Showing posts with label Text. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Text. Show all posts

March 19, 2025

The 20th Anniversary of the Text Festival

Back in 2005, I launched the International Text Festival in Bury, Manchester. It's aim was to question, curate, display, distribute, around the question of the state of language practice across artforms. To be frank, it was greeted with a degree of incomprehension, maybe because the difference fields of practice were not used to being presented in such a way. In what was a form of madness, I ended up curating a festival that lasted 9 months and featured nearly 20 exhibitions and performances. By the end of the first festival, I think both me and the audience were burned out. I'll share the reasons why I programmed the subsequently Text Festivals in 2009, 2011 and 2014, in a later post. Because producing the festivals was a mammoth undertaking, I didn't really take the time to think about or share my experiences or its implications, or, more importantly what would have come after 2014. Over the next few months I plan to revisit the Festival's importance and conclude that with a series of essays of what comes next. 

Having posited that there might be some cross-artform commonalities, as the curator, it seemed incumbent on me to offer some theoretical basis for the question. And so the first Text was accompanied by something of a manifesto - TEXTLocating the Text Festival’s first ‘statement’ in a formal lineage, it took its structure from John Cage’s 1937 THE FUTURE OF MUSIC: CREDO 

 T E X T

 “Me? I don’t read books!” Irnerio says. 

“What do you read, then?” 

“Nothing. I’ve become so accomplished to not reading that I don’t even read what appears before my eyes. It’s not easy: they teach us to read as children, and for the rest of our lives we remain the slaves of all the written stuff they fling in fronts of us. I may have had to make some effort myself, at first, to learn not to read, but now it comes quite naturally to me. The secret is not refusing to look at the written words. On the contrary, you must look at them, intensely, until they disappear.”

From: If in a Winter’s Night a Traveller – Italo Calvino

CONVENTIONAL LANGUAGE IS ABOUT ITS SUBJECT

                                                                                         conventional? What did Ian Hamilton Finlay mean by conventional? Veronica Forrest-Thompson, (how different poetry would have been if you had not been killed in 1974) wrote:

“it is easy to treat poetry as if it were engaged in the language game of giving information and thus to assume that what is important about a poem is what it tells us about the external world. The meaning of the poem is extended into the world … Such an approach falsifies our experience of poems, reduces the distinctiveness of poetry, and neglects many of the components of poetic language, but it is an intellectually less taxing approach which triumphs for that reason…”

The reference to a language-game coming, of course, from the influential philosopher of language Ludwig Wittgenstein: “Poetry is a language game not primarily concerned with the transmission of information.” Wittgenstein identified the totality of propositions as language. Language is the sum set of all subaltern sets operating across landscapes in which descriptive facility and functionality is synonymous with their fabric – the fabric of the (language) act synonymous with its content. Synonymous but not the same.

Charles Bernstein writes: “Content never equals meaning.” How does this square with the view that poetic (or scientific) language is different from conventional language – if conventional language is about its content, but any language act is synonymous. American poet Lyn Hejinian answers:

Reality remains identical to itself in

Form

But not sum

                        AND WITH THE UBIQUITY OF (COMMERICAL) TYPOGRAPHY,

                                                                                                                        in every moment of your waking life you can see a text – this page. Look up from this page – in any glance in any direction you will see another text. You are immersed in text. You describe your experience to yourself in language and every aspect of your visual field is labelled, text-overlaid

            THE OMNIPRESENCE OF A PLENARY UNIFORMIST LANGUAGE IN THE PUBLIC

and through a hierarchy of mediations, the private

                                                                              DOMAIN HAS ENMESHED THE TEXT INTO THE “EFFICIENT” AND “TRANSPARENT” – PRINCIPLES OF GRAPHIC DESIGN/LANGUAGE

                                  commercial design has absorbed the craft and inspiration of modernist graphic innovations, while

                                        UNIFIED AS THE VISUAL HEGEMONY OF PACKAGING, IDENTITY AND COMMUNITY.

                            “Thus how do we read what is meant precisely to be read? That is given for no other purpose, and without distraction (even those distractions which we often take as the stigmata of “reading” but are really those of entertainment, those of good fog)”, wrote Bruce Andrews.

To Veronica Forrest-Thompson’s observation that there would be no point in writing poetry unless poetry were different from everyday language, it should be added that poetry similarly has no point if it is the same as advertising language.

                                                                                  THE AURAL DEBRIS OF FURNITURE MUSIC BURYING CONSCIOUSNESS IN ORGANISED MARKETING NOISE IS THE SHARED

               (unacknowledged)

                                            FATE FOR TEXT.

                                                                       In 1916 Eric Satie performed his work ‘musique d’ameublement’, literally furniture music; music heard but not listened to. It was the first ever muzak; Satie foreseeing the time when our lives would be filled with unheeded music. While ignoring this contemporary sound track most of the time, we are conscious that it is there, neutered, affecting our moods, altering our behaviour. This musical accompaniment is a new phenomenon – less than one hundred years old; in a same period of time, text has become furniture text, text seen but not read – logos, signs, advertisements, labels – affecting our moods, altering our behaviour, constructing our experience of reality, changing our attitudes in an assumption of universal literacy and ‘the fallacy of unmediated expression’

                                                                                                                          RESTRICTING THE DEFINITION OF LITERACY

Bruce Andrews: “Objective assumptions, which ground meaning in reference to the world outside and which relate self-evidence of objects to the practical tasks of learning to read, provided only one scenario” – what Charles Bernstein calls the tyranny of the familiar – a manufactured consensus of models of competence “a coercive organization of grammar, rhetoric, technical format, & ideological symbols”: “It is the terrorist function of forms (and of institutions deriving from these forms) to maintain the illusions of transparency and reality and to disguise the forms that maintain reality.” – Henri Lefebvre

Literacy is

a social construction and is significant in determining, and being determined by, the prevailing social order.

Literacy is

a relative construct and is in practice context dependent. Global definitions therefore are both elusive and unattainable.

                                     TO CONSENSUALISED STANDARD PUBLIC ORGANISATION, LANGUAGE IS CO-OPTED TO APPROVED CENTRAL MEANINGS

                                                                                                              “Everything in our age conspires to turn the writer, and every other kind of artist as well, into a minor official, working on themes handed down from above and never telling what seems to him the whole of the truth,” noted George Orwell in The Prevention of Literature or as Guy Debord observed it as the “sprint between independent artists and the police to test and develop the use of new techniques of conditioning” or after 20 years of national arts policy, the arts are mobilized to

- Develop a Stronger Community Spirit;

- Improve Transport and the Environment;

- Create a Better Future for All Generations;

- Make our communities Safer and Healthier;

- Achieve Social Inclusion:

- Develop a Competitive and Diverse Local Economy;

Hence the need for the Official Verse Culture

                                                                       AND DECANTED THROUGH A HIERARCHY OF MEDIATIONS TO ALLOW ONLY POETRY EXPRESSIONS OF EXEMPLARY PERSONAL NARRATIVES.

                      the (pre)dominant ‘poetic’ factor of poetry is embedded in self-reflexivity, the first person, the voice of the poet, sharing an epiphanous moment, his or her narrow emotional life or simply a wry anecdote. As the British rhyme-writer Sophie Hannah would have it: the best thing about being a poet is “being able to get a relatively civilized revenge on anyone who treats you really nastily – and plenty of people do! – by writing something cutting about them” …

…an intellectually less taxing approach which triumphs for that reason…

“The production of ignorance that is enforced by restraints on complexity of thought, political, social and aesthetic content; and form” according to Charles Bernstein.

In this Official Verse Culture, “The world is found to be meaningful, but not for and to itself; it is meaningful because perceiving it makes the poet special; the poet plunders the world for its perceptual, spiritual treasure and becomes worthy (and worth more) on that basis” – Lyn Hejinian.

It will be as if Modernism never happened, this representational/narrative art (with its concomitant fallacy of unmediated expression) with patron saints celebrated for their advertisement rhymes as much for their lyricism.

O the Lyric

held as axiomatic, itself a vocal heritage of language drawn from poetry’s archaic roots as the story-telling accompaniment to rhythmic tunes, pre-modern and therefore strictly tonal.

Despite Robert Grenier’s seminal 1971 declaration I HATE SPEECH;

Despite even Adorno’s question of the implication of the Holocaust, the British Lyric Tradition, its margins of landscape and voice, renews itself in dismal paddling further into its backwater to privilege dialect and regionalism – ‘authentic’ Northern voices (or more recently rural southern voices) instead of the dynamic experimental uncertainty of Bob Cobbing and the Writer’s Forum or the need to animate a millennial Modernism in dialogue with international Concrete Poetry, LANGUAGE or OULIPO,

But it is an intellectually less taxing approach which triumphs for that reason…

The practice of text art in public space stems from conceptual art’s critique of the materiality and economics of the art object, and liberation of possibilities for unmediated public distribution. This liberating dialogue between reader and writer, a continually evolving context of process and actuality, has been denied by the backwater cultural constriction of the poet to the page, the reading, or the advertisement copy. Meanwhile, Culture driven by massive global forces, History re-started, Science and the Image move on. The marginal language of song? Poetry? It’s irrelevant. “Me? I don’t read.” Let them sell their Past of anthologies for Christmas, birthdays, funerals, and the next war…

                                                        THE QUESTION OF FORM IS OUR ONLY CONSTANT CONNECTION WITH THE PAST. ALTHOUGH THE GREAT FORMS OF THE PAST WERE THE SONNET

                     The history of poetry over-written with all the drama and import of a nursery rhyme forgets in the fourth century A.D., Optatianus Porfyrius published a permutational poem called Carmen XXV. With words fixed in its fifth column, words in other columns can be arbitrarily shuffled with each other, creating a fixed form poem with words shuffling to 1.62 billion possible permutations of the text.

By the Renaissance (1561), Julius Caesar Scaliger was able to establish word permutation poems (Proteus Verse) as one of the canonical poetical forms of the 17th Century.

Trace the real Past from there to here.

On to 1961: the French writer Raymond Queneau, published ‘Cent Mille Milliards de Poèmes’, which is constructed of ten basic sonnets, sliced into 14 strips, one per line of sonnet text. By flipping the strips to left or right, the reader obtains a combination of lines making up a sonnet. Every one of the possible sonnets is structurally perfect and makes perfect sense but the incremental arithmetic is such that it would not be possible to read all the possible variations in one lifetime.

(As William Carlos Williams wrote: “All sonnets mean the same thing.”)

                                                                                                             OR FREE VERSE,

In contemporary verse, how many ‘poems’ can stand the prose test of removal of their arbitrary line breaks or the mock portentous hush of the poet’s reading?

“Should humanity lie back and be satisfied to watch new thoughts make ancient verses? We don’t believe that it should.” – Francois Le Lionnais.

The key modernist project is the question of the nature of the medium. This is the terrain that the 2005 Text Festival in Bury seeks to examine: what are the innovations and devices that characterise the tradition of poetic innovation and what is their relationship to contemporary visual text art practice? “Valorizing form has its limits”, there is a danger in focusing on the means at the expense of the meaning, a catalogue of devices and methodologies, but in engaging with the debate about the future of text and poetry it should be productive to examine the tools currently available.

And so what if it’s not? Remember you don’t read poetry.

                                                                                         TEXT, THE FUTURE

                                                                                                                          “To construct room for further efforts” – Bob Perelman,

                                                                WILL DIALECTICALLY RISE FROM A GLASS BEAD GAME OF

                 “a way of reconstituting language by unpacking the toolbox” applying to performative writing sound, text, digital, environmental and performance.

PARATAXIS,

is simply the juxtaposition of two elements or clauses without a conjunction. One sentence is placed next to another which has no obvious relevance. This practice is most familiar in the Haiku tradition which frequently uses the enigmatic effect to generate the deeper meaning in a poem. Making the sentence the basic unit of composition as opposed to traditional Western poetry’s focus on the line, poets and artists using text, thus require the reader’s participation in the sense-making process.

The paratactic tension achieved in poetry is mirrored in contemporary text art practice which frequently juxtaposes a sentence unit as paratactic to its location; the meaning of a text located in a public space resonates in the collage of the words with their location. Lawrence Weiner’s WATER MADE IT WET had toured mainly gallery-based locations until finding its home on the Cricket Path Bridge in Radcliffe; the economic accuracy of its textual intervention creates a paratactic dialogue unifying the experience of the bridge in the landscape “the decision as to the condition rests with the receiver upon the occasion of receivership.”

The New Sentence (coined by Ron Silliman) is significant because its formal properties place it at the centre of a number of non-narrative techniques driving a political as well as poetic challenge to the accepted structures in contemporary poetry. In paratactic writing the autonomous meaning of a sentence is heightened, questioned, and changed by the degree of separation or connection that the reader perceives with regard to the surrounding sentences.

INTERTEXTUALITY,

more recently the curatorial theorist Nicolas Bourriaud coining the phrase ‘postproduction’ from TV film and music editing/recording/channel-flicking for the ever-increasing practice of creating artworks (of all types) from pre-existing works, artists and writers interpreting, reproducing, appropriating cultural products into new works.

Intertextuality posits that a text does not exist as a self-sufficient whole, hermetically sealed. The writer is reader of texts before s/he is a creator of texts, and therefore the act of writing – text or poem – is inevitably shot through with references, quotations and influences of every kind. Moreover the reader reads the text immersed in texts. A text is available only through some process of reading; what is produced at the moment of reading is due to the cross-fertilisation of the packaged textual material by all the texts the reader brings to it. Reader embody texts. The reader is surrounded by texts, advertising, signs, exits, numbers on doors, names on shirts, your watch, every where you look, every text you read is intermingled with the text world in which you are embedded. Texts are reading you. Quotation containing quotations embedded in quotations – it’s staring you in the face.

Carolyn Thompson’s recent work explores this relationship between text creator and text with works that generate a new text from an ‘original’ other, drawing on an implicit subtext or principle supplying the constructive rule. “After Easton Ellis” consists of 384 sheets of paper cut to the size of leaves of the Picador publication of American Psycho. Consumerism is a dominant theme in the novel, so Thompson’s appropriation reduces the original to a new work leaving only the hundreds of brand names in their original arrangement. Similarly, in “Winston and Julia: A Love Story”, Thompson eliminates much of the original text from George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four leaving only the passages featuring the love of Winston and Julia and thus creates a new intense textual work of operatic passion.

                                                                                              MATERIALITY,

Text as a material, has a long history that can be traced back to ideogrammatic languages of ancient civilisations. Futurism, Dada, Surrealism, Constructivism and Cubism all made use of text materially. Since the Sixties, the principal manifestations of text as material build on the discoveries of Concrete Poetry (the first truly international poetry movement) and Conceptual Art. Although intended to be critical, Veronica Forrest-Thomson’s observation that Concrete Poetry carried discontinuity with ordinary language to its limits by seeking a point where language ceases to be language and becomes simply material, visual or aural, for making patterns is accurate, only missing Eugen Gomringer’s conclusion that: “The purpose of reduced language is not the reduction of language itself but the achievement of greater flexibility and freedom of communication (with its inherent need for rules and regulations.)”

Since Marcel Duchamp’s invention of the ‘ready-made’ in 1909, Conceptual Art has developed approaches involving installation, ready-mades, documentation and words “where the concept, proposition or investigation is presented in the form of language.” Sol LeWitt wrote in his Sentences on Conceptual Art (1969) “Ideas can be works of art; they are in a chain of development that may eventually find some form. All ideas need not be made physical.” One of the leading figures of the late 20th Century art, Lawrence Weiner famously wrote:

(1) THE ARTIST MAY CONSTRUCT THE PIECE.

(2) THE PIECE MAY BE FABRICATED.

(3) THE PIECE NEED NOT BE BUILT.

 Each being equal and consistent with the intent of the artist,

the decision as to the condition rests with the receiver upon the occasion of receivership.

Despite 40 years of conceptual art practice, the material of language as a visual arts medium continues to challenge traditional notions of art as object, narrative or representation. It is a challenge that the poetry mainstream continues to fail to meet.

“Reading as a particular reading, an enactment, a co-production” (Bruce Andrews) may best be applied to Hester Reeve’s remarkable work Being and Time. The artist adopts reading, writing and thinking and re-presentation of them as modes of ‘Being’. Reeve sitting at a desk for nine weeks, reading and transcribing by hand Heidegger’s Being and Time, presenting the work of art as a ‘passport to a conceptual kingdom,’ as an embodied processual effort as well as a concrete/material object to be viewed in the gallery.

                                                                                         SPATIALISATION,

                                                                                                                     relates closely to the use of language as a material, foregrounding the transition of the language object into (actual or virtual) three-dimensions; described by Charles Bernstein as words freed of the tyranny of horizontality. Max Bense observed: “the three-dimensional language object is the carrier of a specifically concrete aesthetic message.” The spatialization of a text generates a tension between the particular of the text mark/act and the generality of its space, organized spatially, highlighting non-linguistic ground, breaking down the meaning-bearing elements of language into graphic signs.

The spatialization of language is a frequent operation in text art installation, with words fracturing across a location. “There is no such thing as an empty space or an empty time. There is always something to see, something to hear” – John Cage.

Word-text-space, actually, virtually or metaphorically, spatialized can be conjugated in such a way that their positions imply ‘verbs’ in the spaces (silences) between them. This invisible grammar can be read within and between categories. The linguistics of interval, position and duration are usually closed off by line rules and structures and dimensional limits, but “placement as a grammatical concept can be extended to any abstraction…to a degree we may speak of meaning as a system of permutations, as a mathematics of placement…” – Sigmund Bode.

To read/hear a spatialized text constitutes a test for the reader, constructing readings based on the order that the senses collide with the words, offering alternate readings, multiple readings, generating meanings from the vocabulary of placement. Place and Time and Duration – qualities of poetry. The modern scientific understanding of the non-linearity of space and time is mirrored in text-in-space/time experimentation and it’s the most familiar form of spatialization in digital text and film animation.

                                                                       RESTRICTED LANGUAGES

First glyph; the syllabary,

Then letters.

                      Louis Zukofsky – ‘A’

                                                     Language operates with rules (of grammar, syntax, spelling), poetry adds further rules such as counting syllables, rhythmic beats or lines. A constraint is an axiom of a text and invented poetic rules become central to poetic cultures. Shakespeare working within the rigid constraints of the sonnet nevertheless produced some of the most original, inspired, and long-appreciated poetry known to the world. As Queneau points out “the poet has always been dependent at least on elementary arithmetic. If he wants to an alexandrine, he must be able to count up to 12; for a sonnet, up to fourteen, and for a sonnet in alexandrines up to 168.” The arbitrariness of one form over another – the established culture’s endorsement – has over the last fifty years been directly challenged for ethical, political and artistic reasons. The artistic avant-gardes of the 20th century reinvented poetic forms on occasion assuming the notion of arbitrariness adopting a poetics of indeterminacy and chance. Tristan Tzara created Dada poetry by cutting out the words of a newspaper article, shuffling them in a bag and writing them down in the accidental order they had been pulled out. Despite the anti-art gesture, Tzara’s strategy to select, break up and permute a group of words can be traced back to the 16th Century and Julius Caesar Scaliger. All pre-20th Century permutation peoms shuffle a fixed set of data directly inscribed into them. However, moving on from Tzara’s innovation, in the sixties, John Cage and Jackson Mac Low engaged directly with the arbitrary, generating a number of poetic (and musical) works with process/random decisions related to source text selection and ordering using I Ching chance operations.

The most systematic and determined exploration of new poetic rule forms has been the primarily French phenomenon OULIPO (the Ouvrir de Litterature Potentielle – the Workshop of Potential Literature). The already mentioned “sonnet machine” of Queneau is perhaps the best known of an enigmatic OULIPO Workshop he founded in 1960 with mathematician – Francois de Lionnais. Aside from the element of creative fun went a sincere interest in exploring implications and possibilities for new language processing literature. What happens to language under the constraints of structural formulae and how far can it be driven before reaching limits of intelligibility? This might sound similar to Surrealist, Concrete and particularly Dadaist ideas, but Dada aimed to break down the rules, OULIPO’s focus was in creating new ones – famously proclaimed: ‘a text written according to a constraint describes the constrain.’ It generated numerous new (often deliberately simple) forms rather than necessarily new literature, such as S+7 which consists in taking a text and replacing each substantive with the seventh following it in a dictionary (N+7 replaces the nouns) or the lipogram (a rediscovery from as early as the Sixth Century) in which the writer excludes one or several letters of the alphabet. The most famous example is the novel La Disparation by George Perec in which there are no ‘e’s. More recently in what might be called a post-OULIPO development in the Canadian poet, Christian Bök’s book Eunoia is made up of 5 chapters each one limited to words containing each vowel in turn.

Critically, how does a poem (paratactic, intertextual, material, spatial or constrained) answer the charge that it is simply a package of language games, no more poetic than a puzzle, or even plain nonsense? Charles Bernstein’s defence of poetry challenges the claim that the officially-approved use of language is actually ‘transparent’:

Indeed you say that

nonsense shed leds on its “antithesis”

sense-making: but teally the antithsisi

of these poems you call nonselnse is not

sense-making itself but perhps, in some

cases, the simulation of sense-making:

decitfullness, manifulation, the

media-isation of language, etc.

The poetic function is manifested when an utterance is ordered additionally in a way which cannot be justified by the usual requirements of linguistic communication. Each being equal and consistent with the intent of the artist, the decision as to condition rests upon the occasion of receivership. Lyn Hejinian has identified the graduation or duration of enlightenment to increased insight, what she has called ‘delayed coherence’. The answer to Simon Armitage’s question “Is the effort to decode them greater than the final reward?”

Is yes

With Wittgenstein’s assertion that language itself is a game, the privileging of an ‘accepted form’ (an intellectually less taxing approach which triumphs for that reason) over the struggle for meaning through language is exposed as value-driven and ideologically based.

IN THE FACE OF THE PARADOX OF LANGUAGE’S MILITARISATION

                                                                                                                 “War, it will be seen, accomplishes the necessary destruction, but accomplishes it in a psychologically acceptable way. In principle it would be quite simple to waste the surplus labour of the world by building temples and pyramids, by digging holes and filling them up again, or even producing vast quantities of goods and then setting first to them. But this would provide only the economic and not the emotional basis for a hierarchical society. What is concerned here is not the morale of the masses, whose attitude is unimportant so long as they are kept steadily at work,” said George Orwell

One leading spokesman for the Project for the American Century, former CIA Director James Woolsey, unabashedly declared in 2004, “we are already fighting World War III.” The reconstruction contracts have been granted. To the Empire of Freedom you are either with us or you are against us.

“Perhaps not what Beckett was thinking when he wrote, “Let us hope the time will come, thank God that in certain circles it has already come, when language is most efficiently used where it is being most efficiently misused” in the war on abstract nouns.

“Instead of making art I filled out this form” (using the sentence as the unit of composition).

AND DE-MILITARISATION,

“Poetry must involve more than the filling out of forms – the exercise of formalities; it requires an invention of form.” – Lyn Hejinian

Syntax, like government, can only be obeyed.

It is therefore of no use except when you

have something particular to command

such as: Go buy me a bunch of carrots.

                                               - John Cage

                                                                   INVENTION OF NEW LANGUAGE FORMS,

Maurice Merleau-Ponty wrote: everything signifies everything; concatenate this with Wittgenstein’s “The word ‘is’ figures as the copula, as a sign for identity, and as an expression for existence; we speak of something, but also of something’s happening. (In the proposition, ‘Green is green’ – where the first word is the proper name of a person and the last an adjective – these words do not merely have different meanings: they are different symbols.)” and Donald Rumsfeld can add the comment that the five groups opposing U.S. forces in Iraq – identified as looters, criminals, remnants of Saddam Hussein’s government, foreign terrorists and Iran-backed Shiites – “are all slightly different in why they are there and what they are doing…That doesn’t make it anything like a guerrilla war or an organized resistance. It makes it like five different things going on in which the groups are functioning more like terrorists.” A reporter quoted the Pentagon’s own definition of guerrilla war – “military and paramilitary operations conducted in enemy-held or hostile territory by irregular ground indigenous forces” – and told Rumsfeld that it “Seems to fit a lot of what’s going on in Iraq.”

To which Rumsfeld replied: “It really doesn’t.”

All norms of other kinds of discourse are changed when absorbed by a poem, and that syntax in conjunction with convention is the agent of this change:

measure the degree of disorder in their system

it is a matter of common experience

disorder will tend to increase if things are left to themselves

Order can create order out of disorder but cleaves

expenditure

effort or energy

so decreases the amount of order

Woe for our unhappy town!

Woe for thee, O lands that nurse thy little babes!

                                                                          LANGUAGE AS A MATERIAL AND FIELD OF ENQUIRY

                “Poetry must involve more than the filling out of forms – the exercise of formalities; it requires an invention of form.” Lyn Hejinian.

                                                                   MUST BE THE RESPONSE TO THE CHALLENGE OF CHANGING EXPERIENCE.

Paratactic, intertextual, material, spatialized, and process-rule-constricted

                                                                                                                      INNOVATION IS THE NEGATION OF THE GIVEN –

                                                    The absence of this negation, the hegemony of the given, is the real reason for the lack of public interest in poetry – it’s not the marketing but the product that is at fault.

                     THE CONTINUITY OF DISCOVERY BEYOND THE COLONIZED

“a kind of reservation for good savages who (without realizing it) make modern society, with the rapid increase in its technological powers and the forced expansion of its market, work,” Guy Debord.

                   AND THE FUTURE OF TEXTUALITY

                                                                          The failure of poetry will be the failure of poets to challenge Poetry and the forces which would have it fail. The way forward is not thru the basement door as Bruce Andrews observed, but in the direct challenge to the dead weight of British (and American) poetic conservativism,

                                                                        WILL REST NOT WITH THE GATEKEEPERS,

Controlling access and distribution, academic and social discourse, (“education teaches us to read as children, and for the rest of our lives we remain the slaves of all the written stuff they fling in front of us”), a curriculum that teaches poetry’s irrelevance, that language can only be used in approved and prize-winning ways, “to divert the taste for the new, which has in our era become a threat to it, into certain debased forms of novelty, which are entirely harmless and muddled” – Guy Debord

                                      BUT AS IT ALWAYS HAS,

Despite the history of appropriation and forgetting, a consistently powerful counter-hegemonic stream has historically played a central role in most of Art Movements of the twentieth century set out to reinvent and challenge the language of expression. Future, Dada, Surrealism, Fluxus, Conceptualism, were all, first and foremost, literary/language movements and as Ron Silliman has persuasively demonstrated, historically it is the banality of the Establishment poets that fades into obscurity. The future of textual work will in the future be as ignored as every other previous future has until it is the past

                                                                              WITH THE RESTLESS, THE INVESTIGATORS OF LANGUAGE,

Ron Silliman writes: “all practitioners of post-avant writing have had to confront such questions of form, content, coherency, implication, context, responsibility and any other number of qualities of the poem from scratch. On average, they have had to work much harder and far more thoughtfully than their counterparts on the far side of the genre in almost anything they have written. & when they don’t do their homework, it shows immediately. There may be self-delusion, but there is no hiding allowed for post-avant poets.”

Crowd horror at the gait of a mistake

There are local degrees of freedom

Classes of excitations

To believe the heroes’ recipe.

“In a passionate age, the crowd would cheer his courage and tremble

As he tried to reach it. But in the age without passion, people would agree that it was unreasonable to venture out so far,

And think each other clever

For figuring this out

Admire ourselves.

The possibility of ‘fresh’ perception, the ability of the TEXT to outflank perception and make the receiver experience the object in question as if for the first time. The recipe for the New itself then cannot be new, “The concept of defamiliarization was not invented by the Russian Formalists; Romantic writers like Goethe and Wordsworth to Proust had discussed the power of particular linguistic forms to create ‘strangeness’” (Marjorie Perloff); Ezra Pound’s call for poets to ‘Make it new’ is still the imperative.

                                                                 WHO DISCLOSE AND CONSTRUCT EXPERIENCE

The non-linearity of much so-called disjunctive poetry, itself a point of contact with everyday experiences; Text must be made by all – but text defined as enquiry, as seeking new understanding in how language works, how reality is constructed, how life is lived, and changed

              AND MEANINGS

“The language of poetry is a language of inquiry, not the language of a genre. It is that language in which a writer (or a reader) both perceives and is conscious of the perception. Poetry, therefore, takes as its premise that language is a medium for experiencing experience.”

                   IN THE SUBSTANTIAL AMBIGUITY OF LANGUAGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

July 20, 2020

Poetry as Thoughtcrime


The Poetic Imperative in the Age of Surveillance

In returning to writing from curating, I find the absence of a unified theory of poetry distracting, especially in these dark times. I have “Architecture & Now” (my poem with Maurice Shapero’s architectural drawings) coming out shortly and my hybrid-poetry collection “Dyer & Mahfouz” is rapidly taking shape, but a theoretical framework is missing. Thus, I am preparing just that: “Poetry as Thoughtcrime”. This aims to examine the huge existential problem facing contemporary writing and includes my manifesto for what to do about it. The analysis flows from the curatorial practice developed in the Text Festivals from 2005 to 2014. After that, I was creatively focused on the projects in China, which took my attention away from theoretical and practical next steps that should follow from the Text. In retrospect, this post-Text hiatus gave me a parallax view and distance from which my vision for the future could mature.

The full analysis will be available soon as a publication, but with the request from Synapse for an extract, and the near apocalyptic turn of world events in 2020, it feels imperative to offer some form of the new thinking. The starting point for any analysis of future direction has to acknowledge the backdrop of the crises of Late Capitalism, Brexit, Trump, and of course the big one, climate catastrophe; in this truncated disaster timescape, the hope that the post-virus world will be a brighter future already looks delusional; indeed, though I have referenced capitalism as the evil, there are credible arguments that it has already been replaced by an economic system that is even worse .
When Mark Fisher bleakly observed “it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism” you sort of optimistically imagine that he meant capitalism being ended with something better. Anyway, increasingly the massive crisis of the pandemic and capitalism’s responsibility and response continues to fit my initial analysis of the dangers we face as humans, and specifically, the challenge for writers isn’t materially changed.

My analysis does have an implicit fatalism – the longer version of this essay investigates the implication of writing in the countdown to extinction.

My project then will be as follows: as with all manifestos, the opening essay (a taster for which this is) is an analysis for the scale of the dangers we face – ‘Poetry as Thoughtcrime’. This is followed by a Manifesto, which posits an imperative direction for writing, and, more specifically, a unified theory for poetry in this age of multiple global crisis. In support of this statement and proposal, there are a series of related essays examining the implications for literary production which include a new vision for internationalism, a recognition of the inadequacy of Conceptual Poetry to meet the challenges, the poetic space within Post-Truth and the distractions/implications of dominant tropes in popular culture.

There are two ‘problems’ writers no longer have. From Albert Camus “A writer writes to a great extent to be read (as for those who say they don’t, let us admire them but not believe them).” And from Derek Beaulieu - “Don’t protect your artwork. Give it away. Trust your audience. Be your own pirate.” We have entered the age when everything is read and you don’t have to give your artwork away, because it is taken at the moment of conception. In fact, more than that, writing will soon be heteronomically manipulated in advance of its creation. In this regard, as the conceptualist writers argue, writers will not be the special category which they have claimed for themselves, as we progress into the end of Personhood.

In the full essay, I expand on the threats to Personhood (“You”) through three dynamic appropriations: commodification of consciousness, addictive attention sequestration and behaviour manipulation. For the sake of brevity here, I will just touch on some of the main sources of analysis. Shoshana Zuboff’s ‘The Age of Surveillance Capitalism’ articulates the final stage of capitalism where humans themselves are the commodity, humans are ‘farmed’:
“Surveillance capitalism migrated to Facebook, Microsoft and Amazon – and became the default option in most of the tech sector. It now advances across the economy from insurance, to retail, finance, health, education and more, including every “smart” product and “personalised” service.” … “Surveillance capitalism unilaterally claims human experience as free raw material for translation into behavioural data … fabricated into prediction products that anticipate what you will do now, soon, and later”. So “Computer-based personality judgements are more accurate than those made by humans” - Facebook knows you better than members of your own family do. “The team found that their software was able to predict a study participant’s personality more accurately than a work colleague by analysing just 10 ‘likes’’; and “Belgian police now say that the Facebook is using ‘likes’ as a way of collecting information about people and deciding how best to advertise to them. As such, it has warned people that they should avoid using the buttons if they want to preserve their privacy” (Andrew Griffin, the Independent). With personal data becoming the world’s most valuable commodity, the best analogy I’ve seen comes from Digital Ethicist Tristan Harris where he likens the digital model of you to a voodoo doll. Every action you take, real or digital, updates a more perfect copy of you which can then be used to predict what you will think, do or consume next, but more than that it can be tested, digital ‘pins’ can be poked into it to see how the real you will react to stimulus, and building on that, can be used to alter you. Algorithms are developing in ways that allow companies to profit from our past, present, and future behaviour – or what Shoshana Zuboff describes as our “behavioural surplus.”

You’ve already heard this. You know that your data is farmed. You know governments sell citizens’ records to the private sector. You know that facial recognition and location technologies have started following you – you’ve seen it on TV from China, cameras that identify citizens crossing the road wrong, etc. Every time you upload a photo, every time you download an app that makes an comic avatar of you or turns your selfie into a Renaissance style painting, or shows what you’d look like if you were a different gender, etc, you give more of yourself away, and make the software better at recognising everybody else.
Even more extreme Microsoft were, until recently exposed, working with the Israelis on implant technology for children; and under cover of the pandemic the transnational digital passport system ID2020 is actively being promoted, which will be able to restrict movement on the basis of your health status. It’s no coincidence that American police departments are using Covid Tracking Apps to identify Black Lives Matter protestors. “The internet is, in its essence, a machine of surveillance. It divides the flow of data into small, traceable, and reversible operations, thus exposing every user to surveillance”, writes Boris Groys.

Predictive data will tune and herd our behaviour towards the most profitable outcomes. It is not enough to automate information about us; we need to be consumable consumers. As one data scientist observed: “We can engineer the context around a particular behaviour, and force change that way … We are learning how to write the music, and then we let the music make them dance.”  Herbert Marcuse wrote in One Dimensional Man “The music of the soul is also the music of salesmanship. Exchange value, not truth value counts. On it centres the rationality of the status quo, and all alien rationality is bent to it.”
The final step will be AI. One might imagine that AI research is driven by the spirit of philosophic or scientific enquiry, but fundamentally it is business driven: AI, when successful, will be able to work faster, cheaper and beyond the limits of labour laws. With human factory labour already replaced, companies like Google, Amazon and Facebook have the automation of white-collar jobs directly within their sights. “It is no surprise that the idea of creative machines is coterminous with the ascent of platform capitalism. Art is among the last problems for which a human is still the best solution. No ruling class can exist without an appeal to the aesthetic, as almost any page from art history will show. To administer the aesthetic – to control the terms of what counts as an image, or what constitutes art – is to rule both the mind and the body, to influence the whole sensate world of human emotion and expression.” Mike Pepi (Frieze).

The world has become more digital in response to the Covid19 lockdowns, so the dynamics of control and subsummation are magnified. You may think that this is over-egging the threat of Surveillance and even that this is a First World anxiety, but the combination of corporate capitalism, rapidly expanding dictatorships and controlling propensity of neoliberal-fascist government, there are numerous examples of not only the dangerous direction of travel but significant inhuman initiatives. Orwell’s prediction - “Nothing was your own except the few cubic centimetres inside your skull” will be surpassed very soon when that few centimetres has gone too. 
This is not a luddite rejection of the digital, we can only live in now, the 21st Century. But facing a more voracious form of capitalism: how can artists respond? Artists responses to surveillance hegemony fall into 3 categories (ignoring the blind innocents farmed as human cattle):

Lamentation - “the Internet, completely and unreflectively subject to market processes and dedicated to monopolists, controls gigantic quantities of data used not at all pansophically, for the broader access to information, but on the contrary, serving above all to program the behaviour of users, as we learned after the Cambridge Analytica affair. Instead of hearing the harmony of the world, we have heard a cacophony of sounds, an unbearable static in which we try, in despair, to pick up on some quieter melody, even the weakest beat.” Olga Tokarczuk (Nobel Lecture)
Compromised Embrace - There are writers, certainly within the Uncreative/Conceptual movement who piratically celebrate the ‘creative’ utility of technology, the prospect of AI creativity, the literate viruses etc, etc., but in the context of this consciousness Final Solution, their commitment is reminiscent of  Buddhist Monks willing to self-immolate: they prove their absolute belief; you can be impressed with their rigour and their faith but you have considerable doubt that they will be reborn in their next life. Notwithstanding this zeal and accepting that conceptual literary techniques will have a place in the way forward I will propose, we can also accept that there will be writers and readers who will choose subsummation.
Subversion – There are many technology critical artists mostly reliant on guerrilla or subversive utilisation of digital tools – a good example is Pip Thornton’s ground-breaking critiquing of linguistic capitalism using the system algorithms themselves to question the appropriation of value.

I contend that these strategies ultimately fail to free human creativity. None of them address the scale of the threat and will be subsumed by it. So where does poetry come in? Without Romanticism or wishful thinking, how is poetry answer to be all-consuming capitalist behemoth? After all, if you look at the canonical moments when poetry is addressed seriously, it doesn’t generally measure up. Everyone’s first thought, of course: Plato bans it from the Republic; and the go-to in times of totalitarian threat, George Orwell is even less enthusiastic: “There can be no doubt that in our civilization poetry is by far the most discredited of the arts, the only art, indeed, in which the average man refuses to discern any value. Arnold Bennett was hardly exaggerating when he said that in the English-speaking countries the word ‘poetry’ would disperse a crowd quicker than a fire-hose.”  Interestingly though, Orwell soften his dismissal of poetry in the context of the totalitarian: “Poetry might survive, in a totalitarian age, and certain arts or half-arts, such as architecture, might even find tyranny beneficial,” and “It follows that the atmosphere of totalitarianism is deadly to any kind of prose writer, though a poet … might possible find it breathable.” Maybe his observation of discredit becomes a utility: “It is not certain whether the effects of totalitarianism upon verse need be so deadly as its effect on prose … To begin with, bureaucrats and other ‘practical’ men usually despise the poet too deeply to be much interested in what he is saying…It is therefore fairly easy for a poet to keep away from dangerous subjects and avoid uttering heresies: and even when he does utter them, they may escape notice”.  It would be a pretty lame revolutionary claim to posit irrelevance and inefficacy as the resistance space against Surveillance Capitalist. However, these ‘weaknesses’ have the strength in the context of the commodification of Personhood of being an agency with intrinsically no value. As Guy Debord observed: “Poetry is becoming more and more clearly the empty space, the antimatter, of consumer society, since it is not consumable”. So, in this historic moment of crisis, where the omniscient god they have created turns to consumption of us, its flock - Poetry is thoughtcrime. But how do you commit that crime? There are already programmes that create artificial poetry. So, poetry as thoughtcrime must take a specific resistance form: I will lay out what that is in the second (Manifesto) essay.

April 21, 2012

Visual Poetry Event

Sunday 22 April 2012 at TR1, Tampere, Finland
 http://tr1.tampere.fi/mariam-kretschmer-2-9-%E2%80%93-20-9-2011-galleria-nottbeck-tampere/ 




13.00 - 14.00 Curators' tour on the exhibition: Karri and I talking about the works in the exhibition and its links with the Text Festival.
 14.00 - 15. 00 A panel discussion about visual art/text with me, Karri, and some of the artists in the show, questions and answers.
 15.00 - 16.00 Artists performing  - Karri Kokko, Satu Kaikkonen, Marko Niemi, & Mia Toivio.

August 13, 2010

node:space #1

The first installation in node:space. Have I created a visual poem?

Or an architectural poem?





Viewing by appointment.
I'll be inviting other artists into node:space in future moments.

20 Years after Vertigo

In April 2006, after the end of the first Text Festival, I installed  Vertigo,  the first exhibition of my own works, in the Sleeper Gallery...