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?
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
I want both with my post-avant!