I think I have come much closer to understanding the connections between
form and social and political life... having yet again read over the
early 20th century debates.
This chapter by Trotsky is worth reading...
http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1924/lit_revo/ch05.htm
Marxist do not dismiss form but assign to form an essential vital
importance.
But reading over this article I am reminded again how much poverty of
thought is allowed by the theorist of Futurist poetics in the early 20th
century. Today it is not possible to think form on the grounds given by
theorist of form such as Victor Shklovsky.
It is no longer possible to think form on the grounds provided by Kant
as the pure empty form of space and time, a priori. There is no such
thing as the pure empty form of space since space is made along with
matter and the pure empty form of time is at best, nonsense, since it is
n onsense to have a pure empty form of time, a priori.
But today, I am struck by the far greater understandings of form
available by theorists such as Foucault, Deleuze, Derrida, Badiou, as
that which is non-formal as the potential to create form. This is
probably a small book... but different forms are created by women poets
and LGBT poets. These forms cannot be ruled by the Kantian a priori
legal claims to proper form.
--
BLOG http://abdevpoetics.blogspot.com.au/
|