langauge poets attack my self esteem

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

so i should like these guys, but i have been comforting myself with auden and bogan and bishop and gunn and carver, im not bragging-feel like im too stupid to get the whacked out fucked up theory heavy stuff anymore. so tell me about them and tell me im not lazy and/or stupid

― anthony easton (anthony), Monday, 2 June 2003 17:39 (twenty-one years ago)

perverted by L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E

(haha I've been reading stevens, myself.)

― Ess Kay (esskay), Monday, 2 June 2003 17:56 (twenty-one years ago)

Bishop and Auden are langpos in disguise and without all the issues. Carry on.

― Chris P (Chris P), Monday, 2 June 2003 18:02 (twenty-one years ago)

anthony, don't waste your time on those so-and-sos (the language poets).

― Rockist Scientist, Monday, 2 June 2003 20:01 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.jacket.zip.com.au/jacket02/graphics02/bernstandrews02.jpg

"Can you believe the backward folks on this ILX site?"

― Rockist Scientist, Monday, 2 June 2003 22:55 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh, whatever. There are more langpos out there than those two.

― Chris P (Chris P), Monday, 2 June 2003 23:00 (twenty-one years ago)

I know, I just did a lazy google search. It's not really a bad picture.

― Rockist Scientist, Monday, 2 June 2003 23:03 (twenty-one years ago)

I used to be a little obsessed with this stuff, in a negative way. I even have a letter and note from Charles Bernstein responding to my comments on his poetry. (At least he was nice enough to write back.)

― Rockist Scientist, Monday, 2 June 2003 23:04 (twenty-one years ago)

So what were your comments?

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 00:31 (twenty-one years ago)

I quoted something from a Brion Gysin interview about how some of his cut up experiments came up with things that were unreadable, which would actually give him unpleasant feelings to read. I asked Bernstein if he thought any of his own poetry was unreadable, and if maybe it could cause unpleasant side effects. Basically, he said, no he didn't consider it unreadable, but at the same time, he wasn't sure what Gysin might have meant by using that term. He also thought my use of the term "side effects" was funny and wondered how seriously I meant it.

I think there were some other things. Maybe I will dig out his responses later to see if I can figure out what else I asked. I was in college at the time. I don't think what I wrote him was particularly brilliant, and most of the theoretical stuff just went past me (as it still does, though I am much more suspicious of it than I was then). To some of my questions he said, I've already discussed this extensively, so read some of that first, and then if you still have questions, write back, which was reasonable enough.

― Rockist Scientist, Tuesday, 3 June 2003 00:43 (twenty-one years ago)

This would have been around 1983-85, incidentally, to give you some context of what he would have published by that point. I think his latest book was something like Stigma or Controlling Interests.

― Rockist Scientist, Tuesday, 3 June 2003 00:45 (twenty-one years ago)

See, the way "unreadable" is used is interesting, since it rarely means, you know, "unreadable". Most people use it to mean "something I don't want to read" or even "something that won't give me what I'm looking for in a text".

Anyway langpo helps you figure out what you want a text to do, and that is why you should read it, Anthony: because some of it is unreadable. (Or is it?)

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 00:52 (twenty-one years ago)

It looks like I was initially asking about something Bernstein had said in an article about Jackson MacLow (who I kind of liked at the time--I did start out sympathetic to this stuff generally). I don't remember specifically what that was about. He mentions essays in various places, and the L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E Book, but also says I'd be better off looking at "the actual work" and recommends the sampler that appeared in Paris Review (#86, Winter 1982), that he had edited.

And then later, in a shorter note: "I don't know to what degree you have a sense of humor about the letter you sent--but I had to take it (in part) that way: 'I wonder about the side-effects of your writing': you sound a little like a Burroughs character after a session w/ Dr. Benway. I don't, by the way, consider my writing 'unreadable' in the sense Burroughs presumably means. . . Happy [ier!] reading to you--"

I guess it was Burroughs that I had quoted. "Happy" has a little arrow pointing to "ier!"

― Rockist Scientist, Tuesday, 3 June 2003 10:39 (twenty-one years ago)

I didn't even hear about "language poetry" until about three years ago. I haven't read any, to my knowledge, but unless I'm misunderstanding its intentions, it's always seemed like something I would like. The kind of poetry I want to read = poetry that uses language in interesting, unusual ways (with a touch of the nonsensical) to evoke moods and sensations rather than to effect rational, sober philosophies.

― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 14:53 (twenty-one years ago)

I wouldn't say that language poetry is particularly interested in evoking moods and sensations. A lot of poetry tries to use language in interesting, unusal ways, but many of the language poets are particularly interested in exploring the way meaning is generated, or something like that. How language operating outside conventional bounds can nevertheless be meaningful, and how readers can participate in that.

I am not trying to convince you not to look at it, however. Ron Silliman's In the American Tree seems like one of the most representative collections. From the Other Side of the Century also includes a variety of this material, though it's not soley devoted to language poetry. Maybe someone who actually likes it can recommend more recent starting points.

― Rockist Scientist, Tuesday, 3 June 2003 15:03 (twenty-one years ago)

Actually probably the best place to start these days is Silliman's blog of poetry criticism, http://ronsilliman.blogspot.com/

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 3 June 2003 15:50 (twenty-one years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.