Saturday, April 22, 2006

But what do you compare it to?

Couple days ago I told Jessica Smith that I wasn’t kidding when I said (of Annie Finch) “I love it when people talk of poetry as a dance”: “I always remember – tho I can't lay my finger on it” (said I) “that passage where WCW kicks Pound's butt over the ‘condition of music’ business, and tells him that if poetry has to be compared to anything, it ought to be compared to dancing.” So Michael Zbigley replies:
Pound also said "Music rots when it gets too far from the dance. Poetry atrophies when it gets too far from music."

I don't recall that WCW line, but I suppose the salient point is that both dance and poetry arose as responses to music, supplements, you might say.

The Derridean logic of the supplement certainly plays out in poetry's history, i.e. poetry as augmentation to music becomes poetry as replacement for music, but this seems less apt for dance. I suppose purveyors of modern dance see their work as separable from music just as poets since at least the 13th century have been happy to speak their poems sans melody.

Pound again: "There are three kinds of melopoeia, that is, verse made to sing; to chant or intone; & to speak. The older one gets the more one believes in the first."
Well, I found the WCW passage I had in mind, from towards the end of Spring and All:
Writing is likened to music. The object would be it seems to make poetry a pure art, like music. Painting too. Writing, as with certain of the modern Russians whose work I have seen, would use unoriented sounds in place of conventional words. The poem would then be completely liberated when there is identity of sound with something – perhaps the emotion.

I do not believe that writing is music. I do not believe writing would gain in quality or force by seeking to attain to the conditions of music. (Imaginations 150)
Nothing about dance there, tho my memory isn't playing me entirely false, since Wms a few lines before writes of how poetry "creates a new object, a play, a dance which is not a mirror up to nature but –"

I don't deny the historical linkage of music & poetry, & EP, Zukofsky, and Bunting among others certainly got a lot of mileage out of the entertwined roots of the two arts. But for all the maddening & wonderful inconsistencies of WCW's statements about poetics, I think he's onto something: that the Paterian notion of art aspiring to a "condition of music" – a content-free, non-referential, purely formal shape – is only one of the options open to the poet in the 20th century & beyond.

Admittedly, there is a very basic pleasure to be obtained from the poet with a conventionally or unconventionally musical ear. And one can't gainsay the achievements of poets who've been attracted by the model of music – Pound and Zukofsky, to name 2 who really didn't know jack about music in any substantial sense, and Bunting, who seems to have known quite a bit. But there's no meaningful, foundational link between the two arts – maybe never, and not anymore if there ever was.

I find, as I get older and even dorkier on the dance floor than I was when I was young & thin, that I find the metaphor of dance – and metaphors're all they are, these "musics" and "dances" and "paintings," after all? – more attractive when I sit down to write. Celan's "Todesfuge" got analyzed in German high school classes all thru the '70s for its "fugal form," but it's worth remembering that the poem started life as "Todestango."
***
Oh yes, the weekly random 10:

1) “Den of Sins,” Naked City, Naked City
2) “Born to Run,” Emmylou Harris, Spyboy
3) “Down Where the Drunkards Roll,” Richard Thompson, the big box set
4) “Bottle of Smoke,” The Pogues, If I Should Fall from Grace with God
5) “I Don’t Know,” Mekons, I Love Mekons
6) “Friendly Ghosts,” Mark Ribot, Rootless Cosmopolitans
7) “Archimedes,” John Cale, Hobo Sapiens
8) “Garage d’Or,” Mekons, Original Sin
9) “Long Dark Street,” Oysterband, The Shouting End of Life
10) “Ashes to Ashes,” David Bowie, Scary Monsters

Thursday, April 20, 2006

Honey, get the kids out of the house...now!

And this sighted in Friday's Washington Post:

Learning the Wrong Things From Poetry

Fill your house with books if you want little Billy or Beth to grow up to be an academic all-star. Shakespeare is good. But stay away from poetry -- books of poesy on your shelves may dumb down your child.

A research team headed by demographer Jonathan Kelley, of Brown University and the University of Melbourne, analyzed data from a study of scholastic ability in 43 countries, including the United States. The data included scores on a standardized achievement test in 2000 and detailed information that parents provided about the family. The average student scored 500 on this test.

The researchers found that a child from a family having 500 books at home scored, on average, 112 points higher on the achievement test than one from an otherwise identical family having only one book -- and that's after they factored in parents' education, occupation, income and other things typically associated with a child's academic performance. The findings were presented last month at the annual meeting of the Population Association of America in Los Angeles.

Of course, it's not the number of books in the home that boosts student performance -- it's what they represent. The researchers say a big home library reflects the parents' dedication to the life of the mind, which probably nurtures scholastic accomplishment in their offspring.

They also found that not all books are created equal. "Having Shakespeare or similar highbrow books about bodes well for children's achievement," they wrote. "Having poetry books around is actively harmful by about the same amount," perhaps because it signals a "Bohemian" lifestyle that may encourage kids to become guitar-strumming, poetry-reading dreamers.

Various

The latest heartwarming photo-op from the White House: "Katrina Kids" shivering on the lawn at the annual Easter Egg Roll, serenading the First Lady to the tune of "Hey Look Me Over":
Our country’s stood beside us
People have sent us aid.
Katrina could not stop us, our hopes will never fade.
Congress, Bush and FEMA
People across our land
Together have come to rebuild us and we join them hand-in-hand!
I know I'm moved – or at least bits of my digestive system are in motion.
***
From the "Never Underestimate a Slacker Undergrad" department: Today in my Am Lit course we were doing some Dickinson poems, in particular Johnson #1052:
I never saw a Moor –
I never saw the Sea –
Yet know I how the Heather looks
And what a Billow be.
The first question – I'm not making this up – was "What's Heather?" To which someone replied – and I'm not making this up either, nor was he joking – "It's a girl's name."
***
I have – to the detriment of my work, my family life, and my sleep schedule – finished watching The Ister; and I pronounce it good. Very good indeed. Don't miss the extra 25 minute bonus segment of Werner Hamacher extemporizing on Heidegger's reading of Hölderlin; I wish I could talk like that. (I wish I was that good looking!)
***
Oh indeed, Jessica, no irony about poetry as dance. I always remember – tho I can't lay my finger on it – that passage where WCW kicks Pound's butt over the "condition of music" business, and tells him that if poetry has to be compared to anything, it ought to be compared to dancing. (Dylan Thomas to Harry Levin, upon being introduced to Levin & told he was a professor of Comparative Literature: "And what do you compare it to?")
***
J. leaves tomorrow for another weekend at the Folger in Washington, thus casting me into single parent status. Survival is probable, tho not assured.

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

The Ister


What a gift! One of my (soon-to-be-ex-) students somehow managed to wangle me – apparently by way of India and other points east – a DVD copy of David Barison and Daniel Ross's monumental film The Ister. (I shan't name my benefactor, since I'm not entirely sure of the legality of this transaction, the film as yet not being available in the US at a price anybody short of a major research library could afford. Suffice it to say I've spent a bit of time downloading software to enable me to get around "region codings.")

On its face, this seems an unlikely project: a three-hour film that travels 3000 kilometers up the Danube, from its mouth to its source, all loosely organized around Martin Heidegger's 1942 lecture series on Hölderlin's hymn "The Ister" (the ancient name for the river). It's philosophy lesson as travelogue, long static shots of the river and surrounding towns accompanied by off-the-cuff lectures by French luminaries Bernard Stiegler, Jean-Luc Nancy, and Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe (as well as German filmmaker Hans-Jürgen Syderberg). Along the way we tour the whole postwar history of Europe, from the fall of the Iron Curtain to the wars in the former Yugoslavia, all converging on Heidegger, Hölderlin, the legacy of the ancient Greeks, and the Third Reich.

Okay, I'll confess: I haven't screened the whole movie yet; on the other hand, I've had a great deal of trouble tearing myself away from it to do such mundane things as prepare lectures and read course text. But it certainly beats the Derrida film hands down, as far as cinematic versions of contemporary philosophy go. And it's a very beautiful film indeed, paced as slowly as Tarkovski (it's not surprising that Barison turned to making films specifically after seeing Tarkovski's The Mirror), yet full of haunting details. I have some problems with listening to philosophers improvising – Bernard Stiegler, for instance, recaps much of Technics and Time I: The Fault of Epimetheus in talk that is far less snappy than his prose – but on the other hand, it's worth it to hear the occasional squawks of his little girl in the background & see the opening and shutting of kitchen cabinets behind his work table.

Lacoue-Labarthe is quite rivetting, even beyond the painful game of wondering when exactly he's going to light the cigarette he keeps gesticulating with. He's afraid, it seems, that he's been too easy on Heidegger in the past, too light on the philosopher's involvement with the Nazis & too light on his refusal to comment on Auschwitz. Lacoue-Labarthe's discussion of Heidegger, of the "caesura" in history the Holocaust marks, and of Paul Celan's term "Atemwende," all of which floats over a montage of images from one of the death camps, is astonishing.

Clearly this film was a labor of love, & I hate to undercut whatever sales it might have in the States – if, that is, it ever gets released commercially; but I don't blame anyone else who wants to phone up a friend overseas and start figuring out how to circumvent the region codes on their DVD player. The Ister is definitely worth it.

Friday, April 14, 2006

sightings

La poésie in the news: the Times runs a story on the "fib," a Fibonacci Series-based form that's set to replace the haiku in the hearts of junior-high teachers and poetically-inclined Dan Brown readers. Dig that measured quotation from Annie Finch: "The form gives you something to dance with so it's not just you alone on the page." I love it when people talk of poetry as a dance.
***
In Reno, a federal judge has ruled that a ninth-grader will be allowed to recite Auden's "The More Loving One" in a state competition, even tho the poem contains the words (horrors!) "hell" and "damn." The dean of the student's charter school Cheryl Garlock, believes that the school should only present its students with "pristine" language.
***
Michel Foucault: "if I had encountered the Frankfurt School while young, I would have been seduced to the point of doing nothing else in life but the job of commenting on them. Instead, their influence on me remains retrospective, a contribution reached when I was no longer at the age of intellectual 'discoveries.'"
***
...& the weekly random 10:

1) Hüsker Dü, "Somewhere," Zen Arcade
2) French, Frith, Kaiser, Thompson, "A Blind Step Away," Live, Love, Larf and Loaf
3) Public Image Ltd., "Bad Baby," Second Edition
4) Brian Eno, "Decentre," Nerve Net
5) Pixies, "Nimrod's Son," Come On Pilgrim
6) U2, "Until the End of the World," Achtung Baby
7) Naked City, "Snagglepuss," Naked City
8) Mekons, "Slightly South of the Border," Original Sin
9) Pharoah Sanders, "Morning Prayer," Thembi
10) Gang of Four, "I Absolve You," Shrinkwrapped

Thursday, April 13, 2006

hi out there

It's been a way busy week. Lots of reading, lots of thinking, lots of teaching – not much writing, for whatever that's worth.
***
Everyone should go visit the really big sale at the University of California Press. I just got a big box from them, with poetry by Juliana Spahr, Martha Ronk, Srinkanth Reddy, Frank O'Hara, etc., and lots of other cool stuff I don't really have space for. And the packing peanuts in the box are actually edible – spray them with salt and they'd probably be as good as rice cakes.

One of the items: Pierre Joris's edition of Paul Celan: Selections; a really handy compilation, unfortunate only in its lack of German texts. The list of translators is telling: Pierre himself, Norma Cole, Cid Corman, Robert Kelly, Joachim Neugroschel, Jerome Rothenberg, Rosmarie Waldrop. Who's missing? Most notably, Michael Hamburger and John Felstiner. Two "schools" of Celan translators evident, I think.
***
Picking away at Antonia Fraser's Faith and Treason: The Story of the Gunpowder Plot. Not the first account of the plot I'd read, but the first that takes an emphatically sympathetic Catholic stance.
***
Working towards a more positive personal presentation: less knee-jerk cynicism, more thoughtfulness. Finding a spot on the spectrum closer to the Ithaca Josh C than to the Berkeley Josh C. Brighten the corner where you are.

Friday, April 07, 2006

The Crunch

We're still three weeks from the end of the semester, & I feel very much in the crunch. For one thing, it's MFA thesis defense season around Our University, and a couple of folks on whose committees I sit are winding up their projects right now. A very excellent poetry defense out of the way earlier this week, but early next week there's a novel that has to be defended – which means that there's a novel I need to be able to ask intelligent questions about, & to have read carefully. Nothing wrong with fiction, mind you – I just resent how much longer the form tends to be.
***
Weekly Random 10 (with lone classical movements deleted):

1) "Pop Tones," Public Image Ltd., Paris au Printemps
2) "Hard to be Human," Mekons, Heaven & Hell
3) "Heartbreak Hotel," John Cale, Slow Dazzle
4) "Healthy Colours III," Robert Fripp & Brian Eno, The Essential Fripp & Eno
5) "Notre Dame De L'Oubli (For Olivier Messiaen)," Naked City, Absinthe
6) "Midnight Jam," Joe Strummer & the Mescaleros, Streetcore
7) "Foreign Accents," Robert Wyatt, Cuckooland
8) "My Songbird," Emmylou Harris, Spyboy
9) "Sunday," Sonic Youth, A Thousand Leaves
10) "Orphan Train," Julie Miller, Broken Things

Go Thou & Buy

Michael Peverett pointed out a "Freudian slit" in that last post – "Barry Lydon," merging Ryan O'Neal and Johnny Rotten. I only wish I knew enough Photoshop to post a picture of the 18th-centurified O'Neal with a spiky Lydon quiff. Michael also asks whether I'll be reflecting "here on what sense there is to be made of a post-Zukofskyan tradition with an ambiguous pull towards closed forms?" I take it he refers to some of the remarks in Ron Silliman's recent take on Zach Barocas's Among Other Things, where Ron holds up LZ as a master of anal retentiveness. Aside from my own exasperated comments on that post, and a nice bit of reflection from Curtis Faville –
There's no question Zukofsky was meticulous. However that may have been expressed in his life--some couples live lives of scrupulous attention to detail. But the life of the mind is endlessly complex, and not to be measured in such terms. Poetry likewise. I never read an LZ poem without feeling his puckish mischief--there's always a sweet comedy or (contrarily) a dourness lurking between the lines. Good God!, read the Catullus--how could anyone without a sense of the absurdity and delight of accident (and gratuitous convergence) have composed such work???
– yes, I think I'd like to think about Michael's suggestion in public.

But not now. Right now I just want to celebrate the release of the latest volume in the Library of America's American Poets Project, Louis Zukofsky's Selected Poems edited by Charles Bernstein. Hurrah! This ain't Robert Pinsky's Williams, either, but a full-scale selection of the greatest LZ hits from one of the sharpest set of eyes in the field. You got a big selection of the short poems, you got 9 of the Flowers, you got 70 pages of "A" (including all of "A"-23), you got a handful of Cats, you got more than enough to teach an undergraduate semester or to persuade your stick-in-the-mud sweetie that this guy really is the shit! Everybody go buy this thing! Now! You! – yes, you, Carruthers! There in the back – you're not buying, young man!

And the first review seems to have hit the street, from of all places the Forward, where David Kaufmann makes a number of nifty observations, among them:
There may be, of course, a touch of the parvenu's pushiness in Zukofsky's deep and vigorous play, a desire to show that he can indeed better the instruction of his (goyish) instructors and twist red-hot pokers into even more complicated knots. But his work, with its emphasis on puns, on different shades of sound and sense, has something of rabbinic argument, of pilpul, to it. Zukofsky's delight in sheer virtuosity and in naked displays of intelligence owes more than a little to this tradition.

Wednesday, April 05, 2006

Winstanley (1975)


The four or five people out there who read my Anarchy know that I have a bit of an obsession with 17th-century British history, in particular in the intersection of orthodox and heterodox Christian beliefs and radical political movements. I am also happy to admit that I love historical costume-dramas, from Ken Hughes's broad-brush potboiler Cromwell (1970), to James Clavell's intriguing but deeply flawed Thirty Years' War flick The Last Valley (1971) – and not excepting Stanley Kubrick's near-static take on Thackeray's Barry Lyndon (1975). They must all now bow down in my personal pantheon to Kevin Brownlow's low-budget 1975 masterpiece Winstanley.

Gerrard Winstanley (1609-1676) was a radical pamphleteer during the Civil War period (along with about 50,000 others, it seems), a man with an argument: that the Lord had created the land as "a common treasury for all," that social subordination was contrary to God's intention for humanity: "in the beginning of time God made the earth. Not one word was spoken at the beginning that one branch of mankind should rule over another, but selfish imaginations did set up one man to teach and rule over another." In 1649, the year of King Charles's beheading and the final triumph of Parliament's revolution, Winstanley led a small group of followers to "common" land on St. George's Hill, Surrey, where they established a small egalitarian agricultural colony that they hoped would be self-sustaining, beyond the necessity for buying, selling, and subordinating themselves to market logic and market hierarchies. In short, a proto-hippie socialist commune. It didn't last, of course: the "Diggers" (or "true Levellers"), as Winstanley's group was known, were driven off of the "commons" – lands technically reserved for cattle grazing, and off-limits for agriculture or wood-cutting – by forces of the local landowners.

By the late 1960s, when the very young Kevin Brownlow started work on Winstanley, his second film, the radical elements of the English Revolution were very much in the air among the British Left. (And here's a difference between the British and American Leftist traditions that intrigues me: unlike the Americans, the British can lay claim to a very venerable radical tradition indeed, one that's deeply intertwined with the tradition of religious dissidence – one that by some accounts goes as far back as the indigenous resistance to the Norman Conquest.) In 1972 the great Marxist historian Christopher Hill published his The World Turned Upside Down: Radical Ideas During the English Revolution, a volume that works very explicitly to establish a 17th-century intellectual pedigree for the student movement and other contemporary Leftist causes. (For very late Hill on Winstanley, see here.)

Brownlow's Winstanley is the diametric opposite of Hughes's Cromwell. The latter film was packed with color and expensive costuming and jammed with big stars – Alec Guinness as King Charles, Richard Harris as Cromwell, a very young Timothy Dalton as Prince Rupert. Hughes shot his film in black and white; the only real "actor" in Winstanley was Jerome Willis as General Fairfax, all of the other roles being taken by amateurs (for the most part an inspired stroke – for the film's band of "Ranters," Brownlow enlisted a party of contemporary hippie commune-dwellers who considered themselves the new Diggers); and while Brownlow's overall budget was something short of what it cost to film the opening credits for the latest James Bond feature, he went to absurd lengths to ensure the authenticity of his costumes, props, and scenes (in this rather like Kubrick in Barry Lyndon).

One way of conceiving Winstanley is to think of Barry Lydon's visual beauty and deliberate pace, distended (stripped of sumptuous soundtrack music, the long shots even more protracted) or Beckettesquely minimalized (no color, no more beautiful people – Brownlow's actors are remarkably real – dirty, shabby, unshaven, bad-toothed), and animated thruout by the stately rhythms of 17th-century English prose & the luminous power of Winstanley's ideas. At times – really very magical moments – one forgets that one is watching "fiction," the power of Brownlow's cinematography is so compelling, and one is convinced that one is watching an anthropological documentary filmed, by some species of necromancy, on a hill in Surrey in 1649. Unforgettable.

Monday, April 03, 2006

Pop Quiz

Which of the following three paragraphs might be published in the New York Times Book Review?

1) You are living in a world created by Andy Warhol. Granted, our culture owes its shape to plenty of other forces — Hollywood, Microsoft, Rachael Ray — but nothing matches the impact of a great artist, and in the second half of the 20th century, no American artist in any medium was greater than Warhol (1928-87). That he worked in one of our country's least popular fields, easel painting, doesn't matter. That he was the child of Slovakian immigrants doesn't matter. That he was gay doesn't matter. That he was addicted to various drugs, besotted with celebrity, and deeply eccentric — none of this matters. What matters is that he left behind a body of work that teaches us, as Italo Calvino once said of art generally, "a method subtle and flexible enough to be the same thing as an absence of any method whatever."

2) You are living in a world created by John Coltrane. Granted, our culture owes its shape to plenty of other forces — Hollywood, Microsoft, Rachael Ray — but nothing matches the impact of a great artist, and in the second half of the 20th century, no American artist in any medium was greater than Coltrane (1926-67). That he worked in one of our country's least popular fields, jazz, doesn't matter. That he was an African American doesn't matter. That his playing charted new reaches of abrasiveness doesn't matter. That he struggled with drugs and found solace in various mysticisms — none of this matters. What matters is that he left behind a body of work that teaches us, as Italo Calvino once said of music generally, "a method subtle and flexible enough to be the same thing as an absence of any method whatever."

3) You are living in a world created by Elizabeth Bishop. Granted, our culture owes its shape to plenty of other forces — Hollywood, Microsoft, Rachael Ray — but nothing matches the impact of a great artist, and in the second half of the 20th century, no American artist in any medium was greater than Bishop (1911-79). That she worked in one of our country's least popular fields, poetry, doesn't matter. That she was a woman doesn't matter. That she was gay doesn't matter. That she was an alcoholic, an expatriate and essentially an orphan — none of this matters. What matters is that she left behind a body of work that teaches us, as Italo Calvino once said of literature generally, "a method subtle and flexible enough to be the same thing as an absence of any method whatever."
Okay, you already know that #3 is the opening paragraph of David Orr's review of Bishop's Edgar Allan Poe & the Juke-Box, and that it's attracted all sorts of vitriol in the alt-poetry corner of the blogosphere (my favorite moment being Jonathan Mayhew's near-apopleptic fit). But the point of the pop quiz is not to demonstrate Times imbecility (for my money, Coltrane is clearly the "greatest" figure of these three, & if anyone's "created" the world we live in, that dubious honor goes most closely to Warhol), but to remark in what a very odd vocabulary they choose to couch their highest praise.

It's one thing – tho still flatulent hyperbole, & an astonishing dumbing-down of waves of subtle new historicist theorizing – for Harold Bloom to claim that Shakespeare "created" Western subjectivity. Goethe, Keats, and a number of other serious types would more or less agree. But by what excess of closeted subjectivity can one claim that Bishop – a fine and subtle poet at her best, but overshadowed in her own half-century by a range of American talents* that bears comparison to the most densely-crowded literary period you'd care to name – has "created" anything more than the template for 20 years' worth of unambitious magazine verse: the Fireside Poets of the second half of the century?

*Off the top of one's head, one notes that Bishop shared her American half-century with Louis Zukofsky, George Oppen, Lorine Niedecker, Jackson Mac Low, Kenneth Rexroth, Susan Howe, Lyn Hejinian, Ronald Johnson, Michael Palmer, Jay Wright, John Peck, Fanny Howe, etc. Generate your own list at your leisure; Jim Behrle needs to adapt the old Saul Steinberg New Yorker cover of the world as seen from Manhattan, so that it reflects the New Yorker's vision of poetry.

Saturday, April 01, 2006

weekly random 10

I thought briefly of doing an April Fool's post, but then reflected on how sadistic most April foolery really is. Or maybe I've just been impressed by a recent Parents magazine feature on supposedly funny pranks dads had played on their preschoolers – fun stuff like freezing the milk & cereal overnight before serving them their breakfast, or gluing scattered spare change on the front walk and chortling as the wee tykes tried to fingernail the coins up.

Instead, I thought I'd start imitating a colleague's weekly random 10: set iTunes or the iPod (or whatever playback device one prefers) on "random" mode, & transcribe the first ten things that play. So today's:

1) "My Lady Carey's Dompe," Philip Pickett with Richard Thompson, The Bones of All Men
2) "Still Water," Daniel Lanois, Acadie
3) "Lovely Day," Pixies, Trompe Le Monde
4) "Shot in the Dark," Naked City, Live at the Knitting Factory
5) "Socialist," Public Image Ltd., Second Edition
6) "Sonata No. 2 for Violin & Piano: Larghissimo espressivo," Armin Loos, Zukofsky/Torre [those classical pieces sure have a way of breaking up the "party" of "party shuffle"]
7) "The Letter," Mekons, Edge of the World
8) "A Pair of Brown Eyes," Pogues, Rum, Sodomy, & the Lash
9) "Lantern Marsh," Brian Eno, Ambient 4/On Land
10) "Café Royal," Henry Cow, Concerts

Friday, March 31, 2006

Linkages

Harry Gilonis notes that most of the obituaries for Ian Hamilton Finlay were "crass" or "even in a veiled way vindictive," but points out this notable exception by Tom Lubbock in The Independent.
***
The Cultural Society website has a wonderful new update online (click on "texts"), including poems by Pam Rehm, Peter O'Leary, Joel Bettridge, Michael Heller, Norman Finkelstein, Derek Coyle, Graham Foust, and Sam Ward. Also my own oblique homage to the master of low-budget downtown shock-porn, Richard Kern.
***
Incoming:
Peter O'Leary, Depth Theology (U of Georgia P, 2006)
Susan Gevirtz, Black Box Cutaway (Kelsey St., 1999)
Susan Gevirtz, Hourglass Transcripts (Burning Deck, 2001)
James K. Lyon, Paul Celan and Martin Heidegger: An Unresolved Conversation, 1951-1970 (Johns Hopkins UP, 2006)
***
Finished Müller-Doohm's Adorno biography, with reluctance – the perennial problem with biographies is that one always knows how they will end. This from Adorno to Helmut Heißenbüttel in 1968, responding to attacks on how he had handled Walter Benjamin's legacy:
While on the one hand I wanted to defend Benjamin's metaphysical impulses against himself, I wished also to defend dialectical materialism against him, since he seemed to me to have a mistaken idea of it. And this misunderstanding was not just his alone, but was shared by Brecht. I fancy that I have a very precise knowledge of Marx, as indeed you implicitly concede. This means that I could not fail to see that, while Benjamin felt committed to Marxism, he had missed the point of the essential contents of Marxist theory. God knows how highly I think of Brecht, but his ignorance of Marxism ... was indescribable. Neither had made a serious study of Marx, but ... they had swallowed him like a pill. This was what struck me as being so dubious; their view of Marx was heteronomous and irrational, in contrast to materialist dialectics as a theory.

Monday, March 27, 2006

Terror Is the Piety of the Revolution


Ian Hamilton Finlay, 1925 – 2006.

What to call Finlay? Poet, Concrete poet, conceptual artist, gardener? Conservative? Revolutionary? Radical? Fascist? He posed some of the problems of the last century as eloquently and starkly as any poet or artist of our moment.

I never met Finlay, & my first-hand encounters with his work were few – a sundial in downtown Biggar, the town where MacDiarmid spent his declining years; a broken stone sculpture of the Saint-Just aphorism, "The Present Order is the Disorder of the Future" (in Italian), at the Cheekwood Gardens in Nashville – but his work has obsessed me as much as that of any poet alive.

Jonathan Williams made much of the early Finlay's fondness for the "wee" and homespun. Such fondness could be put to the service of deflation, however, as in the Fifth "Orkney Lyric," "Mansie Considers the Sea in th Manner of Hugh MacDiarmid":
The sea, I think, is lazy,
It just obeys the moon
–All the same I remember what Engels said:
'Freedom is the consciousness of necessity'.
His Poor.Old.Tired.Horse. was the most important journal of concrete poetry in the English-speaking world, his Little Sparta the most important poet's garden since Alexander Pope's. It is going too far to call Little Sparta, as the writer for the Times does, a "shrine to pacifism," for early & late Finlay evinced a grim fascination with the violence inherent to revolution, the echoes of pre-Sokratic imagery in modern weaponry. Saint-Just – Barrère: "He spoke like an axe" – was Finlay's patron saint; Apollo his deity, transformed to "Apollon Terroriste"; the aircraft carrier was, in Empedokles' words, "The Divided Meadows of Aphrodite."

Various

This past week – a fiendishly busy one – left me no time to comment on the flurry of posts and comments in response to Josh Corey's really rather sweet musings on the possibility of a "poets' union," and on the rather cross-purposed fusillade of pedagogical suggestions from the resuscitated Eric Selinger. But I'd like to, and I will.
***
Reading, still, Stefan Müller-Doohm's Adorno: A Biography; right about up to the point when yours truly was born in Frankfurt am Main, who knows how many streets away from Teddie's haunts at the Institute. I don't find my advent listed in the index, however.

And (again) Anne Carson, Economy of the Unlost (Reading Simonides of Keos with Paul Celan) (Princeton UP, 1999). My first impressions hold: beautifully written, but the insights come a bit too "easy" at times. And far more persuasive on Simonides than Celan; too often a lengthy bit on S. will be followed by two or three pages of oblique impressions of P.C.

Neal Stephenson, Snow Crash; Christopher Hill, The World Turned Upside Down: Radical Ideas During the English Revolution (a book ransacked for my own Anarchy, but never read straight thru).

Watching: Lots of Hitchock: Topaz, Torn Curtain, Marnie (astonishing, that last).

Teaching the girls to dance to the Mekons.
***
I've just put to bed – finally – a Parnassus piece on the redoubtable neo-modernist John Matthias. To the extent that an omnibus career-review has a thesis, that last adjective ("neo-modernist" – approbative) sums it up.
***
Contemplating essays: "Towards a Publication and Textual History of Zukofsky's 'A'"; "My Paul Celan"; "Economics and Economies of Words in Zukofsky."

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

Corey on the barricades

Josh Corey is on spring break, & thinking:
A poets' union would not strike for fair wages: that's nonsensical on its face. A poets' union would be primarily oriented toward the fair apportionment of cultural capital—toward the redistribution of attention, the primary currency of the art.
[Whose attention? Readers'? Does that mean that for every poem by an interesting unionized poet I read, I also have to read 15 poems by uninteresting unionized poets who need the attention? Or do you mean poets' attention? In order to belong to the union, I have to pay attention to the works of everybody else in the union? Are poets who rarely pay much attention to poetry – sometimes the most interesting writers, as they have actual subject matter to address – disqualified?]
But the ultimate goal is not attention, whether in the form of publications or criticism: it's the de-alienation of poetic labor. When Richard Hugo said, "A creative writing workshop may be the last place you can go where your life still matters," he was imagining that the institutional shelter of the university might be enough of a windbreak for poetic labor to flourish, for its products (poems) to retain their use-value (their uselessness-value?). That's no longer true if it ever was: the university is a primary instigator of the desire to turn one's poems into commodities, which in sufficient number can be exchanged for the goods of prestige and jobs (though it's a peculiarity of the system that publishing less can actually vastly increase the exchange-value of your work). Yet many of us cannot resist the temptation the institution offers us to live as poets, to subtract the A from avocation.
[Rock on, Garth! Quite like the formulation that I scribbled into my own notebook a couple years back, & the well-theorized version of Donald Hall's still accurate diagnosis in "Poetry & Ambition" from well-nigh 20 years back. The Poetry Industry.]
But the university does not manufacture the cultural capital (whose body is subtle, invisible even, yet real) apportioned to poetry: poets do. And the university did not invent the artwork-as-commodity; it can even, perhaps via its residual fedualism, function as a site of resistance: if not to capital itself, at least to the celebration of capital that cathects exchange-value as the only value into our souls every hour of every day.
I'm inclined to see said cultural capital manufactured not merely by the poets themselves, but by entire structure of literate, word-valuing culture – a structure somewhat larger than "the poets," tho perhaps no longer by much. & the university as site of resistance – well, only in pockets: in the richest of the rich institutions, where resident poets aren't continually dogged by metrics of number & productivity, and in the tiny liberal arts institutions which still value actual intellectual & creative endeavor & still value teaching not immediately quantifiable. The Oberlins, St. Olafs, Grinnells.

As weary and aging tenured faculty member, I find more and more attractive, and perhaps ultimately more honorable, the notion of staking out a place in the academy that takes advantage of its "residual feudalism" without directly tieing one's stake to poetic cultural capitalism: perhaps the finest poet of our moment was Director of Studies and Librarian of Gonville & Caius College, Cambridge – but never instructor in creative writing; another is codirector of the Editorial Institute at Boston University, and Professor of Religion.

A parable: "Not long since, a strolling Indian went to sell baskets at the house of a well-known lawyer in my neighborhood. 'Do you wish to buy any baskets?' he asked. 'No, we do not wan any,' was the reply. 'What!' exclaimed the Indian as he went out the gate, 'do you mean to starve us?' Having seen his industrious white neighbors so well off, – that the lawyer had only to weave arguments, and by some magic wealth and standing followed, he had said to himself; I will go into business; I will weave baskets; it is a thing which I can do. Thinking that when he had made the baskets he would have done his part, and then it would be the white man's to buy them. He had not discovered that it was necessary for him to make it worth the other's while to buy them, or at least make him think that it was so, or to make something else which it would be worth his while to buy. I too had woven a kind of basket of a delicate texture, but I had not made it worth any one's while to buy them. Yet not the less, in my case, did I think it worth my while to weave them, and instead of studying how to make it worth men's while to buy my baskets, I studied rather how to avoid the necessity of selling them. The life which men praise and regard as successful is but one kind. Why should we exaggerate any one kind at the expense of the others?" – Thoreau, Walden ("Economy")

Monday, March 20, 2006

More wombats

So maybe that's why I've been feeling so lousy the past week – I got around to taking my temperature last night & discovered I'm running about 3 degrees of fever, & probably have been for days & days. No doubt some kind of touch of the 'flu. Today I'm just toddling around the house in robe & slippers, shunning classes and trying to get a little writing done.

In response to my recent "Adorno and the wombat" post, Alex Davis from Cork has put me onto some fascinating wombat-related arcana, the wombat-obsession of Dante Gabriel Rossetti. (Who would've thought?) The University of Virginia's Rossetti Project has a wombat page which includes some wombat drawings by Dante Gabriel and William Michael, and a set of wombat verses. This by Christina Rossetti:
O Uommibatto
Agil, giocondo,
Che ti sei fatto
Liscio e rotondo!
Deh non fuggire
Qual vagabondo
Non disparire
Forando il mondo:
Peso davero
D'un emisfero
Non lieve il pondo.
And these by Dante Gabriel:
Ode to a Wombat
(written while waiting for his mail-order wombat)

O how the family affections combat
Within this heart, and each hour flings a bomb at
My burning soul! Neither from owl nor from bat
Can peace be gained until I clasp my wombat.

Death of a Wombat

I never reared the young wombat
To glad me with his pinhole eye
But when he was most sweet and fat
And tailless he was sure to die!

Saturday, March 18, 2006

wearing of the green


St. Patrick's day, & I "celebrated" – one's celebrations are necessarily circumscribed in single parent state – by watching about three-quarters of Jim Sheridan's fantastic Shane MacGowan documentary, If I Should Fall from Grace. I have trouble with the last bits, where the chronological unfolding of MacGowan's career meets the "present" of the circa 2001 interviews, and it becomes clear how the razor-sharp lyricist and snarling, perfectly-timed singer of the Pogues' Rum Sodomy & the Lash and If I Should Fall from Grace with God has become a toothless, bloated, drink-soaked celebrator of his own past. I discovered the Pogues at their apogee, right between Rum Sodomy and Fall from Grace, and they led me backwards to the more subtle and musically sophisticated Irish musicians that had opened up Irish "traditional" music in the 1970s – Planxty, the Bothy Band, De Danaan, and so forth. (I have little interest in the flourishing sub-genre of pub-celtic-punk that's followed the Pogues, tho I'm certainly keen on bands like the Levellers & Oysterband who've learned certain lessons from Shane & co., & taken them in particular political directions.) I often wonder how much the extraordinary popular efflorescence of "celtic" music in the late 1980s had to do with the Pogues' explosive mixture of first-rate songwriting, post-punk energy, & rather hokey Irishiana.

Shane's career has been patchy since the date in the early 1990s when the rest of the band tossed him out. The Snake, released in 1997, is not a bad record at all; The Crock of Gold (1997) is actually rather excellent, and the 2001 St. Patrick's Day live album, Across the Broad Atlantic, is musically exciting thruout (tho Shane's enunciation leaves much to be desired). I have not yet written the boy off, tho I suspect his internists have given his liver up as a hopeless case. Shane appears to have cast off his band of the last decade (the supiciously familiar-sounding Popes), & as I write, he's playing a show with the recently reunited Pogues in New York City.

Friday, March 17, 2006

questions of scale

Wish I'd been at the Ronald Johnson panel Josh describes so well (tho somehow I've missed its exact location – New York? – & whatever auspices it was held under...). The roundup of participants is a pretty familiar list of names: Joel Bettridge (co-editor of the forthcoming RJ collection), Jena Osman, Barbara Cole, Jonathan Skinner, Josh (I note that the slim and dashing Peter O'Leary was listed to appear, but Josh doesn't describe his presentation, so I suppose he didn't make it?). It's great of course to see Jena, Jonathan, & Barbara – all folks I respect & like very much – writing on Johnson (tho I'm not at all surprised). But all in all, it doesn't sound a whole lot different from the list of suspects RonJonning 5 or 6 years ago, when Joel organized a little conference in Buffalo, followed by a panel I got up for Orono's "Poetry of the 60s" conference.

What strikes me as is that now, going on 10 years after Johnson's death, at least 10 years since the publications of the complete ARK, one could still probably fit all the really dedicated readers of Johnson's work into a single medium-sized lecture room. Heavens, I feel like I could name them myself: the six listed above, the (non-blogging) Eric Selinger, Steve Collis, Norman Finkelstein, Paul Naylor, Devin Johnston, Peter O'Leary's brother Michael, Joel Felix, a few others. I know this list is exaggeratedly short – the Joel Bettridge/Eric Selinger collection that's been forthcoming for the last half-decade is probably going to feature a laundry list of prominent alt-poetry figures; I know Jed Rasula & Rachel Blau DuPlessis are in there.

Which is sort of to say that when I really started reading Johnson in earnest, maybe 20 years ago, I got convinced real fast that he was really BIG, was the BOMB, in fact (I'm trying to avoid that tweedy concept, "a major poet," but I really can't) – but at the time I think only I & Guy Davenport & 5 other people in the world thought so. Well, I'm still convinced – probably more than ever – & now maybe 30 other people think so too. Can't we get things moving along a little faster?

Thursday, March 16, 2006

hanging in there

J. left yesterday afternoon for a Folger Seminar in DC, leaving me to play superparent. We'll see whether there are any broken bones by Sunday; one girl has already acquired a nice bruise on the cheekbone falling off the slide, the other has discovered that the ostensibly harmless pleasure of rolling down the hill (Samuel Johnson-wise) of our local playground carries with it the drawback of getting her hair full of those sticky little seed-pods some of the "grass" around here carries.

Trying to keep up with responsibilities over the last few days has largely eclipsed any independent thinking, much less blogging. Read Michael Palmer's The Danish Notebook (very notebook-y) and Cole Swensen's Such Rich Hour (very rich, and quite lovely). Picked up copies of Sonic Youth, NYC Ghosts & Flowers, Bill Laswell's Invisible Design, and Marc Ribot's Scelsi Morning – the latter by far the coolest title I've met in ages, and some of the song titles are no slouches either: "Pennies from Hell," "Identity I-Schmentity," "Kabukitsch" (this a faux-Japanese klezmer tune or faux-klezmer Japanese tune). But no surprise from the guy who called an album Yo! I Killed Your God!

Will at some point try to find something coherent to say about the stunning riches of the Richard Thompson boxed set, which the postman – one of my favorite people – brought round just t'other day.

Sunday, March 12, 2006

Adorno loved furry animals


We always knew it. In 1955, in correspondence with Bernhard Grzimek, director of the Frankfurt Zoo, he suggested the Zoo obtain a pair of wombats: "I have fond memories of these little round friendly animals...and would be delighted to see them again.... Then I would like to remind you of the babirusa pig, which was also one of my favourites in my childhood... And finally, what happened to the dwarf hippos they used to have in Berlin?" Stefan Müller-Doohm, who quotes this letter in his Adorno: A Biography, goes into more detail in his notes:
Zoos, no matter where, were one of Adorno's passions. Many of the animals he loved were associated with private fantasies. His mother, Maria, who had great talents as an actor, could do a convincing imitation of a mother chimpanzee de-lousing her offspring. In his personal bestiary, however, she was not a primate, but a female hippopotamus. Her son was known as Archibald, the Hippopotamus King, and called himself just Hippo (and sometimes just a great fool [großes Rindvieh, literally 'cattle' = 'a great ass']), one of the pachyderms which, according to Brehm's Life of the Animals, is a gregarious animal that spends much time dozing dreamily but is also immensely greedy, so that it can easily become a pest. Aunt Agathe was a tigress which, again according to Brehm, commonly attacked the largest animals but was also content with the smallest ones; it was bold and cheeky. Gretel [TWA's wife] was called a gazelle by her husband, an animal well known for its long legs, graceful head and large clear eyes.
Max Horkheimer was "Mammoth," & in 1941 Adorno composed "Rüsselmammuts Heimkehr," a joyful little "Singstimme und Pianoforte" song celebrating Horkheimer's imminent return:
Rüsselmammuts Heimkehr

Was fährt denn dort auf einem Wangen und streckt den langen Rüssel aus? (2X)
Es ist ein Mammut, es ist ein Mammut, es is ein Mammut und er fährt nach Haus.

marking time

Okay, so our spring break is almost over, & I've accomplished not too much. Poked away a bit at a piece of writing that's already way past due, did some radical house-cleaning, tried to catch up on my teaching some, and so forth. No, I'm not at AWP. Can't say I'm missing the conference itself – I've never been particularly invested in the whole institutional framework of academic pobiz – but it would be nice to hang out with some of the people who're there, and Austin is by far one of my favorite cities. Anybody with sense who's at AWP will be going to the Gospel Brunch at Stubb's Barbeque tomorrow: 1st-rate rhythm-&-blues live gospel, & bucketloads of ribs, brisket, chicken, and catfish.
***
I've been reading my way, not too rapidly, thru a stack of books I bought two weekends ago at Louisville, including John Xiros Cooper's Modernism and the Culture of Market Society (Cambridge UP, 2004). A book written with sort of zest & panache one misses in most academic studies, but pretty relentlessly depressing. I'll no doubt say more about it, but suffice it to say that Cooper's take on literary modernism and late capitalism makes Teddie Adorno look like a gay and laughing optimist.
***
On the last "official" day of break – yesterday – I drove down to Ft. Lauderdale and bought books, among them Slavoj Zizek's Iraq: The Broken Kettle (Verso, 2004). Like most of Mr. Z's books, this one comes across as the sometimes-almost-ramblings of an extremely brilliant ADHD patient. But there're insights on every page, even if he feels obliged to relate every last damn thing to Lacan. The money quote, on the first page:
Of course the people don't want war....But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along....All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
Dick Cheney on a secret CIA tape? Paul Wolfowitz in his cups? Nah – it's their ideological mentor, Hermann Goering, speaking at the 1946 Nuremberg trials.
***
Some new links on the right: Amy Letter & Brian Spears' Incertus, Michael Peverett's Michael Peverett, Kate Greenstreet's Every Other Day, and Bill & Lisa Howe's Slack Buddha Press (with dandy pictures of Keith Tuma & chris cheek).

Tuesday, March 07, 2006

Conflict of the faculties

Culture Industry is one year old today. Thanks to everyone who’s ever dropped by.
***
Remember the “My Three Songs” challenge – name the thread of continuity among Depeche Mode’s “Route 66,” U2’s “Night and Day,” and Lloyd Cole and the Commotions’ “Perfect Skin”? Well, out of the thousands of entries (actually 3) Michael came closest – “um... Night Porter, Cole Porter, Lloyd Cole, ?” I don’t follow the “Night Porter” allusion (the only song by that name I know is by Japan), but he’s on the right track, even if he’s looking for a Wittgensteinian “family resemblance” rather than a direct commonality. We don’t get quite that subtle around here, folks: the connection is of course the name “Cole” – “Route 66” was made famous in 1946 by Nat “King” Cole, Cole Porter wrote “Night and Day” (which U2 covered on the Red Hot and Blue AIDS benefit album), and Lloyd Cole’s last name is – well – Cole.
***
Finished David Edmonds & John Eidinow’s Wittgenstein’s Poker last night, and found myself that I actually had learned something in the last stretch of their diverting but pedestrian 300 pages. E&E decide, on the basis of the preponderance of evidence, that Karl Popper’s response, when asked that he give an example of a moral rule, “Not to threaten a visiting lecturer with a poker,” was probably made after Ludwig Wittgenstein had left the meeting, rather than before. In short, while Popper recalled in his autobiography that he’d made the quip to LW’s face, in response to LW’s request, & at the end of LW’s poker, whereupon LW threw the poker down in disgust and left, E&E show that KP was probably “misremembering”: the poker quip almost certainly got made after LW stalked out of the meeting (as, everyone remembered, was pretty much his habit when out of patience).

Popper, E&E make clear, had gone to Cambridge in 1946 with the clear intention of challenging Wittgenstein & the whole tradition of “ordinary language” philosophy growing up around him. The thrust of P’s argument that afternoon was that there were indeed real philosophical problems that philosophers ought to address – he cited as examples the existence of real or potential infinity, induction, & causation, but it’s clear he had in mind his own massive work, The Open Society and Its Enemies, which addressed the roots of totalitarianism in Western thought from Plato on, and made an aggressive argument on behalf of free expression & a vigorous public sphere.

Wittgenstein believed, in contrast, that the difficulties philosophers dealt with were for the most part “puzzles,” enigmas or glitches that arose when language – perfectly adequate for the ordinary business of life – is torqued in abnormal uses. What Popper called “problems” lie outside of the scope of philosophy: Infinity is not a philosophical, but a mathematical problem; induction is a logical problem; and all of the moral and political issues dealt with in KP’s big book – which LW probably never read – were the province of the sociologist or historian, not the philosopher.

Popper left Cambridge thinking he had bested Wittgenstein, having goaded him into physical aggression and then challenged him with a moral imperative – thou shalt not threaten a visiting lecturer with a poker – that drove him from the field. E&E make a strong case that what really happened was that LW grew more and more impatient with the “nonsense” spouted by this “ass” (LW’s words) until he finally left the room in disgust, as he had many time before. Did he even realize he’d been punctuating his own objections by gesturing with a poker?

It’s not really hard to see where E&E come down in the final question of who “won” this dispute. (The fact that the final photo in their book is of a sage-like, elderly Popper is one clue.) Their final chapter, “All Shall Have Prizes” (the title is from Alice in Wonderland, where the Dodo distributes sweets to all participants in the Caucus-race), tots up the score: LW has become a fixture of contemporary philosophy, one of the top 5 philosophers of all time according to one poll, constantly taught, argued over, & adapted by poets & novelists – but whose work has had little impact outside of the ivory tower of academia, & who remains something of a slippery “mystic.” Popper, on the other hand, has almost been a victim of his own success: his arguments against totalitarianism and on behalf of an open society have become “received wisdom,” “beyond challenge and so beyond debate.”

I’m not really interested in critiquing E&E’s account of Popper’s & Wittgenstein’s philosophies, but I can’t help feeling that the way in which they pit the two men against each other ends up missing out on precisely what’s most interesting about their confrontation: the extent to which it stands as synechdoche for two very different ways of conceiving of the discipline of philosophy itself. For Popper, the philosopher is the thinker whose task is to take on the “big questions” – the meaning of life, what is the good life, etc. (One thinks of the Bertrand Russell joke: BR gets into a London cab, whose driver says, “’Eh, in’t you Bertrand Russell?” “Why, yes, my good man.” “So, guv, whassit all about?”) For Wittgenstein, the “big questions” are either by definition beyond the reach of philosophy and even language itself – ethics, for instance, can only be shown, and aesthetics are similarly meta-lingual – or result from misuses of language: to ask the “what’s the meaning of life?” is in essence to misuse the language-game of asking “what’s the meaning of X?” (Eg, “what’s the meaning of ‘synechdoche,’” “what’s the meaning of that poster?”) Where Popper conceives of philosophy as something of an all-purpose intellectual Swiss Army knife, Wittgenstein sees it as a hygenic device, an analytic logic whose purpose is to cut through the fog and fuzziness that obscures our ability to discern when we can usefully think and talk about something and when we’re better off leaving well enough alone.

Perhaps that’s why Popper’s been left in the dustbin of history and Wittgenstein still retains his power to startle and compel: while Popper’s ideas might (or might not) have been “right,” in the end he was just another philosopher telling us what it’s all about; Wittgenstein had an entirely new conception – if a diminished one – of what it meant to think philosophically.
***
Ali Farka Touré (1939-2006).

Monday, March 06, 2006

Private property, pokers


We spent part of yesterday at CityPlace in West Palm Beach, a recent development that does its damnedest to look like the central square of a Tuscan village. Of course it's one of those prefabricated faux-urban "environments," essentially an open-air shopping mall with apartments and condos attached. The giveaway, apart from the oppressive cleannesss of the place and the fact that all of the on-street spaces are reserved for valet parking (South Florida is the world capital of valet parking), is the Kenny G.-level soft jazz perpetually piped thru unseen speakers (it's what they play during the coffee breaks in hell). Oh yes – and the massive Mediterranean church that dominates the square functions not as a house of worship but as a theater (available for bar and bat mitvahs & other banquet functions, tho I could find no evidence of actual scheduled performances).

Anyway, we were there in the forenoon before the shops & restaurants opened, the umbrella'd tables & chair were occupied by retirees drinking coffee and reading their Sunday New York Times, and there were families with children strolling about every few yards. All very nice, save for the imbecile music & my own subterranean rage that this – one of the few open areas within a hour's drive whose space & architecture wouldn't have made Ruskin spew – was all private property, & that if I chose to panhandle or distribute political leaflets, I'd be given the heave-ho by the private security army within minutes.

After lunch we wandered into a Barnes & Noble where I read P. about a dozen children's books (mostly "Little Critter" but also a Berenstain Bears that convinced me that Stan & Jan B. are little better than fascists, & ought to be boycotted by all Left-leaning parents) & bought a couple of remainders: Don DeLillo's Cosmopolis & a book I'd contemplated reading for a while, David Edmonds & John Edinow's Wittgenstein's Poker: The Story of a Ten-Minute Argument Between Two Great Philosophers (Ecco, 2001). Readable enough, but disappointing. E & E take as their focal point the 1946 Cambridge argument between Ludwig Wittgenstein & Karl Popper (during which LW by some accounts threatened KP with a fireplace poker), & from there exfoliate backwards & forwards, filling in the 2 men's cultural & intellectual backgrounds, the significance of their philosophies, & what was at stake in their quarrel.

I'm within 50 pages of the end, but I don't have high hopes to learn anything I didn't already know. Maybe this is just another proof that "philosophical journalism" (as one blurb calls the book) is an oxymoron. At any rate, the penultimate paragraph of the text is a remarkable example of empty boilerplate:
that one can be identified in academia as a Popperian or a Wittgensteinian is a testament to the originality of these philosophers' ideas and the power of their personalities. Those extraordinary qualities were on display in H3 [the room of the debate]. The thrust of the poker becomes a symbol of the two men's unremitting zeal in the search for the right answers to the big questions.
Ouch.

I myself am contemplating a similar piece of "poetico-historical journalism." Provisional title: "Watten's Overhead Projector."
***
Still waiting for answers on "My Three Songs." Kathrine's closer than Bob, tho – the connecting thread lies in original provenance.

Saturday, March 04, 2006

MS joins the Flarfistes

Spent a few hours today at the headwaters of Flarf: yes, the Florida Renaissance Festival, squatted down – with its hordes of wandering minstrels, busty wenches, moody teen-aged goths, frivolous teen-aged pseudo-faeries, strolling jugglers, relentless tchotchke hawkers, and so forth – only a half-dozen miles south of Culture Industry home base. Noted:

•Most of the guys playing what look like "lutes" have them tuned to regular 6-course guitar tuning. The bouzouki players favor the easier G-D-A-E tuning over G-D-A-D (& so do I...).

•These sort of events really are the last refuges of what they call the "variety arts": where else can you see an act that involves trained dogs jumping thru hoops and a husband and wife juggling machetés on balance boards while playing a harmonica duet of "When the Saints Go Marching In"?

•If you wear a Guinness t-shirt, you don't actually have to say anything when you go to order beer, but can just point.

•One doesn't go to the RenFest to get back to the 16th century; one goes in order to enjoy the spectacle of a bunch of people playing a really dizzying range of dress-up – goths in high-techno black kilts, serious reenactors in big bucks Elizabeth farthingales and pearl-studded head-dresses, fools and jesters, Samurai, faeries in green paint, horns, wings, and little raccoon tails, even one or two Wild West gunmen this time around. A hell of a lot more postmodern than Fight Club (which I finally watched last night, for the first time, & found wanting).
***
The knowledgeable Keith Tuma pointed out to me that I'd misremembered the author of Oh as Norma Cole in my last post, when I should have written Cole Swensen. My bad, but don't bother checking, as I've changed it. Norma Cole is someone whose work I admire rather much, tho I haven't read all her books; Cole Swensen is someone I'd like to read soon. The whole business reminds me of "My Three Songs," a little game show the "alternative" radio station in DC used to run every afternoon: they'd play three songs by different artists, and the winner was the listener who could figure out (and explain) the thread of continuity among them. A memorable example:
•Depeche Mode, "Route 66"
•U2, "Night and Day"
•Lloyd Cole and the Commotions, "Perfect Skin"
Any takers?

Thursday, March 02, 2006

some things I saw in L'ville

A few observations from the University of Louisville’s 20th-Century Literature & Culture conference last weekend, of necessity scattered & impressionistic, & much shaped by my having shown up a day later than originally planned.

•Lynn Keller on Cole Swensen’s Oh: reads the poem not on the model of the “fragment” but on that of the “fractal,” with its implications of self-similarity of structure at different scales (Hugh Kenner did something like this with the Cantos years ago, but not nearly as compellingly); a rushed but entirely distinct presentation, reminding me of just how smart, & just what a good close reader, Keller is; talk of opera reminds me how much I dislike most lyric opera; best phrase: “this minimal yet spacious art”

•Mark Cantrell on Christian Bök’s Eunoia and its Flash version (by Brian Kim Stefans): beautiful presentation – I’m glad he went after me rather than before me; serious discussion of the aesthetics & reading experience of the Flash Eunoia much disrupted by oblique & not entirely germane general comments on the oulipan procedures used to produce the original text, as if Bök were not in some sense producing a deeply traditional poem – ie one rooted in a half century+ of procedural compositional tradition (like American academics in the ‘50s assuming that phenomenology was a philosophy newly arrived from outer space)

•Mitchum Huehls on Nathaniel Mackey: one of those productions of one’s youth that attempts to overturn 40 years of critical thought in a stroke; he relies on the concept of the “contranym,” a word which contains contradictory meanings – “I will cleave unto thee all my days,” “let’s cleave that apple in half”; “the house weathered the storm well, though its shutters were weathered by the constant rain”; I’m interested (& have been for a while), not so much in the paradox of opposed meanings, but in the slippage between the structures of those meanings: ie, they are never perfectly opposite: to separate is “to cleave X,” while to come together is “to cleave to”; to allow is “to sanction” (v.), while to restrict is “to impose sanctions” (n.) – “weather” the only one I can come up with that functions grammatically identically in each of its meanings; gotta talk to a linguist

•Adalaide Morris on “ambient poetry”: puts up a background desktop of Brian Eno’s Ambient 4: On Land, then talks about a number of (mostly web-based) works that, like Eno’s ambient stuff, neither demand nor reject close attention; (of course, ambient music, pushed to its extreme arrives at John Cage’s realm of listening to sounds as music, as I’m presently enjoying the faulty ball bearings in the pool pump, which actually closely resemble some Zorn pieces I know); conceptually, this is great stuff, & something I’ve been thinking about for maybe two decades, since I read an interview with Eno where he compared his own ambient work to Samuel Beckett’s Company; but heavens – aren’t there enough bits of poetry out there earnestly entreating my attention thru their depth of insinuation, their wealth of craft, their cunningly wrought surfaces and mysterious depths? perhaps I’ll save “ambient poetry” for the day when I’ve no longer got the faculties to focus my attention – but then again, come dotage it’ll all be ambient…

•Andrew Rippeon on LZ’s “’Mantis,’”, Creeley’s Pieces, and Michael Palmer’s The Danish Notebook: I wish I could follow this one better – it’s a combination of 1) AR reading too fast, 2) AR reading in too low a voice, & 3) MS being deeply exhausted & having eaten (with the estimable Grant Jenkins) way too much pizza for lunch; gotta get The Danish Notebook; Andrew, do send me a copy of the paper, okay?

The climax of the whole shebang, the obelisk around which the conference was supposedly organized, was to be a talk by Alain Badiou. Ooops. M. B– had double-booked himself, so consented to do a videoconferenced talk Saturday from Seattle. (I boycotted on principle; my life is Baudrillardian enough without watching philosophers on TV.) The audience was in place, peering up at a blank screen, when B– phoned in the news that he was locked out of the building from which the feed was to originate. So, after the crowd shlepped to another AV-equipped room, B– delivered a 20-minute audio-only talk, which he ended by thanking them and hanging up – no Q&A, and M. B– wasn’t picking up his phone thereafter.

Norman and Alice Finkelstein have a Maltese (!) named Tchotchke (!), which despite myself I found really cute.

Monday, February 27, 2006

well I'm back

The University of Louisville's 20th-Century Literature & Culture conference, as usual, was great fun. The normal pleasures of hanging out with friends, acquaintances, and frequent interlocutors – Alan Golding, Norman Finkelstein, Bob Archambeau, Ken Sherwood, Joel Kuszai, Lynn Keller; of meeting folks I hadn't before; the piquant doro wat at Kilimajaro restaurant; and Ear-X-tacy, a very cool record store that I tear myself away from conference-going to visit every time I'm in Louisville. It's by no means one of the world's greatest, but certainly better than anything I know in South Florida. I was relatively restrained: Black Acetate, John Cale's latest; Heaven and Hell, a 'best of' from the Mekons; and a brand new expanded reissue of John Martyn's 1975 Live at Leeds, a hard-to-find concert album that is to British folk what the Who's Live at Leeds is to rock & roll. This is Martyn at his most interesting, having grown out of the pseudo-Dylanisms of his earlier period and still a few years away from his overproduced, keyboard-drenched excesses of the 80s and 90s. For most of Live at Leeds, it's just Martyn's heavily echoplexed acoustic guitar and the astonishing double bass of his then-partner Danny Thompson (formerly of Pentangle). The two of them, according to interviews, spent the mid-70s pretty much continually dead drunk, and while that would certainly seem to be the case here judging from Martyn's between-songs patter, the alcohol hasn't blurred their musicianship one whit. A really dynamic set, hanging around the intersection of blues, folk, and free jazz, and occasionally descending into downright noise.

Down the street from Ear-X-tacy, one of the best guitar shops I've been in in recent years. They have my holy grail: an original Gibson ES-295, circa 1955 – like the one Scotty Moore played. No price tag – does that mean if I need to ask I can't afford it?, I query the counterman. "Naw. Price tag jes' fell off. I'll look it up... right, $7500." For some reason, I don't whip out the credit card, but give the guitar one long look before retreating out the door.

I had planned to fly into Louisville on Thursday, but ended up spending half the day in the West Palm Beach airport waiting to find out how badly my flight was delayed. (I ended up rebooking for Friday morning.) Ever anxious to improve the time, however, I read Christopher Middleton's Of the Mortal Fire: Poems 1999-2002 (Sheep Meadow, 2003), in the process reminding myself just how amazing a poet Middleton is: a truly stunning density of thought and sound, even in a collection he describes as "only afterthoughts" ("odds & sods," Pete Townshend would say). From "The Curlew":
Well, he has done rinsing the sky
Clear of ghosts now.
And the true, still it fools
All the hectic sectarians.
Only the hermits hear
But obey the cry's lash. Heavily
Clouded vistas they spread into
Seldom welcome
Such questioners, each in his arms
Or hers, as they patrol
Targeted streets, cradling
An old cave, snatched up
At the last possible moment,
A crystal hollowness torn
From its crag, now distant, each
Coolly questioning equipoise.

I mean to write some of my impressions of the conference itself – that seems to be a growing genre, conference-blogging (for a shockingly complete take on my own paper, see this post by Joshua Stuart). But I was conscious above all else of a certain "hole" in the proceedings. I've been going to L'ville for over a decade, always with pleasure and edification, always enjoying the company of other poets and scholars. But one motivation I've always had for going there was to jump in my rental, drive over to Lexington, and spend a few hours in front of the fire in Guy Davenport's sitting-room, surrounded by thousands of books, drawings, & paintings, listening to Guy ramble through his encyclopedic knowledge of pretty much every aspect of human culture that one might want to know something about. And now Guy's gone. Louisville is a fine and good thing, and I'm sure I'll be coming back – but the trip will never be the same.

Thursday, February 23, 2006

A Party to which I haven't been invited

Well. The former-left-winger-turned-rabid-conservative David Horowitz, doing his best to sustain interest in his latest screed against commie-traitorous-terrorist-supporting academics in American universities, The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America, is running a poll on the Frontpage Magazine website to determine who's the #1 "worst professor" in the U.S. I'm sorry to say that I'm not listed on the poll, nor is there a space in which you could write me in. (I didn't even make it onto Horowitz's encyclopedia of paranoia, Discover the Network – tho some of my colleagues down the hall did.) At any rate, Michael Bérubé is leading the Frontpage poll for "worst professor" by several thousand votes, having urged his blog readers to come by and vote this morning.

Now I'm convinced that Michael is perfectly dangerous, especially when it comes to tree trimming gadgets and other sharp objects, but come on, folks: surely Cornell West (14 votes at this writing), that soft-spoken proponent of love, peace, and spiritual rebirth, poses a danger to the current hegemony? And what about Fredric Jameson (4 votes at this writing), whose books have probably caused more nervous breakdowns among grad students than anyone since Paul de Man? Isn't that dangerous? So go by the site and vote for your favorite evil lefty terror-monger; and as they used to say in Chicago, vote early and often – in the best intelligent design scientific spirit, you can vote multiple times from the same IP address.
***
A very brief blog hiatus while I hie myself up to Louisville for the 20th Century Literature and Culture conference; hope to see you there.

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Noted

oh my.
***
And some sentences, from Simon Jarvis's 10 February TLS review of a clutch of Austen books, that make me wish I were reading Emma rather than Moby-Dick:
It seems likely that, for many of us, commentary on Jane Austen affords the scene of our first encounters with literary criticism, and, therefore, of our first disappointments with literary criticism. Not because the brightest and best haven't been the ones supplying the commentaries (they often have, at least among anglophone critics), but because it is so rarely given to literary criticism to find a style capable of facing Austen's. That style is not a container for content, nor an ornament to it, but the whole substance of whatever Austen's fiction knows. Nothing passes into her books untouched by style. After reading her, it becomes hard to tolerate any novel in which mere information or narration appears without the evidence of continuous thinking provided by work on language. The styleless author can tell us something outwardly quite probable, such as that Mr X got up from his chair and walked over to the window, and, after reading Austen, we just don't believe a word of it.
Repeat: "the evidence of continuous thinking provided by work on language."

Monday, February 20, 2006

Poetry on the ground

Michael Peverett made a useful comment to that last line of thinking (which has also been picked up by Bob Archambeau at some length, and with some witty schematicism). Michael remarks,
Seems to me Mark that there's a subterranean train of thought going on in your blog, from Thoreau's joyously disenchanting meditation on how literature that starts off "out there" turns into our comfort zone, then via Frankfurt, to the huge success of poetics as a sexy subject with students and as an institutionalized shaper of good citizens.
(I like that last phrase – "an institutionalized shaper of good citizens" – very much. It reminds me precisely how strongly the last century's crop of poet-theorists were theorizing with the ultimate end of making society something that one might be proud to be a citizen of, whether that might be a neo-renaissance fascist arcadia, a "polis" of connected and wide-awake townspeople, or some more ill-defined utopia: whatever they were working towards, it wasn't the colorless tenure-track "collegiality" that Michael's acid "good citizens" perfectly captures. [Michael is a sharp fellow, with an eye for a lot of things around him that aren't on pages: check out his blog.])

Michael's quite right about how grum and pissy Culture Industry gets when I try to think about contemporary poetry in the amalgam, its institutionalized forms, its networks and linkages and chains of power, whether pobiz or alt-pobiz. When I think about poetry in practice, when I turn to individual poems and books, then I'm altogether more sanguine. There's rarely a week when I don't read a poem or a book, by someone whose works I've known a long time, or by someone of whom I've never heard, that makes me say "Wow! how'd she do that? that's beautiful/compelling/totally surprising!" Latest cases in point:

Prageeta Sharma's Bliss to Fill (2000, reprinted subpress collective 2005): an entirely invigorating collection of poems that revolve around matters that one would think are entirely played out: youth, love, desire – all that stuff. But there's a wonderful, almost awkward obliquity to Sharma's turns of phrase that make one's distant youth come alive again. For instance "Paper II" (one of the collection's more straightforward moments):
There had been enough time for her to become an adult
without it having too much of an effect on her parents'

nervous system. She had certainly told them in a slow,
honest way, with a pre-planned epiphany – that she had lovers.

Madhu and Raju, her parents, out of their arranged marriage
grew a rhyme. And their daughter grew into a poet.

Or she grew into a lover which was taking up all her time
and poetry was only a series of mistakes worth claiming

to a page and not a lover.

Or Stephen Collis's second full-length collection, Anarchive (New Star Books, 2005). (Bloody brilliant title, and one that I'd certainly have used first if I'd had the gumption to think it up.) Collis (whom I consider a young poet only because he's a few months younger than me) works in what I like to think of as "late modernist" mode, writing poems that deform syntax and resist straightforward reading, but that still revolve around clear "subject matters." Mine, his first book, reads a bit like Robert Duncan presenting a history of the Vancouver Island coal mining industry. (In other words, nothing like Clark Coolidge's Mine, but quite as alluring in a very different way.) Anarchive plays over the matter of Republican Spain in the 1930s, a moment when the anarchist ideals that were so attractive to Joyce and others looked like they might actually get road-tested (until they were run over by the Fascism so attractive to Pound and others). Collis casts a wide net over the Anarchist archive – even the Clash and the Pogues make it into this book – and draws up a gleaming, idealist catch. This is political poetry, make no mistake, but political poetry that melds idealism with resignation, that steers its way from agit-prop to elegy:
If we are alone with the word

it is because wells
spring from all eyes

how is it learned
but through follies

naked we enter the bed
of their eternal wars

our hands intruding love
where blind fortunes hate

we become the penumbra
of powers know

death is certain
inconstancy distracting rage

as they would order nature
while nature must into its own orders fall

and we would keep to the chaos of growth
open at the top and

lifting from the bottom

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

institutionalizing poetics ii

New mailbox; will post photo when I get around to photographing it – you'll just have to wait.
****
Joshua/Jane responds to my last post:
For what it's worth, I'm not sure that I draw the same conclusions. I'm interested in the expectation that poets ought to have theorized their own work in certain ways -- and how that expectation might be historicized. I'm less interested in debating whether actually theorizing one's own work is good or bad, and am prepared to take that on a case by case basis.

Relatedly: from my own experience of writing programs, I would say that it's frustrating that "poetics" (et al) courses are expected in lieu of critical/analytic courses happpening down the hall in the English Department. I am not at all averse to the idea that writing program students ought be expected to labor over critical knowledge, and indeed, contra your history, fear that these poetics classes are disreputable not for being an unnecessary supplement, but rather an insufficient one: a pale compensatory veil to cover over the absence of historical, aesthetic, and philosophical engagements that were once far more common among poets. When I hear "mardi," I think Mallarmé and Valéry.
Nothing here to disagree with: and SM & PV were precisely what I had in mind when I mentioned "mardi" – tho the fiction writers at least in my old program were far more like to think "Mardi Gras." At least within the institutions of MFA and PhD programs in creative writing, one might historicize the recent demand for poets to theorize their work in terms of something like disciplinary mimeticism: English studies managed to legitimize the reading of vernacular literature precisely by inventing the theoretical scaffolding of New Criticism; creative writing, now by some accounts one of the few growth sectors in the humanities, is trying to legitimize itself – while simultaneously trying to retain the air of the individual afflatus – by requiring self-reflexive "poetics" moments.

The increasing appearance of "poetics" sections in poetry anthologies, and even of anthologies of poetics, is I suspect largely driven by the market these new "poetics" emphases in creative writing programs have created. Most of such books are precisely as useless as the ubiquitous, mushroom-like "introduction to theory" volumes that turn up in my department mailbox every month.

Saturday, February 11, 2006

institutionalizing poetics

Damn the postal service. Our mailbox got whacked during Hurricane Wilma last October – I mean deeply whacked: buried under a stack of tree limbs, the metal post broken off level with the ground. As soon as our yard got cleared, I rescued the box itself, which now looked like Daffy Duck's head after one of those TNT-swallowing incidents, tried to restore it to something like usability (let's just say at one point I was inserting a tire jack into it in an attempt to uncrumple it), and duct-taped it to the top of a handy three-foot stump at the end of the driveway. And there it's been ever since, until the duct tape wore away a few weeks ago. Now it balances atop the stump, except when the letter carrier leans out of his/her jeep to stick mail into it (then it inevitably slides off, usually into a big puddle when it's been raining) or when a windy day tips it over. Anyway, the p.o. has now informed us by rude form note that our mailbox is inadequate: apparently they won't deliver mail to anything that requires the letter carrier having to (horribile dictu!) actually get out of the vehicle.
***
Sighted, a couple of displays of virtuosic snarkiness:

Michael Bérubé and the vile David Horowitz are at it again; Michael wins on points, because
a) Michael writes gracefully and makes good funnies (tho snarky funnies);
b) David knows neither how to punctuate (e.g., "Michael take note" needs a comma) nor how to insert accents into proper names (for "Berube" read "Bérubé");
and
c) Michael's right: David's a pathological liar and an evil dwarf.

On another front, Joshua Clover responds to Dan Hoy's rather weird essay on Flarf (should that be capitalized?) with some flashes of characteristic "more (cultural-)materialist than thou" snarkiness. But I'm taken with his final paragraphs:
If there's anything new-ish to the action, it's the presumption that poets should have theorized their own work explicitly and completely as a necessary supplement to the poetry, without which it can't be trusted or read as such (thanks to Tom Orange for the conversations regarding this topic). For this, Hoy can't be held entirely responsible; the relative success and insight of recent poetics in making theoretical accounts of itself that are at once persuasive, and relevant to poetics in general, has perhaps produced a certain set of expectations. Certainly there is a rise in general in the sense that poetry is well-accompanied by the author's "poetics," as seen in, for example, the collection edited by Spahr and Rankine (and the follow-up, Sewell and Rankine), or the increasing footage given over to critical writing by the poets in the back of the Norton Anthologies.

This issue — of how responsible poets are, especially those who make some claim on unfamiliarity, for theorizing their own practices — seems worth pondering further. This is true in part for exactly how historicizable an issue it might indeed be; it does seem inseparable from the endless parallel debates about the increasing academicization of poetry and the increasing centrality of the writing workshop.
So let's ponder it further. By "the relative success and insight of recent poetics in making theoretical accounts of itself that are at once persuasive, and relevant to poetics in general" I suspect Joshua means the array of theoretical and poetics-oriented writings produced within the general milieu of Language poetry. But I'm interested in how this has been institutionalized, how the writing of poetics – often quite apart from any engagement with "theory" in the sense that the term is most often used in the academy, but nonetheless drawing on the etymological sense of "theory," to look at with detachment – is being written into the requirements for creative writing programs. One can see this in the web pages of various CW programs around the country, which have begun requiring "theory" and "poetics" courses, and some sort of "poetics" component to their theses & dissertations. Even Our University has instituted a self-reflexive "poetics" moment into the requirements for the MFA.

All very different from when I did an MFA back in the day, where the very notion of an MFA student actually writing prose about what she/he was doing was seen as an idea landed straight from Saturn.* Without making any judgments about whether the general quality of work coming out of the poetry industry has gotten any better since management started requiring students to produce blueprints of their processes,** I'd agree with Joshua that this is straight-up "academicization," the final downfall of the old "workshop"/"atelier" model of teaching writing, which can now look only wistfully back on its origins as an artificial imitation of the buzzing café or the intense mardi, where the young gathered – voluntarily, with no grades assigned, no registrar involved – around the table or at the feet of the elder artist. What's at the root of it all, one suspects, is precisely how profitable creative writing programs are to universities.

*Read no nostalgia there.
**My sense is that it has, but I wouldn't hazard a causal relationship.

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

Swampt


I haven't actually dropped off the face of the earth, tho it might seem that way – it's just turning out to be one of those semesters, one of the ones where there seems never to be the time even to think, much less to write. But I've just cleared one large hurdle, & am gearing up for the next one, so I have a few days' breather.

Reading biographies lately – Rüdiger Safranski's Martin Heidegger: Between Good and Evil (trans. Ewald Osers, Harvard UP, 1998), which I mentioned a while back; Robert D. Richardson, Jr.'s Henry David Thoreau: A Life of the Mind (U of California P, 1986), which I picked up on a whim at our library's sale shelf, & which is turning out to be a truly luminous, beautiful book (doesn't hurt when if you have Barry Moser designing and illustrating). The mail just disgorged Stefan Müller-Doohm's Adorno: A Biography (Polity, 2005), which I'm doing my best to avoid starting, since I know it'll eat up a substantial chunk of time (almost 500 pages of text, and another hundred of notes). The dedication alone is enough to put off those of us who have little patience with the fabled German ponderousness: "I dedicate this biography to my daughter Anna-Maximiliane because I would like my account of Adorno's life and work to help keep alive for future generations something of the thinking that was so influential for my own intellectual orientation." Phew! If you can’t wait for the paperback (I couldn’t), go to Amazon, which is offering a pretty substantial discount. But reserve at least 3 inches of shelf space.
***
New on Michael Rothenberg’s Big Bridge is the collaborative poem, “Blue Poets in a Red State.” Some trifling prize to anyone who can find the 10 lines I contributed.

Friday, February 03, 2006

Reading Material

Delightedly received today: The latest issue of Talisman: A Journal of Contemporary Poetry and Poetics (#30-31, Fall 2005-Winter 2006). This one has nutty goodness in every bite, friends, including new work by Hank Lazer, John Olson, and a bunch of others, reviews by Susan Smith Nash, Tony Tost, and Norman Finkelstein (and a bunch of others), and a selection of North Carolina Poets edited by Joe Donahue. The centerpiece of the issue, however, is a memorial festschrift for Gustaf Sobin, who died last year. There are pieces here – mostly poems – by some very fine poets indeed: Peter Cole, Forrest Gander, Pierre Joris, Robert Kelly, Cole Swensen, Charles Tomlinson, Michael Palmer. There's a snippet of new work by Susan Howe, a piece of something called Souls of the Labadie Tract:
I'll borrow chapel voices
Song and dance of treble
bass for remembrance Stilt-
Walker Plate-Spinner air
piebaldly dressed heart's
content embroidered note
Distant diapason delight
Like most of the excerpted Howe I happen upon, it makes me itch to get my hands on her next book.

Yes, and there's my review of Michael Heller's latest, Uncertain Poetries: Essays on Poets, Poetry, and Poetics. But don't let that put you off of running out and buying a copy.