this is the time for me to wrangle out some issues with you. For a start,
what on earth does an ugly phrase like 'performative practises' actually
mean? I have no problems with the existence of performance art, I went to an
installation a few weeks back and really enjoyed it, but it's not the same
as 'poetry'. This ragged and beleaguered art attempts to bridge the void,
and make something that will last, performance pieces are not reproducible,
and therefore limited to their occasions.
Despite all the despight, the virtue of poetry lies in its written form,
literacy matters, it can be carried around from one to another, I have no
apology for taking that stance.
A Chide's Alphabet
Painting Without Numbers
----- Original Message -----
From: "cris cheek" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: "This poem"
I like the tenor of this.
> In J6 performances, we often read parts of each others' poems, reducing
> the influence of authorship and ownership. That has had interesting (and
> sometimes surprising) consequences, such as forcing us to pay much more
> attention to presentation and choreography and the like. The (written)
> poem, in context, becomes only part of the (presented) poem. And the
> (presented) poem is subordinated to the set as a whole.
What, I wonder, is the gradual influence on the writing of such performative
practices? Are you beginning to write with those shifts of voice in mind?
Does it matter which voice? Through playing with such ideas, through
performance is any of the writing beginning to explore hitherto unattended
looking forward to hearing more
love and love