[Apologies for not responding to these before now.]
>The first item on Saturday was germanr to this list, this list being referred
>to often as the kind of model for cybernetic communication and
>publication among poets.
actually exiting germ of potential, perhaps
>Though there were ambitious plans to develop
>webs, there was interesting talk about e mail and simpler e systems.
'ride the trailing edge' - was one point made
>John urged poets to use the medium NOW whilst it remained textbased.
this I believe is absolutely vital. cf. Gregory Ulmer's etremely
contentius notion of 'electracy' (for recent re-innvocation:)
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/pmc/v008/8.1ulmer.html
what will be the performance of (explicitly/markedly) literate
poetextuality within/amongst proliferating media dominated by the Writing
(applied-grammatological capital intended) of archivable/archived
editable/edited sound and vision? this is 'our' specialism, 'we' should
have something to say about it.
>I
>expressed my ignornace of what the potentialities might be, pointed out
>that we rely on people like John to inform us.
basically, imho, the potential to apply 'appropriate form' to poetextual
structures which still tend to be print-bound and (unitary/monologic)
voice-bound (or else still interpretable as such)
what forms?
hypertext
cybertext (shameless self-re-promotion =
http://www.demon.co.uk/eastfield/in/hcp000.html)
co-operative/collaborative/co-creative textual objects and regions
'open' 'unbounded' editorial projects
jump stations (a couple more below):
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/pmc/v007/7.3glazier.html
Loss Glazier's very relevant hypertext essay
http://www.wenet.net/~rkendall/wordcircuits/
- Robert Kendall set of resources is becoming very useful
http://www.duke.edu/~mshumate/hyperfic.html
hypertext fiction
>There was a considerable Adornoesque technophobist air though to
>John's not at all messianic suggestions, which surprised me.
no, I didn't want to be wired-west-coast-utopian. I wanted to make
practical suggestions
but I did have an explicit agenda which I don't think I made as clear as I
might have.
I believe the editorial project of the BritPo 'small press' /
innovative poetry scene is compromised because it is largely 1) not
articulated; 2) arbitrary and dependent on the (excellent) hard-work of too
many *individuals* working on their own - (arbitrary for this reason in
fact); and 3) working against its own post-structuralist poetic principles
(anti-hegemonic/anti-patriarchal/de-centrist) because of 1 and 2 above,
while at the same time commiting this project to the print-bound (also
typo- and plain-bad-editing-ridden) archive of the dominant discourses of
print-based literacy. YASUDA!
please note that the scene seems to me to be very different in
America and this is, imho (= "he's making unsubstiated claims, sisters,
based on scant experience..."), largely because 2) of the critical and
theoretical interventions of the I=T girls and boys, and 1) because there
seems to be a 'social' voice and an 'social' engagement in the writing of
the new and younger American writers -- like they feel comfortable both
discoursing and shooting the breeze in MOO- and other e-spaces; like the
New York (poste-)School drops tabs of I=T in partyspace, gets highs and
changes world (around them) by soft- wet- hard- and leafware reconfiguration
>Responses John? Relauch yr suggestions?
Here is one of the original suggestions:
>1) Work out a mechanism to allow the regular publication of new poetry
>through the list. Never disallow the 'at will' posting of occasional
>pieces by 'individuals' or 'entities', but in order to develop the list as
>a for(u)m for, shall we say, 'first publication of finished pieces' set up
>an ad hoc, rotating list of readers. Every month (or two or three) one
>person on the list is chosen (arbitrarily?/according to chance
>procedures?/just some one person?) as 'first reader'. For that month,
>submissions for publication of original texts on the list are sent to the
>first reader. The first reader comments, recommends acceptance/refusal and
>passes on the piece to two other readers for their comments,
>recommendation. If the piece is 'accepted' it is posted to the list as 'a
>publication of the list'. (It could also be posted to other lists of
>related interest, even to the email addresses of selected individuals and
>organizations, such as, for example the regional arts boards, to keep them
>aware of what *we* consider to be good contemporary work in our field.)
>Consider publishing (with permission) the readers' comments on accepted
>pieces. The list then becomes a hybrid of daily correspondence/posting,
>but also a regular publication for(u)m for 'peer-reviewed' new work.
I still think this is a good idea, and wouldn't be too difficult to
set up. I felt it related strongly to some of the other contributions at
the colloquium, especially Peter Larkin's flowing hints at a 'hydraulic
society's counterweight to this here infinite velocity. Why don't we
introduce some obstacles, obstructions, dams and locks, wellsweeps and
irrigation channels? (Another of 'our' specialities, no?)
But I now think that it might be better to leave the list as is is
(unbroken, with no immediate need of repair), and implement something like
the above on a hybrid Web thing, something flowing back and forth over the
edges of 'list' and 'web site':
submit!it - through an editorial/moderating
collective/structure/machine (for, yes!, it could be
aleatory/semi-automatic) - to a web site, on 'acceptance', the work is both
mounted at the site *and* automatically post(e)d by email to all
subscribers (subscribers to the site itself, but perhaps including
subscribers to this list *and* those other addresses that 'should' be
reading the BritPo that matters (from transgressive hedonism, thru I=T,
CamPunk/t exhaustion, and pergramming to chisel-penned neo-pastoral). (This
circumvents the problem of people not bothering to visit the page and check
out new work.)
Allen Fisher:
>I took John Cayley to be calling for a kind of poetry staff development in
>uses of digital spacetime. we could sure use it. the computer does feel
>like some of it has moved out of its reliance on older genres and forms.
>the way McLuhan would say it eventually would. but couldn't get to grips
>with what John - where were you going. must have been the cold in my
>head.
trouble with 'us':- the chiefs is the indians and vice versa, but who would
have it any other way? how's the virus, Allen ?
Finally, a few web references which point to interesting / realizable
potentialities, or comment on them:
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/pmc/v008/8.1r_caplan.html
- a very interesting review of the Electronic Poetry Centre & its
others
http://www.jacket.zip.com.au
- jacket magazine, URL previous posted to the list very recently
by Anthony Frazer. Didn't it sound good?
Why couldn't we do something like it?
(not so convinced about the design tho')
http://www.cyborganic.com/people/present/Lyra/Roundtable/
- round table. those 'young Americans' again, trying something 'new'
http://www.ubuweb.com/vp
- Kenny Goldsmith's UBU web. necessary to re-cite
http://www.mcs.net/~ittielli/rudetrip/
- no idea: haven't been there yet
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >
John Cayley / Wellsweep Press http://www.demon.co.uk/eastfield/
1 Grove End House 150 Highgate Road London NW5 1PD UK
Tel & Fax: (+44 171) 267 3525 Email: [log in to unmask]
< - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
