========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 22:24:36 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Peter Quartermain Subject: Re: british women poets There's an astonishing number of really good women poets around. To the list of British and Commonwealth women poets alreadty listed by Maria Charles Daniel Rod John Keith and others, let me add: Catherine Walsh is Irish, and as Keith hinted, would be deeply insulted by being called British; among Brits not mentioned yet (but let me too add a plug for Maggie O'Sullivan,. Geraldine Monk, Wendy Mulford, Denise Riley) Bridget Penney, Caroline Bergvall, Frances Presley, Harriet Tarlo, Grace Lake, Vittoria Vaughan, Maggie Helwig (Canadian, living in London), Helen Macdonald and Jennifer Chalmers; if you want to step back a little in time don't forget writers like Veronica Forrest-Thomson or even Frances Horovitz... . . In Canada there's -- in more or less random order -- besides the much neglected Phyllis Webb already mentioned, M. Nourbese Philip, Catriona Strang, Melissa Wolsak, Sharon Thesen, Daphne Marlatt, Karen Mac Cormack, Lola Lemire Tostevin, Lisa Robertson, Christine Stewart, Julia Steele, Hilary Peach, and Karlyn Koh. The list goes on and on -- there's gazillions of others, all so-called "experimental." Alternative might be a better word. I don't know the Scottish and Welsh scene at all, someone should chip in here -- maybe Romana Huk? Eck Finlay if he's around? (As soon as I send this I'll no doubt think of lots of others). Good reading! At 01:57 PM 6/28/96 -0400, Steve wrote: >A friend of mine is looking for suggestions of British or Commonwealth >women poets of the 20thC to teach in an upcoming course, and i was rather >embarassed at how few names i cld summon off the top o' the noggin. Any >suggestions, for my own edification, and my friend's? > >thanks, steve > > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Peter Quartermain 128 East 23rd Avenue Vancouver B.C. Canada V5V 1X2 Voice and fax: 604 876 8061 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 22:30:44 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Jacquee la Mousse In-Reply-To: <199607010406.AAA04655@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> I was ASSIGNED by Loss to report back from Orono on the subject of race & ethnicity -- I didn't get a chance to ask if he meant that I was to review the gathered complexions or the complexities of the papers, or if perhaps I was to examine the demographics of Orono itself -- as if that were not enough confusion, our email system has been returning everything I've attempted to post on this or any other subject ever since I sent in that execrable poem -- but I'll see what I can get in before the whole shebang (and are there any hebangs?) collapses again -- if interrupted, there will be a part two -- "Of the approximately 231 papers delivered at this conference, about 14 were devoted to the writings of minority poets." This observation was part of my introduction to a panel on Langston Hughes and Bob Kaufman. This sentence was also singled out by Robert von Hallberg at the beginning of a five minute long denunciation of the panel which exhausted the discussion time remaining for the session. In the course of his comments, Robert accused the panelists, including me, of "doing the sociology thing," which is reductive, of lending ourselves to identity politics. He said that what should be done instead is close readings of interesting poets, but that the poets discussed here weren't worth that sort of close reading because they were "bad" poets. Now . . . this is a pretty old hat to those of us who have been studying issues of race and ethnicity in literature longer than two weeks -- But what I want first to mention is that, repeating strategies of the oldest of new critics, these comments required a complete decontextualization (and an evasion of close reading, I might add) of what had in fact been presented. In the interests of saving time, I will only use the example of my opening remarks. The numbers that I noted were offered in response to repeated accusations from many quarters (I used the example of Carol Iannone) to the effect that academic critics had in recent years entirely abandoned "true" critical criteria and were instead simply promoting authors on the basis of an "ethnic agenda." I introduced my numbers with the remark: "Let's see how the ethnic agenda is doing." My point was to offer a simple refutation. The large number of critics gathered at Orono had in fact produced a remarkably small number of papers concerning minority authors. Iy looks to me as if the profession is some distance still from being dominated by an ethnic agenda. This point is truly sociological, but hardly pointless. (Might add that at least two of us there on the panel have devoted considerable efforts to criticisms of identity politics.) At any rate, I could say much more on this topic, but that's not what I was asked to do -- so -- The first day included a panel on Stephen Jonas, Melvin Tolson and Russell Atkins, where could be heard (gasp) close readings of truly interesting black poets. Mark Scroggins advanced an interesting view of the ever-problematic Jonas, Keith Leonard (one among a stream of Stanford presenters -- Stanford and Buffallo seem to be the hotbeds of poetry criticism now) set up parameters for thinking about Tolson that were later fleshed out in Lorenzo Thomas's talk, and I spoke about the critical theories of poet Russell Atkins (check your library for his old selected from Cleveland State, about the only easily available volume) On Friday morning I discovered the amazing discussions of O'Hara and race that were already in progress at the conference. Ben Friedlander followed some intriguing wrinkles (already mentioned on this list by others) and Steve Evans followed with exactly the type of scholarly and philosophically informed exploration that some of us have been hoping for for years -- Steve has done what any good Pound scholar would do -- finding himself in a poem to the "French Negro Poets," Steve went and read them (now there's a novel approach folks --) also reading the requisite Sartre etc. -- Steve's paper asks questions about the ideologies of race and their relationships to poetics that have long needed looking into -- The one question I left with (there wasn't time to ask it) is why so many white critics think that desegregating the sex act is a politically radical move -- Tell that one to Walter White -- ooops, have to relinquish the keyboard -- will be back in about 24 hours with rest of my homework assignment -- bottom line is that there were great papers all around on these topics, though there were few of them -- and there really might have been at least one African-American or Asian-American or Latino or American Inian poet reading poems, huh??? but back with the GOOD stuff in 24 hrs -- love to all, aldon ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 13:58:17 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michael Faherty Subject: Re: British Women Poets It's always fascinated me that poets, like comedians, don't seem to travel very well and that, by all appearances, very few contemporary British poets are known in the States and, likewise, only a handful of young American poets are read here. As far as contemporary women writers go, I would second the recommendations of Carol Ann Duffy, Pauline Stainer and Sujata Bhatt. Bhatt, by the way, actually grew up in the States and attended the Iowa Writers Workshop, where she met her German husband and moved back home to Bremen with him, but she's still often listed as a "British" poet. I would also suggest that Helen Dunmore, Lavinia Greenlaw, Kathleen Jamie, Liz Lochhead, Sarah Maguire, Paula Meehan, Grace Nichols and, especially, Jo Shapcott are worth a look. And for Irish writers, of course, you can't miss Eilean Ni Chuilleanain, Nuala Ni Dhomhnaill and Medbh McGuckian. If I were putting a course together, I would use the France anthology since it includes many of the above and more. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 09:21:36 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Burt Kimmelman -@NJIT" Subject: Bruce Andrews Anyone have an e-mail address for Bruce Andrews? thanks, Burt Kimmelman kimmelman@admin.njit.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 14:32:22 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: R I Caddel Subject: brit.wom.po's In-Reply-To: <199607010405.FAA01231@hermes.dur.ac.uk> Blimey, you go away for a wet weekend and a whole discussion about the british poetry scene zips past you. This is to endorse John Matthias' plug for OUT OF EVERYWHERE (Reality Street Editions, 1996) and the individual plugs for Maggie O'Sullivan, Elaine Randell, Catherine Walsh (Irish), Michelle Leggott (NZ), and add special mention for Wendy Mulford and Geraldine Monk (both in OOE) and add Caroline Bergvall, Carlyle Reedy (also both in OOE) and Harriet Tarlo (forthcoming in Talisman, amongst others). RC ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 09:53:16 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jordan Davis Subject: O the glassy towns are Which four poems by O'Hara are you (is someone) saving? I am a speculator and would like all the rest, thank you. Please send to: Jordan Davis ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 09:11:38 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Jacquee la Mousse, ono etc as long as we're complaining now about our recent love fest, let me say that at this conference i saw something i didn't like --a coupla times, senior, well-established, famous folks excoriating or picking on grad students who were giving their first papers in public. after one such instance i put my arm around louis simpson, took him aside and sd look, louie (for some reason this conference, or maybe it was the sabbatical, being out of the hierarchic loop for a year, has made me less fearful) this kid is never gonna get a job, he's just a student in some third rate graduate program, give him a break. he was reasonably contrite, and hoped he hadnt been too harsh (unlike r von h, he hadn't been). also, two other plenary speakers whispered loudly and passed notes throughout most of lorenzo thomas's talk, right there in the front row. he kept looking over at them but they didn't stop until they decided he was actually saying something (about 3/4 of the way thru). i was embarrassed, cuz these were ladies i expected more from. also, at banquet, ml rosenthal started baiting us younger scholars on "what is 'discourse analysis' anyway and what does it do other than state the obbvious in unnecessarily convoluted terms?" but then he apologized. i never use that phrase discourse analysis anyway and neither to my knowledge did any of the other folks (all women) there either. as for lisa amber philips' comments on feminist turf-establishing, there was something very retro about the conference, as i sd in my earlier post. i myself had fun with it because i felt accepted by the male elite, and kinda basked in it, but let's not get carried away with nostalgia for an earlier era when white males could attack accomplished, intelligent women as symbols of the establishment, with no consciousness of their own gender privilege. lisa, you know nothing about what that woman who made the comment about another comment's being "contemptible" has been through professionally, personally, etc, what her struggles with sexism in the academy have been, how these social dynamics have affected her health, her standard of living, her life chances, etc. I don't know where you're at in your career, but i myself never took sexism seriously as something that affected my material well-being (of course i was aware of paternalism and the occasional patronizing comment from a male professor, but i just ascribed that to his stupidity, and it didn't affect my life) until i entered the workforce. as a student i was very protected. now, i routinely see my white male colleagues get outrageous raises for --not mediocre, but --NO scholarly accomplishment, i see white guys with no publications deciding who does and doesnt get raises, fellowships, jobs, etc ...it's the lowpaid and overworked women in my dept who get offers frm elsewhere for endowed chairs, huge salary increases, reduced teaching loads, invitations to give seminars at harvard etc, while at home its the white guys who've never written a word past their disserations 30 years ago who make sure these women don't get a break, and who promote those in their own image. i never would have believed it was that blatant. i know i sound maternalistic myself now, pulling the rank of "older and wiser," and i apologize for that. i could be totally off in my assumptions about where you're coming from. and i know it's not academically "rigorous" (to invoke a word i'm not too fond of) to suggest that knowing the larger context of a particular utterance may nuance our reception of it --that is, a biographical understanding of why this woman said what she did may take it out of the realm of facile post/feminist theorizing and give it some substance. so, i'm sorry if i'm intervening from left field. nonetheless, i think one of the things that made the conference so good, in spite of our complaints, was the relative openness and acceptance. paradoxically, in light of the strictly retro demographics. perhpas, and i hope not, this was due to the relatively homogenous population --that is, social differences were underrepresented, so there was less overt tension and conflict...? if so, and its possible, i can easily relate to how diana trilling must have felt seduced by being a token in the white male literary establishment --i had a great time BECAUSE i wasn't really a threat...?xo, md ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 10:41:52 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: henry gould Subject: John High email Does anyone have an email address for poet/translator John High? I have his street address. Please backchannel - thanks - Henry Gould Henry_Gould@brown.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 12:49:35 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ward Tietz <100723.3166@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Re: Paul Zelevansky Thanks Charles for the overview of Paul Zelevansky's work. Yours is far more detailed and cohesive than anything I could have done. To pick up on this idea of the glyph, I think it's the narrative use of glyphs that perhaps sets Zelevansky's work apart, for me anyway. It's true Schwerner uses a very different system of support for his glyphs and the effects are in many ways more conventionally literary, but I would say in contrast that Zelevansky's use of them is probably more synthetic and sustained in terms of their function with text. What interests me especially about Zelevansky's work is the development of an iconic/symbolic narrative that begins, in time, to function very much in a literary way. How this occurs is difficult to articulate, but in my experience it seemed to be a result of a slow but steady accumulation, a re-cognition of the material that was very analogous to learning how to read. This can be done by means of images, but I think the entire process is enhanced by the use of glyphs. The useful thing, I think, about a glyph is that it functions very differently from an image or a mark. It's iconic, in C. S. Peirce's use of the term, in the sense that it is a sign that refers by way of similarity back to its referent, but it is also symbolic, and in that sense its use as a sign is similar to text. I've begun to think about forms of this sort as investigating a certain "presentational" potential of literary form, in contrast to more conventional discursive form, but I still haven't worked it all out. In any case I think Zelevansky's books are some of the most ambitious and successful examples of hybrid literary form in book format of the last 20 years or so. There's a new piece of Zelevansky's, by the way, in Chain 3, vol. 1. Ward Tietz ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 13:01:17 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Keith Tuma Subject: Re: Zelevansky In-Reply-To: Message of Sun, 30 Jun 1996 06:33:47 -0700 from I'm wondering if you have time, Ron, to say a little more about what it is that you like about Ken Irby's work within the line. Examples would help. I don't know the work except by reputation; KI seems to me far more disappeared than Tarn or Enslin et. al. Keith Tuma ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 10:11:36 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steve Carll Subject: Re: of the whole art/spam two generations At 04:12 PM 6/30/96 -0500, Jordan wrote: >Hi. What's the unconscious? Federal regulations require this label when the product contains less than 4% caffeine. |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| `````````````````````````````````````````````` Steve Carll sjcarll@slip.net I listen. I hear nothing. Only the cow, the cow of nothingness, mooing down the bones. ~~Galway Kinnell `````````````````````````````````````````````` |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 10:42:03 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kevin Killian Subject: Re: Jacquee la Mousse, ono etc This is Dodie Bellamy speaking. Maria, One thing you didn't point out in your last post was that the Orono conference had much more to offer to women than acceptance by a male elite that we could kind of "bask in." Rachel Blau du Plessis' and Joan Retallack's talks were *the* best moments of the conference for me. Rachel's talk reminded me that if it weren't for women like Rachel who promoted a specifically female approach to post-modernism, I wouldn't exist. I also found it great to just watch Margorie Perloff, her energy, her awesome confidence. I think you should do a bit of deconstruction on your post--in your complaints about the conference the men are treated as troublesome boys who do things out of line, but--usually with your guidance--apologize and get their shit together. The only unredeemable characters in your post are the covertly racist female plenary speakers in the front row. Funny, I was in the third row (sitting next to Rachel, who was quiet as a mouse) and I didn't hear any loud whisperings. What female plenary speakers are left? Margorie Perloff? Alicia Ostriker? Couldn't these female plenary speakers be considered a *female* elite whose acceptance a young scholar would want to bask in? One thing that stuck me about Lisa Amber Phillips' presence at the conference was how clearly she liked women and how much time she spent talking with other women--rather than chasing "testosterone," as you put it in an earlier post. There should more to feminism than demanding materialistic equality. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 10:43:16 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Race 'round Orono II In-Reply-To: <199606250409.AAA23735@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> well, where were we -- Wednesday evening Robert von Hallberg delivered an interesting talk on Robert Hayden -- The talk began and ended with, of all things, a sociological argument, to the effect that "we should" learn to reread poets who have made certain types of arguments for universality, and I would have to agree -- Not much point in making universal rejections of such readings, is there? While von Hallberg seemed to gloss over the specificity of address in Hayden's poem about certain eveangelical types (Daddy Grace, Father Divine, etc.), he presented a good overview of Hayden's long poem "Middle Passage." (By the way, why do people believe that "Those Winter Sunday's has no ref. to race? This is not von Hallberg's argument, but was raised here recently) -- I believe the reading of "Middle Passage" must be part of a longer and more detailed analysis, but this was a good introduction to the important issues in the poem for an audience that might not have been all that familiar with the text. I'm afraid I missed the papers on Audre Lorde and Gwendolyn Brooks, but perhaps somebody else on the list heard them & can fill us in? Lorde needs to be seen in the fuller context of the avant garde set she was part of in her early years; and Brooks was perfect for a conference at which Louis Simpson appeared. Simpson, for those of you who have not read ALL his reviews, authored a notrious review of Brooks back in the day in which he opined that until she could write poetry without making "us" aware that she is a "Negro" she will never be an important poet -- Saturday included the panel I have already mentioned -- Joe Lockard gave a quick summary of his attempts to lay out a parallel between the racialized social space of 50s America and the racialized space of literary anthologizing, criticism, etc., using the reception of Hughes as an example -- John Millet gave a reading of Hughes's blues lyrics as a form of "projective" community, and Maria Damon, working around a fine reading of Bob Kaufman's "Bagel Shop Jazz," broadened our understandings of the Beat orbits -- if you haven't already read her "Beat Occlusions" essay in the Whitney Beat catalogue, that's a good place to start to pick up Maria's direction -- and that was pretty much it -- no papers, for example, on Chicano poets, though Tino Villanueva's landmark antho. appears in the 50s -- but want to mention too Marjorie Perloff's talk -- As Michael Davidson had started us off by examining the trope of containment as it extended from foreigh policy throughout American culture, Marjorie's paper touched in one respect on issues of race and containment -- I can't go into it all here,,, but in the expectation of this paper's one day appearing in print, let me mention that she offered a brilliant reading of the differing ideologies and aesthetics in two widely circulated collections of photographs -- the infamous "Family of Man" exhibit (the book of which was given even to me as a birthday present still in print in the next decade -- and Robert Frank's (name right?) collection of American photos published by Grove press -- Professor Perloff, now semiretired but hardly slowing down, "read" individual photos as well as the reception of the volumes as context against which to read Ginsberg, O'Hara and that ole gem "Love Calls Us to the Things of this World" -- This kind of paper is really exciting to me -- not an attempt to read the cultural past as a transparently available and stable entity, but looking at, how else to say it, what everyone was then looking at, as a means of deepening our discussions of the, hate to say it, poems themselves -- One of the best fast tours of "AStep Away from Them" that I've heard -- (off the track, but another question -- has any O'Hara critic EVER bothered to read the contemporaneous accounts of the night the police beat up Miles Davis, which episode figures in a lunch poem? This was a major topic in all the black newspapers of the day -- One of the speakers on O'Hara panel No. IV commented that there's nothing wrong with thinking of O'Hara as a poet of surfaces so long as we recognize those surfaces as quicksand -- this poem, I think, offers a good example of that --) so, in the end there wasn't all that much discussion of race among the papers, but what did appear was worth attending to -- next time, perhaps, we could expect conference notices to go, early, to MELUS, African American Review, Callaloo, CLA Journal, ethnic studies programs, etc.??? and despite what Chris said here a few days ago, and despite my dread of the coming rush of anthologies on the construction of whiteness, I still think that "critics who are regarded as white people" still need to lead a struggle, among "white" people," against racilaist ideology, but there I go being sociological again -- forgive me, love to all, aldon ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 11:08:06 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: last days and time In-Reply-To: <199606250409.AAA23735@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> got shoved off system before I could insert my final paragraph on the final keynote at Orono -- so here, quickly, before I'm shoved again The final hangers-around at Orono were privileged to hear a quite good presentation by Lorenzo Thomas on Melvin B. Tolson's major 50s work, _Libretto for the Republic of Liberia_. Thomas did an excellent job of building on the works of earlier Tolson scholars (Farnsworth, Robinson, Woodson, Pinson, Berube, etc) and adding new details to our understanding of Tolson's relationships to his sources -- Particularly useful, though brief due to time constraints, was Thomas's look at the changes Tolson made in his poem between the time a part of it appeared in _Poetry_ (where Williams saw it, to great effect!) and the time of hte book appearance of the poem -- thanks to the great audience response to Thomas's talk, it appears that the Natinal Poetry Foundation will probably see to it that at least some of Tolson's out-of-print work is again made available -- Now that's the kind of reader response I like to encourage -- see y'all ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 14:19:54 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jordan Davis Subject: I'll iterate Put down the gun. Yesterday afternoon two new books of poetry came out. Joe Elliott, sultan of Situations Press, brought _Sea Lyrics_ by Lisa Jarnot and _Western Love_ by Bill Luoma in bulk to Biblios where he semi-secretly presides as master of puppets. These are very good books which will only increase in value. Readers of the poetics list may remember a few mentions of _Sea Lyrics_ around last February when Jarnot read at the Ichor Gallery. It was referred to then as 'something about California.' Also there was a brief mention of Luoma's _Western Love_ in connection with his reading at Ruthless Grip in Washington. Yesterday Luoma read the book in its entirety to a cheerful and noshing crowd. I enjoyed it significantly more than I did the first time I heard parts of it, there in Washington, sitting directly in front of my grandmother. It is a loping study of double intention and rewired vocabulary, with the good natured sexual hijinks familiar to readers of Luoma's love poems in The Impercipient and the Poetry Project Newsletter. When will there be a big perfect bound book of Bill's poems? There was a big perfect bound book of Lisa's poems on the table, too. _Some Other Kind of Mission_, a Burning Deck book, contains much of the collaged and looped work Jarnot published in Lingo and other places, and the exciting static of it suggests the purity of first feedback, you know, rock and roll, not that rock and roll ordinarily has anything to do with poetics, but it ought to, not that depressing rockist fetishization of the stage, the band line up, but getting the noise to do the work too. I suppose a good cellist would argue a different necessity of noise: overtone. Well there's that in _Sea Lyrics_ which is curiously more like a studio album than the perfect book, handsome typography by Joe, and god I hope I'm not embarrassing the authors who are after all reading the list. Probably I will be able to get some copies to offer to the readers of the list for not too much sometime soon. So yes in a way this should be read as a movie minute produced by Buena Vista. Who was there. A clean shaven Drew Gardner (who looked for a second just like Tim Griffin! imagine), Lewis Warsh, Juliana Spahr and Charles, Rob Fitterman and Kim Rosenfield, Marcella Durand and Rich, Kevin Davies, Deirdre Kovac, Garrett Kalleberg and Heather Ramsdell, Douglass Rothschild, the Mitch Highfill, Mark Cheney, Joe and Leo of course, Sophie Warsh, and Max Warsh, geez, I'm leaving out a lot of people. Drew is playing at the Knitting Factory on the 9th of July. Poetry's sort of quieting down for the summer, bang. Jordan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 11:07:04 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Tristan D. Saldana" Subject: Re: of the whole art/spam two generations In-Reply-To: <199606302025.UAA05978@fraser.sfu.ca> On Sun, 30 Jun 1996, Carl Lynden Peters wrote: > > Hi. What's the unconscious? > > > > Jordan > > > jordan, -- what eliot was so afraid of > > c. And what he so effectively demonstrated in his poetry . . . Tristan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 14:16:32 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Henry Gould Subject: unconscious Jordan Davis asks, what's the unconscious? While perusing a moldy volume of pharaonic lore I discovered the following glyph, partially effaced, found tattooed in t-bird ink on an indentation in Tuthankhamen's ritually bashed-in skull: !! @ ~~~~~ ## $ % $ ~~~~~ !!! Roughly translated from the Akkadian (or is it Rebokkian?): "The Divine Simulacrum rules the Right Hand; The Unconscious Trace rules the Left Hand; You, O Pharaoh, must be a Switch Hitter; Live Forever in the Hereafter... O [effaced]" - Henry Gould ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:20:57 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jordan Davis Subject: Re: unconscious geography Henry, funny, wrote: >"The Divine Simulacrum rules the Right Hand; >The Unconscious Trace rules the Left Hand; >You, O Pharaoh, must be a Switch Hitter; >Live Forever in the Hereafter... O [effaced]" Which I think gets to it. Why is half the brain marked X? (Half my brain anyway. And keep your smart remarks to yourself, as they say at the state line of Rhode Island on a t-shirt a camp mate wore once ten summers ago.) 'new world' or 'terra incognita.' is this so much imperialism of the unknown J ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:12:41 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Daniel Bouchard Subject: books, books, books Bill Luoma, You said, in reference to new books by yourself and Lisa Jarnot, that ordering info. was forthcoming. I may have missed it. Could you post it again? daniel_bouchard@hmco.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:44:41 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Henry Gould Subject: Re: unconscious geography In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:20:57 -0500 from On Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:20:57 -0500 Jordan Davis said: > >>"The Divine Simulacrum rules the Right Hand; >>The Unconscious Trace rules the Left Hand; >>You, O Pharaoh, must be a Switch Hitter; >>Live Forever in the Hereafter... O [effaced]" > >Which I think gets to it. Why is half the brain marked X? (Half my brain >anyway. And keep your smart remarks to yourself, as they say at the state >line of Rhode Island on a t-shirt a camp mate wore once ten summers ago.) >'new world' or 'terra incognita.' is this so much imperialism of the >unknown If I might add a brief scholarly addendum to this presentation: I adhere to the school of Hermann Nautical of Liebfraumilch Univ., who interprets this "glyph" in a strictly political sense. If "Pharaoh", in the regal sense of Person, looks to the "Right", politically, she finds a "simulacrum" of the divine - those traditional orders of the Good she is enjoined to obey. If Pharaoh looks to the "Left", politically, she finds the upwelling trace of the repressed, to which she is enjoined to submit. They are, in a sense, mirror images. Both demand obedience of the Person to a higher (or lower) authority. Where, then, in Chaadevian terms, is moral freedom? Where is - the po commodified Person? She or he flourishes in a realm of freely chosen commitment to... the glyph.... the [effaced]... if indeed shuhee exuhists... - Heinricvh Gcvld ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 16:19:31 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mary Hilton Subject: "The Haunted Baronet" by Mark Wallace (ad) Now available from primitive publications -- "The Haunted Baronet," by Mark Wallace, inspired by Sheridan Le Fanu#s ghost story of the same title. According to Wallace, "The seventeen poems here are a way of taking the vocabulary of #The Haunted Baronet# and seeing what it says now." The result is stunning, mysterious, and haunting in its own right. primitive publications produces approximately six chapbooks a year, focusing on present-day writing based on historical text, language or subject. Cost of one chapbook is $4.00, or $20.00 for six. All checks may be made payable to Mary Hilton and mailed to: primitive publications c/o M. Hilton 1706 U Street, NW, #102 Washington, DC 20009 Inquiries, or requests to be included on the mailing list, may be e-mailed to mhilton@tia.org Thank you. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 12:45:38 CST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Baratier Subject: unconscious Jordan How bout Eryque's version of "what is the unconscious" of course, what i've got in mind isn't really in mind yet as the weather conditions in albany and economic conditions in my pocket are ripe for aviating riper than an faux (foh) ode to joy in Philly, David Baratier ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 14:42:07 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: filch Subject: Peeing Studies have shown the incidence of peeing in pools to be larger, by far, among members of the adult male population. Subsequent studies will show whether this figure can be broken down by race, socioeconomic status, and/or sexual orientation. If you would be interested in participating in such a study please contact me at your earliest convenience. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 17:06:42 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Maria Damon Subject: Re: Jacquee la Mousse, ono etc ok dodie. there were wonderful women-generated moments; i too loved rachel's talk, esp the alphabet device, and retallack as well. i guess i was trying to be self-critical cuz i had such a good time --thanks for calling me on my puritanical side. who other than louis simpson did i chastise? are you referring to barry? i didn't chastise him but told him what i thought. i didn't convert him or bring him into the fold. we had a conversation. sorry if i sound self-serving. i didn't, nor did anyone else i saw, chase testosterone. i enjoyed male attention. perhaps i shd be less self-disclosing. the comment was intended not to cast aspersions on the men present, most of whom i like and admire a great deal and have been inspired by, but to question my own sexual politics. as for materialistic equality, i agree that there should be more to feminism, but it would certainly be an obvious place to begin. as for the thomas/tolson whisperers, why should i not feel uncomfortable and critical. i was so not because they were women but because i liked them and they were doing something i didn't like. the truth is, i know the woman who made the comment on diana trilling and i felt the need to come to her defense. md In message UB Poetics discussion group writes: > This is Dodie Bellamy speaking. > > Maria, > > One thing you didn't point out in your last post was that the Orono > conference had much more to offer to women than acceptance by a male elite > that we could kind of "bask in." Rachel Blau du Plessis' and Joan > Retallack's talks were *the* best moments of the conference for me. > Rachel's talk reminded me that if it weren't for women like Rachel who > promoted a specifically female approach to post-modernism, I wouldn't > exist. I also found it great to just watch Margorie Perloff, her energy, > her awesome confidence. > > I think you should do a bit of deconstruction on your post--in your > complaints about the conference the men are treated as troublesome boys who > do things out of line, but--usually with your guidance--apologize and get > their shit together. The only unredeemable characters in your post are the > covertly racist female plenary speakers in the front row. Funny, I was in > the third row (sitting next to Rachel, who was quiet as a mouse) and I > didn't hear any loud whisperings. What female plenary speakers are left? > Margorie Perloff? Alicia Ostriker? Couldn't these female plenary speakers > be considered a *female* elite whose acceptance a young scholar would want > to bask in? > > One thing that stuck me about Lisa Amber Phillips' presence at the > conference was how clearly she liked women and how much time she spent > talking with other women--rather than chasing "testosterone," as you put it > in an earlier post. There should more to feminism than demanding > materialistic equality. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:53:26 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kevin Killian Subject: Re: Jacquee la Mousse, ono etc Okay, Maria, thanks for listening and not chewing me out. To add a note of compassion, I for one certainly would never be able to survive the hell of academic politics--and I think any woman with the strength to make it in that world deserves--I don't know what: admiration? Awe? But I'm sympathetic to Lisa Amber Philips' complaints. These blanket statements about what White Middle Class Women do and do not know are highly problematic. Also statements about young women. There are lots of young women poets (many of them black, asian, and lesbian) on the scene here in San Francisco, and, from what I've seen, they have a wide range of response to the question of whether or not they're oppressed as women in our "post"-feminist era. I'm particularly close to my intern who's 27, and her frustration over the position of women in the young hip world she operates in is a frequent topic of discussion-- particularly in terms of her acting out her sexual desires. Dodie ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 18:53:20 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ken Edwards <100344.2546@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: British Women Poets I'm a little late responding to this, as I've only just downloaded several days' worth of digests, but... _Out of Everywhere_, the anthology John Matthias mentioned, is published by Reality Street Editions, the press I run in conjunction with Wendy Mulford. I've mentioned it several times before on this list. Among the thirty contributors there are eight who are UK-based: Maggie O'Sullivan (who edited the book), Wendy herself, who also contributes an afterword, Caroline Bergvall, Paula Claire, Grace Lake, Geraldine Monk, Carlyle Reedy and Denise Riley. Another contributor, Fiona Templeton, is Scottish but has lived in New York for the past few years. The 21 others are American and Canadian. The book has been out since March in the UK, is a 256pp paperback and costs 9 pounds. Until recently I was under the impression that copies would be available by now at SPD, and at Marginal Distribution in Canada. However, I have been badly let down by people who promised to ship them over; it transpires that Marginal will only now be receiving copies and the copies which SPD should have had weeks ago have apparently still not arrived; I shall be following this up urgently. (I'm sorry: I'm in an "if you want anything done you've got to do it yourself" mood.) I know many people are eagerly awaiting copies. Please be patient, I'll sort this out soon. Those who are going to the University of New Hampshire shindig in August/September will get a chance to hear some of the above in person: Maggie, Wendy, Denise. Also Catherine Walsh, who's Irish, not in the anthology but very good. I shall be coming over too, as well as a number of other like-minded poets of the male persuasion. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 19:19:15 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: cris cheek Subject: Re: British Women Poets Hi, seconding the multiple branch listings of - and then beginning to ask questions as to the increasingly inclusive lists of 'British Women Poets' cropping up here. The borders of 'nationality' and of 'poetry' are inscribed by processes of dis/emi/nation (to use a Bhabha-ish breakdown), and as has already been mentioned in this context Catherine Walsh would be unhappy being described as British. So, the subject immediately becomes more complex. I'd list Fiona Templeton, who's been mostly in Stateside for best part of 15 years, who's 'English' and whose 'You - The City' is in my view a major piece of work. Then there are Paige Mitchell and Carlyle Reedy, both U.S. born but living here for the past 25 and more - both very engaging writers. Keith Tuma's placing of Mina Loy in his list is equally problematic under such origins and migrations and exiles and Is this proposed course on women poets . or is there a more focussed agenda? (yes, there are a couple of terrible puns there). There are very many women poets among these islands, thankfully, and I can see the advocacy for a course presenting a range of such practices. There's a considered distance between Carol Ann Duffy (for example) and Maggie O'Sullivan though. I'd echo cheers for Reality Street's 'Out of Everywhere' anthology, edited by O'Sullivan and the Linda France collection from Bloodaxe. Then I'd teach specific books, and this isn't meant to be an inclusive list (I've also tried, as much as possible, to limit the number of presses you might need to contact to get a fair collection together) : Jean 'Binta' Breeze - ('Riddym Ravings', in 'The New British Poetry' anthology and from Race Today) Caroline Bergvall - ('Strange Passage', Equipage - 'Eclats', forthcoming Sound & language) Catherine Walsh - ('Pitch', Pig Press) Grace Lake - ('Viola Tricolor', Equipage) Elaine Randell - ('Beyond All Other', Pig Press) Merle Collins - ('Rotten Pomerack', Virago) Frances Horowitz - ('Snow Light, Water Light', Bloodaxe) Geraldine Monk - ('Interregnum', Creation Press - 'Quaquaversals', Writers Forum) Fiona Templeton - ('You - The City' - Roof Books) Elaine Feinstein - (Selected Poems' - Carcanet) Jackie Kay - ('The Adoption Papers', Bloodaxe) Maggie O'Sullivan - ('Unofficial Word', Galloping Dog - 'In The House of the Shaman', Reality Street') Denise Riley - ('Mop Mop Georgette', Reality Street) Jo Shapcott - ('Electroplating the Baby', Bloodaxe) Maighread Medbh - ('The Making of A Pagan', Blackstaff Press) finally a note on Madge Heron. Gab, I haven't seen her for about 18 years, since I heard her read in various motley company's with bill bissett and Bob Cobbing. She was a riotous presence, and I too hope she's well somewhere. love and love cris ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 23:33:15 +0000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: John Cayley Subject: Engaged Issue Four - the tinned issue Comments: To: wr-eye-tings@sfu.ca NOW AVAILABLE - ENGAGED Issue Four - the tinned issue. Issue Four is dedicated to Pop and Found art. The featured work of ten artists and the additional content, which includes seven ounces of potential poetry, are sealed within a standard supermarket tin. Artists featured in # 4: Patricia Collins - Fragile Andrea Draper - Pickled Madonnas Alberto Duman - Seduced Item Maria Fusco - Questionnaire Medium Sliced - Mobile Phone Michael Leigh - Curious Thing Stewart Life - Easy Alyson Morgan - Untitled Norman Sherfield - Mona Lisa Kate Smith - Chilli Lid and more. "a magazine like no other, and not even like itself" - Creative Review "Tip for the top" - Time Out ENGAGED is an arts magazine that aims to be experimental, challenging conventional ideas about publishing. Each issue appears in a different medium in an attempt to let artists publish work in the way it was intended to be experienced. FUTURE ISSUES Issue Five - video issue for film-makers and animators Issue Six - radio issue for poets, musicians, sound-artists... Issue Seven - Comic/Cartoon strip issue All work welcomed. SAE for return of work. Work published in ENGAGED is selected on merit and the magazine works towards equal opportunities for all artists. FEED BACK 1.Do you have any suggestions regarding a medium in which you think ENGAGED should publish? 2.Would you like to place a free ad. with a view to initiating a collaboration with another artist/writer etc.? 3.Do you have any suggestions of new outlets for ENGAGED? ENGAGED is available on subscription PRICE: UK-Ten Pounds, Europe-Thirteen Pounds, World-Fifteen Pounds (all include p&p). Please make cheques payable to ENGAGED MAGAZINE, and if paying from abroad then please make out a cheque for the equivalent amount in your currency. or from selected bookstores: Dillons, Long Acre, London Tate Gallery , London ICA, The Mall, London Serpentine, Hyde Pk, London Arnolfini, Narrow Key, Bristol Ormeau Baths, Belfast Collective Gallery, Edinburgh CCA, Glasgow Zone Gallery, Newcastle Athenium, Amsterdam and others This issue has been funded by London Arts Board ENGAGED, 334a Kennington Road, London, SE11 4LD rachel@engaged.demon.co.uk 0171 735 3123 ENGAGED Issue Three is still available from the ENGAGED address It is published on cross platform CD ROM and features: "well-wrought and funny" Esquire ART - ARTISTS COLLAGES - a collaborative piece by Oona Campbell and Paul Ramsay who combine random sound and image to create an unfixed, living collage. GEOFF STOCKER's animations - pure, abstract, computer generated art. KATH MOONAN - seven stills taken from 'Prime site', a campaign that set out to question the politics driving the development of mass media communication. S.O.S - by Tony Patrickson, uses sound, film and animation to create an impression of a world in which technological developments lead to an emotionally barren existence SKIN - by Carl Stevenson, a responsive and sensual piece dealing with corporeality in a medium that is, by its nature, virtual. SELBSTPORTRAIT - by Claudia Herbst - four animations centred around the female body, giving abstract impressions of form and identity. BOOK UNBOUND - by John Cayley - an interactive textual/poetic work - 'when you open "Book Unbound" you will change it irreversibly.'(This is available only on Mac Platform) A PORTRAIT OF PERSONALITY - by Katie Waters - a lively animation comically portraying various aspects of the personality of the artist. This piece has an introduction written by Martha Ladley of Real World Studios. ICY-ICY - by Ronald Fraser Munro - a series that sets off imagery against poetry creating a striking and disturbing piece of work. THIS WORLD - by Martha Aitchison - a still in which text is built up, layer upon layer, to create a pictorial account of the language. IN ADDITION A FEATURE ON STRIKE, a fine arts project based in London. AN INTERVIEW with featured artists Paul Ramsay and Oona Campbell. THE LONELY ARTS COLUMN, artists advertise for others to collaborate with. A GRAFFITI CUBICLE where readers are encourage to get involved and pick up a spray can. LETTERS AND OTHER MESSAGES EXHIBITION DATES All this can be found within the virtual walls of a three-d rendered public lavatory. PRICE: UK-Ten Pounds, Europe-Thirteen Pounds, World-Fifteen Pounds (all include p&p) Please make cheques payable to ENGAGED MAGAZINE, and if paying from abroad them please make out a cheque for the equivalent amount in your currency. (if you have already subscribed, for fifteen pounds, the difference will be sent out with this issue) This issue was funded by The Arts Council of England, Cimex and PDO ENGAGED, 334a Kennington Road, London, SE11 4LD rachel@engaged.demon.co.uk 0171 735 3123 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 20:43:13 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Loss Glazier Subject: Postmortems on Orono (Perloff) To All, Marjorie Perloff was kind enough to send an Orono report for the online book. I wanted to share this in advance with the list! My thanks to Marjorie, Loss --- > >Postmortems on Orono: > >In some ways, this conference was not as exciting for me as the 30s one a >few years back because we're in many ways still "in" the fifties and so >they're harder to assess and it was painful to have appraisals like Louis >Martz's that assumed nothing had changed in forty years and we could still >talk about the giant breakthrough of FOR THE UNION DEAD for chrissake. > >The highlight (for me) was the attention now paid to Frank O'Hara, our new >hero, as it were. It's been 20 years since I wrote my O'Hara book; in the >midseventies, I was reprimanded by Don Allen and others for referring to >Joe LeSueur as O'Hara's "lover"; the correct word then was "friend." As >for race issues--so fascinating at this conference, especially Steve >Evans's and Ben Friedlander's analyses--in the seventies, it was all one >could do to get people to accept that these texts were passable as poems, >much less discuss O'Hara on race. So I was delighted to hear these talks >and delighted that the 50s are no longer considered "The Age of Olson" as >they once were.... > >I wish there had been more time for discussion--so many issues were simply >left HANGING. After each and every talk I had dozens of questions as I'm >sure we all did and so for future reference, I think it would be great to >forget having keynoters at all and have fewer sessions, each with an hour >of built in discussion. That's how you learn, I think. > >Again, poetry readings shouldn't be sandwiched in at 10.30 PM as a sort of >afterthought. Either have them or not but if so, give them some >prominence. > >A larger question I've discussed with Burt is the diversity issue. Are >all poets of the 50s of equal interest? Do we make choices and have a >point of view? Does anyone get to give readings just because he/she wrote >poetry during the fifties? It can be argued either way but I did feel >that to have Jerry Rothenberg's account of the making of POEMS FOR THE >MILLENIUM followed by Louis Martz's talk which implied that the issues >Jerry was discussing didn't so much as exist created a strange empty >space. Burt's argument is that this diversity of points of view is >valuable. I'd be curious to know how others felt about this. > >All in all, despite the horrible weather, awful food, lousy facilities and >problems getting back and forth for those of us at the Bangor Inn, I >thought it was a fabulous time, including the fabled argument I had with >Barrett Watten at the latenight cash bar. We've got to keep arguing and >not be too polite. That means not being so hyperpolite to dead poets >either. Or in making even Allen Ginsberg a prophet. > >Finally: Kevin's fashion report was WONDERFUL. I was one of the few >people present who knows Star Black well--she's a really old friend via >Paul Monette and Roger Horwitz. Kevin's right: she absolutely won the >fashion award and was also like a breath of fresh air in this sometimes >hyperacademicized world. Star makes a living as a professional >photographer; has covered lots of stories and made artist's books; she's >now writing more poetry and is passionate about it. It was also great to >have Geoff O'Brien, another non-academic, really fine writer around. And >I loved Star's responses to >things--you should get her to write them up. > >Ciao! > >Marjorie > > > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 22:14:43 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steve Evans Subject: Re: chapbook 2 (North, Robinson, Ngai) Editor Beth Anderson has brought out another beautifully designed chapbook in her fledgling reference: press series. The idea behind this terrific series is to bring together work by three poets who are at different stages in their careers, from just emerging to firmly established. re: chapbook 2 publishes new poems by Charles North, Elizabeth Robinson, and Sianne Ngai. There is also a striking cover drawing by artist Renee Anderson. Some of you no doubt saw re: chapbook 1 (1995), featuring Keith Waldrop, Jennifer Moxley, and Angela Littwin, also with a graphic by Renee Anderson. This is an editorial project worth keeping up with! Make out a check for $5.00 to BETH ANDERSON and mail it to reference: press 154 Doyle Avenue Providence RI 02906 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 22:20:11 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steve Evans Subject: Robert Kocik/Andrew Levy Reading For those of you in or near or willing to drive like wild to get to Providence, this Bastille Day's eve... Don't miss Robert Kocik and Andrew Levy on Saturday, 13 July at 8 p.m. at the wonderful new loft space of Patrick Phillips, 320 Lafayette Street on the Providence / Pawtucket line Both these writers are newly returned to the New York area after extended sojourns, Kocik in Paris and Levy in Chicago. Both are poets engaged in prodigious poetic and epistemological projects, recent glimpses of which can be caught in Kocik's AUKSO (GAIN)--published as OBJECT 4 (Spring/Summer 1995)--and Levy's CURVE (O Books 1994). Come for the poetry, stay for the poetics (party). More information, including directions, backchannel or call (401) 274-1306 r i a t n m u a t s u o o o s ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 19:36:28 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kevin Killian Subject: haunted This is Dodie. At 4:19 PM 7/1/96, Mary Hilton wrote: >Now available from primitive publications -- "The Haunted Baronet," by >Mark Wallace, inspired by Sheridan Le Fanu#s ghost story of the same >title. According to Wallace, "The seventeen poems here are a way of >taking the vocabulary of #The Haunted Baronet# and seeing what it says >now." The result is stunning, mysterious, and haunting in its own right. This just came in the mail today. It looks luscious. Just yesterday Kevin was pondering the world's enduring interest in ghost stories--due to our channel-surfing late the night before and landing on a schlocky ghost movie staring the ever-talent-free Allie Sheedey (or however you spell her name). Le Fanu has never been a favorite of mine, but he will always hold a warm place in my heart due to the Hammer Studios "adaptations" and re-adaptations and re-adaptations of his Carmilla story--cleverly in each remake they simply re-arrange the letters in Carmilla--and voila Mircalla emerges from the grave! Oh those bare-breasted lascivious vampire women--I can never get enough of them. Recently I read a collection of ghost stories by Edith Wharton and was delighted to see how many of Wharton's ghosts write letters. (The handwriting of ghosts is very faint). A writer writing about ghosts who write--does anybody smell a psycho-drama here? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 14:36:29 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Roberts Subject: AWOL: Poetry Stand at the Australian Book Fair (forwarded) >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 07:02:17 +1000 >To: awol@ozemail.com.au >From: awol@ozemail.com.au (awol) >Subject: AWOL: Poetry Stand at the Australian Book Fair > >Poetry Stand at the Australian Book Fair > >This year The Poetry Stand will, for the first time, appear at the >Australian Book Fair (4-7 July, Darling Harbour Sydney). The Poetry Stand >represents a world first initiative. This co-operative adventure will place >emphasis on poetry and independent poetry publishers from NSW. The venture >has been sponsored by the NSW Ministry for the Arts. > >The Poetry Stand will provide a showcase for poetry and highlight the >quality and diversity of poetry published in NSW. It highlights the >significance of poetry in a growing market and will bring poetry more >attention from distributors, librarians, educators, curriculum advisers and >the general public. > >As a special event one of Australia's brightest poets, Adam Aitken, will be >launching his new book IN ONE HOUSE (A&R in association with Paper Bark >Press). > >Publishers and organisations taking part include A&R in association with >Paper Bark Press, AWOL, Hale & Iremonger, Five Islands Press, Heat, Hobo, >Scarp, Southerly and many others > >For further details contact Heather Cam at Hale & Iremonger ph (02) 565 >1955 or email the Poets Union Inc at poetinc@ozemail.com.au. > > >AWOL >Australian Writing On Line >awol@ozemail.com.au >http://www.ozemail.com.au/~awol >PO Box 333 Concord NSW 2137 Australia >Phone 61 2 7475667 >Fax 61 2 7472802 > __________________________________ Mark Roberts Student Systems Project Officer Information Systems University of Sydney NSW 2006 Australia M.Roberts@isu.usyd.edu.au PH:(02)351 5066 FAX:(02)351 5081 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 22:43:02 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kevin Killian Subject: my stack William Northcutt, you had a good idea. Here's what I've been reading. 1. Bitter Blue by Jeremy Reed. Incidentally, thanks to all who backchannel me with info on Reed, especially Pierre Joris, Ira Lightman, Joel Lewis, Romana Huk, and Ken Edwards. 2. Portrait of a Lady by Henry James. 3. Autotoxaemia by Latif Harris. About six weeks ago Eddy Berrigan was looking for a job here in San Francisco and told me he went into this one store & the owner gave him a test, and it turned out it was the "questionnaire" Jack Spicer asked his students to fill out to apply to his 1957 "Magic" Workshop (it's printed in the back of the "Collected Books" of Spicer). Following up I went into the store and demanded to see the owner. That's how I met Latif Harris, and he gave me one of his books. Turns out he is the missing witness I've been seeking for all these years, the man who drove Jack Spicer to his last poetry reading at the Berkeley Conference (1965) and had the nerve to bundle him up in the car with the man JS hated, Lew Welch. P.S., good book! PSS>, Eddy did not get the job! 4. The Green Mile, by Stephen King. One of Steve's best. 5. Abigail Child, "Scatter Matrix." Thanks to the people at Segue for sending this to me (or was it to Small Press Traffic????) 6. "Heart of the Breath," by Jim Brodey. I'm supposed to write a review of this one, and it is so long. (Quite a bargain.) 7. "The Prince, the Showgirl and Me," by Colin Clark. At age 19 Colin Clark was the 3rd assistant director on the set of the Olivier/Marilyn Monroe film "The Prince and the Showgirl." This is his diary of the period. 8. "Sunshine Muse," by Peter Plagens (1974). Out of date by lots, but an interesting art history of California during the Cold War. Who was it recommended this book to me as a good place to get more information about Jay De Feo, the San Francisco painter whose life I am dramatizing as we speak? 9. From Outlaw to Classic, by Alan Golding. I have read this book before, but I wanted to read it again to see if I have anything to add to Golding's Laws of Canon Formation. 10. Angry Women in Rock, ed. Andrea Juno, this is the first book of a new press formed by one of the editors of the defunct ReSEARCH. 11. Learned and Leaved: a Tribute to Rosalie Moore-Moore was one of the Bay Area activist poets, like Lawrence Hart, whose death a few months ago inspired a bit of discussion here on this list. These Activist people really had a program, didn't they? A program, and a destiny. Alan Golding, how do they fit in to your ideas about Canon Formation? --Kevin Killian ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 22:58:47 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: James Brook Subject: my stack, 2 New to the list, old to books, I confess to reading the following in fits, starts, and restarts (thanks to Kevin Killian for inspiring me to click Reply): Apollinaire, Lettres a Lou (one side of the correspondence--only a few of her letters survive--rich in poetry, emotion, and naughty bits) Jens August Schade, People Meet and Sweet Music Fills the Heart (a great lyrical novel by a Danish poet woefully undertranslated into English-- there's only a small book of poems from Curbstone; this novel was translated for Dell in 1969 because it served as the basis for what appears to be a cheesey Dano-Porno flick of the era: it's compared to I Am Curious) The indexing chapter in the Chicago Manual of Style (with snooze alarm) Tom Raworth, Clean & Well Lit (which includes a lovely song to dedicated to Franco Beltrametti) Henri Lefebvre, La Somme et le reste (autobiographical/philosophical/poetical reflections published in 1959) A pile of books on San Francisco and California (research for a book on what we around here call The City, a place susceptible to smug alerts) Please direct all questions about indexing elsewhere. . . . Regards from afar, James Brook ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 18:45:47 +1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Daniel Salmon Subject: Not a stack Jumping on the reading list band wagon - these are what I'm bogged down in at present. Alastair Campbell 'Sidewinder'Never read his fiction before & i am quite enjoying it as a late night book. He is a Cook Island/New Zealand Poet/novelist. Judith Binney 'Redemption Songs' Biography of Te Kooti (bloody hard work but it pays off) J C Beaglehole 'The Life of Captain James Cook' Hugh Kenner 'The Pound Era' Conrad 'Nigger of the Narcissus' From the Other Side of the Century (Bought through poetics - at last a way to supplement limited choice auckland bookshops. Beekeeping books & Japanese history. & 2 books by Lowell Thomas 'The Sea Devil' & 'Raiders of the Deep' for a poetry project. In the Penguin 60's Classics - for the next time i am stuck in a cafe without a paer or company Henry James' 'The Lesson of the Master' For light relief in all the non-fiction i just finished Mao II -Don de Lilo & American Tabloid - James Ellroy, don't think I'll be visiting either of them again - still better than sitting through Tarantino or Oliver Stone movies. & Listening to the Iliad on talking book on long drives in the car. Daniel. Daniel Salmon ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 08:10:25 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Henry Subject: Re: chapbook 2 (North, Robinson, Ngai) In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 1 Jul 1996 22:14:43 -0400 from On Mon, 1 Jul 1996 22:14:43 -0400 Steve Evans said: >Editor Beth Anderson has brought out another beautifully >designed chapbook in her fledgling reference: press series. Speaking of Beth Anderson: she'll be reading with Keith Waldrop at Native Gallery in Providence on August 15th, time to be announced (probably around 8 pm). Native Gallery is a new big space at 367 Charles St. Sponsored by the Poetry Mission. - Henry Gould ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 08:46:09 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Loss Glazier Subject: Re: my stack At 10:43 PM 7/1/96 +0100, you wrote: Kevin, your annotations are just woooooooooooooonderful! -- Loss ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 03:55:34 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ron Silliman Subject: Irby's ear Keith, The best way I know to demonstrate Irby's ear is by example. These are the opening lines (first section) of "Heredom," the first poem in Orexis (Station Hill, 1981): lobe of opalescent glass broken in the irreplaceable lampshade out of the shoulder, the corridor down the street the kids from junior high come by in t-shirts for the warmth of February pigeons overhead stamp and cry in their sleep gathered, the branch of acacia fused through the green swirled Egyptian thorn milk waters raised, itself, of the lost and gathered body of mastery or all the highschool years again, unslept, review the annual faces [over and over till they run green in the movies after the eyes are closed and still as distant as they were in person the society of the ordinary highschool days, never left, will it? against the society of the widow's son, those who on the elephant's back be freed? the generation of mourning doves' cries is from twilight in the mind releasing and attracting us ------------------------------------------ I hope your screen reader doesn't muck with the line breaks (I had to insert one "[" myself). Just following the progression of the 'l's 'o's 's's etc from the first two lines makes me dizzy with pleasure, noticing how "lampshade" sets up "stamp" later, all the way to the contrast in the final line between the liquid consonants of "releasing" versus the hard "tt" and "ct" in "attracting" (not even wanting to make a case, though I think there's one to be made, for the way that line mimics the cooing and feather settling sound of doves). I don't think anybody's done a better job than Kenneth at understanding how Olson used to the caesura in his breath defined line (and these lines seem to me not an instance of the projective in that simplistic organic metaphor, but rather each is a construct). I find "gathered, the branch of acacia" to be breathtaking in how that comma works. I've been reading the poem maybe twice a year now for 15 years and it never gets old. You are right about Kenneth having been disappeared likewise. A little like Enslin, it has had to do with the fact that sometime around 1980 or so little magazines that sought to carry forward some sense of the Olsonian project just stopped cold, combined with Kenneth's return to Lawrence, KS, to take care of his mother (the widow of the above poem) during her last years and his own very reticent nature about putting his work forward. I spoke with him last about two years ago, when the veterans of the Free Speech Movement were searching out folks who had been active in the FSM at Berkeley in 1964 and Lowell Levant, a Berkeley poet of those years and friend of Irby's (and now a truck driver out of Union City), was on the list. Kenneth said he'd seen and talked to Ronald Johnson just once since his own return to Kansas, so it would appear that Kansas is a state one can indeed get lost in (Mr. Dole, please follow suit). Station Hill/Tansy did a big collection of the late '70s poems, Call Steps: Plains, Camps, Statioins, Consistories, in 1992. Orexis is reprinted there. It's probably still available from SPD and I recommend it heartily. Further note to the Oronians: it is very intriguing seeing the comments about, in particular, the talks given by Steve Evans and Ben Friedlander, but for the life of me, I cannot divine from any of the comments what was actually *said.* (And Von Hallberg pulled that same stunt at an Oppen conference at UC San Diego about 10 years ago, declaring Oppen to be a "tedious" poet with onerous politics on a panel.) Ron Silliman rsillima@ix.netcom.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 10:13:00 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Pritchett,Pat @Silverplume" Subject: Re: my stack Comments: To: Kevin Killian Patrick Pritchett here: Capital idea. My own list includes the following; which are being read in no particular order, or rather with Dr. Johnson's notion in mind of "read what you like:" 1. Descent of Alette - Alice Notley (Penguin) 2. The Human Abstract - Elizabeth Willis (Penguin) 3. The Green Lake Is Awake - Joseph Ceravolo (Coffee House). Many thanks to Joel Lewis and others who initiated discussion of Mr. C. and led me to him. He's marvelous! 4. Call Steps - Ken Irby (Station Hill). Met Ken recently here in Boulder. Very nice man. The work is pure delight. 5. Moon Palace - Paul Auster (Penguin) 6. A House White With Sorrow - Jennifer Heath (Rodent Press). Great new novel on Afghanistan. 7. The Cold of Poetry - Lyn Hejinian (Sun & Moon) 8. On The Name - Derrida (Stanford UP) 9. A History of the Arab Peoples - Albert Hourani (Belknap Harvard) 10. Skywatch - A book on clouds, storms, weather... 11. Ice Time - Re: climatology 12. The Kabbalah Unveiled - S.L. MacGregor Matthews (sic) ---------- From: Kevin Killian To: Multiple recipients of list POETICS Subject: my stack Date: Tuesday, July 02, 1996 12:47AM <> William Northcutt, you had a good idea. Here's what I've been reading. 1. Bitter Blue by Jeremy Reed. Incidentally, thanks to all who backchannel me with info on Reed, especially Pierre Joris, Ira Lightman, Joel Lewis, Romana Huk, and Ken Edwards. 2. Portrait of a Lady by Henry James. 3. Autotoxaemia by Latif Harris. About six weeks ago Eddy Berrigan was looking for a job here in San Francisco and told me he went into this one store & the owner gave him a test, and it turned out it was the "questionnaire" Jack Spicer asked his students to fill out to apply to his 1957 "Magic" Workshop (it's printed in the back of the "Collected Books" of Spicer). Following up I went into the store and demanded to see the owner. That's how I met Latif Harris, and he gave me one of his books. Turns out he is the missing witness I've been seeking for all these years, the man who drove Jack Spicer to his last poetry reading at the Berkeley Conference (1965) and had the nerve to bundle him up in the car with the man JS hated, Lew Welch. P.S., good book! PSS>, Eddy did not get the job! 4. The Green Mile, by Stephen King. One of Steve's best. 5. Abigail Child, "Scatter Matrix." Thanks to the people at Segue for sending this to me (or was it to Small Press Traffic????) 6. "Heart of the Breath," by Jim Brodey. I'm supposed to write a review of this one, and it is so long. (Quite a bargain.) 7. "The Prince, the Showgirl and Me," by Colin Clark. At age 19 Colin Clark was the 3rd assistant director on the set of the Olivier/Marilyn Monroe film "The Prince and the Showgirl." This is his diary of the period. 8. "Sunshine Muse," by Peter Plagens (1974). Out of date by lots, but an interesting art history of California during the Cold War. Who was it recommended this book to me as a good place to get more information about Jay De Feo, the San Francisco painter whose life I am dramatizing as we speak? 9. From Outlaw to Classic, by Alan Golding. I have read this book before, but I wanted to read it again to see if I have anything to add to Golding's Laws of Canon Formation. 10. Angry Women in Rock, ed. Andrea Juno, this is the first book of a new press formed by one of the editors of the defunct ReSEARCH. 11. Learned and Leaved: a Tribute to Rosalie Moore-Moore was one of the Bay Area activist poets, like Lawrence Hart, whose death a few months ago inspired a bit of discussion here on this list. These Activist people really had a program, didn't they? A program, and a destiny. Alan Golding, how do they fit in to your ideas about Canon Formation? --Kevin Killian ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 11:36:39 CST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Baratier Subject: orno for pyros (aside Aldon mentioned that Marjorie "offered a brilliant reading of the differing ideologies and aesthetics in two widely circulated collections of photographs -- the infamous "Family of Man" exhibit and Robert Frank's collection of American photos published by Grove press -- Professor Perloff, "read" individual photos as well as the reception of the volumes as context against which to read Ginsberg, O'Hara and that ole gem "Love Calls Us to the Things of this World" -- This kind of paper is really exciting to me -- not an attempt to read the cultural past as a transparently available and stable entity, but looking at, how else to say it, what everyone was then looking at, as a means of deepening our discussions of the, hate to say it, poems themselves --" There are various books of poetry by Simon Perchik that brilliantly "read" these same exact photo's into poems which might be of interest. The Snowcat Poems (1981) work on Robert Frank's photos. The Gandolf Poems (1986) (and the book after, I forget the name) do a superb translation of the "Family of Man" set. The wild thing is the translation itself, how the punctuation is used as a codification process without direct (as Frye would say "radical" or copular) metaphor but rather a connatative associtional value that Perchik builds throughout each poem to guide a readers understanding of the culmative affective utilization of the punctuation. For some reason, few folks seems aware of his work with constructing an intricate set (through series) of "unit values" for various typographical signs, "Family of Man" works,or even of his connection with Blackburn in the late 40's. I can get more publisher info if anyone is interested. Be well. David Baratier ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 12:18:25 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Edward Foster Subject: NEW DOUG OLIVER BOOK New from Talisman: Douglas Oliver's *Selected Poems* ISBN: 1-883689-38-4, $10.50 Visa/Mastercard orders: 1-800-243-0138 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 12:20:22 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Edward Foster Subject: NEW LESLIE SCALAPINO BOOK New from Talisman: Leslie Scalapino's *Green and Black: Selected Writings* ISBN: 1-883689-36-8, $10.50 Visa/Mastercard: 1-800-243-0138 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 12:22:12 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Edward Foster Subject: NEW GEOFFREY O'BRIEN BOOK New from Talisman: Geoffrey O'Brien's *Floating City: Selected Poems* ISBN: 1-883689-38-4, $10.50 Visa/Mastercard orders: 1-800-243-0138 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 12:52:56 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Keith Tuma Subject: Re: Irby's ear In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 2 Jul 1996 03:55:34 -0700 from A public thanks to Ron Silliman for the example of and commentary on Ken Irby's work. I'm sometimes surprised that we don't get more of this on the list, what with all the poets subscribed. More micro-analysis of technique, that is. It's one way to make the disappeared reappear. One test of value in a poetic mode is its possibilities for refinement and extension, no? I'm thinking of Basil Bunting's remarks about Pound having provided a box of tools, making it possible to go on, and not by simple mimicry or imitation. Similarly, I'm thinking right now about the ways it might be possible to speak of "the new sentence" in Harryette Mullen's _Muse & Drudge_, what it means that she's crossed the new sentence with idioms and stanzas derived from the blues, r&b, etc, forced thoughtfulness about the stanza as unit back onto formal practices identified and explored by RS and others (if I'm right about this). (The stanza/strophe of Toner or Xing is not at all Mullen's, it seems to me.) Anyway, I for one would be grateful for more discussion of technique--and thanks again to Ron. Keith Tuma ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 14:11:02 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Wallace Subject: Quartermain, Cage, Beckett Dear Peter Quartermain: Thanks very much for your interesting query about Cage and Beckett from several days ago. I'm only on e-mail about twice a week, so I'm sorry I couldn't get back to you sooner. In that particular post of mine that you quote, I think I was using the word "limitations" exactly as Charles Smith suggests I was (thanks, Charles), that is simply the unavoidable fact of having a consciousness that can imagine a limited number of concerns, etc. Olson's quote has always seemed important to me--in my own new Haunted Baronet chapbook I echo it, somewhat more darkly as befits the contents of the chapbook, as "The form of limitations is history." But I agree with you, also, that "limitations" is a problematic word if understood in other ways--often, the "limitations" of a writer turn out, in critical work, simply to be the extent to which the poet is not doing what the evaluator wishes the poet was doing, i.e. the "limitations" are just as likely to be that of the critical evaluator as they are that of the work itself. In that sense I greatly enjoyed Louis Cabri's remark about bringing poetry to theory, rather than the other way around--that poetic practice can often enact a scathing criticism of the "limits" of literary theory is something that is often missed. But I still believe in the value of critical response, however limited most such responses turn out to be, and I take also your point that such critical response might find the word "limitations" to be itself limiting. Perhaps I would say that it would be better to talk about the "problems" (or "issues," perhaps) that a given writer creates in the mind of a reader, with the recognition that both the critic and the poet (and they can be one and the same!) speak from the perspective of their own "limits" in the Olsonian sense. If I were to talk about the "problems" that Cage's work present for me, I think I would focus right now on the issue of what might be called "the dark side" in Cage's work. It's possible to argue that Cage is one of the most "optimistic" artists of the 20th century, yet what exactly would one mean by such an argument? Simply that from the perspective of his Buddhism, "worry" is a transitory, ego-ridden phenonmena. But is that really where Cage would land on such a problem? I don't think so, really. Rod Smith, who knew Cage and is certainly more of an expert on his work than I am, has often told me about Cage's reticence to talk about the "darkest" periods of his life, such as the 1940s, and I wonder about the significance of that possible "resistance" to darkness. According also to Rod, Cage did not like Beckett's work, because it was too relentlessly "dark." Yet I think the surface "optimism" of Cage's work is deceiving--one has only to think of Cage's almost total rejection of western music to recognize how much of the world he disliked--hated even--and how vehemently he hated it. It turns out that Cage's surface "acceptance" of any phenomena (any noise as music, etc) turns out to include a rejection of western cultural hierarchies in every conceivable guise, which means quite literally that he must have loathed almost everything around him, however "quietly" or "gently" (two cliched phrases about Cage that I can't stand--the man's work seems amazingly fierce and insistent, frankly). Indeed some things that he rejected perhaps seem insufficiently considered--is it in SILENCE that he speaks against jazz as simply repeating the same foreground/background (melody/harmony) as western classical structures (I don't have books here with me, and I certainly haven't read everything he might have said about jazz)? In any case, even if his rejections seem in most cases valid to me, it's hard to imagine that a man who has spent so much time throwing off the burden of his whole culture does not understand what having a "dark side" would be. I'm tempted to echo Robert Duncan here and say "I prefer to take my John Cage dark." When it comes to Beckett, the problem his work most presents for me is the same problem that the work of William Burroughs presented for me when I was writing my dissertation on it--how is one to read the relation between the fictional world created in the books and the world outside it that we all know to exist? Too many critics of Burroughs simply wanted to reduce his work to a representational description of human life, and then to dismiss it on the grounds that it was exaggerated (i.e. how does one take the Burroughs phrase "communication must become total before we can stop it"? literally? some other way?). A social realist critic like Lukacs would have read Beckett simply as the decadent expression of a "subjectivity," whereas Adorno, perhaps, would have seen in Beckett a series of social symptoms created by class consciousness, i.e. would have seen Beckett as successful on the grounds of his social criticism. But what's the truth of this really? That is, do we really read Beckett as social critic, or as limited subjectivity? Do we read the circular frustration his texts enact as existentialist comment on human absurdity irrespective of any social context? I think it's possible to say that all these things are legitimate possibilities arising from Beckett's work, and that all of them are potentially valuable, and that, finally, the genius of Beckett's work is the multiplicity of context to which it is responsive. Another "problem" I find interesting in the work of both writers is the extent to which a dominant paradigm does or does not control the work which they produced. There is some level of theoretical sameness to all of what Cage does, and all of what Beckett does--their work, like say Wallace Stevens, seems to operate on modulations within dominant paradigms, whereas someone like Gertrude Stein seems much more comfortable operating in multiple paradigms. I think Cage has a greater level of multiple approaches than Beckett--he's both a musician and poet, so there's at least two approaches there at the very least (though Beckett wrote fiction and plays, etc). But I wonder the extent to which their artistic goals remain similar accross pieces, and the extent to which they differ, and the extent to which achieving such similarity or difference across a lifetime of production reveals to us the "limits" (Olsonian sense again) of various creative minds. Not a question I could possibly answer here. But all this is more or less off the top of my head, as e-mail encourages, and perhaps has gone on too long already. Mark Wallace /----------------------------------------------------------------------------\ | | | mdw@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu "I have not yet begun | | to go to extremes" | | GWU: | | http://gwis2.circ.gwu.edu/~mdw | | EPC: | | http://wings.buffalo.edu/epc/authors/wallace | |____________________________________________________________________________| ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 15:51:22 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Howard Shoemaker Subject: Re: British Women Poets In-Reply-To: <960701225319_100344.2546_EHQ35-1@CompuServe.COM> from "Ken Edwards" at Jul 1, 96 06:53:20 pm Just back in town after a long weekend and it will take me a while to catch up, but many thanks for all those fab suggestions. I've forwarded them all to my friend and she's wishing she had a whole course to devote to the subject rather than the lit intro. she'll be teaching. I wldn't be surprised if those intriguing names and titles eventually drive one of use to teach such a course. Oh, and at the risk of "boosterism" (Yo Keith), i can't resist relaying how impressed my friend has been w/ the knowledge and enthusiasm present in this forum. A similar call went out to the ModBrit list (more academic, and also, by default, fiction-oriented) and garnered pretty much no result at all. I've been thinking about the dangers of easy "consensus" Keith wrote about, but still, for myself, finding a lot of breadth and variety under the "alternative" umbrella when it comes to questions of who and what people are reading. steve ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 14:21:33 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Jacquee la Mousse, ono etc okay, dodie, all points well taken. it's true, all generalizations are kind of odious (except for blanket staements about minnesota; actually, now that i'm back, one day at a time it's not terrible). i for my part admire anyone who has the presence of mind to live outside of institutional life...i cd never, for example, run a small business although i'd love to, say, do a cafe/bookstore or something. if i weren't an academic i'd probably be on disability or otherwise scraping by on govt benificence (sp?). can't deal w/ too many unknowns, too much responsibility, etc. In message UB Poetics discussion group writes: > Okay, Maria, thanks for listening and not chewing me out. To add a note of > compassion, I for one certainly would never be able to survive the hell of > academic politics--and I think any woman with the strength to make it in > that world deserves--I don't know what: admiration? Awe? But I'm > sympathetic to Lisa Amber Philips' complaints. These blanket statements > about what White Middle Class Women do and do not know are highly > problematic. Also statements about young women. There are lots of young > women poets (many of them black, asian, and lesbian) on the scene here in > San Francisco, and, from what I've seen, they have a wide range of response > to the question of whether or not they're oppressed as women in our > "post"-feminist era. I'm particularly close to my intern who's 27, and her > frustration over the position of women in the young hip world she operates > in is a frequent topic of discussion-- particularly in terms of her acting > out her sexual desires. > > Dodie ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 16:28:43 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Howard Shoemaker Subject: Enslin In-Reply-To: <199606301333.GAA16922@dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com> from "Ron Silliman" at Jun 30, 96 06:33:47 am Ron Silliman wrote: I'll be on the lookout, as it were, for New Sharon's Prospect, which I don't know. And I agree that Enslin's neglect has much to do with his decision not to "hustle" his work. In fact, he seems almost a limit case in that regard, and interesting as such. From what I've seen his life in small town on the Maine coast is an impressively Thoreauvian one. Gathers mussels, clams and other fruits de mer, feasts on veggies from his meticulously tended garden, and pays very little attention to the mechanisms of literary fame. But I have to say my experience of reading Enlin's longer work differs from Ron's. I'm about 350 pages into the 2 vol. *Ranger* without yet marking its "fading" into an excessively "restricted range of possibility." That book wld be difficult to excerpt here for exemplary purposes, and I don't have time to type out a section from the "Autumnal Rime" sequence I mentioned earlier (but wld refer everyone to the Enslin number of Talisman). So I'll have to content myself w/ one of the small domestic poems from Music in the Key of C. (Behind the title is Schoenberg's remark that there is much good music still to be composed in that key.) Where? Buy I'll not take you home unless we have been somewhere or met and asked each other where? There is the chance that something like this happens every day on streets impossible in clutter where? the faceless angels intersect suppose they do and where the home is bound to labyrinth so many threads an asking noise of traffic desperate to cease and darkens lightens as a voice that sharpens through it where? To my ear at least this is very fine, and quite precise "musically," for lack of a better word (Enslin was trained as a composer). And since Ron mentions Irby's caesurae, I might point here to Enslin's use of an Oppen-derived "gap syntax" that I've tried to reproduce here (the exact spacing, that is) as far as my editing program will permit. steve > > Re the disappearance, to whatever degree, of Enslin (please spell that > name right), Tarn, Schwerner et al, I would think this is a sign that, > say, Sulfur and its predecessor Caterpillar have not had the lasting > impact on the scene that its editor imagines. All of these are > interesting poets, but their relation to Olson et al is at some > distance (Armand really is part of the scene around NYC that originally > led to Caterpillar--he, Antin, Rothenberg, Kelly et al either "too > young" or too non-projective to get into the Allen anthology). In the > case of Tarn and Enslin, they've lived at some distance from those key > urban centers and really don't hustle their work as much as they might. > > Nathaniel was in Hoboken the other week for the big Russ/American thang > and looked and sounded fine. His work with Grossman/Cape Goliard, which > originally brought out the Mayan Letters, Mayakovsky's How are Verse > Made, the first English translations of Victor Segalen and Nazim > Hikmet, LZ's "A" 22/23, Henri Lefebvre's Dialectical Materialism, was > one of the most intensely great editing projects of the past 40 years. > It's impact is still vibrating through the culture. > > My favorite Enslin book is an early one: New Sharon's Prospect and > Journals. The long poems seemed too much to me to be exercises on the > line, fine for a hundred pages, but ultimately fading into a restricted > range of possibility. For pure studies of the ear, my own preference > has been, say, for Ken Irby, whose work does so much WITHIN the > individual line. > > All best, > > Ron > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 17:14:14 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Howard Shoemaker Subject: Re: Enslin In-Reply-To: <199607022028.QAA76788@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU> from "Steven Howard Shoemaker" at Jul 2, 96 04:28:43 pm Dammit! I just did the same thing to Ron Silliman that I did to Burt K. another time. *I* wrote the stuff below, not Ron. His post is quoted after the "Steve" signoff. Sorry for the tangle. steve > > Ron Silliman wrote: > > I'll be on the lookout, as it were, for New Sharon's Prospect, which I > don't know. And I agree that Enslin's neglect has much to do with his > decision not to "hustle" his work. In fact, he seems almost a limit case > in that regard, and interesting as such. From what I've seen his life > in small town on the Maine coast is an impressively Thoreauvian one. > Gathers mussels, clams and other fruits de mer, feasts on veggies from his > meticulously tended garden, and pays very little attention to the > mechanisms of literary fame. > > But I have to say my experience of reading Enlin's longer > work differs from Ron's. I'm about 350 pages into the 2 vol. *Ranger* > without yet marking its "fading" into an excessively "restricted > range of possibility." > > That book wld be difficult to excerpt here for exemplary purposes, and > I don't have time to type out a section from the "Autumnal Rime" > sequence I mentioned earlier (but wld refer everyone to the Enslin number > of Talisman). So I'll have to content myself w/ one of the small domestic > poems from Music in the Key of C. (Behind the title is Schoenberg's > remark that there is much good music still to be composed in that key.) > > > Where? > > Buy I'll not take you home > unless we have been somewhere > or met and asked each other > where? There is the chance > that something like this happens > every day on streets impossible > in clutter where? the faceless > angels intersect suppose they do > and where the home is > bound to labyrinth so many threads > an asking noise of traffic desperate > to cease and darkens lightens > as a voice that sharpens > through it where? > > > To my ear at least this is very fine, and quite precise "musically," for > lack of a better word (Enslin was trained as a composer). And since > Ron mentions Irby's caesurae, I might point here to Enslin's use of > an Oppen-derived "gap syntax" that I've tried to reproduce here (the > exact spacing, that is) as far as my editing program will permit. > > steve > > > > > > Re the disappearance, to whatever degree, of Enslin (please spell that > > name right), Tarn, Schwerner et al, I would think this is a sign that, > > say, Sulfur and its predecessor Caterpillar have not had the lasting > > impact on the scene that its editor imagines. All of these are > > interesting poets, but their relation to Olson et al is at some > > distance (Armand really is part of the scene around NYC that originally > > led to Caterpillar--he, Antin, Rothenberg, Kelly et al either "too > > young" or too non-projective to get into the Allen anthology). In the > > case of Tarn and Enslin, they've lived at some distance from those key > > urban centers and really don't hustle their work as much as they might. > > > > Nathaniel was in Hoboken the other week for the big Russ/American thang > > and looked and sounded fine. His work with Grossman/Cape Goliard, which > > originally brought out the Mayan Letters, Mayakovsky's How are Verse > > Made, the first English translations of Victor Segalen and Nazim > > Hikmet, LZ's "A" 22/23, Henri Lefebvre's Dialectical Materialism, was > > one of the most intensely great editing projects of the past 40 years. > > It's impact is still vibrating through the culture. > > > > My favorite Enslin book is an early one: New Sharon's Prospect and > > Journals. The long poems seemed too much to me to be exercises on the > > line, fine for a hundred pages, but ultimately fading into a restricted > > range of possibility. For pure studies of the ear, my own preference > > has been, say, for Ken Irby, whose work does so much WITHIN the > > individual line. > > > > All best, > > > > Ron > > > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 17:07:42 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: perloff-watten i for one heard nothing about an impolite, engaged argument between perloff and watten. please recap, somebody, as it evidently concerns poetry and poetix. bests, maria d ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 14:38:00 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Don Cheney Subject: and i thought my translations were out at third base I found a tiny book titled, "Modismos - Familiar English-Spanish Expressions" by Mrs. Anness & Mr. Boughton published in Mexico w/no publishing date (my guess is 1950's -- so probably 1961!). Anyway, I love the English expressions that are used, such as: "This cigar smells like a ten-center." or "I'd like to lick the stuffing out of him." but the translation for "He stormed around mad at everything and everybody." as "Parecio que habia fumado marihuana. "Estaba engrifado." makes me believe that it was published in the 50's and makes me wonder if the authors were Monty Python fans. Don "Dinsdale" Cheney dcheney@ucsd.edu (i didn't use diacritical marks as i didn't know how everybody's email browsers would handle them) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 19:45:17 -0400 Reply-To: Robert Drake Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert Drake Subject: Re: and i thought my translations were out at third base such are landmines fr raw poetic ore... i recently found a copy ov "200 Colourful Expressions in English Language" by Sr. Miriam Azode (Onaivi Publishing, Nigeria), with such jems as: "I never saw him as a _shrinking velvet_" "The big row he had with Udo's family _unearthed the skeleton in the cupboard_" "I invented that statement _to save_ his force" "If they do not _take time by the forelock_, they will miss their luck" lbd ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1996 03:07:23 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ron Silliman Subject: Ben Friedlander email address? Does anyone have a current email address for Ben Friedlander (Ben, are you reading this?)? The one I had bounced back as "user unknown." Thanks, Ron ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1996 21:13:23 +0900 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Nada Gordon Subject: Re: Ben Friedlander email address? >Does anyone have a current email address for Ben Friedlander (Ben, are >you reading this?)? The one I had bounced back as "user unknown." > >Thanks, > >Ron You can try this one: V080L3NP@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu. It worked sometime around last Hannukah. :-) Nada (Gordon) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1996 20:24:03 +0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Schuchat Subject: Re: my stack In-Reply-To: <01I6LDXDFJH69898HY@iix.com> 1. CONINGSBY, Benjamin Disraeli 2. ST.PETERSBURG, CRUCIBLE OF CULTURAL REVOLUTION, Katerina Clark 3. TRANSBLUENCY, Jones/Baraka 4. IN MEMORY OF MY THEORIES, Rod Smith 5. WALT WHITMAN'S AMERICA, David S. Reynolds 6. NEGOTIATING COOPERATION: THE UNITED STATES AND CHINA 1969-1989, Robert Ross 7. CLOSE TO ME & CLOSER...(THE LANGUAGE OF HEAVEN) and DESAMERE, Alice Notley 8. MAO & MATISSE, Ed Friedman 9. PRONTO, Elmore Leonard 10. DISCOURSES OF THE VANISHING, Marilyn Ivy (modern Japanese culture, pub by U of Chicago) also, for those of you with access to libraries that would have it, I very strongly recommend Michelle Yeh's article THE "CULT OF POETRY" IN CONTEMPORARY CHINA which you can find in THE JOURNAL OF ASIAN STUDIES 55, no 1. (FEbruary 1996), an excellent account of what is going on "post-Misty school." ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1996 09:27:48 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Loss Glazier Subject: Re: Friedlander email + Note Actually, that address should be: v080l3np@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu Note also: the UB machines have been spittin vinegar lately (I believe that's the technical term for malfunctioning nodes). Sometimes they will say things don't exist just because they're messed up. (This also occurs in other discourses.) Often it's good to try a couple of times over a few days if you're having trouble getting to the EPC or otherwise accessing our gleaming towers of silicon. --- At 09:13 PM 7/3/96 +0900, you wrote: >>Does anyone have a current email address for Ben Friedlander (Ben, are >>you reading this?)? The one I had bounced back as "user unknown." >> >>Thanks, >> >>Ron > >You can try this one: V080L3NP@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu. It worked sometime >around last Hannukah. > >:-) Nada (Gordon) > > ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1996 14:54:19 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rod Smith Subject: Re: Quartermain, Cage, Beckett, Severity Mark Wallace wrote: "It turns out that Cage's surface "acceptance" of any phenomena (any noise as music, etc) turns out to include a rejection of western cultural hierarchies in every conceivable guise, which means quite literally that he must have loathed almost everything around him, however "quietly" or "gently"..." Well, loathe, is much too strong I think. Cage loved Satie, & thought highly of Mozart, particularly Don Giovani. He listened to Bach & Beehtoven a great deal in his teens & twenties, & studied with Schoenberg. Seems more appropriate to me to say that at a certain point he just didn't need that tradition anymore, or only _very_ selectively. It just wasn't useful to him, & that in part accounts for the usefulness of his work to so many, I think. He was forced on occasion, or very often, to address it of course. There's that great story he told of the African prince that saw a program of music from Bach to Wagner, & when asked what he thought of the concert he replied "very nice, but why did they keep playing the same tune over and over." But on another note, in the spirit of Peter Q's "limiatations" question-- somebody, maybe it was George Bowering, used the term "severe avant-garde" in a post, I believe comparing Beckett to Cage-- the implication being Beckett wasn't, Cage was. Not to get stuck on that particular comparison, but just to put the question to the list-- whatsa "severe avant-garde" anywho? Cld be the basis for a new movement-- _Expurgationism_? Also, if anyone would volunteer a close reading of Charles B's "An Afternoon on the Jetee" from _Arras 3_ (does anyone have a tape?). . . I would be quite curious . . . Rod ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1996 15:21:08 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: pee pee In-Reply-To: <199607020406.AAA12104@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> well now we seem to have hit a "low" -- look "filch" -- your survey wd either have to rely upon self-reporting, in which case it's useless, ot on direct observation, in which case that must have been you that was kicked out of the pool for peeking at people peeing -- surely we can come up with a better satire than this -- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1996 15:28:04 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Irby Matters In-Reply-To: <199607020406.AAA12104@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> Keith -- you might look for the Station Hill volume _Call Steps_, copies of which may still float about -- I suspect the Tansy Irbys are long gone -- Did you know that his brother is an important translator of Spanish works? particularly of Jose Lezama Lima's fantastic Cuban novel _Paraiso_ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1996 15:51:41 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Perchik In-Reply-To: <199607030404.AAA19336@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> David -- I had been aware of that via the old Perchik _Selected_; but the book as a whole had left a bad feeling in me that kept mt from returning to it -- Now, I'd like to take a look at the fuller sequences (the Frank series in the selected appears to be less than half the sequence?) Will give Simon a second try on your advice -- ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 1996 00:37:31 MDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Louis Cabri Subject: Re: my stack In-Reply-To: ; from "Schuchat" at Jul 3, 1996 8:24 pm some hits of bed/floor/deskside reading over the last indefinite while - at 1pm & 4am; caffeinated, ginsenged or cigared; from usedbookstore purchases to gifts & library loans; all 100-watt bulbed; in no special order 1. Primitivism and Decadence by Yvor Winters, where I found "The Experimental School in American Poetry," a descriptive catalogue of literary devices & to me a very uncanny read - templating a poetics which seems to haunt the logos of discursive prose itself. That, next to Artifice of Absorption, is boondoggling - & recommended for formal change fetishists & their detractors. What other catalogues are out there? 2. Laura Riding's The World and Ourselves (1938). She leaves Spain in the nick of Franco's razor & writes, i guess from England, a "personal letter" circulated by meanderment to 400 people, asking how should those she singularily terms "inside people" respond to the changes in the world of "the outside"? "International affairs are too much with us, they are eating into our personal lives and labours...." The book collects 100 responses into an extraorganized format - divided into a section of responses by women and a section by men, then two further sections, "the realistic approach" and the approach "beginning from the inside." Riding provides allover narrative that further strings each leter to her own. Much of her narrative responds to the letters, and explains - wen required - her use of terms like "inside." Is this a protoypical version of the poetics survey? 3. George Bowering's early seventies poetry sequence, At War With the US, loaned from friend & returned else I'd quote some contusional lines. Chequer le livre out, taberwit! 4. Torque #4 (Spring 1996), ed. Elizabeth Fodaski. 21 E Second St #12, NYC 10003. We're talkin' propellant - at torque 4, the blade's curve is d-base .25 & the windcut jigs the meters but good, so you reach "Fifi La Labial Nana Fofana" in about four minutes. Leather bag not supplied. 5. Dick Gregory's first book, of one-liners & short para sequences, From the Back of the Bus, published & intro by... Hugh Hefner, that would be in 62. I had to pack this in a box a few days ago, but it's got some great lines & black&white photos on race matters (Little Rock figures prominantly) - who says the "groundlessness" of permanent irony can only display glibness, despair & cynicism? 6. The Cool Crazy Committed World of the Sixties: 21 Television Interviews from The Pierre Berton Show, 1966. Journalist Berton is an icon of Cdn cultural nationalism, & WASP - so he interviewsd all that is Not He, for an audience comforted by a then wellfunded public broadcaster. Apparently the last interview w/ Malcolm X. Interview with "Mrs Ian Fleming." Interview with "a single parent," "a gate crasher" (over 26 Beatles concerts), etc, & w/ Lenny Bruce, Phil Specter... only in Canada, eh? 7. A book by James Campbell on Montreal abstract painter Claude Toussignant. Professional art critic "doing the professional," and swings his hardy boy sloop into Michael Fried's dramascope, then to litcrit harbour for a poke in the weeds of what T Eagleton tried to satirize in 1986 as RLM - the Reader's Liberation Movement. Campbell until now has mostly written monographs for gallery shows of artists like Barnett Newman and Ron Martin. 8. Collected writings of another (same gen) Montreal abstract painter, Guido Molinari, who has mostly gone it alone as they say ("I am a UFO & loving it"), though at one time, in wake of a preponderant influence of Automatism on the Montreal scene, associated himself by signature with a selfdeclared NeoPlasticist manifesto. He has various phases. He painted a series blindfolded in the early 50s. 9. Derrida's The SelfPortrait and Other Ruins. Exhibition catalogue of 17-19 c. French paintings/drawings of/on blind subjects, which he curated for the Louvre, plus booklength essay. One more argument I suppose, this time perceptual, for the impossibility of pure "identity." The perceptual geometry holding together artist, canvas, mirror or subject, and viewer, is such that the artist cannot literally see, D argues, the action of painting, even, and especially, a selfportrait. There's a blindness at the "origin" of the act of drawing. 10. Essays in Felix Guattari's Molecular Revolution, an early book. Seems that in one sentence from 1966 he sums up Fredric Jameson's entire generalist's project in The Political Unconscious, and moreover in the specific context of a description of French labour history in this century: "It is the revolutionary vanguard's failure to understand the unconscious processes that emerge as socioeconomic determinisms that has left the working class defenceless in the face of capitalism's modern mechanisms of alienation" (p. 199). ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 1996 03:01:35 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ron Silliman Subject: More addresses Thanks to Gordon & Loss for their help in getting in touch w/ Ben. I need two additional addresses for folks whose missives bounced back this past week: John Byrum Joel Kuszai Email and snail mail needed. -------------------------------------------- Simon, Since the Valley Forge area is not awash with Asian Studies (unreconstructed xenophobia is the local mode), can you sketch out what Michelle Yeh says in that article on the cult of poetry? I'd love to know and I'll bet I'm not alone, All best, Ron ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 1996 10:46:53 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Golumbia Subject: Skoal Chaw In-Reply-To: <9607040637.AA30644@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca> from "Louis Cabri" at Jul 4, 96 00:37:31 am In case anybody's (remotely) (still) interested, there's a far beter response to the Sokal thing than Ross's (& to media response to Sokal), by ST co-editor Bruce Robbins, in July 8/21 edition of IN THESE TIMES (&, mild self-promo, two letters in defense of cultural studies, one by yrs truly, the other, a really nice missive by Phil Goldstein, with Tom Frank response). "In Defense of Cultural Studies" runs the banner across the top of front cover. I'm surprised, but glad, to find out the Jim Weinstein is willing to listen to those of us who find it worth defending. -- dgolumbi@sas.upenn.edu David Golumbia ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 1996 12:20:11 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Smith Subject: Re: Ronald Johnson Broadside (ad) Joel, I wd like one of the unsigned RJ braodsides for $10.00. Charles Smith 2135 Irvin Way Sacramento, CA 95822 (916)454-3375 thanks ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 4 Jul 1996 16:19:37 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Christina Fairbank Chirot Subject: Re: comments on women today and oppression In-Reply-To: <199607010145.VAA04030@toast.ai.mit.edu> On Sun, 30 Jun 1996, Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest wrote: > re ms. phillip's dismay about a conference attendee's comments that > women today do not realize that they are oppressed and that white > middle class women are the last to realize they are oppressed, i can > very easily see much that might have motivated those comments and > agree. i have seen entirely too many anti-feminist slings recently, > as if one is being somehow radical and brave to trash all those dingy > feminists. and i can easily, only too easily imagine losing my temper > if i thought i heard yet another pseudo-daring slam on feminists. > > people have been slamming feminists for hundreds of years -- white > master-owners; male husbands enjoying such privileges as beating a > wife with anything smaller than the circumfrance of their thumb, being > the only one in the partnership who can own or inherit land, being the > only partner who have a bank account or vote; men who can vote, own > land, have a bank account, work at any number of professions while > women cannot; men being asked to desist from disenfranchising women; > academics (male and female) who profess, as dale spender has pointedly > put it, that "you don't have to read women's literature to know it > isn't any good" in her book on sexism in literature; academics who > refuse to hire women in tenure track positions; academics who > consistently give lower marks and bad reviews to work by women, while > giving accolades to work of comparable quality by men; etcetera, > etcetera. it isn't, after all, so very new to slam feminists and > those who do so certainly aren't the sort of company i would like to > keep. perhaps mr. howe meant nothing disrespectful toward women. but > with the comments as reported, i have only too many painful > experiences which lead me to agree. > > in other words, i can't say how many times i have heard some younger > woman tell me, often with a placating smile (as if being, publically, > a "good girl"), that SHE is certainly not oppressed and doesn't feel > women are oppressed anymore. she tells me this while she is typing, > filing, and scurrying away at a shit job for lower pay than men her > age and ability. she has also, often, just told me about the job(s) > she left because she was sexually harrassed, the boyfriend she lives > with who expects her to wash all the dishes, do the laundry, cook, and > clean, the same boyfriend who has perhaps just left her for a younger > prettier woman. she leaves work to paint one more painting that will > not get exhibited in a museum because although over half of the people > in art classes are women, less than a tenth of exhibited or reviewed > artists are women (and this situation exists for women writers, in > large measure as well -- have you ever noticed how in anonymous entry > contests, the winners are half or over half women, but in contests > where names are used, 1/5 to 1/3 of the winners are women?). and we > watch while a black or latino woman cleans the building around us and > tells us, if we ask, how she was an accountant at home, or how her > husband doesn't let her go home alone so she will have to stay here > and wait for him, or one of us in the room struggles to hide the > bruises from being beaten by an abusive partner while the residents of > rooms on all sides of us shut their ears since "he's her boyfriend" so > that makes it all right. > > i am sick of hearing that women are not oppressed. i am sick of > hearing the very feminists whose damned hard work has gotten women the > right to vote, to hold about 3/4 more sorts of jobs than they used to, > the right to start a bank account without their husband's signature to > give them permission, and so on and so on jeered at, disowned, and > dismissed as they take on yet another painful, difficult battle for > the very women who will not stand with them, yet benefit by their > labor. > > from this ground, such seeds as the comments you report seem only too > understandable. > > and while i'm on my soapbox, i have found myself distanced and pained > by the numerous readings listed with no women writers, by the numerous > lists of admired writers with at best only one woman for every eight > men, and by the books and book lists with almost no women. the thread > on british women poets has been, to say the least, a delight and i'd > love to see more of the same. > > women write too. > e > YES, YES, YES! And you've only mentioned a bit of the daily pressure/oppression. Backlash is pervasive. "Chicks" is not chic. Reviews of the Orono conference manifest underrepresentation of women there, as elsewhere. Here's an other woman's voice supporting y/our position. T in a c. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 09:45:32 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tony Green Organization: The University of Auckland Subject: Teaching women poets I'd like to pick up an old thread. Teachability is closely linked with publicationability. New Zealand with a population of 3,600,000 does not support publication of quertzblatz writing except in minute quantities. There is a "mainstream" of writing which fares better, though the rate of publication does not match that for U.S. writing. There are few magazines. Sustaining anything in that way for the kind of quertzblatz interests of many people on this list is damn near impossible. Attempts to get public money for it have not proved successful lately. The only magazine at present serving this interest is in some trouble financially and that is a xerox magazine stapled through, no cover, edited by Alan Loney and called A Brief Description of the Whole World. He also edited Parallax for 3 issues in the early 80's. This was the successor to a short-lived magazine edited by Graham Lindsay "Morepork". In the early 80's there were two xerox magazines, AND and SPLASH, neither lasted long. Meanwhile the mainstream carries on happily enough. Singling out Michele Leggott as teachable woman NZ poet is just fine. Good luck to her. But I must point out that there are perhaps more challenging poets who are not going to be teachable because they do not get books in print and because they do not necessarily appear in anthologies. A reader of the magazines I've named will know what I mean. Can we rely on the "teaching" of Michele Leggott knowing anything of this context? I guess the answer is a very big NO. In which case that teaching, probably unintentionally,,or even, with the very best of intentions, tends to be an "outside" interference in the canon, which can make the situation for those poets who NEVER fit the mainstream magazines at all, more difficult. This is not meant to indicate any kind of dislike of Michele or of her writing, far from it. But before a liberal-minded extension includes that which is available, to suit its liberality, it should be very careful about the effect it can have within the immediate environment within which availability has occurred. In short, I would trust this kind of foraging around for names to put into a plausible list of "representative" NZ women poets for a U.S.college course, only where the library resources could establish that context I've referred to, e.g Buffalo, where most of the magazine material is available. Best Tony Green, e-mail: t.green@auckland.ac.nz ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 10:10:15 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Poetics List Subject: Welcome Message Rev. 5-16-95 ____________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Poetics List & The Electronic Poetry Center sponsored by The Poetics Program, Department of English, Faculty of Art & Letters, of the State University of New York, Buffalo ____________________________________________________________________ http://wings.buffalo.edu/epc ____________________________________________________________________ _______Contents___________ 1. About the Poetics List 2. Subscriptions 3. Who's Subscribed 4. Digest Option 5. When you'll be away 6. The Electronic Poetry Center (EPC) 7. Poetics Archives at EPC 8. Publishers & Editors Read This! [This document was prepared by Charles Bernstein (bernstei@acsu.buffalo. edu) and Loss Pequen~o Glazier (lolpoet@acsu.buffalo.edu).] ____________________________________________________________________ 1. About the Poetics List Please note that this is a private list and information about the list should not be posted to other lists or directories of lists. The idea is to keep the list to those with specific rather than general interests, and also to keep the scale of the list small and the volume manageable. Word-of-mouth (and its electronic equivalents) seems to be working fine. The "list owner" of Poetics is Charles Bernstein: contact me for further information. As of May, Joel Kuszai is working with me to administer the list. For subscription information contact us at POETICS@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU ____________________________________________________________________ 2. Subscriptions The list has open subscriptions. You can subscribe (sub) or unsubscribe (unsub) by sending a one-line message, with no subject line, to: listserv@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu the one-line message should say: unsub poetics {or} sub poetics Jill Jillway (replacing Jill Jillway with your own name; but note: do not use your name to unsub) We will be sent a notice of all subscription activity. * If you are having difficulty unsubscribing, please note: Sometimes your e-mail address may be changed slightly by your system administrator. If this happens you will not be able to send messages to Poetics or to unsubscribe, although you will continue to get your Poetics mail. To avoid this, unsub from the old address and resub from the new address. If you can no longer do this there is a solution if you use Eudora (an e-mail program that is available free at sharewar sites): from the Tools menu select "Options" and then select set-up for "Sending Mail": you can substitute your old address here and send the unsub message. The most frequent problem with subscriptions is bounced messages. If your system is often down or if you have a low disk quota, Poetics messages may get bounced. Please try avoid having messages from the list returned to us. If the problem is low disk quota, you may wish to request an increase from your system administrator. (You may wish to argue that this subscription is part of your scholarly communication!) You may also wish to consider obtaining a commercial account. ____________________________________________________________________ 3. Who's Subscribed To see who is subscribed to Poetics, send an e-mail message to listserv@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu; leave the "Subject" line of the e-mail message blank. In the body of your e-mail message type: review poetics You will be sent within a reasonable amount of time (by return e-mail) a rather long list containing the names and e-mail addresses of Poetics subscribers. This list is alphabetized by server not name. ____________________________________________________________________ 4. Digest Option The Poetics List can send a large number of individual messages to your account to each day! If you would prefer to receive ONE message each day, which would include all messages posted to the list for that day, you can use the digest option. Send this one-line message (no subject line) to listserv@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu set poetics digest NOTE:!! Send this message to "listserv" not to Poetics or as a reply to this message!! You can switch back to individual messages by sending this messagage: set poetics mail ____________________________________________________________________ 5. When you'll be away Do not leave your Poetics subscription "active" if you are going to be away for any extended period of time! Your account may become flooded and you may lose not only Poetics messages but other important mail. You can temporarily turn off your Poetics subscription by sending a message: You can temporarily turn off your mail by sending a message: set poetics nomail & turn it on again with: set poetics mail When you return you can check or download missed postings from the Poetics archive. (See 7 below.) ____________________________________________________________________ 6. What is the Electronic Poetry Center? our URL is http://wings.buffalo.edu/epc The mission of this World-Wide Web based electronic poetry center is to serve as a hypertextual gateway to the extraordinary range of activity in formally innovative writing in the United States and the world. The Center provides access to the burgeoning number of electronic resources in the new poetries including RIF/T and other electronic poetry journals, the POETICS List archives, an AUTHOR library of electronic poetic texts, and direct connections to numerous related electronic RESOURCES. The Center also provides information about contemporary print little magazines and SMALL PRESSES engaged in poetry and poetics. And we have an extensive collection of soundfiles of poets' reading their work, as well as the archive of LINEbreak, the radio interview series. The EPC is directed by Loss Pequen~o Glazier. ____________________________________________________________________ 7. Poetics Archives via EPC Go to the EPC and select Poetics from the opening screen. Follow the links to Poetics Archives. You may browse the archives by month and year or search them for specific information. Your interface will allow you to print or download any of these files. Or set your browser to go directly to: http://wings.buffalo.edu/epc/poetics/archive ____________________________________________________________________ 8. Publishers & Editors Read This! PUBLISHERS & EDITORS: Our listings of poetry and poetics information is open and available to you. We are trying to make access to printed publications as easy as possible to our users and ENCOURAGE you to participate! Send a list of your press/publications to lolpoet@acsu.buffalo.edu with the words EPC Press Listing in the subject line. You may also send materials on disk. (Write file name, word processing program, and Mac or PC on disk.) Send an e-mail message to the address above to obtain a mailing address to which to send your disk. Though files marked up with html are our goal, ascii files are perfectly acceptable. If your word processor ill save files in Rich Text Format (.rtf) this is also highly desirable Send us extended information on new publications (including any back cover copy and sample poems) as well as complete catalogs/backlists (including excerpts from reviews, sample poems, etc.). Be sure to include full information for ordering--including prices and addresses and phone numbers both of the press and any distributors. Initially, you might want to send short anouncements of new publications directly to the Poetics list as subscribers do not always (or ever) check the EPC; in your message please include full information for ordering. If you have a fuller listing at EPC, you might also mention that in any Poetics posts. Some announcements circulated through Poetics and the EPC have received a noticeable responses; it may be an effective way to promote your publication and we are glad to facilitate information about interesting publications. ____________________________________________________________________ END OF POETICS LIST WELCOME ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 10:56:35 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joel Kuszai Subject: e-mail address sorry to blast this over the public channel but my address is now kuszai@acsu.buffalo.edu I've been off the list for a couple weeks and have been spying it in a digest form. At some point I'll post my maine response and also some more junk mail about Meow Press summer publications. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 13:30:41 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Wallace Subject: rod smith and john cage Hey Rod: Thanks for the clarification on my earlier remarks relative to John Cage and his feelings towards the musical traditions he leaves behind. But your post leaves me with a question I'd like to hear more from you about. When you say that "at a certain point, Cage simply didn't need that tradition anymore" (I'm paraphrasing), are you implying that he left it behind without antagonism, just decided it could be ignored? Or, if he continued to have reactions towards it, what were the nature of those reactions? Loathe is, I can see, probably too strong. But what, from your understanding, would be the proper way to characterize his feelings towards the tradition he leaves behind? There's something about your post that seems almost to be characterizing his reaction as strangely unemotional--i.e., oh there it is, I don't need that, it really doesn't bother me and let's talk about something else. That seems to me a little bit hard to believe--you're trained in a whole tradition, work in it for many years, and then one day decide it's not significant, and leave it without much feeling either way? I'm just curious as to whether you could try to characterize more fully his reaction to what he left behind. mark /----------------------------------------------------------------------------\ | | | mdw@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu "I have not yet begun | | to go to extremes" | | GWU: | | http://gwis2.circ.gwu.edu/~mdw | | EPC: | | http://wings.buffalo.edu/epc/authors/wallace | |____________________________________________________________________________| ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 13:45:48 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Wallace Subject: ghost stories Dear Dodie (and whoever else): Ever read anything by the 19th century British ghost story writer Mrs. Riddell? After seeing bits and pieces of her work, I finally tracked down two weeks ago a complete collection of her ghost stories that had been published by Dover about twenty years ago, and has long been out of print. She wrote several supernatural novels also--the one I'm most familiar with is THE UNINHABITED HOUSE, which I also read in a Dover edition now out of print. Her stories are not always fully developed--she wrote too fast, for money, according to E.F. Bleier--but they have some genuinely frightening moments, and she does quite a good job with character. A real strangeness runs through the best of what she does. Sheridan Le Fanu's novels are almost all long out of print, with the exception of UNCLE SILAS and two collections of his stories, all still in print I think from Dover. There's a 1977 hardback series from Arno that republished all of his novels, many their first re-publication since they originally appeared in the 1860s and 70s. The Arno can be hard to find, but interlibrary loan will usually pick them up somewhere. I myself spent several days one summer at the Library of Congress tracking down the original serial publications of Le Fanu's novels in various British periodicals, including the Dublin Magazine which Le Fanu himself ran for many years. I even discovered several stories from the 1840s that had never been republished since their original serialization, including several early versions of stories he would later turn into novels. My own sense has always been that of all the British ghost story writers, Le Fanu's novels are most in tune to the economic realities of 19th century British life. His characterizations of women are certainly often problematic, tending towards views of them as sweet and moral but fairly helpless, although there are significant exceptions, like the struggle between strong mother and daughter characters in THE ROSE AND THE KEY, which also features one of the scariest 19th century descriptions of an insane asylum that I'm aware of. mark /----------------------------------------------------------------------------\ | | | mdw@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu "I have not yet begun | | to go to extremes" | | GWU: | | http://gwis2.circ.gwu.edu/~mdw | | EPC: | | http://wings.buffalo.edu/epc/authors/wallace | |____________________________________________________________________________| ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 12:54:10 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: felicitous misprisions along the lines of shrinking velvets, the liner notes to Alemayehu Eshete("the james brown of ethiopia")'s Addis Ababa album refers to his heart-rendering ballads. render my heart like butter, baby, and i'll lard you with poems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 15:22:01 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Resent-From: Keith Tuma Comments: Originally-From: von6@midway.uchicago.edu (robert von hallberg) From: Keith Tuma Subject: Orono Several days ago I forwarded to Robert von Hallberg the comments made about his comments in Orono. I did so because I think it's important that people be allowed to respond to the charges made against them in what is after all a public forum, however circumscribed. I now forward von Hallberg's response to Aldon, having been asked to do so. I expect that conversation will ensue. Unfortunately, I'm leaving for the East Coast for a week on Sunday, and thus will be unable either to participate or to forward messages. Perhaps someone might take care of the latter for me. best to all, Keith Tuma ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >To: anielsen@email.sjsu.edu >From: von6@midway.uchicago.edu (robert von hallberg) >Subject: Orono >Cc: >Bcc: >X-Attachments: > >5 July 1996 Friday. > >Dear Aldon, > > Keith Tuma was good enough to forward to me your remarks about my contribution to your Langston Hughes, Bob Kaufman session at Orono; I might otherwise not have known of your representation of what I said to that gathering. I want to reply first to you directly, then I will post this so that others can consider the matter further, if they wish. > > Why is it that after all the rhetorical and intellectual training that people like you and I receive, we tend so often to want to reduce intellectual differences until our opponents seem wholly negligible? I have felt this pull in my own writing, and friends have stopped me and reminded me that the issues that divide people are not ridiculous, that it is important to get right what our adversaries are advocating or claiming. And of course I recognize this pull in your representation of my remarks at your Hughes/Kaufman panel. > 1. I did not claim that Hughes and Kaufman are "bad" poets, as you allege. This is simply a factual error on your part. I claimed instead that our job as literary scholars is to sort out the best writings of the poets we claim are being wrongly neglected and present them along with principled evaluative arguments to such audiences as the one gathered at Orono. > 2. This relates to your quotation of my saying in an accusatory manner that you and the other panelists were "doing the sociology thing." My objection is not at all to the use of sociology or sociological analysis in literary history or criticism; my own work is heavily indebted--as is clear to my readers--to the work of sociologists of American intellectuals, and my most recent book is a sociology-of-art study of East German intellectuals. My objection was then explicitly to simplistic sociology. The example I gave in Orono, you will recall, was not your remark about the number of papers on minority poets, but instead the listing by the first presenter, whose name is not before me now, of the various postwar anthologies and the tabulation of the number of African American poets included: "One" or "none" were the scores repeated a number of times. This sort of sociological analysis is limited because it does not get beyond the obvious point that is not in contention: that African American writers have consistently been poorly represented in mainstream anthologies. I think the word I used to characterize this analysis was "simple." I said that as an intellectual endeavor, this sort of analysis is superficial and not worth doing. > Once one observes, before an audience of teachers and scholars of contemporary poetry, that African American poets are not being discussed enough in conferences, not being published often enough in anthologies, etc., one should go on to the next step: the making of an argument for the teaching, study, or appreciation of particular poems by particular poets. If one does not take that step, one implies that the teaching, study, or appreciation of one African American poet is as desirable as the teaching, study, or appreciation of another. That is, one is refusing to take the poets with full seriousness by not examining their best work in detail. And, yes, at this point I do feel that identity politics misleads literary critics into thinking that any form of commentary on underrepresented poets is itself a good thing and often even a sufficient thing. These poets existed; they were rarely published in mainstream anthologies; document their existence in the future--this is an elementary sort of literary critical project. The training that we have as literary scholars and critics enables us to go much further in the intellectual analysis of poetry. Why should we be timid about subjecting poems by Hughes, for example, to the most rigorous critical scrutiny of which we are capable? > 3. One answer that is commonly given to this question is that the methods of critical analysis that are commonly used to scrutinize poems by Eliot, say, or Pound, or Moore, will not get at the full achievement of African American poets. That may be the case. If so, we need to know exactly where it is so, at what point in analysis the critical categories fail to serve the poets well. That is very interesting and worth knowing in detail, through patient analysis. Once we see just where the critical categories come up empty we can begin to define alternative categories that will serve the poetry better and we can theorize the significance of these categories. > I did claim, apropos of your misrepresentation of my statements (cited above as item #1) that the poems quoted by Hughes in the first paper were not on the face of things impressive, and that the analysis presented there did not take them beyond the face of things. > I will relate an anecdote here. Later in the day, after your session, another conferee told me that I just did not understand Hughes. She told me that her husband and she had known him and came to learn of his craftiness. Her husband once remarked to Hughes that he would love to hear Hughes talk about the blues, because he was sure that Hughes would have a different understanding of them than he did (being white). Hughes said, yes, they would have to have that talk, and that maybe they could talk about Schubert at the same time, because Hughes would like to know the white man's understanding of Schubert too. The woman telling me the story said that she wasn't sure her husband took the point of the rebuke right away. Then she told me that what I failed to understand about Hughes was that he was writing for an uneducated, large [black] urban audience, and that of course poems addressed to such an audience would not sound impressive to me. Her point was that Hughes was crafty, knew what he was doing, etc. I asked her if she didn't see any similarity between her claim about Hughes writing simply for simple folk and her husband's presumption that black people have a distinct, circumscribed view of music. She saw no resemblance there. But I think that she and her husband were condescending to Hughes in both instances. Not to subject Hughes's poetry to close analysis and developed evaluative argumentation is to refuse to give him as an artist just what we are trained to give to the work of Eliot, Pound, Wilbur, Lowell, Bishop, Moore, et al. > 4. After you misrepresent me by alleging that I said Hughes and Kaufman were "bad poets," you say: "Now ... this is pretty old hat to those of us who have been studying issues of race and ethnicity in literature longer than two weeks." > Let me say forthrightly here what I said to you in Orono: I benefited from your book on intertextuality and race, esp. (as I told you) from your discussion of Robert Hayden's "Middle Passage." You have been working for years on race and ethnicity, and my paper on Hayden at the conference is the very beginning of my effort now to write about African American poetry, as I mentioned. I am a novice, maybe even an interloper, in your field, and I respect the feelings that are expressed by your remark about the two weeks. You are a professional in this area and you are entitled to feel a somewhat proprietary sense toward this academic specialty, African American poetry. > My own view is that outsiders sometimes manage to bring something distinctive and unsettling to academic specialties. For this reason, I repeatedly argue that the writing of poet-critics is of special value to us now that literary scholarship has become thoroughly dominated by academic criticism and interpretation, and I hope that my engagement as an American with East German literary and intellectual culture will be off the beaten track of the straight disciplines that have custodial and proprietary claims to the study of East German literature and culture. > But it is not the case that my advocacy of evaluative argument and close analysis of particular poems is properly characterized as the "strategies of the oldest of new critics," as you claim. The authority of New Criticism has been discredited, but not all close analysis and not all sustained evaluative argument have been discredited at the same time. I am not advocating that the arguments for the poets you admire be conducted by New Critical criteria--analysis of irony, tone, imagery, etc. My claim is rather that advocates of poets excluded from anthologies need to put on the table the evidence of poetic achievement and argue, in whatever terms work best for those poems, for the understanding and evaluation of those poems. Not to do this when an audience is gathered that can make a difference to the dissemination of such poets seems to me intellectually timid. > > Yours, > > Robert von Hallberg > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 15:11:50 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Judy Roitman Subject: Another ethnic group If one were so foolish as to try to describe contemporary Native American poetries briefly, what would that description be, and what names would be attached? No, I'm not giving a course, and do have other sources (Haskell Indian Nations University is down the road a short piece), but I'm curious what members of this list would say. Thanks. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Judy Roitman | "Glad to have Math, University of Kansas | these copies of things Lawrence, KS 66045 | after a while." 913-864-4630 | Larry Eigner, 1927-1996 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 16:20:45 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gwyn McVay Subject: Re: felicitous misprisions In-Reply-To: <31dd56c136af012@mhub2.tc.umn.edu> If they haven't changed the dessert menu at the Westin William Penn in Pittsburgh, see it; it was obviously compiled by a non-native speaker, and is chock full of inexplicabilities. The banana something I ordered was described as being "attacked by a banana liquoir." In the heading to "cappuccino mousse," someone had struck an accidental carriage return, so it now read: Cappucci no mousse which may be a found pome? Gwyn ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 15:54:27 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Orono hi keith! did you also let aldon know you were going to forward his remarks? it is not at all clear to me that this list is a "public" one, and i have had the experience of having a formal grievance brought against me by members of another list i made reference to on poetix, believing that, tho this is to be sure a conversation, it is a "private" conversation. this is not a rebuke but a reminder --to all, in fact --that there is some uncertainty about exactly what the boundaries of the list in fact are. i guess it's good to assume, as you do, that anything CAN be made public, and that anyone can reach our files thru EPC after all, anyway. i'll respond to von h at some length later. as i've said, i have had very good interactions with him and consider him a warm, supportive colleague, but i see sometimes the adoption of a persona --the LIBERAL conscience of "what we do" --and the invocation of categories many of us have come to dismiss (he would argue that we're throwing the baby out w/ the proverbial bathwater) --can be startling. he has, tho, written one of the best (and first) of what i would consider cultural studies/poetry texts around, choosing to argue --again, not an argument i make, but a worthy one --that poetry has played a very centrist role in consolidating the American empire. that he does not go on to criticise this role is where i part with him, but i think it important that someone is making an argument different from the common assumption that poetry is necessarily a vanguard discourse. his and my work could be seen in point-counterpoint dialogue, in fact, and i think it matters a lot who it is we choose to study to buttress our respective positions. i do not, for example, think that qualitative evaluation is why we study poetry, or that we should only teach what is the "best." the kaufman poem i discussed ("bagel shop jazz") has, to be sure, some real clinkers in in ("doomed to see their coffee dreams/ Crushed on the floors of time" --for example --i like coffee dreams but anything "of time" sounds soupy to me) but it illustrates a "scene" that is rich, complex, and sociologically compelling to me, which is why i wrote about it. i agree that listing anthologies and saying how many Black poets were or weren't included is not sufficient as analysis, but i also don't think it can be said often enough as a starting point. i have seen some essays on hughes, for example, that don't attend to his social location and his circumstances, that completely fall flat and end up sounding very bad-faith and just plain inaccurate; for example, rather than looking on his importation of popular Black culture into print-"Poetry" as an intellectual/aesthetic achievement, it was seen as an example how skillfully he "marketed" himself. the critic was clearly trying to get beyond what s/he considered a simplistic boosterish analysis, but the result was, to my mind, disastrous. i think it is possible to be both analytically sophisticated AND advocacy-oriented, as Aldon's, CLR James's, Stuart Hall's, and George Lipsitz's work show. I think also the o'hara/race sessions instanciated this blend of skillful critique/analysis and sympathy. i do think that marjorie has a point about getting rid of plenary sessions, because it sets up a class system, so that Bob can give what he himself describes as a "neophyte" effort at a plenary, while Aldon, to whose work he graciously describes himself as indebted, is in the position of appearing to take on a "heavy" from the sidelines, as it were. well i guess I have responded to Bob's post here/now after all. In message <199607051829.NAA17860@midway.uchicago.edu> UB Poetics discussion group writes: > Several days ago I forwarded to Robert von Hallberg the comments made about > his comments in Orono. I did so because I think it's important that people > be > allowed to respond to the charges made against them in what is after all a > public forum, however circumscribed. I now forward von Hallberg's response > to > Aldon, having been asked to do so. > > I expect that conversation will ensue. Unfortunately, I'm leaving for the > East Coast for a week on Sunday, and thus will be unable either to > participate > or to forward messages. Perhaps someone might take care of the latter for > me. > > best to all, > Keith Tuma > ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- > >To: anielsen@email.sjsu.edu > >From: von6@midway.uchicago.edu (robert von hallberg) > >Subject: Orono > >Cc: > >Bcc: > >X-Attachments: > > > >5 July 1996 Friday. > > > >Dear Aldon, > > > > Keith Tuma was good enough to forward to me your remarks about my > contribution to your Langston Hughes, Bob Kaufman session at Orono; I might > otherwise not have known of your representation of what I said to that > gathering. I want to reply first to you directly, then I will post this so > that others can consider the matter further, if they wish. > > > > Why is it that after all the rhetorical and intellectual training that > people like you and I receive, we tend so often to want to reduce > intellectual differences until our opponents seem wholly negligible? I have > felt this pull in my own writing, and friends have stopped me and reminded > me that the issues that divide people are not ridiculous, that it is > important to get right what our adversaries are advocating or claiming. And > of course I recognize this pull in your representation of my remarks at your > Hughes/Kaufman panel. > > 1. I did not claim that Hughes and Kaufman are "bad" poets, as you > allege. This is simply a factual error on your part. I claimed instead > that our job as literary scholars is to sort out the best writings of the > poets we claim are being wrongly neglected and present them along with > principled evaluative arguments to such audiences as the one gathered at > Orono. > > 2. This relates to your quotation of my saying in an accusatory manner > that you and the other panelists were "doing the sociology thing." My > objection is not at all to the use of sociology or sociological analysis in > literary history or criticism; my own work is heavily indebted--as is clear > to my readers--to the work of sociologists of American intellectuals, and my > most recent book is a sociology-of-art study of East German intellectuals. > My objection was then explicitly to simplistic sociology. The example I > gave in Orono, you will recall, was not your remark about the number of > papers on minority poets, but instead the listing by the first presenter, > whose name is not before me now, of the various postwar anthologies and the > tabulation of the number of African American poets included: "One" or "none" > were the scores repeated a number of times. This sort of sociological > analysis is limited because it does not get beyond the obvious point that is > not in contention: that African American writers have consistently been > poorly represented in mainstream anthologies. I think the word I used to > characterize this analysis was "simple." I said that as an intellectual > endeavor, this sort of analysis is superficial and not worth doing. > > Once one observes, before an audience of teachers and scholars of > contemporary poetry, that African American poets are not being discussed > enough in conferences, not being published often enough in anthologies, > etc., one should go on to the next step: the making of an argument for the > teaching, study, or appreciation of particular poems by particular poets. > If one does not take that step, one implies that the teaching, study, or > appreciation of one African American poet is as desirable as the teaching, > study, or appreciation of another. That is, one is refusing to take the > poets with full seriousness by not examining their best work in detail. > And, yes, at this point I do feel that identity politics misleads literary > critics into thinking that any form of commentary on underrepresented poets > is itself a good thing and often even a sufficient thing. These poets > existed; they were rarely published in mainstream anthologies; document > their existence in the future--this is an elementary sort of literary > critical project. The training that we have as literary scholars and > critics enables us to go much further in the intellectual analysis of > poetry. Why should we be timid about subjecting poems by Hughes, for > example, to the most rigorous critical scrutiny of which we are capable? > > 3. One answer that is commonly given to this question is that the > methods of critical analysis that are commonly used to scrutinize poems by > Eliot, say, or Pound, or Moore, will not get at the full achievement of > African American poets. That may be the case. If so, we need to know > exactly where it is so, at what point in analysis the critical categories > fail to serve the poets well. That is very interesting and worth knowing in > detail, through patient analysis. Once we see just where the critical > categories come up empty we can begin to define alternative categories that > will serve the poetry better and we can theorize the significance of these > categories. > > I did claim, apropos of your misrepresentation of my statements (cited > above as item #1) that the poems quoted by Hughes in the first paper were > not on the face of things impressive, and that the analysis presented there > did not take them beyond the face of things. > > I will relate an anecdote here. Later in the day, after your session, > another conferee told me that I just did not understand Hughes. She told me > that her husband and she had known him and came to learn of his craftiness. > Her husband once remarked to Hughes that he would love to hear Hughes talk > about the blues, because he was sure that Hughes would have a different > understanding of them than he did (being white). Hughes said, yes, they > would have to have that talk, and that maybe they could talk about Schubert > at the same time, because Hughes would like to know the white man's > understanding of Schubert too. The woman telling me the story said that she > wasn't sure her husband took the point of the rebuke right away. Then she > told me that what I failed to understand about Hughes was that he was > writing for an uneducated, large [black] urban audience, and that of course > poems addressed to such an audience would not sound impressive to me. Her > point was that Hughes was crafty, knew what he was doing, etc. I asked her > if she didn't see any similarity between her claim about Hughes writing > simply for simple folk and her husband's presumption that black people have > a distinct, circumscribed view of music. She saw no resemblance there. But > I think that she and her husband were condescending to Hughes in both > instances. Not to subject Hughes's poetry to close analysis and developed > evaluative argumentation is to refuse to give him as an artist just what we > are trained to give to the work of Eliot, Pound, Wilbur, Lowell, Bishop, > Moore, et al. > > 4. After you misrepresent me by alleging that I said Hughes and Kaufman > were "bad poets," you say: "Now ... this is pretty old hat to those of us > who have been studying issues of race and ethnicity in literature longer > than two weeks." > > Let me say forthrightly here what I said to you in Orono: I benefited > from your book on intertextuality and race, esp. (as I told you) from your > discussion of Robert Hayden's "Middle Passage." You have been working for > years on race and ethnicity, and my paper on Hayden at the conference is the > very beginning of my effort now to write about African American poetry, as I > mentioned. I am a novice, maybe even an interloper, in your field, and I > respect the feelings that are expressed by your remark about the two weeks. > You are a professional in this area and you are entitled to feel a somewhat > proprietary sense toward this academic specialty, African American poetry. > > My own view is that outsiders sometimes manage to bring something > distinctive and unsettling to academic specialties. For this reason, I > repeatedly argue that the writing of poet-critics is of special value to us > now that literary scholarship has become thoroughly dominated by academic > criticism and interpretation, and I hope that my engagement as an American > with East German literary and intellectual culture will be off the beaten > track of the straight disciplines that have custodial and proprietary claims > to the study of East German literature and culture. > > But it is not the case that my advocacy of evaluative argument and close > analysis of particular poems is properly characterized as the "strategies of > the oldest of new critics," as you claim. The authority of New Criticism > has been discredited, but not all close analysis and not all sustained > evaluative argument have been discredited at the same time. I am not > advocating that the arguments for the poets you admire be conducted by New > Critical criteria--analysis of irony, tone, imagery, etc. My claim is > rather that advocates of poets excluded from anthologies need to put on the > table the evidence of poetic achievement and argue, in whatever terms work > best for those poems, for the understanding and evaluation of those poems. > Not to do this when an audience is gathered that can make a difference to > the dissemination of such poets seems to me intellectually timid. > > > > Yours, > > > > Robert von > Hallberg > > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 17:43:04 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Keith Tuma Subject: Re: Orono In-Reply-To: Message of Fri, 5 Jul 1996 15:54:27 -0500 from No, Maria, I hadn't asked Aldon if I might forward his comments. This is perhaps a lapse in list ethics on my part--if so, I apologize. Like many on this list, I've learned from Aldon, had useful exchanges private and otherwise with him, find him one of the best, friendliest folks in po-biz. So, sorry, Aldon, if you mind. But I expected that the exchange would be productive, and surely wouldn't send just any remark or a remark by just anybody (somebody I didn't or wouldn't necessarily expect to be willing to take on a particular conversation) to a person not a part of the list. And I would never send on a remark of the sort you allude to re your own situation. I know von Hallberg well-enough to know that he would respond to Aldon's commentary in a manner which would raise questions. What happened to you is regretful. Nevertheless, I do think that some clarification of the parameters of our conversation here is needed--or perhaps I've missed them. The EPC archives are of course available to all interested computer users, and increasingly comments made on poetics are cited in various print venues. (A poetics note of mine, for instance, is cited in Jed Rasula's book; and I have no problem with that, though I was not asked for permission and I'm betting neither was the listowner.) I guess I take it that "private" applies first and foremost to the matter of informing people of the existence of this list. And that there, as elsewhere, some common sense and taste must factor into the decision to "spread the word." Beyond that I'm not sure how this list can be altogether private, but if i'm missing something I'll be happy to be clued in. all best, keith ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 16:16:58 PDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: William Marsh - 3809183 Subject: Re: stochastic I'm hunting down references to the term "stochastic" and wonder if anyone out there has come across it recently, especially in specific reference to writing/poetics. I came across it myself in an essay by Alan Davies, who evidently got it from Gregory Bateson's _Mind and Nature_ -- a stochastic sequence is one which "combines a random component with a selective process so that only certain outcomes of the random are allowed to endure." Has anyone seen the term defined/applied more extensively? Appreciate the help. Bill Marsh wmarsh@nunic.nu.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 17:55:44 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Herb Levy Subject: Re: stochastic In the mid & late sixties, the composers Iannis Xenakis & James Tenney used the term stochastic to describe works in which they set up a range of parameters about pitch, rhythm, relative density, etc. and then allowed a computer program to select the details. In this way they could control the overall texture of a piece, while allowing various random processes to fill in the details. The term stochastic comes from a Greek root that has (I think) something to do with arrows or archery. The model here is that an archer tries to get a bull's eye each time, and over time, depending on the archer's skill, most arrows will be near the center of a target, but the actual trajectory & landing point of any specific arrow is not as clearly defined. I don't know if either Tenney or Xenakis coined the expression, or if it had previous use in the fields of mathematics, cybernetics, etc. Bests H >I'm hunting down references to the term "stochastic" and wonder if anyone >out there has come across it recently, especially in specific reference to >writing/poetics. I came across it myself in an essay by Alan Davies, who >evidently got it from Gregory Bateson's _Mind and Nature_ -- a stochastic >sequence is one which "combines a random component with a selective >process so that only certain outcomes of the random are allowed to >endure." > >Has anyone seen the term defined/applied more extensively? > >Appreciate the help. > >Bill Marsh >wmarsh@nunic.nu.edu Herb Levy herb@eskimo.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 20:59:58 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Christina Fairbank Chirot Subject: Re: stochastic In-Reply-To: According to the OED, stochastic comes from the Greek, means "to aim at a mark, guess". "Pertaining to conjecture" The following from Ilya Prigine and Isabelle Stenger's Order Out of Chaos makes a conjunction of poetics with the stochastic--and if one thinks in terms of the relation of cave paintings, rock art and heiroglyphs to poetics in terms of "objects" and "sounds"and "images" in/out of time is most useful: It is hard to avoid the impression that the distinction between what exists in time, what is irreversible, and, on the other hand, what is outside of time, what is eternal, is at the origin of human symbolic activity. Indeed, one aspect of the transformation of a natural object, a stone, to an object of art is closely related to our impact on matter. Artistic activity breaks the temporal symmetry of the object. It leaves a mark that translates our temporal dissymmetry into the temporal dissymmetry of the object. Out of the reversible, nearly cyclic noise level in which we live arises music that is both stochastic and time-oriented (312). Highly recommend this book & appreciate connection made to music in previous note-- dave baptiste chirot (susan howe: "articulation of sound forms in time"--from schoenberg--but improvisation in Free jazz--check out New York Contemporary Five lps--Archie Shepp and Don Cherry--way to approach understanding chance in relation to form can be quite different when thought of in terms of collective improvisation--and so of "harmony of the spheres"--in relation to "chaos")(Don Cherry wrote "Relativity Suite") ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 23:23:47 -0400 Reply-To: Robert Drake Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert Drake Subject: Re: Stochastics Stochastic Languages A stochastic language is a collection of strings with a probability distribution defined on the set of strings... For a stochastic language it is required that the sum of weights for all strings equals 1, making p a probability function. Stochastic languages with strings which has no upper limit on their length constitute a special situation since the strings will have a very small weight... For infinite languages it is not feasible to check whether the sum of probabilities equals one, simply by adding the weights, since there will always be strings of greater length representing a small part of the total probability mass. In such a situation it is required to obtain a model for the generation process and perform a test equivalent to evaluate its behaviour in the limit as the processing time goes to infinity... Stochastic languages are typically specified by a stochastic automaton or a stochastic grammar. For a given stochastic language there is a one-to-one correspondence between the strings accepted by the automaton and the strings generated by the grammar meaning that both models can accept/generate the same strings with identical probabilities. Any string in a language can be modelled correctly concerning its syntactic structure by the corresponding automata/grammar but probabilities might be assigned to a string in such a way that none of the models can reproduce strings with the correct probability... Theorem: There are stochastic languages for which no stochastic grammar or stochastic automata can reproduce the correct probability for all the individual strings in the language. There are several explanations for this. As stated [through the pumping lemmas loops...] the derivation process can result in strings differing from each other only on the number of repetitions of a substring. The probabilities of such strings will be dependent on each other, and they therefore cannot take any arbitrarily probability. Furthermore a string is the result of a sequence of derivation steps, each with a predefined fixed probability. Therefore the probabilities assigned to generated strings, come from a discrete set of probabilities, and this fact can conflict with the fact that a string ... can be assigned any value... Due to the inference mechanism creating the grammar the problem... is of no real concern when using stochastic languages for syntactic pattern recognition, and most other applications. The grammar is typically inferred from a finite set of learning samples, in such a way that it is capable of generating a set of strings of greater cardinality (possible countable infinite) having identical syntactic structure. In such a situation it is not relevant to maintain the exact probability of individual strings in the learning samples. after Jesper Gravgaard Jensen for automaton read "poet" for grammar read "poetics" for string read "poem" for stochastic language read "canon" ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 23:20:33 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Orono In message UB Poetics discussion group writes: > No, Maria, I hadn't asked Aldon if I might forward his comments. This is > perhaps a lapse in list ethics on my part--if so, I apologize. Like many on > this list, I've learned from Aldon, had useful exchanges private and >...etc okay keith, cool. good points all. i didn't realize we cd be cited in books w/out our permission. i'll have to start watching my tongue, my back, my mind and my fingers. bests, maria d ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 23:28:20 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: stochastic i heard the term "stochastic"" used by Julie Patton in her intro to her and Janice Loeb (sp?)'s performance at the Bob Kaufman celebration at the st mark's poetry projecct in april. she gave me the impression that there was an element of sound involved --what you mention below applied specifically to combining sounds. she and janice l read a kaufman poem --sang it, improvised it, playing off each other, simultaneously AND alternating. it was quite wonderfl and i wrote down the word "stochastic" as a result.--md In message <199607052316.QAA29757@nunic.nu.edu> UB Poetics discussion group writes: > I'm hunting down references to the term "stochastic" and wonder if anyone > out there has come across it recently, especially in specific reference to > writing/poetics. I came across it myself in an essay by Alan Davies, who > evidently got it from Gregory Bateson's _Mind and Nature_ -- a stochastic > sequence is one which "combines a random component with a selective > process so that only certain outcomes of the random are allowed to > endure." > > Has anyone seen the term defined/applied more extensively? > > Appreciate the help. > > Bill Marsh > wmarsh@nunic.nu.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 22:33:48 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "filch@pobox.com" Subject: agitprop defined / applied combines a random component with a selective process so that only certain outcomes of the random are allowed to endure stochastic a mark that translates our temporal dissymmetry into the temporal dissymmetry of the object (possible countable infinite) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 08:40:28 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Paul Naylor Subject: The Disappeared SEND in%"poetics@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu" in%"poetics@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu" This is a somewhat late response to the comments about the "disappearance" of Irby, Enslin, and Tarn. For those interested in their recent work, you should check out Lee Chapman's journal, _First Intensity_. All three of those writers serve as editorial correspondents (along with Michael Boughn, Patrick Doud, Forrest Gander, John Moritz, Joe Napora, Susan Smith Nash, and Spencer Selby). Subscriptions are $17 for two issues, and you can contact Lee at P.O. Box 140713, Staten Island, New York, 10314-0713. While I'm in the plugging mode, the new issue of _River City_ is out and about. The special topic this time is "The Caribbean: South of the South." Contents include a beautiful address by Kamau Brathwaite, "Note(s) on Caribbean Cosmology," new poems and an interview with M. Nourbese Philip, Wilson Harris' "Apprenticeship to the Furies," Aldon Nielsen on C.L.R. James, a section on women poets in the Caribbean. Also, Nathaniel Mackey on Miles Davis, and poems and fiction by Hank Lazer, Aldon Nielsen, Omar Castaneda, Claire Harris (a stunning long poem entitled "WOEMAN WOMB PRISONED"), etc. _River City_ sells for $7 per issue or $12 for two. Make checks out to The University of Memphis and send to: _River City_ Department of English 463 Patterson Bldg. The University of Memphis Memphis, TN 38152 I'd also like to announce that our next issue, Winter 1997, will focus on the topic of Engendering Culture; submissions on that topic -- whether poetry, fiction, critical writing -- can be sent to the same address. Paul Naylor SEND in%"poetics@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu" in%"poetics@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu" ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 10:21:27 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Burt Kimmelman -@NJIT" Subject: New Magazine I have been sent a really lovely and rich magazine called "Object Lesson." How to describe it? It is multi-media pre-electronic: art and all kinds of verse (multi-textual I guess) including many insets of smaller "books" and envelopes full of all kinds of juicy things. The editor, Joshua Beckman, was put on to me by Alex Cigale, and some of you may know his terrific magazine Synaesthetic (based on the found art/poem concept). Beckman writes about his planned next issue: "the next issue will include essays on poetry machines. Everyting from Bob Brown's *Readies* to personal essays on typewriters and tape recorders [yes, believe or not, folks, Beckman does not have e-mail and one might guess from this above remark that he might not own a computer--but i urge you not to be put off by this!]. The idea being to awaken the notions of mechanics that are embedded in the creation of poetry and to broaden the definition of what a machine can be, especially to a writer. I want to have the essays on everything from 'the corporate machine' to 'the influencing machine', so that the idea of the typewriter and the author end up too confused to untangle. At the same time, I hope to have work that simply praises the different tools of the trade and inspires a curiosity towards the reader's poetry and poetry machines." Now, I would think that if you of, say, the Chris Funkhauserian persuasion, then you might want to think about sending Beckman something anyway. Send to: Joshua Saul Beckman, Editor OBJECT LESSON 630 Wickenden St. Providence, RI 02903 (401) 453 - 5146 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 09:43:22 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Alexander Subject: Re: Another ethnic group >If one were so foolish as to try to describe contemporary Native American >poetries briefly, what would that description be, and what names would be >attached? > >No, I'm not giving a course, and do have other sources (Haskell Indian >Nations University is down the road a short piece), but I'm curious what >members of this list would say. Mostly I wouldn't be so foolish. But one thing I would be careful about is that adjective "contemporary." For me, it would have to include works from the oral tradition, which are still living, therefore "contemporary." And many of these works are subject to contemporary variations. Too often (although I think this has changed somewhat in the last couple of decades) the oral traditions have been treated as past, as relics. In many cultures they are decidedly not so. Some of the primary work in this regard has been done by Larry Evers through the Sun Tracks series at the University of Arizona Press, and to my mind some of the very best of that is the work with Yaqui oral traditions Evers has done in collaboration with Felipe S. Molina, himself a Yaqui singer. But this is just one part of a huge story. good luck, charles ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 10:08:37 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: Orono ok, i guess i have to add something here, grinch-like, that is *not* intended primarily as a rebuke to anybody per se, but is essentially a comment about how this list stuff works: i don't like it that keith had to forward comments to the list from robert von hallberg... that is, i'm sure keith was willing to do so, and it's a settled issue as i see it at the level of propriety... but i'm talking instead about relative visibilities, and about how lists work... and my carp here has to do, for one, with why robert von hallberg (and others who occupy a visible, even 'senior' position in our profession) are generally not to be found in these regions... sure, we on poetics enjoy the presence of some folks who are well-known---kudos to these latter for their willingness to mix it up (i won't name names for fear of not naming all the names)... but for some years now, i've noticed the online absence of some of the better-known academics, all of whom have done quite well in print, many of whom are continually referenced in online discussion... that is, part of the explanation has always seemed to me to have to do with why bother? logic... or i don't have the time logic b/c i'm already getting published in print logic... or the real debate is over there logic so (again) why bother? logic... things are changing, to be sure... yet i'd still argue this absence is felt... in short: though there is, as has been discussed, nothing at all wrong with forwarding comments hither & thither (with due allowance made for variations between public and private and permissions pertaining thereto), i would nonetheless like to go on record here (and anybody who wishes to, btw, can quote anything i say anywhere, but please do let me know if you do so) as saying that we need not only more access for folks without access, but we need our senior folks, or at least our more visible folks, to take the plunge... to wit: i'd like to think that robert von hallberg is now subbed to poetics... and if he doesn't know how to, i'd like to think he's asking somebody... b/c i don't think his outsider-insider status (at this moment, anyway, wrt this list) is a good place from which to enter into discussion with this network community, or one of its members... he can of course, like all of us, unsub at any time... but it's fair to ask him, and others, to sub to the list if they'd like to be part of the discussion (assuming they have the technical capabilities to do so)... otherwise, i'm left feeling as though i'm 'witnessing' an exchange w/o really being invited to contribute to same (which is decidedly *not* what lurking is about, either), with one participant offering tidbits from over yonder someplace while he goes about his 'real' business... which is, i understand, not at all intended, but which is nonetheless one effect this sort of forwarding/distancing can produce... and since most on this list know just how talky i can be, most will understand me when i say that i'm feeling a bit uncomfortable at the moment... best, joe ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 14:15:12 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ward Tietz <100723.3166@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: A Humument Does anybody know of any criticism written on Tom Phillips' "A Humument"? Thanks, Ward Tietz ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 11:47:48 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Herb Levy Subject: Re: A Humument Comments: cc: 100723.3166@COMPUSERVE.COM Ward Tietz writes: >Does anybody know of any criticism written on Tom Phillips' "A Humument"? There was a very good special issue of the Canadian magazine Open Letters entitled "Between Poetry & Painting" that focused on Joe Tilson, Ian Tyson, & Tom Phillips. It was fourth series, #1&2, Summer 1978. This includes lots of good stuff: an interview by Kevin Powers (who interviewed each of the featured artists) & articles by Phillips, composer Gavin Bryars, David Bindman, Nicholas Zurbrugg, David Bindman, & others. There's also a piece in Heather McHugh's book of essays Broken English about the work. I'd love to know of any other things people know about too. Herb Levy herb@eskimo.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 15:15:34 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Howard Shoemaker Subject: age of speleological reproduction In-Reply-To: from "Herb Levy" at Jul 5, 96 05:55:44 pm I've just read an account in the latest Discover about some tablets that have just been found in caves near Beijing. Apparently, around 605 A.D. a Buddhist monk named Jingwan decided that the only way to save the the Buddhist scriptures from hostile Chinese emperors was to chisel them in stone. Over generations, the monks of the Yunju monastery carried out the project, bringing it to completion a millenium later, around 1644, having used 14,278 tablets. They hid the tablets in nine caves, and only the locals knew about them until recently, when a farmer showed them to Josef Guter, a German China specialist. Guter says: "The most important aspect of this discovery is that we have on stone the whole canon of Buddhism in 35 million Chinese characters written over 1,039, and that it has survived WW II and the Cultural Revolution. Its study will be in the hands of generations of men and women in many disciplines of cultural history." What a textual project! Fascinating to me along many lines, one of them being that it is probably the ultimate example of the potential for atom-based textual preservation--making words as *solid* as possible. At at the other extreme, one might undertake the bit-based strategem of digitizing a text and then *distributing* it as widely or carefully as possible, making it nearly immaterial but pervasive? And actually, that question is directly relevant: what will happen to the texts now? Paradoxically, as soon as they are discovered, as soon as they have readers, they are endangered... steve ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 15:22:48 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Howard Shoemaker Subject: Re: stochastic In-Reply-To: from "Christina Fairbank Chirot" at Jul 5, 96 08:59:58 pm Strangely, when i made my post about speleological reproduction, I hadn't yet read Christina's post below. Interesting synchronicity. I wonder if Clayton Eshleman has his tickets booked for Beijing yet? steve > > According to the OED, stochastic comes from the Greek, means "to > aim at a mark, guess". "Pertaining to conjecture" > The following from Ilya Prigine and Isabelle Stenger's Order Out > of Chaos makes a conjunction of poetics with the stochastic--and if > one thinks in terms of the relation of cave paintings, rock art and > heiroglyphs to poetics in terms of "objects" and "sounds"and "images" > in/out of time is most useful: > It is hard to avoid the impression that the distinction between > what exists in time, what is irreversible, and, on the other hand, what > is outside of time, what is eternal, is at the origin of human symbolic > activity. Indeed, one aspect of the transformation of a natural object, > a stone, to an object of art is closely related to our impact on matter. > Artistic activity breaks the temporal symmetry of the object. It leaves > a mark that translates our temporal dissymmetry into the temporal > dissymmetry of the object. Out of the reversible, nearly cyclic noise > level in which we live arises music that is both stochastic and > time-oriented (312). > Highly recommend this book & appreciate connection made to music > in previous note-- > dave baptiste chirot > (susan howe: "articulation of sound forms in time"--from > schoenberg--but improvisation in Free jazz--check out New York > Contemporary Five lps--Archie Shepp and Don Cherry--way to approach > understanding chance in relation to form can be quite different when > thought of in terms of collective improvisation--and so of "harmony of > the spheres"--in relation to "chaos")(Don Cherry wrote "Relativity Suite") > ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 16:25:42 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Alexander Subject: Re: A Humument I would also be interested in the answer to this. I once curated an exhibition at Minnesota Center for Book Arts in which some of the original page/paintings of A Humument were included, borrowed from the Ruth & Marvin Sackner Archive for Concrete & Experimental Poetry. Perhaps Ruth or Marvin Sackner would know the answer, but I don't think either is on this list. I will forward the question to a book arts list and see if it stirs up any answers there. charles >Ward Tietz writes: > >>Does anybody know of any criticism written on Tom Phillips' "A Humument"? > >There was a very good special issue of the Canadian magazine Open Letters >entitled "Between Poetry & Painting" that focused on Joe Tilson, Ian Tyson, >& Tom Phillips. It was fourth series, #1&2, Summer 1978. This includes >lots of good stuff: an interview by Kevin Powers (who interviewed each of >the featured artists) & articles by Phillips, composer Gavin Bryars, David >Bindman, Nicholas Zurbrugg, David Bindman, & others. > >There's also a piece in Heather McHugh's book of essays Broken English >about the work. > >I'd love to know of any other things people know about too. > > > >Herb Levy >herb@eskimo.com > > ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 16:39:19 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Alexander Subject: journal praise Seeing the interest in criticism of Tom Phillips's, and thinking of works in which literature becomes physical (visual & otherwise) made me want to put in a word of praise for the new issue of Chain (vol. 3, part 1, I believe). There are many genre- & some gender-bending works, and enough of works which extend the literary into an other space (conceptual, visual, etc.) as to not make of such works "the exception." It's the first journal in a long time (despite several other fine ones) I have read cover to cover and continually been amazed by. Already I find myself planning activities or works or publication projects partly influenced by works therein. Thanks very much to Juliana Spahr & Jena Osman for the fine editorial work. charles ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 16:00:59 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: James Brook Subject: jakob van hoddis? Anyone know of translations of the poems and other writings by Jakob Van Hoddis, an early German Expressionist? Or articles about him, especially with biographical information? The only thing I've found in English is a brief entry in Twentieth-Century German Verse edited by Patrick Bridgewater (Penguin 1968) and two poems. Thanks, James Brook ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 18:39:43 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michelle Roberts Subject: Re: post language poetry, post modernist poetry, fakes Comments: To: Ira Lightman In-Reply-To: This is me being a bumb bunny, but could any one offer me a quick definition of "the new sentence'? I read it a post on this thread and would like to get a grip on the concept. Any hints appreciated, Meaghan Meaghan Roberts Ph.D. Candidate - Ethics and Literature The University of Texas at Dallas Meaghan@UTDALLAS.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 14:49:02 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: Ougarit (fwd) Thought someone must be interested in seeing this. Gab. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Ce courrier que j'ai recopi=E9 int=E9gralement =E9tait joint au premier exe= mplaire de la revue Ougarit =E9dit=E9e en Palestine et que je vous laisse d=E9couvr= ir : Madame, monsieur, Nous avons le plaisir de vous pr=E9senter la revue lit=E9raire et artistiqu= e 'Ougarit', r=E9alis=E9e par un groupe de jeunes artistes de diff=E9rentes disciplines (litt=E9rature, arts graphiques, cin=E9ma, th=E9atre, musique) = et publi=E9e =E0 Ramallah (Palestine). Pourquoi cette revue? Tout d'abord parceque nous sommes convaincus qu'il es= t essentiel aujourd'hui de cr=E9er un espace pour un dialogue artistique interdisciplinaire, un lieu d'=E9change o=F9 puissent se rencontrer et confronter les nouveaux courants et les nouvelles visions artistiques et intellectuelles =E0 l'oeuvre dans la soci=E9t=E9 palestinienne. En effet, les nouvelles r=E9alit=E9s que nous vivons actuellement ont ammen= =E9 un boulversement des anciennes cartes intellectuelles et mentales qui, en se redistribuant et se red=E9finissant, c=E8dent la place =E0 de nouvelles car= tes, =E0 de nouveaux horizons. Cette p=E9riode "troubl=E9e" est en m=EAme temps le f= oyer d'un bouillonnement culturel et artistique dont t=E9moigne l'=E9mergence, d= ans diff=E9rents domaines, d'oeuvres de grande qualit=E9, m=EAme si certainesen= sont encore =E0 un stade "exp=E9rimental". Aussi sentons-nous l'urgence de cr=E9er un/ des forum/s pour que ces nouvel= les visions en mouvement puissent se rencontrer, se rassembler, mais aussi =EAt= re fertilis=E9es par un plus grand contact avec des courants qui se d=E9velopp= ent =E0 l'=E9tranger et desquels nous avons si longtemps =E9t=E9s coup=E9s. C'est pourquoi le comit=E9 de r=E9daction, compos=E9 de jeunes artistes imp= liqu=E9s activement dans la cr=E9ation d'une nouvelle culture palestinienne, esp=E8r= e par cet envoi initier un =E9change fructueux avec ceux qui, d'une rive =E0 l'au= tre de la m=E9diterran=E9e, ainsi que dans d'autres r=E9gions du Monde, souhait= ent entamer un dialogue culturel autour de leur vision de l'art, de sa place et de son r=F4le. Nous serons heureux d'accueillir les articles, travaux litt=E9raires, recherches etc... d'intellectuels d=E9sireux d'apporter leur contribution en partageant une vision novatrice. Nous esp=E9rons une =E9dition semestrielle, la pr=E9sentation en sera am=E9= lior=E9e, la forme actuelle (en particulier l'absence de table des mati=E8res et le d=E9sordre de certains textes) n'=E9tant certes pas due =E0 notre volont=E9= e mais aux cons=E9quences du bouclage impos=E9 aux territoires palestinniens penda= nt la p=E9riode de son impressio. En vous souhaitant une bonne lecture, nous vous prions d'agr=E9er Madame, Monsieur, l'expression de nos sentiments chaleureux. Le comit=E9 de r=E9daction. Ougarit c/o Hussein BARGHOUTHI Cultural Studies Department Bir Zeit University P.O.BOX 14 - Bir Zeit Palestine fax : (972 2) 995 78 10 ou (972 2) 995 76 56 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 21:53:00 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tenney Nathanson Subject: Chain unchained? >Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 16:39:19 -0500 >From: Charles Alexander >Subject: journal praise > >Seeing the interest in criticism of Tom Phillips's, and thinking of works in >which literature becomes physical (visual & otherwise) made me want to put >in a word of praise for the new issue of Chain (vol. 3, part 1, I believe). >There are many genre- & some gender-bending works, and enough of works which >extend the literary into an other space (conceptual, visual, etc.) as to not >make of such works "the exception." It's the first journal in a long time >(despite several other fine ones) I have read cover to cover and continually >been amazed by. Already I find myself planning activities or works or >publication projects partly influenced by works therein. > >Thanks very much to Juliana Spahr & Jena Osman for the fine editorial work. > >charles could Juliana or someone post an order-from address for this issue? Plus how-to (email? snailmail? etc) hi Charles! get ready, it's HOT here! Tenney ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 22:18:23 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: here's another fine mess . . . In-Reply-To: <199607060409.AAA18852@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> Keith did not ask my permission to forward my report to Robert, nor do I feel in any way that permission was required. But now some slippage has happened that does bother me. As you will note at the beginning of Robert's message, addressed to me, he says that he is sending it directly to me prior to posting elsewhere. I believed that this meant we were to have some discussion between ourselves. I posted a quick response to Robert and requested that, should he decide to place his message in a public place, my response go along with it and thqat I be informed where it went. I also offered to continue the discussion in private. It may be that Keith misunderstood the timing and forwarded the post too soon, or it could be that what I took to be a direct post to me was already posted in public. I will copy this to Robert in hopes of getting an answer. When I get a chance I will also forward my initial response to this list. In the meantime I want to point out a few things that I think bear rather directly on Robert's reasonable sounding message. There is a tape recording of the panel to which Robert responded. The tape is available to Robert on his request. I do not believe that I in fact have misrepresented his comments at the panel (though perhaps "tirade" was a little strong on my part) and there are any number of people on the list who were also at the session and may recall the conversation. Here is one example. In Robert's message, after complaining that I have misrepresented his comments, he writes: "My objection is not at all to the use of sociology or sociological analysis un literary history or criticism . . ." In his recorded comments he said, "When we do the sociology thing it comes out real simple." I will leave it to you to decide which of us has represented the facts of the discussion more accurately. This is important to me because, you may recall, one of my complaints about Robert's commentary was that he had decontextualized the papers to which he was responding. In this way he wound up, in response to a paper that argued that poets had been excluded BECAUSE of their racial identity from anthologies etc., stating that the paper argued for including poets based upon their representation of identity formations. I will confess to having been angered, and I will cop to having gone a bit overboard in my subsequent comments about sociology. However, the fact that a good portion of Robert's message responds to arguments that were not made by me, and that were not part of my original post, should prompt a certain caution here. And that is not a Freudian typo up there -- Robert said "in" not "un" literary . . . As I said, I will forward this to Robert, and I will post here the reponse I sent to him that has not accompanied his message. After that it's pretty much up to Robert if there is any more on this subject -- ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 22:35:22 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Orono (fwd) Here is my response to Robert's message, made before I knew that his message was already on the poetics list. Only note I would add here is that it was Don Wellman who first raises the issue of performative criteria, not Hank Lazer -- Hank raised the issue as a question as we were standing around the podium afterwards -- Have now also read Joe Amato's note on this -- I know that Joe is out of town now, but I want everybody else to feel perfectly free to jump in on the issues involved -- Since Robert felt that I had misrepresented his remarks, I thought it important first of all to state that I had reviewed his remarks carefully -- I am now more than ready to move on to possibly useful discussions of some of the other issues raised in this episode -- And by the way, if anybody on the list whose paper or comments I described in my report feels I have been inaacurate about anything, let me hear about it -- ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 11:02:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Aldon L. Nielsen To: robert von hallberg Subject: Re: Orono I will respond at greater length later (am on my way to family meetings at the moment) but here are a few VERY quick comments -- First of all, I would be careful about stating that I have misrepresented your remarks. (excuse the oddness of that sentence please; I, of course, would not have made the remarks) You did in fact include a reference to my opening comments about the number of papers at the beginning of your commentary. Perhaps you did not notice the tape recorder that was on the table in front of you. I responded directly to that comment as I felt I could appropriately speak of that which had been directed to my own remarks. If it becomes necessary in the course of public discussions, I will ask your permission to post a transcription of the commentary and will supply you with a copy of the tape. The remark about "badness" is off the tape. As we discussed these issues after the panel broke up, you did in fact say to me that the poems discussed were "bad poems." You will perhaps remember that I told you I would not argue with you then and there over the particular qualities of the poems cited for the simple reason that, in the case of "Montage," I didn't happen to like the poem all that much anyway. My arguments with you were not so much about the value of individual poems as about your mode of address (and the amount of the time it took.) Now for a few quick matters that are more important to me, but have less to do with what one or the other of us actually did or did not say. (Again, I will gladly supply you with the tape if you wish to be certain about quotations.) It is true that some people argue that a different mode of critique is required for poems such as "Montage," and I would agree with you that IF that is the case, then we should get down to the business of laying out what we think such an aesthetic might entail. However, please recall that I made no such argument to you on the day in question. Hank Lazer and, I believe, Jerome Rothenberg made a few comments on the need for a "performative" mode of critique as we were standing around debating afterwards. But as we go on with ouur own disucssions, please bear in mind that this is not an argument that I make. I believe that "performative" modes of critique are appropriate for forms of performance. I think it condescending to argue that Hughes has to be read by some other criteria of performance (when we're talking about poems on the page at least) than, say, Hayden. When I refer in my posts to strategies of the old New critics, I am not speaking of their techniques of close reading, which I continue to use. I was speaking of the strategies used to dismiss black poets in the 403, 50s and 60s. In my other telegraphic reports of Orono (Did Keith in fact send you all of it, or just the part about that panel?) I mentioned an infamous review of Brooks by Simpson. Better examples might be Tate's various responses to African-American poets. What I was getting at in my all too short hand (and perhaps even short sighted) way was that a thorough and close reading of the history of American criticism of African-American poets turns up numerous instances of this same set of remarks being directed to similar panels and critical efforts. I in fact not only welcome close readings of black poets, I produce them from time to time. Mu complaint about your complaint was that you seemed to be ruling out other efforts that I feel are worthwhile and needed -- For example, if I agreed with what you said about the first paper (and I have much to dislike about that paper on entirely other grounds) I would be hard pressed to see much use in Alan Goldings work on anthologies, work that I find useful. If we did not make such arguments, the Heath and Norton would probably not have changed much at all. I believe they have not changed enough, and so I continue to make such arguments. The word "interloper" does not in any way represent my view. I do indeed believe that any field of criticism is likely to benefit from interventions from well-informed critics who have worked primarily in other fields. I'm not sure what the term "outside" would even mean in this context. BUT, I have to admit amazement at part of our post-session (and therefore post-tape) exchange. When we were discussing the fact that numerous conferences, articles, books etc. were devoted to precisely the sorts of readings you called for, you indicated to me that you did not read journals such as _CLA_, _Callaloo_, _AAR_ etc., because, as you put it, you "can't be an expert in every field." Now, I hardly expect such expertise from anybody, including myself, but I found that a renarkable statement to come from somebody who had just delivered a keynote address on Robert Hayden. I wouldn;t put too much weight on this part of our exchange, as it's not part of the issues you have raised in your post to me, but I am trying to communicate something to you about how certain of your remarks must sound to people, perhaps without your meaning to sound objectionable. (by the way, I am away from my office for an extended period, and the machine I am using does not allow me to back up and correct typographical errors. I am no typist, so please be forgiving of oddities of spelling, punctuation, spacing etc.) Again, there is much else we could argue about. (For instance, the phrase "sociology thing" is yours, not mine. -- And I remain puzzled by your remarks about the importance (or lack thereof) of looking at Pound's contacts with black culture (doesn't all that Frobenious weigh on your mind for something?) It's probably never a good thing to put too much weight upon post-panel discussions. The reason that I tape panels I am a part of is that I hope to get suggestions for further research, new abgles to explore, etc. What angered me that day (and I suppose I am still a bit angry about it) is that you did not ask a question, nor did you offer your comments in a way directed specifically to elements of the papers that might help their authors (or even me) to improve the work in hand. You did tell the panel that they were being reductive, that they were lending themselves to identity politics, etc. If I might take a cue from your own comments, I think you would be far more likely to achieve the result you seem to have aimed at by engaging directly with an element of the readings about which one might argue prodcutively. I suspect that any of us who present a paper of 20 minutes on such topics (or even an address of 40 minutes?) might accurately be accused of being reductive. On the other hand, I do not believe it truly is reductive to examine the history of race and anthologizing or race & criticism -- You appeared to me to go past arguing that the papers had failed in a specific way in the tasks they had undertaken to argue that the tasks they had undertaken shouldn't be undertaken. If I am misreading you on that point, I'm ready to be set straight. I hope you will remember too that as we left the room I said to you that I felt comfortable having such an argument with you because I thought we could listen to one another (perhaps even mishear one another) and still get somewhere -- whereas I feel there is simply no point in my having such an argument with Louis Simpson. I do not mean by this that I believe you will eventually see things my way, but that I have much to learn from arguing these points with you. But, as I keep telling my graduate students, we have to look at the same text before we can argue about our interpretations of it. I am responding directly to you, in private, to the extent that any email is private. If you decide to post your message to me in any public place, please post this with it and let me know where it went. I have much more to say if we are going to debate in public. I have more to say, but perhaps in a happier tone, if we discuss this between ourselves. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 02:26:26 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Christopher K. Whipple" Subject: poetry performance I am hoping for some help from this group. I am putting together a season of performed poetry. The premise is that there is a superabundance of miraculous poetry out there; but for some reason it's not read publicly. My idea is to have trained actors read this great poetry. Who better to bring out the pacing, movement, and prosodic effects of these taught language dramas? The performances will fall somewhere between reading and theater. The season will be a four part sequence of themes, running 1) Soviet Poetry; 2)Poets of WWI; 3) Victorian Dramatic Monologues, and 4) Contemporary Poetry. I am going to use public (coffee house) readings as a rehearsal/development process for the fully staged perfomances. I'm most interested in getting help on the WWI poets right now. The poets I have so far are Wilfred Owen (of course), Seigfreid Sassoon, Ivor Gurney, Isaac Rosenberg, e.e. cummings, Ernest Hemingway, Rupert Brooke, Edward Thomas and David Jones. Am I missing anyone? Can anyone lead me to some lesser known poets I might otherwise overlook (or lesser known poems from established poets not usually associated with this theme)? Does anyone have any ideas on why coffee house readings are so often lame and depressing; why do these horrible people have a monopoly on the espresso circuit, while so much that is delicious is abandoned to a half-life in academia? Does anyone have any ideas on how poetry can be successfully performed? Has anyone seen examples, even failed ones? I look forward to your responses. Chris Whipple ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 03:39:52 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert J Wilson Subject: Covering Cherub In-Reply-To: There's a critical concept/category from Blake that I think is still useful in trying to negotiate the blocked vision and pseudo-pluralism of the US poetry scene, even as worked out in the tender terrain of those panels in Maine-- it's called the Covering Cherub, which I take to be a figure for occluded vision pretending to be open to the past and future, pretending to be benignly liberal and political, pretending to do cultural critique while, at the same time (as in the New Yorker poem, or, for that matter, the poems in Nation or New Republic) bracketing out nine-tenths of social reality and twenty two thousand five hundred and sixty six alternative visions and voices and "outside" (Spicer on Mag Verse genres) languages. The Covering Cherub sits in some middle class heaven, in an Englsh Department of the soul, and he can talk about Language Poetry and AfroAmerican poetics and shaman poets an pidgin poets, he (or she can edit an anthology for Harvard UP too) just makes it possible that what Gramsci called (doing cultural studies in prison for his vision) "good sense" will never break through the "common sense" of ideological sonambulence and formalist reifications and "the big lie of the personal voice." But Covering Cherubs should be heard on language poet panels too, and they should get on poetry lists too and talk and talk and talk the talk, this is called 'cheery American poetry' and that is why, still, 'creativity takes place along a line of flight.' and I want out from that 'dialogue.' Regards to Joe Amato for blasting through so much of the American bullshit, it is an American as apple pie and critical inquiry, Rob Wilson ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 10:15:38 -0400 Reply-To: Robert Drake Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert Drake Subject: Re: Chain unchained? i'll second earlier enthusiasms for Chain--i'm lookin forward to pt 2... Chain 107 14th St. Buffalo NY 14213 $10 for 1 issue, $18 for 2 checks to UB Foundation... lbd ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:15:29 BST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Peter Nicholls Subject: Re: oppen Dear Peter: just wondering whether there is any news from California about Objectivist Nexus....Will you be coming to the UK this summer? Let me know if you are. All best wishes, Peter. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 10:29:05 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Burt Kimmelman -@NJIT" Subject: Re: Orono Joe, I understand your frustration, but I don't want to see our possibilotoe possibilities of discourse circumscribed. We're in a wierd techno-leap moment and maybe that accounts in part at least for why people like van hallberg aren't on our list; maybe we should draft a letter to newt gingrich to send some of those lap tops he promised to all the inner city kids of america to senior profs, that is, along with a subsciption to the net. burt ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 12:11:08 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: Orono burt, yeah... my little rant has been brewing for a while, b/c it's become obvious to me over time how specific discourses operate with personnel in absentia, as it were... i mean to say that, while it's arguable that online exchange is not for all tastes, it's not arguable that such exchange (nevermind electronic publication) is becoming a vital part of academic communities, esp. b/c it presents possibilities for academics to learn from non-academics, for both groups to learn from one another---not least, to learn how to speak to one another... interestingly, too, there's also the little-big question of what "counts" in academic circles as professional service, and as you suggest, sometimes the old guard, or the new old guard (pardon moi), is culpable on the count of not taking this stuff too seriously... perhaps due to sheer lack of electronic exposure (academics can be so very anemic), perhaps b/c things can be so comfy post-tenure... not a blanket statement---there are plenty of tenured, visible, full-blooded folks on this list who for me are the exception proves the rule... anyway, mebbe i only imagine (as i just posted to another list member backchannel) mebbe i only imagine a certain nonchalance when a legible name begins speaking from the margins, as it were, or from above... as much as i wish to behave w/o rancor, i just get steamed-up a bit when i sense that sort of intrusion (besides, it's hot and humid today in chicago)... and i mean this w/o finger-pointing at keith, and really by way of saying to robert von hallberg, a bit unfairly--- HELLOOOOO---YOU OUT THERE YET, ROBERT???--c'mon into the pool and join the fun!... you may get splashed a bit, either way... all best, joe ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 15:00:11 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Burt Kimmelman -@NJIT" Subject: Re: oppen I guess I must have missed something. Peter, could you say more about California and the Objectivist Nexus? Burt ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:24:03 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Howard Shoemaker Subject: Tate/Pound/African-Americans In-Reply-To: from "Aldon L. Nielsen" at Jul 6, 96 10:35:22 pm Aldon's recent reference to Tate's and Pound's views of African-Americans moves me to put forward an odd bit of business I've been somewhat puzzled lately. In a review of Pound's How to Read published in Poetry, Tate uses a racially and ethnically charged image to make a point about what he sees as Pound's shortcomings. The review acknowledges Pound as someon who "understands, as no other living man...the craftsmanship of verse," but also points to a "logical confusion of his [Pound's] intellect when it is not performing the task which is specifically his own, that task being poetry." (So far, this is an argument that seems to have some merit.) From there Tate takes extended exception to a comment of Pound's to the effect that when one is studying great inventors (like Newton or Dante) one shld be allowed to extract the gist of their discoveries without being bothered about "laundry bills" (i.e. an unnecessary clutter of biographical data). Tate sees poetry not as a science, with inventions and discoveries, but as a craft. As such, "It is the product of innumerable factors--of the relations among language, church and society, between fathers and mothers, butchers and bakers, between the poet and what society thinks of him." Accordingly: "the laundry bills of Dante should be zealously studied, by somebody like Mr. Pound who would know why he is studying them." So what we have is a plea for an historically informed understanding of poetry and the poet's role in society. Not all that far from the the Oppens' criticism that Pound wld have been better off if he had spent some time in a factory before developing a theory of economics. But then comes Tate's final criticism of Pound: "Finally, I should like to intimate that Pound's own laundry bills might be studied with profit, for they are fuddling his logic. They would make an interesting collection, beginning with Idaho and Indiana, and ending up with the banks of the Susquehanna and the 'banks o' Italie.' There is Mr. Pound sitting in his heap of miscellaneous laundry bills, so confused outside the moment of his craft (which is the most lucid of our time), that he thinks the laundry bills did the washing: what Mr. Pound needs is just an ordinary Irish or colored washerwoman. To look an honest African wench in the face is better than a column of figures, and a fine cure for the belief that a poet can get along without having any laundry done at all. As I see it, Tate is suggesting that what an appropriate historical grounding (i.e. looking an honest African wench in the face) will tell you is the absolute necessity of the current forms of racial and political oppression (somebody's gotta do the laundry and it's not gonna be Tate). The analysis is like the Oppens', but with an exactly opposed political valence. Also interesting because I have been trying to think about Pound's racism, but what happens here is that Tate's own form of racism seems (in Tate's reading) to cancel out Pound's. For Tate, Pound is a "dyed-in-the-wool revolutionist" who wld abolish the social hierarchies. So that's my reading, but the problem is that I don't know much at all about Tate and his other expressions of his views on race. Can anyone (perhaps Aldon) give me some more context here? Sorry this is so long, steve ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 15:55:06 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Tate/Pound/African-Americans In message <199607072024.QAA72926@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU> UB Poetics discussion group writes: >... > So that's my reading, but the problem is that I don't know much at all > about Tate and his other expressions of his views on race. Can anyone > (perhaps Aldon) give me some more context here? > > Sorry this is so long, > steve walter kalaidjian has an extended analysis of the "New Critics" and Agrarian poets and critics on race. it's in a book forthcoming i think from michigan? edited by Stephen Watt and someone else??? and entitled something like "Marketing Modernisms." if you can't find that book, i'm sure walt will share his essay w/ you; he's in the the english dept at emory. bests, maria d ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 15:58:13 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Tate/Pound/African-Americans . > So that's my reading, but the problem is that I don't know much at all > about Tate and his other expressions of his views on race. Can anyone > (perhaps Aldon) give me some more context here? > > Sorry this is so long, > steve ps. tate taught in the dept i now teach in, and he is known to have been rather retro in the fifties by his then colleagues. i've heard him thus characterized by leo marx, who was in the american studies program, who sd that, much as these english dept new-critics were admirable intellectual colleagues and congenial conversants, "I suspect that were the subject to have turned to politics we would have had little to say to each other." folks like marx lived in terror of the mccarthyite shadow, while folks like tate WERE that shadow.--md ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 16:01:27 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Tate/Pound/African-Americans In message <199607072024.QAA72926@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU> UB Poetics discussion group writes: >... > So that's my reading, but the problem is that I don't know much at all > about Tate and his other expressions of his views on race. Can anyone > (perhaps Aldon) give me some more context here? > > Sorry this is so long, > steve 3rd installment: i think that while tate and others were embarrassed by pound's fanaticism, which they saw as indecorous, basically they shared, if not his outright fascism which was, after all, unpatriotic, a horror of Jews, Blacks and other Others who could not quite conform to their standards of rational --enlightenment --humanity. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 18:18:45 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Howard Shoemaker Subject: Re: Tate/Pound/African-Americans In-Reply-To: <31e025a638dd002@mhub0.tc.umn.edu> from "maria damon" at Jul 7, 96 04:01:27 pm Thanks for responding Maria. I'm trying right now to apply some of your insights from the Stein chapter in *the dark end of the street* to a reading of a piece of "Yiddish" doggerel that was Pound's contribution to *An "Objectivists" Anthology. Trying to think about what happens when an "in-between language" is staked out for use by a representative of the white, male, gentile modernist establishment rather by a member of the "minority" culture... steve ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 15:53:17 PDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jerry Rothenberg Subject: Re: Covering Cherub For Rob Wilson, if it's of any interest. In the second issue of SULFUR (1981, altho it doesn't seem to me that long ago) I had an attack piece vis a vis Harold Bloom called "The Critic As Exterminating Angel" -- at the end of which I go into a few pages about the Covering Cherub ("who in one tradition may be the Exterminating Angel himself, the [Hebrew] Malakh ha-Mavat" and who "guards the Tree of Life & blocks the return of fallen man to Paradise.") Bloom writes on this in considerably more detail and I'm in fact turning it on him, polemically, for reasons explained in the essay. Eshleman, who was editing Sulfur then as now, was very good on this matter, although I don't know off hand where -- if anywhere -- he has it in writing. In that context, I think, Covering Cherubs are much more foreboding than what you're suggesting -- what I thought of at the time as that which "not only keeps the poet from the paradise of poetry but from a natural relation- ship to all those poets who inhabit it." I pin the label on Bloom in that one, tho there's clearly more to it than that. Jerome Rothenberg jrothenb@carla.ucsd.edu ps. If you're in Hawaii when I get there in September, maybe we can meet & talk about this & related matters. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 11:34:06 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tony Green Organization: The University of Auckland Subject: Re: poetry performance Hi Christopher Whipple. Response to your notion abt actors. Distaste for actors reading poetry for me goes with the felt difference between stand-ups and actors. "Stand-ups can't act" is a way of noticing that stand-ups do not seem to know they are assuming a role (even though, of course, they are). Actors always assume roles. Rather than actors you want really good poet-readers. Last year I had the pleasure of hearing Robert Creeley reading Williams et al. You want something like that: no putting on a special voice or tone, no change from Creeley-voice reading Creeley that I could identify, but a real intelligent sense of what the text was doing at any point. That was really engrossing. To turn up the volume, to turn up the decor, to turn up the video-presentation, may do something for people who don't actually like poetry, but there is a danger in that of a deceptive kind of substitution. I guess I feel the poetry is damaged, more or less seriously by what you are thinking of. best Tony Green, e-mail: t.green@auckland.ac.nz ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 14:07:28 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: Ougarit (suite) (english/french) (fwd) More on this mag. Gab. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 08:01:45 -1000 From: J-C Helary Reply-To: bad@eng.hss.cmu.edu To: Multiple recipients of Subject: Ougarit (suite) (english/french) Happy to see that although I posted in french, some people replied. It make= s me wonder about (so called ?) progressists on a moderated news group criticizing a french contributor who complained because his french posts were never sent. It was about cultural imperialism. He was replied (more or less) that it was really a joke that french criticize anglo-saxons for cultural imperialism and anyway, english was a lingua franca on this ng and throughout usenet so he would just have to cope with it... Good to see it's not like this here. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D for GDGoodman (sap@TANK.RGS.UKY.EDU) : I'll try to make a summary of my previous post. I'm working in a book shop specialized in the arab world, in Paris, an we received last week the first issue of a palestinian art magazine edited in Ramallah, in the occupied territories. I just decided to reproduce their presentation letter with their fax number so that interested people could get in touch with them. They don't seem to have Internet access (like most people on the world...). The magazine is supposed to become an interdisciplinary art forum (which probably sounds quite pompous on our side of the world but might mean different things there), a place were they can share new visions and be in touch with currents developed abroad from which they had been cut off for a long time. They say that the troubled times they live are the source of a cultural and artistic renewal that leads to high quality creations. This letter, and the joined issue is supposed to be a bridge across mediterranee (?) to places beyond. They hope to be able to publish this magazine twice a year, depending on local conditions. En vous souhaitant une bonne lecture, nous vous prions d'agr=E9er Madame, Monsieur, l'expression de nos sentiments chaleureux. (sincerly yours,) Le comit=E9 de r=E9daction. Ougarit c/o Hussein BARGHOUTHI Cultural Studies Department Bir Zeit University P.O.BOX 14 - Bir Zeit Palestine fax : (972 2) 995 78 10 ou (972 2) 995 76 56 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D for Neil (lingvoj@lds.co.uk (esperanto)) Je m'appelle Jean-Christophe, Jean-Claude c'est mon p=E8re mais je ne crois pas que tu le connaisse. La revue est bilingue, une partie fran=E7aise, une partie arabe. Je n'ai pa= s pris le temps de la lire (je ne connais pas encore assez bien l'arabe pour commenter la deuxi=E8me partie anyway). Je suis mal plac=E9 pour parler de la langue des colons mais il me semble q= ue toutes les langues majeures (du point de vue de la quantit=E9 de locuteurs)= le sont parcequ'elles ont =E9t=E9 la langue d'un peuple en position de sup=E9r= iorit=E9 =E0 un moment de l'histoire. Donc on peut considerer une langue comme un m= =E9dia privil=E9gi=E9 dans une aire culturelle donn=E9e. A toi de choisir ton public. Quant =E0 leur utilisation du Fran=E7ais, je ne trouve pas =E7a bizarre vu "l'importance" qu'a eu la France dans cette r=E9gion =E0 une certaine =E9po= que. Peut-=EAtre que leur niveau de conscience n'est pas encore parvenu =E0 la critique de l'imp=E9rialisme culturel... Mais je pense que le multilinguism= e est quelque chose d'autre que =E7a (I mean l'absence de critique de l'imp=E9rialisme culturel). Le multilinguisme est une situation 'normale', c'est la standardisation unilingue qui ne l'est pas (IMHO). =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Amicalement, Jean-Christophe. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =09=09Stand up, all victims of oppression =09=09For the tyrants fear your might =09=09Don't cling so hard to your possessions =09=09For you have nothing, if you have no rights =09=09Let racist ignorance be ended =09=09For respect makes empires fall =09=09Freedom is merely privilege extended =09=09Unless enjoyed by one and all =09=09So come brothers and sisters =09=09For the struggle carries on =09=09The Internationale =09=09Unites the world in song =09=09So comrades come rally =09=09For this is the time and place =09=09The internationale ideal =09=09Unites the human race ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 14:25:31 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: Re: poetry performance In-Reply-To: <31DF82C2.24A2@west.net> nHi Christopher. My question is where are the women? Mina Loy began publishing around 1914. And other _Others_ folks. And and and.. gab. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 19:26:02 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Herb Levy Subject: Subtext Readings for July & August, solicitation for Fall readers I don't think that the last two Subtext readings curated by Nico Vassilakis have been posted yet, so here they are: July 18th Noemie Maxwell & (from Vancouver) Lisa Robertson (followed by a short, uncurated performance by visiting composer Ellen Fullman) August 15th Bryant Mason & (from Oregon) F A Nettelbeck (who will perform some collaborations with Seattle-area composer/performer Wayne Horvitz) All readings start at 7:30 pm on the third Thursday of each month, at the Speakeasy Cafe, in Seattle's Belltown district. See you there. If any writers on the list know that they'll be in the Northwest this fall, please let me know via e-mail (address below). There's still some spaces available. Bests Herb Herb Levy herb@eskimo.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 20:15:11 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Ron Silliman Subject: Listpersonship This will sort of be all over the place, but I got piqued by the discussion about von Hallberg's participation(and by extension, of others in a similar position). My personal guess with regards to Bob not belonging to this (or any other) list is simply that he imagines himself as having better things to do with his time/energy. Ultimately, I think it falls outside our own ability to judge another's intentions. It's like suggesting that, say, Bruce Andrews is politically incorrect because he doesn't choose to own a computer. There is also a certain hubris in suggesting that this list, as distinct from CAP-L, Wr-eye-tings, The Sixties, the Derrida, Deleuze, Baudrillard, Fluxus, High Tech Marketing or any other list is or is not at the center of the information universe. But beyond those two very big caveats, the question is not a bad one. There is a very distinct phenomenon on many campuses of people, some of them "senior critical" or even directly poetry heavyweights, who do not participate in whatever avenues the scene in their vicinity takes. I recall being amazed that James E.B. Breslin, a favorite professor of mine at Cal, who could speak passionately about post-WW poetry and sympathetically read a wide range of it, never seemed to think to actually attend a poetry reading in Berkeley, let alone San Francisco. It was as if there was a total disconnect. Similarly, students and faculty at Stanford (with the notable exception of Marjorie Perloff) seem to find San Francisco impossibly far away. And I've met one person connected with the Stanford writing scene for over a decade who claims (facetiously?) never to have physically laid eyes on Gilbert Sorrentino. I suspect the examples with regards to NYC are at least as mind boggling. It is, as I think everyone of us knows all too well, very possible for people to be "professionally engaged" with contemporary literature without ever connecting to it as an active social phenomenon, something going on in their town. Sometimes that's just a reclusive personality (hermetic types from Anne-Marie Albiach to Karl Young are legion). I once knew a poet, someone who published several books in the 1970s, edited a magazine and published a few terrific books of other peoples, who hated to meet writers, because they were never the perfect beings he envisioned from their poems. I've also known others who had a seriously ill child, partner or parent, who were equally removed. But what may be situational or neurotic can also be utilized cynically, and I think that was the question being suggested by someone like Bob having to have his inputs "forwarded" to the list. It suggests both that he's not so out of touch as to not know about its existence, but somehow too something (fill in your paranoia here) to be bothered to participate directly. Of course, the day this list becomes the transparent medium of all poetry (or even of all post-New American poetry), it will be far too unwieldy to have any further value. It's value consists precisely through the work of people who do participate. And, frankly, it matters much more what somebody who actively participates on this list thinks than it does some distant critic who's not clued in. Why not badger Fred Jameson? Or Andrew Ross? Or, or, or? How does von Hallberg's response, detailed and serious as it was (I can't tell if Aldon misrepresented him or not, although knowing the two of them I'm inclined to buy Nielson's account), differ from, say, Catherine Stimpson saying in the NY Times on the day that the MacArthur Foundation (whose fellowship process she directs) awarded a grant to Richard Howard that the fellowships were being given to those who are "pushing the envelope"? von Hallberg at least knows what the issues are. It seems to me that a much closer and more tangible form of "passive aggressive" relation to any list like this one (including this one) comes from those people who function as "pure lurkers," who actively want to get some of the value produced by this collective mind (to use Marc Andreeson's definition of the internet) without wanting to contribute themselves. This one-way relationship falls somewhere between pure consumption and parasitism proper. If I were feeling intemperate (and I have my moments), I'd be inclined to suggest a rule on the order of deleting anyone who doesn't contribute to the discussion, say, once per month. Now that's a modest proposal... Ron Silliman rsillima@ix.netcom.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 00:28:43 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: JOEL LEWIS <104047.2175@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Re: Tate/Pound/African-Americans memorey is hazy.... but Tate does write the intro to Melvin Tolson's Libretto for the Republic of Liberia (??) in th 50's, remember the intro as serving as the official New Crit blessing on the African_american Modernist. Joel Lewis ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 23:24:14 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Tate In-Reply-To: <199607080404.AAA26600@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> By all means read Walter's essay, and tell him to send me a copy! meanwhile, read Tate in I"ll Take My Stand, his novel, The Fathers, his collected poetry reviews, his bio. of Stonewall Jackson, the intro. to Tolson that Lorenzo spoke about so effectively at the Maine conference -- AND it wdn't hurt to read the poems again -- I've been away from studying Tate too long to know what's been done just recently -- so fill me in, via the list, on anything further you come across -- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 08:30:24 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jonathan A Levin Subject: Re: Tate/Pound/African-Americans In-Reply-To: <31e024290ecf004@mhub1.tc.umn.edu> Just a footnote to Maria Damon's first note-- Marketing Modernisms (I think that title is correct) is forthcoming from Michigan, and is edited by Stephen Watt and Kevin J.H. Dettmar. I know the editors just received final proofs, so maybe the book will appear later this year. Jonathan Levin ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 03:13:41 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert J Wilson Subject: Re: Covering Cherub In-Reply-To: <9607072253.AA20805@carla.UCSD.EDU> Dear Jerry Rothenberg, Thanks for the return of the uncanny Covering Cherub as a critical cateogry/weapon to be used against those who would depoliticize and/or monopolize the sublime of vision in a narrow, lyric solipsism kind of way (HB). And one can only appreciate and applaud the detailed and painstaking and broadhearted way you have fought to keep this 'return to paradise' open to diverse traditions and contenders that the northeast hegemony has never heard of reckoning. All I meant, in this devious context of American liberalist poetics, that a third and mediating level (the state and its ideological agents, complicit, unconscious, sleepwalking and otherwise) has to be thought through, because when somebody tells me (arguing on a large scale, absorbing diverse poets left and write) that American poets work 'to consolidate empire at home and abroad' etc, then I day, let us blast that Covering Cherub out of the line of vision so that a non-imperialist poetics and a more trenchantly politicized vision of what trans/US poetics could and should be-- to invite such people as 'keynote' speakers at Orono or otherwise seems to me a derelection of duty and vision. When you know the details on what books, projects, essays etc such people have deviously rejected "anonymously," then I say let us take those people out and off the scene so that some poetic deep thinking can begin "In the Middle of [Reified] Modernism in the Middle of [Late] Capitalism on the Outskirts of New York [Chicago]." I am tired of crossing a desert of dead vision even if it means, for me or for some, that in visionary terms I can 'enter the paradise of Blakean heaven." That such people read and appropriate all the emergent energies of counter-poetics makes it all the more devious and urgent to get some agon going by which to overturn the temples of the moneylenders and their market-friendly babble. And of course I look forward to your visit to Hawaii where you can enter into the Tinfish/Bamboo Ridge/redflea indigenous poetics of the local in some helpful way. The president of HLAC (Hawaii Lit Arts Council), Gabriel Welford, urged me to send you some essays and works on and around local/Pacific poetics, and I just remembered I will do so. The Covering Cherub is out here too, and it may (at times) be me. take care, Rob Wilson On Sun, 7 Jul 1996, Jerry Rothenberg wrote: > For Rob Wilson, if it's of any interest. > > In the second issue of SULFUR (1981, altho it doesn't seem to me that long > ago) I had an attack piece vis a vis Harold Bloom called "The Critic As > Exterminating Angel" -- at the end of which I go into a few pages about the > Covering Cherub ("who in one tradition may be the Exterminating Angel > himself, the [Hebrew] Malakh ha-Mavat" and who "guards the Tree of Life & > blocks the return of fallen man to Paradise.") Bloom writes on this in > considerably more detail and I'm in fact turning it on him, polemically, for > reasons explained in the essay. Eshleman, who was editing Sulfur then as > now, was very good on this matter, although I don't know off hand where -- if > anywhere -- he has it in writing. > > In that context, I think, Covering Cherubs are much more foreboding than > what you're suggesting -- what I thought of at the time as that which "not > only keeps the poet from the paradise of poetry but from a natural relation- > ship to all those poets who inhabit it." I pin the label on Bloom in that > one, tho there's clearly more to it than that. > > Jerome Rothenberg > jrothenb@carla.ucsd.edu > > ps. If you're in Hawaii when I get there in September, maybe we can meet > & talk about this & related matters. > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 09:24:44 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Dean Taciuch Subject: Re: poetry performance I agree with Tony Green's position on actors performing the poetry--best to have other poets reading the works. The readers need to be concerned with the medium itself--the language. I don't think actors generally would do this--their concern would be with the meaning, the emotions, of the poem. The temptation would be, I think, to render "dramatic" readings of the poems, which would damage them in the same way as using, say "dramatic" lighting to make sure the audience "got the point." In Joan Retallack's recent book of interviews with John Cage, Cage had a similar problem with using Julliard musicians to perform his compositions--they try to emote, rather than allowing the music to occur. Same with the poetry, I think--actors would tend to force meanings out, rather than allowing them to occur in the langauge. Dean Taciuch dtaciuch@gmu.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 09:44:41 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gwyn McVay Subject: Re: Tate/Pound/African-Americans In-Reply-To: <199607072218.SAA63254@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU> Steve, in the same vein, what about Berryman's Henry Pussycat? On Sun, 7 Jul 1996, Steven Howard Shoemaker wrote: > Thanks for responding Maria. I'm trying right now to apply some of your > insights from the Stein chapter in *the dark end of the street* to a > reading of a piece of "Yiddish" doggerel that was Pound's contribution to > *An "Objectivists" Anthology. Trying to think about what happens when > an "in-between language" is staked out for use by a representative of > the white, male, gentile modernist establishment rather by a member of > the "minority" culture... > > steve > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 08:47:35 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Tate/Pound/African-Americans steve: fascinating! could you send me that piece by pound. i shudder to think what the objectivists made of this. it seems that in this case, you are dealing with something more charged than a "white male gentile modernist" but someone who dedicated much of his life and risked his national standing to participate in the war on the Jews,,, in other words, a confirmed anti-Semite of the unsubtle kind.--md In message <199607072218.SAA63254@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU> UB Poetics discussion group writes: > Thanks for responding Maria. I'm trying right now to apply some of your > insights from the Stein chapter in *the dark end of the street* to a > reading of a piece of "Yiddish" doggerel that was Pound's contribution to > *An "Objectivists" Anthology. Trying to think about what happens when > an "in-between language" is staked out for use by a representative of > the white, male, gentile modernist establishment rather by a member of > the "minority" culture... > > steve ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 10:05:16 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Henry Gould Subject: Re: Tate/Pound/African-Americans In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 8 Jul 1996 09:44:41 -0400 from On Mon, 8 Jul 1996 09:44:41 -0400 Gwyn McVay said: >Steve, in the same vein, what about Berryman's Henry Pussycat? See Miao Filene's monograph, "Catty Gossip, Anemic Cad : Berryman's Pseudo-Animalism in _The Dream Songs_", Manx University & Veterinarian Institute Press, 1995. A good critique of Berryman's uncrritical presumtive style, employing an analysis of his use of CATalepsis and DOGberryisms in ahistorical and super-humanist frames (or, as she calls them, "c-oops"). - Henry Gould >..< ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 09:23:56 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: Listpersonship ron, yo, i'm over here man... hey: i can only imagine, again, what subject position someone is writing from who feels free to have his post forwarded (this latter construction the most lenient i can manage) to a list of some 400 plus folks, many or most of whom he doesn't know... i would never, never do this mself, and i've been hanging around online for some time now, here and there... which means either (1) robert von hallberg has no working knowledge of list communities, and doesn't see this as a cheeky move or (2) he really doesn't care if this is seen as a cheeky move... let's be nice and go with (1)... which feeds my hunches about how senior folks in our profession, on the avg., have a print-based sense of themselves... i won't get into all of the various twists and turns of this latter assertion at this point... but von hallberg clearly has a critical rep. at stake, yes, and all's i'm asking that he do is subscribe to poetics formally to address what he takes as a challenge to same from aldon... as to whether we can talk "about" anybody who's not on this list: well as you say, this ain't the center of the poetics world or anything... but again, me talking about, say, andrew ross is not quite the same thing as me talking about robert von hallberg... i mean, look at the dynamic that's developed: from now on, any time i write "robert von hallberg" i feel his absent presence... mebbe it's just me, but it's like i'm talking at once behind and in front of his back... and I DON'T KNOW THE MAN, and this is not my way... and this all b/c he stuck only his Big toe into the pool to test its temperature, as it were... whereas ross hasn't done so, except to the extent that his *public* post about the sokal affair (thankfully) ended up here (and if you wanna know what i think about ross's little stunt, just ask and i'll send you a 45kb draft of a piece i'm finishing up for _ebr_ on why the sokal situation shoulda been electronic from the get-go)... so intentions and such aside, fact is that this list dynamic has been altered for me wrt r-o-b-e-r-t v-o-n h-a-l-l-b-e-r-g... and i expect for a few others anyway... now, as to "pure lurkers": ain't really no such thing, is there?... i mean, this presumes that there are some folks who will *never* leave lurk mode... granted, there may be many who rarely do... but at least we can imagine them, say, *listening* to some of what's being espoused by mouthier types like you and me and _____(i assume they're not merely processing the messages into oblivion)... and listening is worth something, ron... now as i see it we should be working, all of us, to try to pull more folks out of lurk, make for more comfortable regions hereabouts... and it happens: there have been a number of folks who've waited quite some time, by their own accounts, to enter into the public discussion (i suspect in fact your remarks may provoke same, as i'm sure you're aware)... and this takes time, and it's time that allows these spaces to mutate, to register, say, different sorts of conversational possibilities---which is to say different gendering, different cultural potentials, and such like... so your "modest proposal" (setting aside how easy it would be to defeat same functionally) gives exceedingly short-shrift to the possibility of helping this space accommodate---if not all tastes, predispositions, what have you---at least a somewhat broader range of interests and motivations than you and i and _____ can hope to represent... and again, i'm preaching to the choir now---you know this already... ok?... just so's we're talking *to* each other, yknow... peace// joe ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 10:42:34 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Burt Kimmelman -@NJIT" Subject: Re: Listpersonship Ron, I agree with you except for your suggestion that each list member have to say SOMETHING to the list at least once a month; then there'd be a lot of meaningless chatter, I fear, which demeans all the good talk that often also takes place. No, the list is fine as it is, terribly unfair at times, perhaps, but also incredibly free (or at least as free as we want to be since we may be worried about having what we say on the list repeated elsewhere; of course, again (as I said the other day--and this is no news to you but I'll say it anyway here), we're in a techno-warp and questions about copy righting, patenting, authored (single and multiple) and authorless texts (even linearity?) are not to be resolved easily. I know I'm saying the obvious here but perhaps it needs saying and then maybe we can all move on to other matters? Burt ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 12:24:47 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Steven Howard Shoemaker Subject: Re: Tate/Pound/African-Americans In-Reply-To: <31e11177628b246@mhub1.tc.umn.edu> from "maria damon" at Jul 8, 96 08:47:35 am Maria, Yes, I treat him as a "confirmed anti-Semite" throughout, and have already written about his anti-Semitism and how it affects his relations with Zukofsky in a piece that will be in the collection on Zuk edited by Scroggins, and due out anytime, i guess, from U of Alabama Press (any word, Mark?). What makes things complicated is that, unlike an anti-Semite like Eliot (whose public pronouncements are actually much less virulent), here is Pound in the early '30s working with all these Jews! And, as Casillo shows and I am seeing as well, there is a thread of admiration, and competition, running thru the anti-Semitism. The point is not that this admiration mitigates the anti-Semitism but that it is weirdly part of it... and that ties into Pound's need to "try on" the Yiddish... steve Maria wrote: > > steve: fascinating! could you send me that piece by pound. i shudder to think > what the objectivists made of this. it seems that in this case, you are dealing > with something more charged than a "white male gentile modernist" but someone > who dedicated much of his life and risked his national standing to participate > in the war on the Jews,,, in other words, a confirmed anti-Semite of the > unsubtle kind.--md > > In message <199607072218.SAA63254@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU> UB Poetics > discussion group writes: > > Thanks for responding Maria. I'm trying right now to apply some of your > > insights from the Stein chapter in *the dark end of the street* to a > > reading of a piece of "Yiddish" doggerel that was Pound's contribution to > > *An "Objectivists" Anthology. Trying to think about what happens when > > an "in-between language" is staked out for use by a representative of > > the white, male, gentile modernist establishment rather by a member of > > the "minority" culture... > > > > steve > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 13:01:18 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rod Smith Subject: Re: Listpersonship Ron wrote: >If I were feeling intemperate (and I have my moments), I'd be inclined to >suggest a rule on the order of deleting anyone who doesn't contribute >to the discussion, say, once per month. Ron, do we really want that many posts! My mailbox is always already stuffed. Rod ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 12:19:58 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Listpersonship/aldon/rvh i'm somewhat struck by how a discussion about race, sociology and literary criticism has turned into a discussion of list etiquette. this is indeed one of the problems i think rob wilson touches on in his scathing "covering cherub" posts. volatile issues of materialist criticism get watered down into an internicene critique of our own teensy weensy little hierarchy of poetry-critics this not to say that any one remark about list-politics and academic politics is trivial or ill-directed, but the cumulative effect of what draws discussion and what dies in silence is noteworthy. likewise, chris s's query last week about erotics and race, or aldon's challenge to the view that interracial sex is politicallly radical both got no pick-up. md ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 10:36:45 -0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Christopher Filkins Subject: Re: poetry performance Dean & Tony's positions are misinformed. An actor emotes or doesn't emote according to the direction they receive. There is a reason why we have directors after all. The virtue of actors is their ability to chameleon anyone who comes their way. Do not slam actors as emoting fools when they can do so much more. Christopher Filkins ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 13:43:10 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rod Smith Subject: Re: and john cage and car sickness In response to Mark's post of a few days ago. I think Cage's relationship to "the western tradition" was complex & highly contextual. & of course he could get angry on occasion. The maddest I ever saw him was at a concert at the Philips Collection, the pianist had chosen the program to be performed, which included Ives, Crumb, Cage, &, I believe he had wanted to play a longish piece by Liszt (clue, clue) which was turned down, or maybe he did play it, don't remember. Any case he played one of Cage's pieces from the fifties very badly. The pianist told us he had only read the score the day before. At the intermission he said to the curator, in a very congenial manner, "thank the pianist for me, and ask him never to play my music again" and we left. By the time I knew him, his work, & that of many artists he felt kinship with, was internationally acclaimed. So his energy was consumed by doing the work rather than railing against a tradition. Also, I'm not sure it's accurate to say he left the or a tradition-- rather that he & others played a part in changing it. Rod -------------------------------------------- Mark Wallace wrote: Hey Rod: Thanks for the clarification on my earlier remarks relative to John Cage and his feelings towards the musical traditions he leaves behind. But your post leaves me with a question I'd like to hear more from you about. When you say that "at a certain point, Cage simply didn't need that tradition anymore" (I'm paraphrasing), are you implying that he left it behind without antagonism, just decided it could be ignored? Or, if he continued to have reactions towards it, what were the nature of those reactions? Loathe is, I can see, probably too strong. But what, from your understanding, would be the proper way to characterize his feelings towards the tradition he leaves behind? There's something about your post that seems almost to be characterizing his reaction as strangely unemotional--i.e., oh there it is, I don't need that, it really doesn't bother me and let's talk about something else. That seems to me a little bit hard to believe--you're trained in a whole tradition, work in it for many years, and then one day decide it's not significant, and leave it without much feeling either way? I'm just curious as to whether you could try to characterize more fully his reaction to what he left behind. mark ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 13:45:29 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "c.g. guertin" Subject: Re: Listpersonship In-Reply-To: <960708130117_151178550@emout08.mail.aol.com> Lurker equals/does not equal listener? Is this a 'bad' moral equation? Silence is evil or simply undesirable? cg ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 13:10:37 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: Listpersonship/aldon/rvh but maria, isn't this just IT?... i mean isn't it exactly the case, *exactly*---that list politics, intentionally or otherwise, reflect the ongoing silencing of Other politics?... ergo attending to list politics, however one (which is to say, e.g., me) goes about same, is not merely an exercise in formal maneuvers, but a very (forgive me) *real* attempt not to be dismissive of such political undercurrents?... isn't it the case that issues of 'race, sociology and literary criticism' are over there (and where else could there be but print?) *and* over here?... i mean, if there's a there there, is there no here here?... best, joe ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 11:20:58 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: James Brook Subject: Re: poetry performance A case study of actors performing poetry: Last fall in Paris I had the opportunity of hearing Bei Dao read at the new Maison de la Poesie at the recently renovated Theatre Moliere, sponsored by Covering Cherub Enterprises. Admission was 50 francs--about $10--which seemed a little high. But we had to pay twice: the young woman at the counter wanted to know whether we had "reservations." No, we didn't. She made a big show of consulting her list, shaking her head, and making discouraging sounds--before turning back to us and declaring that she *might* be able to get us in. We paid, got tickets, and were ushered to our numbered seats in the half-empty theater. Exactly on time the curtain(!) was raised to reveal the backlit silhouettes of five people seated on stage: an actor (Michael Lonsdale), a presenter, a critic, an interpreter (not Bei Dao's translator), and, off to the side, the poet himself. I guess they were all getting paid out of the ticket price. . . . At least there was no dramatic music. . . . The presenter presented in a vaguely presentational way. The actor moved up to the podium and gave his idea of a "poetic" delivery of the French translation of a short poem. Bei Dao was asked to read it in Chinese. And then the critic jumped in and harassed the poet with a series of profound questions in the form of retarded little essays about "the difficulty" of Bei Dao's poetry and its "problematic condensation." These stupid remarks were interpreted for an annoyed-looking Bei Dao, who replied brusquely to the effect that poetry tended to be "difficult" and "condensed." And so on for two hours. In the course of the evening we heard no more than a dozen poems--massacred by the actor, whose dramatic and strictly-from-wardrobe-romantic air contrasted sharply with Bei Dao's seriousness and intensity. But it was the critic who really monopolized the stage--the large mouth in a small frame couldn't contain itself. But of course the French have a horror of poetry, a horror expressed in curious ways: they elevate it into a spectacle for the culturati, they encapsulate it as part of "the national heritage," and they carefully wrap it in criticism. They prefer the package to the contents. Like so many people. Progressing a few months in time while digressing just a little in topic, I should also report on another "performance" at the Maison de la Poesie at the Theatre Moliere sponsored by Songs of Experience et Cie: Michel Deguy in Conversation with Jacques Derrida. This event was billed as a meeting between Poetry and Philosophy. I assure you that Philosophy won the match. Michel Deguy began by introducing himself and his "friend Jacques" and outlining their program: to engage in a dialogue on the reciprocal relations between their disciplines. Ever courteous and by his own admission a little unprepared for the occasion, Deguy asked Derrida to go first. Deguy was surprised to see Derrida pull a sheaf of papers several inches thick from his briefcase and begin reading--and reading and reading and reading and reading. In fact, Derrida read for almost an hour straight as he went through all the problems posed by the first words of one of Deguy's poems, which was written in the form of a love letter addressed to "Ma chair" [My flesh] instead of the more usual "Ma chere" [My dear]. There was no attempt at dialogue; Deguy was never questioned or given an opening. He just sat there in evident discomfort and astonishment, crossing and uncrossing his legs, unsure of where to put his hands. . . . I don't think that Derrida noticed the other obvious pun: "Ma chaire" [My pulpit, rostrum, university position]. When Derrida finally relented, Deguy said he didn't at all know how to reply to such a demonstration and so he finished the evening by reading a few unrelated journal entries and taking a few even less related questions from the audience. Now, do I have to stress that my remarks are not an "attack" on actors, critics, or philosophers? They have their uses. But what I saw at these two events was a hatred for poetry that masqueraded as a love for poetry, a love that wished to consume its object, to become its object, to take the place of its object (Freudian references intended). Your reporter, James Brook ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 12:19:07 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kevin Killian Subject: Re: Listpersonship/aldon/rvh At 12:19 PM 7/8/96, maria damon wrote: >i'm somewhat struck by how a discussion about race, sociology and literary >criticism has turned into a discussion of list etiquette. this is indeed >one of >the problems i think rob wilson touches on in his scathing "covering cherub" >posts. volatile issues of materialist criticism get watered down into an >internicene critique of our own teensy weensy little hierarchy of >poetry-critics Poetry-critics? Am I naive in my assumption that the poetics list was at least originally intended as a place for the discussion of poetics by *poets*? > this not to say that any one remark about list-politics and academic politics >is trivial or ill-directed, but the cumulative effect of what draws discussion >and what dies in silence is noteworthy. likewise, chris s's query last week >about erotics and race, or aldon's challenge to the view that interracial >sex is >politicallly radical both got no pick-up. Again, this is a *poetics* list. I'm sorry, but I find this holier-than-though attitude of your post very offensive, this accusing of 400 people of racism because no once picked up on threads that *you* found important. Dodie Bellamy ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 15:06:26 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Elisabeth W. Joyce" Subject: in defense of parasites In Defense of Parasites As a silent lurker on this list, I find a need to respond to Ron Silliman's remarks about lurkers as parasites. Yes, I am a parasite, but not in the sense that I want to kill the list, to suck out of it all of its essences. Instead, I think of myself in terms of the food which the list offers me and which I digest in thoughtful silence. I recall scoffing at silent members of classes in graduate school, thinking that they were not effectively immersed in their pursuits, but in retrospect perhaps I misjudged them. I am not on the cutting edge of the field, nor will I ever be, but I am deeply invested in it and in what it means to me. I teach a heavy load of courses and have two small children. I live in relative isolation. The poetics list is a lifeline for me, composed of active intellectuals engaged in response to social and political effects on literature (poetry!). I payattention to what you say; I am learning here. I sift through your endless reams of material fo r the more often than not superlative assessments of awide range of topics. I am inspired by your reading lists. I am even moved by you (to tears even) as when you eulogized Larry Eigner, bringing in his life, his personality, and as always, his poetry. I am a reasonably active scholar, but I can't speak right now--perhaps later when my life is less strapped--but this doesn't mean that parasites are a negative force on this list. Rather, I would suggest, we are an everpresent supportive force, tha t audience which poetry often fears it lacks. Lisa Joyce (ejoyce@edinboro.edu) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 14:21:25 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Judy Roitman Subject: Re: poetry performance >Hi Christopher Whipple. Response to your notion abt actors. Distaste >for actors reading poetry for me goes with the felt difference >between stand-ups and actors. "Stand-ups can't act" is a way of > noticing that stand-ups do not seem to know they are assuming > a role (even though, of course, they are). Actors always assume > roles. Rather than actors you want really good poet-readers. Last >year I had the pleasure of hearing Robert Creeley reading Williams et >al. Amen. There was also the radio reading of Whitman with the Prairie Home Companion guy, the Deliverance guy (is my memory correct?) and Allen Ginsberg. The first two were self-conscious and silly, but AG's reading was tremendously illuminating. He *inhabited* Whitman's line is if it were his true home (why not? since it is). No change (to parallel Tony Green) from AG reading AG, but, as Tony put it, "a real intelligent sense of what the text was doing at any point." Worth finding if anyone knows how to find it. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Judy Roitman | "Glad to have Math, University of Kansas | these copies of things Lawrence, KS 66045 | after a while." 913-864-4630 | Larry Eigner, 1927-1996 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 14:55:14 CST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Baratier Subject: Chapbook Contest Pavement Saw Press 1996/1997 chapbook contest $500 and 25 copies of the winning chapbook will be awarded for the finest collection of poetry received. The judge will be announced in an upcoming issue of AWP and Poet's and Writer's. Submit up to 32 pages of poetry. Include a cover letter with your name, address, phone number, poem titles, publication credits, and a brief biography. Do not enclude your name anywhere on the manuscript. Entry fee: $7. Make all checks payable to _Pavement Saw Press_. All entries must be postmarked by December 20, 1996, for consideration in this year's contest. Each entrant will receive a copy of the winning chapbook provided a 6 1/2 by 9 1/2 SASE with $1.01 in postage is included. All manuscripts will be recycled. Send all entries to: Pavement Saw Press Chapbook Contest 7 James Street Scotia, NY 12302 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- About last years winner: Pavement Saw Press proudly announces the winner of our 1995-1996 chapbook award: Permutations of the Gallery by Joshua McKinney Poems from this collection first appeared in publications such as the Columbia Poetry Review, Denver Quarterly, Situation, Santa Barbara Review, and Willow Springs. Publication, a prize of five hundred dollars and ten percent of the book run are awarded to the winner of the annual prize. *Permutations of the Gallery* was selected by Naton Leslie as the 1996 winner of the Pavement Saw Poetry Chapbook Award. About the book: Permutations of the Gallery is an ambitious collection, even if recklessly so. Joshua McKinney's poems struggle against the confines of syntax and literal sense, in order to arrive at a uniquely clear grasp of the truces we must maintain with time and spacial existence. To attempt to paraphrase these knotty and paradoxical poems would be akin to stating that Wallace Stevens wrote about the weather. Don't search for narrative threads here, poems about Queen Anne's Lace or cicadas, or paeans for our humdrum, domestic lives. And don't expect to read this book once. Naton Leslie Joshua McKinney knows that philosophy is not an abstract matter, nor in anyway separate from our everyday lives. His poems show that to engage the world intimately, we need to _think_ it in the most particular ways. In *Permutations of the Gallery* family friends, nature, and a troubling social world are not givens, but rather questions by which we explore the twisting, disruptive, estatic, sometimes even annihilating terms of our existence. Mark Wallace A poetry held taut, that revels in economy and clarity, is filled with insights and syntactical compassion. I highly recommend *Permutations of the Gallery*. Simon Perchik Published in a limited edition of 250 copies, perfect bound, 6 by 9 size Price $5.00, includes postage & handling. Checks payable to: Pavement Saw Press 7 James Street Scotia, NY 12302 Thanks dave.baratier@mosby.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 15:15:54 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Henry Gould Subject: Re: in defense of parasites In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 8 Jul 1996 15:06:26 -0500 from Lurkers win my admiration for their self control. Now as I was saying about Charles S. Peirce... Perhaps John Milton's classic SONNET (yall hear that? I said S*O*n*n*e*t) is appropriate here: Thine e-air, Lord, doth buzz with eerie speed Postings innumerable from fair and noir; Oft over snail mail doth thine angels soar, Froward to advance, or staunch impede Eelecteronic eels athwart thy deep-- Yea, over hill and dale and chip and bleep They fling their witty bits, or, bootless, weep; Thus many a mungy wolf turn eep-eep sheep. Yet I, gone blind from staring at yon screen, Will not despair, nor call o'duty shirk; These keys annoy not I; my fingers keen Tap yet, yon delphic "Ode on a String Bean". - Technohysterical, tis true - and yet - 'twill work! They also serve, who only sit and lurk. - Henry "Johnny B. Milt" Gould ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 15:44:44 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Dean Taciuch Subject: Re: poetry performance >Dean & Tony's positions are misinformed. Not speaking for Tony Green, but I may in fact be uninformed rather than misinformed (I'm not actor, never studied acting, etc). But it is the actor's "abilty to chameleon" that may be the problem. I'm not saying they are "emoting fools"; the question is one of focus--an actor looks for a character to get into. Yes, actors have directors--but poets don't, you see. Would an actor assume the character of the poet whose work is being read? That misses the point, doesn't it? So would, I fear, any attempt to "act" a poem out--it places the focus elsewhere (on character, emotion, story) rather than on the language. It shows, I think, a distrust of the audience as well--the idea that poetry needs to be a bit predigested (by the actor or director), already worked out so that the masses can more easily absorb it. So I'm not knocking actors--but performing poetry is not acting. . . Dean Taciuch ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 14:49:59 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Listpersonship/aldon/rvh In message <199607081810.NAA16677@charlie.cns.iit.edu> joe a writes: > but maria, isn't this just IT?... i mean isn't it exactly the case, > *exactly*---that list politics, intentionally or otherwise, reflect the > ongoing silencing of Other politics?... ergo attending to list politics, > however one (which is to say, e.g., me) goes about same, is not merely an > exercise in formal maneuvers, but a very (forgive me) *real* attempt not to > be dismissive of such political undercurrents?... isn't it the case that > issues of 'race, sociology and literary criticism' are over there (and > where else could there be but print?) *and* over here?... i mean, if > there's a there there, is there no here here?... > > With all due respect, joe, for your politics and the sophistication thereof, no, i don't think the discussion of whether or not bob von hallberg signs onto POETIX is the same as a discussion of how to do responsible, anti-racist scholarship in poetry and poetics. I was hoping for a discussion of the latter, not the former. so, how DO we respond, in our scholarship, to the challenges posed by both Bob and Aldon in their point counterpoint, regardless of who is quoting whom more accurately? md ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 16:02:17 -0400 Reply-To: Robert Drake Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert Drake Subject: Re: Listpersonship >... a modest proposal that wouldnt be a Litterary ILLusion, would it? there, my post fr th month, and only 8 days into it... lbd ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 16:03:45 CST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Baratier Subject: Re: Perchik Aldon Perchik's selected poems have a number of textual problems which lead me to recommend the originals, if possible. The poems are manically compressed onto the page space in such a fashion that renders them either inadequately represented (through the loss of a readers eye) or unfathomable without extensive page flipping. The editors of this series decided to clump the work together as close as possible, instead of the full-page-per-poem demands of a syntax driven syndoche. Be well. David Baratier ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- David -- I had been aware of that via the old Perchik _Selected_; but the book as a whole had left a bad feeling in me that kept mt from returning to it -- Now, I'd like to take a look at the fuller sequences (the Frank series in the selected appears to be less than half the sequence?) Will give Simon a second try on your advice -- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 15:51:37 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Listpersonship/aldon/rvh In message UB Poetics discussion group writes: > At 12:19 PM 7/8/96, maria damon wrote: > >i'm somewhat struck by how a discussion about race, sociology and literary > >criticism has turned into a discussion of list etiquette. this is indeed > >one of > >the problems i think rob wilson touches on in his scathing "covering cherub" > >posts. volatile issues of materialist criticism get watered down into an > >internicene critique of our own teensy weensy little hierarchy of > >poetry-critics > > Poetry-critics? Am I naive in my assumption that the poetics list was at > least originally intended as a place for the discussion of poetics by > *poets*? > > > this not to say that any one remark about list-politics and academic > > politics > >is trivial or ill-directed, but the cumulative effect of what draws > discussion > >and what dies in silence is noteworthy. likewise, chris s's query last week > >about erotics and race, or aldon's challenge to the view that interracial > >sex is > >politicallly radical both got no pick-up. > > Again, this is a *poetics* list. I'm sorry, but I find this > holier-than-though attitude of your post very offensive, this accusing of > 400 people of racism because no once picked up on threads that *you* found > important. > > Dodie Bellamy i'm puzzled. this is the second time since the conference that you've come down on me for holier than thouness; both times, i've felt misrepresented in the way you characterize my posts. i have not accused anyone of racism, nor in general would i, since i find that kind of personal judgement to be counterproductive and not too meaningful. i'm saying i was disappointed at the way the discussion went. in my reference to poetry-critics, i was referring specifically to the discussion of robert von hallberg's presence and/or absence on the list and what it means. he is a critic rather than a poet; aldon too is a subject in this discussion, and it is true that he is a poet, but it was his work as a critic that was being discussed. i think "senior scholars" is the term joe used. bests, md ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 11:09:01 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: Re: in defense of parasites In-Reply-To: <01I6U1UDYPK28WW1EA@edinboro.edu> Just wanted to thank Elizabeth Joyce for her heartfelt message about lurking. Me too, small kids, lots of work and lots of learning. Also occasional bleeps. Ron, you can't have meant US!! :-) What sort of creature were you thinking of? gab. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 11:10:30 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: Ekphrastic Poetry by Women (9/15/96; NEMLA 4/4-4/5) (fwd) North East Modern Language Association April 4-5, 1997 Philadelphia, PA Session: Image and Text Topic: Ekphrastic Poetry by Women There has been considerable interest recently in the genre of ekphrastic poetry, that is, in A.J. Heffernan's useful phrase, poems which are "verbal representations of visual representations." W.J.T. Mitchell has discussed the tendency of poems in the ekphrastic tradition to treat the image as a "female other." The genre, he writes, "tends to describe an object of visual pleasure and fascination from a masculine perspective, often to an audience understood to be masculine as well." Somewhat offhandedly, he con- tinues: "All this would look quite different, of course, if my emphasis had been on ekphrastic poetry by women." The session seeks papers which put the emphasis exaclty there, papers which discuss poetry in which the speaking and seeing subject of the text is a woman. Can a "female gaze" be characterized? What does it mean when a woman is in the position of viewer, respondent, "envoicer," maker of the poetic meaning. How do ekphrastic poems written by women complicate current theories of ekphrasis? Other critical questions that arise in this context: why this painting, and why now? What does it reveal about the poet's temperament, her character, her situation in time and place? what does it reveal about her sense of self as artist, her aesthetic, political and moral position vis-a-vis her chosen painter? Papers are invited about all historical periods. Prospective panelists need not be members of NEMLA to submit a proposal; but selected panelists must be members of NEMLA by November 1, 1996 in order to have their names included in the convention program. Send a brief abstract of your paper, postmarked no later than September 15, 1996 to the following address or email. Selected panelists will be notified no later than October 15,991 1996. Sara Lundquist Department of English University of Toledo Toledo, OH 43606 email: SLUNDQU@uoft02.utoledo.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 15:31:00 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Pritchett,Pat @Silverplume" Subject: Re: poetry performance Comments: To: Judy Roitman I would just add that the moment anyone "stands up" in front of someone else to speak that moment "becomes" theatrical and those who ignore this do so at their (and their audience's) peril. Actors can enhance a text; they can also make a hash of it. The key (as someone mentioned) is the presence of a director. All of this begs the question, Is the poet always and necessarily the best reader of his/her own work? Usually, yes. But not always. I've heard some real botches, generally from people with a very poor notion of the intrinsic theatricality of even the most perfunctory spoken exchange. To assume that just standing there and "telling the truth" as James Cagney once described acting can result in readings that are painfully bad in their naivete. And also very powerful. I think readings are both theatrical and anti-theatrical. That is, the encounter between the reader and the audience creates ipso facto a theatrical experience, but one which is anti-theatrical in that it forces our attention away from the expectations usually aroused by the idea of a performance. Valery said the best way to read a poem is very plainly and without any adornment. Well, yes and no. Patrick Pritchett ---------- From: Judy Roitman To: Multiple recipients of list POETICS Subject: Re: poetry performance Date: Monday, July 08, 1996 2:57PM <> >Hi Christopher Whipple. Response to your notion abt actors. Distaste >for actors reading poetry for me goes with the felt difference >between stand-ups and actors. "Stand-ups can't act" is a way of > noticing that stand-ups do not seem to know they are assuming > a role (even though, of course, they are). Actors always assume > roles. Rather than actors you want really good poet-readers. Last >year I had the pleasure of hearing Robert Creeley reading Williams et >al. Amen. There was also the radio reading of Whitman with the Prairie Home Companion guy, the Deliverance guy (is my memory correct?) and Allen Ginsberg. The first two were self-conscious and silly, but AG's reading was tremendously illuminating. He *inhabited* Whitman's line is if it were his true home (why not? since it is). No change (to parallel Tony Green) from AG reading AG, but, as Tony put it, "a real intelligent sense of what the text was doing at any point." Worth finding if anyone knows how to find it. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Judy Roitman | "Glad to have Math, University of Kansas | these copies of things Lawrence, KS 66045 | after a while." 913-864-4630 | Larry Eigner, 1927-1996 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 16:26:27 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: Listpersonship/aldon/rvh maria, listen: let me set my own record straight here, or gay, or whatever, and w/o any rancor (really!): i find a certain degree of discomfort---aside from my intentionally (there i go again ron, shit!) provocative remarks addressed 'at' my neighbor, robert von hallberg---who, as i say, i've never met, but who teaches right down the street from me---i find a certain degree of discomfort in debating 'about' the point-counterpoint discussion twixt aldon and robert, w/o robert being t/here... you wanna know what i think?... for one, i found robert von hallberg's remarks to be--- but you see, whereas i might backchannel my response to you and others with whom i feel a certain affinity---friendship, trust---and have over time owing to our online interaction, to go public with my opines given robert's 'entrance' on this list just doesn't feel right to me, i can't help it... this is a feeling i get, and i think it's justified... and so i'm stuck with examining why i feel so, and how this is a function of how this list discussion works... and of course, were robert to make a formal entrance, i think you know me well enough to know that i wouldn't be shy about agreeing or disagreeing etc... that said, i think i can offer this much as a relative rule-of-thumb from my pov: i tend to measure comments that have to do with minority and ethnic textual representation in terms of how well these latter play to my idea of good pedagogy, and good curricula... i mean to say that, aside from issues of canonicity per se, there are issues here having to do with WHO the students are who are being taught, of what their needs are, of where they're coming from, and of what we think we should be teaching them and how this plays off against their needs... maria, just imagine what i think of certain comments made wrt this latter tendency of mine to measure same against pedagogy and curricula... best, joe ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 17:30:15 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest Subject: performance & poetry: "measure carefully, can be toxic" i don't think it is a matter of actor/non-actor/poet reading as it is the way the poetry is read, the experience of the reader with poetry reading and audience, the dynamics of the situation. i have heard more than anyone's share of poets reading badly. one all too common and painful scenario is the Dramatic Reader. acting and dramatic reading is, as one might expect, a highly skilled art, not to be embarked upon by the extravagantly undertalented. too often, a new writer will write a shaky melodramatic paraphrase of all the shaky melodramatic works written since the dawn of time. the ethos of reading for such work is an earnest, admonitory expression, lots of william shatner pauses, and a speeded-up pace whose only virtue is that it ends the exhibition more quickly. the melodramatic pauses and sudden shreiked words, no doubt inserted at the urging of some would-be instructor or other to "make it interesting," have all the lethal quality of high school plays. on the other hand, i have, myself, succumbed to the I Am A Poet Reading Poetry style -- monotone, odd pronounciation, rhythm subsumed to a throaty growl, eyes glued to the page. i don't know why i succumb to this; can only guess that one sees it at enough respectable readings to make it the default. the finest readers i've heard -- grace paley, galway kinnel, adrienne rich, martin espada, alicia ostriker, tim o'brien and larry heineman (prose), maxine kumin, carolyn forche, [doubtless more but i want to get on with this] -- tend to 1) read very slowly; poetry is compressed, tight, and requires much more work to parse, so if it is read too fast, it deconstructs into a blur of nothing; 2) seem, as larry heinemann has put it, to "see/hear/feel" the images as they read them. in other words, as the reader reads, they too are experiencing the writing. it lingers where a listener needs time to hear, speeds up where a listener is eager to hear more; 3) have enough confidence in the material not to need to jazz it up with shatnerian excesses (ala flannery o'connor quote in someone's signature ~ 'i've had as much of this pleasure as i can stand'). one reading comes to mind particularly -- martin espada reading with a jazz band. it sounds as if it would be horrible and i wasn't expecting much but it was one of the most extraordinary experiences of poetry i've ever had. martin has a deep basso voice, flexible, burred, resonant. he waited, took in the rhythm of the jazz peice, then entered combining rhythm of poem and rhythm of music. paused. listened. let the music make itself part of the sound in a compelling way. if i were putting together a collection of performed work, i'd listen for non-hoakey readings (dylan thomas' "child's christmas in wales" is a gorgeous antithesis of hoakey -- really lovely, resonant, hypnotic). and only use people i'd heard reading the peice. no room for surprises. and emphasize slowness, respect and tenderness for the words rather than efforts to make them more exciting. for WWI poets, MUST BE SLOW. poems are extraordinary stories, and if not paused over, heard, then becomes a jumble of rhymes. also, i don't see any women writers in there and i also wish i did. norton anthology of literature by women, as well as magazines of the time, are good source material. i've always wanted to hear more of how women of that time experienced WWI. i had a teacher in high school who lost her two shining older brothers, her lover, her cousins -- an entire generation of british men were wiped out in that ghastly mess. she went to germany after wwII to the camps, part of her committment after WWI to not glorifying military, and translated for DP's. of camps, she has said only "i'll never forget the smell as i went through the gate that first day. never." and first women nurses were going over with nightingale in wwI. i think there must be some extrardinary women's writing from them. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 16:54:00 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Alexander Subject: Re: performance & poetry: "measure carefully, can be toxic" >i don't think it is a matter of actor/non-actor/poet reading as it is >the way the poetry is read, the experience of the reader with poetry >reading and audience, the dynamics of the situation. absolutely. And more, too, a kind of tuning, reader to what is read to audience. For often so much depends on this syllable with that, move to a particular kind of liquid consonant, or fricative, and echoing that two or three lines later with something else which one wants to be heard but which one doesn't want to stress too much. this is attention to the language at hand, having possibly nothing to do with "character." Yet there is also a personality projected in a reading. Lyn Hejinian does it very well; Mei-mei Berssenbrugge is extraordinary; Leslie Scalapino is captivating. And others. I like to think that great work is easy to read well -- it actually helps the reader. But still it may require some unusual attentions. Attentions which may not be at all easy for any actor, and which the writer may embody differently on different occasions, to more or less success. Glad to hear of the success of a Martin Espada reading -- I heard him a couple of times early on, when he was a student, and then it seemed over-dramatized to the point that I didn't want to listen. But then bp Nichol's readings/sound poetry performances were extremely animated, and they are about the best I have ever heard. charles ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 17:28:29 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Judy Roitman Subject: Re: performance & poetry: "measure carefully, can be toxic" >i'd listen >for non-hoakey readings (dylan thomas' "child's christmas in wales" is >a gorgeous antithesis of hoakey Interesting. That reading *defines* hokey for me. My husband (Stan Lombardo) recently gave a selected reading from his forthcoming translation of the Iliad (publ: Hackett), working with a director and a percussionist. It was great, and I'm a very tough critic of Stan's readings. The director definitely did something good. But he was working with a poet, not an actor, and was sympathetic to the difference. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Judy Roitman | "Glad to have Math, University of Kansas | these copies of things Lawrence, KS 66045 | after a while." 913-864-4630 | Larry Eigner, 1927-1996 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 12:28:48 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: think of meeee! Going for an interview at a community college for a lit teaching job this afternoon (my first serious interview) so please send blessings this way at 3 p.m my time (3 hours behind SF), oh good people. gab. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 18:49:37 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Lisa Samuels Subject: Re: performance & poetry: "measure carefully, can be toxic" In-Reply-To: <199607082130.RAA07792@toast.ai.mit.edu> from "Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest" at Jul 8, 96 05:30:15 pm for poetry performance: i still want to see someone at least *begin* a reading from behind an opaque black (or whatever) curtain -or- put an enormous mirror in front of the curtain so the audience sees only itself for a while (small venue and large mirror required) -or/and- position mirrors on either side of the stage so the audience can see the poet from the sides only, still behind the curtain something along those lines and for eliza mcgrand -- as for #3, i prefer the phrasing of a country song: 'I've enjoyed as much of this as I can stand' my month's worth, lisa samuels ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 10:58:23 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: wystan Organization: English Dept. - Univ. of Auckland Subject: Re: in defense of parasites Comments: To: EJOYCE@EDINBORO.EDU Dear lisa, good work. you can stay on the list for another month. seriously though, ron didn't mean it. i who never mean it could add modest proposals of my own and so trivialise discussions of race, sex and class even further... think up rules specific to specific people. like if ron really loses his temper that's it, he's out. the list citizenship of boomers debating the merits of beatles and stones is already in question i understand ... hope to hear from you more wystan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 15:02:56 +0000 Reply-To: creiner@crl.com Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Christopher Reiner Subject: Witz Announcement Hi everyone, Can this count as my once-a-month message?..... WITZ: A Journal of Contemporary Poetics Essays * Criticism * Reviews NOW AVAILABLE ISSUE 4.2 - SUMMER 1996 CONTENTS: Towards A Free Multiplicity of Form By Mark Wallace "...In a free multiplicity of form, all forms of writing are possibilities that may or may not lead to a particular form of cultural life. In such circumstances, use of a poetic form does not become the equivalent of a manifesto-like assertion of one's values, but instead becomes a matter of exploration..." ------------------------------- "'Our Words Were The Form We Entered': Towards A Theory of the Net" By Loss Pequeno Glazier "...The cultural dimensions of technologies occur once they escape their original definition, subsequently undertaking vast production and reproduction of these alternative subjects. At this point, the purpose of the technology no longer holds court. Rather, control of its rapidly diversifying subjects becomes the focus of attention..." -------------------------------- ALSO: CHRIS STROFFOLINO ON NYU POETRY TALKS CRAG HILL ON bpNICHOL STEPHEN ELLIS ON TOD THILLEMAN 40pp, 5" x 8-1/2" Individual issues: $4 (US) Subscriptions (3 issues, 1 year) $10 Institutional Subscriptions: $30 (3 issues) Please make checks out to Christopher Reiner. WITZ 12071 Woodbridge Street Studio City, CA 91604 creiner@crl.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 11:28:56 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: wystan Organization: English Dept. - Univ. of Auckland Subject: Re: performance & poetry: "measure carefully, can be toxic" Comments: To: elliza@AI.MIT.EDU dear eliza, i don't think poets read badly or well. (thinking back to the post which kicked this off, everyone responded to the actor's do it better bit, but what about Mr Whipple's abhorrence for coffee house readings upon the preference was predicated? for myself coffeehouses, or bars, disused churches, stinking holes in the wall ... are where I hear poetry. Actors read poems on stages, in school assembly halls, well appointed community centres... places i don't go. but where i really want to read myself next is in this great indoor rock-climbing place) poets have good days and bad days, but in my experience they read their work as they mean it to be heard and if it doesn't sound good to you then its poetry you don't like. wystan ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 10:08:18 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mark Roberts Subject: Re: Listpersonship One of the advantages of being on this list is that it gives those of us outside of the 'centre(s)' a chance to have some input etc. In many cases we may not post for months, but one learn much from lurking and reading about US or UK based discussions. While encouraging people to contribute to the list is a good idea it could also be counter productive in driving away those 'marginal' list members who occassionally may have something important to say..... anyway that's my 20c worth...and should keep me on the list for another month!! :) __________________________________ Mark Roberts Student Systems Project Officer Information Systems University of Sydney NSW 2006 Australia M.Roberts@isu.usyd.edu.au PH:(02)351 5066 FAX:(02)351 5081 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 21:13:48 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Loss Glazier Subject: Server failures If you have trouble retrieving files or otherwise accessing the EPC, please keep trying intermittently. The hardware folks are having some problems with the machines so things that are really there at the EPC sometimes give you 'do not exist' error messages. Hopefully, these problems will be resolved soon! ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 21:13:50 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Loss Glazier Subject: Private List/Public Space >okay keith, cool. good points all. i didn't realize we cd be cited in books >w/out our permission. i'll have to start watching my tongue, my back, my mind >and my fingers. bests, maria d -------------------------------------------------------------------- My 'read' on how this list is private is that the attempt is to keep it small in size. (A list in general is many things but most tend towards enormous sizes, fantasy-tinged anonymity, and a climate where hit-and-run incidents of spamming and flaming are considered, just like having a tv blaring in the room, normal.) I think the goal here is to aim for a size where we can know each other as much as would be possible in a non-virtual world (if there could be that many jobs in one place). As for being cited, this is how I'd think of it. In contrast to conversation, where one is rarely cited, a post to the list is like a post on a bulletin board in the hallway. It is a comment made in public. Though not considered 'formal' writing, I think some things get cited because the informality that nurtures them also gives them a liveliness that says more than is said elsewhere. (Well, ok. In addition, messages are also archived.) And let's face it. In certain areas such as the discussion of new books and reports on conferences (crucial nutrients for many of our interests!) the print medium has long abandoned us. (As such we may be cited the way a comment in a _good_ book review is occasionally cited) A list such as this can be a 'journal' in a truer sense that 'The Journal of ...'. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 05:31:46 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Carnography Subject: Re: poetry enormance And then there are those who post when they ought to be lurking (And I don't mean Mr. Whipple). Christopher K. Whipple typed: > Does anyone have any ideas on why coffee house readings are so often lame > and depressing; why do these horrible people have a monopoly on the > espresso circuit, while so much that is delicious is abandoned to a > half-life in academia? XV. The coffee-house is not simply a generic site for poetry. It carries with it overtones of beat-poetry, which, for the unimaginative, conjure a kind of Fred Flinstone version of a "poetry scene": pseudo-scat-singing, faux lyricism (doo-bee-doo-wah sound-patterns), comic-book-Picasso pastiches of abstract verse ("that blue/...*now*"), and even the notion that poetry ought to be autobiographical ("I [lived/hated] [X kind of downtown] life and I [loved/despised] it.") or preachy [I'm here to educate you by railing at the teachers I hate]. 2. Careerism on the part of readers and organizers does much to kill the encouragement of individual talent. Also: mere poetry, and thoughtful performance, prove irrelevant to various cliques and clots of paradoxical careerists who proffer bios instead of brio and lyrics instead of the lyric. Careerism is an invitation to mediocrity; to paraphrase Cicero, the insistence of those who shout is often a hindrance to those who wish to listen. c. There's altogether too much self-aggrandizement in much contemporary poetry. Writers like Sapphire and Dael Orlandersmith are certainly worthy of interest, but the entire slant of merely autobiographical writing is responsible, I think, for providing even more impetus to the profoundly self-congratulatory. It was his exasperation at the plethora of musical cliches masquerading as emotion that led Stravinsky to say, "Music doesn't have the power to express anything." Also: when the writer is not vigilant, autobiographical detail can become an excuse for narcissism. I tend to think that the trick of autobiographical writing is *not* to be self-absorbed. Iv. The dumbing of poetic audiences is also responsible for the blinding tedium of many performances. Organizers have forgotten that poetry can function on difficult levels and still communicate in the basic sense. (Hindemith's Gebrauchmuzik is as common as it is chiseled.) Paradoxically, it is often the populist and not the cryptographer who obscures poetic meaning. 4. Many publicized poetic events are well-meaning attempts to assault high culture that result, inevitably, in more mere low culture. > Does anyone have any ideas on how poetry can be successfully performed? > Has anyone seen examples, even failed ones? I would like to see performances that combined music and words but didn't overuse popular cadences or stress-patterns, such as Nyorican cadences ("I saw/that/man, that/high-handed/Mosh-pit/religion of/lint/gone/lyric) I'd like to see (or rather, hear) performances in which sound and poetry are explored more closely, with textures as involved as those of chamber music. I'd be also be interested in readings that excluded overt autobiography. More plays: the emergence of poetic theater, of plays in which, as in absolute music, texture, modulation and other abstract elements, were the primary source of tension and release rather than the narrative. I'd like to see performances and plays in which devices like simultaneous monologue and tergiversation functioned as dramatically as textured dynamics in baroque Concerto Grossi. with props to Annie & Jerry: readikns ik iknu khk, thy enormoranges ih? dhh, ips op/errant, scansion p'll ear-wheel ego deeno quagnum eensy ernst Al Iz Blesteraht, Rob Hardin (According to Cankerian analysis) http://www.interport.net/~scrypt ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 21:07:43 +1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Daniel Salmon Subject: Re: Another ethnic group At 09:43 AM 6/07/96 -0500, you wrote: >>If one were so foolish as to try to describe contemporary Native American >>poetries briefly, what would that description be, and what names would be >>attached? I was interested to read Charles response to this. Any such classification is by nature 'reductivist' I realise this is an obvious response, but i am interested as similar arguments have been going on here (on various levels) in NZ about Maori & Pacific Island Poetry. It seems that classification by ethnicity/race etc is at times even more meaningless than by geography - eg as a focus/reason for an anthology, though on the other hand this is a usefull 'tool' for facilitating getting other non-mainstream poets into print. I guess a large point here is that classifications are often more by POET than by POETRY. I could go into this more but am falling asleep at the keys, and will very soon make less sense (having immensely enjoyed Wystan's exhibition in Wellington this afternoon, then braved the emmissions of our awakening antipodean volcano flying back to Auckland.) Hope this is enough to keep my 'place' on the list. Dan. "The urge to silence penetrated every corner" - Glen Simpson >> >>No, I'm not giving a course, and do have other sources (Haskell Indian >>Nations University is down the road a short piece), but I'm curious what >>members of this list would say. > > >Mostly I wouldn't be so foolish. But one thing I would be careful about is >that adjective "contemporary." For me, it would have to include works from >the oral tradition, which are still living, therefore "contemporary." And >many of these works are subject to contemporary variations. Too often >(although I think this has changed somewhat in the last couple of decades) >the oral traditions have been treated as past, as relics. In many cultures >they are decidedly not so. Some of the primary work in this regard has been >done by Larry Evers through the Sun Tracks series at the University of >Arizona Press, and to my mind some of the very best of that is the work with >Yaqui oral traditions Evers has done in collaboration with Felipe S. Molina, >himself a Yaqui singer. > >But this is just one part of a huge story. > >good luck, > >charles > > Daniel Salmon ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 04:48:25 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Carnography Subject: Re: paradigms in defense of parasites To regard lurkers as parasites, I would have to long for a debate that has no audience. I do not long, and have never longed, for such a debate. Sometimes it is more parasitic to react than it is to pause and reflect. Who hasn't entered a conversation impulsively, only to learn that the subject was not what it seemed, or to realize, too late, that one has played Socrates in reverse; that one knew little and spoke at gaseous length? Yet sometimes the glitches and hiccups of impulse lead to discovery, to investigations of error that lead to invention. That is why lurkers and posters are almost of equal importance--even when either proves novice (or renunciate). One sometimes has time enough to post but not to reply to subsequent posts. This might be another reason why lurkers choose silence over expression. (All of this is so general that I feel I'm paraphrasing Dryden or Emerson, or possibly Napoleon Hill.) =A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7= =A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7= =A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7 =46lame-wars, I think, are more appropriate to usenet than they are to a discussion to which one is formally invited. They are also a nuisance to the participants, because everything involved, including piquant rebuttals, feels awful--even winning feels awful. I also regard flames as mere ad hominem, i.e., admissions of defeat. Also: I live in NYC. If I wished to participate in a violent argument, I could ask my local policeman why he was arresting innocent people. De facto anonymity, and uncredited citations, seem irreconcilable paradoxes to me: both bind one participant while purporting to free another. On uncredited citations: I have long disagreed with Kathy Acker's justification of all appropriation as anti-phallocentrism, as sufficient justification for literary theft. It is one thing if the writer is riffing on Dickens. But Kathy also appropriates from unknown writers, in which case the justification proves meaningless. One cannot riff on the reader's expectations if the "original" writer, the one who is being riffed on, is unknown. Acker also argues that the "original" writer is merely participating in a great authorless work (figuratively, but not literally, I agree). Still, I've noticed that Ms. Acker is careful to secure credit for her own efforts. (Do I detect a certan inequity in her excuse?) In such cases, I believe in giving credit to the original writer. =46or that reason, and for many others, it always thrills and pleases me to be able to quote an eloquent list, usenet or email writer by name. If s/he wishes to be cited by handle, that's fine as well. (As when usenet poster Brian Bulkowski said, of a manic depressive's affair with a borderline personality: "He failed to fail, which was a failure in itself.") =A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7= =A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7= =A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7=A7 Anyone who lurks might be a philosopher, and anyone who writes memorably deserves recognition. These are not posited ultimatums or dictums. These are merely my own tenets--for myself and for my own conduct. I give credit for selfish reasons--the act is almost as pleasurable as writing--and I listen to replenish depleted stock: I listen because I love to write. As such, I list my--tenets, anyone? (sorry)--with faux-Lisztian flourishes--on y/our list of lists. "hands that wander as they list"--Joyce, _Chamber Music_ Al the best, Rob Hardin http://www.interport.net/~scrypt ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 23:09:36 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Peter Quartermain Subject: Re: poetry performance I must say I'm inclined to agree with Tony -- actors tend, reading poetry in performance (I don't mean in a theatre so much as on disk or on tape) to draw attention to the singular voice of the speaker, and tend as a result to close down possible meanings that a reader like Bob Creeley might well leave open (and usually does). But there are nevertheless of course some amazing and wonderful readings by actors -- witness Siobhan McKenna's reading of Joyce, for instance. But it's worth remembering, too, that there are distinct fashions in reading poetry aloud -- Dylan Thomas' readings (for instance and especially from King Lear and The Duchess of Malfi -- CaedmonTC1158] always struck me as being over the top but) were extremely popular (as these sorts of things go) in the late 50s and 60s (the Shakespeare/Webster recording was made in 1952 but not released until 62) and of course Thomas himself had an enormous influence not only on the fact of reading poetry aloud but on the manner of doing so. One offshoot -- again which enjoyed great popularity -- is the really quite astonishing and to my ear utterly inappropriate and wrong-eared reading of Keats and Shelley by Theodore Marcuse ("The Poetry of Keats and Shelley" Lexington 7505 -- I don't know the date). Reading "Nightingale" Marcuse sounds very like Thomas in the first stanza, but soon starts milking it for all possible dramatic worth, sometimes prolonging not only a syllable but a consonant for as much as two or three seconds (and believe me, that's a long time indeed) with extreme pitch and volume shifts -- "F-a-a-a-a-a-de far away" in ever increasing treble tremolo diminuendo, "and QUITE *FORGET*!!!" pretty loud and vehement. Utterly absurd, utterly risible. But he played to packed houses for a (happily brief) while. But then, Thomas and Marcuse were playing to the house, and reading poems familiar to the hearer. How would they have fared, I wonder, with a poem unknown and possibly unperformed (in public, at any rate) before that one occasion. Basil Bunting used to say the only place to read poetry aloud was the pub. I'm inclined to agree. The classroom is a loathsome thing, god wot, but it too might be a place where people learn how to turn that inner silent voice into the outward actual one, reading a poem. Better readings? worse readings? Everything -- or so much at any rate -- depends on the circumstance, the context, the poem. At 11:34 AM 7/8/96 GMT+1200, Tony Green wrote: >Hi Christopher Whipple. Response to your notion abt actors. Distaste >for actors reading poetry for me goes with the felt difference >between stand-ups and actors. "Stand-ups can't act" is a way of > noticing that stand-ups do not seem to know they are assuming > a role (even though, of course, they are). Actors always assume > roles. Rather than actors you want really good poet-readers. Last >year I had the pleasure of hearing Robert Creeley reading Williams et >al. You want something like that: no putting on a special voice or >tone, no change from Creeley-voice reading Creeley that I could >identify, but a real intelligent sense of what the text was doing at >any point. That was really engrossing. To turn up the volume, to turn > up the decor, to turn up the video-presentation, may do something for > people who don't actually like poetry, but there is a danger in that of a >deceptive kind of substitution. I guess I feel the poetry is damaged, >more or less seriously by what you are thinking of. > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Peter Quartermain 128 East 23rd Avenue Vancouver B.C. Canada V5V 1X2 Voice and fax: 604 876 8061 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 23:09:33 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Peter Quartermain Subject: Re: oppen Burt: I'm not sure whether it's me or Peter Nicholls you had in mind, Burt, but you didn't miss anything, actually. Peter Nicholls ooopsed in sending to the List a message to me. So I might as well answer the question for everybody, if they don't already know. Over the last couple of years Rachel Blau DuPlessis and I have been assembling an anthology of critical essays on Objectivist poetics, with a fairly substantial Introduction which we drafted in April, entitled _The_Objectivist_Nexus_. The book is not yet *quite* complete, but the manuscript is currently under consideration. Peter At 03:00 PM 7/7/96 EST, you wrote: >I guess I must have missed something. Peter, could you say more about >California and the Objectivist Nexus? > >Burt [Kimmelman] > > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Peter Quartermain 128 East 23rd Avenue Vancouver B.C. Canada V5V 1X2 Voice and fax: 604 876 8061 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 22:38:04 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Marjorie Perloff Subject: Re: List wars In-Reply-To: <199607090404.AAA08750@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> Here's what strikes me as slightly absurd in the recent controversy re: Aldon Nielsen and Bob von Hallberg and Bob's non-membership on this list etc etc. Lorenzo Thomas, a Live Black Poet and the only one present in Orono gave a very interesting and moving talk about Melville Tolson. I knew almost nothing about Tolson and I learned a lot, also from Keith Leonard's paper. Lorenzo T is a fine poet but didn't get to give a poetry reading because he only came the last day? I'm not sure why. At any rate, instead of discussing this actual living poet-critic, we are now busy discussing the following: 1) Who was right about the Nielsen panel, Aldon or Bob? I am very fond of both and admire both very much; I wasn't there so I can't tell what really happened but I suspect there was less difference of opinion than appeared from Bob's and Aldon's letters. 2) Was it Ok for Keith Tuma to send on Aldon's remarks to a non-list member? 3) Was Bob von H within his rights in responding to the List? 4) Should Bob join the list asap?? 5) Should lurkers have to contribute to the list (as Ron suggested)? and so on and so forth. Thus it is that an important (to me) issue gets wholly lost in the shuffle. And thus it is that instead of talking about the black poet who was in our midst (Lorenzo)--as a poet, not just because he's black--we end up, academic-style, arguing about what white men (Aldon and Bob) are supposed to say about black poets. The whole thing strikes me as wonderfully silly. As Dodie said, I thought this was supposed to be a POETICS list. And what I want to know--since Bob's paper, fine as it was, doesn't convince me of the case is: why should I read Robert Hayden at all? I find his poems very boring and status quo? Why should I read him rather than such "forgotten white poets" as Archibald MacLeish or Babette Deutsch? Hadn't we better begin with such questions? Marjorie Perloff ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 22:28:46 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Perchik In-Reply-To: <199607090404.AAA08750@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> David -- Thanks for that info -- I wish I had known some of that back when I wrote that negative review of the book -- will make a habit in future of comparing ANY selected I get for review to samples from the original -- will be looking up those earlier books next time I have library card ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 22:25:08 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: " . . . : . . . " In-Reply-To: <199607090404.AAA08750@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> Dodie -- whatever else Maria's post might have been doing, it didn't seem to me to be accusing anyone of racism -- and despite my question, I don't suppose that if two interracial radicals have sex with one another they are any less radical -- It's just that there is, after all, quite a long history of reactionaries desegregating the sex act, on their own terms -- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 22:01:45 +0000 Reply-To: jzitt@humansystems.com Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: Joseph Zitt Organization: HumanSystems Subject: Re: Listpersonship Comments: To: Ron Silliman On 7 Jul 96 at 20:15, Ron Silliman wrote: > If I were feeling > intemperate (and I have my moments), I'd be inclined to suggest a rule > on the order of deleting anyone who doesn't contribute to the > discussion, say, once per month. Hmm... I'd much rather see those of us who have little to say remain active listeners rather than speaking just to be heard. I'm a newbie to poetics, and am learning a lot reading the list. When I have something to say, I do so, but I try not to when I don't. ---------1---------1---------1---------1---------1---------1---------- |||/ Joseph Zitt ==== jzitt@humansystems.com ===== Human Systems \||| ||/ Organizer, SILENCE: The John Cage Mailing List \|| |/Joe Zitt's Home Page\| ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 19:43:25 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: James Brook Subject: Re: Private List/Public Space Loss, I appreciate your comments regarding keeping the list intimate--which in this case means about 300 people, I believe. This does help promote productive discussion and develop the bases of a critical public with common interests. On the other hand, I'm uncomfortable with the idea that anything anyone writes here is available for citation elsewhere. I feel that if a comment is citable, then it must be a text--and subject to the same protections as any other text. No, I'm not particularly invoking copyright protection--but I do think that the citer should go ahead and ask the cited for permission. That's mere courtesy. Besides, if we feel that our words are subject to such reuse, then there's bound to be a chilling effect on discussion: fewer people willing to participate and the remaining participants under greater constraint. James Brook Loss Glazier wrote: > > I think the goal here is to aim for a size where we can know each other as > much as would be possible in a non-virtual world (if there could be that > many jobs in one place). > > As for being cited, this is how I'd think of it. In contrast to > conversation, where one is rarely cited, a post to the list is like a post > on a bulletin board in the hallway. It is a comment made in public. Though > not considered 'formal' writing, I think some things get cited because the > informality that nurtures them also gives them a liveliness that says more > than is said elsewhere. (Well, ok. In addition, messages are also archived.) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 21:16:44 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Listpersonship/aldon/rvh In message <199607082126.QAA18119@charlie.cns.iit.edu> UB Poetics discussion group writes: > maria, listen: let me set my own record straight here, or gay, or > whatever, and w/o any rancor (really!): i find a certain degree of > discomfort---aside from my intentionally (there i go again ron, shit!) > provocative remarks addressed 'at' my neighbor, robert von hallberg---who, > as i say, i've never met, but who teaches right down the street from me---i > find a certain degree of discomfort in debating 'about' the > point-counterpoint discussion twixt aldon and robert, w/o robert being > t/here... > > you wanna know what i think?... for one, i found robert von hallberg's > remarks to be--- > ..etc joe: listen, (no rancor detected in your comments, none intended in mine) it makes perfect sense to me that you'd want someone to be present when his comments were being discussed. i get it; it's ethical. it's just that i thought some of the issues raised by aldon and robert were really interesting --pedagogically (tho i hate that word), in terms of how we go about doing our scholarship and presenting it, etc... and i was disappointed to see those go unresponded to. for example, as i sd in my longish post, i don't consider my primary responsibility to be canon-building; thus i don't weigh "merit" in terms of modernist aesthetic values when i decide what to teach or write on. i do, though, have definite tastes, which are, willy-nilly, shaped by those values --heck, that's what i learned in school. the issue of what r von h considers condescension is also interesting to me. i don't see "universality" per se --if there is a per se --to be what writers should necessarily strive for (as few "shoulds" as possible) and i don't think the criterion for great writing should be its "universal" appeal. but there is a movement currently away from particularism in favor of SOME kind of universalism, tho that is constantly in tension with our sense of how vexed that term is. i've been interested to see folks i wouldn't have expected come to some kind of appeal to "universalism" in a way that would have been hard to imagine 15 years ago. at the same time, people seem to be qualifying it: "Jewish universalism", "marxist universalism" etc. I'm not sure quite what this means either, except that it announces the point of view from which everything is universalized (i think). From what i could gather of Bob's talk on Hayden, as well as his comments at the end of that panel (i was there, and i remember hearing it as aldon reported, tho i was not especially troubled by it --it just seemed like business as usual), he was not interrogating the category of universalism, or inflecting it in any way that moved it out of the vexed presumption-of-normative-values critical category; i'd like him to be on the list so we could find out if he really means that pound, eliot, etc set a standard other writers shd meet or if he means something different --perhaps more like what blurbs on bookcovers of books by writers of color appeal to the book's "universal appeal" --i.e. this is n't "just" an African-American book, etc. Both uses of the term are problematic, but is this really what he meant? I was touched by his reply because it was about ideas and a desire to be understood; though as i have sd, we come from very different places critically. so, joe, what kinds of things do you consider when preparing to teach or write "ethnic" or "Other" materials? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 22:00:51 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Emily Lloyd Subject: maria--/& performance Maria--didn't find your post offensive at all & think that yes, which threads do and don't get picked up merits observation, mention, critical examination etc., & thank you for boldly calling attention to it. I myself kept Chris S.'s post in my in-box for days, challenged & wanting to respond, & eventually giving up because I just didn't feel qualified to. I've been studying race and representation for years, & the more I study, the less qualified I feel to speak. Mostly I got worried & a little nauseated at the prospect of a predominantly-white-membered list discussing "race & erotics," esp. in the assertive and "I know what I'm talking about" voice many conversations here seem to take, even as I also get worried & perhaps more than a little nauseated at the prospect of same list skirting those issues. This is why I didn't respond. I personally couldn't care less about whether or not R V H signs on to the list, so I could post about it (although I won't) all day. It is not because I didn't care about the issues raised in CS's post that I didn't respond, but because I cared too much to respond quickly & maybe at all. & yes I'm aware this might sound sappy or irresponsible. But because I was worried & unsure how/if to proceed, holding off the procession seemed most "responsible" at the time. I'm not sure it was and--this sounds facetious but is meant sincerely--I'm sorry for not knowing, not being sure. It may be that others felt similarly-- ? --emily On performance-- Wystan, I can't agree that all poets read their work the way they mean it to be heard. There's that nerves thing: some folks just can't read in front of others. I've got a friend who, in front of a group: tongue death, stuttering, accidental automatic reading of earlier drafts, self-corrections in medias res, etc. It's painful to watch him--especially, I think, because he *is* such an interesting poet--when he reads, you'd hardly know. On the other hand, some poets who are great readers read not "as they mean [the poem] to be heard," but as they mean it to be *read* (on the page, in the reader's head)--meaning, the reading is captivating but it just ain't there on the page. I know that when I began reading my live linebreaks were rarely the same as my page linebreaks--I was so into the rhythm that when I looked on the page I saw the one I was reading out loud, but *nobody* else would. Since fixed, but always a challenge for me. That said, best of luck in getting to read in the indoor rock-climbing place--that sounds fabulous--& I wonder if fake cliffs cause echoes-- Eliza--I think it was you who brought up "poetry voice"---that monotone thing so many seem to slip into? I think I would rather hear Sally Field read than someone afflicted with poetry voice, all misplaced accents & drones. In less patient days, when that started to happen at readings, I'd get up and read "I...am at a PO-e-TRY...READ-ING...and ALL...of the PO-ETS...have FOUND...their VOICE...and it ALL..SOUNDS....like THIS" etc. Like it wasn't enough to sit through Keanu Reeves playing Siddhartha. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Emily Lloyd emilyl@erols.com "Emily said Emily said, Emily is admittedly Emily." --G. Stein ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 21:23:20 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Loss Glazier Subject: !Orono Online! _50s in Orono: the Reviews_ an online 'book' collecting reviews and comments upon the Orono conference will soon be announced as an active URL. If you were at the conference and were thinking of posting your reactions, please do so soon! ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 09:16:00 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: List wars maria, emily, marjorie, all: ((((and sorry folks for the little tirade i initiated re rvh's forwarded post (if in fact i initiated it) but i *did* say that it bugged me and i was feeling "grinch-like" and so what the hell i said so---again and again!)))) my primary problem as a white guy addressing at times black and latino/a students is that, to put it as simply as possible, i don't come from where they're coming from... i can generally relate along class-lines, given my own history, but i don't feel the same urgencies or necessities to validate my own racial or ethnic construction or gender construction (and combinations of same)... and even when i do feel this pull as a poet, i don't tend to come to it in the same terms... and this leads to all sortsa problems in the classroom... for example (and aldon, you've already heard some a this) i don't particularly care for maya angelou's or niki giovanni's poetry... i prefer, for lotsa reasons, ntozake shange's or erica hunt's or audre lorde's or rita dove's or wanda coleman's (which is not to say that i whole-heartedly embrace all work by these latter poets, either)... but maya angelou, for example, is extremely popular with black women in my classes these days... and she's popular in part, from what my students tell me, b/c her voice is one that they can relate to (an easily accessible identity formation)... and here i come with all of my [cough] c-c-c-critical sophistication, talking about voice as a set of conventions, asking them (after folks like patricia hill collins) what are they gonna DO with *their* voices once they 'find' them? etc... kinda pulling the rug out from under... of course, one could argue that the answer here is to work teaching in stages, developmentally... but for me this can all too often constitute indoctrination in a given stage (read 'aesthetic')... and besides, work that i like more, in order to appreciate it, already for me works at an advanced stage... uhm---no, not 'advanced,' i take that back---just more complex in the terms i indicate... so what i then have to do is find a way to promote dialogue among my students (and me at times)---which i think i'm never too good at, no matter how hard i try, mebbe b/c i'm so wedded to my *own* dialogic or monologic tendencies---to see if i can't get them to talk about the voice complexities i believe need airing... but thing is, many times the majority of the students are white students... so i end up at times trying to 'fill in,' trying to provide some leverage for my black and latino/a students *as a white guy*... i'm sure you can see the problem here... christ i've been through it over and over, and in my professional writing courses especially (which i teach many more of than lit. or creative writing courses, and which i teach in terms of institutional issues)... i'm lucky to have a mix of students in my classes, teaching on an urban campus as i do... but this is itself problematic to the extent that i don't have any humanities majors---all science, business, engineering... anyway, that's a start i s'pose... ysee, when it comes to who should be canonized, and comments about owing it to---posterity?---to safeguard the 'quality' of work that's passed along, well---whose aesthetic is at (the) stake here?... who passes what along to whom?... i too am culpable on the count of simple 'liking' or 'valuing' that is no doubt rooted in an aesthetic of whiteness... how, i'm not always certain, but i've no doubt this is true... at the same time, *as a poet*, i've simply got to be able to take my best guess at times as to work that doesn't, well, work!---incl. my own...i mean, I CAN BE VERY OPINIONATED (understatement of the month)... and even with peer review in a classroom, sooner or later an instructor gets involved in questions of evaluation, and in any case i evaluate all the damned time... and whatever the thorniness of these problems, i can't quite imagine entering into a discussion of who gets anthologized, say, w/o recognizing that anthologies, for better and for worse, are classroom tools... and anthologizing is one measure of canonicity... so for me the question of 'condescending' to such & such poets had better *begin* by considering who speaks, and to whom... i think the various what's will tend to emerge with greater clarity this way... best, joe ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 09:37:56 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: " . . . : . . . " aldon rites: > and despite my question, I don't suppose that if two interracial radicals > have sex with one another they are any less radical -- It's just that > there is, after all, quite a long history of reactionaries desegregating > the sex act, on their own terms -- okay, of course, i see. thanks for the clarification. still, i was thinking of folks like o'hara, who in the fifties was having gay sex w/ black men...a double taboo, though the taboo against miscegenation not so strong in his case since the fear of same was mostly due to the purported horrors of having "mixed" kids...i guess people can have radical practices (like gertrude stein) without necessarily having politically radical consciousnesses...and the reverse as well --etc....maria d ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 09:40:01 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Alexander Subject: Re: poetry enormance >Christopher K. Whipple typed: > >> Does anyone have any ideas on why coffee house readings are so often lame >> and depressing; why do these horrible people have a monopoly on the >> espresso circuit, while so much that is delicious is abandoned to a >> half-life in academia? I think this is overstating the case. For example, a lot of good readings, including by people on this list or talked about on this list, have taken place in coffee houses & bars, such as the Ear Inn in NY. My guess is that the ratio of "delicious" to "lame and depressing" in coffee houses & bars is somewhere near the same ratio in publications, academic departments, or anywhere. And I think there's a lot of work that's far from delicious which also has a life or half-life in academia. charles ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 10:37:54 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Mary Hilton Subject: Submissions for "Political Diction" In the spirit of July 4th (albeit 5 days late), submissions are now being accepted for "Political Diction 96," a magazine devoted to the electoral process, politics, government, and most specifically to the election year 1996. A multi-partisan magazine distributed each election year, it is hoped that "PD" will allow various views and thoughts about the democratic process to be expressed. Innovative essays, poetry, short stories and visual art are welcome. Submission deadline is August 15, and the mag will be distributed in Sept/Oct. Please send to: Political Diction 96 c/o Mary Hilton 1706 U Street, NW, #102 Washington, DC 20009 or send e-mail inquiries to mhilton@tia.org Thanks! ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 10:05:27 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: List wars joe: thanks for your considered reply. i myself tend not to teach stuff i don't feel i can get behind. once or twice i've taught adrienne rich and audre lorde --which was interesting for the class but boring for me, and problematic, because i don't want to be put in a role that could be construed as anti-feminist, but i also need to feel free to criticise work that doesn't excite me, tho i can appreciate its skill. sometimes, with rich, w/ undergrads, i take the opportunity to talk about the academic tradition and how someone can be part of it, trying to break out, and succeeding in some ways, but being reinscribed in it...that usually works --to talk about "radical politics" v. "radical style" etc. i don't know, joe, if there is a "white aesthetic" --that term seems to encode something more? i.e. new critical? modernist? etc. bests, md ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 09:42:17 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: List wars thank you, marjorie, this is exactly what i was trying to point out.--maria d In message UB Poetics discussion group writes: > Here's what strikes me as slightly absurd in the recent controversy re: > Aldon Nielsen and Bob von Hallberg and Bob's non-membership on this list > etc etc. > Lorenzo Thomas, a Live Black Poet and the only one present in Orono gave a > very interesting and moving talk about Melville Tolson. I knew almost > nothing about Tolson and I learned a lot, also from Keith Leonard's paper. > Lorenzo T is a fine poet but didn't get to give a poetry reading because > he only came the last day? I'm not sure why. At any rate, instead of > discussing this actual living poet-critic, we are now busy discussing the > following: > 1) Who was right about the Nielsen panel, Aldon or Bob? I am very fond of > both and admire both very much; I wasn't there so I can't tell what really > happened but I suspect there was less difference of opinion than appeared > from Bob's and Aldon's letters. > 2) Was it Ok for Keith Tuma to send on Aldon's remarks to a > non-list member? > 3) Was Bob von H within his rights in responding to the List? > 4) Should Bob join the list asap?? > 5) Should lurkers have to contribute to the list (as Ron suggested)? > > and so on and so forth. > Thus it is that an important (to me) issue gets wholly lost in the > shuffle. And thus it is that instead of talking about the black poet who > was in our midst (Lorenzo)--as a poet, not just because he's black--we end > up, academic-style, arguing about what white men (Aldon and Bob) are > supposed to say about black poets. > > The whole thing strikes me as wonderfully silly. As Dodie said, I thought > this was supposed to be a POETICS list. And what I want to know--since > Bob's paper, fine as it was, doesn't convince me of the case is: why > should I read Robert Hayden at all? I find his poems very boring and > status quo? Why should I read him rather than such "forgotten white > poets" as Archibald MacLeish or Babette Deutsch? Hadn't we better begin > with such questions? > Marjorie Perloff ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 09:52:20 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: maria--/& performance emily rites: > Maria--didn't find your post offensive at all & think that yes, which > threads do and don't get picked up merits observation, mention, critical > examination etc., & thank you for boldly calling attention to it. I myself > kept Chris S.'s post in my in-box for days, challenged & wanting to respond, > & eventually giving up because I just didn't feel qualified to. I've been > studying race and representation for years, & the more I study, the less > qualified I feel to speak. Mostly I got worried & a little nauseated at the > prospect of a predominantly-white-membered list discussing "race & erotics," > esp. in the assertive and "I know what I'm talking about" voice many > conversations here seem to take, even as I also get worried & perhaps more > than a little nauseated at the prospect of same list skirting those issues. > This is why I didn't respond. I personally couldn't care less about whether > or not R V H signs on to the list, so I could post about it (although I > won't) all day. It is not because I didn't care about the issues raised in > CS's post that I didn't respond, but because I cared too much to respond > quickly & maybe at all. & yes I'm aware this might sound sappy or > irresponsible. But because I was worried & unsure how/if to proceed, > holding off the procession seemed most "responsible" at the time. I'm not > sure it was and--this sounds facetious but is meant sincerely--I'm sorry for > not knowing, not being sure. It may be that others felt similarly-- ? > --emily yes, i see; e-mail is indeed a hard medium in which to have serious sustained inquiries about matters that require a lot of thought. this is certainly true; i often find myself fading out just when a big juicy issue that i really care about comes up, as if, as you say, i'm aware that the medium is working against me and a kind of pre-emptive weariness sets in. and no, you don't sound sappy and irresponsible in the least (to me), and yes, the prospect of mostly white folks holding forth confidently on the subject of race and eros is indeed a bit peculiar. but... i learned a lot from aldon's 4-line post clarifying his statement about un-radical desegregations of the sex act,that i wouldn't have learned if i'd just let it go. it was hard for me to ask for that clarification, cuz i had that inertia-feeling: "do i really want to open up this can o' words?" but i'm glad i did. i most emphatically did not mean to call anyone on the carpet --i really dislike this ad hominem/feminam stuff --but to point out, as marjorie has since, the way charged issues often get watered down. i think you may be right tht it's a function of the medium.--xo, md > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 10:31:29 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: " . . . : . . . " about this question of radical-ness (i got four days left hereabouts and then i'm away from my machine for three weeks, so i may as well post like hell): anecdotally speaking, some of the more radical poets i've known have led conservative lives---i'll let 'conservative' stand for mainstream living arrangements (by which i don't quite mean values), and i mean by 'conservative' at least as conservative as mine---whereas i can think of a few formal poets i've known who've been all over the charts in terms of how they've lived... i mean, i don't see any necessary connection, necessarily, twixt radical writing and radical living, though i do at times see connections... and i suppose necessity here is a function of what community one is a part of... so i guess what this means for biographically or culturally-based work is that it's best not to assume from the get-go such correspondences by way of 'explanation'?... love to hear more here... joe ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 08:42:13 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Herb Levy Subject: List, person, ship Mr Silliman's proposal does not adequately address the pernicious issue of the lurker slime on this e-mail list. Requiring a single post per month from each list member would likely result in cutesy, off-topic messages about the weather (it's been warm & sunny here in Seattle, but there are early morning clouds today) or irrelevant "me-too" posts in ongoing threads. As several people have already noted, this will result in too much empty traffic, further allowing the vampiric lurkers in our midst to stay on for another month of reading the collected wisdom of others at no cost to themselves. To actively combat these lurker vermin, we must require full participation by all list members in every current thread. After all, it is really not too much to ask that list members participate in the activities of the group. To start with, we could allow brief (less than a hundred words) responses to be made within forty-eight hours of the intiation of any new topic. However, to achieve the goal of total active participation, we would have to move quickly toward the more reasonable requirement that all list members respond within one hour to each post to the list (including their own) with a closely reasoned 250-500 word statement. To make it easier to follow the advanced discourse that would likely result under this new system, each list member would also have to provide a shorter abstract of their arguments. This simple change in policy would most certainly cut down on the number of non-participating lurker scum on poetics list and we would soon arrive at the kind of total and immediate participatory democracy that one usually sees in only a few of the more progressive-thinking Usenet newsgroups. Herb Levy herb@eskimo.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 10:49:47 CST6CDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Hank Lazer Organization: The University of Alabama Subject: Re: List wars Marjorie asked why should she/we read Hayden, stating that she was unconvinced by Robt's plenary session paper. I have been reading Hayden rather carefully for about ten years, and my argument may overlap with a slightly different question: why teach Hayden's poetry. I suppose in some ways I read and enjoy Hayden for reasons similar to the pleasure I take in re-reading Robert Frost--there is a subtle but serious self-criticism in their work, an undermining and ironizing, in Hayden's case a beautiful use of an occasional odd word in the poem (to my ear, similar to such a gesture in Oppen's work, though Robt's paper gave me a different and convincing way of hearing the indulgence in that savored single word in Hayden's poetry). Marjorie might even enjoy looking at Hayden's last poem, "American Journal," which, on the page, looks remarkably like David Antin's talk-poems. I teach Hayden in contemporary poetry classes, in part, for reasons that Robt discussed--to complicate and question certain assumptions about ethnic identity and to counteract a tendency to state what "the" African-American poet says etc. I generally teach Hayden (Collected Poems) along with a big unit on Baraka (I had been using The LeRoi Jones/Amirir Baraka Reader), discussing the many different positions taken by Baraka on Afro-centrism and on socialism, and putting Hayden's universalist pronouncements (which I read as somewhat in conflict with his actual poetic practice, reading that universalism as a "wish" rather than an actuality), then moving to considerations of gender as well in Audre Lorde's poetry and essays. In all three cases, I am making use of essays and poetry and interviews, trying to consider all these expressions as part of a single thinking, as part of a cultural critique, as part of a poet's activity as an intellectual. Also, I live and teach in Alabama, and Hayden's poems often push us into important and local considerations, including the complex intersections of Native American and African American culture here. Before Marjorie (or Robt) or others accuse me of offering merely sociological reasons for reading Hayden, let me add that I consider his poetry GOOD. Which poems? Here's a partial list--The Diver, Electrical Storm, The Rabbi, "Night, Death, Mississippi," "Incense of the Lucky Virgin," The Whipping, Those Winter Sundays, Middle Passage, and I'm only on page 48 of the collected. Hayden, to my ear, has an extraordinary ear, writes beautiful sounding poems. In little snippets, as in "so sibling innuendoes all aver--" or "His pain/ our anguish and anodyne" or in entire poems. I also admire the complex and shifting sympathies of Hayden's poems--something which Robt argued for as well. I don't think that my own enthusiasm for Hayden (and for Baraka and Lorde) will necessarily persuade others. I can vouch for the fact that re-reading Hayden's poetry over a number of years has been a pleasant experience, a re-reading that has re-paid the sustained attention. At any rate, on the way to the office, such are my quick notes to Marjorie (and others) about Hayden. A quick note too on the exchange between Aldon and Robert. I was there. Yes, I did argue for seeking and articulating different modes of reading, interpreting, evaluating in relation to Hughes (whose early poetry can be read and appreciated in a way that is not merely an analysis of "themes" when juxtaposed with some of the blues recordings he was listening to). (By the way, Hughes' "Theme for English B" raises interesting questions about ethnic identity vs. universalism in poetry....) It seemed to me that Robt came on a bit insulting and heavy-handed, though that was not, I think, his intention. Ultimately, I heard him arguing for a different balance (than he heard in this one panel) between sociological perspectives and close reading. He wanted more of the latter, as a means to defend or articulate the value and excellence of particular poems. Aldon explained that there were other panels (including the one done by him, Mark Scroggins, and Stephen Leonard, which I also attended, and which was excellent and informative and DID involve close readings of specific poems) that did precisely that, and that Robert should consider attending the CLA if he really wanted more information and to connect with what scholarship was being done. To my ears, some of the tension in their exchange has to do with issues of professional stature and the politics of the profession. Robert was ignorant of the CLA & indicated that he only attended (or mostly?) conferences where he was invited to speak. Aldon suggested that if Robt really was developing an interest in AFrican American poetries that he should attend CLA conferences and join the CLA. I drifted away from the conversation at that point, trying to ask Aldon and Robt to continue to talk to one another. I know and like both of them, and believe that a sustained conversation between both would be of value. De-lurked, and having said enough for July & August both, Hank Lazer ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 09:03:02 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Shaunanne Tangney Subject: Re: poetry performance In-Reply-To: <01I6U4LPLVYI8ZE1ZZ@iix.com> On Mon, 8 Jul 1996, Pritchett,Pat @Silverplume wrote: > I would just add that the moment anyone "stands up" in front of someone else > to speak that moment "becomes" theatrical and those who ignore this do so at > their (and their audience's) peril. Actors can enhance a text; they can > also make a hash of it. The key (as someone mentioned) is the presence of a > director. i have long argued that all art is ultimately performative because it ultimately requires an audience to be "complete." > > All of this begs the question, Is the poet always and necessarily the best > reader of his/her own work? Usually, yes. But not always. I've heard some > real botches, generally from people with a very poor notion of the intrinsic > theatricality of even the most perfunctory spoken exchange. To assume that > just standing there and "telling the truth" as James Cagney once described > acting can result in readings that are painfully bad in their naivete. And > also very powerful. even if all art is ultimately performative, it does not mean that all artists are ultimately good performers. it takes practice, and an attention to details other than those that went into the poem, and into the writing of the poem. > I think readings are both theatrical and anti-theatrical. That is, the > encounter between the reader and the audience creates ipso facto a > theatrical experience, but one which is anti-theatrical in that it forces > our attention away from the expectations usually aroused by the idea of a > performance. i suspect this also depends quite a bit on the poem, the way the poet wrote it. by this i mean that i tend to write more for the ear than the eye, because i think poetry is, finally, and oral medium. but there are many who would disagree with me, and so not write their poems with an ear for performance. best, shaunanne ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 11:59:35 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Daniel Bouchard Subject: Re: List wars and so on and so forth. Thus it is that an important (to me) issue gets wholly lost in the shuffle. And thus it is that instead of talking about the black poet who was in our midst (Lorenzo)--as a poet, not just because he's black--we end up, academic-style, arguing about what white men (Aldon and Bob) are supposed to say about black poets. The whole thing strikes me as wonderfully silly. As Dodie said, I thought this was supposed to be a POETICS list. _______________________ Who can blame lurkers for keeping silent? ["vermin, scum, slime," says Herb Levy referring to lurkers.] I'm pleased that Ron's post prompted at least one person to write in and say who she was, what she does, and why she's silent on the list. There's nothing wrong with keeping quiet in a discussion. On the other hand, it's better to type something in once in a while (even if you're unsure of yourself, or going out on a limb. There's few instances of flaming here, if any, my perception of the list over the past year has been one of general friendliness). Here are some other Herb Levy gems: "allowing the vampiric lurkers in our midst to stay on for another month of reading the collected wisdom of others at no cost to themselves." "To actively combat these lurker vermin, we must require full participation" "This simple change in policy would most certainly cut down on the number of non-participating lurker scum on poetics list and we would soon arrive at the kind of total and immediate participatory democracy" Democracy for you, Herb, is an elimination of the "scum?" Can the unfortunates help themselves if they (we) do not possess your "wisdom?" But I don't want to dwell on your post, I'm sure you have some vitriol headed your way. Something struck me about M. Perloff's post: the way the terms were set, as in "the black poet in OUR midst." What does "our" refer to? The members of the list who also attended the conference? I'm not clear as to whether Lorenzo's attendance at Orono was important to you because he is a poet, or because he is a black poet. Also, could you clarify "academic-style" as a form of argument and maybe propose an alternative? I've seldom seen any other kind of argument on this list (Lurkers, speak up!) daniel_bouchard@hmco.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 13:00:31 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Fred Muratori Subject: Re: List wars Re: >Democracy for you, Herb, is an elimination of the "scum?" Can the unfortunates >help themselves if they (we) do not possess your "wisdom?" But I don't want to >dwell on your post, I'm sure you have some vitriol headed your way. >> >daniel_bouchard@hmco.com Damn, I knew I was too naive and culture-bound to subscribe to this list. I thought Herb Levy's post was meant to be satiric. This means that now I'll have to re-read everything I've ever read to correct all my earlier mis-frissonings. Where will I find the time? *********************** Fred Muratori "Certain themes are incurable." (fmm1@cornell.edu) Reference Services Division - Lyn Hejinian Olin * Kroch * Uris Libraries Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 WWW: http://fmref.library.cornell.edu/spectra.html *********************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 11:59:42 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Alexander Subject: Re: List wars > >Who can blame lurkers for keeping silent? ["vermin, scum, slime," says Herb >Levy referring to lurkers.] > > >Here are some other Herb Levy gems: > > "allowing the vampiric lurkers in our midst to stay on for another month of >reading the collected >wisdom of others at no cost to themselves." >"To actively combat these lurker vermin, we must require full participation" >"This simple change in policy would most certainly cut down on the number of >non-participating lurker scum on poetics list and we would soon arrive at >the kind of total and immediate participatory democracy" > >Democracy for you, Herb, is an elimination of the "scum?" Can the unfortunates >help themselves if they (we) do not possess your "wisdom?" But I don't want to >dwell on your post, I'm sure you have some vitriol headed your way. I know it's said that one can't read tone in email messages, but I had no problem being absolutely convinced that Herb's post was tongue-in-cheek. charles ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 13:16:26 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jordan Davis Subject: amusing and depressing Hey, who sent me that little golden book of lesser New York School poets? It's amusing. Thanks. Is that really a reprint of some previous anthology? I suppose silence is a topic. Ford Madox Ford writes about reading with some surprise mid 19th c numbers of popular american periodicals filled with letters to the editor not about the fine moral shadings of the tales published in the magazines, but questions about the technique of short story writing. Isn't it funny that none of the poets here talks much about technique? Whatever that is. I guess I bring it up because I found it amusing and depressing, as I usually find Ford. The satires on lurking and on cross posting are also amusing and depressing. Bummer! And then I remember Bill Luoma's injunction not to write without having some feeling to send across, otherwise one produces a dull brown feeling in the reader. Why is that. What is the emotional reading that obtains to even a torn scrap of paper lying the street, that makes us accountable for the tone of our writing in ways we spend all our grace to avoid acknowledging? Heh? Eh? J PS It was Ben Friedlander who wrote that, about it being all right to think of O'Hara's poems as fascinated with surface, as long as one acknowledges that the surface is quicksand.. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 12:26:53 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: List wars yes, ditto on herb's tongue-in-cheeky-ness... joe ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 13:38:58 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: hen Subject: Re: think of meeee! In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 8 Jul 1996 12:28:48 -1000 from >Going for an interview at a community college for a lit teaching job this >afternoon (my first serious interview) so please send blessings this way >at 3 p.m my time (3 hours behind SF), oh good people. gab. the vibes are with you. just emitted them - should be arriving gently in Hawaii around that time. Aloha. - Henry ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 13:41:29 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: henry Subject: Re: think of meeee! In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 9 Jul 1996 13:38:58 EDT from SORRY FOLKS...hit the dern reply button. All of you now, focus those stray vibes toward Hawaii. No Darren, that's not a volcano. - hg ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 13:18:56 CST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Baratier Subject: Re: List wars Dear owners of the list, Do advertisements count? David Baratier ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 10:59:06 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kevin Killian Subject: Re: List wars At 10:00 PM 7/8/96, Emily Lloyd wrote: >yes, which >threads do and don't get picked up merits observation, mention, critical >examination etc. The is Dodie Bellamy. On the surface, Emily, this sounds just great--but serveral issues come up for me. First of all, this list is not going to change the world, it's a bunch of mostly-white middle class people shooting the breeze. It's a place of priviledge and leisure--the priviledge to have access to a computer hook-up, the luxury of all this time to shoot the breeze. Let me get this clear, I am not against anybody discussing race issues and/or teaching--even though for us non-academics, issues of teaching are rather boring--and academic approaches to literature and to poets themselves are something many poets I speak with find problematic. For instance I do not think M. Damon's erasure of poets in her original post was merely an oversight--perhaps a Freudian slip? As Ron pointed out, for many academics living breathing poets are not part of the picture. Furthermore--this isn't the 50s, no one that I know of, and few (if any) people on this list would challenge the need for representation of non-"white-middle-class" writers wherever writers are represented. But creating a hierarchy of what's acceptable or more acceptable on this list is something I find highly problematic. It is that process of hierarchization which excluded non-"white-middle-class" writers and women from the literary canon in the first place. There is no god-given hierarchy of importance. It is this mindframe, for instance that has often disparaged conversation by women as "chatter." I have much difficulty when white middle class liberals use the issues of "oppressed" groups to guilt trip other white middle class liberals--and I think some of that has been going on here. Let me give an example from outside the list. Several years ago here in San Francisco there was a poet who became "engulfed" in the Gulf War. He marched against the Gulf War, did performance art against the Gulf War, wrote poems about the Gulf War, wore buttons. So, at least a year after the Gulf War ended he gave a reading--of course it was all poems about the Gulf War. During the course of the reading he took the opportunity to brow beat the audience by saying we're all here listening to poetry--but there was THE GULF WAR--in other words he posed himself as this messianic figure concerned with human suffering, and the audience was cast as a bunch of superficials listening to Poetry. I have problems with the colonizing of another group's oppression and and wearing it as a badge. I am skeptical when someone makes an academic career out of Bob Kaufman then makes jokes about his "clunkers" on this list. This is not treating Kaufman with the dignity he deserves. To conclude, I think the Beatles and list politics are just as valid topics of discussion here as anything else. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 12:49:35 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Paul Naylor Subject: Re: List wars I'm with Charles on this one. I think Ron's allusion to Swift's "A Modest Proposal" and Herb's allusion to Ron's allusion suggests that a satire is coming or has come our way. Paul Naylor MAIL SEND in%"poetics@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu" in%"poetics@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu" SEND in%"poetics@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu" in%"poetics@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu" >From: IN%"POETICS@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU" "UB Poetics discussion group" 9-JUL-1996 12:23:08.59 >Subj: RE: List wars > >> >>Who can blame lurkers for keeping silent? ["vermin, scum, slime," says Herb >>Levy referring to lurkers.] >> > >> >>Here are some other Herb Levy gems: >> >> "allowing the vampiric lurkers in our midst to stay on for another month of >>reading the collected >>wisdom of others at no cost to themselves." >>"To actively combat these lurker vermin, we must require full participation" >>"This simple change in policy would most certainly cut down on the number of >>non-participating lurker scum on poetics list and we would soon arrive at >>the kind of total and immediate participatory democracy" >> >>Democracy for you, Herb, is an elimination of the "scum?" Can the unfortunates >>help themselves if they (we) do not possess your "wisdom?" But I don't want to >>dwell on your post, I'm sure you have some vitriol headed your way. > > >I know it's said that one can't read tone in email messages, but I had no >problem being absolutely convinced that Herb's post was tongue-in-cheek. > >charles SEND in%"poetics@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu" in%"poetics@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu" ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 09:41:00 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Don Cheney Subject: List wars: 100 Years, Star,... while i don't consider my SELF a lurker on this list i also don't consider my self a big time contributor. i do think that Herb's post that Daniel quotes is a sort of hyperbole or maybe just a "hyper text" but i think he went out of his way to make sure we all knew he was kidding. no? don cheney dcheney@ucsd.edu Daniel Bouchard writes: and so on and so forth. Thus it is that an important (to me) issue gets wholly lost in the shuffle. And thus it is that instead of talking about the black poet who was in our midst (Lorenzo)--as a poet, not just because he's black--we end up, academic-style, arguing about what white men (Aldon and Bob) are supposed to say about black poets. The whole thing strikes me as wonderfully silly. As Dodie said, I thought this was supposed to be a POETICS list. _______________________ Who can blame lurkers for keeping silent? ["vermin, scum, slime," says Herb Levy referring to lurkers.] I'm pleased that Ron's post prompted at least one person to write in and say who she was, what she does, and why she's silent on the list. There's nothing wrong with keeping quiet in a discussion. On the other hand, it's better to type something in once in a while (even if you're unsure of yourself, or going out on a limb. There's few instances of flaming here, if any, my perception of the list over the past year has been one of general friendliness). Here are some other Herb Levy gems: "allowing the vampiric lurkers in our midst to stay on for another month of reading the collected wisdom of others at no cost to themselves." "To actively combat these lurker vermin, we must require full participation" "This simple change in policy would most certainly cut down on the number of non-participating lurker scum on poetics list and we would soon arrive at the kind of total and immediate participatory democracy" Democracy for you, Herb, is an elimination of the "scum?" Can the unfortunates help themselves if they (we) do not possess your "wisdom?" But I don't want to dwell on your post, I'm sure you have some vitriol headed your way. Something struck me about M. Perloff's post: the way the terms were set, as in "the black poet in OUR midst." What does "our" refer to? The members of the list who also attended the conference? I'm not clear as to whether Lorenzo's attendance at Orono was important to you because he is a poet, or because he is a black poet. Also, could you clarify "academic-style" as a form of argument and maybe propose an alternative? I've seldom seen any other kind of argument on this list (Lurkers, speak up!) daniel_bouchard@hmco.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 14:07:31 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rod Smith Subject: Onward: Contemporary Poetry & Poetics This is the Contents and Introduction for the forthcoming anthology _Onward: Contemporary Poetry and Poetics_ ed. Peter Baker, Peter Lang Pub., $28 pb, 440 pgs. due out Sept '96. Peter is off line traveling and asked me to send it to the listwar. "The Rejection of Closure" is a revised and extended version. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Bernadette Mayer Twenty Questions about Form or New Forms / Poems Lyn Hejinian The Rejection of Closure / Poems from The Cell Charles Bernstein The Parts Are Greater than the Sum of the Whole Rosmarie Waldrop Thinking of Follows / Inserting the Mirror Harry Mathews Dormouse Poem David Bergman Staying in the Lines John Taggart Were You: Notes & A Poem for Michael Palmer Rachel Blau DuPlessis On Drafts: A Memorandum of Understanding / Draft 11: Schwa C. D. Wright Provisional Remarks... / Op Ed / the box this comes in/ Poems from Tremble Albert Cook Poetic Purposes / Syllabic Margin / Poems II. Robert Creeley Was That a Real Poem or Did You Just Make It up Yourself? / Nothing New / Four Days in Vermont Stephen Rodefer Preface to Four Lectures / Prologue to Language Doubling / Enclosure of Elk / The Library of Label / Poems Clark Coolidge from Notebooks / Letters / Poems Michael Palmer Active Boundaries / Autobiography / Far Away Near Joan Retallack The Poethical Wager / AUTOBIOGRAPHIALITTERARIA II / The Woman in the Chinese Room Nicole Brossard Fluid Arguments Carolyn Forche On Subjectivity / Poems Bob Perelman Statement /The Marginalization of Poetry / The Manchurian Candidate: A Remake Barrett Watten Nonnarrative/History / Bad History I John Ashbery PN Interview / Poems from Houseboat Days poeanth.pb (Introduction) Poetics is a vast, ancient, yet understudied field. Except, of course, for poets. Yet many if not most poets would probably assent to the proposition that one's poetics can be deduced from the poem. A statement on poetics presents immediate difficulties within such an aesthetic, because it risks being seen as ancillary to the production of the poem, and may, in fact, misrepresent the implicit poetics in the poet's work. Given these risks, many poets choose reticence as their primary mode of statement, with the limit of reticence approaching silence, often accompanied by an attitude of active disdain. Belief in an implicit poetics can be seen to derive from an immanentist theory of language, or the idea that words bear direct relation to what they represent, even carrying a little bit of the essence of the thing in the word. Such immanentist theories deriving from the religious tradition ("and the word was with God and the word was God") drove William of Occam, in the twelfth century, to propose the complete separation of word and referent, in his philosophy of nominalism. Jacques Derrida is often thought to represent such a nominalist viewpoint in his philosophy of deconstruction (see my Deconstruction and the Ethical Turn). Ezra Pound's language theory is explicitly immanentist, as when he instructs his Italian translator of The Cantos: "Don't worry about the meaning of the poem. Translate accurately line by line. The meaning is inherent in the material." Pound's poetics in The Cantos thus demonstrates what I call (in Obdurate Brilliance) the "myth of transparency," or the ideology of direct apprehension of the surrounding context from the text of the poem. Without worrying too much (right now) about the accuracy of labels, much of what is called mainstream poetry today operates either knowingly, or usually unknowingly, out of this model of transparency. Anthologies of poetics by mainstream poets are thus usually concerned with craft and techniqueaehow the poem is put togetheraewhen the poet is not discussing where he or she went on his/her last vacation or MacArthur grant to gather material. The poem's meaning is either inherent in the material (themes) or what it represents (nature). This view of poetics as purely practical and personal both derives from and sustains the poetic practice variously termed workshop or MFA verse, and can be found exemplified in every issue of the AWP Chronicle. In the past twenty-five or so years vibrant alternatives in the theory and practice of poetry have risen out of the movement known as Language poetry. Following the "radical modernism" of Stein, Zukofsky and others, in Charles Bernstein's appellation, or what Marjorie Perloff has called "the other tradition," this practice has as one explicit goal, quoting Zukofsky, "to stop the gaze on words as things." By now, Language poetry has been around long enough that, like deconstruction or Mt. Pinatubo, it no longer exists, but its practitioners, many of them represented here, are still very active and its effects, as John Ashbery indicates in his interview, may be even more interesting than the initial productions of those associated with the movement. Literary history (which H. R. Jauss terms "conceivably the worst medium through which to display the historicity of literature") is already at work deriving a genealogy to explain the transition between the "radical modernism" of Stein, Zukofsky and others, and the Language poets. Materials for such a genealogy are generously represented here in the selections by John Ashbery and Robert Creeley, as well as those of Clark Coolidge and Bernadette Mayer. There is no raw material. So Harry Mathews begins his contribution. Mathews, a member of the Ourvoir de litterature potentielle, or OULIPO group, brings impeccable credentials to his theorizing, or non-theorizing, of the production of the poem. As with Lyn Hejinian's already-classic essay, "Against Closure" (revised and expanded for publication here), Mathews' statement is a kind of manifesto, reminiscent of the radical modernism of Andre Breton and early surrealism. Manifestos are less concerned with explanation than with demonstration; they attempt not to analyze, but rather to make manifest artistic practices and attitudes. Looking at the materials assembled here, I have been struck that there are two clear poles, or limits, or borders, to their expressive strategies. If the manifesto is one such border, the other is collage. Some of these collage assemblages, such as those of Charles Bernstein and Nicole Brossard, were created or at least shaped explicitly for this collection. Others are the results of collaborations between the poets and/or the editor and/or the editor's friends, notably Rod Smith, Lee Ann Brown, and Peter Gizzi. The relation of poetics to poetry always to some extent resists explanation. Yet we are drawn to explore it as part of a life commitment to poetry, a commitment those in the present volume recognize under the sign of necessity, Beckett's "all that I can, more than I could." Each poet's approach also necessarily involves questions of individual history and practice while somehow managing to ground the communities of poets and artists actively committed to the creative imagination. This volume emerges from these multiple communities and hopefully will serve as a resource for those already involved in the work and those yet to come. Or, as Bernadette Mayer likes to say, "Onward." Peter Baker Washington D.C., 1996 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 13:39:43 CST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Baratier Subject: poetry parfornir >Christopher K. Whipple typed: `Does anyone have any ideas on why coffee house readings are so often lame and depressing; why do these horrible people have a monopoly on the espresso circuit, while so much that is delicious is abandoned to a half-life in academia? The tension between the academic and the street (or spoken word) poets have created the coffee-house lameness in most cities I've lived in. The problem is two-fold: many academics believe that poetry worth reading is to be institutionalized and therefore works outside of this sphere are improperly crafted or have a lower unit value, while many of the street poets believe that reading other's poems or revising their own are both unecessary aspects of the craft. One of the few reading series I have chanced upon with a full mixture and a successful open mike, was sponsored by an independent bookstore in Philly (now out of business) which actively sought out both university and non-university readers willing to take smaller (guaranteed) amounts of money. For this reason, plus the owner's stable of consistent readers he supported, out of a crowd of twenty readers, at least a fourth, and usually more, were excellent. Does anyone have any ideas on how poetry can be successfully performed? Joy Harjo uses a slow reading style with bursts of animation and/or inflection to add to the lyrical scenery. A good sample can be found on the _Woman who fell from the sky_ cassette which accompanies the book. But a more representative example (not so over produced and the like) can be found on an earlier tape (I think it's called _Furious Light_. Jack Gilbert is a contemporary master of silence. Of how silences can be manipulated to fit the reading space for the most impact in relation to the poem. His use of rhetorical questions followed by long pauses fell entire audiences into thought, tense with answer. One keeps waiting for an escape, the brilliance is his refusal to withdral, to slacken the question. Michelle Boisseau the length of her poems accumulate in an audiences head in such a way as to bring the weight of the poem upon the ending. For one who listens intently during the entire piece, the ending is a miraculous articulation of associative values built upon throughout the piece. Be well David Baratier ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 13:57:56 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Daniel Bouchard Subject: Re(vision): List wars So my server's getting drowned in messages to me saying "Herb Levy was just kidding." Yeah sure, so was Jonathan Swift-- that murderous bastard! So I retract my previous post, and offer this revision (this is what happens when you try and engage in a discussion for fifteen second intervals during work). I remain undaunted though. I don't "get" those Leslie Neilsen spoof movies either. daniel_bouchard@hmco.com __________________________ Marjorie Perloff wrote: and so on and so forth. Thus it is that an important (to me) issue gets wholly lost in the shuffle. And thus it is that instead of talking about the black poet who was in our midst (Lorenzo)--as a poet, not just because he's black--we end up, academic-style, arguing about what white men (Aldon and Bob) are supposed to say about black poets. The whole thing strikes me as wonderfully silly. As Dodie said, I thought this was supposed to be a POETICS list. _______________________ Who can blame lurkers for keeping silent? I'm pleased that Ron's post prompted at least one person to write in and say who she was, what she does, and why she's silent on the list. There's nothing wrong with keeping quiet in a discussion. On the other hand, it's better to type something in once in a while (even if you're unsure of yourself, or going out on a limb. There's few instances of flaming here, if any, my perception of the list over the past year has been one of general friendliness). Something struck me about M. Perloff's post: the way the terms were set, as in "the black poet in OUR midst." What does "our" refer to? The members of the list who also attended the conference? I'm not clear as to whether Lorenzo's attendance at Orono was important to you because he is a poet, or because he is a black poet. Also, could you clarify "academic-style" as a form of argument and maybe propose an alternative? I've seldom seen any other kind of argument on this list (Lurkers, speak up!) daniel_bouchard@hmco.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 14:00:47 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert A Harrison Subject: L. Thomas Has anyone mentioned that Lorenzo is not only black, but Hispanic? He's Panamanian-American, a non-native speaker of English. Haven't been able to keep up with all the details of the conversation, I'm at work ... so if this is old news, then... I happened to be looking for his current address before this discussion started. Does anyone have it? Bob Harrison Robert.A.Harrison@JCI.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 08:19:02 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: Re: performance & poetry: "measure carefully, can be toxic" In-Reply-To: <199607082249.SAA102990@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU> Sounds like Edith Sitwell... gab. On Mon, 8 Jul 1996, Lisa Samuels wrote: > for poetry performance: i still want to see someone > at least *begin* a reading from behind an opaque > black (or whatever) curtain > -or- > put an enormous mirror in front of the curtain so the > audience sees only itself for a while (small venue > and large mirror required) > -or/and- > position mirrors on either side of the stage so > the audience can see the poet from the sides only, > still behind the curtain > > something along those lines > > > and for eliza mcgrand -- > as for #3, i prefer the phrasing of a country song: > 'I've enjoyed as much of this as I can stand' > > > my month's worth, > > lisa samuels > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 08:29:41 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: thanks In-Reply-To: to all for well wishes. All the traffic lights on the way there were green, I made it in time, the committee smiled a lot. I had fun teaching them for 10 minutes. Now, back to area exams... Don't stop wishing. You guys are good. gab. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 13:34:52 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Maria Damon Subject: Re: List wars dodie: this is the third time you have attacked my person, my character, and my motives in a public conversation. what's going on? i have admired and respected your work as a writer and editor and contributor to the list. you know this. we have had a very warm (i thought) working relationship. now, everytime i utter a sentence, it seems, i get targeted for being holier-than-thou, careerist, making "freudian slips", etc -- my words are being twisted around, caricatured, and then ridiculed, with unsavory motives ascribed to these inaccurate representations. clearly something's up. if i have offended you personally in any way (and your remarks seem clearly personally directed), please let me know, back channel, how i have done so. This is extremely painful to me and i would like it to stop maria d. In message UB Poetics discussion group writes: > At 10:00 PM 7/8/96, Emily Lloyd wrote: > >yes, which > >threads do and don't get picked up merits observation, mention, critical > >examination etc. > > The is Dodie Bellamy. > > On the surface, Emily, this sounds just great--but serveral issues come up > for me. First of all, this list is not going to change the world, it's a > bunch of mostly-white middle class people shooting the breeze. It's a > place of priviledge and leisure--the priviledge to have access to a > computer hook-up, the luxury of all this time to shoot the breeze. Let me > get this clear, I am not against anybody discussing race issues and/or > teaching--even though for us non-academics, issues of teaching are rather > boring--and academic approaches to literature and to poets themselves are > something many poets I speak with find problematic. For instance I do not > think M. Damon's erasure of poets in her original post was merely an > oversight--perhaps a Freudian slip? As Ron pointed out, for many academics > living breathing poets are not part of the picture. Furthermore--this > isn't the 50s, no one that I know of, and few (if any) people on this list > would challenge the need for representation of non-"white-middle-class" > writers wherever writers are represented. > > But creating a hierarchy of what's acceptable or more acceptable on this > list is something I find highly problematic. It is that process of > hierarchization which excluded non-"white-middle-class" writers and women > from the literary canon in the first place. There is no god-given > hierarchy of importance. It is this mindframe, for instance that has often > disparaged conversation by women as "chatter." I have much difficulty when > white middle class liberals use the issues of "oppressed" groups to guilt > trip other white middle class liberals--and I think some of that has been > going on here. Let me give an example from outside the list. Several > years ago here in San Francisco there was a poet who became "engulfed" in > the Gulf War. He marched against the Gulf War, did performance art against > the Gulf War, wrote poems about the Gulf War, wore buttons. So, at least a > year after the Gulf War ended he gave a reading--of course it was all poems > about the Gulf War. During the course of the reading he took the > opportunity to brow beat the audience by saying we're all here listening to > poetry--but there was THE GULF WAR--in other words he posed himself as this > messianic figure concerned with human suffering, and the audience was cast > as a bunch of superficials listening to Poetry. I have problems with the > colonizing of another group's oppression and and wearing it as a badge. I > am skeptical when someone makes an academic career out of Bob Kaufman then > makes jokes about his "clunkers" on this list. This is not treating > Kaufman with the dignity he deserves. > > To conclude, I think the Beatles and list politics are just as valid topics > of discussion here as anything else. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 14:20:48 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Christina Fairbank Chirot Subject: posters interesting to scroll down the screen and read alternating messages: "poetry performance"/"list wars". Remember that poster, "What if they held a war and nobody came?" Thanks to Bob Harrison for his message regarding Lorenzo Thomas. Dave Baptiste Chirot ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 09:40:22 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: herb levy's scum In-Reply-To: <199607091618.MAA01508@krypton.hmco.com> Hey daniel, I have an eensy feeling herb's modest proposal was a little tongue in cheek. But I'm looking forward to the 200-500 wd responses from 300 people with abstracts attached. I think we should all take this very seriously wink wink nudge nudge gab. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 15:43:15 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kathrine Varnes Subject: Re: poetry performance In-Reply-To: As far as I'm concerned, a good performance is a good interpretation, or at least an interesting one. (The reverse is also true.) A bad performance is one that has no interpretation, or at least not a complete one. This re-states some of what folks have already said, except I'd also add that what kills poetry for me (which is often what happens when actors are reading) is when the reader has already decided what the perfect reading is and tries to create it -- some static idea -- instead of actively interpreting while reading. Better to be imperfect and lean on the words. Kathrine Varnes ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 15:47:32 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Emily Lloyd Subject: Re: List wars Ok, Dodie. I see your point clearly w/the example of the Gulf guy, although I'm not sure that Maria's etc. posts were coming on in that way. Having attended 2 of the most supposedly "leftist" and "activism-oriented" undergrad schools I can think of, I'm all-too-aware of the kind of unconstructive self-righteousness you describe, & tend to respond to Gulf-guy types by holding out my hand, slapping it, and crying "bad little activist." I just didn't read the post that way. And I pretty much agree that there should be no "godgiven hierarchy of importance" as to what will be discussed here (although perhaps that part of your post should be addressed to Marjorie's last, and not Maria's?). I'd hope there was a place for Beatles & teaching & race & list politics (after all, we're "mostly-white middleclass people shooting the breeze"--we've got the time) But I think the point was that there wasn't...certain issues were dropped like potatoes, for whatever reason (and I admit, yes, to an interest/concern in that reason). I'm not interested in falling into the "why are we talking about this when we could/should be talking about THIS?" trap; on the other hand, I think "why *aren't* we talking about this?" is a valid question. emily ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Emily Lloyd emilyl@erols.com "Emily said Emily said, Emily is admittedly Emily." --G. Stein ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 15:48:33 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Loss Glazier Subject: Orono papers & other authors Comments: cc: Loss Glazier --> An update on a topic that arose on this list. I've had a couple of people offer to give me Orono papers so I will be making a small number of papers a part of the online Orono book. If you have a paper from the conference to put online, you are very much encouraged to get in touch with me via individual e-mail. --> For their home pages, I'd also be very interested in essays/works on: Enslin Ceravalo Irby Robert Creeley Ray Federman Steve McCaffery Fiona Templeton Cecilia Vicun~a Lyn Hejinian Barbara Guest Bruce Andrews Jackson Mac Low Susan Howe If you have writing on any of these authors you'd like to make available online, please let me know. --> I'm interested in putting papers about other authors online also. So please let me know if you have other papers too! ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 15:52:17 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: David Kellogg Subject: Re: List wars In-Reply-To: <649CA4011FF@as.ua.edu> Marjorie has made an important point about the dominance in these here threads of silly issues. She also points out that a lot of energy is expended on peripherals when more important issues are staring us in the face. But I don't think it's easy to separate the central from the peripheral. To wit: On Tue, 9 Jul 1996, Hank Lazer wrote: > Before Marjorie (or Robt) or others accuse me of offering merely > sociological reasons for reading Hayden, let me add that I consider > his poetry GOOD. Now, why does Hank feel a need to say this? What the hell's the matter with reading a poet for sociological reasons, or for reasons other than that poet's value? Why the obvious debasement of "mere" sociology? What's wrong with sociology? Bob von H stated the assumption explicitly, somewhere in his response to Aldon, that the goal of scholarship should be, more or less, to separate the wheat from the chaff. Marjorie in her post assumes something similar, and now Hank has to make an obligatory nod to that belief. Well that's not MY goal, or not most of the time, and I don't see why it should be. From the posts of those critics who are on this list, it seems to me that the world (or at least the Net) is filled with people yakking about why such-and-such a poet is good, and another is bad. The last thing I want or need is another tastemaker. Save that, as Foucault might say, for the police. I'm not trying to exclude considerations of value. We have to evaluate all the time anyway. But prior definitions of the proper job of the critic or poet are a lot sillier than examinations of net-politics. When people talk about "mere" sociology, or slag critics as somehow less credible than poets (thank you Dodie), or talk about the proper role of poetry, or criticism, or whatever, I get alternately bored or angry. Mainly, though, I think that if sociology draws this much uncontested ire and obvious anxiety, there must be something to it. A "pure" poetics outside of sociology doesn't exist, and if it did I wouldn't want it. Cheers, David ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ David Kellogg Duke University kellogg@acpub.duke.edu University Writing Program (919) 660-4357 Durham, NC 27708 FAX (919) 684-6277 The time is at hand. Take one another and eat. -- Thomas Kinsella ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 15:02:39 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Orono papers & other authors loss --if our papers are being published somewhere, what are the print-copyright politics of sending them also to you; wd it be seen as undercutting the print-publisher's market? i don't wanna do anything "wrong."--md In message <199607091948.PAA23742@conciliator.acsu.buffalo.edu> UB Poetics discussion group writes: > --> An update on a topic that arose on this list. I've had a couple of > people offer to give me Orono papers so I will be making a small > number of papers a part of the online Orono book. If you have a paper > from the conference to put online, you are very much encouraged to get > in touch with me via individual e-mail. > > --> For their home pages, I'd also be very interested in essays/works on: > Enslin > Ceravalo > Irby > Robert Creeley > Ray Federman > Steve McCaffery > Fiona Templeton > Cecilia Vicun~a > Lyn Hejinian > Barbara Guest > Bruce Andrews > Jackson Mac Low > Susan Howe > If you have writing on any of these authors you'd like to make > available online, please let me know. > > --> I'm interested in putting papers about other authors online > also. So please let me know if you have other papers too! ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 13:12:45 PDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jerry Rothenberg Subject: Re: Covering Cherub Dear Rob Wilson -- Thanks for yours, & please feel free to send any essays/works etc. concerning local & Pacific matters. We'll be arriving there on the 4th of September & I understand from Gab Welford that there's a big Bamboo Ridge reading on the 5th, so certainly we'll plan to get to that one. I have an interest in all of that, so looking forward very much to this particular visit. Tell me if you have any ideas or suggestions, and in the meantime all good wishes JERRY ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 20:41:13 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Carnography Subject: Re: maria--/& performance emily writes: > > I've been > > studying race and representation for years, & the more I study, the less > > Mostly I got worried & a little nauseated at the > > prospect of a predominantly-white-membered list discussing "race & erotics" > > esp. in the assertive and "I know what I'm talking about" voice I can understand your frustration. But: The best way to involve more women and people of color in this group is to invite them here, don't you think? Why slam others for being white or male, why transfer the abuse from patriarch to matriarch, why pass racism back and forth, like any dysfunctional family? Let's involve more voices, let's encourage more people to speak. But let's not show disrespect for the voices that have spoken. I'm not being contentious or smug. What I'm saying is difficult, not easy. It would be easy to agree with you and to rail at the villain I resemble. Yet I can't do that, because the supposition makes me ethically *un*easy. All the best, Rob Hardin http://www.interport.net/~scrypt ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 19:33:49 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michelle Roberts Subject: Re: herb levy's scum In-Reply-To: (blush) see what happens when the unitiated go blabbing? Excuse me, Herb -- you were kidding. Cool. Very funny, might have enjoyed the post, shucks. Meaghan Roberts-Jones Our exchanges? An engendering Ph.D. Candidate - Humanities-Lit.&Ideas through rare and always The University of Texas at Dallas infinte fortune. Meaghan@UTDALLAS.EDU -- L. Irigaray ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 20:26:00 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Carnography Subject: Re: poetry parfornir David Baratier typed: > The tension between the academic and the street (or spoken word) > poets have created the coffee-house lameness in most cities I've > lived in. The problem is two-fold: many academics believe that poetry > worth reading is to be institutionalized and therefore works outside > of this sphere are improperly crafted or have a lower unit value, > while many of the street poets believe that reading other's poems or > revising their own are both unecessary aspects of the craft. I cite this paragraph baldly because it is breathtakingly apt. This is one of the deepest, most problematic schisms in NYC's poetic mileau. It is also why brilliant autodidacts fall through the cracks--only to be discovered generations later. Nice one (as the singer in Speedway says). All the best, Rob Hardin http://www.interport.net/~scrypt ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 19:23:53 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michelle Roberts Subject: Re: List, person, ship In-Reply-To: As regards Herb's post on "lurker vermin:" Dude, I do seriously hope you were kidding. Your system would require a life lived on line what with the pace of discussion on this list. Some of us "vermin" are sincerely listening, not ripping y'all's posts to use in our papers or poems, not interested in damaging a valuable source of expansion for our our own sad little minds -- and some of us are busy! I regret that you feel that way, but your democracy sounds facsist, a little to Texas Christian Coalition uspurps the REpublican party for me. But thanks for the in-put, we son't mean to bug you. Meaghan Roberts-Jones Our exchanges? An engendering Ph.D. Candidate - Humanities-Lit.&Ideas through rare and always The University of Texas at Dallas infinte fortune. Meaghan@UTDALLAS.EDU -- L. Irigaray ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 20:16:16 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Dean Taciuch On Tue, 9 Jul 1996, Kathrine Varnes wrote: > As far as I'm concerned, a good performance is a good interpretation, or > at least an interesting one. (The reverse is also true.) . . . > what kills poetry for me (which is often what happens when > actors are reading) is when the reader has already decided what the > perfect reading is and tries to create it -- some static idea -- instead > of actively interpreting while reading. Better to be imperfect and lean > on the words. > > Kathrine Varnes > OK, but how to offer an interpretation without having an interpretation in mind? This is a serious question..I wonder this myself when reading--do I try to express an ambiguous line break verbally (and how?) or do I collapse the distinction, choose a reading, and present that? I think the key is "static"--the performance should not be a single thing, or at least not the same single thing to everyone. Also, I don't mean to knock actors/acting. It certainly is possible for an actor to give a good reading of a poem, just as it is obviously possible for a poet to give a bad reading. Dean Taciuch ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 12:13:35 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: wystan Organization: English Dept. - Univ. of Auckland Subject: Re: List wars Comments: To: kellogg@ACPUB.DUKE.EDU Dear David, The matter with reading poetry for sociological reasons is the kind of closure it applies to response/interpretation. Of course, if culture=the real, then there's no validity to my objection, but I don't happen to think it is. For you sociology subsumes poetics, for me poetics subsumes sociology. But I agree with you, if there are lots of people on the list who find sociology nauseating and don't say why, then we should get a discussion going. So I've offered two, or is it one? reason. Can we have some more? Does anyone recall the text of the Bruce Nauman piece at the last DOCUMENTA which begins: Anthropology, sociology ....?? Wystan ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 18:03:23 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michelle Roberts Subject: Re: poetry performance In-Reply-To: <31E1518A.58AF@ix.netcom.com> > that wished to consume its object, to become its object, to take > the place of its object (Freudian references intended). James, that sounds more like Lacan. I wish we could get over him. And I wish Derrida would quit demolishing people, and I wish poetry or poets would defend themselves. Or at least quit ..... why is poetry on the side of the feminine in dynamic?? Actually, I've read my Kristeva, so I have an answer for that. pffft. M> ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 08:04:37 +0900 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Bruce Malcolm PLEASE HELP! Date: 09 Jul 1996 07:43:47 Reply-To: Conference "reg.burma" From: simon_billenness@cybercom.net Subject: KEY SENATE BURMA VOTE: THURSDAY, JULY 11 To: Recipients of burmanet-l X-Gateway: conf2mail@igc.apc.org Precedence: bulk Lines: 65 From: simon_billenness@cybercom.net (Simon Billenness) Subject: KEY SENATE BURMA VOTE: THURSDAY, JULY 11 SENATE MAY VOTE ON BURMA SANCTIONS THURSDAY, JULY 11 BUMRA SANCTIONS UNDER THREAT! CALL YOUR SENATORS TODAY! July 9, 1996 The news from Senator McConnell's office is that the Foreign Aid Bill, containing an amendment section 569) by Senators McConnell and Moynihan imposing economic sanctions on Burma, may come up for a vote on Thursday, July 11. Section 569 is under severe threat. One or more Senators will attempt to remove the sanctions on Burma through a floor amendment. It is vital that we each call our Senators and urge them to keep the sanctions on Burma (section 569) in the Foreign Aid Bill. CALL YOUR SENATORS TOLL-FREE AT (800) 972-3524 1. Ask for the staff person responsible for foreign policy issues. 2. Stress that you want your Senator to support the economic sanctions on Burma contained in Section 569 of the Froeign Aid Bill. 3. Ask your friends, family and co-workers to call too. MAKE SURE YOU CALL BY 5PM, WEDNESDAY, JULY 9!! ----------------------- Simon Billenness Franklin Research & Development (617) 423 6655 x 225 (617) 482 6179 fax simon_billenness@cybercom.net ---------------------------- SECTION 569 OF THE FOREIGN AID BILL & CURRENT TEXT OF THE "BURMA FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY ACT" (S.1511). 1. LIMITATION ON FUNDS FOR BURMA 2. Sec. 569. Until such time as the President determines 3. and certifies to the Committees on Appropriations that an 4. elected government of Burma has been allowed to take office, 5. the following sanctions shall be imposed on Burma: 6. (1) No national of the United States shall make 7. any investment in Burma; 8. (2) United States assistance to Burma is prohib- 9. ited; 10. (3) The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct 11. the United States executive director of each inter- 12. national financial institution to vote against any 13. loan or other utilization of the funds of the respective 14. bank to or for Burma; and 15. (4) Except as required by Treaty obligations, 16. any Burmese national who formulates, implements, 17. or benefits from policies which hinder the transition 18. of Burma to a democratic country shall be ineligible 19. to receive a visa and shall be exclude from admission 20. to the United States. DON'T DELAY! CALL TODAY! bmalcolm@nagoya-wu.ac.jp ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 17:46:11 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michelle Roberts Subject: Re: Listpersonship In-Reply-To: On Mon, 8 Jul 1996, c.g. guertin wrote: > Lurker equals/does not equal listener? Is this a 'bad' moral equation? > Silence is evil or simply undesirable? > > cg > Actually, Ron made some excellent points. Devoloving is no fun. And as to the ethics and morality of lurking: 95% of the time I lurk on this list because y'all are already a community, some it appears were before the list existed, and I'm not going to shoot off my mouth and mess up the party -- also, the level of thinking here is simply smore sophisitcated than mine at present and y'all serve as a good model (for lots of reasons, some contradictory) of what this little poet-critic could aspire to. Combine those, and I'm quiet cuz I'm not silly. I know when I'm being taught, that's all. And thanks for being good at what you do. Yours in gazing, m ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 17:32:50 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michelle Roberts Subject: Re: bumb bunny In-Reply-To: Thanks all for the responses to my inquiry. It turns out that the essay on teh new sentence was in file in my cabinet, and I'd read it four years ago while getting my masters -- somehow, and don't take this personally, Ron -- I just forgot it!! And I was reading lots of L-poetry at the time. Sheez. Again thanks, I'll be re-reading now. M Meaghan Roberts-Jones Our exchanges? An engendering Ph.D. Candidate - Humanities-Lit.&Ideas through rare and always The University of Texas at Dallas infinte fortune. Meaghan@UTDALLAS.EDU -- L. Irigaray ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 18:05:44 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Burt Kimmelman -@NJIT" Subject: Re: Private List/Public Space James (and Loss et al.), I guess we should simply acknowledge that the list is as public as potential citationers make it. If you give a talk somewhere, does every scholar in the audience need to ask your permission before quoting/citing you? Of course not. But a reader will understand the level of formality of the discourse, and perhaps thereby its seriousness, when the reader finds out that this was a talk you were giving and not, say, a paper published in a button down refereed journal or whatever. burt ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 17:54:27 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Burt Kimmelman -@NJIT" Subject: Re: Private List/Public Space Loss, yes, but how often do one's notes tacked onto a bulletin board get taken down and shipped off to some archive; archiving (electronic or otherwise) seems to legitimize the mere missives, no? And then they get quoted perhaps, and so on. Burt ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 14:46:05 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Bill Luoma/Vanstar Subject: Re: tonight's HRs Comments: To: LancerLeg Comments: cc: drothschild C har, I wanted biggio and there's no more permanent billy ripken. so NL goes: chipper, hundley, larkin. AL: knoblauch, anderson, carter. with a wiff To: bluoma @ vanstar.com @ VSMAIL cc: From: LancerLeg @ aol.com @ VSMAIL Date: 07/09/96 05:32:42 PM PDT Subject: tonight's HRs National League: Bagwell, Ellis Burks, Biggio American League: R.Alomar, Pudge Rodriguez, Buhner pitch to maz ... gawn ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 11:07:15 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: Collaborator on M.E.T. Lambert article, 19th c poet (fwd) I am seeking possible collaborators for an article on 19th-c American woman poet Mary Eliza (Perine) Tucker Lambert, whose works are included in _Black Women's Poetry_ from the Oxford UP series, the Schomburg Library of 19th-c Black Women Writers, and excerpted in Cheryl Walker's anthology of 19th-c American women poets. An important component of the article will be reception of the poem in classrooms, so that any classroom experience with her works would be a valuable asset for a collaboration. Janet Gray jsgray@pucc.princeton.edu ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 16:49:54 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Eliza McGrand- CVA Guest Subject: the guy and the gulf war a year or so ago, the dance critic from the new yorker (arlene croce? i know i am blanking on the name here) had an extraordinary essay on victim art. she took an extreme position against it, refusing to attend bill t. jones' latest dance peice, about death and dying, because she felt it was a category she defined as "victim art" -- work written about hardship that causes the creator to be evaluated as a victim, rather than as an artist. her refusal to even go to the concert was extreme, certainly, and her essay sparked much protest in artistic sectors. but the point was valid. there is a tendency to evaluate art about hardship not as art but as a test of audience compassion, liberalism, etc. your gulf-war fellow was just another remove of this. i am working on a book about domestic violence and it has been very difficult for me to evaluate the writing, to decide whether it should be public or not. i think putting victimhood out in writing, submitting the writing to forums as writing, and then complaining, if it doesn't go over well, that the critics are being as abusive as the initial source of hardship is, to say the least, being a bad sport. but on the other hand, the source of a terrifying amount of art (can't, for gods sake, we write/draw/sing/compose about anything but pain i ask myself sometimes in frustration) IS pain. and art works can bring the audience into a close understanding of what a hardship is, and does, as very little else can. all of this is old ground, covered by the new yorker essay and numerous responses to it... and the gulf war poet is yet another wrinkle. do we admire someone for at least caring about a painful issue and taking on the burden of making art about it? on the other hand, to harangue an audience for being an audience, instead of performing some undefined activist task, seems absurd, almost sartre... when does a work become too personal and too painful to be evaluated as art? e ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 15:24:40 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Alexander Subject: Re: Orono papers & other authors Well now I feel embarassed having goofed with the reply button and passed on a personal message to the list. Sorry to all. charles ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 15:23:45 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Charles Alexander Subject: Re: Orono papers & other authors Dear Maria: Welcome back to town. I'm very swamped this week, but I'd love to see you sometime soon. Perhaps next week, even on a weekday, you could come over to our house for coffee/tea, meet my wife Cynthia, talk a bit? so very lovely yes yes And I'm sorry Dodie is giving you such a hard time. To these eyes it's not apparent why she's giving you a hard time. I've always had a good time with Dodie in email conversations, have met her a couple of times at San Francisco readings I've given, but I don't know her very well. Hope it passes. love, charles ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 13:31:19 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kevin Killian Subject: Re: List wars At 3:47 PM 7/9/96, Emily Lloyd wrote: >But I think the point was that there wasn't...certain issues were dropped >like potatoes, for whatever reason (and I admit, yes, to an interest/concern >in that reason). I'm not interested in falling into the "why are we talking >about this when we could/should be talking about THIS?" trap; on the other >hand, I think "why *aren't* we talking about this?" is a valid question. emily I agree with you Emily. But my point is that the "why are we talking about this when we could/should be talking about THIS?" trap *was* evoked--and that is what I was criticizing. Dodie ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 13:21:47 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kevin Killian Subject: Re: List wars Maria, you criticized a population I was a member of--the people on this list. I was defending that population. Dodie ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 01:24:40 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rod Smith Subject: Re: amusing and depressing J-- Who's in that lesser known NY poets anth. I've heared tell of its existence. Howe bout a quick contents. "war is other people" --rrpfet ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 17:25:49 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: wystan Organization: English Dept. - Univ. of Auckland Subject: Re: Orono papers & other authors Comments: To: chax@MTN.ORG Dear Charles, Was that a goof-on-purpose, or an honest-to-goodness-goof? Wystan ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 17:41:27 GMT+1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: wystan Organization: English Dept. - Univ. of Auckland Subject: Re: List wars Comments: To: dbkk@SIRIUS.COM Dear Dodie, I am sorry Charles is saying those things about you. (said in a personal, feeling, tone of voice) But seriously, Ms. Bellamy despite the fact unlike Mr. Alexander I don't know you at all, your motives seem clear and above board to me. I observe some kind of comprehensive confusion about 'the personal' developing here. What's to be done? Wystan. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 01:43:06 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Thomas Bell Subject: Re: Listpersonship In-Reply-To: can i stay if i promise to close my ears? tom ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 01:47:13 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rod Smith Subject: trolling for newbies Ochre yo to obtain "exactitude" a substituted herb splash he devoted to from childhood atmospherization I like it vertical to infinity Sokal's a landscapism of the Cubist overleaf drop your right ear in fault tone imp carnivore of the mechanical ample in us by us analogues ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 22:55:47 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Aldon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: in which will be found what is set forth therein In-Reply-To: <199607100408.AAA16200@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> -- thanks for identifying Ben Friedlander as the author of that wonderful liner about the quickenbing sands of O'Hara's poems -- should have been IDed in my post, but I didn't have a tape of that session! --Bob, I have an address for Lorenzo somewhere in my apartment -- backchannel me next chance you get & I will try to find it in the meantime -- --Loss -- want some pages on Lorenzo Thomas for that set of author pages? can excerpt from forthcoming book if you want -- --DOOR PRIZE -- I will send a book (NOT by me!) to the first person who identifies the author of these lines: To a Captious Critic Dear critic, who my lightness so deplores, Would I might study to be prince of bores, Right wisely would I rule that dull estate-- But, sir, I may not, till you abdicate. --Mangled quote of the week -- I don't have the book with me, but here is an approximation of a poem by Dudley Randall: Black Poet / White Critic A critic advised me to use images that appeal to the universal, like a white unicorn. _A white unicorn?_ --Hank: whenever you feel you have the time, I'd be interested in hearing more of your take on "American Journal" -- That's a poem I've never been able to enjoy, and I'd like to hear from somebody who has worked with it more than I have -- I talked with Hayden any number of times about the poem, but it seemed a stretch to me -- I always thought it was the occasional poem he felt he had to write as Poetry Consultant -- but I suspect there's more to it than that -- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 23:06:16 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Marjorie Perloff Subject: Re: List Wars In-Reply-To: <199607100408.AAA16200@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> Thanks, Hank, for that marvelous posting: I really learned a lot and you really make me want to read more Hayden. Daniel Bouchard asked me a few questions I want to answer. "In our midst" meant literally there at Orono, at the conference. The fact that Lorenzo is black (and also Hispanic as someone else has reminded me) is important insofar as at this particular conference there was much interest (naturally, given the time) in questions of race. More, interestingly, than in gender at this point. So--this being the big topic of discussion and of the argument between Aldon and Bob von H, I just meant that I was surprised no one was even discussing Lorenzo's own poetry or even his talk but was busy determining how to judge Langston Hughes. I said it badly, but anyway... As for David Kellogg's point that Marjorie is assuming that one can separate the wheat from the chaff, an idea David rejects out of hand, I want to say I plead guilty. Absolutely. If criticism doesn't at least in part do that, what are we writing for? Moreover, David, you too separate the wheat from the chaff. Everyone does everyone he/she makes a choice as to what to read, what to teach, what to write about. Right now I'm rereading MAN WITHOUT QUALITIES, for me one of the great novels-ever. It's very long. In the amount of time it takes to read Musil, I could read all of Robert Hayden or, for that matter, Robert Frost, to whom Hank compares Hayden. So whom to pick? David, don't you think some critical methodologies are better than others? Isn't that separating the wheat from the chaff? Why don't you base your critical writing on F. R. Leavis? Or on Arthur Quiller-Couch? Don't you believe certain articles you read in scholarly journals are better than others? Why, then, can't we, heaven forbid, think some poets are better than ours? Why is there so much discussion of O'Hara (or Baraka) on this list and so little of Mark Strand? No value judgements involved? The question, I think, is not whether or not we make value judgments--because all of us do--but what we do with them? I agree with the people who wrote in "What's wrong with sociological criteria?" Nothing at all, as long as you know they're your criteria. But since no one can read everything, we all make choices. So I was amused when Hank said Robert Hayden was good in the way Robert Frost is good. In all my years of teaching modern poetry, I've never yet taught Robert Frost. If I have 10 weeks (a quarter at Stanford) or even 15 (a semester), there are just poets I'd rather be teaching and I figure Frost gets taught enough anyway. That doesn't mean my criteria should be yours. But I'm just trying to say that if someone is going to convince me that X is worth a lot of discussion, I want to know why. Aldon, who's a good friend, has gone a long way in alerting me to African-American poets he feels are especially interesting and he makes a case for those poets--but not just for any poet who happens to be black. In fact, he's down on quite a few of the above. Wheat from the chaff, why not??? No hard and fast binary divisions of course. But how do you make actual practical choices?? Marjorie Perloff ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 00:51:26 +0100 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Kevin Killian Subject: Re: List wars At 6:41 PM 7/10/96, wystan wrote: >Dear Dodie, > I am sorry Charles is saying those things about you. (said in >a personal, feeling, tone of voice) But seriously, Ms. Bellamy despite >the fact unlike Mr. Alexander I don't know you at all, your motives >seem clear and above board to me. Wystan, I'm fine with Charles. > I observe some kind of comprehensive confusion about 'the personal' >developing here. What's to be done? I think the line between the personal and non-personal is always messy--and I wouldn't want it any other way. I think I, at least, should move on to new topics. If *I'm* getting tired of this one, I can only imagine what the poor lurkers are going through. Dodie ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 01:15:23 -0700 Reply-To: subq@halcyon.com Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Tom Malone Subject: A Closer Reading Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 08:42:13 -0700 NOT FROM: Herb Levy Subject: List, person, ship Mr Silliman's proposal does not adequately address the pernicious issue of the Academic slime on this e-mail list. Requiring a single, coherent post once per month from each Academic list member would likely result in cutesy, off-topic messages about the Von H. Affair or other irrelevant "me-too" posts ("I'm delivering a paper on The Canon vs. More of the Same." "No way! Me too!!") in ongoing threads. As not enough people have noted, this will result in too much Academic traffic, further allowing the vampiric Academics in our midst to stay on for another month of reading the collected wisdom of others. To actively combat these Academic vermin, we must NOT require full participation by all list members in every current thread. After all, is it really too much to ask that Academic members refrain from participating in the activities of the group. To achieve the goal of total Non-Academic participation, we would have to move quickly toward the more reasonable requirement that all Academic members respond within one hour to each post to the list (including their own) with a closely reasoned 250-500 word statement outlining the many ways univerities perpetuate socio-economic distinctions of class. To make it easier to follow the incoherent discourse that would likely result under this new system, each Academic member would also have to provide a shorter abstract of their denials. This simple change in policy would most certainly cut down on the number of Academic scum on poetics list and we would soon arrive at the kind of total and immediate Revolution that one usually sees in only a few of the more progressive-thinking Usenet newsgroups. Tom Malone subq@halcyon.com As an aside: At the very least it is a misguided notion to say the poetics list is private. ANYONE can (and do) read, download, and forward posts from the p-list archive at the Poetics Website. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 21:51:31 +1200 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Daniel Salmon Subject: Re: List, person, ship 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13a 13b 13c 14 15 At 08:42 AM 9/07/96 -0700, you wrote: >To start with, we could allow brief (less than a hundred words) responses >to be made within forty-eight hours of the intiation of any new topic. > >However, to achieve the goal of total active participation, we would have >to move quickly toward the more reasonable requirement that all list >members respond within one hour to each post to the list (including their >own) with a closely reasoned 250-500 word statement. To make it easier to >follow the advanced discourse that would likely result under this new >system, each list member would also have to provide a shorter abstract of >their arguments. > >This simple change in policy would most certainly cut down on the number of >non-participating lurker scum on poetics list and we would soon arrive at >the kind of total and immediate participatory democracy that one usually >sees in only a few of the more progressive-thinking Usenet newsgroups. > > >Herb Levy >herb@eskimo.com > > Daniel Salmon ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 19:58:59 +0800 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Schuchat Subject: Cult of poetry in China ---------- Forwarded message -------- Since Ron asks, here follows some precis and quotes from the Michelle Yeh article in THE JOURNAL OF ASIAN STUDIES which I had mentioned in an earlier post. My apologies for the length of this post, (its hard to do justice to a 30 page essay in an email) and also for my numerous typos, spelling errors and transcription errors. I hope it is of interest. The article deals with the "avant garde/experimental" poetry scene in post-Mao China, which is unofficial though not necessarily "illegal." "By 'cult of poetry' I am referring to the phenonemon and the concomitant discourse in the 1980s and 1990s that bestows poetry with religious significance and cultivates the image of the poet as the high priest of poetry. The word cult has no exact equivalent in Chinese and is used here as an approximate tanslation for 'worship' or chongbai with strong religious connotations. The 'cult of poetry' thus denotes a religious poetics that is based on the worship of poetry and that inspires a religious-like devotion among poets." The late 80s/90s generation of experimental Chinese poets, according to Yeh, are alienated both from the traditional Communist orthodoxy and also from the rising commodity/westernizing/pop culture environment around them. Both of these options do not particularly value the poet or poetry: "Most of the avant-garde poets who choose to continue to write, however, tend to be in the lower echelon of the current economic structure, holding low-paying state-assigned jobs or no jobs at all." A quote from poem by Zhou Lunyou, "A cofounder and editor of the long-running Sichuan-based poetry journal Feifei, Zhou spent seven months in a prison in Xichang before he wassentenced to three years in a labor reform camp on Mount Emei for "counter-revolutionary incitement": To prove through my writing: to be alive is important What is food? What is Sarte? The blows of commodities are more gentle, more direct than violence, More cruel too, pushing the spirit toward total collapse." "The image of the poet as someone who chooses a lfe of wandering and poverty in order to follow the sacred calling of art, who rejects the dehumanizing system and vulgar society with courage and defiance, finds a vivid expression in the folllwong description of the poet Hei Dachun (b. 1960). Nicknamed "the Drunkard of Yuanmingyuan," Hei is a central figure in a group of poets, artists and rock-and-roll singers who live a bohemian life near the ruins of the leisure palace from China's last dynasty: 'Much of his food and clothes are gifts from his friends. Seeing his religious spirit of dedication, his friends feel that they should do something for art. The worship of art and the eternal need of humans for art makes him believe firmly in the art of poetry which he engages in. He will not waste his energy and life on things he dislikes just in order to lead a normal life; therefore, he does not work, does not bow to the leadership, does not sell his life which belongs to art. He'd rather drift about, embrace death.'" Yeh discusses several highly-publicized suicides among avant garde Chinese poets, including Gu Cheng, who hung himself after murdering his wife. She notes that "many reminiscenes and memorial essaysd that appeared after the tragedy held a rather understanding, if not forgiving, attitude toward Gu. Referring almost always to his precious poetic talent and occassionally also to his previous attempts at suicide...they tend to see in his a romantic genius beyond the laws of this world, who consequently perhaps should not be judged in accordance with the "normal" criteria of right and wrong." Discussing the current Chinese avant gardes self-admitted forebears, after several Chinese poets including the early 20th century modernist Zhu Xiang, the pre-Han Qu Yuan and Tang dynasty's Li Bai (Li Po), she notes that "some of the most frequently mentioned names in the poetry and prose discussions are" Holderin, Rilke, Borges, Tsvetayeya, Mandelstam, Rimbaud, Plath, Pasternak, Brodsky, Celan, Keats, Shelley and Dante.....what the majority of the poets on the above list have in common is personal tragedy." "Perhaps a ready-made explanation for the 'cult of poetry' is this: it is a response of poets to the spiritual vacumn in the wake of the Cultural Revolution in the post-Mao era. In view of the destruction of traditional Chinese values and mores, coupled with the widespread disaffection amontg the intellectuals with the Communist party in the post-Mao era, it is understandable how poets seek to redefine themselves beyond the pale of official ideology. The "cult of poetry' represents a search for an alternative value system, a new identity of the self in contradistinction from, and in defiance of, that dictated by the Party." "When the poet is held as more important than the poetry, death -- especially self-imposed death--becomes the ultimate poem, the poem to end all poems." "Whatis porobably most problematic about the overwhelming interest in the poet rather than the poetry is its ambivalent relation to the mentality underlying the culture of an earlier era -- the personality cult of Mao. ...The deification of poetry and the canonization of the poet reveal an absolutist, Utopian frame of mind that at least implicitly excludes other approaches to poetry both in theory and practice. Are alienation and the sense of crisis the necessary driving force behind the creation of poetry? Why is the poetry that emphasizes suffering and sacrifice regarded nobler or better than the poetry that does not? Why does the poet have to be perceived in heroic terms?" "Throughout the dsicussion thus far I have used male personal pronouns whenever I refer to Chinese avant-garde poets as a group. Rather than committing a sexist oversight, I mean to make a point about another significant aspect of the discourse of the "cult" ....few women poets can be found actively participating or involved in the discourse [ofthe cult of poetry]. It is true that a number of women poets have achieved a national, even international reputation in post-Mao China, most notably Shu Ting and Wang Xiaoni in the early 1980s and Zhai Yongming and Lu Yimin since the mid-1980s. However, none of them have played a significant role in the discourse of the cult..." "In the final analysis, the ;cult of poetry' in post-mao China is a paradox. It advocates creative freedom and individuality, however, in elevating poetry to the status of a supreme religion, it imposes arbitrary limits on poetry. It defies the official ideology, yet is unable to escape entirely the absolutist, Utopian mentality in its worship of the poet and deification of poetry. It resists and detests consumerism, yet it is by no means immune from itself becoming a commodity. When it is perceived by the outside world as "dissent literature" in a totalitarian regime, Chinese avant-garde poetry can easily be turned -- or some may say, has already been turned -- into a commodity in the international (especially Western) cultural market. These contradictions and pitfalls--artistic, ideological and economic--point to the intrinsic limitations of the "cult of poetry," and we can already see "anti-cult" reactions coming from various perspectives in recent years..." **** again, my apologies for lacunae etc. It is not easy to do justice to a 30 page essay in this post, especially one that presupposes some knowledge of recent Chinese history and literature. Anyway, I hope the above quotes are interesting, and of course, following up with the article itself from the Journalof Asian STudies will give a better sense than my excerpts. Ta ta ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 08:01:17 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: henry gould Subject: Re: Onward: Contemporary Poetry & Poetics In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 9 Jul 1996 14:07:31 -0400 from On Tue, 9 Jul 1996 14:07:31 -0400 Rod Smith said: >This is the Contents and Introduction for the forthcoming anthology _Onward: >Contemporary Poetry and Poetics_ ed. Peter Baker, Peter Lang Pub., $28 pb, >440 pgs. due out Sept '96. Peter is off line traveling and asked me to send >it to the listwar. "The Rejection of Closure" is a revised and extended >version. Peter Baker's preview of the new anthology is interesting - is it just me, or is there really a kind of response in his intro to some list discussions (am I being too "immanentist"?). PB draws up a new genealogy specifically contrasting Pound (the immanentist) with Zukofsky (the nominalist) and lining up contemporary & language poets with Zukofsky. This is not really new but it seems to take things from both the dreaded Blasing discussion from months back & the Peirce harangue from weeks back, & turn them on their heads. (Ie. the language poets, contra Blasing's pantheon, are the true purveyors of the split between assumed reality & the word - in terms of Scholasticism!) Here's what sounds familiar to me: > Belief in an implicit poetics can be seen to derive from an immanentist >theory of language, or the idea that words bear direct relation to what they >represent, even carrying a little bit of the essence of the thing in the >word. Such immanentist theories deriving from the religious tradition ("and >the word was with God and the word was God") drove William of Occam, in the >twelfth century, to propose the complete separation of word and referent, in >his philosophy of nominalism. Jacques Derrida is often thought to represent >such a nominalist viewpoint in his philosophy of deconstruction (see my >Deconstruction and the Ethical Turn). Ezra Pound's language theory is >explicitly immanentist, as when he instructs his Italian translator of The >Cantos: "Don't worry about the meaning of the poem. Translate accurately >line by line. The meaning is inherent in the material." Pound's poetics in >The Cantos thus demonstrates what I call (in Obdurate Brilliance) the "myth >of transparency," or the ideology of direct apprehension of the surrounding >context from the text of the poem. Without worrying too much (right now) I don't see how the concluding few sentences above follow logically. Pound's saying the meaning is inherent in the material certainly does not "demonstrate" a belief in language's transparency, though I'd grant that Pound certainly did have a kind of idealist-realist faith in the access of poetry to the real. Pound's statement above, though, that the meaning is inherent in the material, would hold as true for Objectivism as for high modernism. The differences, real or imagined, between the poetics of Pound and those of the anthologized poets perhaps hinge less on their approaches to language than on the status of meaning & belief. Language, as I see it, though changing and evolving, is something of a constant in comparison with the astonishing pressures of ideology, history & the zeitgeist on culture's idea of what is artistically necessary or important. These pressures, of course, influence trends in the philosophy of language (exhibited clearly both in the Scholastics and in the above intro), but poetry operates, hopefully, by digging toward the permanent functions of language, which persist THROUGH the "zeitgeist". - Henry Gould ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 08:44:58 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Loss Glazier Subject: Re: Private List/Public Space Burt, Yes, true. But some of the great literary archives consist of just these sorts of notes (and letters) that some kind soul just happened to save... Loss At 05:54 PM 7/9/96 EST, you wrote: >Loss, > >yes, but how often do one's notes tacked onto a bulletin board get >taken down and shipped off to some archive; archiving (electronic or >otherwise) seems to legitimize the mere missives, no? And then they >get quoted perhaps, and so on. > >Burt > > ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 08:45:00 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Loss Glazier Subject: Re: Orono papers & other authors At 03:02 PM 7/9/96 -0500, you wrote: >loss --if our papers are being published somewhere, what are the print-copyright >politics of sending them also to you; wd it be seen as undercutting the >print-publisher's market? i don't wanna do anything "wrong."--md Maria, If a piece will be published in print, it's courteous to ask the publisher if it's ok if it's also available online. Some publishers are barbaric enough to think of online space as a threat. (Of course, if the online paper is a different version somehow, it makes it less of a threat!)* If the publishers says no then maybe they'd let the piece go online say six months after serial publication in print (tho not as timely, this might also work). I know people have valid reasons to prefer print publication, but if making the ideas public is what writing is about, there are few (maybe no?) journals that can circulate so widely. I know from handling the mail here that these pieces are getting read. (Also the statistics reinforce this.) (Studies I've seen actually show that online versions actually help sales of print publications.) But I think also of pedagogical uses. How many libraries don't have subscriptions to most magazines I adore - and will students or others be willing to use ILL (interlibrary loan) if it is even available via ILL, etc. etc. I have people request permission to use EPC materials for courses and I always say OK enthusiastically! But I do of course understand that sometimes people just can't make their work available. Best, Loss ------------------ *In this case you might think of how your paper would be without certain constraints. It can be longer. With some knowlege of html, you can have color graphics/ illustrations, etc.) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 09:06:07 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Michael Coffey Subject: Re: Irby Matters -Reply Comments: To: anielsen@email.SJSU.EDU More on the availability of Ken Irby's work; last week Ron Silliman enthusiastically parsed a section for Irby's Orexis, listfolk may recall. Kenneth Irby, CALL STEPS: PLAINS, CAMPS, STATIONS, CONSISTORIES, 154 pgs, $12.95, ISBN 0-88268-090-0, Station Hill Press, in association with Tansy Press, Distributed to the trade by The Talman Company, but available from Small Press Distribution and other wholesalers. Direct from Station Hill, Barrytown, NY 12507, $3.00 shipping & handling. (This volume contains all of the long-poem Orexis) OREXIS is still available for $10, ISBN 0-9930794-17-6. Same as above (minus the Tansy association). ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 09:17:13 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gwyn McVay Subject: Re: Orono papers & other authors In-Reply-To: <199607091948.PAA23742@conciliator.acsu.buffalo.edu> Related to which-- The National Museum of Women in the Arts is currently devoting a whole floor to an exhibit of 20th-century women artists, including Theresa Hak Kyung Cha, whose "Passages/Paysages" is installed, and a new column/yarn setup by Cecilia Vicu~na that is deeply moving to look at. The catalogue, pleasantly enough, is well-researched, highly informative, and chocked with bibliographical refs, so if you're going to be in DC, hit 12th and New York, and go there, and see the concurrent artists' books exhibit there too. Gwyn ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 22:36:07 +0900 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Nada Gordon Subject: poetry performance Since readings are embodied voicings, I'm happy to see readers who remember their bodies instead of keeping most of their *ki* upwards of their necks I also like to notice eye contact and verbal contact with the audience, comprehension (grokking?) checking even a page poem can live without a gloss but a read poem doesn't need to When I read here it's true I have to rely on all kinds of gimmicks -- the only real venue is a faux-British pub of mostly non-poets -- but I find if I crawl on the floor, sing acappella and gaze into people's eyes I can read the subtle stuff once I get the audience's attention It's a far cry from the well-lit gallery spaces of my salad days, full of folding chairs and captive fellow-writers, yet there's a feeling of challenge here, albeit hoop-jumping Tokyo is having a typhoon now after three days of solid rain. And how are you? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 22:36:18 +0900 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Nada Gordon Subject: Re: Listpersonship 'twas the voice of the flea, I heard it declare. . . While it may be true I use this list as a kind of highbrow entertainment, it keeps me away from the quiz shows and samurai dramas --nada ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 09:41:10 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Burt Kimmelman -@NJIT" Subject: Re: Onward: Contemporary Poetry & Poetics William of Ockham in the 12th century!?! Not by a long shot. COMPLETE separation of word and object--hardly, and anyway this is a terrible over- simplification, and I suspect this kind of sloppiness informs the the Pound-Zuk split. Anyway, this is a big discussion and as many of us know a long ongoing one, i guess. I do like what I see when I read about "the status of meaning and belief" and, yes, NOW one can return to Ockham for some help. Pardon this perhaps non-sequiturial and willy-nilly grouchiness. Burt ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 09:22:21 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Joe Amato Subject: Re: the guy and the gulf war e, yr point about victimhood well-taken... it can be an aesthetic dilemma if one is simply exhibiting pain... how to get around, or better, through this?... for one, i think what's necessary, and this pace dodie's hammering on the white middleclass, is to pull apart some of these categories we rely on... already there's humor on this list to suggest intervention in the seeming rift between academic/non-academic... there may be more overlap here than is customarily (publicly) allowed (in fact i'm sure there is)... and though half the income-earners in this country are below $21k, you're called "middleclass" at $30k, and you're called "middleclass" at $70k... you're called middleclass if you own a four bedroom house, and you're called middleclass if you rent a one bedroom apartment... you're called middleclass if you're going to inherit property, and you're called middleclass if you have no inheritance... lotsa room here to debate about what "middleclass" means... one thing it does not mean is that there's no grief or urgency or despair in this so-defined group... class is shifty, b/c one can shift in and out of different class structures... but speaking personally, my memories remain intact, thank you... in any case, the point would be not to negate or trivialize experience w/o first (somehow) coming to terms with what that experience is... i can feel more for the poverty-stricken than for the wealthy, sure, but this at the level of economic circumstance... and b/c of who i am i might relate a lot more to the former (and sometimes err accordingly)... but as an artist/poet, part of what i'm about is not mistaking the truth of my experience for the truth of my art (however i construe both sorts of truth)... i wouldn't want, for example, to fall into that (current) marxist trap of arguing against any discourse that isn't specifically needs-based, on the grounds that non-needs-based discourse (if we could identify such a beast) does not address global-economic realities or some such (and regarding which rob wilson's cherub is a downright illuminating construction)... also, i'm reminded of a line from a zappa tune, where he sez something like "yknow something people? i'm not black but there's a whole lotta times i wish i weren't white, either"... yeah, 'sixties liberal white guy,' but at least i hear in this an inkling of an attempt (in a pop-cultural space) to confront one's own advantage (if not quite privilege)---social/ontological issues relating to skin color---from the inside... it's important to examine racial discourse from the point of view of the other, but i'll still hold to the value of addressing, each of us, our own position and status in our institutional systems---and yeah, as a matter of fact, our own complicity, without getting whiny about it... and i don't find that it helps much to constantly defer to real anguish on another part of the planet (though i'm all for recognizing real anguish on other parts of the planet)... there's always enough grief to go around... mebbe, to create meaningful art that attends to our grief, mebbe we need to attend to the ways we tend to categorize social experience???... best, joe ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 09:21:16 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: List wars Comments: To: Multiple@maroon.tc.umn.edu, recipients@maroon.tc.umn.edu, of@maroon.tc.umn.edu, list@maroon.tc.umn.edu, POETICS@maroon.tc.umn.edu db rites: I think I, at least, should move on to > new topics. If *I'm* getting tired of this one, I can only imagine what > the poor lurkers are going through. > hear hear. md ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 09:59:07 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: List wars Comments: To: Multiple@maroon.tc.umn.edu, recipients@maroon.tc.umn.edu, of@maroon.tc.umn.edu, list@maroon.tc.umn.edu, POETICS@maroon.tc.umn.edu In message UB Poetics discussion group writes: > Maria, you criticized a population I was a member of--the people on this > list. I was defending that population. > > Dodie It was not my intention to criticize a population of which i've been a very happy, active part. I'm sorry for any distress I might have caused you or any other individuals who felt as you did. in my view, inspired by rob wilson's "covering cherub" posts (sorry if i'm quoting you out of context, rob, but this is what i got from it), i made some observations about what seemed to me the difficulty of discussing certain issues --primarily race -- on the list, and as emily helped me to see, this is a difficult medium for volatile topics, in part because the possibilities of misunderstanding are so high, as the recent herb-levy-lurker flurry instanciated. i most emphatically was not, as others have also pointed out, setting out to be an arbiter of pc-ness or list content. i was not invoking any "shoulds," nor do i see myself as any kind of "expert" on the topics i was calling attention to. this is the only list i'm on, and perhaps it's unrealistic to think it can address all my intellectual community needs; on the other hand, my larger project has to do precisely with bringing cultural studies and poetry/poetics to bear on each other, and i'd like to feel that i can explore this perspective on this list, rather than having to compartmentalize (as the academy does) my intellectual life. md ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 10:47:03 +5 Reply-To: ajm@acpub.duke.edu Sender: UB Poetics discussion group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: Andrew John Miller Organization: Duke University Subject: Value Judgments and Sociology (was Re: List wars) David Kellog wrote (among many other things): > From the posts of those critics who are on this list, it seems to > me that the world (or at least the Net) is filled with people > yakking about why such-and-such a poet is good, and another is bad. > The last thing I want or need is another tastemaker. Save that, > as Foucault might say, for the police. [...] A "pure" poetics > outside of sociology doesn't exist, and if it did I wouldn't want > it. > David: I agree with the general tenor of your remarks. Poetic value is contingent and contextual; it is circulated and produced under conditions that are mediated by forces of the sort that we have been taught to describe as social, economic, and/or cultural. I strongly disagree, however, with your contention that an entity called "sociology" forms an essential and necessary part of our understanding of poetry and poetics. Sociology is an academic discipline, one that has its own rules, traditions, procedures, and sacred texts. Like most academic disciplines, it is marked by a broad array of disagreements over its basic aims and methods; even the question of what does or does not qualify as "social" remains open to considerable debate. Those of us who define ourselves as literary critics and scholars can derive considerable benefit from reading the work of sociologists; we can even, much of the time, make effective use of that work. So long, however, as we continue to define ourselves--institutionally, professionally, and/or personally--as literary critics and scholars, we will be doing something that is not "sociology" in any precise or specific sense. We will find ourselves compelled, moreover, to deal with rules, traditions, procedures, and sacred texts that are profoundly different from those favored by sociologists. Of course, we can attempt to persuade our colleagues to think more like sociologists--an enterprise in which you, among others, have enjoyed at least some degree of success. I believe, however, that it would be a serious mistake to proceed as if sociology somehow provided us with a higher level discourse by means of which we could loftily point out the errors of those (supposedly) primitive and unenlightened colleagues who continue to approach literature in other ways. While I'm at it, I might as well confess that I see nothing wrong with the production of value judgments, poetic or otherwise, *provided* that those judgments are forthrightly presented as judgments and are not cloaked in the aura of some pseudo-objective theory of poetics, society, history, etc. For me, one of the most helpful things about this list has been the opportunity to hear intelligent and informed people describe their poetic likes and dislikes. I personally feel that, if anything, there has not been enough of this sort of discussion. I greatly appreciate it when friends share with me their value judgments about wines, restaurants, movies, music, and cars. Why should poetry be any different? --Andrew John Miller Department of English Duke University Durham NC 27701 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 08:32:23 -0700 Reply-To: Shaunanne Tangney Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Shaunanne Tangney Subject: Re: Cult of poetry in China In-Reply-To: m/m schuchat-- i seem to have missed your earlier post--could you please send me the issue/date of the journal of aisan studies to which you refer in yr post? i am v. interested in chinese poetry-- thanks, shaunanne ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 08:52:03 -0700 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Marjorie Perloff Subject: Re: Lorenzo Thomas In-Reply-To: <199607100408.AAA16200@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu> I owe Bob Harrison an apology. He's the one who alerted the list to the fact that Thomas is Hispanic (Panamian-American) as well as black. I referred to Harrison as "someone"--inexcusable but it happens sometimes when the list gets as long as it got last night and when it comes as a listserv and when it's midnight... But herewith apologies to Bob! Marjorie ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 11:54:53 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jordan Davis Subject: sports and wine Why value judgments about poetry are different from consumer judgments about wine, food, cars, etc. Not as easy a question as it seems. How to live. The development of a poetics runs parallel to the life one lives, right? It's like a second allegedly intelligent childhood, you learn things, it's like choosing (Wallace Stevens thought it _was_ choosing.. so he went into business), but with this difference--you meet it. That is, the car one drives, one's consumer profile, is at a remove from this. Which is something like a soul, or a mind. This and that. Sports and wine. Once more, from the top. A poetics can only be individuated from any other poetics if it can manage to persist in its idiosyncratic diplomacies. These may consist of: willful good nature, perverse sarcasm, topiary artifice, technical foul, cranberry juice, ectopia broadband arsenio fallout, rodeo maser, let's go, pinball. I like pinball, because of its simultaneously centrality and diffuse irrelevance--its harmonization of chance and teleology--I guess they used to call it peripeteia. Also I like a cuvee from Cain vineyards in california, and I have a Jordan chardonnay in my fridge. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 12:14:31 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jordan Davis Subject: past tense mope dream Oops! simultaneous. Also, ain't no prize for persisting in your idiosyncratic diplomacy, either, unless you're a painter and can sell x hundred near-identical instances of said diplomacy, which is actually paint, and not language, and not the same. Except that x thousand years later, people will say, oh yeah, that kind of poetry. Got to be redundant to make it in poetry. J ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 12:40:30 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rod Smith Subject: Re: Onward: Contemporary Poetry & Poetics HG wrote: >but poetry operates, hopefully, by digging toward the permanent >functions of language, which persist THROUGH the "zeitgeist". Henry, what does this mean? I see raising questions re Peter's distinctions, but this seems even less explanatory-- a kind of social-constructivist mysticism. "Permanent functions of language"? What are we talking some kinda deep structure metaphor? Seems we don't have a handle on these issues, which leads many toward religiosity & others toward skepticism. I tend to prefer eastern ideas, which, I think, rest in an acceptance of immanent transparencies-- to torque the classification a bit. Rather than talking about Pound/Zuk perhaps Peter should have talked about Pound/Wittgenstein. The "meaning & belief" question reminds me of Carla Harryman's "Both belief and denial throw existence into question." Perhaps the "schism," if there is one, is at the level of practice-- between those that are self-reflexive (Wittgenstein) & those that aren't. One cld talk about Olson's "from where the poet got it over to the audience" (sic)-- someone taking what I would call an eastern or Wittgensteinian approach wldn't trust that sort of formulation, however many APR folks seem to see meaning operating in just that way, i.e. as a package to be delivered. Rod ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 12:52:26 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rod Smith Subject: Re: Onward: Contemporary Poetry & Poetics P.S.-- yes, I know it wasn't that simple for Olson. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 11:58:30 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Judy Roitman Subject: Re: Onward: Contemporary Poetry & Poetics >HG wrote: >>but poetry operates, hopefully, by digging toward the permanent >>functions of language, which persist THROUGH the "zeitgeist". Rod Smith writes of "an eastern or Wittgensteinian approach" to language and semantics. Could you unpack that a little? Related to this discussion is a new book, "The Spell of the Sensuous," by David Abram. It's touted as a book on ecology from a phenomenological perspective, but (but?) much of it is rooted in issues of language and also in David's experience as a master sleight-of-hand magician hanging out with shamans in traditional cultures. It's Poundian in more ways than one: the alphabet is seen as distorting perception. Fun to read and I've been looking for an excuse to tell you all about it. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Judy Roitman | "Glad to have Math, University of Kansas | these copies of things Lawrence, KS 66045 | after a while." 913-864-4630 | Larry Eigner, 1927-1996 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 12:42:47 EDT Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Henry Gould Subject: Re: Onward: Contemporary Poetry & Poetics In-Reply-To: Message of Wed, 10 Jul 1996 12:40:30 -0400 from On Wed, 10 Jul 1996 12:40:30 -0400 Rod Smith said: >HG wrote: >>but poetry operates, hopefully, by digging toward the permanent >>functions of language, which persist THROUGH the "zeitgeist". > >Henry, what does this mean? I see raising questions re Peter's distinctions, >but this seems even less explanatory-- a kind of social-constructivist >mysticism. If it's mysticism, it's a kind of aesthetic idol-worship. It's a fascination from a proto-Acmeist carpenter's perspective. What makes something built to last? Why do some artworks still grip us while others seem hackneyed by timebound blinders? It's language talking through the obsessions and neuroses & sleepwalking and timeserving of an era - not denying it, but mastering it & throwing light on it - and in the process gripping us with real experience, on the scent of truth. > >The "meaning & belief" question reminds me of Carla Harryman's "Both belief >and denial throw existence into question." Perhaps the "schism," if there is >one, is at the level of practice-- between those that are self-reflexive >(Wittgenstein) & those that aren't. One cld talk about Olson's "from where >the poet got it over to the audience" (sic)-- someone taking what I would >call an eastern or Wittgensteinian approach wldn't trust that sort of >formulation, however many APR folks seem to see meaning operating in just >that way, i.e. as a package to be delivered. I think we're all roaring with hunger for those very packages, & that's why packaged truth, & poetry, & anthologies, are so winning... What I meant by the "status of meaning & belief" was the idea that the forces shaping a historical era also pressure various groups' energy level & sense of breakthrough - so that Pound's "epic quest" fulfills demands and expectations in a truth-oddyssey at a level or in a way that has dissipated or grown more obscure or latent at a later period (waiting for the next explosion). Later on we invent our genealogies & ascribe organized styles or differentiations. - Henry Gould "Classicism is revolution" - O. Mandelstam ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 15:11:02 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Value Judgments and Sociology (was Re: List wars) Comments: To: ajm@acpub.duke.edu, Multiple@maroon.tc.umn.edu, recipients@maroon.tc.umn.edu, of@maroon.tc.umn.edu, list@maroon.tc.umn.edu, POETICS@maroon.tc.umn.edu andrew miller wwrites a longish post on sociology that you've all seen; andrew: i agree with you that the category "sociology" is a scientistic, academic discipline and an ugly rubric under which to classify something as broad as, say, "attention to social, biographical, historical context." i think it's crucial not to, to use the language of one of the New Zealanders (tony green? wystan?i've deleted the actual post, so can't quote specifically, sorry) said, "subsume" "poetics" into/under "sociology" or vice versa --this is why a project that would treat text and its surrounding environment as one continuous --"ecological" system as it were --is dear to my heart. in order to talk to people in my world, that is, the academy, i use the terms "poetics" and "cultural studies", which shouldn't, but are, segregated and seen as mutually inhospitable terrains of inquiry. i was thrilled to see, in the papers at Orono, the degree to which this kind of treatment is becoming acceptable and even respected, though there is still, in most cases, a leaning toward one or the other poles of the false binary. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 09:53:22 -1000 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Gabrielle Welford Subject: two film reviews (fwd) After the mention of interracial sex, I couldn't resist this forward. gab. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 08:15:34 -1000 From: Julian Samuel Reply-To: postcolonial@jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU Two Film Reviews by Julian Samuel Bhaji on the Beach, A film by Gurinder Chadha, 1994, 100 minutes reviewed by Julian Samuel Bhaji on the Beach is an energetic, race-and-sex-relations comedy that is a must see for anyone who thinks that putting these issues-of-the epoch in the mass media is a nice way to deal with the traumas plaguing South Asian women. Community orientated films are a superb way to dramatize, confront, and to come to terms with interracial sex and pregnancies, and other configurations that are a source of endless trouble for South Asian parents who just can't forget India, Pakistan, Kenya, Uganda etc. Bhaji follows hot on the heels of but does not go beyond other "Black" British masterpieces such as Hanif Kureshi's My Beautiful Laundrette, The Bhudda of Suburbia; and Isaac Julien's gay landmark, Young Soul Rebels. Bhaji's plot does not strain the imagination. Here's a part of it: a Southall Black Sisters type South Asian community leader takes an all-ages-all-classes group of South Asian women to Blackpool. In the old days, before we all got to England and improved the English diet it was a white holidaying spot. But UK immigration changed all that. The insertion of these splendiferously dressed women on the beach include a battered wife who during the trip makes up her mind to leave her husband forever; a teenage couple who, one gets the impression, are sexually involved; a shilvar kamees clad granny who is mechanical scripted in to contrast old-world values with "English" ones. Chastity, obedience to Gods, and a reverent respect for the family bread-winner are up for gentle feminist review. The granny stereotype has to act shocked most of the time. Boring. The biggest shock for her is the pregnancy of one of the young Asian women by her black boyfriend. This dilemma is elegantly solved, as the rest of the group drive back to town, with a tender lingering kiss during a interracial sun-set. Thank god this scene will bother some Asians. At Blackpool, sexually explorative members of the outing meet English cowboys who work at a hot-dog stand. One of the women gets into a bit of interracial necking, but before anything exciting happens her protective about-to-de-cloak lesbian friend pulls her back into the virginal harem of the Asian community. The acting is earnest cardboard stereotyping au maximum. No one evolves, everyone stays in the same charactival rut, and the story is as tense as watching Rajiv Gandhi have tea and biscuits at a press conference on the Tibet question. However, it is stereotyping with a huge difference: its brown stereotyping. Bhaji is more than mundane; check this for excellence: "I just needed you to be there" says the pregnant woman. And there are hundreds of lines like this. But even at that, Bhaji is saved by being more or less a first of its kind, and it does not grind on inexorably. It is ultra light race-sensitive entertainment, for the lily-livered. Notwithstanding the simplistic editing -- there is not one unpredictable cut -- this film is brilliant even if the South Asian in-jokes will pass over the heads of both white Canadian tribes. British audiences, however, are hip to all this post-colonial modernity, so they will get most of the culturally anchored funnies. Bhaji is better than most films made in Canada in the last five years. Quebec films don't even come close, and of course, Quebec lives in mortal fear of black actors, artists, intellectuals and directors and therefore does not encourage them. Director Gurinder Chadha is lucky to have generous film funders who take her so very seriously. Imagine the National Film Board or the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation putting bucks into such a film without getting utterly terrorized by the racegender questions. Forget it. Canada will not catch-up, not even by the time Hong Kong slips into Beijing control. A warning: there are hectares of songs and dances: You can take the Asian out of Asia but you can't take the Bollywood out of the Asian. end Julian Samuel Bandit Queen directed by Shekhar Kapur reviewed by Julian Samuel Bandit Queen is based on the true life story of a peasant woman who established an earth-shattering reputation throughout India for having fought against her oppressors. Her story is tragic: a forced marriage to someone centuries older than her -- she was about 10 at the time. After a few rapes she escapes her "husband" and, a few years later joins a band of country-side highway men who engage in various nasty activities. She is caught by rival forces and is raped by scores of men. She escapes and the same thing happens: she is caught again, raped, and again takes revenge. Finally, she politicizes the entire Indian country-side and attempts to besiege Delhi capital of the "largest democracy in the world." Well no not exactly: the filmmaker has made an exaggerated and simplistic account of her life. The real Bandit Queen (Poolan Devi) in fact wanted to stop the distribution of this film because she thought that it did injustice to cause. She is right: The film should have been pulled out of distribution not because it did an injustice but because it is repetitive to the point of making the viewer suicidal and as inelegant as Benazir Bhutto attempting to defuse the civil war now raging in Karachi. Her narrative is important for those who want to learn about political struggles with the bazaar rituals of Mother India. However, this film is maligantly marred by gun shots in every scene and screechy rape scene after rape scene. You'll only be able to sit through it if you're a masochist or if you've taken sleeping pills with your cholesterol loaded popcorn. Julian Samuel > --- from list postcolonial@lists.village.virginia.edu --- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 14:57:56 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Robert A Harrison Subject: onward: + Thanks for the apology and the acknowledgment, Marjorie. Glad to see there're a bunch of other threads going on now. Not to hold those up, wanted to send the list a quote and a coupla references. Here's a quote from one of Lorenzo Thomas' recent talks ("... first presented as part of "Revolutionary Poetry: Directions for Further Investigation," the concluding panel of the Poetry Project's 1994 Symposium,....") from *Nothing Slow and Careful About It* "In the past couple of days I think we've heard some very interesting and nice rhetoric: the principle of "continual revolution"; a return to the '60s via a "counterculture." Lots of individualistic and ethnocentric expressions. The Yenan forum revisited. And so on and so forth. What bothers me is that much of what we heard was flawed by unsystematic thinking and I think that might have something to do with the fact that we're poets. Y'know, "We cool like that we write like that we think like that." Anyway, I was suffering from all the cybernetic stuff that I was hearing and I finally came down with something like Dada overload........." hmm published in The World #51 The Poetry Project St. Mark's in-the-Bowery 131 East 10th St NYC, NY 10003 Some of Lorenzo's early work is in "None of the Above," Michael Lally's anthology, 1976. There is also a "comprehensive collection" called "The Bathers." Published in 1981 by I. Reed Books isbn #0-918408-18-0 ok. ONWARD!! As the the subject says! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 15:00:47 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Burt Kimmelman -@NJIT" Subject: Re: Onward: Contemporary Poetry & Poetics Hey Judy Roitman and anyone else interested in poetry/lang phil/ecology: Abram's book sounds like territory covered by my colleague David Rothenberg' s new journal Terra Nova; maybe someone would want to review "The Smell of the Sensuous" for it. David can be reached at rothenberg@admin.njit.edu. burt ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 14:47:28 EST Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Burt Kimmelman -@NJIT" Subject: peter quartermain Peter Quartermain, I've been trying to email you and have had my mail spit back to me. could you let me know where you are and how to reach you? thanks, burt kimmelman kimmelman@admin.njit.edu ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 12:58:00 -0600 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: "Pritchett,Pat @Silverplume" Comments: To: Dean Taciuch Dean raises a good point. I think the way we must finally come to understand "how to read a poem" to an audience is that, for most poets (and most poems), a reading only constitutes 50% (or so, it varies, naturally) of the poem's quiddity (gotta love that word!). For Shaunanne, it would seem to constitute a greater percentage. Any reading is, of course, an interpretation, i.e. it presents a particular profile of the poem at a particular moment. If you go to the same play on two different nights, that play will vary in minute particulars per performance. But it's still the same text. Which implies that the poem itself, silent on the page, occupies some kind of Platonic/Ur-dimension from which it "descends" when invoked/pronounced by the speaker. A dubious notion, perhaps, but intriguing. As for how to get across ambiguous line breaks: maybe read the same line more than once, each time differently to stress its multiple weights/meanings/emphases... Patrick Pritchett ---------- From: Dean Taciuch To: Multiple recipients of list POETICS Date: Tuesday, July 09, 1996 11:39PM <> On Tue, 9 Jul 1996, Kathrine Varnes wrote: > As far as I'm concerned, a good performance is a good interpretation, or > at least an interesting one. (The reverse is also true.) . . . > what kills poetry for me (which is often what happens when > actors are reading) is when the reader has already decided what the > perfect reading is and tries to create it -- some static idea -- instead > of actively interpreting while reading. Better to be imperfect and lean > on the words. > > Kathrine Varnes > OK, but how to offer an interpretation without having an interpretation in mind? This is a serious question..I wonder this myself when reading--do I try to express an ambiguous line break verbally (and how?) or do I collapse the distinction, choose a reading, and present that? I think the key is "static"--the performance should not be a single thing, or at least not the same single thing to everyone. Also, I don't mean to knock actors/acting. It certainly is possible for an actor to give a good reading of a poem, just as it is obviously possible for a poet to give a bad reading. Dean Taciuch ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 13:33:23 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Rod Smith Subject: Re: Onward: Contemporary Poetry & Poetics Well, an eastern or Wittgensteinian approach wld be a contextual approach-- an understanding of context as multiply & complexly constitutive. The emphasis being not only on what we can "compute" but also upon acknowledgement that any given context is more complexly constituted than one can apprehend-- which is why intuition is such a powerful & real aspect of our experience & also why it is so individualized. Seems to me both Wittgenstein & aspects of buddhist & taoist thought share a concern with pointing out limits of apprehension & *using them.* One cld also talk about Duchamp in these terms. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 13:24:41 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: Jordan Davis Subject: mis/guide to the extent that we participate in the terms of someone else's debate--the sumerians, the greeks, the cherokees, the democrats--we're what, learning? except that information, poetic information, is located at once in the capitol and the kitchen, we've been lured into 'the zone' and we've been talking, we need these common terms, and that's it, that's all, inscribe it and if you can 'say it without saying it', all the better, all the best, save a lull, pause, take a breath. No stride like the strident, eschew the received phrase, find file, hey. only music is information? J ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 15:22:53 -0500 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB Poetics discussion group From: maria damon Subject: Re: Value Judgments and Sociology (was Re: List wars) Comments: To: ajm@acpub.duke.edu, Multiple@maroon.tc.umn.edu, recipients@maroon.tc.umn.edu, of@maroon.tc.umn.edu, list@maroon.tc.umn.edu, POETICS@maroon.tc.umn.edu ps to my post to andrew miller --and david kellogg, indirectly -- on "sociology": i also like it when a "critical" text aspires to or achieves the poetic. that's why i come back again and again to walter benjamin; not just cuz he's one of the current gods of cult studs, but because he language and insights are so inspired, so...well, poetic. no one could call his essay on some motifs in Baudelaire "mere" sociology, though it has a strong component of social concern and sociological observation. to me this is a kind of "texte ideal." (it teaches great with o'hara's lunch poems, btw). susan stewart, who is "also" a poet, is another writer/"critic" whose essays embody a lovely poesis of their own. others, y'all? rachel bdp's talk at orono was in that realm. bests, maria d ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 16:38:10 -0400 Reply-To: UB Poetics discussion group Sender: UB P