 |
 |
Fascism: a no brainer at any point in history. Maosim: history rebuts it, entirely. Stalinism: just too mental. Trotskyism: same but covert. Nazism: obviously not a nice idea. Anarchism: is it even a nice idea? That's my political run down! I suppose it's a shame, for us, that the left wing of the Comintern weren't able to really split from the rest in an especially meaningful way. Luke On 23 February 2018 at 19:42, David Bircumshaw <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > More a kind of road accident things have ended up at Jaime > > best > > David > > On 23 February 2018 at 16:28, Jaime Robles <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Is that who you are talking about? Goldsmith, flarf and Place? >> >> Blimey. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> jaimerobles.com >> >> >> >> >> ______________________________ >> >> QS: Let’s return to poetics. >> JR: When did we leave? >> >> —From the conversation between Quinta Slef and Joan Retallack, The >> Poethical Wager >> >> >> >> >> >> On Feb 23, 2018, at 2:56 AM, David Bircumshaw <[log in to unmask]> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Tim >> >> I'd certainly see a line of descent in the way modernism is modified for >> US consumption, and then re-exported back to the rest of the world. If I >> think of 'modernism' generally I think of an internationalist movement - >> whatever all those French, Russians, Spanish and Latin Americans and others >> were doing it generally didn't involve being wrapped in a national flag. >> The Stein portrait is another story - it seems as if to the US modernism >> equals the language of its rise to a position of dominance. The disruption >> to syntax in say Vallejo or Celan seems to arise from overwhelming >> pressure, political, psychological, cultural, historical; in the US it >> seems to be aesthetic alone. >> I'm perfectly aware that many US poets aren't flagsters, but what >> concerns me is the kind of dominant push I see. The rather toxic feel of >> some recent US writing - e.g. Goldsmith or flarf or Place - seems to >> underline that. >> >> >> On 22 February 2018 at 14:07, Tim Allen <0000002899e7d020-dmarc-reques >> [log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >>> Wow. Quite a fantasy. Very difficult to comment upon without some >>> fantasising of my own. But isn't it a mistake to equate the US of Stein and >>> Pound with that of Ashbery and then Bernstein? We lefty Brits have a >>> different take on politics to our American friends, including the lefty >>> ones (relatively lefty, you know what I mean) - one thing I realised a >>> while back is when Americans talk about revolution they rarely mean taking >>> to the streets and usually mean something like disrupt your syntax folks - >>> their pronouncements have to be taken with their cultural context in mind. >>> >>> Any Americans wish to comment... >>> >>> On 21 Feb 2018, at 11:15, David Bircumshaw wrote: >>> >>> Well if as Eric Mottram reportedly said the 'British Poetry Revival' was >>> about accepting American poetry then taking on board the hunt for the white >>> whale really equates to a signing up for US-centric global capitalism. Big >>> Space equals Big Money. Certainly the kind of stuff that emanates from US >>> poetry now often seems to signal a global proselytism for Americanism >>> equals American values i.e dollars. I'm sure that's not what a lot of poets >>> involved would desire but I fear that's what the package really is. I have >>> this vision of a Tiepolo ceiling with Gertrude Stein in the clouds denying >>> the 30s slump existed because she was having problems getting servants, >>> Ezra Pound delivering sermons against militarism with his hand raised in a >>> fascist salute, John Ashbery IV smiling about the value of his art >>> collection and Charles Bernstein on his Donald P. Regan chair above a >>> scrolled inscription that chants '*aesthetically* left-wing'. At the >>> base of the figure some desultory figures wander about in old cardies over >>> tee-shirts lettered 'BPR'. >>> >>> A fantasy of course. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> twixt the devil and the deep blue >>> >>> dave >>> >>> >>> >> >> >