1) break the language to see what's underneath. Allow for paradox and competing representations.
2) speak clearly and efficiently. Less clouded than political speech. less abstract than academic discourse.
While both propositions are too simplified, it seems they are variations of the "experimental" and "conventional" approaches to poetry and language.
I am wondering if various techniques of breaking English can become frozen? a cold dot, depending.
1) aesthetic arrest
2) seen as beautiful or hip in and of itself)?
I am also wondering if taking the techniques of say Clark Coolidge and publishing it in Fence magazine creates a context in alignment with marketplace commodification of the "new" rather than the "new" as resistant to commodification?
Or is any resistance to the commodification of the "new" simply futile?
PART TWO: AM I THINKING WITH LANGUAGE OR IS LANGUAGE THINKING ME?