiration and the author's task is mere recording and ON TOP of that believe that manipulation of a language is also not critical, then there is NO basis for assuming that a poet writing poetry has not thought critically about other poetry, her own poetry, the general categories of poetry, etc., etc. But that is beside the point! I think an argument could be made for distinctions between poetry and philosophy, as separate categories of thought and writing that have defined themselves negatively by the other for several thousands of years.=20 I agree with the above quoted bit at least to the degree that these days I tend to think of critical work as more popularly being classified as poetic, then poetry being declared critical =97 but that is true all over: what isn't called poetic? Hell, even poetry is described as having particularly poetic phrases inside it. What about Blake? Williams? Stevens? =97 to mention three names I've read i= n the last 3 days on here: don't each of these poets write poems which in engage in critical work?=20 And to draw from a closer deck: look at our own list members, today, in an exchange that began: Dear Kali, Are your men and women too heavy for words? and ended, very powerfully, I thought, quite brilliantly in fact, given the tenor and subject of much of the proceeding dialogue, about violence in writing, pornographic writing: the rest is gloss put your body where your mouth is If the power of these words isn't a critical one; if their "function" can not be said to have a critical role, why not? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 14:12:20 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Re: acadminished in Boulder In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Since Tom asked, here's Derrida on switch hitting: > >"An aphorism is a name but every name can take on the figure of aphorism." > >from "Aphorism Countertime" How does he feel about the squeeze play? George Bowering. , 2499 West 37th Ave., Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6M 1P4 fax: 1-604-266-9000 e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 17:13:19 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest Subject: Re: a cigar is a cigar and a bar is a bar Comments: To: tmorange@julian.uwo.ca tom you DID engage with me backchannel and make a good case for why you could not defend kim dawn's misreadings. but you did not engage, in public, with the fact that while complaining about how she had been misread, misunderstood, attacked, etc. she perpetrated the same acts ad nauseum. a defense that ignores the offenses is perhaps the best you can do, but it is pretty lame. to be honest, it was the hypocrisy that bothered me most in kim dawn's posts and posturing, i.e. the i- don't-see-all-those-beams-in-my-eye manner. re identity, i thought i was clear but evidently i was not clear enough for you (nor was dodie or several others in their treatment of the same thing) so i'll elaborate: poetics list was hit by a spam/possible false identity/flamebait attack a number of months ago. by "wierdness" and "bizarreness" of posts, i referred to, as i said in post, the fact that the same sort of rhetoric were used in earlier outbreak as in the kim dawn posts: the same multiple mailings of disconnected, uh, prose. the same misreadings. the same extremes of violence. when investigated, the same lack of computer identifications emerged. it is not unique to poetics. this kind of misrepresentation of identity, then spam/flamebait/ worse, has happened in almost every list in cyberspace at least once. i have friends on longstanding lists who've gone through multiple bouts. there is a site, if you're interested, run by a fellow in finland on spamming and cyber space list attacks. as i said in previous posts, and as dodie has elaborated on among others, the kim dawn posts have all the hallmarks and we are already out there in community as mark, witness earlier bout. finally, in that you spoke with me backchannel, i honor your efforts. i can understand that you feel you spoke to me about this so the situation was, in your mind, settled, and you might well feel i've been unfair to you. but it remains that you make apologia, defense, noises of "she's not so bad" and yet you did not, publically, grapple with her inexcuseable behavior to me. i find her behavior to jay, to dodie (the bait-switch of "i love your work" and then a really virulent attack in the next post just after dodie, good heart, let down her defenses was particularly beyond the pale i thought), to me, all of a piece. thus, before anyone sets to work on apologias and defences, ALL the aspects of this posting nightmare should be considered. when her behavior to me is included, i think she is, in essence, indefensible. but you did at least make an effort to deal with me directly, which is the best i've seen so far. when writing previous post, it occurred to me that you might feel i'd dissed you, but as i thought about it, though you were prompt and good about trying as best you could to both admit the fault but explain that you couldn't speak for her and defend it, you continued, in effect, by not dealing with it in public but defending her, to defend her behavior to me by default. and it was, as you said, indefensible. she is your friend, you've said, and that means you are in some sense honor bound to stick up for her. i can also understand that. but she has not apologized, publically or privately, for what she did to me and did, i add, a NUMBER of times EVEN AFTER she was requested to cease and desist from misreading me and spreading utterly false rumors. in fact, she went on to commit, after the second or third request, the infamous false rape allegation coupled with an accusation of hypocrisy based on the notion that i'd said (which i hadn't) that one oughtn't post private matter or write about it then had written about what she alleged was my rape (though i'd done no such thing!). in one fell swoop, we have misreadings, spreading of false information, accusations of hypocrisy (and worse) based on false premises, and repeated disinclination to honor my requests that she read me words carefully before paraphrasing, interpreting, or otherwise using them. as i've said, however, there has been no public apology, no private apology, no owning up, no responsibility taken, no effort to discern similar misbehavior to other people, not even an explanation of how she came to make such a hash-up (with, perhaps, some consideration of possible similar mistakes)... and in the defenses, no mention of a grave misdeed in line with a number of other misdeeds. in a word, nothing. i've said this to kim dawn backchannel, by the way, as well, so it is not that she did not have the opportunity to understand both from public post, and private post, that her behavior was excessively offensive. rather than upbraid me for not letting that serious group of misdeeds slip out of the picture in a sort of kim-was-only-playing defense, i would think it a better use of time to analyze the bad scholarship of such misreadings, the apologies owed to people attacked wrongfully, methodology to honorably undo some of the damage wrought, and ways to be playful but truthful and intelligent at same time. i know, it isn't as sexy as calling people nasty names and writing fun little flamebaits, but that is what landed kim where she is in the first place, no? final note: it was out of a sense of HONORABLE feminism, i.e. fair play and that sort of tiresome thing, that made me protest the sexual harassment of jay schwartz. what, as a feminist, i find unacceptable when done to me i am honor bound not to accept as right to do to anyone else. i've said this before, but consider audre lord on the tools of the master which build the master's house. but posts on this foolishness has taken up much too much space on the list and i'm ashamed to be adding to it. e ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 14:17:53 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Re: power in nipples In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19970708203233.00726e84@pop1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I never have any of those problems in bars. I always go to asexual bars. That's where I met David Bromige, in 1958, so I am eternally grateful for them asexual bars. The one I favour now has a pickup area called the Platonic Lounge. George Bowering. , 2499 West 37th Ave., Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6M 1P4 fax: 1-604-266-9000 e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 14:34:20 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Weiss Subject: Re: acadminished in Boulder Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 02:12 PM 7/8/97 -0700, you wrote: >>Since Tom asked, here's Derrida on switch hitting: >> >>"An aphorism is a name but every name can take on the figure of aphorism." >> >>from "Aphorism Countertime" > >How does he feel about the squeeze play? > > > > >George Bowering. > , >2499 West 37th Ave., >Vancouver, B.C., >Canada V6M 1P4 > >fax: 1-604-266-9000 >e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca > He's French--need you ask? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 19:45:18 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: overheard in the Platonic Lounge { was "Re: power in nipples" -- but now that we're goin' all Plato-like, a new subject-line seemed apposite . . . ] George Bowering remarks, <> A: i have an idea I've seen you before -- B: how could it not be so? A: that toga you're wearing, . . . B: yes, i've worn this since before eternity . . . A: how do you keep it in such good repair? B: i buy a new one each spring -- A: isn't that rather crass? B: how so? the vernal partakes of the beyond, n'est pa? A: an idea of happiness seems to emerge -- B: when it turns, as in the wind -- A: does it turn clockwise B: or counter? . . . A: garcon! -- scotch on the rocks . . . B: as for me: absinth no chaser . . . ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 20:50:41 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Israel Subject: damian lopes / Project X Website Comments: cc: dal@INTERLOG.COM Poetas, the following surfaced via the So.Asian Lit. listserv. I'm not acquainted w/ this Damian Lopes (or as he prefers, damian lopes), but from the description, his project seems apt to prove of interest to some folks here. Meanwhile, if anyone might have remarks / anecdotes / whatever re: the da Gama gambit, and/or its author, I'd be interested to hear . . . d.i. >>> Prose & Contexts 07/08/97 08:24pm >>> >Date: Tue, 08 Jul 1997 14:24:29 -0400 >To: (Recipient list suppressed) >From: Project X >Subject: Project X Website Launch > >For Immediate Release > >8 July 1997 > >Project X Launches Poetry-Multimedia Website > > > >Today marks the 500th anniversary of Vasco da Gama's departure on his all >but forgotten first voyage from Portugal, around Africa, to India. Project >X is an ongoing poetry-multimedia installation that re-examines that >journey in order to explore discovery, technology and colonialism. It is >written and designed by Toronto-based writer, publisher and designer damian >lopes. It is located at > >Approximately one third complete at present, it will be expanded, updated, >rewritten and revised regularly, likely undergoing several complete >transformations as the changing medium reshapes the work. This is not a >literary work on the internet but an internet literary work as the medium >is an integral part of the project. For example, the intention is to link >virtually every word of the poetry either within the project or to external >sites, taking the concept of hypertext to its logical extreme. Also, the >work explores continuing issues of colonialism and technology, using one of >our most advanced colonial media. > >The public is invited not only to watch the work's development, but to >participate by offering comments and suggestions. Links to reviews, >responses and critiques, in addition to other related sites, will help >start a dialogue between the explorers and the explored. > >In addition to Project X, damian lopes has two books due out this fall: a >poetic travelogue, towards the quiet, to be published by ECW Press; and a >box of visual work, sensory de(p)rivation, forthcoming from Coach House >Books. He has recently completed his first novel, St Anthony's Children, >which explores the migrations of three generations of a South Asian family. >Last summer he co-edited A Handful of Grams: Goan Proverbs, published by >Caju Press. He is also a publisher (fingerprinting inkoperated), bookseller >(afterwords literature), and desktop publisher/web designer (Prose & >Contexts). > >Project X is funded by The Canada Council for the Arts, and the City of >Toronto through the Toronto Arts Council. The website is sponsored by >Interlog Internet Services. > >- 30 - >__________________________________________________ > Project X damian lopes > Box 657 Station P Toronto Canada M5S 2Y4 > > >a poetry-multimedia installation exploring >discovery, technology, colonialism ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 20:54:30 -0400 Reply-To: Tom Orange Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Orange Subject: Re: a cigar is a cigar and a bar is a bar Comments: To: Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest In-Reply-To: <199707082113.RAA12488@waffle.ai.mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII [first, as an aside -- yes d.i. i am *very* curious abt this, sounds like some kind of net surveilance check -- could you elaborate on this last sentence eliza? >by "wierdness" and "bizarreness" of posts, i referred to, as i said in >post, the fact that the same sort of rhetoric were used in earlier >outbreak as in the kim dawn posts: the same multiple mailings of >disconnected, uh, prose. the same misreadings. the same extremes of >violence. when investigated, the same lack of computer >identifications emerged.] On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, Eliza wrote: > tom > > but you did not engage, in > public, with the fact that while complaining about how [kim] had been > misread, misunderstood, attacked, etc. she perpetrated the same acts > ad nauseum. a defense that ignores the offenses is perhaps the best > you can do, but it is pretty lame. [and elsewhere] > but it remains that you make apologia, defense, noises of "she's not > so bad" and yet you did not, publically, grapple with her inexcuseable > behavior to me. [and still elsewhere] > you continued, in > effect, by not dealing with it in public but defending her, to defend > her behavior to me by default. mea culpa for a "pretty lame" defense, eliza, but i don't know what you'd have me do: go back through the archive, repost all the exchanges you had w/kim and then apologize *for her*? seriously? i honestly cant see how this wd constitute proper public/scholarly engagement on my part. you feel you've been violenced, i respect that, i empathize with you, but i can't see my engagement with the specific issue of identity/violence arising out of this miasma as constituting a dereliction of my argumentative or compassionate duties. (as to her "perpetra[tion] of the same acts ad nauseum" -- such an exaggeration perpetuates the reduction of kim's writing to "endless bad pornography." her post today was the first in quite a while and -- gasp -- no smut!) > re identity, i thought i was clear but evidently i was not clear > enough for you (nor was dodie or several others in their treatment of > the same thing) so i'll elaborate: poetics list was hit by a > spam/possible false identity/flamebait attack a number of months ago. no, you were quite clear, so let me reiterate what i said. i witnessed the spam-of-old you speak of, i was subscribed to this list then as i have been for well over a year. i can even understand your then-fear that poetics was being invaded by a flamethrower--a fear i tried to assuage in a 14 june post. let me also reiterate my primary concern here. there is an insistance than kim has violenced people, and what i have been trying to argue all along -- not so much that "kim's not that bad," that she must be defended, etc. -- is that the language that has been used to denounce kim's violence *itself* possesses a kind of violence, a far more covert and subtle kind: take what we find unknown, fearful and bizarre -- moving gradually from the level of fact to *interpretation* mind you -- and assimilate it with something that we know to be fearful (flamethrowers) so that we can identify it as having no identity and hence contain it, silence it, and cast it out. this i find to be a dangerous logic. this is what i am saying. > > i can understand that you feel you spoke to me about this so the > situation was, in your mind, settled, and you might well feel i've > been unfair to you. > i never assumed it was settled -- obviously it's not since we persist in talking about it. i don't feel you've been unfair to me, unless what you want of me is an apology on someone else's behalf; it's simply not my place, and i don't think that delegitimizes my place of speaking, from which i have been trying to demonstrate that there has been violence from both sides of this battlefield and that we can all judge for ourselves which violence is more dangerous. tom orange ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 18:24:36 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Bromige Subject: Platonic Lounge Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Really! In the interests of historical accuracy, I must deny ever being in a Platonic Lounge. It is true that the watering hole where i met mr bowering was sexless, but that was because it was a canadian beer parlor. There can be no sex in a canadian beer parlor, although plenty of hormones, & then he hits you, eh? so you slug him right back. But thats not what i call sex. It is true that, later, there was a Ladies & Escorts section, next to the Men Only section, & that mr bowering got to be practiced at slipping in there solo (strictly against the law) & then "picking up" a woman likewise solo or perhaps sitting with a girlfriend or two as they called one another back then.Engaging them or her in the sort of idle badinage so familiar to us listlings, he "pulled rank" on those of us men condemned to drink with each other but only to gaze thru the door (only slightly ajar) at the rhapsodies of femininity so near yet so far. But the "Ladies & Escorts" section cannot be what he means when he says "Platonic Lounge". He must allude, as I sd at the start, to the dingy dungeon where we drank our lager & tomato juice until we got drunk enough to get ourselves hurt--or in mr b's case, arrested & thrown in the slammer. And hurt. Thats the kind of place Plato's Lounge w o u l d be, dont you think? --I know if socrates came that old game of his with me, I'd be glad to hand him a knuckle sandwich. My trainer, by the way, is Tom Mandel. Another of Bowering's Bubbles popped. ...& nobody h a s to do it. But i had saved some message space up, & its how i have my fun.....Brahms. PS John Ashbery d i d suggest once that he & I enroll in bartenders' school. I often regret not following this advice. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 18:15:17 -0700 Reply-To: main Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: main Subject: sh'wa MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII is anyone familiar w what (if any thing) this signifies in hebrew? according to _webster's new universal unabridged_, the etymological underpinning of _schwa_ is "hebrew _sh'wa_". i'm told by hebrew speakers that this word (as it's phonetically translated into english) doesn't exist. ? please backchannel. thanks, dan featherston ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 21:39:41 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest Subject: Re: Platonic Lounge dear innocent bromige -- may he ever retain his redenbacherian nattiness, with it's soupson of canadian purity... the prime, uh, swingers en groupe, in ny city for years congragated and conjugated in a joint called Plato's Retreat. i am not at ALL surprised Bower-ring was a regular. it was that kind of place. i know of it, of course, only through hearsay since it closed while i was still too young to drink. otherwise, passing it in the night (but NEVER going in i vow) i would, doubtless, have met the tiparillo-chewing, fishing hatted, more-than-slightly seedy GB himself. no doubt he would have in tow some number of firm-chined canadian mounties, perhaps the ottawa crowd, to whose loved ones he offered plentiful assurances of literary tours and historic salons of the wits of days past. what they got is best left to the shudders of some bleak sleepless night... e ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 21:49:52 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Loss Pequen~o Glazier" Subject: collaborative poem Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" The EPC is testing a brand new collaborative writing interface and invite you - if you have a moment - to help us run this interface through its loops (we hope no loops) - and put it to the grind. Will this be one of the first debuggings done with original poetry? We welcome your contributions to a collaborative poem to test this interface. Point your browser to http://www.cs.buffalo.edu/~npsmith/poem.html and fill in a few lines if you will. This interface will only be up briefly so if you get a chance, thanks! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 00:13:43 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jordan Davis Subject: Re: Platonic Lounge In-Reply-To: <199707090139.VAA12641@waffle.ai.mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Now I get it ... the dwirling subplots, arty lighting, tedious soap opera living, and then alternatingly shocking and cozy sex .. it's not Ellen, Bob Hale, it's Twin Peaks we're watching! what tipped me off was Bowering's allusion to the "White Lodge" ... Platonic Lounge my foot. Plato as we readers of Caterpillar and Sulfur know is a cover fr Amerindian lore .. the cave you see. I'm expecting all of us collectively to hit our heads against the mirror -- Killer Bob is us! -- and laugh and say over and over, "How's Annie? How's Annie?" Thanks you all, wow, Jordan's doppelganger ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 00:43:10 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Alan * Sondheim Subject: By way of explanation -- (fwd) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII --)--=_ The It of the Texts: Centering texts creates a bulbous apparatus, as well as an axis, as if there were _spew_ or ballooning pouring from/to the subject - as if the flow revealed the invisible _form._ Random capitalization implies pastiche, pasting, crazed breath and em- phasis, language gagging on itself - as if there were _violation-fab- ric_ rabbit-glued to the earth. Textual mixture and rearrangement transforms meaning into broken and reconfigured bodies, part-objects of isolated cries, indecipherable culture, the other: dyslexic glossolalia. Patterning constructs representation itself garnered against the plea- sure of the text, its life-world constructed as semantic markup. Pat- terning symmetricizes as well, reflecting screen and dream-screen as a return to the reading subject, suddenly glancing at her reflection, suddenly dreaming mandala-meaning criss-crossing the desperation of the textual interior. Diacritical marks such as < and > embedded as unquoted symbolic tend towards doubled meanings as language engages with the articulation of a formal-performative. Text oozes around marks, floods _things_ with clots, disarms. Repetition constructs the gasping-for-breath of the textual body, de- sire for redundancy, an urgency which ripples into sound, contradicts the very meaning it attempts to display. The _singular repetition_ is the site of each and every textual unit: what has been spoken or writ- ten belongs nowhere and to no-one, is subject to the precarious infin- ity of duplication. Thus what has been written hinges on one's dream of eternity, one's eternal dream, the continuation of _the tongue_ past every perturbation of the body. Substitution turns text into sound, broadening or shortening words, consonants, vowels; what is substituted increases in frequency, glid- ing from the tongue, reconfiguring the maternal. The sound recuperates the stereotypicality of common words, duplicating them within stereo visibility as well. Site splits, spreads; citations curl across the textual domain. Utilization of programs (doctor, snoop, dissociated-press, tac, rev, sed, grep, awk) creates negotiations among text, body, framework - language, breath, screen - stutter, flow, formal definition. Meaning seeps among protocols, across bodies, throughout discursive forma- tions, including Internet applications, hard-copies, spoken-words, ululations... One speaks of the body of repetition or substitution, the html-body, the patterned or centered body, the dismemberment of the capital- letter-punishment. One thinks of the multiplicity of bodies; bodies seeping among sites, sights, citations; bodies as _semantic flow_ - political economies of subjectivities across partial domains. Each reconfiguration of the surface (such as this itself, written in emacs) turns towards an investigation, the peripheral image caught at the edge of the mirror, the feeling that someone, some body, is behind you this very moment. The _tiny or weak_ body sits, ponders, a metaphysics occasioned by the _tools of the Net_ - by any Thing (site, formation, flow) within which language is mobile, constrained, channeled. The Jennifer-body is close to the ground, close to meaning. The Alan-body remains over-determined and tending towards foreclosure, defuge; it is the Jennifer-body that carries on this work, the Julu-body that undermines it with sexuality, rage, and the phenomenology of the _sleazy,_ torn, half-open, gleaming in a midnight of artificial illuminations. (Within and without, _it_ attempts speech, continues inconclusivity.) ______________________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 00:37:05 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: George Bowering Subject: Re: Platonic Lounge In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" (Sigh!) another of Bromige's revised memory numbers. >PS John Ashbery d i d suggest once that he & I enroll in bartenders' >school. I often regret not following this advice. It was not John Ashbery; it was Lionel Kearns. And it was not Bromige whom he asked to enrol in bartenders' school with him; it was yr servant. Said the fee was $200. I had the $200, but I used it to pay off the brother of that woman that Bromige compromised. This took place, not in any lounge, but at the Drake Street Baths. George Bowering. , 2499 West 37th Ave., Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6M 1P4 fax: 1-604-266-9000 e-mail: bowering@sfu.ca ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 07:23:27 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest Subject: conspiracy in the air.... what on earth is in the water up in uwo canada?. what am i asking from you? -- i've already said a number of times: come off of that "i'm being impartial" pose unless you are willing to extend the same critical eye to both parties. you've made it very clear so far that you are not -- once again, you fulminate about the "violence" done kim dawn as if she were some sort of wounded fawn. wrong. she entered this list with one of, if not the, most vicious attacks on someone i've yet seen with little or no provocation, and continued firing off attacks augmented by misinformation. understandably, her bizarre, mean, and irresponsible behavior irritated people. overall, the list has been remarkably forebearing. your continued talk about the "violence" of response to her takes no account of her own far greater violence. i think i've said that how many times now? and no, there is not some conspiracy of computer surveillance extended across national borders and that you'd speak as if it were a settled thing in that tone only points up more painfully clearly the rhetorical technique i am beginning to fear is becoming standard issue up in UWO. whenever a request comes in to take self-responsibility and acknowledge misdoing, a salvo of wild accusations against requester is sent out. i have not seen one single word of apology from kim dawn about any of her misdeeds. i have not yet seen you turn any sort of analytic eye publically to her appalling acts. and it doesn't take masses of research through the computer to find them -- post after post of vicious attack and misinformation. as more of the harrassing and confused posts came in from kim dawn i used the standard unix command to verify addresses, "finger," and got several conflicting results. that was one of the early signs in the early spam episode that things were worse than they seemed, which was discussed several times on list -- yet you act as if you had no knowledge of it while claiming to remember incident... and, yes, the previous post to me was full of rhetorical violence and accusation... and, why, you are posting from "julian" server, and everyone knows that julian is a name used by british who are notoriously colonial... and you have begun evoking the extreme sexual rhetoric of your... and, yes, could it be? you must be the one who invented the secret "julian" computer virus! unmask yourself villian! we've seen behind your rhetoric of mild studenthood to the international net terrorist beneath! yes, yes, and i bet you shot the kennedies too, that's the ticket! it's all a plot, it's all a vicious front of rhetorical violence aimed at innocent bystanders to get them to... arughhghhghhhghhhhhghhhh!!!!!! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 07:53:50 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Prejsnar Subject: Re: Bob Grumman's list poetic schools / Is Langpo acadominant? In-Reply-To: <199707081543.IAA16461@germany.it.earthlink.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, Mark Weiss wrote: When Language > Poetry arrived at the academy it fit so well into the theoretical concerns > of some of the younger critics (Lacan was all the buzz at Hopkins by 1965, > and the Columbia French Department had begun the process of assimilating > structuralism and post-) that it seemed made to order. This need not be read > as a put-down. It is different from what came before. > > At 10:10 AM 7/8/97 -0400, you wrote: > >On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, Michel Delville wrote: > > > >> socio-cultural practices. The list could go on and on forever . . . To > >> pretend that this has nothing to do with the entrance of U.S. colleges into > >> the intellectual life and creative pratices of poets is simply absurd. > > > >Sorry but the the general arguments of your post, Michel, strike me as > >somewhat more absurd.... > > > >Most of the poetic tendencies that are seen as alternative to LP (deep > >image type stuff, the generlized plain-spoken "I" free-verse lyric of APR, > >etc.) are **far more** anchored in the academy, and dominant there, than > >is LP. This is why most of my posts in response to Bob's list have been > >a little irritable. It's so obviously *gratuitous* to link the Lang-ists > >with academe, given the siting of most U.S. poetry within academic > >settings, that it seemed that the term could only be intended as a rather > >heavy-handed put-down. That still seems self-evident to me. > > > >Mark P. > > > > > From Atlanta this response: The contrast between my snipe at Michel's posting, and what Mark W. says in the bit quoted at the top here, gets at some of the reason for my apparent disagreement with a number of folks on this issue....I'm thinking about the **social placement, or siting** of poetry as an institution. Others are thinking about the fact that the LangPotes were strongly shaped by Derrida and other related theory--and that much of their practice is consequently somewhat familiar to and congenial to academix of that persuation.....In part, I'm just talking about something elese...But I return to the fact that Bob's "acadominent" (or whatever it was) label is just completely silly..It implies a mainly acadmic character for LP. How can this be when, as a social practice, most competing schools of US poetry are **so much more** dominant in academe, and dominated by their character as acadmic practices (supported by grad writing programs, sustained by university-sponsored literary mag's etc.)?? And another thing: it is really a problem, this hand-wringing focus on Derrida and deconstructionist influences..At least as important in shaping most of the articulate theory-type LangPotes is the influence of Brecht (that musty ol' perfesser)...The idea that social reality and therefore poetry are *unfinished* until the reader/social actor make a major contribution, is the single most important item in the LP theoretical toolkit. Mark P. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 08:34:51 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Susan Wheeler Subject: Re: POETICS Digest - 7 Jul 1997 to 8 Jul 1997 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Ron Silliman wrote: >Time Magazine (and its companion Life) is not a bad thumbnail index of >official culture, esp. in the 1936-70 timeframe. I don't know what they >thought of Stevens or WCW, but they did do a special issue on poetry (not a >"single author" job like the recent Robert Hughes deal on the visual arts, >which was too hokey and shallow for words, but did have some nice >illustrations) in 1964 that had Robert Lowell on the cover. It would be >worth it to look up that particular issue and report back what it said of >Verse. As chance has it, I found a copy of the article I believe you're referring to among some old papers last year; I was eleven in Minnesota and the weekly Time was News from Outside, I recall. It's from June 2, 1967 -- Lowell's on the cover and is the main feature of the article, which is eight DENSE pages long -- no author noted (does anyone know who was covering books for Time then?). It is also striking for its leisurely lead and pace: maybe there really is something to the idea that Laugh-in changed everything. It's much too long to key in (if anyone wants a copy I'll send or fax -- let me know), but some of what pertains here is: . . . In that respect, the testing is proceeding at a pace never before felt in the history of American literature. Two generations ago, many poets were at work in the U.S. -- probably a greater number of major poets than at present -- but their world seemed narrower. The literary quarterlies spent more space and passion discussing poetry, but their audience was limited. Slowly, poetry moved out of the parlors of overstuffed gentility into the academy. Now it is moving out of the academy -- out of college lit courses and esoteric coteries -- back to where it was when minstrels sang their verses in the marketplace. It exists once again in an ambiance of instant feeling. Poets are declaiming their works before large, theater-size audiences in the cities and on the campuses. Government grants, foundation funds and universities with chairs for poets-in-residence are all conspiring to strengthen or at least amplify their voices in the world at large. Their poetry books trip ever more briskly off the presses, and their phonograph recordings feed a flourishing market. . . And this is its 3-paragraph synopsis of poets who made a dent in the U.S. in the 20th century(!): . . . From Pound to the Beats. In the 20th century so far, the devotees of the "second chance" have constituted a remarkable poetic pantheon. The Zeus of that lofty company is himself still alive, thought he has long since had his say. Erza (sic) Pound, 81, now living in Italy, fathered modern English poetry, freed it from excessive strictures of meter, rhetoric and prosody. One of his earliest converts was T.S. Eliot, who sensed the dilemma of modern, urban and areligious man, and whose dry, ironic style and endless rhythmic ways of weaving contemporary sounds are echoed in virtually every poet's work today. Of Eliot's generation, Robert Frost seemed a throwback; yet, while he adhered to established forms, he commanded a deceptively simple vision of man's vanities, his heart and his land. More experimental, and less accessible, were William Carlos Williams, a true avant-garde poet and master of the spare, stripped-down image, and Wallace Stevens, a pointillist of light, color and all intangible things. Marianne Moore, now 79, constructs unique mosaics from conversations, newspaper clippings and even scientific tracts. W.H. Auden and Allen Tate were both, in Auden's words, "colonizers" of the terrain that Pound and Eliot discovered. Theodore Roethke was already a major poet when he died in 1963 at 55. The late Dylan Thomas, with his crosscountry sweep of public performances, helped carry poetry into the floodlit arena. So did the beats. Of them, only Allen Ginsberg retains any influence, perhaps less for his poems than for his relentlessly acted role as the be-whiskered prophet of four-letter words, homosexuality, pot, and general din. Still, in their better moments, the beats, now fitfully imitated by the hippies, gave poetry a startling air of spontaneity. . . Susan Wheeler wheeler@is.nyu.edu voice/fax (212) 254-3984 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 08:35:10 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "David R. Israel" Subject: shades of Yasusada? Comments: cc: KENT JOHNSON MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT yo, this just in from Tehran -- of poss. interest for diehard multi-asian comparative lit Pessoa Phenom (okay, I fudge) hobbyists ? . . . d.i. ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- From: Kimia@neda.net (Karim Emami) To: adabiyat@listhost.uchicago.edu Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 19:37:06 -0400 Subject: A query for Arabists Greetings, A book has just been published in Tehran which claims to be a translation of an Arabic satirical novel entitled (the Living Man) by a certain Mamduh ibn Aatel Abu Nazzaal (please forgive the transcription). The action takes place in Baghdad in the early eighties. The translator is a prominent Iranian novelist called Ahmad Mahmud, and according to bookshop gossip the translator is in fact the real author. So the question now is whether the alleged original work and its purported author truly exist. According to a short biographical sketch included in the front matter the book was clandestinely printed in Baghdad in 1984, but it has been widely reprinted abroad ever since. The notice says the author was born near Basra in 1931 and he died in exile in a European country in 1991. Any information that our Arab friends can provide would be appreciated. Here are the particulars of the Persian "translation": by Mamduh ibn-e Aatel Abu Nazzaal. Translated into Persian by Ahmad Mahmud. Tehran: Mo'in Publishers, pp.198, 1376/1997. ISBN 964-5643-14-7. ------ Karim Emami ---------------------------- Karim Emami Zamineh Books, Tehran Phone & Fax: (+9821) 200-9488 e-mail: Kimia@neda.net ---------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 09:31:20 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jordan Davis Subject: Brecht / Derrida In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Mark P -- Yeah, I always heard more Brecht than Derrida in the Tree of Equals Signs. This is because I take the enfranchisement of gimme a T for Theory gimme a D for Discourse in the academy -- TouchDown! -- to be a parallel development to the near-total hostility to/from the New York School of Language Poetry, one of those 'asymptotic' deals you get so much in the poetry of the non-Brechtian graduating classes of 87, 92, 97 -- when's the movie coming out? That is -- Language Writing gets formed independently of but sympathetically with Theory. Then Theory morphs into cultural studies, it all gets called 'bad writing' will-I nil-I, and everybody retrenches in a shaky self-conscious consumerism. Cool! Meanwhile (and to near-total hostility) a few Languge Writers (poets? prose writers? critics? I don't know much about criticism, but I know what makes me anxious) finish their dissertations and despite a needlessly brutal job market, find work teaching. Again, cool! _Wish them well_. An economy that is doing so well -- we'll see them go past 8000 today -- without appreciable distribution of those gains -- are you better off etc == can only get so far by squishing every last grape of thought. Well that's a stupid image. But one should rather think of them, the acadominated, as brave employees, much as one thinks of say, Wallace Stevens dictating sonnets, savoring _privately_ any oxymoron one may care to notice. Manchester United, Jordan ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 08:05:35 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Douglas Barbour Subject: Re: The American poets of TIME Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Ron Silliman mentions Time's cover story on American poetry: <