Skip to main content

reclaiming agency and thinking language

PART ONE: HOW TO RECLAIM AGENCY IN LANGUAGE?

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.

AS IN:

1) aesthetic arrest
or/and
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?

If context is everything where is the text?
I know the text is within context but can it exist outside of it?
What is "out of context?"

Alright, these are rambling pseudo philosophical musings (what are the proporties of real philosophyl?)

I am very interested in how language can open up a space for agency. If language often thinks us, how can we think language without breaking and expressing at the same time?
It seems to me that breaking in and of itself does little but make breaking hip (in the context of a hip journal like Fence).

so to summarize:

1) what is context? How can we know it is context if there is nothing outside of it to give it meaning?

2) can the new (art of every kind) create different potential impacts depending on context or is it all swallowed into the big whole of consumer/marketplace culture almost right after birth?


TRUE OR FALSE:

the call for clarity against hazy political speech (and crazy "experimental" poetry) can:

a) helps us all speak more clearly and effectively (efficiently) and collectively

b) can challenge the political structures that prevent agency by allowing for a greater potential audience (less alienating use of language)

So, again to summarize:

there's breaking and there's

dancing

I want both with my post-avant!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

poets reading poets

There are on A now: Andrews, Antin, Apollinaire, Ashbery


A project from the Atlanta Poetry Group. Check it:

http://atlantapoetsgroup.blogspot.co.uk/

The Poetry of Tao Lin

Another Ireland by Robert Archambeau

This review really hit it for me. I recently read Maurice Scully's _Livelihood_ and Geofrey Squires _Untitled and Other Poems_ is on deck (I love that baseball term. It is baseball, right?)

I think this is from The Nortre Dame review, but I found it via goofle (I mean google).


Another Ireland: Part Two
Maurice Scully, The Basic Colours. Durham, UK: Pig Press, 1994.
Geoffrey Squires, Landscapes and Silences. Dublin: New Writers' Press, 1996.
Catherine Walsh, Idir Eatortha and Making Tents. London: Invisible Books, 1996.

By Robert Archambeau

I began the first half of this article (Notre Dame Review #4) by mentioning some of the limits to the legendary hospitality Ireland has shown to its poets. If you arrive in Ireland from any point of departure outside of Eastern Europe, you will indeed find a public far more willing than the one you left behind to grant poets the recognition all but the most ascetic secretly crave. However, this hospitality has never extended to Irish poets w…