Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002
Subject: Re: To blog or not to blog
I'm glad Nick Piombino
weighed in about the blogicization, and it's helpful that he used that
self/affect slant that he's good at and that's an ideological/poetics
position of his, as I'm not as good at it--- Last night, when I looked
at Nada Gordon's one-entry blog, strangely, I felt similar emotional
regret, nostalgia, disconsolate, etc.,--- not because she was writing
poorly or anything like that--- but, a little bit of a feeling of "Another
one bites the dust", another Stepford blogger. Pod people become
blog people. It's also striking to me that it's, so far, mainly East
Coast and New York City poets who are blogging themselves away. Is this
not a post-9/11 effect? The saddened feeling that I felt was
that it somehow increases our solitude.
I lean toward M. Palmer's
(first name?) response: he said "reactionary" and, last night,
I thought "counter-revolutionary"; it seemed to me like people
were sneaking back in through the "back door" what they'd
just thrown out the front; etc. Nick gets to the point: "Why write
frequently on the poetics list when you can have your own blog?"
My version of that was: why would people ever want to blog? what
could possibly motivate this wave? Jonathan Mayhew's blog is
candid: he unsubscribed in reaction to Richard Tylor's anti-Americanism
(Mayhew calls him "some poet in New Zealand"). A blog
(1) takes conflict-aversion
to the next level of removing oneself from the possibly risky environment
that many have objected to in the List's social unpredictability (there's
a photograph in my family's album of my sister as a child, in a party
dress, sitting on the carpeted floor in her bedroom by herself, caught
by surprise, playing with all the toys and birthday things she was
just given at a birthday party in progress at that same moment
with friends all outside the bedroom whom she'd left behind: blogs
remind me of that protective self-insulation)--- you can hold forth
without interruption, rebuttal, or disagreement;
(2) a blog allows you
to be found by a Google search, whereas the Poetics List does not:
moreso, by writing about poets and keywords that others would be searching
for, people can be lead to discovering you by Googling after those
other names;
(3) importantly, a blog,
with its representational self-depiciton, by returning to all the
Foucauldian "Techniques of Self" mechanisms, allows self-invention
--- one is not merely a practicing poet but someone consummately preoccupied
with poetry in every waking moment and every thought, the poet who
is more than a poet (read: bad faith) (I'm often taken aback at how
bloggers stick to the subject so. Like, don't these people
ever go to the opera [Ron's blog has already stated his antipathy
and condemnation of that] or anything?? Isn't there another channel
that they switch over into? Why is their self-portrayal so lacking
in normal multifariousness, O'Hara's "grace to live as variously
as possible"? It seems like it would be healthier, given this
day-by-day/hour-by-hour reality TV look into their solitude, for them
to just forget about being a poet some of the time and change
the tune every now and then. I'm amazed at how obsessively they stay
on target); . . .
These blogs, so far, are
by no means the Goncourt brothers' journals. Regardless of how
the bloggers might actually live, these self-portrayals are typically
catching them at their most a-social, connecting only through the mediation
of what literature they have opinions about.
I find that this "self
redux" or "pre-self" that's emerging in their self-portraits
is curiously lacking in sympathy to themselves, too. It's lacking
in ideology and it's somehow short on compassion for the very pathos
that they're revealing about themselves. --- Granted, there was remission
from psychosis involved, but if you think of the self-writing in Morning
of the Poem, when James Schuyler returned to mimetic self-depiction
after years of writing in less-/other-signifying modes, the weakness
and frailty of self that he had the courage to show: I'll never forget
that puffy plastic WonderBread bag he went out to buy for his sandwiches.
But how it would tarnish their authority, to make a sandwich (white
bread). To return to diary as a literary form is one thing, but to then
behave as those these "discourses"
and rhetoric were completely natural, in no way to wink, and
to conduct re-construction of self with the same, unconscious prerogatives
as the New Formalists . . . !
Of course, there always
had to remain a dialectic between Language writing (with its various
semblables) and the ongoing momentum of institutionalized normative
autobiography, ---if the latter were to disappear, a world overrun with
nothing but Language would be bedlam,--- but the blogs, like some of
the print essays and interviews that were creeping up to this, seem
blithely oblivious to that original agonistic struggle that these poets'
poetry is based on,--- so that they themselves are simultaneously
re-enforcing the very dominances that their poetry is challenging, as
if undoing with one hand what you'd just done with the other, language
a row of buttons (clothes buttons) that you take off only in order to
put it back on again, language the zipper.
The positive side is that
the pendulum must have swung too far, that it's a free market after
all and not capitalism, and that those weren't crashes, they
were "market corrections." I'm trying to see it along the
lines that Pierre Joris suggested, a helpful reminder that it's
all (maybe) rhizomatic, and not defection from a utopian collectivity
and the hope of
symposium.
--- I admit to generally
skipping over Richard's posts. But I read one the other day (considering
what slim pickin's there are, these days), his uncontrollable enthusiasm
and curiosity thinking that dcmb had actually spent an evening
with the grand J. Ashbery himself, just as Richard's earlier
post had fantasized to do. But when Richard, parenthetically, wound
up including this little, peripheral detail about having lived at
home with his mother all his life until she died when he was 53,
and how he wouldn't listen to "dissonant" music as
much as he might've liked to because the sound of it might've bothered
her in the next room--- ---that's excruciating! The sympathy
just ripped through me. This is what brought down the project
of a poetics community and drove professors of literature into hermetically
sealed sound-proof booths?! This is getting like Sullivan in
the computerized cartoon Monsters, Inc. where the monsters try
to be so scary but they're terrified of a little child. Meanwhile, the
bloggers' armor. . . . Will they ever get there? Could they? Or: the
self imago in Heather Ramsdell's Lost Wax who is always
rummaging through closets and drawers for a pair of missing socks. But
the bloggers don't seem to know where Samuel Beckett took things.
The narcissistic incapacity of the individual to admit to any vulnerability
or weakness completely parallels the current national defense. (Whatever
his prose's other flaws, it should be said in favor of Richard's posts
that he's never erected a reified concrete self as totem in his writings.)
--- But maybe it's positive: maybe these blogged missteps are paving
the way, a gradual loosening of poetry's puritanical rejection of
some badly needed ballast of self. I guess I had expected it to be more
conjectural and avant-garde, though. Who told them they are these
characters? The use of "personal criticism" by feminists or
queer theorists, which Maria rightly mentions,--- wasn't it always an
attempt, though, to maintain at all points the partial, perspectival,
therefore qualified and limited nature of all writing, to localize each
thought, in refutation of the depersonalized and therefore more effectively
dominant (male) voice of criticism (that I often slip into)? It's the
difference between fetish and, say, surveyor's tripod, the latter being
all about a measurement of distance between objects. My myopia,
my color blindness. The "personal criticism" that sticks in
my mind, for example, was queer theorist D.A. Miller putting
himself completely on the line in The Novel and The Police by
describing an appointment with a psychiatrist who diagnosed him as Borderline,---
(then, what's the rest of the book!? Auto-symptomatology?) or
his ambiguous, seemingly gratuitous self-portraiture in the Roland
Barthes book as on his back doing bench press in the gym (man of
steel, or vain conformist? half-naked and at risk of the barbell he
was holding falling down to crush him if his partner slipped). (I don't
recall if it was word of mouth or in his writing, but I also remember
his "personal criticism" including his fear of becoming the
man with the poodle and beret, that somehow stereotypes are true.)
Yes, Richard, yes. He had
a small rose watercolor by Pierre-Joseph
Redouté on his wall.