To try and answer the above
question at length would amount to a doctoral dissertation, which is neither
the aim of the present author, nor, presumably, the expectation of the readers.
Yet in order to understand the new aspects of concrete
poetry a short survey of its development in time might prove useful.
In the
following poem created by Eugen Gomringer the way the letters of the word transparent
are scattered on the page is indicative of the semantic meaning of the word:
Another
very important feature has to do with the way the 'reader' experiences concrete
poetry. Recipients of visual verse
in the 1960s were no longer facing linearity and successive perception, but
were supposed to experience the poem "with a
sense of simultaneity and multidirectionality" (Mike Weaver).
These are a few statements made in the 1960s, a
flourishing, according to some, the most flourishing era of concrete poetry.
The question is to what extent they still hold true in the present day.
Basinski
views the poem as a sort of map suggesting areas a poet might engage, and
leaving it open if he does. The book can hardly still be the medium for such
poetry, other media take it over. According to Basinski the best place to exhibit such colourful,
explosive and impulsive improvisation is the Web. Only here it is possible to
let:
"The poems rise and fall, fly like superheroes,
and crash. And there is room for Bizzaro poetry. Characters can speak, sing,
blab and blah! the poetry. Letters speak of themselves. Color has a form of
voice. Dracula and duende meet, seek, merge, and inhabit a space opened by the
innovations of The New Concrete."
Basinski's definition may of course engender
the question as to what extent the product he is describing still corresponds
to what we commonly call a poem. But then again we are facing the
dilemma of how one is to define poems and poetry in general. Have
we got the ultimate definition? Can we talk in terms of language of anything valid for the eternity? Language is
a living mechanism, prone to change and develop. Why not poetry.
Here are some pieces intended to convey the
traces of a text translated into Ameslan, thus trying to seize the movement of
language into a digital image:
These are fascinating images
about what meaning might look like when conveyed not by words, but by what
words could be like.
My visual three-part poem
"Variations on a Given Theme" illustrates but a few of the possible patterns.
A first, very economical device
would be to place the two words into a combination of horizontality and
verticality with the letter O as a point of juncture:
It suggests on the one hand the formal
constraints, the canons which poetry has had to obey in the course of time:
form, rhyme, rhythm. On the other hand it points to the lack of freedom of
expression in the creative act and to the restrictions imposed upon it by political,
social or other factors.
Two everyday words can thus develop a high
potential of expression, reaching far beyond their daily use. They can at the same
time convey a unique aesthetic experience, and be carriers of
significant semantic content such as protest, criticism, awareness of
questionable states of things.
Some poems are even trying to provide
solutions, like the following, very compressed visual poem, consisting of the
repetition of one word and its embeded alternative, indicating refusal to
follow enforced norms and constraints:
oneway oneway oneway oneway oneway
oneway oneway oneway oneway oneway
oneway oneway oneway oneway oneway
oneway oneway oneway oneway oneway
oneway oneway oneway yaweno oneway
oneway oneway oneway oneway oneway
© Anna Barbara Braun, 2007, member of the Dichthauer Workshop
Do we
have a vision of what the future of poetry in general and concrete
poetry in particular are going to be? The keyword seems
to be cyberspace, concrete is being increasingly replaced by spatial and
the book by the new technologies. Poetry is for the eye, no longer for the ear. Computer generated
poetry offers an infinite range of possibilities. The three-dimensionality
of the poem can be split, divided, combined at other levels. Animation
gives the 'reader' the opportunity
to witness the emerging of the poem, its development, its ability to combine the most unexpected
facets of images, sounds, mathematical formulas. A poem is often an event, a
happening, an experience and, the recipient can interactively contribute to it.
A perfect illustration of
everything a visual poem can combine, but also of the interactive status the poetry recipient is
supposed to adopt is the following image:
www.vispo.com/animisms/index.html
In the multitude of elements reunited in
this construct the careful reader may
discover a small text, a
poem in the poem, begging for 'being done'.
I'm a bad text
I used to be a poem
but drifted
from the scene
Do me
I just want
you to do me
I think there is no better way to
describe the message of the new concrete poetry.
#
Notes:
Jolanta Lapiak is an Ameslan literary and media artist, narrator, and
poet in video, performance art, photography, digital art and text. She is also
a presenter and instructor. Born and raised multiculturally, the nomad had
lived in multiple cities in Canada and U.S., Austria, and Poland. Jolanta has
presented, exhibited, and performed nationally and internationally. Besides
being a native Signer since birth, her first fundamental language
hypothetically was mathematics in her childhood before she received formal
education through ASL/Ameslan and written English in her preteen. Jolanta
received a MFA in Media Arts from NSCAD University, Halifax, N.S. in 2007,
along with a BFA with Distinction in Media Arts & Digital Technologies from
Alberta College of Art & Design (ACAD) in Calgary, 2005. She also earned a
BA with Distinction from Gallaudet University in Washington, D.C.
www.logolalia.com/minimalistconcretepoetry/archives/cat_lapiak_jolanta_a.html
Michael Basinski is the Assistant Curator of the Poetry/Rare
Books Collection of the University Libraries, SUNY at Buffalo.
His poems, articles and reviews have appeared in numerous publications
including: Proliferation, Terrible Work, Deluxe Rubber Chicken, Boxkite, The
Mill Hunk Herald, Yellow Silk, The Village Voice, Object, Oblek, Score,
Generator, Juxta, Poetic Briefs, Another Chicago Magazine, Sure: A Charles
Bukowski Newsletter, Moody Street Irregulars: A Jack Kerouac Newsletter, Kiosk,
Earth's Daughters, Atticus Review, Mallife, Taproot, Transmog, B-City, House
Organ, First Intensity, Mirage No.4/Period(ical), Lower Limit Speech, Texture,
R/IFT, Chain, Antenym, Bullhead, Poetry New York, First Offence, and many
others. For
more than twenty years he has performed his choral voice collages and sound
texts with his intermedia performance ensemble: The Ebma, which has released
two Lps: SEA and Enjambment. His books include: Idyll (Juxta Press, 1996),
Heebee-jeebies (Meow Press, 1996), SleVep
(Tailspin Press, 1995), Vessels
(Texture Press, 1993), Cnyttan (Meow Press, 1993)
, Mooon Bok (Leave Books, 1992)cand Red Rain Too
(1992) and Flight to the Moon (1993) from Run Away Spoon
Press.
wings.buffalo.edu/epc/authors/basinski/basinski.pub.html
Poetry - an Endangered Species?
[An interview with Jennifer K. Phillips]
by Aprilia Zank
A
leading representative of contemporary concrete
poetry, Jennifer K. Phillips, born in
New Zealand and resident in Australia, is also a digital artist,
songwriter, teacher and webmaster. The reader may be puzzled by her
artistic interests going into such divergent directions, yet this
fusion of different forms of art and creative media seems to be
increasingly descriptive of the artistic behaviour of the present
day. Jennifer Phillips herself admits that:
The
exploration of image triggering and message transmission as an
artistic form of communication can cause a blurring of the boundaries
between poetry and art, if we can say that they in fact do have
boundaries. We have created words to say this, such as word art,
concrete poetry, visual poetry, pattern poetry, animated poetry,
visual riddles and puzzle poetry.
(“What is Poetry Becoming?”)
A.Z.:
When did you first discover your love for poetry ?
J.K.P.:
I think the word side of poetry was a gradual building that took
place in my life whereas I think I was born with a love of imagery.
My love for poetry cannot be pinpointed to one instance. It is better
understood as being part of the development of all the forms of
writing and art in my life beginning with the many books that my
parents read to me. I was introduced to poetry before I knew it as an
art form or what it was called. Although I loved listening to stories
it was the pictures that caught my attention to begin with, more than
the rhythm and rhyme of the words.
We travelled a lot when I was young and on our many car trips we
played rhyming and other word games. We laughed as we looked at car
license plates and made funny words from them. I noticed that you
came across my initials JKL when you said the alphabet and I thought
that was clever, but I think it may have been a present that
triggered my curiosity and passion for the juxtapositioning of words.
I was about eight when a boy friend gave me a little china deer and a
card that said, "A wee deer for a dear". This astounded,
delighted and inspired me to think of other interesting things about
words and word patterns such as, “A plain plane”.
As soon as I could write, I began writing stories and plays and put
on little concerts using what I had written. I read poems that other
people had written as part of the performances but it wasn't until I
was 12 years old that I wrote my first poem as a poem. It was part of
a class exercise. I loved it. I remember being surprised that it was
so easy and so much fun and that the activity was called "Poetry".
I had seen and read poems in a range of situations before but somehow
I hadn’t attached the label "Poetry" to them.
Family friends came round for a meal about that time and when they
heard that I was going to be a writer when I grew up, they wanted to
read some of my work. After reading some they said that I should get
my work published. I asked them how and where. They suggested I
start with the children’s section of the Evening Post
newspaper. I took their advice and everything I sent to them was
published. Praise whatever form it takes can trigger a love response.
I think it did in me.
A.Z.: When
trying to give a definition for concrete
poetry,
where would you place the emphasis: on concrete
or on poetry?
J.K.P.:
If I
placed the emphasis on the word “concrete” someone might
think I was talking about a “hard road” if you get my
pun! Concrete is the type of clothing the poetry wears. It is a
branch of the poet tree (poetry) so emphasis depends on where and to
whom the concept is defined. Somewhere in the definition the concept
of concrete would need to be distinguished from other forms of
poetry.
A.Z.: Do you have a certain audience in mind when you
create your poems?
J.K.P.:
Some of the poems I have created
were for specific audiences and situations; others have been
revelations or interesting discoveries about a particular
juxtaposition or shape of the words. I create because I can more
often than because I am considering a particular audience. I did
however create a range of motivational poems to motivate my art
students and I did speak in poetic form in some of the chat rooms I
went to when I first discovered the Internet. I played with the
pattern of the letters and words that others “spoke” and
had a lot of fun. I called myself Silvrwing. The missing e was not a
typo. I was in a philosophy chat room!
Someone
asked me where I came from and I typed, “Silvrwing flies on the
wind of words, she dwells in a land of flightless birds”.
Someone praised me for the way my words could be taken many ways and
I replied with “Silvrwing bow”, which also had a double
meaning and some thought that it was an example of my typoetics.
Should it have been “Silvrwing bows”? The missing s was a
typo but I liked it better the way it came out. As a response I wrote
“Rosetted By the Bow”
Rosetted
By the Bow
Love bowed
to one so low
pointing
out her bow (Oh).
Should she
not congee (Bow and leave)
for the
honour goes to three,
the
greatest to her Beau
who tooled
her with this bow (Oh).
Where
typos are made
To shelter
a typo maid
Where
invitation clicks
To talk to
a lady chick
Love can
be seen……….
I’ll
leave it there. It was a bit of fun on the run!
It was a Christian leader who gave me the idea of putting my poems
into a book, which I did and another Christian leader encouraged me
to keep on publishing books. My four books contain poems that I hope
will appeal to people generally, regardless of the label they attach
to their own belief system or the things they like and dislike. The
songs (musical poems) my books contain are less mobile across the
many possible audiences. They came from the relationship and audience
I have with God. God and I are always my first audience. I often ask
Him for help if I am writing for a specific audience. For the
beginning of my second book I wrote an explanatory poem. I was
thinking of my husband and all those who think that poetry has to
rhyme, when I wrote it:
Do you
think that ‘good’ poetry rhymes?
‘Good’
poetry speaks.
It may be
just a word
but it
opens doors
sometimes
like a snail moving
a seed
growing
sometimes
like a volcano erupting
a machete
slashing.
It clothes
the unseen
makes
visible hidden things
and
publishes that which is silent.
Rhyme is a
style
like the
fashion of clothes
sometimes
‘In’
and
sometimes ‘Out’.
I have
clothed some of the ideas in rhymes
especially
for those of you who think
rhymes are
‘In’.
Whether
its ‘In’ or ‘Out’
may you
find the snippets of truth
in this
clothing store
and share
their treasure.
A.Z.: In the article “What is Poetry becoming?”
you wrote:
“In visual poetry, the juxtaposition of letters,
sound and shapes may be played with. The synergy of these words,
letters and shapes trigger images, sounds and messages that can be
called the art of the poet....making more from the sum of the parts
in a visual communication.”
Do you mean to say that concrete poetry is in the first
place a visual aesthetic experience, or can we talk of such things as
meaning/message to the same extent?
J.K.P.:
We bring or attach meaning to
everything we see including the label of “meaningless”.
To be called “concrete” a poem must have some visual
feature that may not be communicated if the poem is read or
performed. The visual experience whether we attach aesthetic value to
it or not is the first connection we make with the poem, but the
aspect of “synergy” was what I meant to convey in what I
said. Synergy is the key to poetry and the synergy of what is seen
visually is the key to concrete poetry. For instance the words love
and bridge by themselves have meaning and may even have a message if
we meditate upon them. The depth of meaning we give these two words
depends on our interpretation and the complexity of the experience we
have in relation to the words, but if we place them visually together
as I have in the following example, they communicate a lot more than
if you just heard the two words. I have become the director of
thoughts, causing them to go somewhere near what I am thinking about.
This poem contains one word and one image but the synergy of both
produces the poetry. The message the image produces is part of that
synergy.
from my
book “In Their Likeness” (1995)
[Can be
viewed at: www.geocities.com/visualpoetry_au/vpoem19.html]
A.Z.: Can concrete poetry, also, be attributed to social
and political involvement? Could you maybe mention some of your own
poetry in this respect?
J.K.P.:
Yes Aprilia, poetry can be a
powerful political and social comment or changing tool. My concrete
poem “Exhausted”
is a social comment designed with the following message in mind: Some
of the social ailments that we have today could be minimized if we
were not so busy, if we allowed ourselves the time to reflect and
rest. In this “instant coffee” age we tend to rush into
things, grab the ‘quick fix’ solution and end up
exhausted instead of satisfied.
[citwings.com/poetry_Exhausted.html]
I wrote “Solomon’s
Gift” which has a poem within the
poem, after talking with a member of a royal household. It was
politically motivated. It was written rather quickly and is not my
best but I hoped that the message about what we do with our power and
it’s effects would be seen and that it would trigger
reflection.
SOLOMON’S
GIFT
The dawn of man
saw
the dusk of
war
I want what you have
forever more
dusk
A
world-time of loss
propoganded as gain
nations reflecting
the
desire of Cain
scything the harvest of fear
killing the gift of
care
fear
Solomon’s gift
was a crown
happiness all around
for high rank and low
he shared his wealth
a
crown
A king
with the
reign/reigns/rains of peace
and the earth
with itching
ears
But who will share their gifts
the crown of care
to
wear
Dusk, fear, a crown to
wear
or happiness a crown to share?
©2008
A.Z.: What has been the impact of the electronic age on
creativity in general and on creative writing in particular?
J.K.P.:
It has given us more tools, methods
and environments in which to communicate. It has made it possible to
communicate multimedia experiences with a wider audience. It has
opened the door for opportunities for us to be influenced by others
from all over the world very quickly. It has enabled some people with
disabilities to communication and be communicated with more
effectively. The electronic age has improved accessibility in many
ways. To give an example: in the past being able to make an animation
was limited to a very small community in the movie making field, who
had the wealth to own or use such tools. Now anyone with internet
access and the inclination can make an animation using free online
tools. Perhaps the effects of the electronic age on creative writing
can be summed up in the words speed, interactivity, accessibility and
control. One of the specific things that the electronic age has done
for me is eased my frustration. I no longer have to write out my poem
many times in order to correct the typos. I can use the “spell
check” feature of my software….I should use it more
often! I like the control that the electronic age has given us all as
well. We don’t need to be so reliant on others for the
production and publication of what we create. We can self publish
very quickly….. and let us not forget that it has enabled
knowledge to increase. This makes research more accessible and so
creative writing can be more historically authentic or believable.
A.Z.: A prerogative for worldwide
reception of poetry is translatability. Is the new sort of poetry,
especially concrete
poetry, still
translatable?
J.K.P.:
Words are culturally anchored. They
make the sharing of experience possible and meaningful. But we have
trouble even defining words in our own language so translating into
another language has its difficulties. For example the word
“Education“
is a multiconceptual word. The word evokes a spectrum of images
ranging from institutional labels to philosophical ideologies and
signifies a range of activities as diverse as the people engaged in
them, or mentioning them. For some to be called "Educational"
the activity must result in some form of worthwhile personal change
and to others it must have some form of intrinsic worth and choice.
The term is also used to cover any activity in a building or
institution that is labelled "educational". Education seems
to range from being whatever anyone likes to call it, to what the
political power of the day enforces! The conglomeration and
accumulation of opinions and beliefs does not easily produce a
consensus as to what "education" actually is, but we all
think we "know" what we are talking about when we use the
word.
I am teaching myself Hebrew at the moment and I think that all
languages can be translated. A lot however can be gained and lost in
the translation. Some languages lack the variety of words to convey
the nuances of meaning from another culture and colloquiums cannot be
translated word for word, but require contextual understandings.
The difficulties in translating any language are similar to those
that affect the translation of concrete poetry. Bringing meaning to
images has similar problems to those you encounter with words. For
example, religious literacy is needed to understand the symbolism in
much of what we call the “great art” that has been
created by past masters.
Another difficulty is that the meaning of words
and images can change over time. For example the meaning of gladness
is probably no longer triggered by the word “Gay”
and an image of a plane might have triggered thoughts of strange
birds to one of our ancestors if they had a vision of one. It might
trigger thoughts of fear and danger to an indigenous tribe living
simply with little experience of such things. In my concrete poem
Love, those who have heard of the song “Bridge
over troubled waters” may bring a
different meaning to the image of the bridge. The concrete poet as a
director of thoughts has less control when the poem is shared in the
world wide arena.
You may only peak
Into my world.
The subjectivity of words helps and hinders
One perspective.
(From
my poem “Perspective”)
What do you think Aprilia? You are a translator. What are the main
problems you encounter when you translate concrete poetry?
A.Z.: Does tradition still play a role in this new
creative era ?
J.K.P.:
Nothing is created in a vacuum. Traditions are a part of what has
preceded our creativity, they are a part of the “nothing”
that “is new under the sun”. They enable us to bring
meaning to what is new. I may have been the first person to coin the
term “typoetics” or to publish such a poem, but typos and
poetry existed before my “typoetic poetry”. We would not
be able to bring meaning to the word poetry or typo if there was no
tradition of poetry and typing to precede the word. For example,
rhyme may be viewed like the fashion of clothes, sometimes “In”
and sometimes “Out” but when I think of my own poetry,
its effectiveness is dependent upon whether I have used the best
“clothing” to convey the message. If the message is
enhanced by the rhyme then I have done well, if it detracts from the
message then I should have changed the clothing. I feel the same way
about art. The medium affects the meaning and therefore the message
that it conveys. Without traditions how would we classify what we do?
A.Z.:
Are you familiar with
the steampunk
movement?
J.K.P.:
One of the online digital art
communities I belong to has steampunk
as the theme for their latest art challenge, which involves choosing
a traditional myth or legend and reinterpreting it using elements of
gears, springs, brass and steam power. I may have time to work on
something for this challenge
(http://features.cgsociety.org/challenge).
In art I enjoy ‘clothing’ shapes with textures not
usually associated with the shape. From what I understand of
steampunk, they have a fascination and inclination to do this too but
seem to be limited to one period in history. I on the other hand am
not enamoured by one period of history. I like to create parabolic
images, show likenesses and use images synergetically, for example
“Canberra Ice-cream”. The image in the shape of an
ice-cream shows the similarities that the dry land has with the dry
ice-cream cone. The rain clouds that we love because of the drought
are like a cool refreshing ice-cream, and ballooning is like the
lolly on top. It is something extra special and all this is seen from
a balcony view. We like a room with a view and this is the view we
like to see – rain clouds to water the dry earth!
[This can be viewed at citwings.com/art.html]
I do enjoy many of the “kings, castles and Lord of the manor”
stories that are set in the Victorian era and enjoy some of the
modern fantasy movies. I love the elegance of some of the clothing
too! However I have no desire to live in a Victorian type society
that values class distinctions. I love the level “playing
field”, the equality that I find valued and practiced by
Australians. I may have been influenced by the gaming industry to
enjoy the way beauty, adventure and mystery are portrayed in some
recent movies, but I think the timeless qualities of the stories is
what I and others enjoy about them. I have always liked super
realistic imagery and symbolism also appeals to me. I like a story
that has a moral and I like a poem that gives me something. Life is
too short to be wasted on things that do not add value. I hate having
my eyes and ears raped. I think the aim of some of the artists today
is to shock. I have been shocked and I prefer the romanticism of love
to explicit sexual or violent imagery or sound. I can appreciate how
clever some works of this nature are but it is something I would
rather avoid.
I am working towards an integration of message and media. I want my
art works to be a product of my own uniqueness rather than someone
else’s, but that doesn’t mean that I completely disregard
existing poetry styles. I have played with a range of poetic forms
and grabbed words that famous poets have used in the past to trigger
present thoughts. The poem I wrote called “Paradise” has
some examples of this, hinting at Milton and Tennyson:
If
you seek to find this treasure
then
Paradise will wind
her
wisdom arms around you
to
keep you both entwined.
Even
after googling I haven’t seen enough poetry classified as
streampunk
to say much more. If any of my poetry earns the brand it was not
because I planned it that way.
A.Z.: There are poets, critics and
others who say that concrete
poetry and poetry
in general is in a phase of decline. The leading American poet,
critic and educator Dana Gioia, for instance, in his much debated
article “Can Poetry Matter?” (The
Atlantic Monthly,
1991) maintains that poetry has increasingly become the specialized
occupation of a few relatively small and isolated groups. Do you
agree to that?
J.K.P.:
Am I a prophet….? I am not a
statistician. Poetry as “Occupation” probably did belong
to a few in the past. The number of people earning enough money to
say that it is their “occupation” as opposed to being
preoccupied with it may be proportionately similar to the time when
poetry was first published in books after the invention of the
printing press. I don’t have any statistical evidence to make a
judgement. I can say that poetry has been increasing. Just look at
the number of poetry books available now, but then the number of
people in the world has also been increasing so it is a difficult
thing to assess.
We have greater means of storing or “saving” poetry and
it is easier to publish it now. It is certainly more accessible
because of the internet and the groups no longer need to be isolated.
Poetry sites are increasing but so is the number of other sites. In
1991 when Dana Gioia’s article was published, the internet was
not the vehicle it is now so it would be interesting to see if he
still stands by his prediction. I think animated and interactive
poetry is in its infancy, although I haven’t seen much of it
that I would class as animated concrete or visual poetry. It tends to
be animation without the emphasis on the poetic arrangement of words.
In this proliferation of poetry, poetry that astounds, amazes or adds
significant value to our lives has and may always be a “specialised
occupation”. At least now these gems can be shared easily via
email forwarding for example. The more memorable poets we have, the
harder it is to remember them all. Schools certainly had less choice
when it came to memorable poets from which to choose in the past.
I have noticed that many cities now have regular poetry sharing
events and “poetry slams” seem to be very popular. A
similar proportion of poetry groups may have been around in the past.
It just may be that our technologies have made them more visible,
changing our perception of what is really happening.
I have many ideas of how I can use the “poetic clothing”
of animation and interaction to share my messages. When I made my
first animated poem in 2001, I had to format it as a gif file and so
it lost a lot of the information in the file conversion, but now most
browsers read a “Flash” format so I have more freedom to
create a wider range of electronically translatable concrete poems
and more people have the means to see them. If I have many poems
within me yet to be shared, other poets must too. Therefore in the
future I can see much more poetry being published.
[This image can be accessed at: www.poyema.com/wisdom.html]
A.Z.: What can we do for poetry to survive as an
essential act of creation?
J.K.P.:
get to know the “creator”……
(lots of smiles). I hope you don’t mind my smile here! Share
it….share the best of it enthusiastically. If poetry is an
act of destruction, avoid it, unless it makes way for further acts of
creation.
A.Z.: You are a very cooperative person, always ready to
assist young people in their creative endeavour. What advice do you
have for young poets?
J.K.P.: Make
time for poetry. I think a lot of the things I said in my article
“How to promote your art” which can be accessed at
citwings.com/art_promotion.html
apply to poetry. Try substituting the word poetry for art and don't
just read the article. Do what I suggest.
History
into Poetry and the “Word Trade
Center” – American Verse after 9.11
by Chris Tanasescu
The
topic of American verse after 9.11 is quite a complex and demanding
issue to tackle since, practically speaking, an account of all
phenomena that could be entered under such a header actually amounts
to all of the poetry published in the US after the ill-fated attacks,
an enterprise no one would probably undertake to treat exhaustively
lest their were given the time and the space (supposing they had the
expertise) to write a full bulky history of the poetry of almost a
decade of innumerable publications. On the other hand, if by “after”
we mean “as affected by” or “and its most important
trends and evolutions in the wake of those events,” the topic
is again very generous and substantial, and the recent observer can
only venture to pinpoint some of the main landmarks and make (fatally
debatable) predictions regarding the near and the not so near future.
In an attempt to present the Romanian audience with this subject
matter, I have published myself an already one-year long series of
full A3 page long articles in the prestigious monthly literary
magazine, Timpul.
This paper is not going to be a summary of that series of extensive
articles, but a more concisely and academically articulated
expression of my long time interest in and focusing on the
phenomenon.
A
first step in this approach would be discussing the poetry that
explicitly tried to evoke or react to the historical events under
discussion. An impressive number of anthologies have been published
since 2001 in which verse of starkly uneven value expressed various
professional and amateur poets’ response to the great tragedies
that horrified America and the civilized world. Although this shall
hopefully restrain our area of research, things may sometimes prove
tricky, as one can come across poems that have been declared as being
written in relation to those events even if that is not explicit or
plainly apparent in the text.
One
of the most consistent and praised anthologies was the one edited by
Todd Swift and published in 2006, Babylon
Burning. 9/11 five years on. Poems in aid of the Red Cross,
a book that initially started as a website open to international
contributions and that was finally published on print with additional
updated material. It remained though accessible on the internet and
free for everybody to download, on the kind request that the readers
also make donations to the Red Cross. Among the 90 contributors one
can encounter grand figures such as the legendary LANGUAGE poet and
critic Charles Bernstein, Bob Holman a very active poet and poetry
editor who, as we shall see later on here, also edited a 9.11
anthology, the Nuyorican awarded slam poet Hal Sirowitz, the maverick
and monodically metamorphic Nathaniel Tarn, the Australian James
Tranter whose Jacket
magazine is a leading publication in American poetry criticism, etc.
Here is Charles Bernstein’s prose poem “The theory of
flawed design”
The
theory o flawed design is not a scientifically proven alternative to
evolution. It is based on the everyday life experience that natural
selection could not have produced such a catastrophic outcome.
Optimists and the religiously inclined will naturally prefer
evolution as an explanation, since ascribing design to the state of
humanity is almost unbearable. For the rest of us, we must continue
to insist that the theory of Flawed Design be taught cheek and jowl,
neck and neck, mano e mano, with Mr Darwin’s
speculations.
The
theory f flawed design postulates a creator who is mentally impaired,
either through some genetic defect or because of substance abuse, and
is predisposed to behave in a sociopathic manner; although some
Benign Flawed Design theorists, as they call themselves, posit the
radical alternative that the creator was distracted or inattentive
and the flaws are not the result of malevolent will but incompetence
or incapacity.
(Bernstein
3)
The
patriarch of LANGUAGE poetry voices here the grievous dejection of
those who were affected and/or witnessed the tragical events.
Nevertheless, the poem (just as a significant number of other
contributions to the anthology) falls into the category I have
mentioned at the beginning of this discussion, namely the one of the
texts which do not explicitly and sometimes not even in a discernably
allusive way refer to the attacks. But the fact that they are
selected in such an anthology somehow “forces” the reader
to try and refer the poem to the historical events.
Whereas
Language poetics unmask generalities and universals as mere
conventions imposed by a politically informed tradition, this text is
nonetheless a “general” (a theory as the title states in
its facetious manner) or even “archetypal” testimony of
possible reaction towards misfortune, an Eli,
Eli lama sabachtani of sorts in prose
verse. Still, the pervading irony reverses in a very typically
Language manner the established clichés of Western tradition
such as the unfailingness of the (supposed) Maker while also
scuffling with and scathingly teasing the alternative-pretense of
another locus – Darwinism. The underlying poststructuralist
poetics – which David Baker once, while commenting on Susan
Howe, relevantly labeled as “not being nice” (Baker 2000,
120) – is clad in “cheek and jowl” niceties as a
way of being indeed not nice towards the established values which,
just like the “creator” (in lower case, unlike the name
of the theory), the author of the world / poem who erratically
rambles in feigned scientific accuracy.
As
we can find out from a precious secondary source – Susan M.
Schultz’s A Poetics of Impasse in
Modern and Contemporary American Poetry,
where a full chapter is dedicated to Bernstein’s concept of
“dysraphism” (misseaming, seamlessness) and his
“fashioning” of texts out of cultural shreds very much in
the spirit of low feminine cultures such as the ones of design
clothing and fashion – Bernstein reacted immediately after the
attacks in a way that practically denied his life-long (anti)poetics.
Schultz ran an inquiry of her own after the 9.11 attacks (in an
epilogue to the book whence the word play in the title of this
article has been borrowed) in which she emailed or phone contacted
poets of various schools and ages to try to take the pulse of their
reactions towards the events. Bernstein’s accounts of what
happened and of his own reactions and the stories about people’s
solidarity to each other are unmasked by Schultz as being rooted in
the traditional way of writing in which premises related to coherence
and unity (and not the denunciation of such deceitful conventions) as
well as assumptions of a homogenous non-contradictory self of the
speaker (and not intimations of traditional mythologizings of a mere
repository of clichés) are the text generating paradigms
employed by the author.
That
author is obviously the “creator” in the above quoted
poem written by a poet who senses that such a catastrophic historical
event has started an earthquake not only in his community and his own
public life but also in his own psyche and, moreover, in his poetic
voice and his poetics. A stylistic and ars-poetica schizoidism
mirrors the dualism in “The theory of flawed design”
where two structures of power are contested at the same time and thus
mockingly reconciled, an interplay which in its turn constitutes a
correspondence to the historical and political bi-polarity of
American imperialism and fundamentalist Islam.
Thus,
the very image of the Twin
Towers becomes an epitome of both the dualism of a time in which
radical conflicts and stark divides actually stand for equivalent
inequities, as well as for the catastrophic consequences of the
collision between the political Scylla and Charybdis. The iconic
image of the towers and their symbolic potential has been exploited
in numerous poems by poets of different backgrounds and standing.
Poems After the Attack
is an open anthology also available online edited by Margery Snyder
and by the already mentioned poet Bob Holman, who had already urged
the poets as early as September 12th
2001: “Don’t withdraw. Use words!!!” (“Cement
Cloud”), his own contribution being dated September 13th.
One of the poems present in this anthology draws relevantly on the
same iconic image – “I Saw You Empire State Building”
by Edwin Torres. Torres is a young poet who experiments consistently
in poetry performance and multimedia and who also pseudo-theorizes
shrewdly, copiously, and in variegatedly multifarious ways on the
idea of poetry on stage or in interdisciplinariness. Here is the
first stanza:
I
saw you Empire State Building
looking
for your twin brothers
I
saw you
watching
your brothers burning
helpless
to the ground
I
look up at you, tall proud beacon
I
too am a tower
it's
my last name in spanish…
(Torres,
unpag, his spelling)
At
an O’Harian pace and on a Whitmanian tone, Torres identifies
with an older, monumental building, an elder brother of the
collapsing towers, which in comparison with the fallen ones, “ha[s]
more character” (idem). We can see here how the already located
ambiguous symbolism of the twin towers requires a third role-player,
able to solve the vacillation that the fall of the former two
inspires in the heart of poets. Just as by identifying with the dead
Lincoln, Whitman writes, as David Baker deftly points out, a
self-elegy in which not only the dead, but ultimately death itself is
taken through a metamorphic ritual that consecrates a worldly,
“westward” Paradise (Baker 2007, pp 9 et infra, 16-19),
the speaker in Torres’s poem identifies with the emblematic
building in his attempt to find an expiating alternative to the
dead-end dualism of contemporary politics of life and poetry.
The
fashion of online (and sometimes live,
in progress) anthologies evoking the attacks and their aftermath has
reached the much wider contingent of amateur poets, of which some
just discovered that they were poets on the spur of such wide-scale
events and evolutions. In the case of Aimee for instance, 12 years
old at the date of publication, those lines were very likely (among)
the first creative writing attempt(s) ever. “...the workers
stopped working the teachers stopped teaching,/ all the alarms
sounded and the preachers kept preaching...” (“We
Watched…”). Discussing the aesthetic value of such
testimonies would inevitably conjure Adorno’s ghost and his
famous (and often inaccurately quoted) dictum about poetry and
Auschwitz. The dictum is actually two dicta – “writing
poetry after Auschwitz is barbaric” and “It is impossible
to write poetry after Auschwitz” (Adorno 34). But the idea has
been again famously restated by Jerome Rothenberg in his long poem
“Khurbn”: “no meaning after
Auschwitz,/ only poetry is possible”
(Rothenberg 14, italics mine), a restatement that also talks about
the death of a certain side of the poetical, the “death of
metaphor” (ibidem 25); the poet develops his own verse into the
conclusion of this long poem, where we read about a god whose
perfection should make the quintessential trope impossible: “o
god of caves (the stricken fathers cry) if you are light / then there
can be no metaphor” (26).
The
demise of figurative speech together with the assertion of poetry’s
capital importance in post-Auschwitz (and post September 11) eras may
not only invite, as it is the case with Rothenberg, sacred-loaded
“technologies” and avant-garde re-translations of various
tribal traditions, but also a total politicizing of poetry, turning
verse into a spearhead of political struggle, subversive activities,
and unmasking discourse that does away with any established stylistic
and prosodic niceties. It is the case of Amiri Baraka who was New
Jersey’s Poet Laureate at the time of the September 11, 2001
attacks and who wrote soon after them a poem titled “Somebody
Blew Up America,” a poem voicing a stance that certain critics
regarded as flagrant New Anti-Semitism, though Baraka and his
defenders prefer to define his position as Anti-Zionism.
Who
knew the World Trade Center was gonna get bombed
Who
told 4000 Israeli workers at the Twin Towers
To
stay home that day
Why
did Sharon stay away? [...]
Who
knows why Five Israelis was filming the explosion
And
cracking they sides at the notion
(Amiri
Baraka Homepage)
The
fourth line in the fragment quoted above alludes to the fact that
Ariel Sharon, then prime minister of Israel, allegedly cancelled at
the last moment his visit to the US on the day of the attacks.
Protesting against something means here, as it turns out, to use
poetry against another (self-declared and historically acknowledged)
victim. The statement regarding the Israeli prime-minister together
with the other allegations in the above quoted stanza prompted the
Anti-Defamation League of New Jersey to denounce the poem as
Anti-Semitic in a letter they sent to the Governor and in which they
protested on behalf of all residents of New Jersey. The Governor
agreed and asked Baraka to resign, who did not comply and thus made
obvious that there were no legal provisions under which he could be
removed from office. It was only in late 2007 that the Governor
solved the problem by finally eliminating the position once and for
all.
A
less outrageous but definitely craftier and very often more credibly
honest corpus of poems is Poetry After
9-11: An Anthology of New York Poets,
edited by Dennis Loy Johnson and Valerie Merians, a book that made
quite a sensation when it came out in 2002, when some TV networks
even promised that they would include on their daily news shows some
of the poems in the book read by the poets themselves – which
would have been so inspirational since an impressive number of poems
in the anthology are imbued with televised scenes and cinematic
references. Amongst the 45 poets featured were Pulitzer Prize for
Poetry-winner Stephen Dunn, the editor of the Best American Poetry
series David Lehman, Jewish Feminist and National Book Award finalist
Alicia Ostriker – who also signs the foreword, Jean Valentine
and the poets laureate of Brooklyn and Queens, a poet we have already
mentioned above – the Nuyorican Slam Champ Hal Sirowitz, etc.
Stephen Dunn’s poem in that anthology, “To A Terrorist,”
gracefully in the beginning and fiercely afterwards speaks about the
speaker’s understanding for the terrorist’s “ache”
and rage at his (speaker’s) welfare and his country’s
imperial way of being “so muscular,/ so smug, it thinks its
terror is meant/ only to mean well, and to protect,” (Dunn 36)
but, according to the dualist equation we have circumscribed
above, also disagrees with his hypothetical addressee’s
cruelty. “Still, I must say to you:/ I hate your good reasons./
I hate the hatefullness that makes you fall/ in love with death, your
own included.” (idem)
The
courage of such an approach met a reception other brave attempts did
not entertain, or at least not in the beginning. This was the case
with another reputed poet – J. D. McClatchy – whose
“Jihad,” which was later on included in The
Best American Poetry 2003
had a quite bumpy publishing history,
thus proving, through its stunning frankness and openness, how mixed
are the feelings of those affected by and/or involved in those events
and in their media coverage. McClatchy had written a sequence of
three sonnets in which the octaves consisted of two Sicilian
quatrains and the sestinas of two mellifluous tercets rhyming ABC CBA
and which represented, as he himself declared, “pastiche[s] of
the Koran.” (McClatchy 214) What is peculiar about this elegant
poem is that although it had been written long before September 11,
2001, and it just testified the poet’s long-time interest in
Arab culture often evoked elsewhere in his verse, it was solicited
for publication by the op-ed page editors of the New
York Times who somehow learnt of its
existence, shortly after the attacks. To the poet’s amusement,
they called back after a huge wrangle in the editorial board saying
they would eventually not run it because it offended Palestinians.
The surface amusement stemmed from the fact that the poet was
actually in favor of the Palestinian cause, but then, deeper in his
concerns, the stake of such writing was, again, to find certain
political and stylistic / formal alternatives to the notoriously
single-minded two ways of dealing with the issue. “In this
poem, I had wanted to look at things not from the victim’s side
or the dazed teenaged bomber’s, but, as it were, from as remote
a point of view as scripture’s.” (ibidem, 215)
What
could be for one poet the abstracted and serene perspective of the
holy writs is for another the punning and the sour mocking on the
history of science. A sort of West Coast replica of the above
mentioned New York poets anthology came out also in 2002 under the
witty title inspired by one of Mahatma Ghandi’s ear-catching
statements: An Eye For An Eye Makes The
Whole World Blind: Poets on 9/11, whose
editors are the raffish philosophe-poets
Allen Cohen and Clive Matson, of which the former, as we find out
from the book cover presentation, “lives in a basement
apartment in Oakland, CA where he receives improbable impulses to
save the world and celebrate life.” Regarding the latter we are
informed that, “"Squish Boots", his seventh book of
poems, was placed in the coffin of his mentor, John Wieners.
"Delightful and penetrating at the same time, these poems are a
revelation," comments Susan Griffin. John hasn't been heard
from”. The bitter-jocose and anarchist tradition of the West
marks the tone from the very introductory poem (while still major
figures like Robert Pinsky also represent the East in the selection)
which belongs to the legendary Lawrence Ferlinghetti, poet, Beatnick,
painter, director and co-founder of the epoch-making City Lights
press. (Robert Creeley is also present with a contribution not long
before his passing). Ferlighetti’s poem is titled “History
of the Airplane” and pushes tragedy through punning to joke and
then back to the deep historical concerns that pervade his poetry in
general. The mid-story-like opening line brings about a serene
atmospherics which can later on slide into a fake fable tone that
mixes prankish personifications with lurid hovering threats:
And
the Wright brothers said they thought they had invented
something
that could make peace on earth (if the wrong brothers didn’t
get
hold of it) when their wonderful flying machine took off at Kitty
Hawk
into
the kingdom of birds but the parliament of birds was freaked out
by
this men-made bird and fled to heaven
(Ferlinghetti
15)
The
hackneyed perception on the fundamentalist East as the source of all
evil is deconstructed here by tracing it back, dark-humorously to the
(w)righteousness of the West. But thus, despite its fairy tale tone
and its initial playful mood, the poem couldn’t and wouldn’t
find a way out – the conclusion is fierce and apocalyptic, and
the messengers bear no alternative.
This
lack of alternative turns into even harsher indictments of US
imperialism in the case of another great West Coast poet’s
verse – Robert Hass’s. The former US Poet Laureate is
able to combine in his unmistakable way serene contemplation,
landscape and flora pastels, actual and processed/improvised
translations (ranging from Horace to Czeslaw Milosz), meditation on
the state of art and the planet, etc, with the tautest most taunting
critique of scrupleless politics and social/economic inequities. In
one of his Horatian “Imitation” of an ode that originally
spoke of the Parthian wars, a contemporary Sunni mother turns
shuddering to her daughter-in-law after catching sight of a marine
and says: “Pray God our boy / Doesn’t stir up that Roman
animal / Whom a cruel rage for blood would drive / Straight to the
middle of any slaughter.” (Hass 42). The elegant cadences of
the lines in this poem and in others make room at a given moment to a
stolid sturdy text in prose, defiantly titled “Poem” in
which Hass impassibly records some crude and cruel facts. But under
the reportage like tone blisters and throbs a blasting revolt and an
unquenched (though withered) hope:
More
Iraqi civilians have now been incidental casualties of the conduct of
the war in Iraq then were killed by Arab terrorists in the
destruction of the World Trade Center. In the first twenty years of
the twentieth century 90 percent of war deaths were the deaths of
combatants. In the last twenty years of the twentieth century 90
percent of war deaths were deaths of civilians.
There
are imaginable responses to these facts. The nations of the world
could stop setting an example for suicide bombers. …
(Hass
67)
As
compared to the approaches we started with in the beginning of this
article, where certain voices were trying to find an alternative to a
stark stultifying dualism, these latter poetical responses come with
both a grimmer diagnostic and a more responsible and wider, planetary
perspective. Theirs is also a perspective given by the distance in
time which fostered lucidity on the matter but not forgetfulness of
its ongoing painful and expanding consequences.
What
about the Midwest? David Baker, the most prominent poetic voice of
the region, edited in 2007, together with Ann Townsend an impressive
collection of essays (already quoted here), Radiant
Lyre, a bulky volume consisting of
essays on a systematically organized table of issues in the strict
field of lyric, contributed by only the two editors and five other
poet–academics (seven co-authors of which only two live and
work ‘strictly’ off the Midwest area). The book is
undoubtedly one of the most outstanding prose accomplishments of the
recent years and shall be paid, I am sure, even more and more
attention as the time passes over (or lyrically speaking, to
paraphrase one of the editors, into)
it. I have already reviewed it for the Romanian audience, and this is
not the place for a review in English. I shall just briefly point out
some of the aspects that are relevant to this article’s topic.
First,
there is no reference whatsoever to 9-11 nor to its consequences. As
a matter of fact, no references are made to historical events in
general unless they are connected to issues of literary history, and
it so happens that apart from the analyses they conduct on Greek and
Latin classics, English Renaissance poets or Romantics, and American
founding figures such as Whitman, Dickinson, Pound, and Stevens, none
of the contributors who goes deeply into contemporary verse quotes
any poem related to the 9-11 attacks or to anything political in
particular. One could suspect a die-hard New Criticism heritage here,
including via the Kenyon Review,
where Baker holds the position of Poetry Editor. But then, Baker’s
poetry itself often proves so pregnantly that ‘the most lyric’
elegies and pastorals can be ‘very’ political.
Hence
we may conclude that it was not the lack of value or the triviality
of subject in any poem inspired by or reacting to those events that
prevented the contributors from bringing them to the reader’s
attention. It is rather the general focus and approach of the
collective work (the area spanned is at the same time so specialized
and so immensely wide that for instance John Kinsella’s New
Arcadia, so much within these bounds,
only gets to be mentioned once) and also the poetics of some of the
contributors that result in such consequences. In the “Introduction,”
the editors delineate the scope of this work as they define the
exterior of a poem not as the historical context in which it emerges
but its “linear body” (Baker and Townsend xi), while the
questions to be asked further on are stated as “why a
particular landscape… or time” (idem) inspires a lyrical
poem and not what
landscape and time. Landscapes and time become specific only when
there are deemed as paradigmatic for a whole culture, e.g. the
endless trail of the sun westward (and beyond death) and the autumnal
harvest moon season which are in Baker’s and respectively
Stanley Plumly’s view the perennial axes of reference of the
poetic Americana. The contributors favor the idea of free-play and of
poetry writing as a means of discovery (“we write poems to find
out what our poetry is like” (idem), and also Richard Jackson
writing on Horace and beyond – “This process of discovery
[…] is perhaps the central driving impulse of the process of
making poems,” Jackson 71) and are not so much into
irrelevantly depicting obtrusive realities. The subject matter of
such approaches is literary history and not history, and moreover, it
is neither history nor atemporality but, as Baker argues in another
contribution, “time [, which] is an inevitable, central element
in lyric poetry […] [for] time provides the subject, the
story, and the style of lyric poetry.” (Baker 2007, p 239).
Thus,
while never mentioning any 9-11 related poetry, the Radiant
Lyre anthology masterfully instructs
about masterly ways in which poets of the (ancient to closer) past
dealt with such subjects and is probably one of the best guides on
how a
contemporary poet could (or sometimes even should) write valid and
hopefully relevant 9-11 poems.
While,
as we have seen, and are savagely simplifying in such a short
account, the West gains momentum and perspective by combining its
rough radicalism with its refinement in diversity, and the East,
which has started with o flood of evocations of the attacks, seems to
have gone back to its “avant-garde”, “language”
and subcultural discourses, the pastoral Midwest stayed on its track
and finally provided an amazing lyrical poetry aesthetics, poetics
and poetry craft kaleidoscope that can help best with tackling in
verse both personal and public capital events. But although the West
and the Midwest prove a consistency that can lithely and extensively
accommodate change, it is the metropolitan East that sounds the bugle
of overthrow and renewal as infra-language trans-genre musicians like
Harryette Mullen and assamblationist Flarfs like Kilem S. Mohammad
surreptitiously depose Howe and Bernstein by means of oblique
emphasis on content, contortedly passionate Ellipticals (to borrow
Stephen Burt’s term) like David Berman, Lucie Brock-Boido and
Suji Kwock Kim may outstrip the last year’s MTV Poet John
Ashbery, subtle formalists and visionaries like D.A. Powell, Brian
Teare and Dan Chiason (backed by David Wojahn and Dana Gioia)
try to bury Robert Duncan’s ghost and Timothy Steele for good,
exuberantly dark and oneiric humorists like Mathew Rohrer and Joshua
Beckman want to wring the necks of Charles Simic and Billy Collins,
Lorca-time-cadenza-dancing Monica de la Torre and Tracy K. Smith
would gracefully outride (via Espada) Bly and Charles Wright, etc,
etc. But still, beyond the frontier, in the vast territories of James
Wright – and more recently David Baker – Rexroth,
Theodore Roethke, Richard Hugo and Gary Snyder – younger poets
like the freely-riding Amazon Karen Volkman, the spooky gold-digger
G.C. Waldrep, and the melancholy haiduk Ilya Kaminsky may have
actually started themselves the really fierce revolution in poetry.
I
know all these geographical and stylistic labels are evanescent and
can sound and sometimes even prove deceitful, but that is what the
frankness and commitment of the speakers in quite a significant
number of 9-11 poems actually sound or even prove to be like, for
various reasons. Experience in and into verse are not always true to
each other and even less often to any rhythmically signifying
universe(s). Switching from off-beat to on-beat (and the other way
round) with the world may be the real craft of the poet, in a way
which should make people ask themselves not only who is s/he, but
sometimes also who they are. But the scene grows wider and
wider, and it seems that the murderous explosions of September 11
have, on the unhoped-for upbeat, also been the signal for an amazing
outburst of poetically creative energies.
Note:
This article has also been selected for publication in the 2009
biennial RAAS-Fulbright academic anthology.
Works
Cited:
Adorno,
Theodor W, trans. Samuel and Shierry Weber. Prisms. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press, 1967.
Aimee.
“We Watched…” on the Free
Republic
website, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1699653/posts,
09.12.2006, initially posted on the 9/11
Poems
webpage, 09.24.2001, accessed on 1o June 2008,
http://www.firehotquotes.com/911/911-3.html
Baker,
David. “Elegy and Eros: Configuring Grief” in David Baker
and Ann Townsend, Eds. Radiant Lyre. Essays on Lyric Poetry.
Saint Paul, MN: Graywolf Press, 2007: 5-19.
Baker,
David. “To Think of Time” in David Baker and Ann
Townsend, Eds. Radiant Lyre. Essays on Lyric Poetry. Saint
Paul, MN: Graywolf Press, 2007: 235-246.
Baker,
David and Ann Townsend. “Introduction” in David Baker and
Ann Townsend, Eds. Radiant Lyre. Essays on Lyric Poetry. Saint
Paul, MN: Graywolf Press, 2007: xi-xvi.
Baker,
David. Heresy and the Ideal. On Contemporary Poetry. Fayetteville,
AR: University of Arkansas Press, 2000.
Baraka,
Amiri. “Somebody Blew Up America”, Amiri Baraka Homepage,
October 2001, 12 June 2008, http://www.amiribaraka.com/blew.html
Bernstein,
Charles. “The theory of flawed design” in Todd Swift, Ed.
Babylon
Burning. 9/11 five years on. Poems for the Red Cross.
2006: p. 3, 10 June 2008
http://www.nthposition.com/babylonburning.pdf
Burt,
Stephen. “The Elliptical Poets” in Jerry Harp and Jan
Weissmiller, Eds. A Poetry Criticism Reader. Iowa: University
of Iowa Press, 2006: 61-84.
Dunn,
Stephen. “To A Terrorist” in Dennis Loy Johnson and
Valerie Merians, Eds. Poetry After 9-11: An Anthology of New York
Poets. New York: Melville House, 2002: 36.
Ferlinghetti,
Lawrence. “History of Airplane” in Allen Cohen and Clive
Matson, Eds. An Eye For An Eye Makes The
Whole World Blind: Poets on 9/11. Oakland,
CA: Regent Press, 2002: 15-16.
Hass,
Robert. Time and Materials. Poems 1997-2003. New York:
HarperCollins Publishers, 2007.
Holman,
Bob. “Cement Cloud” on the About.com:
Poetry website,
13 Sept 2001, 11 June 2008,
http://poetry.about.com/library/weekly/aa091201a.htm
Jackson,
Richard. “Eros and the Erotics of Writing” in David Baker
and Ann Townsend, Eds. Radiant Lyre. Essays on Lyric Poetry.
Saint Paul, MN: Graywolf Press, 2007: 66-85.
McClatchy,
J. D. “Jihad,” plus a prose explanation of the poem in
the “Contributors’ Notes” section in Yusef
Komunyakaa, Guest Editor and David Lehman, Series Editor. The Best
American Poetry 2003, New York: Scribner Poetry, 2003: 120-121;
214-215.
Rothenberg,
Jerome. Khurbn & Other Poems. New York: New Directions,
1989.
Schultz,
M. Susan. A Poetics of Impasse in Modern and Contemporary American
Poetry. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press, 2005.
Torres,
Edwin. “I Saw You Empire State Building” in Bob Holman
and Margery Snyder, Eds. Poems
After the Attack,
online poetry anthology, 2001, 12 June 2008,
poetry.about.com/library/weekly/aa092501h.htm
A
philosophical inquiry and expansion on the types of the Post-modern
Informational Societies and their dynamics, as presented in Andrei
Marga’s “Dignoses, articles and essays”
by Ormeny
Francisc-Norbert
In
his most recent book, “Diagnoses, Articles and
Essays”(Diagnoze, Articole şi
Eseuri) Professor Andrei Marga, when approaching
the mediatic culture, draws our attention upon the necessity of
making as clear as possible the following distinction:
-the
society of communications
-the
society of cognition(also known as “a society which fosters
knowledge-sharing”)
-the
society of communication
-the
society of transparency
-the
mediatic society
These
five types of society re in fact, five dangerous “false-friends”.
The
Society of Communications
is
seen by Andrei Marga as a society of information; more precisely of
raw data…of data flowing bluntly, like a river toward the
sea/ocean. What counts here is the circulation of data(if possible,
at the fastest achievable speed[1]).
Here a consesnsus, or some other types of agreement upon the
transmitted information out of the agenda.
It
is the natural consequence of consistently applying the basic
fundamentals of
cybernetics
in the civil sphere. It managed to develop a highly sophisticated and
consolidated infrastructure for spreading the data. But the
civilians, in the absence of some appropriate techniques for
processing/ analyzing/using such big waves and mountains of data, see
themselves in an utter impossibility of giving the slightest
(real)“use-value” to any of such piece of information
they constantly receive. It is as if being thirsty in an ocean of
water from which they are unable to drink as they lake the
appropriate techniques for the desalting of ocean/sea water.
Here,
within such a society, communication is reduced to the very act of
broadcasting news(and never goes an inch further than this). The
unavoidable consequence of this is the fact that the mechanical news,
as heard on tv, slowly but surely becomes but a noise – like
the electrical whizzing sound produced by neon.
Andrei
Marga’s final conclusion related to this type of society is
that a society of communications does not necessarily
imply/denote/equal a communicational society (too). A communicational
society is supposed to be based on the exchange of thoughts,
messages, or information, as by speech, signals, writing, or
behavior…in short, on a real interpersonal rapport. Within a
society of communication one finds only the raw circulation of data,
without any concern for feed-back; for its proper assimilation; or
for achieving its envisaged target. In order to obtain a real
feed-back(which would be able to place you in a true
society of communication), one needs, first and foremost a
correct assimilation of information. That is, one cannot go/evolve
straight from a society of communications to a society of
communication-he needs an intermediary phase. This intermediary and
necessary phase in the transition from a society of communications to
a society of communication is what Andrei Marga calls “a
society of cognition”.
The
Society of Cognition
The
question arises: Why is a society of
cognition needed in order for us to be able to successfully evolve
from a society of communications to a society of communication?
The answer is: BECAUSE, IN ORDER TO TRULY EVOLVE, FIRST AND FOREMOST,
A CORRECT ANDCOMPLETE ASSIMILATION ON THE PART OF THE RECEIVER MUST
TAKE PLACE. Such assimilation will find its most complete and
fertile processing within the Society of Cognition. Here I am
talking about the possibility to put „the
matter” through the correct steps of
the bestly contextualized procedure; about the possibility to
prepare, treat, or convert “the matter” (in order to o
gain an understanding or acceptance of something; to come to ideal
terms with something) by subjecting it to the most desirable process;
about the possibility to perform appropriate operations on data.
Should
we consult The Free Dictionary by Farlex for the word
“cognition” at the following location on the Internet
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cognition,
, we are to find the following definitions:
“1.
The mental process of knowing, including aspects such as awareness,
perception, reasoning, and judgment.
2.
That which comes to be known, as through perception, reasoning, or
intuition; knowledge.”[2]
By
simply regarding the above given definitions one could see that
within cognition one no longer simply absorbes information(like a
sponge); that, within cognition one also develops some techniques by
means of which he filters and processes that very information. For
this reason, Andrei Marga calls such societies “societies
nurtured by diversity and its capacities.”
Communities
are based on shared concepts. In Andrei Marga’s vision,
cognition equals a community’s capacity to generate/produce
concepts:”While the <<society of communications>>
simply demanded us to further spread the infrastructure on which the
information circulates, the <<society of cognition>>
requires, the absorption, the spreading but also the production of
cognition.”[3] By
replacing the necessity to spread knowledge with the necessity to
produce knowledge(even while absorbing it), such societies gave the
decisive impulse for economic and cultural developments, in the sense
that such impulses found their expression in proactive
politics. The proactive politics are project-based politics having as
prime engine resourceful initiatives, pensiveness
as
resulted from an authentic process of knowledge-sharing, and a
fertile collaboration with the public interest(instead of simply
subordinating it to some immutable patterns of absorption). In
Andrei Marga’s view, Cognition should be regarded as the very
engine behind social activities and not as some sort of auxiliary
element within the equation of such actions. Professor Marga speaks
of Singapore as being illustrative for the success of such a theory:
in 1965 it was known as an underdeveloped country, but, by means of
proactive politics targeted at cultivating abilities with high social
applicability, it managed to turn itself into an emblematical country
for what the idea of modern development should stand for. When all
these requirements are met successfully, we nter the Society of
Communication…a sort of utopia in matters of fertile political
feed-back.
The
Society of Communication
Such
a society will, first and foremost, systematize the concord among the
participants at the social dialogue ; it will make sure that such
participants understand what is being said and that they filter
through their own personalities the message and then re-release it
into society in a Hegelian
manner
( but not as they received/absorbed it but embellished with their
inner creative subjectivity).It is based on RATIONALITY,
ON COMMUNICATION AND ON ARGUMENTATION. The intersecting point of
these three elements should be the CONCORD
among the participants at the conversational act. Such a concord will
evolve on four distinct flexible (shape-shifting) patterns:
“intelligibility of messages, the conformity to fact or
truth-on the part of the speakers, the veracity of assertions, the
participants’ righteous interaction to communication.”[4]
Such a vision upon human relations clearly carries the scent of
Utopia,
and as any Utopia, it is heavily inclined to remain a pure
theoretical concept, devoid of actual substance and with no relation
to reality(future/past/present) whatsoever.
In
order to make this “society of communication” work for
us, we must carefully and wisely
purge it of Idealism while impregnating it with the most invigorating
because rigorous Pragmatism.
To better illustrate this first thesis of mine, I will use Mihail
Bakunin’s heavy critique of Idealism together with
William James’s vision on Pragmatism, as inspired from that of
Charles Sanders Peirce.
a)
Bakunin’s main point in his masterpiece “God
and the State” is that, should one want to efficiently
manipulate the masses into following his credo, what he has to do is
to first and foremost impregnate those masses with Idealism, The more
exuberant and juvenile the Idealism sown in the brains of the
followers, the more fluent their obedience. Religion and the State
understood this principle and, in their times of absolute tyranny,
they gained a tremendous amount of power by assuming their mission
and persona as divine guiding lights, as absolute principles with an
unquestionable authority over this life as well as over the life
beyond.
Ştefan
Bolea in his “Ontology
of Negation”
observes that “Idealism (an appellation for religion and
theological metaphysics) taken as a drug, is an instrument for
control.” [5]
In
order to better illustrate his theory, Bakunin quotes Proudhon: “The
ideal is but a flower, whose root lies in the material conditions of
existence.” [6]
Concerning
poets, poetry and the social implications of their art, Bakunin
notes:” The more sincere these believers and poets of heaven,
the more dangerous they become.” [7]
Now,
speaking of poets and literature, one can’t fail to notice that
the comparison between Idealism and Flowers is a technique very dear
to literature; a technique more dear to literature than to
philosophy:
-
Nikos Kazantzakis in his “Alexis
Zorba” makes a similar point: the
main character, after remarking the wild beauty of a flower, asks
himself vexed, why that flower needs dirt and blood and filth in
order to rise and shine; why does beauty grow only out of swampy
filth.
-
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry’s flower which embellishes an
entire desolated planet, still has thorns: ” The flowers have
been growing thorns for millions of years(...)And it’s not
serious, trying to understand why flowers go to such trouble produce
thorns that are good for nothing?(…) The thorns are of no use
at all. Flowers have thorns just for spite!” [8]
In
order to become freethinkers (the only way to evolve, or as
Bakunin puts it, the only way to achieve “the development and
realization of all the natural laws in the world”[a long
euphemism for evolution]; the only context in which a real
dialogue could e established ) we must start by abolishing all forms
of idealism.
If
we take or example nowadays radicalized terrorism and inflamed
jingoism(both heavily broadcasted through media channels…and
even in the form of negative publicity, they can’t fail to
produce a strong impact ), we can’t fail to see that
Idealism, ultimately results into desperate and violent behaviour,
and is an excellent fuel for hatred and social maladaptation.
The
Society of Cognition should be a society where a healthy assimilation
of concepts would take place in order to prepare the emergence of the
Society of Communication. Yet, Idealism appears within this equation
of assimilation as the most evil and perfidious possible catalyst: it
sabotages the healthy assimilation of concepts by facilitating some
mental and emotional processes while utterly inhibiting others(or
dissolving them, like a solvent) and thus manipulating the
course of assimilation to the advantage of some well disguised
interest groups.
Andrei
Marga praises RATIONALITY as the basis for COMMUNICATION
AND ARGUMENTATION(argumentation being seen as a superior level within
communication; a level below innovation but above the ordinary/daily
speech acts) and, he further praises these two elements(COMMUNICATION
AND ARGUMENTATION) as the ultimate basis for the CONCORD among
the participants at the conversational act.
But
without a scientifically correct and a humanely healthy assimilation
of concepts, there is no RATIONALITY.
The
question arises: WHY IS RATIONALISM WEAKER THAN IDEALISM?(as the
Inquisition, the Totalitarian Systems and nowadays Media Manipulation
have proved)
My
answer is the following: because humans are, first and foremost
spiritual and spiritualized creatures and this translates itself into
an immutable propensity for mysticism. Ideals and Idealism (as
a state of mind) are dangerous sirens/mermaids and an overwhelming
percentage of people still fall for their seductive chants. We have
an inborn impulse to become lunatic when faced with a skillful
rhetoric…to fall for words(Adolf Hitler is maybe the best
illustration in this sense). When this impulse gets combined with a
taste for fancy, the overall process will fire the insanity. Within
the very same psychological pattern, the endurance to madness by
means of reason occupies a lower and weaker level (that is why we are
fascinated by robots and we try to create them as soon as
possible - hoping that they will live at a more effective level of
existence by minimizing emotions to the advantage of reason and
functionality). Rationalism and judgement don’t have the
same energy to mobilize our spirits, as madness does. This happens
because reasoning rejects the fancy and takes its refuge in a cold
Cartesian equation. Thus, rationalism plays foul
against itself. In order to become successful once again and in order
to be able o prevail over madness, it has to be deeply re-humanized,
on the basis of philosophies such as William James’s.
The
final point to be made here is inquire ourselves into the ways by
means of which we could find the precise location of that fatal
point-of-no-return where a conviction degenerates into a
prejudice(thing which happens most of the time because of the evil
catalyst-solvent called “idealism”). We also have to
inquire ourselves into the techniques by means of which we could
recognize and later on avoid stepping into the trap of this
point-of-no-return … In order to be able to do this,
we’ll have to regard the process of assimilation of information
and building of concepts(within the society of cognition) and the
process of valorization of knowledge through dialogue and
collective mobilization(within the society of communication) not with
prefabricated and inherited(in the sense of taken for granted)
enthusiasm and idealism BUT with a humanized rationality and with
constructive criticism. The place where such humanized rationality
and constructive criticism coagulate into a healthy and fluctuant
pragmatism(within which valorization equals capitalization) is
William James’s concept of cash-value.
b)
William James’s pragmatism can be interpreted as a form of
radical empiricism[9] or as a
“practicalism” obsessed by physical results that can
reflect the value of a person, action or idea in “cash”
terms (the cash-value concept):
-
“The
great English way of investigating a conception is to ask yourself
right off, <<What is it known as? In what facts does it result?
What is its cash-value, in terms of particular experience? And what
special difference would come into the world according as it were
true or false?>> Thus does Locke treat the conception of
personal identity”.[10]
-
“The
cash-value of matter is our physical sensations”.[11]
Those
who have comprehended Kant’s “Critic of practical
reason”, remained with the impression that, in Greek,
there is a huge difference between the terms “praktikos”
and “pragmatikos”. This difference can be compared
with the Earth’s two opposing poles.
James
saw efficiency as an aim in itself and made his philosophy a cult of
efficiency. He managed to demonstrate that the two Greek terms are in
fact not that entirely different as it was previously thought. A
necessary link should exists between the two for the “whole”
to be able to function properly. James connected the concepts through
a genial castling: within pragmatism he shifted the focus from
rationality (Peirce) to perception and extreme personalization of
experience. This becomes obvious if one analyses the definition
of pragmatism from both sides:
Peirce:
“Consider
what effects, that might conceivably have practical bearings, we
conceive the object of our conception to have. Then, our conception
of these effects is the whole of our conception of the object(…)In
order to ascertain the meaning of an intellectual conception one
should consider what practical consequences might conceivably result
by necessity from the truth of that conception; and the sum of these
consequences will constitute the entire meaning of the
conception.”[12]
-
James
reformulating Peirce’s maxim: “Thus,
in order to bring full clarity to our ideas upon an object we must
consider the practical repercussions that the object could
include-what to expect to on what concerns perceptions and reactions.
Our conception on these repercussions, be they un-mediated and
delayed, constitutes for us the entire conception on the object, as
far as it has a positive significance.”[13]
Whoever
compares these two passages can quickly remark that James accentuated
the role of perception as terrain for identification of the
significance.
James’s
philosophy fits itself in the pattern of Bismarck’s
Realpolitik: “the aim must be achieved with a maximum of
efficiency, and in order to do so, one must not stumble upon issues
of morals and sentimentalism”. Here we enter the sphere of the
Nietzschean concept of “ubermensch”(* superman)- the man
who lives beyond morality, beyond good and evil and who values the
community correctly precisely because he managed to value himself
firstly. James’s thesis according to which the true ideas are
those that function and can be verified, doesn’t have to be
interpreted as a thesis that excludes morality but one that is based
on liberty and creativity. The latter is necessary in the
individual’s process of appropriation of the concepts of Good
and of God. The man’s
relationship
with God and with his Inner-Self must function as a burning torch
fueled by inspiration and by the desire to know the divine beauty
(unlike a mirror that merely reflects, or even worst, deforms God’s
image). To this end, the American philosopher has decided “to
construct the human spirit in the model of a torch not that of a
mirror”[14].
The
“Cash-value”
concept, in matter
of dialogue,
would express itself, at the level of the individual, in the will to
read between the lines(if necessary) in order to find and to valorize
the slightest element which could be somehow useful for you and for
your community; in the will to replace manipulation and despotic
orders with PERSUATION[15]; in
the will to try to help an eternal “other” improve his
communicational skills(within an honestly well-intentioned team-work
– because this is precisely what James says, namely that the
“cash-value”concept is desirable only when it is backed
by a positive/well-intentioned/benevolent attitude towards society
and life in general) – because only when communication
fluctuates freely between both sides(receiver and transmitter), will
the transition from words to actual facts be an easy-achievable
one(that is, only then, the putting of ideas into real-life practice
will come naturally). This, I suppose, could be considered the
definition of an adaptable mental equilibrium.
The
society of transparency
Transparency
should imply openness and communication. It is a metaphorical
extension of the meaning used in the physical sciences: a
“transparent” object is one that can be seen through.
In
government, politics, business and law the concept of transparency
must be understood as the ultimate opposite of privacy. An activity
can be called “transparent” only if all information about
it is open to the public and, preferably - freely available.
The
army is by tradition the social sphere where transparency feels least
at home Military men would often classify their operations and
projects as secret or confidential. From the point of view of
national security it could be accepted as an unpleasant but necessary
must. Yet, in time, such attitudes will most surely result into
malevolent secrecy and corruption. Privacy opens an
irresistible opportunity for the authorities to abuse the system in
their own interest. Transparency, as a political concept, was
introduced as a means of holding public officials accountable and
fighting corruption.
In
the social daily routine, transparency usually appears in the form of
government meetings open to the press and the public. Within such
meetings, where the participation of citizens and of media is allowed
and even encouraged, laws, rules and decisions are open to
discussion. In this way, Transparency creates an everyday
participation in the political processes. This kind of participation
is a basic principle within Modern Democracies, in the sense that it
gave birth to collocations such as “participative democracy”
– one of the most closely connected to the will of the people
type of democracy.
Unfortunately,
as Madame Bovary(Gustave Flaubert) put it, there is a darker
and abyssal side in every achievement and reason for happiness. Every
use is cursed to have an abuse. The abuse and the reversed side of
Transparency is the Panopticon.
Mass
Media is involved in both the Transparency and the Panopticon.
In
order to be able to provide its consumers with the most
complete possible general image of truth, the media would often
unethically intrude the private sphere of the individual. The State
will encourage such a behaviour on the side of the Media as it hels
Him to better monitor its citizens – the best example in this
sense is provided by Orwell’s “1984”, where TV
monitors are ever-present in order to erase the slightest privacy(and
thus possibility of freedom).
Foucault
politicized the technological gaze(metaphorically assimilating the
general concept of media to Jeremy Bentham’s panopticon[16])
and he stated that such a gaze comes at us through the official
ideologies of truth which verify the realities of everyday life.
These ideologies are present in systems of discourse and centered in
those institutional formation which produce truth, including the
universities. Taken to new heights by the advanced technological
societies, these ideologies of truth are implemented through ever
more sophisticated systems of surveillance.
The
ubiquitous presence of the media is realized not just through the
classical mediatic channels ( TV, cinema, radio and newspapers),
but, as Norman K. Denzin
observes(in his book entitled “The
Cinematic Society”, London, SAGE
Publications, 1995),
by other smaller but not less malevolent in what concerns the nature
of their usages, devices.
We
live in an “Information Age” filled with databases,
electronic spreadsheets, desk-top publishing, automated tellers,
computer-assisted instruction, virtual realities and artificial
intelligence. Denzin explains the phenomenon more clearly: “not
only aerial viewing and listening devices, but also radar and contact
microphones, hidden transmitters, satellite monitoring systems, body
microphones, data surveillance systems, computer monitors, hidden
cameras, international detective agencies, wiretaps, electronic
intelligence kits, intercom systems, personality tests, lip-reading,
miniature surveillance devices, two-way mirrors, credit card
monitoring systems, undercover agents, parabolic and shotgun
microphones, photochrimic micro-images, television-eye monitoring,
public opinion polls, managed news releases, subliminal suggestion
methods, radio-detection and frequency probes, radioactive tagging,
faked documents, scrambling and signalling devices, sniperscopes,
sonic-wave devices, spectograms, super-spy devices, video-tapes, high
powered telescopes, voice-prints, DNA prints, X-rays, and
ultra-violet surveillance techniques.” And I would add to this
list the zodiac-readings, that are also a part of the strategy of
total monitorization(reminiscences
if not even a continuation and a persistence Marx’s
“maximum-security society”).
The
citizen of such a society has internalized this type of gaze(the gaze
which unveils the private and makes it public) to the point where he
turns himself into an agent of surveillance; a miniaturized terminal
located somewhere on the tentacles of the octopus(the maximum
security society is a society which tries to embrace us all, like a
Leviathan-Octopus): “In this society, each individual has
interiorized the hearing and visual gaze of an <<>objectified>
external, generalized, nameless, often faceless, other. This
technological other is everywhere and nowhere, in hidden cameras and
recording devices, in telephone answering machines, electronic mail
systems and home burglar alarm systems(...) A pornography of the
visible is now everywhere. Nothing is any longer hidden.”[17]
We
live on a broad horizon of “voyeuristic otherness”, where
the other’s presence is variously disguised, hidden, obtrusive
and taken into account and noticed: “I buy gas at my local
service station and watch myself on a video camera paying for my
purchase, I check my E-mail and find dirty messages from an angry
student”(observes Denzin out of his personal daily experience)
Doctors,
anthropologists, tourists, space-observers are, in Denzin’s
view, “disguised voyeurs” and hidden journalists and he
asserts that “disguised research is unethical”[18]
The
State, in implementing such a Devilish all-intrusive technological
dimension, played heavily on the paranoia of its subjects ( more
precisely on their fear of remaining uncovered/unbacked in front of
the unknown) and thus defeated and subjected them with their own
weapons(by turning their needs[for protection] against them): “Guilt
connected to illicit[here Denzin speaks about the voyeur], secret
looking has all but disappeared. It has been replaced and displaced
by the fear that if one’s personal surveillance system is not
in place, he or she will be attacked by the hidden, invisible
other.”[19]
Denzin’s
main thesis and conclusion is that “there
is a subtle and sudden switching of surveillance codes, from
Foucault’s panopticon to a system of detrerrence where the
person gazed upon is the person doing the gazing”[20]
- that is, the once gazed upon one, inevitably becomes a gazer,
a perfect agent of the system. The harder the “re-education of
the heretic”, the loyal the re-educated one gets to be –
as George Orwell has demonstrated with his character- Winston.
The
collocation “ a mass-mediated society” makes the
perfect junction between Marxism and the Media.
In
this context, the Western per excellence
ideal and project of an “Autonomous
Individual”(self-initiating and self-determinig human agent)
becomes highly problematic.
The
beautiful English first personal pronoun written with capital
letter-“I” becomes highly questionable in matters of what
it stands for nowadays…should it really stand for something
and not be just an abstract and weird-looking sign on the paper. The
real question arises in the following terms: “Is there still a
sense of Individuality and Sacred Privacy lurking in the Western
atmosphere, somewhere underneath the heavy shadows filled with
uranium clouds of guilt left behind by The Nazi unpardonable
mistakes…or, this sacred sense gets more and more devoid
of substance, wit and inventiveness, every day which passes by,
approaching extinction(understood as “A
gradual decrease in the excitability of a nerve to a previously
adequate stimulus, usually resulting in total loss of
excitability”[21]).
At best and most desirable, it undergoes a process of transformation
– as the German pronoun did after the Second World – War,
when, because of the political pressure, it had to make room for the
English and the French equivalent pronouns. This subtle aspect is
brilliantly rendered by Martin Amis in his novel - “Time’s
Arrow”. In this book, Martin Amis makes a brilliant
remark on the philosophy of this first personal pronoun singular,
showing us how, after what happened with Hitler, the German variant
was forced to give free way to the French and to the English ones: ”
<<I>>
in English sounds noble and vertical, <<Je>> in French
has a certain power and intimacy...while the German <<Ich>>
resembles the sound of disgust produced by a kid when looking at his
shit from the toilet.”
The
failure of the Nazi Germany also meant the rise to power of Marxism
and of other doctrines of equality. The worse consequence of this was
the socialist industrialization and monitoring/constant surveillance
through technological devices(installed in order to increase[so they
said] the efficiency of the Overall System; and in order to provide
social safety and unmistakable and safe patterns of evolution). This
constant surveillance and, more or less, forced-integration into the
technological(and later computerized) society, brought about
leveling down of standards; of expectations; and induced a general
and irresistible trend toward social conformism(trend which opened
new horizons for manipulation).
But,
in the very middle of all this Argus-hysteria,
the Western society must surely have asked itself many
questions among which the following: “Whenever
we see an ant-hill what really scares us ? The fact that they have
long antennas, tens of legs, bodies covered with scales and hair,
that they secrete incessantly all kinds of disgusting substances-or
the total lack of individuality that reigns in there?” Nobody
has a personal life, each and every individual sacrifices all his
life and energy for the sake of the community, a perfect communist
society. Sexual difference between two warrior-ants, for the eye of
an amateur is a catch 22 dilemma. It is like in a communist utopia
where the woman is strongly masculinized, turned into a hard worker,
a true comrade if not even a brother at arms for the man.
The
power of our machines assures our mastery over the natural
environment. Unfortunately, they also turn our society into a
programmed society where rationalization(planning, organization,
automation) leave little room for independent actions and
spontaneity.
The
concept of “self” has a whole history behind, is a
lifelong project: for instance, the Socratic maxim said “know
yourself” and Rousseau spoke of “amour de soi”.
Also, carring for the self also provided many professionals with
their work: psychologists attempt to heal the self and priests
want to save the self from evil influences. This also happens because
the self always needs validation, nurturing and realization in order
to feel itself alive.
Norman
K. Denzin says that this problem can only be solved by means of a new
pragmatism; a totally re-conceptualized pragmatism:
“A
new global politics of identity is upon us, a new public
culture that no one understands. This is the complex, global,
negotiated order that post-pragmatism addresses. A radical,
re-conceptualized theory of democracy, the state and society must
find its way inside these gendered, culturally and ethnically complex
spaces, and their international arenas and structural domains. This
post-pragmatism will critically attach itself to the post-modern
family, the media and popular culture, cyberspace, science, protest
movements, national identities and race and gender as the critical
sites for interpretative-political work. It will push harder at the
boundaries and intersections of public science and the media, seeing
science and the media as the dominant discourses of power and control
in contemporary life[22].”
[23]
Denzin’s
message is clear: post-pragmatism must not be regarded as a mere
philosophy but as a global project, a project above all opened
to experiment and innovation so as to gain constant adaptive
power/resources. That is why he states that the new pragmatism “will
be a media and communication centered pragmatism; [24]it
will accept the proposition that the image of reality has replaced
reality[25];
it will assume that communication is more than face-to-face
interaction and no longer the natural site of cooperation and
consensus. Violence, dissent and dispute are the cultural givens in
today’s multi-ethnic social order.”[26]
Unlike
previous social theories[27],
it will(or at least should) be based on “fully
dialogic conceptions which are simultaneously reflexive, interpretive
and grounded in some sense of internal solidarity that connects the
person to a larger moral community[28].”[29]
The
final irony about this transparent society is that it is not at all
transparent.
The
mediatic society
The
above diatribe directed against the “opaque transparency”
of the transparent society is, more or less(and
this, without being untrue or exaggerated in any way!!!),
an example of what Andrei Marga calls an “intellectual
inertia”, that is, an intellectual’s inability to see
both the pros and the cons of an issue; his painful feeble
heartedness when it comes to be able to resist the temptation of an
enthusiastic but very subjective and perversely narcissistic
criticism(in the sense that it is a criticism constructed with a
highly premeditated subtlety) in favor of an objective
criticism(dedicated not only to his personal gain but to the
evolution of the whole community).
This
aspect is rendered by Andrei Marga as well, when he states that we
live “in
a <<culture>> within which subjective opinions pass as
veritable ideas; where moods believe themselves to be liberties;
where desires are taken for concepts and where, obviously, people
talk more than they read.”[30]
Professor
Marga goes even further with his pinch criticism:
“However,
it must be noticed that today, conveniences are more attractive than
the pleasure of striving to include various fields of activity, and
than, intellectual inertia - are among the reasons which
determine today’s philosophers to remain within the sphere of
limited experiences, too narrow for the pretension of their concepts.
“[31]
In
such a dangerously confuse intellectual environment, “ the
crumbling down of culture in the multitude of opinions without
horizon(which forced, for instance, the President Of Harvard
University to argue that there are many possible opinions, but not
all of them represent valid perspectives! ) and the magnifying of the
production of books which enlighten nothing(in Romanian
context, this phenomenon takes the shape of an ever-expanding number
of authors which flatter themselves with the number of books they
produced, without actually having been able to release a genuine
work) leave behind bitter question marks. On the other hand, any
opinion silently assumes fort itself a normative basis, a basis
resembling the nature of a diagnosis(by way of example, one may
not formulate a factual sentence <<x
appeared
as a direct consequence of y’s
actions>> within the community, without assuming something in
relation to what is and should in fact be the society), even though,
the dusty essay-writing and the prevailingness of the day’s
small/insignificant opinion ignores this normative basis or
prefers to live it in obscurity.”[32]
According
to Andrei Marga, cynicism plays the heaviest role in the moral
degradation of intellectuals: “We
are witnessing
– anyway, this is Peter Sloterdijk’s diagnosis – on
the very peak of the promotion of illumination(and of that of
the Enlightenment), in the era of the most complete knowledge
of nature, society and man, the
expansion
of cynical behavior. Instead of enlarging the solidarity among men,
each and every one wants to orchestrate the other(…) This type
of cynicism manifests itself strikingly in the intellectual
life as well. It is not only the case of the context where, for
instance, people who have obtained higher positions and who have
published books proclaimed themselves <<intellectuals>>(as
if being an intellectual could be reduced to this) and claim a
<<privileged>> access to truth. It also about something
else, deeper and with heavier consequences: the
incapacity of so-called intellectuals to lay down a different opinion
from those stipended at that particular moment and the inability to
pierce by means of an articulated solution through the wall of
an opaque future.
Everything that these self-proclaimed <<intellectuals>>
can put forth is, in the end, a <<negative futurism>>:
<<Watch out, it can get even worse!>>. Constructing
an articulated solution for the public problems(which is in fact the
purpose of the intellectual truth) is none of their preoccupations,
nor does it lie anywhere near their horizon.”[33]
In
order to be able to throw light upon such a complicated issue as the
dynamics of nowadays informational societies one has to come up with
an all-inclusive system of analysis: “Virtually,
there can’t be philosophy but there where various experiences
are encompassed from one particular point of view, even though this
encompassing remains burdensome.”[34]
This is just another way of saying that we, as intellectuals, need a
real-time interaction among various points of view. Because, in the
malevolently premeditated or not absence of such a real time
interaction, democracy and liberalism have (as Andrei Marga
argues)degenerated into pure proceduralism…just as
multiculturalism has degenerated to a simple, physical cohabitation.
My
conclusion for the transparent society was that it has a somehow
cynical, or at least oxymoronic name, s it is far from being
transparent in any ways… A true intellectual will try to go
beyond the venomous criticism (per se ) of such a society, and he’ll
try to come up with solutions for the crisis that he managed to
signal. A first necessary step within this process of constructive
criticism is to see the causes behind such attitudes and to try to
get an insight(with the sense of “capacity to discern the true
nature of a situation; intellectual penetration”) into the
workings of such a system. Here’s Andrei Marga diagnosis on the
issue:
“After
all, what really holds back the mediatic society from becoming a
society of transparency ?(…)” Andrei Marga proposes the
following answers (analyzing the philosophy of mediatic society
from Horkheimer and Adorno to Vattimo): “a) through its
proceedings, the mediatic process spreads the <<common
denominator>> of facts and cultivates the <<leveling
down>>(equalization) of values; b) it encourages
<<functionality>> within the systems and much too little
initiatives of change; c) it cultivates the intuitiveness, the
fragmentariness, to the detriment of the comprehension of the
world’s subtle but tenacious correlations; d) it disseminates
whatever is <<consumable>> to the detriment of durable
values; e) it weakens the distinctions, within the classic culture,
between the necessary and the accidental, between the essential and
the hazardous; between the truth and the hearsay; between authentic
value and improvisation.”[35]
Despite
all these(its huge manipulative power, its unsuspected ways of
twisting the truth and the reality to its own advantage), Professor
Marga insists on the fact that the mediatic society does not swallow
the postmodern world- it is only a manifestation within it, and that,
“to regard it exclusively from a critical point of view, would
be an attitude just as wrong as the one which simply refuses to
acknowledge its real presence.”[36]
Following
this thread, we could say that media is just another participant to
the society of transparency(like any ordinary citizen), with the only
difference that it has at its disposal highly sophisticated
technological devices and an army of experts with which to interpret
and further spread the message. Its aim should be to make the
transparent society even more visible, that is, to translate
(whenever necessary) the bureaucratic language for the masses and to
read between the lines…that is, to help democracy remain a
vivid concept. Unfortunately, a sad phenomenon happened –“On
the other hand, the media gains its autonomy, to such extent that it
no longer remains just an instrument, but it becomes an enterprise in
itself, with its own purposes.”[37]
Power nucleuses with personal economic interests come into being,
which become stronger by the day, impossible to penetrate and which
begin to use democracy instead of working in its service (as they
should do, considering the fact that they emerged and derived their
power from the democratic theories).
The
question arises: what can we do, when faced with such a situation.
Linda
Hutcheon, in her “Politics of Postmodernism”,
provides us with an excellent answer: not to regard it from an
exclusively negative point of view, but to PROBLEMATIZE it.
But
what means “TO PROBLEMATIZE
SOMETHING OR TO MAKE SOMETHING PROBLEMATIC”?
Linda Hutcheon insists that every individual’s postmodern moral
obligation is to reflect upon those processes by which we represent
ourselves and the world around us – that is, to become aware of
the means used to set up the signification and to construct the order
within our daily experience/routine.
Hutcheon
claims that we live in an epoch not just dominated but simply created
by media and by popular culture. That is why one can’t avoid
representation, and those who pretend to be able to avoid it or to
simply go around it, what they do, in fact, is to avoid and to go
around the settlement of their notion of representation while
deliberately sticking stubbornly to a philosophy which sees
representation as trans-historical and trans-cultural. [38]
Linda
Hutcheon in her “Politics of Postmodernism”
concludes that we live in an epoch where one can’t avoid
representation.
The
Poststructuralists also had a similar vision, but on the subject of
the language: they spoke of the “language as prison”
saying that we live in an “inescapable textuality”, in a
vicious circle of the language(immediately after one had stopped
thinking in a language, he starts thinking in another one). Leaving
the sphere of a language ultimately leads to entering the sphere of
another one, we cannot live outside language.
Not
being able to avoid representation, we’ll surely fail to be
able to avoid media either. But what we can do, is to filter and
personalize(instead of just taking for granted ), to apply a
philosophical critical method to everything that we are offered –
a method that excludes the previous unconditioned confidence and
which makes everything problematic(“A
great man once said there’s no such thing as a stupid
question.”).
Hutcheon
says that we can do this by simply reflecting upon the
circumstances/the context in which the representation was produced
and thus we’ll discover the aims behind its broadcasting. In
fact, Hutcheon’s message is to actually start using the
media. But, she insists, you can only do this if you stop letting
yourself be used by it. Today we live in an era when one finds
information everywhere, hanging up on every fence: the issue is no
longer to find it but to select it and to process it to your
advantage.
But
how can you select and process the information that you need, how can
you let yourself impregnated only with that information which suits
you best?
THE
ANSWER IS: USING HUMBOLDT THEORY OF COMMUNICATION.
Humboldt
shows how language, representation and politics should function in a
sincerely-interested-in-evolution society: he said that language, far
from limiting us, it enriches us. Humboldt proposed the metaphor of
communication
seen as a sexual
act:
when two people communicate, they leave in each other a GERMINATIVE
content which will further develop into a real “foetus.”
This foetus stands for the incipient stage of future great and
complex idea[39]. He also
stressed that, when communication is not staged or politically
biased, when it is sincerely and passionately carried out, this
“foetus” will evolve in the person receiving those ideas
without shattering the initial personality of the receiver. On the
contrary, it will evolve by enriching and expanding it(the
personality of the receiver) to new and unexpected dimensions.[40]
Considering
all of the above as patterned of Humboldt’ s theory of
communication, one must, in order to conceive a viable theory able to
give an appropriate form to the contemporary conscience, carefully
select and filter the informational -“spermatozoa” which
get to penetrate and fertilize his brain. He has to do this, in
order to avoid the reduction of his sapience to raw
information/data.
Bibliography:
1)
Andrei Marga, Diagnoses, Articles and Essays, Ed. Eikon,
Cluj-Napoca 2008
2)
Andrei Marga, Filosofia Americană clasică
, vol.1, editura All Educational, Bucureşti 2000
3)
Ştefan Bolea Ontology of Negation,
ed. Casa Cărţii de Ştiinţă, Cluj-Napoca,
2004
4)
Paul Kurtz, American Philosophy in the Twentieth Century, a
Sourcebook from pragmatism to philosophical analysis, published
by The Macmillan Company Collier-Macmillan, USA, 1969.
5)
Henry Samuel Levinson, The religious investigations
of William James, University of North Carolina Press, Chapell
hill, 1981.
6)
Norman K. Denzin, The Cinematic Society, London,
SAGE Publications, 1995
7)
David Brin, The
Transparent Society (1998).
8)
Linda Hutcheon Politica Postmodernismului,
translated by Mircea Deac, Ed. Univers, Bucharest, 1997
9)
Cornel Vîlcu
unpuiblished
course in Linguistics for the 4th year English majors
2006
UBB Faculty of Letter Cluj
10)
Vasile
Voiculescu Lostriţa(The
Huck)
11)
Stanislaw
Lem’s
The
Cyberiad,
Harvest
Books; 1 edition (December 16, 2002)
Internet
Sources:
1)http://www.thefreedictionary.com
2)
Mihail Bakunin God
and the State, on-line edition at
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/godstate/ch01.htm
3)
http://www.generationterrorists.com/quotes/the_little_prince.html
4)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatic_maxim,
5)
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_701708528/panopticon.html
[1]
The
speed you can achieve in the actual practice of transmitting data is
called “effective speed”. It deviates from the maximum
achievable speed.
[3]
Andrei
Marga, Diagnoses,
Articles and Essays,
Ed. Eikon, Cluj-Napoca 2008, p.47
[4]
Andrei
Marga, Diagnoses,
Articles and Essays,
Ed. Eikon, Cluj-Napoca 2008, p.52, my translation
[5]
Ştefan
Bolea Ontology
of Negation,
ed. Casa Cărţii de Ştiinţă, Cluj-Napoca,
2004, p.102, my translation
[6]
Mihail
Bakunin God
and the State,
on-line edition at
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/godstate/ch01.htm
, Chapter I consulted on the 16th
of May 2008, 12:04.a.m.
[7]
Bakunin,
op.
cit,
Chapter III
[9]
Empiricism,
is the view that experience, especially of the senses is the only
source of knowledge. The theory that all concepts emanate from
experience and that all statements claiming to express knowledge
must be based on experience rather than on theory.
[10]
William
James, “Philosophical
conceptions and practical results”,
p 117, taken from Paul Kurtz, “American
Philosophy in the Twentieth Century, a Sourcebook from pragmatism to
philosophical analysis”,
published by The Macmillan Company Collier-Macmillan, USA, 1969.
[13]
Andrei
Marga –“Filosofia
Americană clasică”
, vol.1, editura All Educational, Bucureşti 2000, p.148. “
Pentru a aduce astfel deplină
claritate
în ideile noastre asupra unui obiect trebuie doar să
chibzuim ce repercursiuni practice poate include acest obiect. - la
ce să ne aşteptam în ceea ce priveşte
percepţiile
şi
la ce reacţii trebuie să ne aşteptăm. Concepţia
noastră asupra acestor repercursiuni, fie ele nemijlocite, fie
întârziate, constituie atunci pentru noi întreaga
concepţie a obiectului, în măsura în care
această concepţie are în general o semnificaţie
pozitivă.”
[14]
Henry
Samuel Levinson, ‘ The
religious investigations of William James’,
University of North Carolina Press, Chapell hill, 1981.
[15]
Specialized
studies claimed that there is a difference between manipulation
and persuasion.
Namely, that the persuaded social actor(in the sense of participant)
is aware
of an well
informed
on the intentions and aims of the one who tries to convince
him...while the manipulated social actor is unaware and even
unsuspicious of such subversive intentions. Unfortunately, what the
nowadays Media is after, is to melt into a single technique both
manipulation and persuasion, to create a all-embracing nebula
with/in which and to blind people and from where(on the background
of ths general state of blindness purposely induced by no one else
than they themselves) they
could project themselves as the a Light-Giving Star(Sun), as the
Guiding Light: ”
Believe
me.The sun always shines on t.v.”, the way A-HA put it in
their lyrics.
But
it’s an evil light, like Vasile Voiculescu’s underwater
deep lights mentioned in LostriţThe
Huck):
„luminiţa
care pâlpâie în beznele nopţii şi trage
pe călătorul rătăcit la adânc”(The
twinkle which flickers in night’s waves of darkness and which
soaks the lost traveler deep down into the dark waters); or like
Stanislaw Lem’s
Gaurozauron
– the most cunning and artful star, the star with shifty,
inconstant and versatile flickering which would often mislead the
caravans towards the Black Waste.(Gaurozauron is the star mentioned
by Lem in his The
Cyberiad)
[16] The panopticon is A prison so contructed that the inspector can see each of the prisoners at all times, without being seen; high-surveillance prison;a prison with cell blocks situated around a central area, ensuring that prisoners could be viewed at all times, http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_701708528/panopticon.html, consulted on the 9th of May 2008, 18:30 p.m.
[17]
Norman
K. Denzin, The
Cinematic Society,
London, SAGE Publications, 1995, p. 191
[18]
Norman
K. Denzin, The
Cinematic Society,
London, SAGE Publications, 1995, p.204
[19]
Norman
K. Denzin, The
Cinematic Society,
London, SAGE Publications, 1995, p.191
[20]Norman
K. Denzin, The
Cinematic Society,
London, SAGE Publications, 1995 p.9
[23]
Norman
K. Denzin, The
Cinematic Society,
London, SAGE Publications, 1995, pp.216-217
[25]
The
unfortunate reality according to which media channels generate
reality instead of reflecting it or of analyzing it (as their
mission within the democratic equation says that they should do) is
also depicted by Professor
Andrei Marga
when he brings into discussion Horkheimer and Adorno’s famous
masterpiece “Dialektik der Aufklärung”(Amsterdam
1946) : ”one enters the era of <<cultural industry>>
which changes the very foundations and infrastructure of previous
public communication and leaves behind serious inquiries: can it be
the case that ever-since the Media entered the political game as a
major player, one can no longer speak about serving democracy but
rather of subjecting it to personal interests?; can it be the case
that the desire to faithfully represent reality was replaced, in the
process, with a rat-race for the creation of that very
reality? “(Andrei Marga, Diagnoses,
Articles and Essays,
Ed. Eikon, Cluj-Napoca 2008, p.51, my translation)
[27]
The
reality according to which the Self had become a haunted animal; an
animal on the verge of global extinction/annihilation through
phagocytosis in the informational systems (a phagocytosis carried
out by the amoeba disguised under the name of “multi-media
societies” ) is also discussed in David Brin’s book -
“The
Transparent Society”
(1998).
Brin
deplores the erosion of privacy in the hands(or, better said,
TENTACLES) of the surveillance, communication and database
technology. He explores, in highly catchy manners and narrative
techniques, how important some degree of privacy is for most human
beings (in the sense that it allows them moments of intimacy within
which to exchange confidences and to prepare - in some security and
necessary mental equilibrium - for the competitive world).
Brin’s
main thesis is that “true privacy” will ultimately be
lost in a “transparent society” but, he still regards
the transparency as a necessary evil, as a must in the fight against
corruption and abuses of power(“most dangerous and corrupt
abuses of power go hand-in-hand with a lack of accountability and
transparency”) and in the struggle/need on the part of the
individual to adapt to this shape-shifting and constantly
overcrowded world.
His
solution is that Governments should provide equal in the sense of
perfectly reciprocal surveillance for all: the public has to
have the same access/right(no more no less) as those in power –
when it comes to obtaining personal gain out of the use of such
technological devices.
[29]
Denzin,
op.cit, p.215
[30]
Andrei
Marga, Diagnoses,
Articles and Essays,
Ed. Eikon, Cluj-Napoca 2008, p.11, my translation
[31]
Andrei
Marga, Diagnoses,
Articles and Essays,
Ed. Eikon, Cluj-Napoca 2008, pp.6-7, my translation
[32]
Andrei
Marga, Diagnoses,
Articles and Essays,
Ed. Eikon, Cluj-Napoca 2008, p.23, my translation
[33]
Andrei
Marga, Diagnoses,
Articles and Essays,
Ed. Eikon, Cluj-Napoca 2008, pp.24-25, my translation
[34]
Andrei
Marga, Diagnoses,
Articles and Essays,
Ed. Eikon, Cluj-Napoca 2008, p.7, my translation
[35]
Andrei
Marga, Diagnoses,
Articles and Essays,
Ed. Eikon, Cluj-Napoca 2008, p.52, my translation
[36]
Andrei
Marga, Diagnoses,
Articles and Essays,
Ed. Eikon, Cluj-Napoca 2008, pp52-53, my translation
[37]
Andrei
Marga, Diagnoses,
Articles and Essays,
Ed. Eikon, Cluj-Napoca 2008, p.51, my translation
[38]
Linda
Hutcheon “Politica
Postmodernismului”,
translated by Mircea Deac, Ed. Univers, Bucharest, 1997, p.58.
[39]
Cornel
Vîlcu
unpuiblished
course in Linguistics for the 4th year English majors
2006
UBB Faculty of Letter Cluj, mimeos
[40]
As
an off the record fact, Kant, the German philosopher buttoned up to
the very last button (of the spirit, of course!!!ha! ha!), when
hearing about such a daring approach, said firmly and with a vexed
German pride in morality and manners:”Out of the Question!”
Freud Sang In Sangfroid
by Patrick Călinescu
The
guy next door is too typically American to exist for real in a
Romanian textual world. However, he might as well eke it out from one
space to another, the other, had texts, generally, been truly
spatially separated like that.
He
is a regular crooner, though. He hums away; he does it all day long.
He just purses his lips into a worn out much spent leather wallet
like mouth and carries his tunes along into the valley of the
uninterested his neighborhood is so proudly teeming with. He turns
his lips into the carnal bulwark of song that songs themselves have
never crossed over. And then he slips into the harked silence you can
easily imagine and later on probably sings inwardly to his out of
tune self.
We
don’t know what he does when he’s at it. Nobody knows
because no one cares. He is just the guy next door too typically
common and too within his own reach to be cared about and listened to
when in strong shouting bouts for his not having been cared about and
listened to by the incrementally soaring vertigo of this illogical
loop. He should stop it while he can but, truth be told, if it ever
is, he has no wish to do it while he’s at it when he hasn’t
been at it for so long ever since his story began into an abrupt and
soundless birth, courtesy of the woman biologically called his
alleged mother. But he doesn’t know her. He was at the time
merely slipping through that woman’s vagina loudly screaming
out the slowness of gliding from one world to another, the other, and
the time was too short for polite introductions that would’ve
made her his mother per se. She was actually only a biological
humaton delivery machine only too eager to complete its then current
task and close for revision until such time another, the other,
humaton would have her boot for another, the other, biological
delivery. So they were both running out of time on their politeness
and, consequently, they acted on it accordingly, slipping off each
other casually and without remorse and without a single good bye on
the record of his initial lip pursing or of her lip staying in line
with its own labial demarcations.
This
is his birth that he himself was a witness to while being its very
subject. Soon after he screamed his way out of her motherly vagina
and moved, on that cant night, to our neighborhood to be our
improbable guy next door and all that already told. All told, he
tuned out to be quite some piece of musical work we never knew how to
work out but for the extraordinary event that dialogued its way into
our world with a kind of brute force we never imagined his pursing
lips were capable of.
Things
went pretty much like this. I offered to stand witness to it all on
behalf of everyone who was at that time at work, having jobs to do
unless they got fired or something.
I
met him in the street. Equally, he met me in the street, too. We both
were on one of the street’s sidewalks, in that street, when we
met running into each other while we were on opposite sides of
parallel sidewalks within the lanes of the mentioned street.
He
was unusually tall that day and unusually cast upon the ground by the
tall shadow his image projected onto the sidewalk he was staying put
on but there was something strange about his demeanor that made me
believe otherwise. He was nevertheless very kind to me and even asked
me in on the most comfortable part of his shadow, which of course I
refused for fear I should bruise it in any pictorial way you might
want to imagine. He then smiled appreciatively of my having paid
attention to his imagistic extension and asked me in again to sit on
the very same spot of shadow. While showing me the way, he explained
to me his choice of place by saying that the bit of shadow he invited
me to sit on was his shadow’s bunions, all collectively amassed
into one single space, so they would naturally feel nothing of my
bodily weight as they too had no nerves in them to feel anything
with. I nodded in understanding of his explanation, bending my
knowledge of it inwardly ground ward and smiled back to him while
weighing in on which more prominent bunion of the collective bunions
to sit. Then I chose my spot and dug myself in comfortably, actually
enjoying the coolness of my séance when he told me I had
chosen the perfect spot for our conversation to be safely carried out
in the shade of his shadow. I thanked him for his generosity and, as
a sign of appreciation, I sunk even deeper into the imprints that my
buns had already left on his callous shadow. He, too, appreciated my
feeling generously comfortable in his company and all this made him
get cozy in the current situation. Then we kept silence for too many
things were about to be said so they had to be properly observed.
Quite unexpectedly, he wasn’t the kind of crooning rooster I
naturally expected he would be. By neighborhood reports, of various
degrees of sincerity, he was expected to croon away both loudly and
mutely. But he wasn’t. He just stood there, shockingly out of
tune for someone thought to be really melodious. I volunteered to
break the silence by popping a stupid question out my disconcerted
mind. He then took it upon himself to volunteer an equally stupid
answer that his lips pursed forth into the space between us, which
was shed whither and thither by glimpses of his better shadow. The
exchange of similarly stupid retorts went on pretty much like this
and they would’ve come more wisely, I think, had not the sage
silence preceding it been so extremely superior to everything that
succeeded it in earnest.
So,
my draft of that initial two line dialogue:
Me:
You sing a lot?
Him:
Nope.
End
of conversation – apparently. He kept on smiling as if my ass
casting off any light that his shadow might have shed to any
convincing degree ticked him most amusingly on both sides of his
being: either on that his neighbors fantastically fancied about, or
on that still belonging to his intimate knowledge of himself. Then he
kept on smiling at me for no other reason than that of keeping me
intrigued a little longer, while his whole shadow took the time of
readjusting itself to the lack of my reciprocating smiles. Countless
other words vanished into the silence that naturally ensued
exhausting the small conversational torrent that we wouldn’t be
able to drown ourselves in even if we did our best. Then we just
looked at each other encompassing our wordy thoughts by bulwarks of
inwardly hearkened silence outwardly dug into what we may never say.
Still looking at each other, we came to a mute understanding that I
should remain comfortably sunk into the many bunions amassing his
shadow while he should keep on smiling at me as a necessary means of
avoiding any further words to take the shape of our previously
suspended dialogue. He forced his words, and mine, on our mutually
agreed upon silence and everything seemed to be working just fine but
for the extraordinary force of our hung dialogue, which worked its
way out of silence by no other means than those of a repeated series
of meaningless smiles on the part of this guy next door and, nothing
else but that, on the part of my seemingly singular self.
So
the following dialogue really took place between the two of them when
they simply embodied this guy from our neighborhood and myself. It
may only be an approximate draft of it for in the process of their
becoming us some levels of accuracy have surely been lost to the
benefit of other equally numerous levels of fictitious certitude.
So
we were just talking. Actually, we had only just begun to talk. Our
dialogue wasn’t faring too well: quite on the contrary. What
else it still needed to be a real dialogue was yet to be voiced out.
We nevertheless picked it up where we left it off. Its tone was
finally fixed in sound by our next controversies.
Me:
So you don’t sing a lot.
Him:
Yep.
Me:
Then you must sing a little.
Him:
I guess not.
Me:
So you don’t sing at all.
Him:
Not true.
Me:
You lost me despite my still sitting on your partially callous
shadow.
Him:
That doesn’t prove anything.
Me:
What do you mean?
Him:
You’ve been wrong all along.
Me:
Throw it at me.
Him:
I can’t sing. Never been able to. But my shadow can. The
ticklish feeling your buns experienced when you were describing what
this dialogue of ours will actually look like when finally voiced in
its final draft form came from all the humming that it generated
sub-sonically just to support your massive weight without falling
apart and in the process leaving me shadowless on such a sunny day.
That wouldn’t be nice, now, would it?
Me:
Wait a minute. I thought we tacitly agreed on this day’s being
anything but sunny, luminous or bright. I thought we agreed on its
being quite the opposite of sunny, luminous or bright for the sake of
emphasizing the strangeness of your casting a shadow in a sunless
environment. And I also thought we agreed on delivering a
non-American piece of fiction that would be rather verisimilar to the
non-Romanian audience we’re supposed to be addressing.
Him:
So what’s your point?
Me:
My point is we shouldn’t be talking any differently than in the
real dialogue that this is simply a draft of.
Him:
And we’re not. This is as real as reality itself can get.
Me:
But you can sing. And you can sing in cold blood, too. And you do it
so well that no one has ever doubted your singing skills. But you
nevertheless argue you never sing, that you shadow does, from the
bottom of its shady bunions, so to speak.
Him:
I can’t sing. But my shadow, the very shadow your ass is
resting on, can. And pretty well, too.
Me:
Let me see if I got it right… You mean you are not a singer,
but your shadow is?
Him:
Correct.
Me.
And am I to believe such nonsense?
Him:
You are.
Me:
Even though it is merely nonsense?
Him:
Indeed.
Me:
But… this is too much. To begin with, how could a shadow,
which doesn’t even really exist, ever sing? Then, how could you
not sing, when you are, and do?
Him:
My shadow does sing. It is its very hums that keep you afloat on its
callous casting.
Me:
Then, how do you explain what our neighbors can see? That you sing.
You sing your time away. You have been seen singing all the time. By
some veridical reports, you’ve even been seen singing when fast
asleep. They say you were singing so loudly that your pitchiest
snores were rendered inaudible by whatever tunes you sang. You were
snoring, or you were singing, or maybe your snores turned into songs
by means yet unknown and unexplained to us. But you were singing
whenever you sang. No doubt about it. Lots of us, your neighbors, can
testify to that.
Him:
Not entirely so. But I can explain it quite easily. You all thought I
sang. But I don’t. And I’m not. I just snore loudly. So
maybe you all mistook my extremely sonorous snores for songs that I
allegedly sing.
Me:
No. That would be too easy to be true and too true to be easy.
Him:
I don’t know what it would be like, but it’s true. I
don’t sing. Never have. Never will. I snore. And I sleep a lot.
That’s where my snoring comes from: vast amounts of sleep. I
cast my shadow on the ground and then I fall asleep in its shade.
It’s cool and nice in there. No pressure from the sun that has
always woken me up before I was sufficiently awake to strengthen my
shadow into the perfect napping nest it is now. Under its cover, and
beneath its awning, fully protected from the harming sun, I can sleep
all I want. There’s no way anyone can dictate how long I can
sleep: nothing of that stuff. I just cast my shadow and fall asleep
within its grasp. And I do sleep the most refreshing sleep. So this
is what happens: nothing else but that. Sleep in the shade of my own
shadow where I feel the most comfortable and secure.
Me:
Wait a minute. That’s too fantastic to be either true or easy.
First of all, how can you sleep when actually walking in the street
or talking to people? Would you by any chance be sleeping even now?
And what happens on cloudy days? You can cast no shadow when it’s
overcast. Your shadow must sleep in the shade of the clouds above
when it’s overcast. So what happens then?
Him:
That would indeed be too fantastic for me to tell you as either
something that’s true or easy. Are you sure you want to know it
all?
Me:
Just hit me.
Him:
You must already have suspected my shadow is not your regular one. It
has bunions on which you can rest your ass. It can sing although I,
its caster, can’t. But that’s not all my shadow is.
There’s much more to it than that. Truth be told, my shadow is
completely unique. It doesn’t need a powerful light source to
cast its body upon. My shadow is actually immune to any sort of
light. I can even cast it in complete darkness. All it needs to be
cast is my wishing to cast it again. And I wish it all the time
because I’m very sleepy. It’s only in the shade of its
protection that I can sleep the best. So whenever I get sleepy, which
happens a lot during the day, I just cast it before me and lay my
sleeping self on it and fall fast asleep. Then I can go on with all
my work undisturbed and undeterred. My mind is so resting that all I
do during its sleep is full of vigor and vitality. I am never tired
because I’m never fully awake. My shadow keeps me from ever
needing to sleep again while I actually sleep all the time. I am just
smart enough to have developed the perfect kind of sleep. The sleep
that you never wake yourself from, the sleep that always keeps you
perfectly fresh without having to give up on one single of your
snores. So what you all thought it was me singing away my time it
actually was me snoring because I was sleeping my morning sleep, and
then my noon one, followed by my afternoon one, completed by my
evening one and finally perfected by my big night one, and so on,
without interruption, or awakening, or without ever getting tired. So
I sing my snores away, if you will. I cast my shadow on the ground
every way I go and then I just sing my sleep away. Or sleep my songs
away, if you prefer. It doesn’t matter which way you think it’s
closest to reality, for both of them are.
Me:
Then, you must be either the best fictitious liar I have ever come
across, or the bizzarest form of freak I’ve ever run into, or
perhaps both. So you do sleep but what we hear is not the voice of
your singing, but the sound of your snoring. Then, may I ask, by what
means have you acoustically turned your snores into songs? Why do we
hear songs when we should hear snores? And disgustingly out of tune,
too, I suppose.
Him:
That’s simple enough to explain, as well. You won’t need
much of a brain for such a facile explanation. None of you is within
my shadow’s reach. None of you has ever gone beyond its
perimeter to hear me in reality. It’s your being outside my
shadow that renders me so fictitious. Had you ever been inside it,
under its protective shade, you would have known better. But its
exterior makes you think otherwise. Its outer margins have made me be
a singer to you. Maybe its exterior borders on your eyes’
horizon line, where every confluence lies in every confluence, and
then gets blurry and ultimately melts into the confusion that has
made you so fantasize about me. It’s your eyes’
outsidedness that has created such an unlikely character in the
un-splitting image of myself. This is all strange stuff but pretty
commonsensical if you think more seriously about it. When looked at
from outside my environment, I no longer am what I really am if
looked at from inside my space. Somehow I lose my own self when
others move me outside. I can only be what I really am when casting
my shadow upon the ground. Outside it, I’m only everything all
of you imagine I am. And that’s strange in yet another, the
other, respect, too. Shadows are generally thought of distorting
reality and making it somehow fictitious. When it comes to me, this
is not happening anymore. It’s exactly the opposite: not only
does my shadow not distort my image, but it also keeps it intact and
true to its original structure. Outside it, I’m merely the
product of your fantasies. Your clearness of thought and lack of
shadow surprisingly mars reality in such a way that completely
baffles me.
Me:
Hold on out there. You’ve talked too much and been pretty
inconsistent with yourself more than every now and then. You’ve
spent too much effort on too much repetition and too much stress on
repeating time and again the very same things. I got you. So you
don’t sing. You only snore. So your shadow, unlike others,
doesn’t distort your image. We do it. But this can’t be
entirely true, even if it partially is. You shadow may not distort
you when you look at its borders from well within its kernel but when
looked at from well beyond its perimeter, things get considerably
different. It then does distort you to such a degree that it turns
your regular snores into songs. From our warping distance, all we
hear is songs, not snores. So your shadow distorts reality: if not
yours, definitely ours. Your reality of yourself may be held in check
by your shadow but our reality of you can no longer be stopped to go
astray. So how can you explain all that?
We
had by that time been talking for too long to remember; and we had
been walking for too long for any shadow, however strong, to remain
in one piece exposed to the destructive forces of my sitting ass. All
along the street, his shadow seemed to have been worn out by my buns,
which for no moment during this interim did they stay put on either
side of my buttocks. They played so intensely on the callous surface
of his shadow that they literally deviated it off its casting course
so now he had to put it back on track if ever he wanted to sleep
again like he’s never awaken in his life. But with his shadow
slightly steered off its casting course, luck might have struck me
instead for this could give me the chance I needed to hear him snore
without his shadow filtering it through the songs he allegedly sings.
No sooner had I thought of that than I ran out of whatever ounce of
luck I may initially have had. He veered his shadow back on track
despite my buns’ continuous playfulness. Everything was again
like it used to be, only better so. Being momentarily off track, his
shadow only fell into a stricter casting mould that had him sleep by
several more sonorous snoring levels. His shadow grew stronger on his
sleep so he began to sing more loudly than ever.
While
working his shadow back into its casting groove, he asked me whether
I had chanced to ask him how he could explain to me that,
irrespective of that’s
original content, which had long been lost in the process of so
complex a dialogue as this still ongoing one. And I replied in the
positive, to which he replied in the negative, for he had no way in
which to explain to me how and in what manner that would be achieved.
When
we reached that point in our conversation, we had already been
dialoging for too long for his shadow to maintain its poised cast
upon the same ground he projected it onto. It had grown extremely
difficult to do so especially because his shadow could not be
consistent with the many places on the ground that he liked to cast
it upon. Every now and then, his shadow would cast itself off the
right word that he was supposed to give me in reply to my own right
word, and that wasn’t good at all for the general sake of our
dialogue, which was in this case in peril of becoming nothing short
of two monologues, one, his own, in the shade of his shadow, and the
other one, mine, completely exposed to the elements outside his
shadow, which would in the long run even strip it of its
monologue-like qualities. And all this could be happening without his
ever waking up from his sleep. To me, that would be the end of his
singing: the beginning of his snoring. To him, that would mean the
end of his sleeping: the beginning of his awakening. It would truly
be a catastrophic ending to both of us and to all our neighbors
because music of the sleeping one would automatically be turned into
snores of the awakened one. That would really spell an upside down
ending to his easy story and that would only be the beginning of his
true life completely outside his story and partially exterior to the
unbalanced casting of his shadow, which alone would have made all
this mess possible.
So
Freud must necessarily keep on singing in cold blood lest he should
wake up and begin to snore.
So
Freud must be the guy next door who is too typically fictitious to
exist for real outside his shadow and inside our music of him.
So
Freud must necessarily keep on casting his shadow on the ground
before our ears.
So
Freud must necessarily keep on snoring to keep on singing so that he
may, in cold blood, keep on casting his shadow upon the ground into
our music of him.
And
Freud sang in sangfroid about all this.
Last
train to Cairo
by Luminiţa Petcu & Adrian Grauenfels
[English translation: Rafael Manory & Ion Vincent Danu]
How
hard it is for me to leave,
more
so because of your melancholic thoughts
without
looking back, to search for the light left behind,
light
you once used to touch my face and hands
when
our ancestral fears penetrate our bones
fears
of bitter truths scattered into an old,
heavy
nightfall after long hours of love
always
borrowing, our repeatable routine
a
destiny condemned to relativity
crying
in a dead language
a
lonely bird turning after the sun
far
away – since near-by exists no-longer
leaves
that fall in front of you
never
gales that could erase
our
own traces,
of a
last kiss,
in
a Cairo museum
[LP]
***
How
shaken I am by a single gesture
that
hurried kiss on a Montmartre bench
I
was holding your hand tight
I
was looking for you in corners with no light
blinking
my eyes attempting to perceive your crevasses,
of
which you were unable to get out
but
you were mimicking an utmost happiness
everything
seemed extrapolated to the fifth decimal digit
and
yes, your knee did hurt me
the
eye hidden in my left palm
the
hurried departures did cause me pain,
the
one-way train tickets
my
body did contract with every ship siren
I
have a pathological uneasiness
when
your hand,
absentmindedly
raises to gather the hair on your back
with
a simple gesture,
devoid
of living.
[AG]
***
I
want to tell you multifaceted truths
Some
limpid and some fancy, as some fully epilated feet
other
murky, my peasant's brain being what it is
full
of happenings and corridas
love
affairs and their pregnant absence
I
roll myself in a ball
porcupine
at your door, hoping that you'll pick me up
on
your porch and talk to me
talk
to me in old Greek about the negation of my spikes
about
the solace I wait for
a
hundred years now
just
like a summer resurrection
oh,
come, gentle and full of bitter tears
on
your bitten (bloody) lips
I
count you with my eyes, with my clepsidra
my
time is your time by now
[AG]
I've
learned to wait and count the days
on
your sun-bleached mane
and
love the sublimation where
the
Avignon Pieta didn't arrived yet
better
to have your shadow and your unique voice
on
bas-reliefs on details of Venetian masters
another
frantic Wednesday
of
my galatea time
to
pronounce moonstruck speeches
somewhere
on the line between possible
and
impossible
an
aesthetic right in the middle of the summer
it's
a long time now since
we
don't know anymore
who
we are
we
still do have some time
to
browse for all lives
among
bare scorching stones..
Psychedelic
Trance
by Diana Todea
You danced
in my dreams as a raindrop,
Your blue eyes melted my
conscience,
your breathing leveling with mine,
I wish this
night to last in heaven,
we are dancers in a psychedelic
trance,
my hands reach beyond this hour,
lasting forever as the
rain melts in water,
You hypnotized my breath, I cannot see
your soul,
You and I forever more,
ice tunnels
loving
forever more.
A
Crazy Night
by Diana Todea
Last
night I slept in front of the
telly,
the
image sucked me in like a drink of LSD,
distorting my face and
making me float.
Inside the virtual realm, I was trapped among
sounds and psychedelic dreams,
searching for a paradise made of
blue ribbons,
a family and a white Christmas,
at one point
meeting Elvis turned out to be a great surprise,
and kissing a
kangaroo became the most insane experience of my life,
every move
inside the tube contorted my mind,
the reality mesmerized me,
was
it natural or fake?
And so my crazy night began-
my head
asleep on a caramel moon,
walls breathing in a velvet room,
some
green sonata and plastic shells danced around me,
the white was
turning red and angel kisses dropped on my neck,
what could be
more divine?
Dreaming inside an artificial realm,
thinking
that breathing is eating
and loving is smiling,
my mind
travelled in the outer space,
just like the agent in Solaris
game,
a mind that can be more than brain,
a heart that can
become insane!
Russian
Love
by Diana Todea
I
was in the narrow place inside my mind,
which I define it to
be-loneliness,
as an atom flying around, never landing,
like
the snow drowning inside the mouth of a Russian child,
the narrow
place dissolved my feelings,
what is love when sadness is big
enough to fill blue eyes?
where all the love goes when nobody is
near to hold you?
are you my Russian storyteller or just a beggar
outside the doors to my soul?
I was flying in an empty space with
only 3 seconds left to live.