Hiya,
always connected this monicker to the Water Margins
and the the Lang Shan Po or whatever it was.
Not at all convinced about this theory before the
poetry proposition. As with several others still
reading this list, I imagine or hope I imagine, I
met Charles Bernstein in London in February 1978.
He turned up at the final jgjgjgjgj . . .(as long
as you can say it that's our name) performance at
Kings College then. We talked and blah blah. Some poetry
came in the post soon after that, from him and Bruce
Andrews. It met with what I already knew of McCaffery
and LEGEND was already in progress at that time (the
booklength collaboration(s) between him, McCaffery,
Silliman, di Palma and Andrews.
That was also the dateline of the first issue of
L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E (see Barrett Watten for a terrific take
on what that equals sign between the letters might
signify). So, the 'theory' came along with the poetry.
Several mags in London published work by such poets in
1978 - 9 (there may be earlier instances??). I know that
the editors (Ken Edwards, Allen Fisher, myself . . ?)
were reading the poetry. Often I was reading the 'essays'
also as 'poetry', rather than as 'theory' per se.
This was a broad and energising body of writings that
resonated with some of my own interests (diy, punk, sharp attitudes,
bullish intellectualism, improv musics, performance works,
spatialities of language on the page post-concrete - having
learned something from that and applying such ideas to syntactical
configurations - text sound works, multi-voice compositions and more).
This was also my own first taste of international peer community.
A formative connection of bright correspondents (letter writers)
and correspondence (generation and feedback of ideas / poetics /
practice). I valued such contacts, who wouldn't, and found them
generous hospitants and colaborators when I went that side of
the pond a year later.
Now it is all too easy to refer to such writers under a monolithic
signature (as inappropriate as are Peter Riley's pertinent
protestations regarding Camb-po or whatever Lon-po?? It is also
too easy to read their work as driven by theory and pre-embourgeoisied.
lots more but enough for now
love and love
cris
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|