2012-12-23
the Modern bird
Everybody loves a martyr in
blue pajamas, throwing up in her white, white house. Your fault
her cakes won't rise and birds find the windows violently.
the Modern bird
a street
there is
where strange birds purr
***
BIRDPILE.
"BIRDPILE" in flight? or
grounded (dead)?
Meaning
brutally dragged in.
2012-12-11
2012-12-03
2012-11-06
New World Translations
"I fever I fever I fever I fever I"
Alto Poepjes, Holland, 1995
Translated by Daniel Bailey
(via New World Poetry)
2012-10-25
Reading
"[W]hen we are dealing with things like racism or identity as forged by race and ethnicity, we're not allowed room to feel more than one emotion. We can't feel disgust AND delight. We can't take something seriously and joke about it without one reaction canceling out or beating the snot out of the other. And that shit is alienating."
~Jenny Zhang, via Coldfront
Or, having a woman's body. or being the encapsulated cells of impression. or being the shape of tables stacked on other tables, the correct perspective being the one where nothing slides.
2012-10-19
New World Translations
Puromunaado2
Season is glove is movement
report
(oh!) wait flowers—
faaaddddiiinnnng
afternoon 3ohclock
not
even brown, gray
(let you in?...)
[eye]<--hehe, love is
probably not a bug or an eyelid
also not a promise given this abundant treasure
Chika Sagawa (1911-1935), Japan
(anti)-translated by Sawako Nakayasu, 2011
2012-09-28
(mis)Reading
"Only the enclosure permits the bird to exist"
as
Only the enclosure permits the poem to exist.
(from Brent Cunningham, "Bird & Forest," The Arcadia Project: North American Postmodern Pastoral)
2012-09-18
"Believe the birds."
"...not the thing presented," (i.e. the poem) "but that which is represented by the thing, shall be the source of the pleasure." The thing the poem represents. "In this sense nature itself is to a religious observer the art of God." If we hope to create poems which represent the things we deem representable. Language or action, meaning or none. We are invested either way, simply by taking a breath.
"...and for the same cause art itself might be defined as of a middle quality between a thought and a thing," (what exists between the sign and the signifier, anyway?!...) "or, as I said before, the union and reconciliation of that which is nature with that which is exclusively human." We create art that is beyond ourselves, beyond pulse, blood, skin. If we create something between Nature and ourselves, and god creates Nature,...what does he/she have to reconcile, anyway? What is on the other side of god/nature?
Is it temporary. Is it even meaningless?
"Poet, / Be like God."
2012-09-14
(mis)Reading
"My slowness of perception assumes loss."
as
"My slowness of perception assumes nothing."
*
Read correctly:
Everything is an omen for everything will happen.
Dark house standing in a darker field.
//
The city falling does not stop at my skin. The weather and the / people are within me--my slow motion mania can do nothing, my / crouch end and my bow bells my highgate and my hammersmith. / my life. my creature.
2012-09-07
Carrying bodies
i’ve been
trying to move away from the word “feeling” for a long time. poems that have
feelings in them. it’s terrible, or at least i tell myself i should think so.
and some kind of dichotomy has set itself up in my head, where a poem focused
on feeling something can’t possibly also be focused on language. and really all
i have to do to cause myself to stumble right now is to look at any recent
piece that i’ve read and loved and recognize not only the immense swell of
things that takes place in my body upon that reading, but also how carefully
these poems still acknowledge and engage and are built directly into and from
language.
i’ve spent too
many years now confusing feeling with
meaning, or just forgetting that
they both exist and are two separate—sometimes inclusive but certainly exclusive
as well—entities. it is a great thing to realize that once engagement between
author & reader begins, or poem & reader, and the cultivation of
meaning is attempted in that engagement, that feelings are appropriate and
necessary and desired. that’s just it: i don’t want a poem to make sense for
me. to appear as if it doesn’t want me to do any work for that. and therein
lies my recognition this morning that neither do i want a poem to express
feelings for me (i can do that myself) or to tell me specifically how to feel
or what to feel. emotions (and i guess here i am talking about subjectivity,
and thinking about Pound’s call for emotion
and then Zukofsky’s call for objective
emotion) should not be the attempt of the poet. if you sit down to write a
poem because you’re feeling emotional, it will probably be terrible. i will
give Wordsworth credit for recognizing the need for recollection and
tranquility post-spontaneous overflow. but Wordsworth also wants to tell me how
good poems should make me feel, and maybe even what to feel those feelings
about, and even directs my language toward a limited realm of the vernacular (i’m
not even sure what ordinary people
means). the language i appreciate and am inspired by and cherish is that
which, though it certainly excites in me a multitude of reactions and emotions,
doesn’t talk to me about feelings and sense and what it’s doing and why it’s
doing it. it does not guide me in an identical, shared emotion. it feels human
but does not point directly to the human who made it, “the poem stands alone,”
to quote a recent letter from a friend. Also from that letter: “subjective
emotion in a poem is dangerous because the author is shoving too much of
herself directly into/onto the work, which is then shoved onto/into the reader,
which may be a lot to bear.”
my favorite: “there doesn’t need to be—can’t be—any evidence of this
particular poet having written it, because that then creates a certain sort of
pedestal in the work, an imbalance in the relationship between reader and
writer, which could be a tipping point.” So to try and answer a question, i do
prefer a constructed thing, a poem
that reminds me i am a human and that poetry necessarily comes from bodies,
though i prefer to carry such weight through the language.
2012-08-31
Reading
Say this may speaking
Trying to get at the core of a phrase, not by expressing it
exactly, perfectly…certainly there’s a perfection Kim is after though it’s not
grammatical or institutional but rather elemental, emotional—perfection in
exact expression, not duplication or imitation (ability to be duplicated, imitated), not the correctness of a phrase
but that moment when you’re first becoming aware of what you’re trying to say before you've said it. of the space in which you attempt to understand something in multiple languages, even, before you can say
it properly, before you could build such a phrase on your own. the moment of
understanding before speaking, which can be a very long moment when you’re
entering a new language. [or attempting to more fully inhabit one’s own body]
(Penury, Myung Mi Kim, page 11)
2012-08-25
Reading
"I don't think that 'possible readers' are really the context
in which poetry is written. For myself it's never been the case. If one plays
to the gallery in that way, I think it's extraordinarily distracting. The whole
performance of writing then becomes some sort of odd entertainment of persons
one never meets and probably would be embarrassed to meet in any case. So I'm
only interested in what I can articulate with the things given me as
confrontation. I can't worry about what it costs me. I don't think any man
writing can worry about what the act of writing costs him, even though at times
he is very aware of it."
Still
thinking about costs, motivations, interactions…
(from the Paris Review, "The Art of Poetry No. 10," an interview with Robert Creeley)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)