http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2008/06/conceptual-poetics-craig-dworkin/ A blog from the Poetry Foundation where contemporary poets debate classic and contemporary poetry from America and around the world. Sat, 21 Nov 2009 07:36:51 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2008/06/conceptual-poetics-craig-dworkin/#comment-3707 Jefferson Carter Mon, 02 Jun 2008 22:42:59 +0000 http://pf/harriet/?p=861#comment-3707 I'd like to hear from others about their reactions to this symposium. Overall, I thought it was fascinating, listening to all those intimidatingly brilliant minds working out loud. I'm still not convinced "conceptual" poetry is a wave (or even a wavelet) of the future, but its existence will surely open up mainstream poets to more challenging approaches and practices in their own writing. For me, there was a gap between theory and practice. The less radical theorists (Cole Swensen and Caroline Bergvall) read the most affecting and gorgeous poetry. The more radical theorists (Kenny G. and Christian Bok) had to rely on performance (voice and gesture) to humanize their poems, not so much to make them accessible but to make them bearable. Charles Bernstein disappointed me. I do love his mind but I found the poetry he read heavy-handed in its irony and too narrow in the targets it attacked. Especially revealing was his last poem, a love poem that sruck me as maudlin and amateurish and revealing: unrelenting hatred for the other (the self, sincerely emoting) is also disguised love for it and desire to express it? Jefferson CONCEPTUAL A smear of foliage (cataract in my right eye), road like a silver arm rising on the left. What structures underlie that woman the invisibility trope bends to the right between the bent trees? And is that a bonnet or a mask? Theoretically masks entice & repel, entice because they repel. Nicole Kidman’s mask, even her pale lithe body, couldn’t save old Kubrick. The.o.ry, the.o.ry, the.o.ry, my fist makes its jacking-off gesture. I’d like to hear from others about their reactions to this symposium. Overall, I thought it was fascinating, listening to all those intimidatingly brilliant minds working out loud. I’m still not convinced “conceptual” poetry is a wave (or even a wavelet) of the future, but its existence will surely open up mainstream poets to more challenging approaches and practices in their own writing.
For me, there was a gap between theory and practice. The less radical theorists (Cole Swensen and Caroline Bergvall) read the most affecting and gorgeous poetry. The more radical theorists (Kenny G. and Christian Bok) had to rely on performance (voice and gesture) to humanize their poems, not so much to make them accessible but to make them bearable. Charles Bernstein disappointed me. I do love his mind but I found the poetry he read heavy-handed in its irony and too narrow in the targets it attacked. Especially revealing was his last poem, a love poem that sruck me as maudlin and amateurish and revealing: unrelenting hatred for the other (the self, sincerely emoting) is also disguised love for it and desire to express it? Jefferson
CONCEPTUAL
A smear of foliage
(cataract in my right eye),
road like a silver arm
rising on the left.
What structures
underlie that woman
the invisibility trope
bends to the right
between the bent trees?
And is that a bonnet
or a mask? Theoretically
masks entice & repel, entice
because they repel.
Nicole Kidman’s mask,
even her pale lithe body,
couldn’t save old Kubrick.
The.o.ry, the.o.ry, the.o.ry,
my fist makes its
jacking-off gesture.

]]>