"Form is never more than an extension of content," is Olson's dictum, via
Creeley, and, through the latter, via Stevens' in turn. The statement had an
"impact", as they say, on American poetry. Compare the hallowed
pronouncement to the Bauhaus's by-now cliched dogma that "form follows
function."
This raises a series of serious questions, Poet, which turns you,
potentially, into a dark and bottomless mouth for ideas, ideas that may well
have an impact on strains of architectural thought and practice in the
future. Don't deny it; don't deny *YOU*.
(Well, enough "Crisis in the Gulf", so to say. Here you are):
1) If there is "extending", as Creeley has it, and if it occurs into
"something", as it must, what is that "something"? Think hard and don't be
shy.
2) Is there already a space or void that the extending occurs into? (Before
jumping to conclusions, you may wish to think about the theoretical problem
of "holes" which has long plagued physical theorists: i.e., Do holes exist?
In a doughnut, for example, is a hole an extension of form or is a hole the
content the form of the doughnut configures "around"? Press your pencil down
until it breaks.
3)Is this conundrum in any way related to how the universe was formed?
Remember your Deleuze and forget about Sokal.
4) Is the problem of the Hole somehow related to the big issue of the "I"
and the "Self" in poetry? Relatedly, do sex and unimaginable violence rim
the outer regions of the Hole, orbiting it at a fantastic speed so that
there is the appearance of a beautiful ring? Close the lid of the eye that
is not pressed to the eyepiece, and sign your name when finished.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
|