Articulating Space

7/27/2019 Articulating Space

1/64


2/64

ArticulatingSpace:ShortEssaysonPoetry

JessicaSmith

Argotist Ebooks


3/64


4/64

ArticulatingSpace:ShortEssaysonPoetry


5/64

Contents

Acknowledgments

7

RupturedLinesasMinorUprisings

8

ObjectivisminL=A=N=G=U=A=G=EPoetics

10

NotaFormlessFormbutanEdgelessEdifice

13TowardsaReinvestigationofCubism:AdaptingSteinforaNewGenerationofPoets

15

Syntax:TheFinalFrontier

19

ArticulatingSpace:L=A=N=G=U=A=G=EPoeticsandtheCreationofIndividualMeaning

21

Theintentionisalwaystothwartdesign:Reading TheBlackDebtthroughMcCafferysPoeticsofExcess

24

ThePlasticityofPoetry

28

TheAestheticImplicationsofJuliasWild

37

SecretPassagewaysinMemoryPalaces:ConsideringAudienceandtheUnpredictableFullnessofLanguageinMultilinearPoetry

39


6/64

TheWovenThing:CeciliaVicuasParalinguisticPoetics

44

EliotsPostwarRevisionoftheIndianDaMyth

48

QueeringtheFemaleMuseinChristinaRossettisGoblinMarket

49

ReturningtoOldHaunts:TheSoulsTravellingin Mrs.Dalloway

53

Eachtimeunique,theendoftheworld:ShelleysApocalypticOdetotheWestWind

59


7/64

Acknowledgements

Theintentionisalwaystothwartdesign:ReadingTheBlackDebtthroughMcCafferysPoeticsof

Excess was presented at the 31st Annual Twentieth Century Literature Conference, University of

Louisville,2003.

TheAesthetic ImplicationsofJuliasWildwasgivenat theRe-ReadingBottom:Symposiumon

LouisZukofskysBottom:onShakespeare(Buffalo,2003)andisin SousLesPaves#5(2011)

ThePlasticityofPoetrywasgivenat the2003NEMLAconferenceinBostonaspartofa seriesof

Poetry and Space panels and canbe found in Vol. 3, No. 3 ofLiterature Compass and in Issue18/19/20/21 of the SwedishmagazineOEI. It exists in a slightly different form as the preface toOrganicFurnitureCellar(2006)andwaspublishedasachapbookbyNoPress(2006).

Secret Passageways inMemory Palaces: Considering Audience and theUnpredictable Fullness of

Language,wasdeliveredatuntitled:speculationsontheexpandedfieldofwriting,CaliforniaInstitute

oftheArts,LosAngeles,2008.

Regardingthecompositionandrevisionoftheseessays,theauthorwouldliketoextendthankstoRosa

Alcala,StephenArata,AlixandraBamford,MichaelBasinski,CharlesBernstein,JosephConte,Robert

Creeley, derekbeaulieu, SteveEvans,Rodolphe Gasch,MartinHgglund,MyungMiKim,Ming-QianMa,NicholasMcLaughlin,MarkScroggins,HenrySussman,andHerbertTucker.

ThankyoutoJeffreySideforhiseditorialprowess.


8/64


9/64

patriarchyoflanguageonemustreachoutsidelanguageoratleastendeavortodoso.Herelanguageisnotmerelythesucculentandvariablemeaningofwordsbuttheirharshandlogicalsyntax.Rupturing

patriarchyrequiresarupturingnotofwordsromanticmeaningnoreventheirlinearplacementsbutthe

inventionofasuper-orpost-linearunderstandingoflanguage,acompoundstateofunderstandingthatdoesnotrequireorderanddurationandtheinextricablemixingofSpaceandTimebutastateofnon-

equality,ofessentialandinassimilablepluralism.

Arupturedline,anunromanticwordtheseareminoruprisingsinthepatriarchalstateofLanguage.

Evenpoetryisbut a smallvehicle for a rebellion against the state of theworldaswe knowit; the

languageitselfmustchange(andluckilypoetryisusuallyaspacewherelanguagecanshiftabitbutpoetrys technology is essentially too old and ingrained into the culture tohave the kind of major

influence that, for instance, the camera and motion picture have had). Poets like Susan Howe (in

WhoweandThisPageisMyPage)goasfarasanywomaninthelatetwentiethcenturytowards

separating poetry from its Romantic, man speaking to men history and its grid-like masculineformality;buttheconstantreferencebacktothedurationallinesoessentialtoLanguageundercutsany

rebellionagainsttheworldasweknowit.

The durational line not only refers toBeat and Black Mountain poetrynot especially friendly to

womenbuttoaclassicalconceptofTimeasinseparablefrommetaphorsofspatiality.Timelasts,itmoves through something, its past, present, and future components are traceable on a time-line. Itoccupiesspace,itmeasures(time=counting=numbers=counters,placeholders).ForLanguagetomove

beyond the current state of humanity it must not merely be used neutrally (erasing engendered

words),itmustbepushedoutofspace-time.


10/64

ObjectivisminL=A=N=G=U=A=G=EPoetics

Intheiressaysonthepracticeofwritingpoetry,manyoftheLanguagepoetsuseMarxistrhetoricto

describepoetrywritingasaprocessofproduction.Ifpoetryisproduction,goingallthewaybackto

theGreekpoiesis,ormaking,whichimpliesthatpoetryiswroughtfromwordslikeahorseshoeis

wroughtfromiron,thenpoetryisanobjectlikeanyotherobject,asmall(orlarge)machinemadeofwords(WilliamCarlosWilliams).

Ron Silliman provides the most obvious comparisons between poetry andMarxist economics, and

thereforebetweenpoetryandobjects,in TheNewSentence.InRe:WritingMarxandThePolitical

Economyofpoetryhedescribesthetextintermsofitsexchangevalue,andthereforeintermsofits

comprehensibility and aesthetic value in society. He writes (in Re:Writing Marx): In order tobecomeabook,thetextmustbetransferredtotheotherperson,forwhomitservesasareadingvalue,throughthemediumofexchange(19).Thebook,whichSillimandescribesearlierinthisshortessay

as an external object, becomes a socially determined object just as a paper dollar has sociallydeterminedvalue.InThePoliticalEconomyofPoetry,Sillimandistinguishesbetweenpoetrywritten

forexchange(thus,poetrywrittenforexchangewithanaudience,evenifthataudienceisthewriter),thuspoetryascommodity,frompoetrythatescapescommoditization.Aspoetryisalwaysasocialact,inthatitcannotescapeparticipationinthesocialentitythatislanguage,poetryisalwaysacommodity.

AlthoughthepoetalwaysalreadyparticipatesinthelargersocialexchangeofLanguage,heorsheneed

notproducepoemsthatarealreadycommodities,asonemayfocusonthelabor(practice)ratherthan

theproduct(form)ofpoetry,thusreplacingacapitaliststandpointwithaMarxistone.Byfocusingonthelaborinvolvedinmakingpoetry,oneescapestheslickpackagingincapitalistsocietiesthatmake

oldthingsseemnewtheurgencytocreatesomethingnewandimprovedwhileatthesametime

minimizingproductionanddevelopmentcosts(OfTheory,toPractice60-61)makesforshoddybutexchangeableproducts.Inmakingpoetry,ifthefocusremainsoncraftratherthanmakingitnew,

poetrycanescape thepureeconomyof exchangeevenwhile itcannotescapethelargerexchangeof

Language.

BruceAndrewsalsoaddressesthematerialityoflanguagethroughasociopoliticalframe.InIndex,

the first essay of Paradise & Method, Andrewsmixes his own theories with quotes from JeromeRothenbergandAramSaroyanwhenhewrites:

8.Eachwordisasyntax,asensoryobjectmorethandescriptions,vehicles,oremotionaljournalism:sound,texture,weight,targets,rhythms,sight,presence.9.Wordsassensory

objects vs. (or and?)words as signs. 10. An object is whatever it becomes under the

impulseof the situationathand.11. Ilook at itas an event,notasdescriptiveinstance.

(PM3)

LikeWittgensteins signposts, Andrews words are things that take onmeaning in (sociopolitical)

contexts.Awordisanevent,not[a]descriptiveinstanceinthatitdoesnotdirectlypointtoathingbutbecomesinstantlymeaningfulinacertaintimethatlendscontext.Awordisthusmeaningfulinitspositioninasociopolitical,chronologicalcontext,andifitisthusimportantonlywhenitispositioned,

Andrewsimpliesthatthewordisamoveable(or,inSillimansterms,exchangeable)object.InTotalEqualsWhat: Poetic & Praxis, Andrews puts the word-object in a political context, drawing (as

Sillimandoes)onMarxistrhetorictoshowthesocialobjecthoodoftheword:


11/64

[If] you think of discourse or ideology as something like a mode of production, thenliteraturebecomessomethingthatsinscribedontomaterialwithinthatmode[Discourse],

asmodeofproduction;meaning,meansofproduction;andtheorganizationofwriting,the

relationsofproduction.(PM38)

Thepracticeofwritingpoetryis,then,forAndrews,aparticularparticipationinalargersociopolitical

discourse. It is also a practice of production, andwithin that production avant-garde writing is anattempttoreinforcethegenerativequalitiesoflanguagesrawmaterialsandlayingbarethedevice

(PM43-44)thatis,arevolutionarysocialactivitythataimstodemythologizelanguage,tobringwhat

is transparentin language (the search for immediatemeaningwithoutrecourseto language itself,asSillimanpointsout) intoviewsothattheentiresocialcommunitycanparticipateinmakingmeaning

withoutputtingthemselvesatthemercyofapolitically(andaristocratically)infusedsyntax.

Andrews uses the word systemicmany times in Total EqualsWhat, implying two qualities oflanguage: First, systemic implies that language is arranged in a particular, holistic way that, as

Andrewspointsout,issociallyandpoliticallycontrolled.Inthissense,systemicimpliesaframethat

is laid onto the world so that a particular sociopolitical group sees the world in a certain way.Fortunately, as political regimes can be overthrown but never escaped, the frame can be shifted

(discursiveshiftersorsocialshifters42)andredefined.Second,systemicimpliesthatlanguageisa

body that, likeanybody,canbescratchedormarked(literaturebecomessomethingthatsinscribedonto material within that mode 38). In this sense, systemic implies that someone writing, or

practicingliterature,canleavehisorhermarkonthegreatersocialdiscourse,asonemighttattooa

bodyorbrandacattle.Leavingonesmarkonthegreatersocialdiscoursethenrefersbacktothefirstsenseofsystemic,inthatonesinfluenceuponthesocialdiscourseshiftsthegrid,enactingsocialand

political change at the same time that it enactschangewithin the smaller and representative social

discourseofliterature.

Charles Bernstein takes up Andrews theme of systemic language in Writing and Method

(ContentsDream).Hestates:

Allwritingisademonstrationofmethod;itcanassumeamethodorinvestigateit.Inthis

sense,styleandmodearealwaysat issue,forallstylesaresociallymediatedconventions

opentoreconveningatanytime.(226)

Writingisalways a reflection ofsociopoliticalvalues;ifLanguagewerenotsocial,or didnothave

exchangevalue,itcouldnotbecommunicative.Withintheconfinesofaninherentlysocialmedium,thewritercanenforce(assume)thestatusquoorrebelagainst(investigate)it.Bernsteinintendsto

laybarethedevicewhenhewritesthat

Much normal philosophy and poetry simply adopts a style and works on techniques

within it, without considering either the implications of the larger modality or itsmethodological assumptions. In contrast, a constructive mode would suggest that the

mode itself is explored as content, its possibilities of meaning are investigated andpresented,andthatthisprocessisitselfrecognizedasamethod.(CD227)

Bernstein, likeAndrews,wantswriting itself, asamodeof discourse, tobe investigated as a thingrepresentative ofa sociopolitical statusquojustasaMedieval artifactmay bestudied inorder to

understand the context of its creation. By approaching writing from a constructivist standpoint,


12/64

Bernsteinendeavorstoshowitsphysical,ratherthantransparent,qualities,andthustocallattentiontothesocietythatusesthatwritingasanexchangeable(communicative)item.

Thesethreetexts,allofwhichaddressthesociopoliticalnatureoflanguage,useanalogousterminologyfromMarxistdiscoursetointroduceanewObjectivism.JustastheObjectivistssawwordsasthings

which could beusedwithoutRomantic meaning, theseLanguage poets seewords as thingswhich,

because of their exchangeable nature, reflect their sociopolitical context and can thus be used toidentifyandchangethestatusquo.


13/64

NotaFormlessFormbutanEdgelessEdifice

Newinnovationsinpoetrywillnothappenintermsofformbutratherintermsofhowapoemutilizes

spaceandtimeinmoreabstractwaysnotintermsofhowsyllablesfitintoa line,orhowalinefits

ontoapage,orhowthepagerepresentswordsdurationintime(asascorewould)butmerelyhow

meaningfulsymbolsdanceand collapse in time and space,andhowto locate theirmeanings in theconstantlyshiftinggraynessofapagewithoutanunderlyingspatiotemporalgraph.

CharlesBernsteinwitnesses the shift toa formless forminhis essayStateoftheArt. Echoing

LyotardsPostmodernismtestimonyofartistsworkingagainstrules,Bernsteincallsattentiontohuman

ability to cite formwithin the seemingly chaotic and poets ability to work constantly against an

assimilation ofthat chaosby providingtexts that call form into question.Hewrites thatPoetryis

aversionofconformityinthepursuitofnewformsandbyformhemeanswhatsswirlingsooften

incomprehensiblyaroundus(APoetics1).Bernsteinworksagainstformatleast,formasweknow

it,semanticgridsweplaceoverourperceptionofreality,leavingthingsoutbyattemptingtoallowalltermstoremain,asortofinassimilablewhitenoiseoftheWorld.Poetryprovide[s]asiteforthe

constructionofsocialandimaginativefactsandconfigurationsavoidedoroverlookedelsewhere(AP3), allowing minor things to coexistwith classically poetic things, allowing the world to retain itsessentialpluralisticinconceivability.

Bernsteinshiftsthefocusofpoetryfromthegraph-seen-from-abovetothegraph-seen-from-within.As

onewouldviewachessboardfromtheperspectiveoftheKnight,thereaderorsubjectseestheworldfromwithin the inassimilableplurality, the whitenoise, of the poem. In Narrating Narration:The

ShapesofRonSillimanswork,Bernsteinwritesabouttheessentialnatureofmakingmeaningthe

gradualcognitivemappingofeachchessboardsquareastimeprogresses.

HowtogetfromAtoCbywayof,attheleast,D.Thisisnotonlythestoryofapoembut

ofalifebiography.Themiracleisratherthatyoustringpiecestogetherandhaveasyntaxcomprehended,alifeinhabited.(ContentsDream305)

Bernsteinpoints toSillimans NewSentencepoetry inexploring this specialkind ofground-levelcognition,usingsuchmetaphorsasthesubway(Itsallconnectedandifyoudontcomprehendthatit

maybebecauseitsnottryingtopersuadeyouthatitis.306)andarchitecturalplans(Theexperience

ofreadingaSillimantextislessthecoollyformalpleasureoflookingatanarchitecturalplanandmorethe surprise ofbeing in a building whose plan becomes apparent as youwalk through it. 309) to

discuss the instantaneous sense-making that parataxis requires. Traveling through subways and

buildings,thesubject-making-meaningencounterstheworldwitharabbitsview,asthoughshewere

traveling through a burrow.Although the labyrinth isunicursalas theKnight can onlymove inaparticulargridthe subject, from hisorher perspective, cannotdevelop aneagles eyeviewof the

grid,atleastnotimmediately.Thesubjectistrappedwithaparticularperspectiveinallitsfuture-less,

grid-lessmultiplicity,andmustformaunifiedpicturefrompartialglimpses(311).

A grid-less, partial cognitivemap makes for a vision of the worldwithoutedges: as early humans

imagined the world todropoff an inevitableedge of flatspace,sothe reading subjectwithout amarkedformmustviewthepoemasstoppingonlyoutofanessentiallackofresourcesthepageends,

andsodoesthepoem.Theformlesspoemisasnapshotofapossiblyendlessterrainofunchartedand

unchartabletopography,aninterruptionofthewhitenoisethatswirlssoincomprehensiblyaroundus.


14/64

Steve McCaffery taps into this shape-without-periphery in McLuhan + Language x Music.McCafferycitesMcLuhansprophesiesaboutradioseffectonourperceptionsofTime.

Electricity,writesMcLuhaninUnderstandingMedia,pointsthewaytoanextensionofthe process of consciousness itself, on a world scale, and without any verbalization

whatsoever.TheElectricAge,quiteacoustically,bringsbackthefutureandlooksforward

tothepast.Itisis[sic]thedestroyingangelofspace-timelinearseriality.(NI79)

Theelectricspaceofsoundasexemplifiedbyrecordingdevices,radio, television,and,now,sound

files(suchas.mpg)allowsthesubjecttodipintoasonicworldthatexistswithorwithouthimorher,and ties itself into chronometric knots. No longer is the past in the pastit can be replayed,

rebroadcast,accessedbyanyone (especiallywith theadventofpersonalcomputers)atanytime.The

delayed immediacy ofTime dominates itsmeaning for us:wecan accesshistoricalmomentsand

predictfuturemomentsinsonicdurationandauralpatterns.WecanaccessGertrudeSteinreadingherpoetryviaan.mpgfile,switchontheradiotohearanNPRreport,andlistentoarerunofTheSimpsons

ontelevisionallatonce,thenturnallofthosesoundsoffandoccupyaspecificauralTimethatexists

onlywithreferencetoamultiplicityofTimefragments.ANativeAmericantheoryofTimemakesthisideaofTime in the ElectricAgemoredigestible: a certain tribe imagined thatTime isawhirling,

edgelesschaos,withoutlinearity(pastpresentfuture),origin,shape(curve,line,circle),orend.Tofind

oneself inTime, tolassooneself toa sortof Time-platformwhere one couldmomentarilytameitschaosintoalivablelinearity,onehadtobuildpoststotouchperiodically.Likeachildsavinghimself

inagameof tagbyhittinghomebaseora journeymanlocatinghimselfwithsignpostsalonghis

way,theNativeAmericanneededtobuildandtouchTime-posts(real,tangibleposts,likesignposts)tolocate himselfona platformof Time inwhichhe could exist. Similarly, Time in the ElectricAge

requiresthesubjecttodipinandoutofachaosandlocateoneselfviadurationmessagesinachaotic

Timethatdisallowscategorizationintoastrictlinearprogression.ThisTimeisnotaformlessform,asBernstein attempts todescribe inStateoftheArt,butanedgelessedifice. Formal innovationsin

poetry,evenasit constantlyattemptstoaccuratelydescribeachaoticworld,areconstantlyboundby

artificialedgestherefore,evenastheyareclassicallyunorthodox,theyretain form.Movingbeyond

current manifestations of innovative poetry, a real avant-garde would need to acknowledge anedgelessness.Assumingthatthepageisstilltheunitofcontainment(whichneednotbeassumed),the

unitwouldbeacknowledgedasalreadyhistoricalandinterruptive,asthoughthepoemonlyexisted

thereasasnapshotofalargerpoeticchaos.


15/64

TowardsaReinvestigationofCubism:

AdaptingSteinforaNewGenerationofPoets

The Language movement introduced us to Gertrude Steins syntactical becoming, revealing the

subtletyofasyntacticalcubismwhilehighlightingSteinsrelationtolanguageassuchasasocial,

politicallyweightedentity.ThesubtletyofSteinsartisticpositionswithregardtoCubismshouldbereinvestigatedbythoseupcomingvisualpoetswhoareattemptingtotaketheLanguagemovementasa

given.Itispreciselythroughthisre-appropriationofSteinsviewsofTimeandSpacethatthegenesofPoetrymaymutateintoanewcreaturewithnewenergyandmomentum.Lookingtothediscoveriesthe

LanguagepoetsmadewithregardtoStein,newpoetsmaymovebeyondthecritiquesofhowSteinuses

timeandspaceandutilizesSteinsprinciplesinnewwork.

The new ways that the Language poets looked at the ways in which humans share language and

perceivetheworldthroughitoftenfoundtheirrootsinWittgenstein.AslightlydifferentandperhapsmorecomplexviewofLanguagetheorycanbeseenwhenonelooksthroughthefiltersprovidedbythe

poetstreatmentofStein.Aself-proclaimedcubist,Steinfocusedonthecrystallinenatureofobjects

the thingness that disallows a direct naming. Objects are crystalline in that they are alwaysentropictheyarealsocrystallineinthatwhenwenamethem,aswhenweviewacrystal,weimpose

uponthemaparticularstasisthathasnothingtodowiththeirrealnature(amoredetaileddescriptionof

crystallography can be found in Barrett Wattens Total Syntax).These issues of Time, reality, and

semantics are focalpointsofLanguagetheory, though theways inwhich they surface inLanguagepoetryareoftenmuchpalerthantheymightbe.

AttheforefrontofthefeministpoliticslatentinLanguagepoetryarefemalereinvestigationsofSteinspoetryasfeministtexts.SusanHowecallsattentiontoaresistancetopatriarchythrougharedefinition

(andthusreversibility)ofhistorybyanalyzingSteinssyntax.Howewrites:Shereachedinwordsfor

anewvisionformedfromtheprocessofnaming,asifafirstwomanweresounding,notdescribing,

spaceoftimefilledwithmoving(MyEmilyDickinson11).Steinmovesawayfromtypicallanguage,andthusfromthepatriarchalsocialorderthatteachesuslanguageandfilterstheworldinaparticular

way.Howecontinues:GertrudeSteinalsoconductedaskillfulandironicinvestigationofpatriarchalauthorityover literaryhistory.Whopolices questionsofgrammar, parts of speech,connection, and

connotation? Whose order is shut inside the structure of a sentence? (MED 11) Stein actually

addressesthesequestionscriticallyinCompositionasExplanation.Shewritesthat

There is singularly nothing thatmakes adifference adifference inbeginningandin the

middleandinendingexceptthateachgenerationhassomethingdifferentatwhichtheyare

all looking. By this I mean so simply that anybody knows it that composition is thedifferencewhichmakeseachandallofthemthendifferentfromothergenerationsandthis

iswhatmakes everything different otherwise they are all alike and everybodyknows itbecauseeverybodysaysit.(CompositionasExplanation21)

Stein writes that each generation is different from the last because of the special way that each

considersitssurroundings.AccordingtoHowe,awayofwritingcanleadtosocio-historicalchangebybreakingopen,orcallingattentionto,thepoliticslatentinlanguage.AnotherwaytolookatSteins

generational change and spaceof time filledwithmoving is toconsider the poemas ifitwerea

living,evolvingbeing.ExplorersofnewvisualpoetrycanlooktoSteinforearlierexperimentsinscale

andthethemeofminorvariationoverTime:


16/64

Itwasallsonearlydifferentanditisdifferent,itisnaturalthatifeverythingisusedandthereisacontinuouspresentandabeginningagainandagainifitisallsoalikeitmustbe

simplydifferent and everything simply differentwas thenaturalway ofcreating it then.

(CompositionasExplanation26-27)

In the above passage from Composition as Explanation, Stein refers to generationsgroups of

people born within certain time framesbut her argument can be applied just as easily to eachgeneration of the semantic unit inpoetry such asSteins. In Steins poetry, each phrase isa slight

mutationoforvariationonthelast,justaseachhumangenerationisaslightmutationoftheprevious

one (genetically). Just as each human generation chooses different things onwhich to focus, eachphrase ina typicalSteinpoem looks at adifferentaspectofthe thing itdescribesthe simply

differentwhichdrawsattentiontothemakingofmeaninginsideminorvariationsofseeing.Thequality

ofhumangenerationsthatallowssomethingstoescapeconsiderationatsometimesisthesamequality

ofSteinsworkwhichallowsathingtomove,unnamed,withinabrokennetofverbsandpronouns.Thingsescaperealdefinitionwhilesimultaneouslygainingfuzzy,compoundmeaning.Thiscompound

meaninghappensonamicroscopiclevel.Fromafar,thewordhumandescribesaverylonghistoryof

blurredbodies;ifonecomesclosertoaparticularspaceandtime,oneseesandunderstandsindividuals.The same phenomenon is present in Steins phrases: reading a long passage gives one a general

understanding, but focusing on short spaces reveals subtle arguments (in her critical work) and

previously unnoticed aspectsof things (inworks suchas TenderButtons).Steins long columns ofslightly differentiatedphrases, and blockparagraphsofevolvingarguments,force thereader into an

unvariedspacethatmirrorsthesyntaxofthesemanticunitsthemselves.

Steinsbecomingasort of continual change towardsanundefined future,ashappens innatural

evolutionisoftendescribedbytheLanguagepoets.Steinspositiononnounsandnaminginvolvesa

particularvisualizationofthedynamismofSpaceandTime.Wherenamesusuallypindownanaspectof a thing, verbs, pronouns, and connectors act as shifters, allowing the language recipient to

understandmultipleidentitiesofathingatonce.Thismultiplicityisnotassimilated,butratherallowed

toexistasamultiplicity,whenSteinwritessuchlinesas:

Suppose,tosuppose,supposearoseisaroseisaroseisarose.Tosuppose,wesuppose

that therearosehereandtherethathereandtheretherearoseaninstanceofknowingthat

therearehereandtherethattherearetherethattheywillprepare,thattheydocaretocomeagain.Andtheytocomeagain.(AnElucidation,asreprintedin transition1927,p.13)

Stein uses very few nouns here, and those things that are nouns are also Times. As the transitionbetween a rose and arose suggests, Space and perspective are mutable with respect to Time,

allowingtheperceivertoamalgamatemanyversionsofathingbeforeunderstandingthenatureofa

thinganaturewhichis,evenwhenunderstood,neverassimilatedasaflatorstaticentity.Hejinianexplains inher astute TwoSteinTalks (printed inThe Language of Inquiry) that things can be

viewedobjectively,whichistosayviewedasobjectsbutalsoviewedintheprocessofcomingintoobjecthood(97).AlthoughHejinianusesSteintoillustratesentential/linearmeaning(thepetsemanticunitofan entiregenerationofphilosopher-poets),Steinsargumentcanbeviewedasanimaginative

explorationintotheSpaceandTimeinherentin languagethatmake languagemuchmore interesting

than linear development allows. Steins language allows forchangeover time: the development of

memoryinrelationtomeaningandthecombinationofmultipleviewsintoacrystallinewhole.ThisefforttodepicttheevolutionofanobjectoverTimeisat theheartofcubism,butmaybetakeninan

abstract formfromSteinswork and established asa root for anewwaveofvisual poetry.Barrett


17/64

Watten describes thisphenomenon ofmultiplicity and its relation toTimeinhiscritique ofRobertSmithsonslandscapesculptures(inTotalSyntax).Wattenwrites:

Amonumentalstasis,compellingandinert,isforSmithsonahopefuldevelopmentinart.Thishopeisconnectedtotherecognitionandexplorationofstatesofentropybyartistsas

theartworldfallsapartintoendlessamountsofpointsofview.Thebreakingapartof

thespatialorderunderminestheauthorityofthepresenttime.(TS69)

Watten,likeHowe,hopestochangethepoliticsoftheimmediatefuturebycallingintoquestionthe

orderingofSpaceandTimethroughlanguage.Hisendlesspointsofviewarethetrajectoriesofautopiawhereeverypointofviewisequallyavisionofreality.Newpoetry,whichmoreoftenthannot

takesdemocracyasagiven(justas ittakesLanguagepoetryasa given),canconstruct theseendless

points of view not only syntacticallyas Stein attempted tobut spatially and aurallymultiple

voices,nolines(linesarealwaysautomaticallyboundaries,asisgrammar),anextantpluralismneverblendedintoameltingpotbutallowedtoexistinadifferentiated,entropic,nearlyboundlesssystem

ofsignsthatborderonnonsense.

CubisminvolvestwomajorshiftsinthinkingshiftsthattheLanguagegroupneverreallymade.Even

intheireffortstocreatenon-linearpoetry(asoccursoccasionallyinCharlesBernsteins DarkCity

andBruceAndrews earlyworks), theunit ofmeasurewasalways thelinethe linewasthe givenevenwhenworksattemptedtobenon-linear.Rethinkingcubismasarootsystemforanewvisual

poetry involves throwing out the ideaof the line.Things can no longerbe non-linearbecause to

break into a new way of thinking about poetry the word linearmust be completely eradicated.Cubismletsus imagineaworldwithoutlinesbyallowingsomanylinestoexistatonce,thatwecan

abstract the idea of the plane. Cubisms multiplicity ofperspective provides the observerwith the

illusionofmotion, denyingany director singular progression through a poem, painting, orotherenvironment.TheLanguagegroup,stillworkingoutofBeatandBlackMountainhistories,continues

toseethepoemasapathwaythatpassesthroughanddelineatesTimeandSpace.TheNewSentence

andevencritiquesofit,suchasLynHejiniansLine,focusonthelinearsemanticunit.Evenmore

advanced criticism such as Charles Bernsteins Words and Pictures and Bruce Andrews LinesLinearHowtoMeanlook todurationanddelimitingastheprimarycomponentsofmeaning in

language. In a new visual poetry, such asworkby SteveMcCaffery andMichaelBasinski (among

others,especiallyasrepresentedinthemagazineEssex),noprogressionthroughTimeandSpaceismarkedoutfortheReaderpoemsarenotjustmulticursalbutmultidimensionallabyrinthsofmeaning,

nonsense,andmaterial.Thewordmaterialleadstothesecondmajorshiftneededtobreakwiththe

currentviews of poetry: the page isnotablankcanvas or silence,not ascorenorapainting,but atopologicalspacethatexpandsinmultiplespatiotemporaldirections.Thatthe linenolongerexists

indicates that thingsdrawn linearlyare obsoletethe cube replaces thesquareas theunit ofvisual

measure,separatingnewvisualpoetryfromworkbyApollinaireandbpNicholbydestroyingtheeaseof a meaning-depiction relationship. The cube in this case is not just two squares with four lines

mappedonto a two-dimensionalspace,but theprinciple between the two-dimensionalcubeandthethird dimension (namely, that an n + 1 dimension can be mapped only inaccurately onto an ndimensionalfield).Rethinkingcubismopensanenormousimaginative(andimaginary)spaceinwhich

tousewords,breakingoutoftheconfinesofprogressiveTimeandlinearSpace.

Thematerialityofthepage,themirroringbetweendifferentiationwithinthepageanddifferentiationofmeaning, and thebreakfrom a two-dimensionalplane toa three-dimensional one, extant inSteins

theory,areaspectsofpoetryinusebycontemporaryvisualpoets.IanHamiltonFinlay,CeciliaVicua,

Robert Grenier, and Steve McCaffery are more influential to these poets than Apollinaire, Pound,


18/64

Nichol, or Johnsonthose poets whose poetry reflects a direct relationship between meaning andvisual representations. The same abstract principle of un-naming, of allowing unassimilated

multiplicity, is present in these forerunners works and those of Stein. Finlay andVicuas works

borderonthemeaninglesswithoutextra-lingualboundaries,suchastheentrancetoLittleSpartaorVicuasceremonialprecarios-makingperformances,thespectatormaynotknowto findmeaningin

objects that, thoughsyntactic,are rarelylingual. InGrenierswork, too, theability torecognizethe

poemassuch

iscalledintoquestion,forcingtheviewertolearnanewlanguagemuchmorecomplexthananyoftheLanguagepoetsinorderto readthepoems(workssuchasCharlesBernsteinsDark

Cityoftenforcethereadertodancebetweenlinestomakemeaning,butthemeaningalwayscomes

together quite linearly), which sometimes consist of only a few wordsand no lineson a page.McCafferyswork, perhaps the most influential toyoung poets, playswith a topology of the page

similartoasmoothnessfoundinSteinsbarelydifferentiatedphrases.AreaderofSteinfindsherselfin

a constant shift ofmeaning, andmust cling to the smallest fragments ofdifferentiation inorder to

understandthewashofphrases. InMcCaffery, thedifferentiation ismuchbigger(lessmicrocosmic)buttheconstantshiftsoffocusinworkssuchas Carnivalforcethereaderintoatectonicsofmeaning.

These examples are quite different from the works of Apollinaire, Nichol, and Johnson, because

although inall of thepoets thevisualaspectis important, inApollinaire,Nichol,and Johnson, it isessential. The calligramic aspect of the work of these three poets subtracts from the dynamism of

shifting meaning and visual playfulness in works such as McCafferysthe meaning-vision

relationshipisimmediateandsimplisticratherthanpluralistic,shifting,anddangerous.


19/64

Syntax:TheFinalFrontier

IntheirinvestigationofLanguage,thelastgenerationofpoetsespeciallythoseworkingwiththeNew

Sentencesoughtafteraminimalunitofmeaning,andfoundsyntax.AlthoughtheLanguagePoetsdid

notexploretheramificationsofthisminimalunitintheirpoetrynearlyasmuchastheywroteaboutit

intheirpoetics,poetsworkingatthesametime(oftenconsideredperipheral) didexploreandarestillexploring the ramifications of minimalist syntax, challenging poetry in ways the Language poets

clearedpathsforbutneverreallyinvestigated.

Poetsworking on the fringe of the OfficialVerse Anti-Culture that is the Language Movement

includeAmeliaEtlinger,CeciliaVicua,andnewvisualpoets,SteveMcCafferyandbpNichol(aswell

astheirCanadianinheritors,poetssuchasChristianBk,DarrenWershler-Henry,KennethGoldsmith,JayMillAr,StephenCain,ChristopherFritton,RicRoyer,etc.),NickPiombino,JohnCage,Arakawa

andMadelineGins,RobertSmithson,andconcretepoetssuchasIanHamiltonFinlay.Notallofthe

worksby these poets and artistsembody the specialvaluation of syntax that Iwill describe in thisessay.WhenImentionPiombino,Imeanspecificallyhiscollageworks;withMcCafferyandNichol,I

meansuchworksasCarnivalandZygalbutnotOwsWaiforTheMartyrology;withBkImeanpartsofCrystallography and hiscollage-likeUBUworksbutnotEunoia.Alloftheseworkshaveaveryspecificuseofsyntaxincommon,andthatisaparticularreadablematerialitythatisindependent,but

notcompletelyseparable,fromSaussureanmeaning.

Inordertoexplainthematerialsyntaxthatisnotonlytheminimalunitofpoeticmeaningbutalsothenextareaofpoetryripeforrealexploration(nowthattheLanguagepoetshavedestroyedallgrid-like

poeticstructures,leavingthelanguagemalleableinwayspreviouslyunimagined),Iwillconcentrateon

twopoets:AmeliaEtlingerandCeciliaVicua.Ithinkthatitisimportantthatbothofthesepoetsarewomen coming into the art form of a patriarchal language. They are working after Stein, Riding-

Jackson,andHowe,andhavehadawayclearedforthem,butateverystepuponthepathofchanging

poetry thereisanimplicitwhispering towomen tooverhaul thelanguageorstopusingitwhetherEtlinger orVicuaheard this whispering ormerelyresponded to it subconsciously isuncertain,but

theireffect onpoeticlanguageserves, atsome level,toanswerthechallengeof thewomanwriting.

AlthoughtheotherpoetsmentionedaboveoftenuselanguageinwayssimilartoEtlingerandVicuasuse,theirmotivationsaredissimilarandtheirresultantworknotatenthasdrasticasthesetwopoets.

Etlingerswork,createdinthe1960sand1970sincentralNewYorkState,iscurrentlyhousedinthePoetryandRareBookCollectionatSUNYBuffalo.Etlingerbeganwritingrelativelynormalfreeverse

poetry, usually taking nature and love as her subjectmatter.After an extended illness, herwriting

changed dramatically, and she began situating a few words on a page and covering the page with

chaoticstitchesoffragilethreads,pollen,leaves,driedflowers,dirt,sand,andothernaturalobjects.Insomepieces,thepoemsstillusuallyaboutnatureandlove,butnowsaidminimally,suchasEric/

love / blue / butterfly with each word situated in each other words space (four groups of four

words)areenclosedinsewn-uppapercardsthatbarelyopen,offering thereaderonlyaglimpseofthewordsthroughtheweblikethreadsandsoftwhitepollen.Eventually,afterinformingherselfofthe

concrete poetrymovementsofthetimes,Etlinger dismissed thewordpartsofherpoemsaltogether,

sending theLibraryboxesofpollen,rocks, sticks,andthread,and, eventually, small tapestrieswithabstractpatterns.Etlingerstapestrypatternsweremeanttosofullyembodymeaningthatwordswere

unnecessarythecolorsofthethreadmakemeaningjustlikePaulSharitsStructuralistfilmsdo,just

asCeciliaVicuasprecariosdo.


20/64

Vicuasprecariosaremademeaningfulnotbypatternsofthreadorobjects,asinEtlingerswork,butbytheperformanceofmakingthework.Vicuasownactionsinmakingtheprecariousaresignificant,

syntactical.Sheweaveshercloud-netinthesamewayinthemoviebythattitle.Inherpresence,one

sensestheinsignificantbeingdelineated,madeimportant,demarcated,aslanguageperhapsoriginallywasforuswhenwewereveryyoungchildrenandwerejustcomingintosense.Tomakeaprecarios,

whichisaconglomerateofpiecessuchasstring,wood,andfeathersagain,naturalobjectsVicua

takesthesenaturalobjectsfromtheirnaturalplacesandverycarefully,evenritualistically,placestheminanewcontext,together,tiedwiththread,yarn,orstringinasewingoflanguage.Vicuasprimary

interestisintheChileanwordforlanguage,whichisthesamewordastoweave(inthatlanguage).

The interplay of fabric and fabrication, of real thread and the thread of narrative, is central toVicuas redefinition of poetry through the focus on the automatic signification of syntax. Her

precarios,which,likeEtlingerswork,havenoattachedwords(spokenorwritten,thoughherritesthat

bringprecariosintobeingofteninvolvenonsensechantingandpurring),challengepoetryassuchand

borderonartbuttheirsyntax,theirmessage-in-the-medium,letsthemoccupyapoeticterritoryandreconfigureitsborders.


21/64

ArticulatingSpace:L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E

PoeticsandtheCreationofIndividualMeaning

Inapostmodern,post-Barthessociety,thewriterisconstantlyontheedgeofextinction.Boundby

languageandtherebychainedintocontextualsocialconstraints,thewriterhaslittlespacetomoveand

evenlessspacetocreateintheclassicsense.Nolongeramanspeakingtomen(Wordsworth)oranunacknowledgedlegislatorof theworld(Shelley),thepoetmustarticulateaspaceforhisorher

workbeforehisorhervoicecanbealignedwithasenseofindividualidentityandheardasaspeck(duPlessis127)inthefabricofsociopoliticaldiscourse.

Theissueofidentityorselfisthefundamental issueinLanguagetexts.WithoutanI,Icannotspeak,write,create,oreventhink.Thesubjectis requiredtoanswerthequestionposedbyHejinian,

Am I speaking? (WS 32). The poets collective preoccupation with subjectivity is based on the

problemofaspeakingbeing.Tospeakandbeheard,onemustusea languageunderstoodbyothers;therefore,onesthoughtsareconstantlymediatedbythesocialbedoflanguagethatcanacceptthem.If

theboundaryofmylanguageis theboundaryofmyworld,asWittgensteinwritesinhisTractatus,

theindividualsmostprivatethoughtsandrelationshipswiththeoutsideworldandsociallifeareboundbythesocietyfromwhichheorshehaslearnedlanguageandinwhichheorshecanarticulatethoughts

throughlanguage.Thesepoetsregardlanguage,previouslyconsideredatoolforcommunication,asa

socialwebthatformsconsciousness(Bernstein141).BruceAndrewswritesthatsociallifespeaks

rightthroughus,wewhoarealwaysalreadyexposedtolanguage(SWI185-186).Hegoessofarastowrite:meaningmeanstheeliminationofidentity,( SI209).Tomeaninvolvesusinglanguage,

andusinglanguageinvolvesbeingsomuchapartofsocietyastolosewhatonemayclassicallydefine

asindividualityoridentity.

To be awriter with these chains around the subjectwriting, and therefore a creative being whose

creativityislimitedbythesocialfabricinwhichonecanthinkanduselanguage,onemustcreatea

spaceinwhichtoarticulatethoughtsthatareontheedgeofwhatasocietyconsidersusefulandnormal.Thewritermustintentionallymarginalizehim-orherselftoevenattempttocreatesomethingbeyond

theedgeofthe sociopoliticaldiscourseinwhichheor she isautomaticallyandconstantly involved.Althoughacreationofsomethingbeyondtheedgeisimpossibleforoneusinglanguage,creationof

things at theedge,pushingtheboundariesof languageand socialconstructs, isadesirablegoal for

poets(ifonedangerouslysimilartoShelleysabovequote).Atthemarginofsocialdiscourse,onecanendeavor toscarmeaning (SI 210) andbecomea speck inthehistoryof[sociopoliticallybound]texts (duPlessis 127). One attempts to make ones mark on language, to claim it for oneself.

duPlessis quotes Howes Secret History of the Dividing Line , which speaks of marking as an

inscriptionsignifyingownershipororigin(duPlessis123)Iattempttomakemymarkonlanguagetomakeitmineandthusfindmyidentitywithinit,tomakethetractoflandheldincommonpartly

mineratherthanjustheldincommon(aslanguageis).Fromthemargintheuninhabitedblankspaceofthepageofsocialdiscourse,aspacebothwithinthelargerpageofall-languageandbesideit,attheedgeofitonecandoonesbesttocommentonwhatlanguageleavesoutthesociopolitical

tracesleftwhenvictorswrotesocialhistoriesthaterasednames,languages,genders,nationalhistories,

andotheridentifyingfactors.

Thisfigurativemarginal space isessential for thespeaking subject: articulating new and interesting

ideas (even in a language already bound by social norm) requires clarifying thatwhich is outside

language inordertoreclaimorreinvent languageand thus identify theself (speakerorwriter).One


22/64

kindofpersonforwhomthismarginalspaceisimportantisthefemale.duPlessisdescribesthenatureof Susan Howes work as a struggle against female erasure. Self-erasure and self-affirmation. A

theatrical.Amasque.Aritualfornaming.Fornamingloss(129).Similarly,CharlesBernsteinwrites

that [Gertrude] Stein celebrates her suspension of identity, this holding off naming to see whatotherwiseemerges(144).Thefemalewritinginmalelanguage(societieswherethemaleisdominant

havemalelanguages:eventhewordfemaleimpliesthesuperiorityofthemale)mustfindawayto

express the new, unapproachable, unrepresentable, and unattainable (Bernstein 143). Thispostmodernexpressionoftheunpresentable(Lyotard)attemptstozoominontheneglectedspaces

between languagethe places that the social constructsofa politically bound language system has

purposefully erased. To identify oneself as a person if one is not in the majority (white, male,protestant,etc.),onemustfindawaytoescapetheusualpuppetryofidentification(Bernstein141)by

approachingtheborders,theunnamedplacesoflanguage,andtherebyrejectingitssociopoliticalbody.

Hejinianadvisesthat,sinceoneneedsacommunitythatcanunderstandandacceptonesspeechfrom

themarginsorfromanywhereinsocietytobeheardinonesreidentification,renaming,restructuringlanguage,onemustcreateonesowncommunity.Awriter,constrainedinhisorhercreativitybythe

necessaryboundariesoflanguage,andthereforebycommunity,canreconfigurethecommunitysothat

themarginsofdiscoursearenotignoredthosepushing attheboundariesoflanguage,prodding itspoliticallyemptyspaces,arelistenedto,areheard.

Theimplicationsforindividualcreativityareproblematic:ifonenudgestheboundariesoflanguagesothat language expands to accept ones self-naming, one becomes more central to language, more

sociallynormal.Thedesireforthenewandforthatthatconstantlychallengesanyhegemonicsystemis

thensmothered.Themarginisneverreallyaccommodatedbyautomaticallypoliticallanguagesystems;thesystemsonlyestablishnewblankspaces,erasenewidentities,disallownewaspectsofself-naming.

Creativityisalwaysautomaticallypoliticalitsnewnesschallengessomethinginthelanguageevenif

itisnotveryinnovative.However,creativityisalways alreadysocial:eventhoseworkingagainstthepowerstructuresimbeddedinlanguagemustuselanguageagainstitselfinbattle.Thechoice,finally,is

whethertoseekoutspacestoarticulatetheproblemsinlanguage(andpowerandsocialstructures)or

tosimplystop,inprotest.

Andrews,Bruce.,SelfWriting/I(luckythought):(OnMichaelLally),Paradise&Method:Poetics&Praxis

(NorthwesternUniversityPress1996)pp.185-189.CitedinmanuscriptasSWI.

Self/Ideology:CorpsesthatDevourTheirOwnFlesh(OnRonSilliman),Paradise&Method:Poetics&

Praxis(NorthwesternUniversityPress1996)pp.208-214.CitedinmanuscriptasSI.

Bernstein,Charles.,SteinsIdentity,MyWay(UniversityofChicagoPress1999).141-144

DuPlessis, Rachel Blau., Whowe: On Susan Howe, The Pink Guitar: Writing as Feminist Practice

(Routledge1990).12339.

Hejinian,Lyn., WhoisSpeaking?,TheLanguageofInquiry(UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2000).30-39.

CitedinmanuscriptasWS.

Hejinian,Lyn.,ThePersonandDescription,TheLanguageofInquiry(UniversityofChicagoPress,2000).

199-208.CitedinmanuscriptasPD.

Howe, Susan., Architecture of MeaningMy Emily Dickinson (North Atlantic 1985). 75-138. Cited in

manuscriptasMED.


23/64

Lyotard, Jean-Franois., Answering the Question: What is Postmodernism?. Trans. Rgis Durand,

Postmodernism,71-82.


24/64

Theintentionisalwaystothwartdesign:Reading

TheBlackDebtthroughMcCafferysPoeticsofExcess

SteveMcCafferysNorthof Intentionoutlinesapoeticsofexcess,orgeneraleconomy,byanalyzing

the works of bill bissett, Claude Gauvreau, and bpNichol. In Writing as a General Economy,

McCafferywrites:atextualeconomywouldconcernitselfnotwith theorderofformsandsitesbutwiththeorder-disorderofcirculationsanddistributions(NorthofIntention201).OnthebackcoverofTheBlackDebt,heexplainsthattheeffect[ofthedisjointednonsensicalphrasesinTheBlackDebt]isoneofeconomyratherthanstructure,a distributionandregulationofautonomouspartspropelledby

powerfulvelocitiesofdisplacement.McCafferysuseofdisjointed,disjunctivephrasesin TheBlack

Debtsdialecticchapters,LagandAnEffectofCellophane,playsoutthepoeticsofageneraleconomythatheoutlinesinNorthofIntention.

McCafferydescribesapoeticsofgeneraleconomyasapoeticsofexcess;thisexcessivenessincludesnonsense(witzandtheparagrammatic),libidinalflow,andatensionofsubsurfaceenergyagainstthe

poeticsofrestrictiveeconomy,orclassicalpoetry.ThetermgeneraleconomyisBatailles:

The general economy, in the first place, makes apparent that excesses of energy are

produced,and that bydefinition,theseexcessescannotbe utilized.Theexcessiveenergy

canonlybelostwithouttheslightestaim,consequentlywithoutmeaning.(NI201)

McCafferyattachesthistheoryofexcessiveenergytoeverythingwastedbysocialdiscourse:orgasm,

dreams,jouissance,nonsense,metaphor,andtheparagram.Eachofthesewastedforcescallsattention

toeveryday use and disuse.Purepleasurewithoutproduction,involuntary expenditure (202n),themetaphor that distributes its indeterminacies among the significatory scenes it helps to establish,

offering displacement as apotential disposition but fixing a residual potentiality between the two

terms (206), and the paragram that counters the supposition that words can fix or stabilize in

closure (207) are all examples of the excessive signification that allows the general economy toparticipate in a dialectic with a restricted economy by offering a language without directly useful

signification.Thesedevicesofageneraleconomyallowsignifierstoseparatefromtheirsignifiedsandenter into a Bergsonian mobile language, thereby revealing Sillimans transparent language of

restricted economy as a false lucidity. They show languages strata, urging an exploration ofboth

languageandanti-languageandanawarenessoftheforcesthatrefusetextualization(93).Devicesofageneral economy reveal the inner-workings of a restricted economy, self-consciously showing themateriality of languagescomponentsby presentingmere waste, orexcess signification, toa reader

seekingmeaning.

TheexamplesofpoetrythatapproachesapoeticsofageneraleconomythatMcCafferygivesinNorth

ofIntentionincludeworksbyhisCanadiancontemporaries,bissettandNichol.McCafferywrites,TheMartyrologyisadoubledproductionthatpositionstheSubjectprecariouslyinsidetwovast,oscillatingeconomiesthattogethercirculateanddistributetheflowoflinguisticandnon-linguisticstimuli(58).

Nicholsworkplacesthereaderinapositionwheresheorhecanseeboththerestrictiveandgeneral

economythe transparentusefulnessofwhat onetakesforgrantedabout languageand thematerialuselessnessofwordswhosecomponentssuddenlydeclarethemselvesasindependentanddifferent

(62).Languagedissolvesintoitsstructuralparts,revealingthechemistryofitshabitualcombinations.The Martyrology calls attention to a general economy by showing that the restricted economy the

readertakesforgrantedisaplaneofinfinitepossibilitiesprovidedbylettersorphonemescombining


25/64

to formnetworks of signification, and thus a space always on the verge of nonsense and excess.Similarly, bissetts orthographically anomalous poetry reveals an energy underlying straightforward

meaning that restrainspure, transparent, communicativeexchangeby borderingonmeaninglessness.

McCafferywritesthatbissettsworkhasaLackofaim,lackofdefinition,lackofmeaningsimplythe need to expelwaste produceenergyexcessan economy of total and irreducible non-

conservation(104).

Thisrelativelypurewaste (compared toconventional poetry,which stressesmeaningand narrative)

allowsa flow that involves a forgetting ofstrictmeaningfulboundariesboundariesthat bissetts

worksare happy tohelperase.This flowentailsamobility ofsignification (thatMcCaffery alsodiscusseswithregard tometaphor inTheMartyrology);bissetts poems representanoverflow, like

magmaonto aplain,ofwaste-significationonto thepage. Even thismetaphor is inexact, however;

languages component parts cannot be pinned down. McCaffery writes that The surface is not

contextualizedit is not a surface of, under, or around anythingbut the flow of force itself,obliterating insides and outsides, and freeing writing from the domain of the categorical (100).

bissetts libidinal (excessive,non-productive) flowoflanguagemarksa separationoflanguagefrom

context and of signifier from signifiedas none of bissetts words are in context or immediatelyrecognizable.As inNicholswork, theseparationoflanguage from itsobjectsmakes fora material

mobility,andthusforanexcessiveordetachable(disposable)poetry.

McCafferys own Black Debt is a project of excess. Composed of strings of nonsense phrases,

includingspelled-outnumbers,BlackDebtis,atitsmostsimplelevel,anexperimentinparataxis.Itis

also,inasense,atributetothecomma;thefirstsection,Lag,iswritteninthesamestyleasthesecondsection,AnEffectofCellophane,buttheprocessoffindingmeaningineachsectionisdifferentbecause

ofthescissionthecommaaddsinLag.Thedifferencesbetweenthesectionscanbeunderstoodasthree

dialectical sets: First, Lag and Cellophane represent the made thing and the process of making,respectively.Second,LagandCellophanerevealthedialecticofforgettingandremembering.Third,

thetwochapters correspond toa syntheticnewBody that entailsboth reference and recombination.

Eachofthesedialecticspointsnottoanoppositionbetweenarestrictedandageneraleconomy,butto

anoscillatorysynthesisbetweenmethodsofmakingmeaningthatwalksthethinlinebetweenthelucidandtheludic.

Atreatisemadeofself-referential,andthusself-contained,languagegames, Lagclosesinonitself:

Lag presents a series of statements whose phrasal nature is determined wholly by the

comma. Although their field of reference is a tangible world of social issues, thesesegmentsinterweavewithdevicesofdeliberateartifice:puns,palindromes,anagramsand

numbers that carry a further linguistic disposition towards self-reference and micro

constitutionsoutsideintention.(BDbackcover)

Lagmarksthefinaleofpopularlanguage(36),makingwordsworkontheirown,assmall(orlarge)machine[s]madeofwords(WilliamCarlosWilliams)thatfoldintoeachotherandobeythelogicof

the larger poem-world without referencing a second-order trajectory of authorial meaning orintentionality.Lagisanamalgamationofdisparateentitiesthatarestrungtogetherwithalighthand

into a web of excessive language. Its self-referential character calls attention to the materiality of

words, removing their use-value (meaning) and placing them within the non-exchange of generaleconomy,wheresupply exceedsdemand.Phrases inLagthatexplainitssystemincludetheopening

phrase, Sentence not sentence (11), which serves as a succinct preamble to an endless string of

decontextualizedclauses.Lagmovesawayfromtheauthorsintentionality,statingstackedintentions


26/64

seem inevitably vicious (19)while at thesame time requiringexchangebecause understandingbyitselfgoeswrong(18).Lagacknowledgesthatwefragmentknowledgetoprovoke(66)andusesa

vocabulary of excess, includingwords like membrane, throwup, tampon, and pyrrhic(11-

119).McCafferysexcessivelanguageandfragmentationinLagarecraftedwasteproductsoflanguage(likeFrankStellasShardsseries,whichfeaturescarefullypaintedrecycledscrapmetal).Wordgroups

inLag aremade thingswithoutcontexts,wasteproductsofthematerialityoflanguagebrought into

viewwithreflectiveliterarydevicesandself-conscioustextualsignification.

IncontrasttoLagsfocusonmateriality,Cellophanefocusesonprocess.Thesetwosystemsarenot

opposed, just asgeneral andrestrictive economiesstandnotinoppositionbutratherinadialecticalrelationship.McCafferywritesinNorthofIntention:

IwanttomakeclearthatImnotproposinggeneralasanalternativetorestricted.One

cannotreplacetheotherbecausetheirrelationshipisnotoneofmutualexclusion.Inmostcaseswewillfindgeneraleconomyasasuppressedorignoredpresencewithinthesceneof

writing that tendstoemergebywayofrupturewithintherestricted,puttingintoquestion

theconceptualcontrolsthatproduceawritingofusevaluewithitsprivilegingofmeaningasanecessaryproductionandevaluateddestination.(203)

Asrestrictedandgeneraleconomiesstandinanon-exclusionarydialectic,sodo LagandCellophanewith their separate but subtly synthesized disjunctions.Lag and Cellophane are not mapped onto

restricted versus general; both exist within the general economy of excess productionlanguage

withouttransparentmeaning.Eachofthetwosystemssimplyshowsadifferentmethodofengagingexcess.IndialecticaloppositiontoLagsmateriality,Cellophaneprovidesanundifferentiatedprocess

thatconstantlyrejectsitsfragmentarymeanings.Cellophaneisanexpulsionandrevisiting:thereader

approacheseachwordseekingaconnection,howeversmall, tothewordsbeforeandafterit,seekingsome form ofnarrative.Cellophane focuses on this atomisticmeaning-making, forcing thereaders

eyes and mind to flicker between small, undifferentiatedphrases in search of local narrativewhere

semanticphrases[are] filled and emptied (backcover).Self-referential literarydevices are notas

populousinCellophane.Theemphasisisontheprocessofunderstandingratherthanonthewordsasproducts;wordsareforcedtothenon-surfaceofadecontextualizedflow.

Cellophanes productive flow andLags products correspond to a theory of excess Time, whereCellophanes form reveals a constant remembering andLags involves forgetting.Cellophane is a

continuum of time understood as force and appearing in the incessant recombinations of a finite

vocabulary(backcover).Itslower-case,unpunctuatedstringsofwordsforcethereadertotraipsebackand forth from one strand of meaning to another, attempting to carry as much meaning along as

possible in case he or she finds a context. The successful reading of Cellophane involves a pure

accumulationandsynthesisofmeaning;andeventhen,context isnotguaranteed.Meaningis falselyholisticthere is no way to assimilate the incessant recombinations, yet the readers mind

appreciatedthenecessityofassimilationforcontextualizationandmeaning.Incontrast,Lagsmeaningisastackingofopaqueobjectsontooneanotheritresistsalldrivestoaccumulatedmeaning(backcover) and requires the reader to forget each phrase as the next one appears. Meaning is purely

atomistic;eachphrasestandsaloneasitsentirenarrative.In Cellophane,thereaderisexhaustedwith

unbearablememory(aNietzscheandigestivedisorder)andforcedtoengageacontinuumoflanguage

withnosemanticgridtodelineatefragmentarymeanings.InLag,thereaderisforcedtoforgetinordertounderstand thenext phrases self-referentiality. Time exists in anexcessof remembering andan

excessofforgetting,lendingthereadernosenseofpresentcontextorstructuralsecurity.


27/64

ThethirddialecticalrelationshipbetweenLagandCellophane isthatof referenceandrecombinationwithin thebody.Both entitiesare self-sufficient,material, time-limitedflowsofexcesssignification,

but each entity has a different way of using linguistic material. Lag is full of puns, anagrams,

instructions, and other devices that use words in an algebraic way, such as mass debate notmasturbate(84),constructasreflection(67),eleventhirteensevenonesixfour(19),orfromT

blocktoFcelltheprocesscentersinthevictim(105).Lagscompositionisself-referential,notonly

inthatitusespunsthatrecyclemeaning,butalsointhatitexplainsitsowncreationinphraseslikeconstructas reflection(67), throughbodypartsthisstaysgrammatical(24),and thefirstphrase,

Sentencenota sentence(11).Lag is self-containedandself-conscious, like abodylooking into a

mirror to determine whether its configuration is accurate.Cellophane, in contrast, is like a bodywithout self-awareness. It doesnot have the power toforgetortoexamine itself; itmerelyhas the

powertolive.Cellophanesgeneticmaterialislanguage,anditssetoflinguisticgenescombinetoform

awholetoowide-rangingtoassimilate.Cellophanedoesnotstaygrammaticalasabody;instead,its

partsare,asMcCafferydescribes,rhizomatic(backcover),whereasLagsbodyislikethenightsky:stars are created and disappear on their own timescale, but the reader (of the sky or the page)

sometimesattributesmeaningstocertainperspectivallocationsofstars(constellations).

TheBlackDebtis,likeTheMartyrologyandtheworksofbillbissett,anexcessiveflowoflanguage

thathighlightsthematerialityandmobilityofthewordandtheverging-on-uselessnessofalanguageof

restrictiveeconomy.Therecombinant,paragrammatic,process-oriented,memory-dependentnatureoflanguageinCellophanecanbecontrastedtothereflective,material,self-conscious,forgettingofLag,

butbothofthesechaptersofTheBlackDebtcallattentiontotheopacityoflanguageanditsabilitiesto

beusedinwaysotherthanthosearestrictiveeconomyoflanguagemakesavailable.

McCaffery,Steve.,TheBlackDebt(NightwoodEditions1989).

BillBissett:AWritingOutsideWriting,NorthofIntention(RoofBooks,2000).93-106

DiminishedReferenceandtheModelReader,NorthofIntention(RoofBooks,2000).13-29

TheElsewhereofMeaning,NorthofIntention(RoofBooks,2000).170-177

LanguageWriting:fromProductivetoLibidinalEconomy,NorthofIntention(RoofBooks,2000).143-

158

LyricsLarynx,NorthofIntention(RoofBooks,2000).178-184

TheMartyrologyasParagramNorthofIntention(RoofBooks,2000).58-76

MichaelPalmersLANGUAGEoflanguage,NorthofIntention(RoofBooks,2000).44-53

WritingasaGeneralEconomy,NorthofIntention(RoofBooks,2000).201-221


28/64

ThePlasticityofPoetry

ThewordscreatearoundmeanewatmosphereinwhichImove,astrangerandtormented.

MariamaB, SoLongaLetter

Japanese architect Arakawa and his partner, poet Madeline Gins, lead a pair of prospectivehomeowners through a house that consists of 2400 square feetofcloth lying low to the ground.

Entering thehouse, thevisitorsfindthatinordertodoanythingmove,sitonfurniture,cookthey

mustconstantlyliftthefabricroofofthehousehighenoughovertheirheadstoslitherthroughthespace.Oneofthemobserves,Roomsformdependingonhowwemove.IfIbenddown,Inearlylose

theroom.2ThisinterdependencyofagentandarchitectureischaracteristicofArakawaswork,which

consistentlyexploresthetheoreticalproblemsofbeingabodyinspace.Questionsofhowoneoccupiesspace, howone affects and isaffected by architecture,move to the fore.Abuilding isnolongera

dwelling-space,butasiteofreciprocalbecoming.

Arakawas and Gins collaborations highlight the key feature of the plastic arts with regard to a

persons use of space. Specifically, they remind us of architectures special relationship to thetraditional artistic categories of nebeneinander and nacheinander (simultaneity and succession).

Traditionally,paintingisplacedunderthecategoryofsimultaneity,sinceitsupposedlyaffectsusallatonce,whilemusicisplacedunderthecategoryofsuccession,sinceitsupposedlyaffectsusonlyasa

pure flow of time. 3 In contrast, the plastic arts reveal the co-implication of these categories by

demanding that the subject change her use of her environment, thus introducing a dimension oftemporalsuccessionalongwiththatofspatialsimultaneity.

Architectureandsculpturerequiresomespecialactionof theirobserver;Idonotmerelywitnessandremember,butusethoseskillsinmyinteractionwithspaces.Inabuilding,Imustfollowthearchitects

design.Confrontedbyasculptureinamuseum,Imustchangemypathinordertoseeitoravoidit.I

dothisallthetimeanywayIsee,index,andremembermysurroundingsinordertonegotiatethem.Arakawas and Gins productions reinforce this condition by disrupting everyday life and making

seemingly simple movements in space impossible or very difficult. In their sites of Reversible

Destiny,housesareinternallyrupturedbyfaketopographies,sothattogettothekitchenonemust

crossthechasmofthelivingroom,ortogettothebathroomonemusttiptoearoundthemountaininthebedroom.4Conventionalarchitecturealsoplaysthisgame:stairslocatedinan inconvenientplace

urgemetousetheelevator;Idisruptaroombymovingachairthatisinmyway.Theplasticartsare

therefore about a bodys movement through a charged space, where the movement of temporalsuccessionnecessarilycompromisesthespatialsimultaneity.

WhatIwanttotheorizeundertheheadingofplasticityisthusthoseaestheticfeaturesthatreinforce

the concomitance of space and time, simultaneity and succession. Some visually complex poems,includingsuchcontroversialworksasSusanHowesSingularitiesandSteveMcCafferysCarnival,are

examplesofplasticpoetrybecausetheymanipulatebothmyspatialexperienceofthebook-pageandthewaythatItemporallymovethroughitorrememberit.Thesevisualpoemsconsistofscatteredword

fragmentsonthepagethatrequirethereadertochoosepathsthatdonotnecessarilyrunfromthetop

lefttothebottomrightofthepage.Thereadermustslowlysoundoutthephoneticfragmentsofthepoem,whichoftencannotbevoiceduntillettersorpartsoflettersarerecognized.Thereadingofthe

poemcanonlyextendtemporallyinsofarasitpiecestogetherspatialmarksandvice-versa.Ofcourse,

thisinterdependencyofspaceandtimecharacterizesallreading,butthedistinctivetraitofHowesand


29/64

McCafferysaforementionedpoemsisthattheyreinforcethiscondition.Thereaderandthepoemarecaught ina reciprocal becoming,wherethe poembecomes themap ofthe readers travels, and the

readerisforcedtotakecertainpathsduetothestructureofthepoem.Wearefacedwithpagesthat

seemmore like construction sites than like neutral canvases, texts thatmanipulateandmislead thereader and open themselvestomultiplereadings that eschewa straight, score-likepoeticmusicality.

Thiswayofproducingpoetryfromthematerialityoflanguageandofreadingitfrominsideitsown

syntactical structuresrequires a theoryofplasticity that can describeand explainthe significanceofpoetic devices such as extreme fragmentation and non-linear text. The aim of this essay is thus to

delineatewhat a theory ofplasticitycan contributeto thereading ofpoetry. In particular, Iwant to

demonstratehowsuchatheoryissuitedtoanalyzeavant-gardevisualpoemsthathavenotyetbeenproperlyaddressedontheirownterms.

Historically, plasticpoetryhasbeenconflatedwith terms like concretepoetry,calligrams,and

visualpoetry.Thetermmostoftendenotespoetrythathassimplybeenmadeofmaterialsotherthanpaper,likethepoeminscribedinconcreteonbpNichollaneinToronto,5orthesculpturalpoemsofIan

HamiltonFinlay.However,thematerialthree-dimensionalityofpoemsshouldnotautomaticallygrant

themthestatusofplasticpoetry.Thistermmustbereservedforworksthatdisruptthereadersvirtualfieldin thesameway thatarchitectureandsculpturedisruptanactivepersonsreal,physicalfield.A

plasticpoemmustchangethereadingspaceinsuchawaythattheonewhoreadsisforcedtomake

amendsfornewstructuresinhisorhervirtualpath.Thewordsonapagemustbeplasticinvirtualspace as architecture and sculpture are plastic in real space. In other words, plastic artsdisrupt an

agentsspace:tohaveplasticpoetrywemustdisruptthereadersspace.Iwillarguethatthisrupture

doesnotstemfrom,asintheordinaryplasticarts,arealphysicaloccupationofspace,butratherfromthedisruptionofthevirtualspacethatonemovesthroughwhenreadingapoem.

Tounderstandwhatavirtualreadingspaceiswemustfurtheranalyzemyproposedanalogybetweentheplastic arts and plasticpoetry.Avant-gardeworksofplasticartcall attention to thewayweuse

spaceevery day.Wesee and remember our physical surroundings inorder torecallthem forfuture

occupation.ArakawasandGinsprojectsremindusofthisdiurnalactivitybydisruptingit.Plastic

poetryworksinasimilar,albeitmorecomplex,way,byreinforcingelementaryconditionsofreading.Whenwereadanytext,theinterplayofwords,letters,fonts,ink,andpaperalreadyrequireswork:real

physicalandmentalefforttomakemeaning.Thisprocessofmakingmeaningisalreadyvirtual,inthe

sensethatmeaningisneveractualbutrequiresmemoryandexpectationinordertobeformedinthefirstplace.Thegearsofmemoryandexpectationarealreadyatworkinsyntaxandthusoperatequietly

beneathourunderstandingofmeaning.Forexample,wereadthenewspaperwithoutthinkingaboutthe

process of gathering sense from printed language. Plastic poetry, however, calls attention to thisprocessin twoways.First,sinceplasticpoetry usually hasa fragmentary visualcomponent, itcalls

attentiontothephysicalityofreading.Thisforcesthereadertorecognizethat thereismorethanonelevel at work inreading.Reading isnot an immediateor transparent process, but aphysicaleffort.Second, plasticpoetry interfereswithsyntactical continuity by disruptingwhat thereader expectsto

find,orbysuspendinghermemoryofawordbybreakingthewordintounrecognizablefragments.Bythusdisruptingthereadingprocess,plasticpoetrycallsattentiontothewayareaderusesthevirtualspace of memory to syntactically organize fragments of language into meaning. Like experimental

architecture,thepoetryIdesignateasplasticcallsattentiontothesyntacticalorganizationofspace

andtime(intermsofthephysicalityofthepageandthevirtualityofthereadersmemory)thatalready

underlieseverymomentofactionandthought.6

In order to explore the virtual reading spaces of plastic poetry, some assumptions that underlie

historicaldiscussionsofvisualpoetrymustbediscarded.Asmentionedabove,poetshavetraditionally


30/64

called poems plastic when theyaremade ofmaterialsother than paper.However, theseconcretepiecesdo not radicallyalter thewaywethink aboutpoetrythewordswe encounter inthe poems

directly relate to the form of the spaces inwhich the poems are situated, thereby reducing three-

dimensional poetry to a planar reading space (top to bottom, left to right). More crucially, thesupposedlyplasticpoetryisreducedtowhatIwillcallacalligraphicconceptualspace.7Acalligramis

apoeminwhichtheoutlineofashapeisfilledwithwordsthatdescribethatshape,asinGuillaume

ApollinairesIlPleut

(ItRains),inwhichwordsdescribingrainpourdownthepage.Thecalligramsplayfulnessissimplyajoke,andoncethereadergetsit,thecalligramhasoperatedaslittlemore

thananideogram,portrayingbuthardlyproblematizingtherelationshipbetweensignifierandsignified.

The calligraphic element traps the reader in a conventional mimetic space; the direct relationshipbetween thewords and theirconfigurationonthepagemakes thepoem flat,notplastic.Thereader

doesnotmovethroughanything;assoonasheorsherecognizestherelationshipbetweenthepicture

andthepoem,whatevervirtualspacethewordsmighthavecreatedisdeflated.WhenIassertthatmany

realmaterialpoemsaremerelycalligraphic,Imeanthattheircontentcloselymimicstheirform.Theirmaterial,three-dimensionalexistenceisechoedorexplainedinthewordsusedinthepoem,providinga

directrelationshipbetweenformandcontent.

A calligrams self-referentiality prevents the reader from entering a virtual plastic space. The

productionofmeaningisconstrainedbytheobviousrelationbetweenthepoemsphysicalformatand

itsregimented readingsequence.Thereisnosyntactical(virtual)spaceforthereadertoexplore; thereaderisnotforcedtohesitatebetweenthememoriesandpotentialitiesofmeaning.Whentherelation

betweentheformandthecontentbecomesapparent,thecalligramclosesitselfoff.Calligraphicpoems

orchestratethetitle,format,andcontentofapieceintoasingleideographicmoment.

Incontrast,aplasticpoemallowsforplayinthevirtualspaceofthereadersmind.Ituseswordsas

things,breakingthemopenandpairingthemtogether.Thefragmentaryplasticpoemneverclosesitselfoff,itneverclapsshut,itneverusesformtodirectlymimiccontent.Rather,itentanglesthereaderina

webofundeterminedsyntacticalrelations.Byundetermined,Imeanthatthereadercanchoosefrom

manypossible syntactical paths. She is not forced to follow just one path thatmakes sense;many

methods and routes make sense in amore complexway than linear syntax does.The presence ofmultiplesimultaneouspossibilitiesi.e.,multi-linearityallowsforaconstantopeningofnewpathsin

thepoemsfield.Thisisnottosaythatthepoemspathsareundeterminedfromtheperspectiveof

theauthor,whocalculatesatleastsomeofthepossiblereadingsequences.

Unlikethecalligram,theplasticpoemmakesthereaderawareof themnemonicactivityofgrouping

fragments8 into letters, letters into syntax, and syntax into narrative. The calligram testifies to the

tensionbetweenthealphabeticwordandthethingitdenotes.Theplasticpoemgoesfurther,revealing

themechanismofmeaningasdependentonthereadersownmemory.Asareaderseyetraversesthe

page,thescatteredmaterialsoflanguagebecomemeaningfulonlyinthecombinationsperformedandenabled by the readers memory. What is at stake in the plastic poem is not merely a matter of

typographyorrepresentationinlanguage,butthelogicofsyntaxanditsrelationtomemory.Consequently,thesecondassumptionthatmustbediscardedisthatthevalueofthemeaningofa

poeminheresinschemasofanalogy,correspondence,oraestheticclosure,wheretheconnotationsand

denotationsofthewordsinthepoemreflecttheworld,theauthorsemotions,ortheformofthepoem

itself.Plasticpoetryplacesthevalueofmeaninginthetracksofthereaderratherthansolelyinwhat

thereader accumulateson hertravels.Thereare twositesofmeaning intheplasticpoem.First,the

reader accumulates fragmentsoftraditionallymeaningfulwordsand rearranges them toformmicro-

narrativesorimpressionsoftheworksoverallsubject.Second,thereaderstravelsthroughthepoem


31/64

becomemeaningfulin themselves,sinceevery timethereader approachesthework adifferentpathbecomeslegible.Evenifthereadershouldencounteronlynonsense,thelabyrinthoffragmentedwords

itselfbecomesmeaningful(ifonlybecausetakingacertainpathwillleadtononsense,thuswarningthe

reader to choosea differentone).This secondkind ofmeaning is purely syntactical, perceptual,orperformative, but is based in a logic of syntax that we always presupposewhenwedescribe how

languagemeans.

A third assumption thatmust bediscarded for a theoryof plastic poetry toemerge is the idea that

readingnecessarilytakesplaceinatemporallylinearorder(thenacheinanderofmusic).Whetherthis

linearityprogressesfromthetopleft-handcornerofthepagetothebottomright-handcorner,orinanyothersingulardirection,isirrelevant.Thesingularityofthedirectionconfinesthepoemsmeaning,and

thereaderspath,toaspecifictrajectory.Aswelearntoread,whateverthesyntaxandtypographymay

be with respect toour native language,we learn the logicofsyntax.The organizationalmodels of

syntaxwelearnneithermimicrealthoughtnorforceareadertonegotiatethelanguageafterlearningthelogicorlanguage,onecanbecontentedlyconfinedinitsunicursalsystem.Plasticpoetrydefiesthe

readers efforts to read smoothly over the text. In his early essay Thoughts Measure, Charles

Bernsteinsuggestswhateffectssuchsyntacticalcomplicationscanhaveonourconceptionofpoetry.Hewrites:

Thinking as the conceptual basis of literary production suggests the possibilities forleaps, jumps, fissures, repetition, bridges, schisms,colloquialisms, trainsofassociations,

andmemory.9

Byallowing theseeffectstoshowupon thepage,plasticpoetryrevealsthe tensionbetweenthought

and expression, calling into question the way that we represent thoughtwhile offering a complex

impression of the subject of the poem. Evenmeanings accumulated on ones journey through theplasticpoemdonotarrangethemselvesinneatlines,butmimictheschisms,reservations,mnemonic

connections,andescaperoutesatworkinanyandeveryactivityofthinking.

PoemssuchasCharlesBernsteinsTheLivesoftheTollTakerscallthereadersattentiontohisorherownreading.ThisopacityoflanguagereachesitspeakinacomicwaytypicalofBernsteininthe

followingexcerpt:

(g

houlis

hnessisit sownrewa

rd).10

Reading(gandtraversingthepagetohoulisthwartsthereader;eventhemerepronunciationof

these fragments is impossible until one reaches hness, which in itself is not pronounceable. Thereadermust confront each fragment,butalsorace tofind itscomponentsin ordertomake soundormeaning.Here,soundandmeaningaresecondarytosightandhesitation,makingthereaderawareof

the gaps inher own expectations.While the L=A=N=G=U=A=G=Epoetsoften write inclichs or

commercial language but twist the phrases to reveal the unreflected way that we use language in

everydaylife(virtueisitsownreward),Bernsteinspoemgoesfurtherthanusualbydisruptingthewords themselves. Bernstein here forces the readers eyes to hop from one line to the next. The

physicaldifficultyofjoiningthelettersintowordsdelaysthereadersarticulationofthemandthereby

delaysherunderstandingoftheirmeaning.Memoryandhesitationformavirtualmentalspacefora


32/64

rangeof interpretivepossibilities toco-exist,allowing thereadertosee thematerialityofthewrittenwordandtherangeofpossibilitiesandlimitationsofmnemonicdevicesandsyntaxes.Thetreacherous

processofreadingbecomesitsownreward.

Surrounded by the fragmentary, non-linear text of a plastic poem, the reader must piece together

meaningateventhemostfundamentallevel.Thebarelylegiblewordorletterreplacesthephraseasthe

mostimportantnexusformeaning,andtheresultingmicro-narrativesarethemselvesmapsorhistoriesof the readers negotiation of the space. Plastic poetry presents the reader with visceral language.

Entrapped in the poems own space and time, the reader must make a logical sequence from the

fragments. The reader finds conventional meaningthe denotation and connotation of a wordassembled from fragmentsand also experiences the physical or syntactical meaning of reading

language.

Anexampleof this latter kindofmeaningcanbe found inCeciliaVicuasprecarios,11which are

miniature,rituallyproducedmassesofmaterial.Fivesticks,ashell,andafeatheraretiedtogetherwith

beadedthread:thismadethingisalanguagenotofwords,butofgesturesintimeandspace.Vicuas

precariousobjectsaremadeinamorephysicalwaythanweusuallythinkoflanguage,butthesyntaxalogicalrelationofthingsthatcanbeinterpretedso thatthereaderremembersthespaceandtimeof

the gesture by proxy, i.e., through the syntax itselfis there. Instead of showing where sounds

happenedintime,plasticpoemsliketheprecariosshowwheremovementhappenedinspace;ifwritingwere a record or score for sound, these objects would analogously be records and scores of

choreography.Likelinguisticpoems,thesegesturalpoemsrequirethereadertoperceiveanorderof

signifiersovertimeandtorememberhertemporaltravelsinthespaceofhermind.Insteadofrecordingtimeinspaceintheusualway,wherethepoemisaspatialscorewaitingtobefulfilledorrealizedby

oral,temporalperformance,Vicuascross-genreworksrevealthatsyntaxisalwaysbothspatialand

temporal.

Thehistoryofplasticpoetry,whilelimited,hashadat leasttwomajorfountainheads.Thetypewriter

artofSteveMcCafferyandthepainterlyhistoriogramsofSusanHoweprovideexamplesofhowpoetry

canbehavelikearchitecture,demonstratingthepropertiesofgesture,syntax,andreciprocalbecomingdescribedabove.12

SteveMcCafferysvisualpoemCarnival:Panel2 (1970-75)13bothdemandsandgeneratesatheoryof

plasticity.Carnivalwasfirstprintedasabookwithsixteenperforatedpages,whichthereadercould

removeandpostonthewallinagiant,continuoussheet.14Thepageslooklikelandscapes,withwords

weaving and circling like topographicalmaps.Dragged througha typewriter,wordsonthepagearescrambled in wavy lines, aborted in half-written sentences, and relieved by the occasional partial

paragraph. McCaffery augments the residue from the papers flamboyant excursion through the

typewriterwithrubberstamps,leavingcirclesofbarelylegibleCHANGEOFADDRESSandchainsofC.Thespacebetweenallofthesemicro-narrativesisfilledwithsmall,typewrittenletters,sothata

magma-likeflowfrom the eruptionofwordsoccupies theplanarpage.UnlikemanyofMcCafferysgraphicpoems,thereisonlyavaguerelationshipbetweenthedisruptedwords,theformofthepoem,andthetitle.Indeed,tolookfordirectrelationshipsistomissthepoint.Thetitleofthispiece keepsit

frombeingcalligraphic:dismissingtheformascarnival-likeoverlooksthepleasureofmovingthrough

thework.Theobjectiveofthetitleisnottodisorientthereaderincarnivalmadness,butrathertolead

herintotheworksmicro-narratives.McCafferywritesof Carnival:

Carnival is closer to cartography, to a diagram or topological surface than a poem or

text[It]eschewsanygeneralleft-rightorientationthatstabilizeslinearterrains,butthe


33/64

resultingtextualspaceis less labyrinthine,orrhizomaticthanstriatedlayeredwithfaultlines, fissures, blocks, apertures, dead-ends, blocked linearities, boundaries, textual

hollows,semanticgeodes,overprints,concretions,excretions.Allofthisservestoprovide

simultaneouslyamapandtheterritorymapped,ageology,andafieldinwhichcontinuouslinearsyntaxisreplacedwithdetoursandcontinuations,propellingthereader-travelerinto

morphingsandmovements.15

Theplasticityofpoetryisnotdependentonarealthree-dimensionalobjectbutisavirtualstructure

composedofthereaderscollectedsensedataasheorshemovesthroughfragmentedpoeticspaces.It

isthusahistorygeneratedby thereaderscompositeawareness,andageological recordrevealedbythefragmentscurrentpositionsonthepage.Thearrangementofpartscouldhavebeenotherwise;the

reader could have traversed them in other ways. McCaffery highlights how the discovery of the

physicalityofreadingisconcomitantwiththediscoveryofthepoemsvirtualtopologicalspace:

Possible [tensions exist] between [the] surface (page) and [the objects] on that surface

(print).Thepageceasestobeaneutralsurfaceofsupportandbecomesinsteadaspatially

interactingregion;itisgrantedtherebyametaphoricalextension.Conceivedasaspatiallysignificantunit,thepagecarriesdimensionalandgravitationalimplications. 16

Thearrangementofwordsrevealstheunderlyinggeologicalforcesastheyreactwiththetectonicsofthepage.Thetaskofthereaderisnottoformaclearunderstandingofthepoem,ortofigureoutthe

relationship between the words and their form (a relationship which may not even exist), but to

physicallytraversethepage,togiveintothepoemsmanipulationofthereaderssenseofspace.Thistraversal of the page entails a reciprocal becoming: the pages syntactical topology emergesas

precarious and historicalas the reader pieces together fragments. This is especially clear in theCarnivalPanelpoems,wherethereadermustphysicallymakethetext(bytearingoutthepagesandarrangingthem)andthenconstantly keepmakingthetext(byreadingit)atthesametimeasthetext

makesthereader(byforcinghertotravelincertainpaths). 17

WhiledistinctfromMcCafferystypewriterpoems,SusanHowesvisualpoetryalsocallsforatheoryofplasticpoetry. InHowesvisuallycomplexworks,includingThorowfromSingularities,wesee

that plasticity is about representation,althoughnotin theway that calligramsare.Howesworldof

distorted,hand-me-downinscriptionscannotbedescribedaslinearnarratives,aswordpaintings,oras directly representational calligrams. Rather, Howes interest in historical narratives entails a

linguistictopology.Thewordsonthepagereflect thecorruptibilityoftellingovertimestandard

spellingschange, typography shifts,meaningiserased, and thestorytellersviewpoint isdistorted.This tectonics of language is represented by the braided narratives and the shifting historical

perspectivesofvoicesrecordedby thepoems. Thorow shows the palimpsestofwords that result

fromHoweshistorico-textualreworkingofhersourcematerials.Abortedexpectationsleadthereaderdowndissolvingpaths.Evensound(usuallyagoodguidethroughHowespoems)seemsinsufficientto

puttogetheranythingbutuncertainnarratives.Questionsofthereliabilityofonestravelsareechoedinthepoemsownhistory,asHowedrawsonpersonalnarrativesfromtheageofAmericanPuritanism.These narratives are pervaded by the inconsistencies that stem from the temporality of the textual

archive (spelling,handwriting, typography, and paper itselfhavingchanged significantlyin thepast

twohundredyears,andthussometimesbeingillegible)andfromthemanipulationsofthetraumatized

orself-promotionalauthor(theunreliablecaptive,Thoreaussmudgedtruth).18Awarilybuiltlinguistic

artificeallowsthesepathsnotchosentoremainascaveatsinthereadersexperienceofthepoem.

Scattering asBehavior TowardRisk, another setofpoems inSingularities, also containsvisually


34/64

complexpoems.Thewords inboth Thorow and Scatteringseem thrownand scattered,andthereaderoftenhastoturnthebookaroundtoreadfromdifferentangles.Evenwhenshehasturnedthe

bookandreadallofthelines,itisnotcleartothereaderwhichorderthephrasesshouldbeputinto

formafinalnarrative.Hermemorymusttrytoremainopentonumerousreadingalternativesthatcan nevermergeintoagestalt.ThetitleScatteringasBehaviorTowardRisk,althoughnotcalligraphic,

describesthereadingprocessofthepoem.Thephraseaptlydescribestheconcomitanceofscattering

andriskinthepoemitself.Ateveryjunctureinherreadingofthepoem,thereadermustask:didImaketherightconnection,didIfindtherightfragment?Howesrupturedpoeticspacesaretheresidue

ofsyntaxes,vocabularies, andhistories thatwe thoughtwe knew. In herbookonEmilyDickinson,

Howe asks: Whose order is shut inside the structure of a sentence?19 Howes work shows the

importanceofhesitationasaquestioningofsociallyapprovedrolesandrulesforlanguage. 20Therisk

ofmisunderstandingthusalsocarriesthepossibilityofcreation.

Withthe schemaofplasticpoetry, then,wecandiscernwhatMcCaffery calls thedimensionalandgravitationalimplicationsofthepage.Thepoemmayrefertoliteraryexpectationsortoameaning

inthetraditionalsense,butthereisasmuchmeaningtobefoundinthereadersphysicaltraversalof

the page. The readers uncertain and shifting travels create a space for Howes hesitation orBernsteins fissuresa virtual space of reading inwhich memory constantly reinscribespossible

meanings, never settling on a single one. In this way, the plastic poem calls attention to the co-

implication of simultaneity and succession. The reader is forced to recognize the spatiality ofsuccessiveelementssuchasthesoundandsequenceofthewords.Sheiscaughtinamulti-linearweb

ofmaterialwords,sothatthespaceandtimeofthepoemdevelopwithregardtooneanotherasshe

traversesthepage.Thus,thereaderisforcedtoadapttothespatialityofthepoemwhilethepoemisforcedtoremainavirtualbeinginthatitexistsasopen,multiplenarrativesinthereadersmind.This

exchangebetweenthereaderandthepageiswhatIhavecalledreciprocalbecoming.Reciprocityof

becominghappensallthetimewhenoneuseslanguage.Oneconstantlynegotiatessyntacticalnormsatthesametimeasthesenormsformonesownwayofunderstandinglanguage.Buttheplasticpoem,

likeavant-gardearchitecture,forcesonefurtherthantheeverydaynegotiationsofmnemonic(temporal,

syntactical) space. Despite her compositionofmicro-narratives, the readernever finds a normative

blueprintofhertravelsinspaceandtime.Instead,themapofherreadingremainsuncertain.Thus,thepoemdoesnotsimplyconformtothereader;italsoforces,constrains,andimpedesthereadersmapof

it.

Consideringhowpoetryisplasticthatis,howthereaderinteractswiththetopologyofthepage

gives us a vocabulary for analyzing previously neglected aspectsof poetry. Although the worksof

McCaffery and Howe receive much critical attention, it is only by understanding the readersrelationship to the page that one can begin toassesswhat isatstake in their most complex visual

pieces.Mostimportantly,wethusprovideourselveswiththetoolstoexplorewhatitmeansthatthe

pageisnotaneutralsurface.Rather,itisaspatialandtemporalsitewheremacro-andmicro-historicalnarrativesaremarkedanderased,comeintobeingandpassaway.

1 Mariama B, So Long a Letter, trans. Modup Bod-Thomas (Johannesburg, South Africa: Heinemann

Publishers,1989)

2MadelineGinsandArakawa,ArchitecturalBody.(Tuscaloosa:UniversityofAlabamaPress,2002),27.The

house described here is similar to the Ubiquitous Site House pictured in Arakawa andMadeline Gins,

ReversibleDestiny(NY:GuggenheimMuseumPublications,1997),300-301.


35/64

3IborrowthesetermsfromGottholdLessings Laocon.Thecategorizationofpaintingassimultaneousand

musicassuccessivedoesnottakeintoaccounttheco-implicationofspaceandtime,wheremusicsoundsare

organized and patternedspatially and one observespartsofclassical painting inan orderdeterminedby the

positionofobjects.Thesesyntaxesofobservation entail spaceand time, simultaneityand succession,a co-implicationwhichLessingignored.NotealsothatLessingequatespaintingandsculptureassimultaneousarts

despitethefactthatsculptureincitesadifferentchoreographyfromitsobserverthanpaintingdoes.

4

SeeArakawaandMadelineGins,Architecture:SitesofReversibleDestiny(London:AcademyEditions,1994)orvisitthethemeparkinYoro,Japan.HereIamoversimplifyingsuchmodelsasTwinHouse( Reversible

Destiny270-273)andKnottedPassageHouse(RD296-297)becauseitisdifficulttoimaginesucharchitecture

withoutseeingit,buttherearemanyothermodelsthatmakeoneawareofonesbodyinspace,andthat(more

specifically)requireonetousehisorherbodyinradicallynewways.

5 Apicture of this poemcan befoundathttp://www.chbooks.com/chb/contact.html, CoachHouseBooks (9December2003)

6 At this juncture itmay beuseful todistinguishplasticpoetry from reader-response theory.Like reader-

responsetheory,atheoryofplasticitydrawsattentiontothereciprocalcreationofthetextandthereaderandto

theactive,manipulativenatureofthetextonthepage.InTheActofReading:ATheoryofAestheticResponse

(Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUP,1978),WolfgangIserwrites:Meaningmustclearlybetheproductofaninteractionbetweenthetextualsignalsandthereaders

act of comprehension. The reader cannot detach himself from such an interaction; on the

contrary, the activity stimulated in himwill link him to the text and induce him to create the

conditionsnecessaryfortheeffectivenessofthattext.(10)

ItisthisreciprocalbecomingofthereaderandthetextthatIwishtotakeupthroughtheanalogywiththeplastic

arts.However,Iseroperateswithathematiclevelofmeaning.Thatis,hefocusesontheimagesthetextbringstomind,thenarrativeittells,theargumentsitmakesthroughitsplotandcharacters.Atheoryoftheplastictext

bringsreader-responsetheorytobearonthesyntacticlevelofmeaning.Thereadermustphysicallystruggleto

readtheillegiblepage,gatheritemsthatlookliketheymightmakesense,andmakesenseoutofthemeven

whilethepresentationofthepoemonthepagecallsattentiontothefactthateverydecisionthereadermakesis

undecidable.IfwethinkofIserstheorywithregardtothelevelofsyntacticalmeaningthatplasticityendeavors

toaddress,hisemploymentofthetermvirtualseemstosupplementthemeaningIdescribeabove.

Iserwrites(myemphasis):

Theliteraryworkhastwopoles,whichwemightcalltheartisticandtheaesthetic:theartistic

poleistheauthorstextandtheaestheticistherealizationaccomplishedbythereader.Inviewof

this polarity, it is clear that the work itself cannot be identical with the text or with the

concretization,butmustbesituatedsomewherebetweenthetwo.Itmustinevitablybevirtualin

character,asitcannotbereducedtotherealityofthetextortothesubjectivityofthereader,andit

isfromthisvirtualitythatitderivesitsdynamism.(21)

IserseemstomeanvirtualinthesenseIamusingit,thatis,virtualasnon-actual.Theworkitselfdoesnot

simplyexistintherealityofthetextortheactualreader,butistheunstableproductofthereadersinteraction

Documents

Articulating Space