Hi eveyone
Reading Olson's 'Projective Verse' (collected writing, ed. Robert Creeley, 1966) for
the nth time, I've found ideas which may be applicable to the recent discussions on
language, voice, 'silent readings' and the oral tradition in the group. What poetry
does, I think, is giving voice to words which, as written signs, aren't physically
vocal - unless you have one of those trendy publications that come with a 'spoken-
word' CD, in which case 'oration' is a much better term than 'poetry'. It makes
pefect sence to me that Olson would say "[syllable] is the king and pin of
versification" because in the syllable is the union of mind and the ear. Seeing as
the mind, ear, breath and heart are all parts of the same family - human faculties -
Olson encourages an 'incest' between these things and the results are, as written
signs, syllables, lines, and eventually, the poem. What interests me is his
disregard for the old 'word', 'sentence' and 'text'. I think Olson was kicking open
the doors that prose (in particular) and modernist verse (Eliot in particular) had
slammed shut. But what's even more interesting - and disturbing, for me - is that
(judging from what's getting published these days) we still see the poem as a tiny,
tight and compressed little package, where wit, intellignece and 'meaning' are the
prominent organs of the body. 'Projective Verse' was published in 1950. Am I the
only person in the world pre-occupied with it?
Ali Alizadeh
|