Just finished Angelus Bell by Edward Foster and it reminded me in some ways of Daniel Zimmerman's Post-Avant with its formal density.
I was really drawn into Angelus Bell by the reflexive gestures and overarching themes and links from poem to poem (aloneness, sound, eyes, and dry landscapes). It makes me realize how new formalism (Dana Gioia etc.) miss the boat. Perhaps innovative/avant poetry has always included formal elements (I mean inherited forms: meter, rhyme etc.) So a return to "form" is not really a return to anything but conservative politics. it seems mighty coincidental New Formalism popped up in the 80's Regan years, and the academy promoted traditional notions of formalism in the 1950's.
hm . . .
Anyway, the turn towards (rather than return to) inherited form is interesting. Foster's book was also humerous. The humor undercuts the formal diction.
It is interesting to note the use of formal diction and inhertited form in some recent books (Moxley, Foster, Zimmerman). The "Poetic" "artificial" diction as opposed to the "natural" "confessional" "quotidian."
Also just started Anselm Berrigan's Zero Star Hotel. Love the opening play in the book.