Saturday, January 27, 2007

Out of Manes?


for Gregg Biglieri & Judith Goldman...
sleepy with democarcy
vigilant at 24 frames per second

"Horses: who will do it? out of manes?..."
~ Louis Zukofsky

The history of Spirit is a flicker-bird
Or rather, a flick
Whose shadow crosses this flimsy narrative framework
For a twenty-fourth of a second
Vanishing from all but your sight

Allll-right...
We were young Hegelians in an American dream
Past its priming
The pump of New World Orders

But your shadow shows
And nicklodeans
Take orders from no one
Waiving our right
To gaze so metapolitics
Must have eyes in the back of its head,
no?

Since as you say "information is not enough"
The poem must be tactical reality TV will be
Like a wall unmended
Rerunning our quilting points 24/7

W is both a wall
& a black box
Whose ears hath not seen
The war dead
But we hear
Better when you point there
(THERE, THERE)
Unpolitely at the crowned
& uncovered

Disaster richochets with thinking
Poetry's not childs play but insists
No child riddled with bullets
Or labored for surplus value

Your ears score the horse
Racing out of manes to tease frames
Like Truth they subtract tears
From the place of our waking

Your eyes like logical proofs
Double-cross us
If only to shoot
Straight into a literal night

Text marks the site
Of hope and critique.

Friday, January 26, 2007

Shut Not Your Doors (Susan Howe @ St. Mark's)


Shut not your doors to me proud libraries,
For that which was lacking on all your well-fill'd shelves, yet needed most, I bring,
Forth from the war emerging, a book I have made,
The words of my book nothing, the drift of it every thing,
A book separate, not link'd with the rest nor felt by the intellect,
But you ye untold latencies will thrill to every page.
~ Walt Whitman

(Winds that enshroud us in their folds--
or no wind). So be it. Pull at the doors, of a hot
afternoon, doors that the wind holds, wrenches
from our arms--and hands. So be it. The Library
is sanctuary to our fears. So be it. So be it.
--the wind that has tripped us, pressed upon
us, prurient or upon the prurience of our fears
--laughter fading. So be it.
~ W.C. Williams

He
(not my father,
by name himself
with his face
twisted
at birth)
possessed of knowledge
pretentious
giving me
what in the instant
I knew better of.
~ Charles Olson

Last week at St. Mark's Church Susan Howe read with Kamau Braithwaite. Howe read two pieces: the first revisiting her poems "Scattering as a Behavior Towards Risk" and "Hope Atherton's Wanderings" from her book *Singularities*; the second, a longer poem soliloquizing the short-lived "New Bohemia" of early 18th century Maryland.

Throughout Howe's books, of course, so much concerns textual histories, and how these histories shape relations of power within cultures and Culture at large. Insofar as Howe's ultimate concern may be for how textual history constructs and constitutes Power, she often privileges academic libraries as crucial institutional sites for textual authority. In *The Birthmark* (1993) and *Pierce Arrow* (1999), for instance, one is struck by Howe's descriptions of Harvard's Houghton library where much of Emily Dickinson's work is held, and practically occulted from all but a few editor's and scholar's eyes. For Howe, libraries are places of esoteric possession and initiatory transgressions; they are also places where the self is continually interpolated by cultural-institutional authority: janitors, police and hermeneutic highpriests. In the preface to *Pierce-Arrow*, the library/special collections of the Yale Sterling library is also like a crypt, a tomb (or womb) space where works of the past remain buried, mummified and deliberately hidden by encoded social behaviors. Rituals of sacralyzing repression constitute a dialect of inclusion and banishment at the heart of the American antinomian controversies grounding Howe's project. Libraries are also part of an ongoing work of mourning pervasive in Howe's work since the earliest books. A work of "working through," of scared and sacred distances, of mediations and memos from a beyond of actualities: facts and percepts near as they are distant.

And yet there is another library in Howe's work, and this library came across to me the other night in the poet's reading of a piece considering her work from the early 90's when she had first moved to Connecticut with her husband, David Von Schlegel, and their family, and, through her husband's position in the Yale Art department, gained access for the first time in her adult life to a major academic research library: the Yale Beinecke. Howe's description of her first visit to the library is poignant. For here the library is less a locus of cultural battles & evaluations, than one of an overwhelming creative clamor: a clamor of becoming, of a natural Univocalism. In her mystical encounter with the Beinecke, Howe appears to feel all the power of Creation itself, the books of the Beinecke stacks practically buzzing with a vital spirit of historical contingency. A dualism of chance and design are imperative for Howe in her descriptions. The books contained within the library stacks, Howe exposits, are the result of a cultural chance-operation, a becoming movement Gilles Deleuze called "disjunctive synthesis" after the philosopher's readings of Frederick Nietzsche's "dice throw". Like Whitman before her, or Emerson or Dickinson, the world is a text insofar as texts themselves are determined by the creative tendencies of all matter--that they are born from the same stock as it were, and extend into the world modally as such.

In the tradition of poets like Walt Whitman, Charles Olson and William Carlos Williams who highly valued the public and democratic spirit of libraries, I take Howe's natural mysticism to be a practical one turned towards actualities and social responsibility. In libraries exists Nature contracted from it's "total" freedom, born from the play of chance and necessity--from History with a capital "H". But the freedom implied by this creation is not enough. The turn in Howe's enthusiastic lyrical essay occurs where she imagines herself wanting to "free" texts from their imprisonment in material conditions of cold storage, and from the fray of confining interpretative permissions; to open them, to give texts back to their original condition of chance, chaos, potentiality. This sense of interpretive and existential opening--an anarchism not so much born from indetermination, as from extreme effort, rigor and sacrifice--I continue to cherish as a student and reader of Howe's.


A Behavior Towards Libraries

Red is a flavor
And blue a waste
That smothers sunlight
And converts us rivallingly

White like heat is not
Sighted or cited to
A blankety something
An everything as were

The words we're stuck with
They compose a library here
And not in the sky a system
Of numbers as arbitrary

As anything elsewhere
We care to call this "scattering towards"
What stacks recall us better
Delimiting Infinity in Fact.

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Thought's Torsion



In the letter of March 1663 to Simon de Vries, Spinoza takes pains to declare that the word 'attribute' does not by itself constitute a naming of the 'there is' in any way essentially distinct from the naming of the latter by substance. Having reiterated the definition of substance he adds: 'I understand the same by attribute, except that it is called attribute in relation to (*respectu*) the intellect, which attributes such and such a definite nature to substance. Thus the attribute, as well as the multipliciity of attributes through which divine infinity is identified, is a function of the intellect. In the general arrangement of the 'there is', there exists --under the name 'God'--a singular localization, that of the intellect, upon whose point of view or operations depends thought's capacity for rational access to divine infinity, and hence to the 'there is' as such.

It is thus necessary to recogize that the intellect occupies the position of a fold--to take up the central concept in Deleuze's philosophy. Or, using my own terminology, that the intellect is an operation of torsion. It is localizable of an immanent production of God, but is also required to uphold the naming of the 'there is' as God. For only the singular operations of the intellect give meaning to God's existential singularization as *infinite* substance.*...
~ from Alan Badiou's "Spinoza's Closed Ontology"

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Fortinbras

America comes in like Fortinbras, after the blood-letting is over, to take charge of affairs.
--Pat Buchanan

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Children of Men (*Charis*)


The ontological import of this axiom is clear: the decomposition of a multiplicity always includes a *halting point*. At a given moment, you will come upon an element of the multiplicity whose own composition no longer belongs to this multiplicity. In other words: there is no infinite descent into the constituents of a multiplicity.... The existence of such a halting point stabilizes every multiplicity upon itself, and guarantees that in one point at least it encounters something that is no longer itself.
~ Alain Badiou

Faith and chance dance
In the lone Infinite's eyes
The singular infant's eyes
And the eyes of those soldiers born
Where they lay down their eventual arms

*Charis* or Grace what is this
Force that is not force
*Shante Shante Shante* towns
And compounds pounding
Refugees their sudden and
Unsurpassed truths?

What is this uncertain ship
We each long for TOMORROW
Which appears but never arrives?


We are all falling then
and write our names in these waves.

We are all falling to our graves
but rising from extension.

While intensity is this child
what should we call her?

What is our name
if not "the one from the one"?


Except life-forms
Faith and Chance play
In our eyes again
And their false eyes
The truth of Chance
Is beaten to a pulp
By Necessity


This counts (it counts
and counts) this subtraction
counts (and counts)
and counts (hold me for
the time being
time being this eventfulness


The held infant holds us in this event
The infant holds us in this in this
Event the infant held the infant cradled holds us in
This event
Beholden as such--


It holds us and we drop...

Our guns we drop | our guns the infant
Holding us and mute | the start and stutter
We drop our guns | we are not

Crying | in this event we | are not crying in
This event we are | not crying we are
Shedding ourselves | we are shedding we

Are subtracting | our selves from this event
We singletons and cells | and children with
Deeper | eyes we are subtracting | we are

The event of this | subtraction this event
Is a subtraction | for which we are
And we drop | our guns and

We drop our guns...

We will not cry for this
We will not shed a single one


It matters this tear
Like a beam in the eyes confused
With sunshine or another light

Of first things priorities without
Artillery "his argosies"
Before this sudden test like knights become

Benighted invincible and grasped
By percept sky falls from sky
Shells rise and touch their aftermath

In the place we will not be when the walls fall
*Charis* will only be cell will be
Cell and soon and not soon enough


Journalists of ought and not
Hardly save this night
The will is a zipper
At the end of every plan

Civilization is stone cold
Called adrift to global loaves
Incommensurable like all
Truth what won't be spared

Must remain
Like a call on the other line
Of other lives or like tears
Frozen in time.


This movie is instructive
Of revolution because there
Will be no revelation such as
We plan it it's not as they
Say just that the revolution
Will not be televised it
Will be realized only through
That number that is not numerical
The bullet holes and the shrapnel
Like a music missing us
We are humiliated but then
We are also heard

That is I am interested in
The old dyad Faith and Chance
Makes *Charis* or Grace
Is the place we go when
There is no place left
To arrive and only occur
May say our names like
A cry distantly heard
Through a variant like a fated
Infant women men are then
Their own mothers irreproducible
More original than any cast


Red is a flavor
And blue a waste
That smothers sunlight
And converts us rivallingly

White like heat is not
Sighted or cited to
A blankety something
An everything as were

The words we're stuck with
They compose a library here
And not in the sky a system
Of numbers as arbitrary

As anything elsewhere
We care to call this "scattering towards"
What stacks recall us better
Delimiting Infinity in fact.


I want to grasp
That flower too
That is not her
Then ungrasp it

Like it were me
And not her
Who can see
Everything and hear

The crows just beyond
This line the sure
Beams their eyes
Are shined with

Just before they die
In the hunt but don't really
Because as soon
As we're grasped we're not.


For "not" and not "sometimes"
For "sometimes" and not "somewhere"
Some signs for flight for flight
Is a swerve from Void and matters

Clinamen and Fold--lo and behold!

For "yes" and not "on high"
For "here" and not "sweet-hereafter"
For missed targets and not the real
Politics of corrupted belief.

Total Process (Prospectus)


In Robert Smithson's *Collected Writings* under the title, "A Cinematic Atopia," Smithson imagines a project for what I would like to call a "total process" or "autotelos"**. Smithson describes the project as such:

What I would like to do is build a cinema in a cave or an abandoned mine, and film the process of its construction. That film would be the only film shown in the cave. The projection booth would be made out of crude timbers, the screen carved out of a rock wall and painted white, the seats could be boulders. It would be a truly "underground" cinema.... (142)***

In Smithson's project for an "underground cinema," the work of art displays a total process insofar as it begins and ends with itself--spiralling in its own interstices, self-becoming perpetually--or, in Smithson's case at least, until the film breaks-down, the walls cave-in, entropy wins-out. The idea of a "total process" can be located across art works, and fields of production. I read it firstly in Herman Melville's *Moby Dick* where, besides being a late-Shakespearian allegory and reflection of American Imperialist exceptions, the book entails an encylopedic reference to the whaling industry at mid-19th century told by the book's narrator-documentarian--Ishmael--and the dialogue of the book's other characters.

Other cases that may be made for total process include Dziga Vertov's *Man With a Movie Camera*, where the film moves among frames of reality or "windows" (Lev Manovitch) in order to provide degrees of reflection for film reality. Here we have multiple (if not often combinatory) degrees of mediation. The first being the film itself (what the camera-consciousness sees without reflection); the second what is revealed of the film's making (editing, shooting, staging); the third reception (the audience within the film seeing the film); and the fourth reception of reception (us seeing ourselves seeing the audience seeing the film).

In Georges Franju's *Blood of the Beasts* and Stan Brakhage's *The Act of Seeing With One's Own Eyes* I observe comparable film forms for total process. Franju's film of course involves a recording (with sparse, accompanying voice-over narration) of Parisian slaughterhouses in the 1950's. In the film, the filmmaker shows various moments in the process of slaughter (the initial blows to the head with a pressure gun, desanguiation, dissection, skinning, hanging). Franju's motivations for making the film are not clear to me (Does he wish to sing a common labor practice, of "our daily bread"; best known for his horror film, *Eyes Without a Face*, does he rather wish to produce shock/terror in his audience through recording actual gore?) Perhaps the motivations (and effects) of this film are deliberately ambiguous.

Similarly, in Stan Brakahge's early 70's *The Act of Seeing With One's Own Eyes* (meaning *autopsy* in Latin), Brakhage records a human autopsy from start to finish. Where Franju's film is restrained in its camera movement, and uses dissolves and time-lapse cinematography to convey the transformation of the "beasts," Brakhage's film tends towards "real" or "lived" time--with edits only for breaks in the autopsy procedure. What has always struck me watching this film, and even showing it once to students, is how important Brakhage's use of "hand-held" is to lend his "Document period" reality and credence.**** That Brakhage trembles before his subject (and so also his camera) conveys a truth less of "the birth of the clinic" (Foucault), than of the individual envisioning-soul bearing witness to death in its purest immanence.


Another figure who I have considered for this project is Matthew Barney, whose works have fascinated me since I first saw *Cremaster 2* in 2000. Seeing *Drawing Restraint* this past fall (and thinking of Melville) I was reminded how much Barney is exemplary of total process in his use of "molds," his athletic procedures, as well as in the large-scale underakings of his works since *C2* (I can only imagine rental fees and/or legal permissions for use of the Chrysler Building and a Japanese whaling liner).

Whereas Melville or Franju seem put into the service of factuality, documentary and history (despite Franju's somewhat aestheticized narrative, and the deep mythological-allegorical underpinnings of Melville's text), Barney's work differs as a mytho-historicization of Capitalist postmodernity (the Guinness logo of *C3* occupying the same narrative space as CGI ogres and dwarves; Gary Gilmore & Houdini emblamatizing myths of Manifest Destiny & American antinomianism). In *DR* I am less interested by the fact that Barney is "Orientalizing" (a charge many have made against the film), than that he reveals the ultimate cultural mobility of his project. Whereas Barney's most substantial films preceding *DR* (*C2* and *C3*) draw upon American icons, motifs and locations to bear-out Barney's foremost problem of creative process and (self-)becoming, in *DR* these problems are graphed onto Japanese culture. *C2*, *C3* and *DR* are all appropriative & mythologizing, only the latter seems more awkward in this appropriation, less "appropriate" (...I think here of the tea ceremony, as well as the parade that inagurates the voyage of the whaling vessel).

Talking to Kevin Killian recently, he mentioned that Barney refers to his Vaseline molds as "self-lubricating". I had not heard this term before, but it confirmed what I already suspected about Barney: that he is *the* artist of total process/autotelos in our era insofar as his works begin and end with themselves, "self-lubriate," self-transform (think of Bjork and Barney chopping off their limbs at the conclusion of *DR*). The works are meta-historical in this respect. That is, unlike Franju, Melville or Vertov, Barney's works do not refer to a historicity beyond themselves, their processes. Though they employ figures from a popular cultural lanscape (Mailer et al), such figures remain iconic and mytholigically enactive. Yet history may interrupt meta-history in *CR3* and *DR* where I for one can not view the Chrysler building without thinking of the men and women who contributed to its making, and its prominence in the NYC skyline; nor can I can think of any whaling vessel nowadays without immediately imagining it being tracked by Greenpeace and other environmental agencies.

Whereas it has become fashionable in recent years to think of historical structures as containing a primordial element both constitutive and disrruptive of its subjects (e.g.: "The Real" or "traumatic kernel" of Zizek and other Lacanians), perhaps we should also be thinking about historicity as something that interrupts the primordial, mythological, meta-historical, interior and imaginal. In Barney, factuality interrupts a form for mythology and pseudo-ontology. However inadvertent, History is the angel that rushes in to save meta-history from itself. Facts depose mythopoetic enclosures, if only briefly.




*a prospectus for Stacy Szymaszek's reincarnated *Gam*.
**thanks to Eliza Newman-Saul for drawing attention to this term.
***from The Collected Writings of Robert Smithson.
****see the 2002 Chicago Review special issue on Brakhage for elaboration of Brakhage's term "Document".

Monday, January 22, 2007

Sleepy with Gregg Biglieri (@ St. Mark's)


Gregg Biglieri is one of my favorite poets & reading with Evelyn Reilly at the Poetry Project tonight...

22 Gregg Biglieri & Evelyn Reilly
Monday, 8:00 pm
Gregg Biglieri is the author of five chapbooks: Profession, Roma, Los Books, Reading Keats to Sleep and I Heart My Zeppelin. He currently lives in Buffalo, where he is finishing a dissertation on Louis Zukofsky's Bottom: On Shakespeare in the English Department at Temple University. Evelyn Reilly’s first book, Hiatus, was published in 2004. A chapbook, Fervent Remnants of Reflective Surfaces, is just out. Reilly co-curates the winter segment of the Segue Reading Series. She is currently pondering the relation of ecology and poetry, and is editing ((eco (lang) (uage ( reader)), a collection of essays on the subject, with Brenda Iijima.

Friday, January 19, 2007

Imaging her Autotelos*

*image courtesy Eliza Newman-Saul (2005)

The juridicizing of all human relations...

The juridicizing of all human relations in their entirety, the confusion between what we may believe, hope, and love, and what we are supposed to do and not supposed to do, what we are supposed to know and not know, not only signal the crisis of religion but also, and above all, the crisis of law. The messianic is the instance, in religion and equally in law, of an exigency of fulfillment which—in putting origin and end in a tension with each other—restores the two halves of prelaw in unison. At this same moment, it shows the impossibility of their ever coinciding. (This is why the actual opposition between secular States, founded uniquely on law, and fundamentalist States, founded uniquely on religion, is only a seeming opposition that hides a similar political decline.) But in this, it points, beyond prelaw, toward an experience of the word, which—without tying itself denotatively to things, or taking itself as a thing, without being infinitely suspended in its openness or fastening itself up in dogma—manifests itself as a pure and common potentiality of saying, open to a free and gratuitous use of time and the world.
~ Giorgio Agamben

Are We Still Married?*


Like Eyes that looked on Wastes ~
Incredulous of Ought
But Blank ~ and steady Wilderness ~
Diversified by Night ~

Just Infinities of Nought ~
As far as it could see ~
So looked the face I looked upon ~
So looked itself ~ on Me ~

--Emily Dickinson




Signs scar everything—presentiments of sight.

We drove on reproachful roads
and prepared everything
but who we are.

The stars are closer now than ever before

but I don’t
want their correspondence.

How can we remember what we recollect first?





The bomb’s always set. And eyes not always ours. And ears eclipse somewhere else.
Bearing messages to our future dead.

Tongue it has been a crescent. Now it longs for obfuscation. To cleave what was said and what is left. To make telling its gleek.

To believe what world is and what is should have been. To pin this sudden clearing in the mind might uncure sin.

In recordings of my dreams I’ve pressed that lack. Blinking to traverse when.




Why in love have we stalked?

We can’t see the animal’s trapped.

The cage door flickers and swings open—and opens

Singing, *Are we still married? Are we still?...*

Who foresees a wound when it is here?




This blue screen we seldom recognized
And slides of places we never were,
Our terrific coverage—a ruse.

Why is the flower an unequal thing?

Difference contacts difference.

Everywhere I look I see ruins.





Somehow we shouldn’t be...
but we must be for

To commit semblance.

To augur remiss tains.





Sweeping our names into this grave

Developing *tracelessness*.

Residues of drum precedents
speed and slow in these lines.

Intervals rise.





*A little time in the pure state.*
A little spot in the eye.

Where *don’t* became *battle*
silos push the air around.

Distant lands suddenly sing
being made of the same thing.

Recall what it means to be unique.
Contraction from critique.





Kill a hole preciously! Correct a capital!

Ransom our will.

Nothing could love Life more.





Why shouldn’t one hate the catalyst
forcing us to reflect
as such on essential stains.

I would prefer to forget
except when you continue your killing spree.

I would prefer to forgive
except only eternity is really just.




While the candlelight is particular
I’ve survived to destroy.

Is there a light that is still not for yes?




Skip town mammal. Don’t confront
the seen eventual.

I know when
it isn’t my turn to breathe.

When we donated dust
hushed by frame.





Could there have been *great discoveries* any other way

then to be reported
by guns
or skinned by flame?

Your love smothers to soar.

If *image of love*
were only image of love and not more.

We might do each other
the courtesy to discern

powder from the keg. Spirit
from its folios.






Your eyes swear
by night-light:
*No more logos!*

No revolution no ratiocination

Lingering in wings.
Flinging this sight.




The hunter has never
wholly seen the deer.

The Open claws a minute
when we’re not here.





I have lived
for rinsing
sty sometimes.

I have died
to widen
the floor.

Surviving
without eyes
or ears to save—

blimps of this rave.






This instance swears
I’m *darkest space*
becoming darker sky.

Never having known me
these letters turn holy.





Holy to be and holy to see!
I propose blindness a historical event

--the world not an entire friendship.

I presuppose possession a
privilege of the personality

who seldom knew flourish, who couldn’t tell
fire from flour.

I provide a grave and everything it conceives
confiding qualities subtended from loss.




You would seem a savage except you’re so pretty.

I’d be a mantle
if not for these tears.


*composed 2003-present.

Monday, January 15, 2007

The Pale of Settlement (Revision)

~ for Louise Nevelson

A colorless guilt
This self-fashioned light

Of the shipyards shore grey
Beardless presence

Of an after

Math after

An aftermath

Wood assumes
Number to not forget

This distance

Beyond the pale of settlement
& into

The arms of this shadow now
We sing a world uncolored

Of those pograms
A more immediate Kiev

They destroy destroy again
For the 29th

Time to ruin
Ruins affix stack

This not world

Variations on seen things seen

Words and wood
What definition of the present

To measure slivers
Through the city scraping

The eye

Fresh it seemed pure conscience, pure

Sense pirched on rocks for thousands
Of years we stand

In this night-
mare counting shadows

as they fall from earth.

Thursday, January 11, 2007

Homage In Blood


for Rob Halpern
after Franju

Thru this pressure g
un and that hammer
thru the scalpel we b
elong to the animal

the animal is a total
process surviving the
mortal meat. But a t
otal process disappe

ars again within pro
duct reappears as a f
ilm or a skin the hide
sings released from

meat the throat sings
with steam and blood.
I wonder Franju why
your camera doesn’t

shake like Brakhage
20 years later his re
velation to see with
*one's* own eyes as if

flesh were only matter
it is terrifying the re
flexes of dying ani
mals are a spiritual ev

idence. I want to bre
ak my lines there wh
ere the animal no lon
ger has a head or hoo

ves but the legs up to
the shins keep shudde
ring a beauty of *poten
tia* undissipated better

than any metaphysics.
The zombie sense of
this the eviscerations
of site the subject who

sees the subject who s
ees this also evacuated
would only be where t
he incision is made tha

t is where their pain is
apparent. Those hands
like tools extend back
into the body this hum

an technology doesn’t
fuck around the torso
rips open the throat expl
odes and this is a mach

inery somewhere in re
lation we are unmade.
From start to finish the
se hands are made from

death material because
the soul must show itse
lf somehow to the world.
I want to show you how

we make death I want to s
how the factory lines ho
w modern death was alw
ays a factory with hooks

that a technology is just
something we don’t have
to think about until *I* de
parts and thinking arrives.

Monday, January 08, 2007

Oh One Arrow


*Oh One Arrow* is now out with Flim Forum Press. Check the advert. below:

flim forum press presents
Oh One Arrow

ISBN 978-0-9790888-0-3

featuring work by:
brandon shimoda, thom donovan, jonathan minton, adam
golaski, lori anderson moseman, katie kemple,
christopher fritton, eric gelsinger, jacqueline lyons,
john cotter, jeff paris, michael ives, jaime corbacho,
matthew klane, pierre joris, and aaron lowinger

cover and insert art by luke daly

208 pages
$18.00

to order, call boyd printing company
1-800-877-2693

or contact: klane@flimforum.com

($5.00 is added for shipping and handling, as well as
sales tax in NY state only, and particular to the
county)

Sunday, January 07, 2007

Peace On A presents Paolo Javier & Eléna Rivera


Peace On A

presents

Paolo Javier & Eléna Rivera

Friday, December 8th 2006 8PM sharp
BYOB & suggested donation: $5

hosted by Thom Donovan at:

166 Avenue A, Apartment #2
New York, NY 10009

about the readers:

Paolo Javier is the author of *60 lv bo(e)mbs* (O Books), & *the time at the end of this writing* (Ahadada). He recently completed a full-length play, *Lunatic*, & has presented his short dramatic works at Poet's Theater Jamboree in San Francisco. He edits 2nd Ave Poetry (http://www.2ndavepoetry.com/), & lives in New York.

Eléna Rivera is the author of *Mistakes, Accidents and a Want of Liberty* (Barque Press, 2006), *Suggestions at Every Turn* (Seeing Eye Books, 2005), and *Unknowne Land* (Kelsey St. Press, 2000), and a recent pamphlet entitled *Disturbances in the Ocean of Air* (Phylum Press, 2005). She won first prize in the 1998 Stand Magazine International Poetry Competition and the 1999 Frances Jaffer Book Award.

Peace On A is an events series devoted to emergent work by writers, artists, performers and scholars. Past presenters at Peace on A include Alan Gilbert, E. Tracy Grinnell, Cathy Park Hong and Andrew Levy. Scroll down Wild Horses of Fire weblog (whof.blogspot.com) for back advertisements, introductions and reading selections.

“to the united states of america on the other side of this page”—Hannah Weiner

Introductions to Paolo Javier and Eléna Rivera

Teaching Kamau Braithwaite with a class at NYU last night, I was struck by a coincidence between Braithwaite’s “Letter Sycorax” from his book *Middle Passages*, and the work of the two poets reading tonight: Paolo Javier & Eléna Rivera. Of course many of the problems Javier and Rivera share with Braithwaite immediately become apparent reading the three poets together: how to posit a linguistic-poetic subject without legitimating it through a mythology of fundamental community? How to posit such a subject in language where language itself bears all the baggage of neglectful and malicious histories? These are just two of the problems that seem readily available to me confronted by the triangulation: Braithwaite, Javier, Rivera. However, a deeper problem that emerges in all three writers is one we may pose as a problem of allegory, or, more accurately, as my friend Gregg Biglieri termed it on the phone last night: *allegoresis*. Where allegory alone implies a static set of symbolic-dramatic properties, *allegoresis* may point to a more active process whereby these properties are made, and re-made: invented, renewed, enacted. In Braithwaite’s “Letter Sycorax” an allegoresis takes place where the poet evokes the figure Sycorax—the mother of Caliban from Shakespeare’s *The Tempest*—through the customized electronic word processing format he uses to write and publish (also called “Letter Sycorax”). Through the ways he employs this type format, Braithwaite cleverly draws out many of the antinomies pervading what the poet calls *Aur-iture* and *Nation Language* (the language of “the folk,” subaltern, enslaved). Here, through (mis-) or (dis-)spelling, words open up to their doubleness at phonetic, morphemic, and syllabic registers between written and spoken language; technologies of mechanical reproduction and standardization are themselves always Janus-faced insofar as they reveal both “a storm of progress” sweeping up the past, and the “straight gate of the messiah”—to use Walter Benjamin’s famous phrasings concerning “Historical materialism”. To write a “letter Sycorax” than seems to channel all of the immanent forces of culture at one’s disposal in order to overcome, to curse by curser, to spell and dispel, to exist in exile, to sound letters at a constant point of bifurcation where literal words become their own mythology: a mytho-praxis; a "making allegory" of letters as actors, as en-actors "symbolic" only insofar as they effect.

*

Shakespeare’s writing argues with no one: only in itself. It says: *Love’s reason’s without reason […]; flaming in the . . . sight . . . Love hath reason, Reason none.* The writing exists as its own tempest…
~ Louis Zukofksy

Heavenly nuptials, Multiplicities of multiplicities...
~ Deleuze & Guattari

Allegory is mentioned on the first page of Paolo Javier’s book *60 lv bo(e)mbs* where he writes, “I rode above allegory. / I see a situation where Leda pleads for the absurd.” Here, to ride above allegory may mean to not condescend to it, or perhaps to ride it out like a wave. Where Leda would normally give birth to an egg, she instead “pleads for the absurb”. Pleading for and producing the absurb, Javier also proceeds; his book abounds with linguistic play, neologism, transliteration, detournment, and other signage of the absurb, contradictory, and trickstering. The (in-)formal structure that sustains the book is a self-involved interlocution (or “call and response”) evocative as much of a KRS 1 or P. Diddy as the three Steins (Ludwig Wittgenstein, Gertrude Stein, and Charles Bernstein).

When Javier repeatedly refers to a “Trysteaser” throughout his text I believe that he may be alluding to such a dialogic coupling or interlocution. There are any number of couples who couple with the proper name “Paolo” in the text. There is Frederick Nietzcshe, who seems to act as a kind of foil to “Paolo” and others; there are Paolo’s “parents” "Prim" and "Rose" Javier, “Cam 1” and “Cam 2”; there is the Phillipino poet Jose Garcia Villa, who in the last poem, “A Play A Play,” is triangulated with “Nietzche,” “Paolo,” and “Love”.


Where William Carlos Wiliams calls the poem “a small (or large) machine made of words,” Javier’s text is a sprawling bachelor hydraulics of words and syllabics: a tryst machine generating the absurb not just to overcodify or deterritorialize, but to make actual virtual conditions of language-use where these virtualities may bring into being a new multiplicity or set of powers among a whole. This is an erotic activity for sure, an allegoresis of the double/couple trysteasing, producing, and reconstituting linguistic sense (like Deleuze’s Lewis Carol or the Zukofsky of *Catullus* and *80 Flowers*) at a point of indiscernibility where representation is both recaptured and released. There is no territory here because desire has no map, only a GPS called a critical erotics. Javier’s desiring language production persists to argue with itself, if not Culture in the largest sense.

Not any more Rene my corzine somber Tabasco cinema barcodes go
Arrival *coo where, po* allegory tubas sweltering dalaga
Marry poses more rain dulcinea deaf in ear native
Camel triangle yells the soul lamp of Paolo he’ll agree he’ll argue (68)

*

The navigator who makes use of the sea and the wind dominates these elements but does not thereby transform them into things. They retain the indetermination of elements despite the precision of the laws that govern them, which can be known and taught. The element has no forms containing it; it is content without form. Or rather it has but a side; the surface of the sea and of the field, the edge of the wind; the medium upon which this side takes form is not composed of things. It unfolds in its own dimension: depth, which is inconvertible into the breadth and length in which the side of the element extends. To be sure, a thing likewise presents itself but by one unique side: but we can circle round it, and the reverse is equivalent to the obverse; all the points of view are equivalent . The depth of the element prolongs it till it is lost in the earth and in the heavens. “Nothing ends, nothing begins.”
~ Emmanuel Levinas

The darkness of trees
Guards this life
Of the thin ground
That covers the rock ledge

Among the lanes and magic
Of the Eastern woods

The beauty of silence
And broken boughs

And the homes of small animals

The green leaves
Of young plants
Above the dark green moss
In the sweet smell of rot
~ George Oppen


I have already mentioned George Oppen in a number of my introductions for Peace on A so far, however the poet seems particularly close to Eléna Rivera’s book *Unknowne Land* and a possible allegory unfolding within its pages. It is the late-Oppen I particularly think of—*Seascape: Needle’s Eye*, *Myth of the Blaze* and *Primitive*—in regards to *Unknowne Land’s* own primitiveness.

The book is structured by the elements: Fire, Earth, Water and Air. There is an almost Medieval sensibility in this, a throw back to angelologies and aeons, an impossibly beautiful Scholastic imagination of number and essence. But the language is not Medieval or Scholastic; and if it is alchemical at all it may only be so in effect, where the language is transformative if not transcendent.

Rivera reminds me that the elements themselves are ethical. And that an ethics of the person, the lyrical subject if you will, is redoubled in language forms as they mimic elemental quality. In “Fire” a certain radiance is achieved by a beautiful line that zips across the text, exterior and sudden not in verticality but in horizontality. I read this formal maneuver as a wonderful inversion of the traditional analogy: the horizontal (line) is to the social as the vertical (spacing/line-break) is to the Divine:



In Earth I am struck by the feeling that the language is a literal sediment being sifted, alluvial as such. The text visually resembles a sieve or net, where it catches voices and images, and sifts impressions in time. In the spaces between words, phrases and sentences one feels the breaking of the earth itself as a breaking of the subject of poetry, a going down in tectonic and mantled shifts of language.



In Water, Rivera has used a series of tercets to mimic a flowing quality of water itself. Here the sonic, rhythmic and intellective values of the poem are not unlike Lorine Niedecker’s wonderful longer poem “Wintergreen Ridge”.



In the penultimate section, Air, the language provokes a sense of weightlessness or grace as, like in Fire, a horizontal row of words cuts through the middle of the poem. In these word rows (with much space left between individual words) one’s vision adjusts to the space of the page, and the fact that the words seem to not be in their proper sequence, or a linearally readable sequence for that matter. The words are light in this sense, having drifted from sequentiality.



In the last section, The Sphere, the fact that the poem is ordered by couplets belies the tension, and drift, within the couplet form as the poem attempts to reorder itself by a grammar and syntax within the couplets, perforating its own map (a perforation Rivera alludes to in the last page of her book).



If *Unknowne Land* is fundamental, I think it is fundamental in an ethical sense that the element is a ground or dwelling for encounter with otherness, if not "the" Other itself. When George Oppen repeatedly speaks of fire and stone, islands, the waterways he traveled by with Mary Oppen in their boats, the elemental is that which brings the personality, the ego, out of its self-enclosure. In Rivera and Oppen both, this encounter with the element is as affirmative as it is melancholy insofar as the self only becomes the self through the struggles against it presented by the world outside, beside, near: an otherness both presupposing and antedating "I", society, others. This limit-work of estrangement calls to mind Hegel’s prescription to “feel against your self”; but also Emmanuel Levinas’s insistence that in the encounter with the other is a necessary *inter-ruption* or *unworking* of being itself. The writing of the poem constitutes the activity of this primitive ethics, this ethics of the fundament. Land “unknowne,” mis-understood, un-theorized or grasped in aspect. Land un-intended. Dis-extended.

*

Paolo Javier:



*top-most image: Anton Van Dalen in his "living room".

Rob Halpern's A Little Lyrical Philosophy


Thrilled to receive the following from Rob Halpern, with whose permission I post...


A L I T T L E L Y R I C A L P H I L O S O P H Y
for Thom Donovan


Yes being this non-

Site you could be

Singing no with me

Too as if being

Could be anything with

Me here is not

What matters being these

Things we didn’t make

The world the one

We might have sung

Another world that doesn’t

Count here for one

And won’t have been

Here what I say

I mean can what

I say defy this

Function to name this

Function has no future

Which is just what

I thought about the

Subject ourselves not being

One as we are

I am this bald

White void this concept

Without identity or depth

A blank in being

Yours I can be

Some notion itself being

Imaginary not what’s real

Whose name has only

No world no state

Like the time when

You put your whole

Thing in my mouth

We ruptured between what

It all could be

And what this is

‘Where there is nothing

Save myself’ nothing saves

What exists in thought

I think I dread

To think what this

Really means is not


[rh — 01/04/07]


* ‘Where there is nothing save myself,’ from Amiri Baraka’s “Duncan spoke of a process”
**above image: Amy Balkin's *Mt. Everest Mall*

Friday, January 05, 2007

On the Beach*

THE DRAWER OUT

An eye peace

REMAINS

An ear peace

DRAWN FROM WORDS

*

This small
Large mech-
anics
Called grace
Separates
The animal
From the animal
The head
From the head

Call it being
This ring
And this
Ring
Calling
The animal
To song
And flight

Fleeting
Fact
Of falling
Fleeting
Fact
Of a will's
Grasp
Ungrasped

*

WHAT WINGS x 2

One
Must
Fall
First

A modal fall

*

One must fall
To ageless
Incoherence
One's wings
Must turn
To dust
And dust
Must turn
To songless
Weeping
This will be
A charade
Of force
Our song
Will be
It will
Sweep
No one
Into its
Wake and
Wake
Kill from
Become

*

FLAT BLUE COLOR
SKY GOES HERE

(site)

CLOUDS CLOUDS
CLOUDS CLOUDS

Sun somewhere

Waves little crests
Their multitudes

(cite)

FOREGROUNDED REEDS

*

)
CANCEL
OCCULUAR
DURING
(

*

some things inside celophane

*

On the rim
Of all things
Seeing all
Things thin
Slices the actual
Reeds receeding
A world

On the rim
In waves
The waves
In waves
Thin Turner
The blue
His favorite

A timorous graph
A word like a wind
Sock a kinetic fact drawn
Like an Oceanic Dean

*

On the rim
Dreams are
Facts too
Of percept
Or ideas
Of waves
Composing
Motion

On the rim
And thinking
I just want
To see
The thing the way
The thing is
Actually
I want to say
What words mean

An ethic of gesture
Think your horizontal
Elements on the way and on and on

*

Earth

A SEVERANCE

Sky

*

The background of this dance has no background

Like a ring to an animal subtract hands from hands

Feet from feet we move without First Mover seemingly


*composed X-mas 2006 on Cape Cod

Thanks to the Scanning Bed

Thanks to Jane Lea & Brandon Stosuy I just got a scanning bed...

a New Year's card


from Cory Arcangel's Migros Museum monograph (2005)

a flyer for my fleeting improv group with Dave Nuss (No Neck Blues Band), Sheila Donovan (Tallboys, Amolvacy), and others

Eva Hesse's suicide in reverse?



three Polaroids of places I've lived

A Kabbalistic sticker by my friend Josh

a favorite (self-)portrait by Maya Deren, from Anthology Film Archives' The Legend of Maya Deren Vol. One Part II: Chambers (1942-1947)

me and my friend Marian, Fall 2005

a favorite "schablone" photo from Caroline Koebel & Kyle Schlesinger, Fall 2004. Check their Schablone book (2005) w/ Chax press...

some notes inside my copy of John Taggart's Loop

a Borscht recipe from a postcard I found at a Ukranian shop in the E. Village

Catherine Sullivan's Metro Pictures show, "The Chittendens," may have been the most interesting art showing in NYC (Thomas Hirschorn's "Superficial Engagement" and Guy Ben Ner's "Berkeley's Island" aside) I saw in 2006

Thursday, January 04, 2007

Badiou on Grace & Apostalic Discourse

There invariably comes a moment when what matters is to declare in one’s own name that what took place took place, and to do so because what one envisages with regard to the actual possibilities of a situation requires it. This is certainly Paul's conviction: the debate about the Resurrection is no more a debate between historians and witnesses in his eyes than that about the existence of the gas chambers is in mine. We will not ask for proofs and counterproofs. We will not enter into debate with erudite anti-Semites, Nazis under the skin, with their superabundance of "proofs" that no Jew was ever mistreated by Hitler.

To which it is necessary to add that the Resurrection--which is the point at which our comparison obviously collapses--is not, in Paul's own eyes, of the order of fact, falsifiable or demonstrable. It is a pure event, opening of an epoch, transformation of the relations between the possible and the impossible. For the interest of Christ's resurrection does not lie in itself, as it would in the case of a particular, or miraculous, fact. Its genuine meaning is that it testifies to the possible victory over death, a death that Paul envisages, as we shall see later in detail, not in terms of facticity, but in terms of subjective disposition. Whence the necessity of constantly linking resurrection to *our* resurrection, of proceeding from singularity to universality and vice versa: "If the dead do not resurrect, Christ is not resurrected either. And if Christ is not resurrected, your faith is in vain" (Cor. I.15.16). In contrast to the fact, the event is measurable only in accordance with the universal multiplicity whose possibility it prescribes. It is in this sense that it is grace, and not history.

The apostle is then he who names this possibility (the Gospels, the Good News, comes down to this: we *can* vanquish death). His discourse is one of pure fidelity to the possibility opened by the event. It cannot, therefore, in any way (and this is the upshot of Paul's philosophy) fall under the remit of knowledge. The philosopher knows eternal truths; the prophet knows the univocal sense of what will come (even if he only delivers it through figures, through signs). The apostle, who declares an unheard-of possibility, one dependent on an eventual grace, properly speaking knows nothing. To imagine that one knows, when it is a question of subjective possibilities, is fraudulent: "He who thinks he knows something [...], does not yet know as he ought to know" (Cor. I.8.2). How is one to know when one is an apostle? According to the truth of the declaration and its consequences, which, being without proof or visibility, emerges at that point where knowledge , be it empirical or conceptual, breaks down. In characterizing Christian discourse from the point of salvation, Paul does not hesitate to say: "Knowledge[...] will disappear"(Cor. I.13.8).
--Alain Badiou

Weeeping As Not Weeping

A Pricksong

--for Harry Partch & Aaron Moore

Some stray notes help
The open cope

A locomotion
Coats

The clouds
As they American
Pass

With strings detached

The least is the highest

The last shall
Be fast

Croons hobo neckbones
At long last.