Hi Billy
>>>"Mills, Billy" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Maybe Prynne is a fine reader of other people's poetry and a reluctant
reader of his own because reading the work of others is an act of
criticism,
of communicating to an audience a particular 'reading' of the work in
question, whereas reading ones own work, even in public, is essentially
listening to oneself articulating, and possibly rewriting, the work.
Yeah, maybe... I mean, this is a nice, really nice and keen as mustard,
piece
of drawing, and for a few moments I was happy with it.
But isn't reading one's own work also communicating to an audience a
particular 'reading'? Why does it have to be a totally inclusive,
definitive
reading? If the inevitable partiality of a reading is so damaging to a
work,
why don't poets prohibit public performances during their lifetime? Is the
partiality of a poet-to-print-to-reception reading so qualitatively
different,
and so much more hazardous, than that of a poet-through-air-to-audience
reading?
I'm not sure how a poetic work can be rewritten through public
articulation,
but say it's possible: is it to be afraid of? I can imagine many poets
believing without question that the written work has an a priori authority,
and that their work must be kilnbaked until it resists all malleation. But
this doesn't do anything to control the moment of reception, and likewise,
no
reader can induce an irreversible mutation.
And anyway isn't this the turf? Or are we saying that a poem is already
'over', before it's begun - an imprint of an intention that's already
passed?
Poetry is an act of making, isn't it? And reading's an act of unmaking. The
only alternative is a kind of CCTV in reverse.
And isn't Prynne's work anyway concerned somewhat with the momentary
organisations of attention that occur while an act of poetry is being
undertaken? Which probably makes it considerably more suitable for reading
aloud, under these weather conditions.
Which prompts me to concede that JHP may be unhappy about the idea of
having to read in one direction only, or the time axis being there at all.
But
that's a different thing and again doesn't the work anyway worry away at
it?
I don't like the suggestion of Prynne being (here it comes) hermetic like
that, or indeed so conservative. (With a small 'c' as in 'common sense
revolution'.)
Anaerobic life is good only for pulses, sprinters, very surprising sea
creatures and the sludge they dug up in the Blue Peter garden. And I'm not
even sure about sprinters. Poets should go to the park more like they used
to.
Now can somebody tell me what a new medium is and how I can get one?
Much obliged,
chris xx
------------------------------------------------
Chris Goode
Director, _signal to noise_
24 Newport Road
London E10 6PJ
U.K.
+44 181 556 4492
[log in to unmask]
"Yes, my real name is Jordan. I just thought that Taylor would bring out the
color of my eyes." - Taylor Hanson
____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|