WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.060 align:middle line:84% We're going to proceed the way we did this morning exactly 00:00:03.060 --> 00:00:05.910 align:middle line:84% according-- this time starting with Barbara Cole. 00:00:05.910 --> 00:00:08.610 align:middle line:84% As it is written, everybody will have eight minutes. 00:00:08.610 --> 00:00:11.200 align:middle line:84% And I think you now know the drill from this morning. 00:00:11.200 --> 00:00:14.190 align:middle line:90% And then we will have-- 00:00:14.190 --> 00:00:16.165 align:middle line:84% the panel can address each other, 00:00:16.165 --> 00:00:18.040 align:middle line:84% and then we will have comments for the floor. 00:00:18.040 --> 00:00:20.850 align:middle line:84% And I know many of you have lots of things you wanted to ask 00:00:20.850 --> 00:00:23.475 align:middle line:84% and say some things that were left over from this morning 00:00:23.475 --> 00:00:26.100 align:middle line:84% [? or ?] [? two. ?] And when we get to that period, by the way, 00:00:26.100 --> 00:00:29.350 align:middle line:84% I hope the person who takes the microphone-- 00:00:29.350 --> 00:00:29.940 align:middle line:90% Hello. 00:00:29.940 --> 00:00:30.780 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 00:00:30.780 --> 00:00:34.560 align:middle line:84% Well, when I see hands, I'll say a so-and-so, so-and-so-so, 00:00:34.560 --> 00:00:37.380 align:middle line:84% so we can do it in that order so that people don't just speak 00:00:37.380 --> 00:00:38.250 align:middle line:90% out, OK? 00:00:38.250 --> 00:00:39.610 align:middle line:90% I think that would be good. 00:00:39.610 --> 00:00:40.590 align:middle line:90% All right. 00:00:40.590 --> 00:00:41.400 align:middle line:90% Do I need that mic? 00:00:41.400 --> 00:00:44.470 align:middle line:90% Yes, you do. 00:00:44.470 --> 00:00:46.510 align:middle line:90% Thank you. 00:00:46.510 --> 00:00:48.490 align:middle line:84% Thank you to everybody for organizing this. 00:00:48.490 --> 00:00:49.180 align:middle line:90% This has been-- 00:00:49.180 --> 00:00:53.300 align:middle line:84% I know I'm yet another person to say this, but it's very true 00:00:53.300 --> 00:00:56.530 align:middle line:84% and I wanted to also add my thanks to the list. 00:00:56.530 --> 00:01:01.360 align:middle line:84% This has been a profound event and really amazing. 00:01:01.360 --> 00:01:04.750 align:middle line:90% In 2005, I-- 00:01:04.750 --> 00:01:08.560 align:middle line:84% 2005, I edited an issue of Open Letter with Lori Emerson. 00:01:08.560 --> 00:01:12.320 align:middle line:84% We started talking about that issue two years before that, 00:01:12.320 --> 00:01:16.600 align:middle line:84% and we knew it was going to be on the work of Kenny Goldsmith. 00:01:16.600 --> 00:01:18.580 align:middle line:84% And we weren't sure what else to call 00:01:18.580 --> 00:01:21.790 align:middle line:84% it other than just sort of like Kenny G Loving. 00:01:21.790 --> 00:01:25.420 align:middle line:84% So we came up with the title of "Kenneth Goldsmith 00:01:25.420 --> 00:01:26.560 align:middle line:90% and Conceptual Writing." 00:01:26.560 --> 00:01:30.280 align:middle line:84% And we did so with great hesitancy and reservations 00:01:30.280 --> 00:01:34.840 align:middle line:84% about actually the sort of that gesture of naming and labeling. 00:01:34.840 --> 00:01:37.180 align:middle line:84% And I was very glad that Jesper this morning brought up 00:01:37.180 --> 00:01:40.060 align:middle line:84% the issue of framing, and that Charles just circled us back 00:01:40.060 --> 00:01:44.110 align:middle line:84% to that issue of framing and to the very notion of us 00:01:44.110 --> 00:01:47.950 align:middle line:84% sort of being gathered here together to sort of be naming 00:01:47.950 --> 00:01:52.300 align:middle line:84% or framing so much of the writing 00:01:52.300 --> 00:01:56.170 align:middle line:84% that we've been talking about as conceptual writing. 00:01:56.170 --> 00:01:58.510 align:middle line:84% So the way that we handled it in open letter 00:01:58.510 --> 00:02:02.030 align:middle line:84% was to essentially not address that problem at all, 00:02:02.030 --> 00:02:05.050 align:middle line:84% and to simply let the essays speak for themselves. 00:02:05.050 --> 00:02:08.380 align:middle line:84% And our introduction skirted the issue of actually discussing 00:02:08.380 --> 00:02:10.960 align:middle line:84% what we meant by conceptual writing, 00:02:10.960 --> 00:02:13.870 align:middle line:84% how we understood that term, and we simply left it up 00:02:13.870 --> 00:02:16.900 align:middle line:84% to the writers themselves and the contributors 00:02:16.900 --> 00:02:18.890 align:middle line:90% to enact that term. 00:02:18.890 --> 00:02:25.090 align:middle line:84% So in that spirit, she do the conceptual in many voices. 00:02:25.090 --> 00:02:29.110 align:middle line:84% "Attention, colon, write down anything you hear for one hour. 00:02:29.110 --> 00:02:32.480 align:middle line:84% It all started when we were brought here. 00:02:32.480 --> 00:02:34.330 align:middle line:90% Oy vey, oy vey. 00:02:34.330 --> 00:02:38.020 align:middle line:84% Every word here is creatively intended. 00:02:38.020 --> 00:02:41.890 align:middle line:84% To see what is happening in relation to what has happened. 00:02:41.890 --> 00:02:45.070 align:middle line:84% What is the state of poetry today? 00:02:45.070 --> 00:02:47.770 align:middle line:84% There was a certain point at which the story changed. 00:02:47.770 --> 00:02:50.920 align:middle line:84% What the opener does is open the two boxes. 00:02:50.920 --> 00:02:54.220 align:middle line:84% What the voice says is this one, never 00:02:54.220 --> 00:02:56.770 align:middle line:84% trust what poets say about their own writing. 00:02:56.770 --> 00:03:00.430 align:middle line:84% To whom, when, where, how much, how much, 00:03:00.430 --> 00:03:02.920 align:middle line:84% we are in the midst of a queer and degenerate 00:03:02.920 --> 00:03:06.790 align:middle line:84% avoidance of meaning, coherence, truth, and tradition, a broken 00:03:06.790 --> 00:03:10.600 align:middle line:84% or failed English, speaking and embodying or distributing 00:03:10.600 --> 00:03:11.320 align:middle line:90% speech. 00:03:11.320 --> 00:03:15.430 align:middle line:84% The space as doubt, the question of linguistic belonging, 00:03:15.430 --> 00:03:19.480 align:middle line:84% the fetishizing of sounds, performing, reforming, 00:03:19.480 --> 00:03:22.990 align:middle line:84% deforming, this gutless indulgence. 00:03:22.990 --> 00:03:26.260 align:middle line:84% All they do is play around with words and phrases refusing 00:03:26.260 --> 00:03:27.550 align:middle line:90% to add up to any. 00:03:27.550 --> 00:03:29.680 align:middle line:90% Idiom is related to idiot. 00:03:29.680 --> 00:03:31.690 align:middle line:90% Flora leads to follow. 00:03:31.690 --> 00:03:34.990 align:middle line:84% A revolt against the transparency of the word. 00:03:34.990 --> 00:03:37.600 align:middle line:84% Bound up in questions of negation. 00:03:37.600 --> 00:03:40.270 align:middle line:84% Are you one of us, not one of us? 00:03:40.270 --> 00:03:43.450 align:middle line:84% In the middle of the way was a stone, 00:03:43.450 --> 00:03:46.300 align:middle line:84% a poetry of intellect instead of emotion. 00:03:46.300 --> 00:03:48.820 align:middle line:90% Is TS Eliot recuperable? 00:03:48.820 --> 00:03:51.490 align:middle line:90% True, false, depends. 00:03:51.490 --> 00:03:52.120 align:middle line:90% Not recently. 00:03:52.120 --> 00:03:55.180 align:middle line:90% 00:03:55.180 --> 00:03:58.630 align:middle line:84% I just wanted to say that this is about my father. 00:03:58.630 --> 00:04:01.630 align:middle line:84% I'm a modernist, too, but I'm a happy modernist. 00:04:01.630 --> 00:04:04.780 align:middle line:84% Yesterday, sequester day, way back when 00:04:04.780 --> 00:04:08.260 align:middle line:84% it was language poetry, potential mishearings 00:04:08.260 --> 00:04:12.520 align:middle line:84% or hearings, portal, mortal, a poetry of intellect 00:04:12.520 --> 00:04:14.080 align:middle line:90% instead of emotion. 00:04:14.080 --> 00:04:17.890 align:middle line:84% Hello, is there a brain inside that mind? 00:04:17.890 --> 00:04:20.990 align:middle line:84% Shifting content into different containers, 00:04:20.990 --> 00:04:25.870 align:middle line:84% a poetry of intellect instead of emotion, archival activism. 00:04:25.870 --> 00:04:29.740 align:middle line:84% It all started when meaning unmoored from vocabulary, 00:04:29.740 --> 00:04:34.510 align:middle line:84% give it up, turn it loose, shut up, [INAUDIBLE],, shut up. 00:04:34.510 --> 00:04:38.050 align:middle line:84% I've been troubled by many things, and also stimulated. 00:04:38.050 --> 00:04:39.610 align:middle line:84% Then I went to the poetry reading 00:04:39.610 --> 00:04:42.070 align:middle line:90% and I decided to begin again. 00:04:42.070 --> 00:04:45.310 align:middle line:84% Language as material, language as process. 00:04:45.310 --> 00:04:47.800 align:middle line:90% Gertrude Stein all over again. 00:04:47.800 --> 00:04:52.600 align:middle line:84% Made, composed, the real work, as opposed to the copy, 00:04:52.600 --> 00:04:54.370 align:middle line:90% reading the illegible. 00:04:54.370 --> 00:04:57.800 align:middle line:84% It all started when material that's already there. 00:04:57.800 --> 00:05:00.280 align:middle line:84% There's a good part coming up in which 00:05:00.280 --> 00:05:04.360 align:middle line:84% I ask, what is conceivable in conceptual literature? 00:05:04.360 --> 00:05:07.930 align:middle line:84% Valueless speech, misbehavior, theft, transformation, 00:05:07.930 --> 00:05:12.130 align:middle line:84% appropriation, citation, reproduction, sloppy copyist, 00:05:12.130 --> 00:05:16.480 align:middle line:84% language as junk, language as a pony that refuses to be ridden, 00:05:16.480 --> 00:05:20.770 align:middle line:84% a rat seeking a dark cavity, the ketchup that loses the race. 00:05:20.770 --> 00:05:24.610 align:middle line:84% A different kind of difficulty defined by what it is not. 00:05:24.610 --> 00:05:25.930 align:middle line:90% Isn't that too easy? 00:05:25.930 --> 00:05:27.790 align:middle line:84% Marjorie's saying that's too easy. 00:05:27.790 --> 00:05:29.920 align:middle line:90% Marjorie says I'm right. 00:05:29.920 --> 00:05:36.220 align:middle line:84% Spontaneous overflow supplanted by meticulous pro-- 00:05:36.220 --> 00:05:38.050 align:middle line:90% meticulous pro-- meticulous. 00:05:38.050 --> 00:05:39.940 align:middle line:84% Spontaneous overflow supplanted by, 00:05:39.940 --> 00:05:44.860 align:middle line:84% supplanted by period, marks of quotation, pronoun, period. 00:05:44.860 --> 00:05:46.990 align:middle line:90% It's so tiring to read-- 00:05:46.990 --> 00:05:48.880 align:middle line:90% identity and all that shit. 00:05:48.880 --> 00:05:51.430 align:middle line:84% I'm still trying to understand conceptual poetry, 00:05:51.430 --> 00:05:53.470 align:middle line:90% but I think I'm a step closer. 00:05:53.470 --> 00:05:55.832 align:middle line:84% It all started when-- it all started when we-- 00:05:55.832 --> 00:05:59.020 align:middle line:84% when we-- when we-- what happens to the proverbial voice 00:05:59.020 --> 00:06:00.040 align:middle line:90% of the poet? 00:06:00.040 --> 00:06:02.590 align:middle line:90% It's the framing that matters. 00:06:02.590 --> 00:06:07.360 align:middle line:84% Everything was fodder, canned chants, troubadours of boredom. 00:06:07.360 --> 00:06:10.840 align:middle line:84% If anything is allowed, nothing is possible. 00:06:10.840 --> 00:06:14.260 align:middle line:84% Someone has always done anything before. 00:06:14.260 --> 00:06:18.580 align:middle line:84% Proof that there is life after the continuous present. 00:06:18.580 --> 00:06:21.970 align:middle line:84% I love originality so much that I keep copying it. 00:06:21.970 --> 00:06:25.540 align:middle line:84% One person's difficulty is another person's pleasure. 00:06:25.540 --> 00:06:28.450 align:middle line:84% And other great things you can do with your mouth. 00:06:28.450 --> 00:06:31.750 align:middle line:84% If you'd like to order at home, $19.95, plus tax. 00:06:31.750 --> 00:06:36.640 align:middle line:84% Because I loved language more, poetry is all around if only 00:06:36.640 --> 00:06:38.440 align:middle line:90% we have ears to hear it. 00:06:38.440 --> 00:06:43.060 align:middle line:84% The answer is not in our machines, it's in our politics. 00:06:43.060 --> 00:06:45.070 align:middle line:90% Do we get to go eat now? 00:06:45.070 --> 00:06:47.186 align:middle line:90% That's the last question." 00:06:47.186 --> 00:06:50.602 align:middle line:90% [APPLAUSE] 00:06:50.602 --> 00:07:00.380 align:middle line:90% 00:07:00.380 --> 00:07:02.600 align:middle line:84% I would, of course, like to add my thanks. 00:07:02.600 --> 00:07:08.750 align:middle line:84% This is a fantastic conference to all who organized it. 00:07:08.750 --> 00:07:11.720 align:middle line:84% And I'm immensely grateful for the time I've had, 00:07:11.720 --> 00:07:15.800 align:middle line:90% I'm having, and will still have. 00:07:15.800 --> 00:07:21.290 align:middle line:84% I want to make some comments about forms and about history. 00:07:21.290 --> 00:07:23.930 align:middle line:84% I hope I don't have too much to say but-- 00:07:23.930 --> 00:07:24.800 align:middle line:90% The mic's not on. 00:07:24.800 --> 00:07:25.460 align:middle line:90% It's not on? 00:07:25.460 --> 00:07:26.650 align:middle line:84% Close enough-- it's not close enough. 00:07:26.650 --> 00:07:27.050 align:middle line:90% Oh, I see. 00:07:27.050 --> 00:07:27.950 align:middle line:90% It's not close enough. 00:07:27.950 --> 00:07:28.750 align:middle line:90% Is that close enough? 00:07:28.750 --> 00:07:29.333 align:middle line:90% That's better. 00:07:29.333 --> 00:07:30.020 align:middle line:90% Yeah? 00:07:30.020 --> 00:07:33.394 align:middle line:84% You want me to repeat what I said, or did you all hear it? 00:07:33.394 --> 00:07:34.370 align:middle line:90% Repeat it. 00:07:34.370 --> 00:07:36.980 align:middle line:90% Repeat it, OK. 00:07:36.980 --> 00:07:39.760 align:middle line:84% I wanted to say how grateful I am. 00:07:39.760 --> 00:07:42.848 align:middle line:90% 00:07:42.848 --> 00:07:43.640 align:middle line:90% You don't have to-- 00:07:43.640 --> 00:07:44.180 align:middle line:90% All right. 00:07:44.180 --> 00:07:47.000 align:middle line:90% 00:07:47.000 --> 00:07:49.640 align:middle line:84% So I'm going to talk a little bit about forms, 00:07:49.640 --> 00:07:51.680 align:middle line:84% and I talk a little bit about history. 00:07:51.680 --> 00:07:58.850 align:middle line:84% And what I wanted to say about forms 00:07:58.850 --> 00:08:03.440 align:middle line:84% I can start saying by quoting from a really good recent book 00:08:03.440 --> 00:08:08.750 align:middle line:84% called Words to Be Looked At by Liz Kotz, yeah? 00:08:08.750 --> 00:08:11.810 align:middle line:90% And this is something she says. 00:08:11.810 --> 00:08:16.910 align:middle line:84% "If, as Rosalind Krauss has argued--" every time 00:08:16.910 --> 00:08:19.070 align:middle line:84% I hear that phrase the expanded field, 00:08:19.070 --> 00:08:21.530 align:middle line:84% or the extended field of something, 00:08:21.530 --> 00:08:24.320 align:middle line:84% I always think of Rosalind Krauss 00:08:24.320 --> 00:08:26.660 align:middle line:84% because that's where it comes from. 00:08:26.660 --> 00:08:31.790 align:middle line:84% Anyway, "if, as Rosalind Krauss has argued, 00:08:31.790 --> 00:08:34.880 align:middle line:84% the breakdown of medium-based practices 00:08:34.880 --> 00:08:38.990 align:middle line:84% provides one model of an historical shift 00:08:38.990 --> 00:08:42.020 align:middle line:84% from specific to general forms of art, 00:08:42.020 --> 00:08:46.160 align:middle line:84% another logic is at play right alongside it 00:08:46.160 --> 00:08:51.450 align:middle line:84% in which a general template, or a notational system, 00:08:51.450 --> 00:08:55.130 align:middle line:84% be it musical scores, fabrication, instructions, 00:08:55.130 --> 00:08:57.800 align:middle line:84% architectural blueprints, or diagrams, 00:08:57.800 --> 00:09:03.110 align:middle line:84% or schematic representations, generates specific realizations 00:09:03.110 --> 00:09:04.640 align:middle line:90% in different contexts." 00:09:04.640 --> 00:09:07.750 align:middle line:90% 00:09:07.750 --> 00:09:11.080 align:middle line:84% What Kotz calls the general template 00:09:11.080 --> 00:09:15.430 align:middle line:84% is what here has been referred to as the idea 00:09:15.430 --> 00:09:20.110 align:middle line:84% following on from Sol LeWitt's ideas-- 00:09:20.110 --> 00:09:25.930 align:middle line:84% idea in his sentences for conceptual art, 00:09:25.930 --> 00:09:30.280 align:middle line:84% or the machine, as it's commonly been called here, too. 00:09:30.280 --> 00:09:36.460 align:middle line:84% And what I want to call here the pretext, or the pretext, 00:09:36.460 --> 00:09:37.030 align:middle line:90% for writing. 00:09:37.030 --> 00:09:39.970 align:middle line:90% 00:09:39.970 --> 00:09:41.110 align:middle line:90% It may be applied-- 00:09:41.110 --> 00:09:42.730 align:middle line:84% this general template idea may be 00:09:42.730 --> 00:09:47.500 align:middle line:84% applied to Oulipian constraints, various language poetry 00:09:47.500 --> 00:09:51.670 align:middle line:84% procedureless practices, the Fibonacci series, 00:09:51.670 --> 00:09:56.260 align:middle line:84% in early Silliman, in Mac Low's various genres or projects, 00:09:56.260 --> 00:10:01.240 align:middle line:84% the pronouns, the asymmetries, the gathers, even to include, 00:10:01.240 --> 00:10:04.210 align:middle line:84% I think, Bernadette Mayer's experiments 00:10:04.210 --> 00:10:10.300 align:middle line:84% and the additions provided by Charles Bernstein. 00:10:10.300 --> 00:10:13.690 align:middle line:84% Appropriation is another general template, 00:10:13.690 --> 00:10:16.540 align:middle line:84% although each specific realization 00:10:16.540 --> 00:10:20.890 align:middle line:84% would seem to have an equally specific pretext. 00:10:20.890 --> 00:10:26.650 align:middle line:84% It is nonetheless a template whose various framing 00:10:26.650 --> 00:10:29.890 align:middle line:90% strategies point to generality. 00:10:29.890 --> 00:10:33.820 align:middle line:84% Better put, the pretext provides the context 00:10:33.820 --> 00:10:37.270 align:middle line:90% for the specific realization. 00:10:37.270 --> 00:10:40.600 align:middle line:84% Other practices with similarly specific pretexts 00:10:40.600 --> 00:10:44.980 align:middle line:84% include writings through, as with Cage and Mac Low, 00:10:44.980 --> 00:10:48.360 align:middle line:90% and translation. 00:10:48.360 --> 00:10:54.630 align:middle line:84% The notion that pretext provides for--" sorry. 00:10:54.630 --> 00:10:56.610 align:middle line:84% "The notion that pretext provides 00:10:56.610 --> 00:11:00.090 align:middle line:84% the context for the general template 00:11:00.090 --> 00:11:04.320 align:middle line:84% is important, useful, and may be difficult-- 00:11:04.320 --> 00:11:05.430 align:middle line:90% an idea. 00:11:05.430 --> 00:11:09.000 align:middle line:84% Difficult because the pretext is barely a text. 00:11:09.000 --> 00:11:12.420 align:middle line:84% Is the idea more interesting than the application? 00:11:12.420 --> 00:11:21.030 align:middle line:84% N plus 7, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, et cetera, or Lawrence Weiner's 00:11:21.030 --> 00:11:22.470 align:middle line:90% general template. 00:11:22.470 --> 00:11:24.990 align:middle line:84% The artist may construct the work. 00:11:24.990 --> 00:11:27.540 align:middle line:90% Two, the work may be fabricated. 00:11:27.540 --> 00:11:30.720 align:middle line:84% Three, the work need not be built. 00:11:30.720 --> 00:11:34.650 align:middle line:84% Each being equal and consistent with the intent of the artist, 00:11:34.650 --> 00:11:38.370 align:middle line:84% the decision as to condition rests with the receiver 00:11:38.370 --> 00:11:40.890 align:middle line:84% upon the occasion of receivership. 00:11:40.890 --> 00:11:45.330 align:middle line:84% This is more difficult. When a statement is a general template 00:11:45.330 --> 00:11:51.720 align:middle line:84% for all his work, each work is a secondary general template, 00:11:51.720 --> 00:11:56.700 align:middle line:84% one whose realization may involve the receiver or viewer. 00:11:56.700 --> 00:11:59.550 align:middle line:84% The devolution of authorship mentioned here 00:11:59.550 --> 00:12:03.840 align:middle line:84% as an element of early language poetry theory 00:12:03.840 --> 00:12:07.425 align:middle line:84% insinuates a further realization, a post text. 00:12:07.425 --> 00:12:10.830 align:middle line:90% 00:12:10.830 --> 00:12:14.040 align:middle line:84% Wiener's many colored objects placed side by side 00:12:14.040 --> 00:12:17.550 align:middle line:84% to form a row of many colored objects. 00:12:17.550 --> 00:12:19.215 align:middle line:84% That's a work of Lawrence Weiner's. 00:12:19.215 --> 00:12:22.020 align:middle line:90% 00:12:22.020 --> 00:12:25.950 align:middle line:84% It may be and has been written on the walls of a gallery. 00:12:25.950 --> 00:12:28.830 align:middle line:84% In that context, it might be constructed 00:12:28.830 --> 00:12:35.340 align:middle line:84% by a curator as an exhibition of abstract paintings, or by me 00:12:35.340 --> 00:12:40.260 align:middle line:84% as a way of organizing a shelf of my books. 00:12:40.260 --> 00:12:44.070 align:middle line:84% Similarly, with Mac Low's pronouns, 00:12:44.070 --> 00:12:46.440 align:middle line:84% we have a general template in which 00:12:46.440 --> 00:12:49.650 align:middle line:84% he describes the elaborate chance operations that 00:12:49.650 --> 00:12:53.190 align:middle line:84% generated the specific realization of the poems that 00:12:53.190 --> 00:12:57.450 align:middle line:84% make up the collection, which in turn serve as pretext 00:12:57.450 --> 00:13:03.480 align:middle line:84% for the choreographer with which to generate, or translate, 00:13:03.480 --> 00:13:07.500 align:middle line:90% specific dance performances. 00:13:07.500 --> 00:13:12.270 align:middle line:84% Perhaps this returns us to the question of the performed text. 00:13:12.270 --> 00:13:16.410 align:middle line:90% Is the poem in some sense or-- 00:13:16.410 --> 00:13:20.340 align:middle line:84% is the poem in some sense a general template or pretext 00:13:20.340 --> 00:13:22.390 align:middle line:90% for performance? 00:13:22.390 --> 00:13:26.910 align:middle line:84% You might think so after hearing Christian's readings 00:13:26.910 --> 00:13:28.410 align:middle line:90% the other day--" yesterday. 00:13:28.410 --> 00:13:30.870 align:middle line:90% What day was it? 00:13:30.870 --> 00:13:31.530 align:middle line:90% Every day. 00:13:31.530 --> 00:13:34.590 align:middle line:90% Every day. 00:13:34.590 --> 00:13:38.490 align:middle line:84% "You might think so after hearing Christian's readings, 00:13:38.490 --> 00:13:42.510 align:middle line:84% or after hearing Olsson's readings. 00:13:42.510 --> 00:13:44.790 align:middle line:84% What of the-- and what of the performer? 00:13:44.790 --> 00:13:47.700 align:middle line:84% We assume the poet must perform the work. 00:13:47.700 --> 00:13:49.080 align:middle line:90% But why? 00:13:49.080 --> 00:13:52.380 align:middle line:84% This doesn't apply to Weiner's work or Mac Low's. 00:13:52.380 --> 00:13:55.680 align:middle line:84% And a last question, post texts may 00:13:55.680 --> 00:13:58.410 align:middle line:84% be something like Vanessa's contribution 00:13:58.410 --> 00:14:01.530 align:middle line:84% at the previous roundtable this morning, 00:14:01.530 --> 00:14:05.070 align:middle line:84% or like some of Charles's work, such as the arts-- 00:14:05.070 --> 00:14:07.650 align:middle line:90% such as artifice of absorption. 00:14:07.650 --> 00:14:15.960 align:middle line:90% Where did that page go? 00:14:15.960 --> 00:14:21.510 align:middle line:84% Where what used to be called primary texts 00:14:21.510 --> 00:14:25.470 align:middle line:84% play the role of what once were called secondary texts. 00:14:25.470 --> 00:14:29.400 align:middle line:90% 00:14:29.400 --> 00:14:34.650 align:middle line:84% This attempt to see the text as a chain of pre and post effects 00:14:34.650 --> 00:14:37.860 align:middle line:84% is not made in the name of hybridity, 00:14:37.860 --> 00:14:40.440 align:middle line:84% as if that were a value in itself, 00:14:40.440 --> 00:14:44.850 align:middle line:84% but in the name of contextual and contingent meaning, 00:14:44.850 --> 00:14:49.860 align:middle line:84% the kind of meaning not understood by or tolerated by-- 00:14:49.860 --> 00:14:54.030 align:middle line:84% or tolerated in the books of accessible poetry." 00:14:54.030 --> 00:14:55.620 align:middle line:90% I think that's enough. 00:14:55.620 --> 00:14:56.220 align:middle line:90% Thank you. 00:14:56.220 --> 00:14:59.643 align:middle line:90% [APPLAUSE] 00:14:59.643 --> 00:15:06.010 align:middle line:90% 00:15:06.010 --> 00:15:06.670 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:15:06.670 --> 00:15:08.380 align:middle line:84% There are several different subjects 00:15:08.380 --> 00:15:09.980 align:middle line:90% that I'd like to talk about. 00:15:09.980 --> 00:15:12.760 align:middle line:84% The first was-- came on the screen, 00:15:12.760 --> 00:15:16.780 align:middle line:84% and actually I'm going to take that last, if I have time 00:15:16.780 --> 00:15:17.380 align:middle line:90% still. 00:15:17.380 --> 00:15:19.690 align:middle line:84% I'd like to start with responding to-- 00:15:19.690 --> 00:15:19.990 align:middle line:90% Are you talking into the mic? 00:15:19.990 --> 00:15:20.620 align:middle line:90% Can you hear it? 00:15:20.620 --> 00:15:21.290 align:middle line:90% Can you hear me? 00:15:21.290 --> 00:15:21.790 align:middle line:90% Yes. 00:15:21.790 --> 00:15:22.450 align:middle line:90% No. 00:15:22.450 --> 00:15:23.120 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:15:23.120 --> 00:15:24.280 align:middle line:90% Better. 00:15:24.280 --> 00:15:26.860 align:middle line:84% Start with talking about or responding 00:15:26.860 --> 00:15:31.690 align:middle line:84% to Caroline Bergvall's multilingual, translingual, 00:15:31.690 --> 00:15:37.030 align:middle line:84% [? Mongolisiam, ?] and give some examples of text 00:15:37.030 --> 00:15:40.030 align:middle line:90% that are in the first case-- 00:15:40.030 --> 00:15:41.590 align:middle line:84% let me get this slide out of the way. 00:15:41.590 --> 00:15:48.070 align:middle line:90% 00:15:48.070 --> 00:15:51.940 align:middle line:84% In the first case, a procedural translation 00:15:51.940 --> 00:15:57.940 align:middle line:84% which requires one to follow the poetics, first of all, 00:15:57.940 --> 00:16:00.910 align:middle line:84% but also all of the different contrivances 00:16:00.910 --> 00:16:03.430 align:middle line:84% of classical Chinese form when translating 00:16:03.430 --> 00:16:06.490 align:middle line:84% a classical Chinese poem into English. 00:16:06.490 --> 00:16:08.860 align:middle line:84% The result is a kind of Chinglish hybrid language 00:16:08.860 --> 00:16:14.240 align:middle line:90% form, which I will talk about. 00:16:14.240 --> 00:16:17.350 align:middle line:84% But I wanted to give this introduction 00:16:17.350 --> 00:16:21.880 align:middle line:84% of an idea of translation as purely mimicry. 00:16:21.880 --> 00:16:26.080 align:middle line:84% And to do that, I wanted to give the example of these two 00:16:26.080 --> 00:16:30.250 align:middle line:84% concepts brought from the 10th and 11th century to China. 00:16:30.250 --> 00:16:32.650 align:middle line:84% This is actually how a lot of poetry 00:16:32.650 --> 00:16:34.840 align:middle line:84% was produced in the later dynasties, which 00:16:34.840 --> 00:16:36.040 align:middle line:90% is just purely mimicry. 00:16:36.040 --> 00:16:39.220 align:middle line:84% You get to choose either to mimic the semantic content, 00:16:39.220 --> 00:16:41.380 align:middle line:90% or the form of the poem. 00:16:41.380 --> 00:16:44.260 align:middle line:84% My idea is that translation is nothing more than mimicry, 00:16:44.260 --> 00:16:47.620 align:middle line:84% generally, mimicry of the semantic content or meaning. 00:16:47.620 --> 00:16:49.210 align:middle line:84% And that all translation, therefore, 00:16:49.210 --> 00:16:51.460 align:middle line:84% is a kind of procedural creation where 00:16:51.460 --> 00:16:55.660 align:middle line:84% you are bound to the constraint of the original source text. 00:16:55.660 --> 00:16:59.260 align:middle line:84% In this case, though, one could also mimic the form, 00:16:59.260 --> 00:17:02.680 align:middle line:84% and that's what I've done here in the following translation. 00:17:02.680 --> 00:17:04.430 align:middle line:84% I'm going to read this in Chinese and then 00:17:04.430 --> 00:17:09.369 align:middle line:84% in English, or in the Chinglish version, if you will. 00:17:09.369 --> 00:17:11.800 align:middle line:90% This is by the last dynasty-- 00:17:11.800 --> 00:17:15.640 align:middle line:84% I'm sorry-- the last emperor of the Tang dynasty. 00:17:15.640 --> 00:17:16.844 align:middle line:90% [SPEAKING CHINESE] 00:17:16.844 --> 00:17:32.140 align:middle line:90% 00:17:32.140 --> 00:17:37.420 align:middle line:84% The English-- "springs red grove blooms ebb past too fast, fast. 00:17:37.420 --> 00:17:41.230 align:middle line:84% Dawn will bring chill rain down night wind blast. 00:17:41.230 --> 00:17:44.800 align:middle line:84% Rouge face cry, men's gaze, sigh. 00:17:44.800 --> 00:17:50.110 align:middle line:84% Time piles vast from our birth, life long [? dearth, ?] 00:17:50.110 --> 00:17:51.400 align:middle line:90% springs flow past." 00:17:51.400 --> 00:17:54.970 align:middle line:90% 00:17:54.970 --> 00:17:57.850 align:middle line:84% To talk a little bit about the constraints here, 00:17:57.850 --> 00:18:02.230 align:middle line:84% all of the end rhymes and little rhymes and so on 00:18:02.230 --> 00:18:04.883 align:middle line:84% are highlighted in the different colors. 00:18:04.883 --> 00:18:06.550 align:middle line:84% Chinese, of course, is a tonal language, 00:18:06.550 --> 00:18:10.510 align:middle line:84% and Chinese poetics requires a tonal oscillation 00:18:10.510 --> 00:18:14.650 align:middle line:84% between yin and yang, if you will, within the tones. 00:18:14.650 --> 00:18:17.590 align:middle line:84% So the prosody is not created in feet of stressed 00:18:17.590 --> 00:18:21.370 align:middle line:84% and unstressed, but with alterations of different tones. 00:18:21.370 --> 00:18:22.990 align:middle line:84% Because English is trans tonal, you 00:18:22.990 --> 00:18:26.770 align:middle line:84% can tonalize English and not lose the semantic content. 00:18:26.770 --> 00:18:29.050 align:middle line:84% The problem, too, of doing this without trans-- 00:18:29.050 --> 00:18:31.030 align:middle line:84% without putting the tones in is that you end up 00:18:31.030 --> 00:18:33.970 align:middle line:84% getting a kind of nursery rhyme sounding text. 00:18:33.970 --> 00:18:36.940 align:middle line:84% But with the tones, it so defamiliarizes the sound 00:18:36.940 --> 00:18:39.580 align:middle line:84% that you end up having something that, I would argue, 00:18:39.580 --> 00:18:45.520 align:middle line:84% doesn't necessarily replicate Chinese poetry sounds, 00:18:45.520 --> 00:18:48.740 align:middle line:84% but mimics the sounds of the poem. 00:18:48.740 --> 00:18:50.170 align:middle line:84% This is all to say that I'm highly 00:18:50.170 --> 00:18:52.900 align:middle line:90% skeptical of translation. 00:18:52.900 --> 00:18:55.870 align:middle line:84% Earlier translation came up as a metacritical term, 00:18:55.870 --> 00:19:00.280 align:middle line:84% something we might think about as a form of conceptual poetry. 00:19:00.280 --> 00:19:04.930 align:middle line:84% I like to think of mimicry as a better metacritical term than 00:19:04.930 --> 00:19:08.830 align:middle line:84% translation since even in this sort of hyper-mimetic 00:19:08.830 --> 00:19:11.830 align:middle line:84% translative process where you create-- 00:19:11.830 --> 00:19:13.330 align:middle line:90% and by the way, it takes-- 00:19:13.330 --> 00:19:17.170 align:middle line:84% I think I succeed maybe 10%, 5% of the poems 00:19:17.170 --> 00:19:19.000 align:middle line:84% that I attempt to translate in this manner, 00:19:19.000 --> 00:19:21.490 align:middle line:84% because there are very few monosyllables. 00:19:21.490 --> 00:19:23.110 align:middle line:84% There's a fair number of monosyllables 00:19:23.110 --> 00:19:24.880 align:middle line:84% but, of course, sometimes the translation 00:19:24.880 --> 00:19:27.280 align:middle line:84% doesn't come through semantically. 00:19:27.280 --> 00:19:30.670 align:middle line:84% And of course, to end rhyme and create all of the inner rhymes 00:19:30.670 --> 00:19:32.240 align:middle line:90% and so on is nearly impossible. 00:19:32.240 --> 00:19:34.210 align:middle line:84% But when it does happen, translation still 00:19:34.210 --> 00:19:39.200 align:middle line:84% has not happened, because your ears and my ears are different. 00:19:39.200 --> 00:19:41.350 align:middle line:84% And so even if the sound is similar, 00:19:41.350 --> 00:19:42.940 align:middle line:90% the poem never comes through. 00:19:42.940 --> 00:19:45.190 align:middle line:84% Translation means to move something, right? 00:19:45.190 --> 00:19:47.620 align:middle line:84% The cognate terms that we came up with 00:19:47.620 --> 00:19:49.330 align:middle line:90% was transfer and transmit. 00:19:49.330 --> 00:19:51.460 align:middle line:90% All of these are impossible. 00:19:51.460 --> 00:19:52.900 align:middle line:84% This is all metaphysics, and it's 00:19:52.900 --> 00:19:56.770 align:middle line:90% all a faith-based initiative. 00:19:56.770 --> 00:20:00.640 align:middle line:84% In the end, translation etymologically 00:20:00.640 --> 00:20:03.670 align:middle line:84% is the movement of a Bishop from one place to another place. 00:20:03.670 --> 00:20:05.800 align:middle line:90% Nothing happens. 00:20:05.800 --> 00:20:07.480 align:middle line:84% Transcreation is also interesting, 00:20:07.480 --> 00:20:11.140 align:middle line:84% but I think problematic because of the creative aspect. 00:20:11.140 --> 00:20:14.020 align:middle line:84% Mimicry is, of course, unoriginal, right? 00:20:14.020 --> 00:20:18.130 align:middle line:84% It is-- it's derivative, obviously. 00:20:18.130 --> 00:20:21.940 align:middle line:84% And I think that the creative-- the idea of creation 00:20:21.940 --> 00:20:23.320 align:middle line:90% may have a lot of baggage. 00:20:23.320 --> 00:20:26.740 align:middle line:84% So I prefer transformation, or transformulation, 00:20:26.740 --> 00:20:31.090 align:middle line:84% as perhaps a better idea about what happens in translation. 00:20:31.090 --> 00:20:33.340 align:middle line:84% And so rather than getting closer to the Chinese poem, 00:20:33.340 --> 00:20:37.437 align:middle line:84% you take this idea that if you only have the sound of Chinese 00:20:37.437 --> 00:20:39.520 align:middle line:84% there, then you might actually have a translation. 00:20:39.520 --> 00:20:41.710 align:middle line:90% And I kind of debunk that. 00:20:41.710 --> 00:20:47.290 align:middle line:84% The next is taking Chinese characters 00:20:47.290 --> 00:20:51.580 align:middle line:84% and writing through transliteration English poems. 00:20:51.580 --> 00:20:55.870 align:middle line:84% This poem here, it's a process that happens all the time. 00:20:55.870 --> 00:20:58.210 align:middle line:84% You were just talking about being in China with Charles, 00:20:58.210 --> 00:21:01.390 align:middle line:84% Marjorie, and the signage, as you saw those kind of Chinglish 00:21:01.390 --> 00:21:02.050 align:middle line:90% signage. 00:21:02.050 --> 00:21:05.260 align:middle line:84% And also in the accent of Chinese speakers 00:21:05.260 --> 00:21:06.760 align:middle line:84% when they're not fluent, obviously, 00:21:06.760 --> 00:21:09.580 align:middle line:84% have a certain accent that holds to the particulars 00:21:09.580 --> 00:21:11.890 align:middle line:84% of Chinese orthography of the phoneme. 00:21:11.890 --> 00:21:14.680 align:middle line:84% And that's also represented in language 00:21:14.680 --> 00:21:15.850 align:middle line:90% through transliteration. 00:21:15.850 --> 00:21:18.490 align:middle line:84% So when you go and you find Rumsfeld 00:21:18.490 --> 00:21:20.350 align:middle line:84% in a Chinese newspaper, of course, 00:21:20.350 --> 00:21:22.900 align:middle line:84% Chinese characters transliterate these sounds. 00:21:22.900 --> 00:21:24.700 align:middle line:84% Unlike any other form of transliteration, 00:21:24.700 --> 00:21:26.860 align:middle line:84% though, the alphabet itself is semantic. 00:21:26.860 --> 00:21:29.200 align:middle line:84% And so what happens is is you can 00:21:29.200 --> 00:21:31.900 align:middle line:84% write an English poem using Chinese characters 00:21:31.900 --> 00:21:36.190 align:middle line:84% and have a secondary, bifurcated semantic poem being 00:21:36.190 --> 00:21:37.900 align:middle line:90% produced at the same time. 00:21:37.900 --> 00:21:40.810 align:middle line:84% So I'm going to read this, and I wish-- 00:21:40.810 --> 00:21:43.240 align:middle line:90% I could turn this off and on. 00:21:43.240 --> 00:21:46.180 align:middle line:90% And I can, just-- 00:21:46.180 --> 00:21:48.790 align:middle line:84% well-- yeah, sure, go ahead and turn it off. 00:21:48.790 --> 00:21:54.320 align:middle line:84% I think it might be helpful to hear it rather than see it. 00:21:54.320 --> 00:21:57.160 align:middle line:90% So here it is, the English poem. 00:21:57.160 --> 00:21:59.920 align:middle line:90% 00:21:59.920 --> 00:22:00.640 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:22:00.640 --> 00:22:06.340 align:middle line:90% "Close your eyes in a dark room. 00:22:06.340 --> 00:22:14.120 align:middle line:84% Open your eyes, open your eyes again. 00:22:14.120 --> 00:22:22.360 align:middle line:84% Outside the dark room, face what you see. 00:22:22.360 --> 00:22:23.860 align:middle line:90% Watching the dark." 00:22:23.860 --> 00:22:26.530 align:middle line:90% 00:22:26.530 --> 00:22:30.840 align:middle line:84% The interesting thing with a poem like this 00:22:30.840 --> 00:22:32.340 align:middle line:84% is that if you're a Chinese speaker, 00:22:32.340 --> 00:22:33.728 align:middle line:90% you hear a Chinese poem. 00:22:33.728 --> 00:22:36.270 align:middle line:84% And it's totally different than if you're an English speaker, 00:22:36.270 --> 00:22:37.470 align:middle line:90% you hear an English poem. 00:22:37.470 --> 00:22:40.110 align:middle line:84% Exact same text, two different poems. 00:22:40.110 --> 00:22:44.310 align:middle line:84% The Chinese speaker would hear ""[SPEAKING CHINESE] appears 00:22:44.310 --> 00:22:46.260 align:middle line:90% as mournful memory. 00:22:46.260 --> 00:22:49.740 align:middle line:84% Narrow shadows control answer as forest. 00:22:49.740 --> 00:22:53.070 align:middle line:84% Gulls origin, mist enveloped temple. 00:22:53.070 --> 00:22:57.750 align:middle line:84% Frustration overflows a day's grief as narrow sensation. 00:22:57.750 --> 00:23:01.110 align:middle line:84% Concave particulars are better than virtue. 00:23:01.110 --> 00:23:04.080 align:middle line:84% Earth replies by carving toward half light. 00:23:04.080 --> 00:23:08.190 align:middle line:84% Distressed, flying, laying down pining for childhood, 00:23:08.190 --> 00:23:10.560 align:middle line:84% resting on flying thoughts, Earth 00:23:10.560 --> 00:23:13.965 align:middle line:84% beats upon the Sun's shell and enters." 00:23:13.965 --> 00:23:17.570 align:middle line:90% 00:23:17.570 --> 00:23:18.980 align:middle line:90% Of course, the latter-- 00:23:18.980 --> 00:23:20.520 align:middle line:90% yeah, that's fine. 00:23:20.520 --> 00:23:23.510 align:middle line:84% The last thing is just to think about how accent 00:23:23.510 --> 00:23:26.840 align:middle line:84% in each one of these, of course, if you read it, 00:23:26.840 --> 00:23:29.250 align:middle line:84% it has an English accent, if you're a Chinese listener. 00:23:29.250 --> 00:23:32.360 align:middle line:84% And it has a Chinese accent if you're an English listener. 00:23:32.360 --> 00:23:37.050 align:middle line:84% So it's a third, if you will, area of interlinguistic play. 00:23:37.050 --> 00:23:37.550 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:23:37.550 --> 00:23:38.648 align:middle line:90% Thank you. 00:23:38.648 --> 00:23:42.134 align:middle line:90% [APPLAUSE] 00:23:42.134 --> 00:23:49.620 align:middle line:90% 00:23:49.620 --> 00:23:52.350 align:middle line:84% Well, first of all, and as many people 00:23:52.350 --> 00:23:56.100 align:middle line:84% have done before me, I want to thank everybody who organized 00:23:56.100 --> 00:24:01.890 align:middle line:84% this incredible conference, and for the possibility 00:24:01.890 --> 00:24:05.880 align:middle line:84% of learning so much and thinking so much about what 00:24:05.880 --> 00:24:07.210 align:middle line:90% is going on in this country. 00:24:07.210 --> 00:24:11.790 align:middle line:84% And I think that really the poetry in my country is that. 00:24:11.790 --> 00:24:25.970 align:middle line:84% So I would like probably to start with two little sayings 00:24:25.970 --> 00:24:28.070 align:middle line:90% by our major-- 00:24:28.070 --> 00:24:30.800 align:middle line:90% two major modernist poets. 00:24:30.800 --> 00:24:34.820 align:middle line:84% One of them was Mário de Sá-Carneiro, and he says, 00:24:34.820 --> 00:24:38.180 align:middle line:84% "I am neither myself, nor the other. 00:24:38.180 --> 00:24:42.270 align:middle line:90% I am something intermediate." 00:24:42.270 --> 00:24:45.260 align:middle line:84% Which is not a good translation because intermédio 00:24:45.260 --> 00:24:50.660 align:middle line:84% in Portuguese means both intermediate and intermediary. 00:24:50.660 --> 00:24:55.910 align:middle line:84% And the other quote is by Fernando Pessoa, probably 00:24:55.910 --> 00:24:58.730 align:middle line:84% the major Portuguese modernist poet. 00:24:58.730 --> 00:25:01.060 align:middle line:84% And this is a terrible translation. 00:25:01.060 --> 00:25:02.450 align:middle line:90% It's my translation. 00:25:02.450 --> 00:25:04.880 align:middle line:84% I'm sure it's been translated much better than this. 00:25:04.880 --> 00:25:10.490 align:middle line:84% Anyway-- and it's something like, "the poet is a faker, 00:25:10.490 --> 00:25:15.830 align:middle line:84% and he so completely fakes that he even fakes as pain 00:25:15.830 --> 00:25:17.690 align:middle line:90% the pain he actually feels." 00:25:17.690 --> 00:25:22.370 align:middle line:90% 00:25:22.370 --> 00:25:25.400 align:middle line:84% Fernando Pessoa created many poets. 00:25:25.400 --> 00:25:26.390 align:middle line:90% He was many poets. 00:25:26.390 --> 00:25:28.598 align:middle line:84% He was Alberto Caeiro, Ricardo Reis, Bernardo Soares, 00:25:28.598 --> 00:25:35.120 align:middle line:84% Álvaro de Campos, Fernando Pessoa himself, and others. 00:25:35.120 --> 00:25:37.800 align:middle line:90% Heteronyms he called them. 00:25:37.800 --> 00:25:41.120 align:middle line:84% And one of the things that is really-- 00:25:41.120 --> 00:25:44.870 align:middle line:84% was really interesting to me was we were discussing 00:25:44.870 --> 00:25:47.840 align:middle line:84% during this past few days the question of the subject 00:25:47.840 --> 00:25:58.670 align:middle line:84% and its subjectivity is how it is something really like-- 00:25:58.670 --> 00:26:02.210 align:middle line:84% it seems to be at least something very 00:26:02.210 --> 00:26:06.680 align:middle line:84% interesting to discuss at this point in here. 00:26:06.680 --> 00:26:08.660 align:middle line:84% And in my country for some reason, 00:26:08.660 --> 00:26:15.180 align:middle line:84% it's not, meaning that what you have as a subject 00:26:15.180 --> 00:26:23.600 align:middle line:84% is basically the possibility of anchor somewhere in language 00:26:23.600 --> 00:26:28.520 align:middle line:84% to be part of yourself, whatever that is. 00:26:28.520 --> 00:26:32.180 align:middle line:84% I love the word constellation that has been used here before, 00:26:32.180 --> 00:26:34.820 align:middle line:84% and I think that's what Pessoa was trying to do. 00:26:34.820 --> 00:26:39.110 align:middle line:84% Because constellation means that it is there and it isn't. 00:26:39.110 --> 00:26:42.800 align:middle line:84% Because the light we get from those stars probably-- 00:26:42.800 --> 00:26:44.510 align:middle line:90% it's just a fake. 00:26:44.510 --> 00:26:48.540 align:middle line:84% It's not there any longer, the star, was that. 00:26:48.540 --> 00:26:52.820 align:middle line:84% And so the other thing I thought was really interesting 00:26:52.820 --> 00:26:58.700 align:middle line:84% was this problem with the materiality, 00:26:58.700 --> 00:27:03.050 align:middle line:84% and the spirituality, or whatever you 00:27:03.050 --> 00:27:05.810 align:middle line:90% want to call it, the emotional. 00:27:05.810 --> 00:27:09.050 align:middle line:84% Because I want to quote Charles Bernstein about this when 00:27:09.050 --> 00:27:13.040 align:middle line:84% he says that "language is the first extension of the body, 00:27:13.040 --> 00:27:15.500 align:middle line:90% and it is the first forgery." 00:27:15.500 --> 00:27:23.060 align:middle line:84% Forgery in the sense of lying, of course, and something made, 00:27:23.060 --> 00:27:26.480 align:middle line:84% something that has been forged, or chemically 00:27:26.480 --> 00:27:28.280 align:middle line:90% some way-- in some way. 00:27:28.280 --> 00:27:32.270 align:middle line:84% So I guess for us the question of cheating-- and truth 00:27:32.270 --> 00:27:34.790 align:middle line:84% is not a question, because there's simply 00:27:34.790 --> 00:27:37.850 align:middle line:90% no way to get out of it. 00:27:37.850 --> 00:27:40.940 align:middle line:84% But it is the politics of the choice between what 00:27:40.940 --> 00:27:43.490 align:middle line:84% you think is truth and what do you think it's not 00:27:43.490 --> 00:27:45.300 align:middle line:90% that makes the difference. 00:27:45.300 --> 00:27:52.070 align:middle line:84% And so coming from a country that has just 00:27:52.070 --> 00:27:56.990 align:middle line:84% passed in the parliament an orthographic agreement that 00:27:56.990 --> 00:28:00.410 align:middle line:84% makes Portuguese, the Brazilian version of Portuguese, 00:28:00.410 --> 00:28:04.380 align:middle line:84% the standard Portuguese language. 00:28:04.380 --> 00:28:06.840 align:middle line:84% And this was voted in parliament. 00:28:06.840 --> 00:28:10.947 align:middle line:90% And not that I'm against it. 00:28:10.947 --> 00:28:13.280 align:middle line:84% I think it's really interesting that these things should 00:28:13.280 --> 00:28:16.730 align:middle line:84% be taken to the parliament to be discussed and decided. 00:28:16.730 --> 00:28:18.830 align:middle line:84% But the interesting thing for me was 00:28:18.830 --> 00:28:20.780 align:middle line:84% to see how many of the Portuguese 00:28:20.780 --> 00:28:24.890 align:middle line:84% intellectuals were completely against the agreement, 00:28:24.890 --> 00:28:30.680 align:middle line:84% not because it's stupid to have a standard in law, but also-- 00:28:30.680 --> 00:28:35.210 align:middle line:84% but mainly because it was the Brazilian version. 00:28:35.210 --> 00:28:37.610 align:middle line:90% It is my language, OK? 00:28:37.610 --> 00:28:40.860 align:middle line:90% We gave them our language. 00:28:40.860 --> 00:28:45.800 align:middle line:84% And so many of the writers, many of the poets say at this point 00:28:45.800 --> 00:28:50.090 align:middle line:84% that they will not obey the law, and they 00:28:50.090 --> 00:28:57.350 align:middle line:84% will continue to work using the Portuguese version 00:28:57.350 --> 00:28:58.850 align:middle line:90% of Portuguese. 00:28:58.850 --> 00:29:06.950 align:middle line:84% So this is very interesting, because as you may understand, 00:29:06.950 --> 00:29:10.040 align:middle line:84% for me, the question of power and of politics is something 00:29:10.040 --> 00:29:13.880 align:middle line:90% that I cannot think without. 00:29:13.880 --> 00:29:16.880 align:middle line:84% I mean, we had a revolution 34 years ago. 00:29:16.880 --> 00:29:18.470 align:middle line:90% We had a dictatorship. 00:29:18.470 --> 00:29:21.140 align:middle line:84% We have many poets that could not be read. 00:29:21.140 --> 00:29:23.600 align:middle line:90% Poetry does matter, by the way. 00:29:23.600 --> 00:29:26.300 align:middle line:84% I was 14 when I was going to sellers 00:29:26.300 --> 00:29:29.870 align:middle line:84% to get some books that if I was caught with them, 00:29:29.870 --> 00:29:31.640 align:middle line:90% I would be in jail. 00:29:31.640 --> 00:29:34.550 align:middle line:84% And so-- and poets made a great difference in my country. 00:29:34.550 --> 00:29:37.940 align:middle line:84% They were very important as a resistance. 00:29:37.940 --> 00:29:42.290 align:middle line:84% And having said this, I just wanted 00:29:42.290 --> 00:29:45.650 align:middle line:84% to turn to, also, another question, which 00:29:45.650 --> 00:29:48.050 align:middle line:84% has to do with the Portuguese history 00:29:48.050 --> 00:29:52.280 align:middle line:84% itself and the question of discoveries that meant, 00:29:52.280 --> 00:29:56.930 align:middle line:84% as we all know, the killing, the destruction 00:29:56.930 --> 00:30:00.080 align:middle line:90% of different epistemes. 00:30:00.080 --> 00:30:04.160 align:middle line:90% We call them epistemicides. 00:30:04.160 --> 00:30:06.260 align:middle line:90% That is what discovery's meant. 00:30:06.260 --> 00:30:09.500 align:middle line:84% That was the beginning of globalization, I remember that. 00:30:09.500 --> 00:30:15.530 align:middle line:84% And so, basically, what is interesting to me at this point 00:30:15.530 --> 00:30:19.790 align:middle line:84% is to what Tracy was doing and what 00:30:19.790 --> 00:30:28.190 align:middle line:84% Calvin was doing to exploit this undertones of language-- 00:30:28.190 --> 00:30:29.450 align:middle line:90% of the Portuguese language. 00:30:29.450 --> 00:30:33.170 align:middle line:84% Because many of the languages and 00:30:33.170 --> 00:30:38.780 align:middle line:84% of the epistemological visions of reality that were destroyed 00:30:38.780 --> 00:30:40.070 align:middle line:90% must be somewhere. 00:30:40.070 --> 00:30:46.010 align:middle line:84% So for me, really, poetry is epistemological research. 00:30:46.010 --> 00:30:52.040 align:middle line:84% I cannot think of poetry without thinking of both referentiality 00:30:52.040 --> 00:30:54.770 align:middle line:90% and non-referentiality. 00:30:54.770 --> 00:31:01.530 align:middle line:84% I cannot think of poetry as being intellect or emotion. 00:31:01.530 --> 00:31:05.160 align:middle line:84% By the way, please forgive me for my very nationalistic 00:31:05.160 --> 00:31:05.910 align:middle line:90% attitude. 00:31:05.910 --> 00:31:11.530 align:middle line:84% But neurobiology-- one major Portuguese neurobiologist 00:31:11.530 --> 00:31:16.540 align:middle line:84% who's doing his research here in the United States, Antonio 00:31:16.540 --> 00:31:21.970 align:middle line:84% Damasio, proved, apparently, in his lab 00:31:21.970 --> 00:31:27.130 align:middle line:84% that there is no language except if the emotional part 00:31:27.130 --> 00:31:30.160 align:middle line:90% of your brain works first. 00:31:30.160 --> 00:31:34.670 align:middle line:84% So you cannot speak without that. 00:31:34.670 --> 00:31:39.790 align:middle line:84% So for me, what I take as a possibility is the possibility 00:31:39.790 --> 00:31:43.600 align:middle line:84% of research in an agonistic model of language, 00:31:43.600 --> 00:31:52.900 align:middle line:84% exploiting that, and see what is the word hypertext, but also 00:31:52.900 --> 00:31:58.570 align:middle line:84% the possibilities that can be open through this kind of work. 00:31:58.570 --> 00:32:01.780 align:middle line:84% And that is for me also the modernist project. 00:32:01.780 --> 00:32:05.110 align:middle line:84% I mean, the enlargement of consciousness, the possibility 00:32:05.110 --> 00:32:10.390 align:middle line:84% of going into some inconceivable, 00:32:10.390 --> 00:32:15.250 align:middle line:84% yet inconceivable, but also probably reproved, 00:32:15.250 --> 00:32:20.170 align:middle line:84% non-approved, yet to be proven, something, whatever that is. 00:32:20.170 --> 00:32:25.870 align:middle line:84% But I just cannot accept the fact that what you have 00:32:25.870 --> 00:32:30.820 align:middle line:84% in language is just a thing, thingness. 00:32:30.820 --> 00:32:34.960 align:middle line:84% And please forgive me, but the celebration of thingness for me 00:32:34.960 --> 00:32:38.230 align:middle line:84% is just another repetition of the market. 00:32:38.230 --> 00:32:42.220 align:middle line:84% That's the product and something that you sell, and that's it. 00:32:42.220 --> 00:32:48.220 align:middle line:84% So I don't see anything in there for me. 00:32:48.220 --> 00:32:51.910 align:middle line:90% But I'd rather have what-- 00:32:51.910 --> 00:32:57.910 align:middle line:84% and I take the Brazilian anthropologist, Alfredo Bosi, 00:32:57.910 --> 00:33:03.550 align:middle line:84% very briefly just to speak about what he calls a post modernist 00:33:03.550 --> 00:33:08.350 align:middle line:84% attitude as a counter anti-modernist in the sense 00:33:08.350 --> 00:33:16.300 align:middle line:84% that you simply refuse to go on with this kind of project, 00:33:16.300 --> 00:33:19.300 align:middle line:84% and so you stick to whatever you have. 00:33:19.300 --> 00:33:23.710 align:middle line:84% Or you accept another version, which 00:33:23.710 --> 00:33:27.490 align:middle line:84% is for me probably the most interesting, 00:33:27.490 --> 00:33:31.780 align:middle line:84% what he calls the ultra modernist attitude, which 00:33:31.780 --> 00:33:36.670 align:middle line:84% is basically even repeating whatever the modernists were 00:33:36.670 --> 00:33:41.800 align:middle line:84% challenging us to do to try to go somewhere. 00:33:41.800 --> 00:33:45.070 align:middle line:84% I don't know where, and I think that it is really interesting 00:33:45.070 --> 00:33:46.240 align:middle line:90% that I don't know where. 00:33:46.240 --> 00:33:48.480 align:middle line:84% That is what makes it interesting. 00:33:48.480 --> 00:33:52.120 align:middle line:84% And that's basically what I wanted to say. 00:33:52.120 --> 00:33:52.620 align:middle line:90% Thank you. 00:33:52.620 --> 00:33:56.064 align:middle line:90% [APPLAUSE] 00:33:56.064 --> 00:34:01.490 align:middle line:90% 00:34:01.490 --> 00:34:05.060 align:middle line:84% Yeah, so this has been a very rich time 00:34:05.060 --> 00:34:07.620 align:middle line:84% to spend together with all of you. 00:34:07.620 --> 00:34:11.330 align:middle line:84% And it's been a tremendous pleasure. 00:34:11.330 --> 00:34:14.630 align:middle line:84% It's-- I notice as we're speaking on this particular 00:34:14.630 --> 00:34:17.750 align:middle line:84% panel that, in a sense, it seems like we're opening out, 00:34:17.750 --> 00:34:23.570 align:middle line:84% that we're taking the kind of core of what's been presented 00:34:23.570 --> 00:34:27.980 align:middle line:84% this weekend, and each person is now sort of moving it out 00:34:27.980 --> 00:34:31.370 align:middle line:84% in their own direction, which I think is a very useful thing 00:34:31.370 --> 00:34:33.500 align:middle line:84% to be doing at this particular moment. 00:34:33.500 --> 00:34:35.179 align:middle line:90% So it's lovely to see that. 00:34:35.179 --> 00:34:42.139 align:middle line:84% I'm going to, I guess, take some direction from Brian Reed, 00:34:42.139 --> 00:34:45.870 align:middle line:84% and also from Tracie, to give you 00:34:45.870 --> 00:34:47.870 align:middle line:84% a couple of remarks of things that have occurred 00:34:47.870 --> 00:34:50.300 align:middle line:90% to me during the conference. 00:34:50.300 --> 00:34:54.850 align:middle line:90% The first heading is the mix. 00:34:54.850 --> 00:34:59.950 align:middle line:84% If-- I guess appropriation as becoming increasingly important 00:34:59.950 --> 00:35:03.050 align:middle line:84% as we're talking about it as an element in the arts. 00:35:03.050 --> 00:35:05.020 align:middle line:84% And I think it also can be increasingly 00:35:05.020 --> 00:35:07.390 align:middle line:90% important in criticism. 00:35:07.390 --> 00:35:12.010 align:middle line:84% Marjorie gave us a model of that looking at Benjamin's Arcades 00:35:12.010 --> 00:35:15.010 align:middle line:90% Project on Thursday night. 00:35:15.010 --> 00:35:18.580 align:middle line:84% In a digital world, to move into the direction 00:35:18.580 --> 00:35:20.800 align:middle line:84% that Brian gave us, appropriation 00:35:20.800 --> 00:35:22.300 align:middle line:90% is known as sampling. 00:35:22.300 --> 00:35:25.180 align:middle line:84% And the inner animation of language art 00:35:25.180 --> 00:35:29.350 align:middle line:84% with still and moving images, sounds, and theory, 00:35:29.350 --> 00:35:33.650 align:middle line:90% and commentary is called mixing. 00:35:33.650 --> 00:35:36.350 align:middle line:84% So I had a book with me that I just 00:35:36.350 --> 00:35:40.370 align:middle line:84% wanted to share and talk about a little bit, Paul D. 00:35:40.370 --> 00:35:45.980 align:middle line:84% Miller, a.k.a., DJ Spooky, That Subliminal Kid's book, 00:35:45.980 --> 00:35:50.270 align:middle line:84% Rhythm Science, which is what he calls sampling and mixing. 00:35:50.270 --> 00:35:55.760 align:middle line:84% He says, "Rhythm Science is not about transparency of intent. 00:35:55.760 --> 00:35:58.700 align:middle line:84% Rhythm Science is a forensic investigation--" 00:35:58.700 --> 00:36:01.940 align:middle line:84% I kept thinking of forensics so many times this weekend-- 00:36:01.940 --> 00:36:07.580 align:middle line:84% "forensic investigation of sound as a vector of a coded language 00:36:07.580 --> 00:36:11.120 align:middle line:84% that goes from the physical to the informational 00:36:11.120 --> 00:36:13.130 align:middle line:90% and back again. 00:36:13.130 --> 00:36:18.860 align:middle line:84% Rhythm science with rhyme time, rough trade. 00:36:18.860 --> 00:36:22.790 align:middle line:84% Sound-- sound is a product of many different editing 00:36:22.790 --> 00:36:27.020 align:middle line:84% environments, an end result of an interface architecture 00:36:27.020 --> 00:36:29.810 align:middle line:84% that twists and turns and sequences 00:36:29.810 --> 00:36:34.610 align:middle line:84% overlaid with slogans, statistics, vectors, labels, 00:36:34.610 --> 00:36:35.135 align:middle line:90% and grids." 00:36:35.135 --> 00:36:37.850 align:middle line:90% 00:36:37.850 --> 00:36:42.060 align:middle line:84% Another quote, "music is always a metaphor. 00:36:42.060 --> 00:36:45.920 align:middle line:84% It's an open signifier, an invisible, utterly malleable 00:36:45.920 --> 00:36:46.940 align:middle line:90% material. 00:36:46.940 --> 00:36:49.940 align:middle line:90% It's not fixed or cast in stone. 00:36:49.940 --> 00:36:53.630 align:middle line:84% Rhythm Science uses an endless recontextualizing 00:36:53.630 --> 00:36:56.240 align:middle line:84% as a core compositional structure. 00:36:56.240 --> 00:36:59.480 align:middle line:84% And some of this generation's most important artists 00:36:59.480 --> 00:37:02.780 align:middle line:84% continually remind us there are innumerable ways 00:37:02.780 --> 00:37:05.830 align:middle line:90% to arrange the mix." 00:37:05.830 --> 00:37:08.500 align:middle line:84% The mix, the mix, I want to keep thinking about the mix. 00:37:08.500 --> 00:37:11.470 align:middle line:84% For the most part, he says, "creativity 00:37:11.470 --> 00:37:15.250 align:middle line:84% rests in how you recontextualize the previous expression 00:37:15.250 --> 00:37:18.430 align:middle line:84% of others, a place where there is no such thing 00:37:18.430 --> 00:37:21.550 align:middle line:90% as an immaculate perception." 00:37:21.550 --> 00:37:25.960 align:middle line:84% I hope these quotes are resonating for you. 00:37:25.960 --> 00:37:29.410 align:middle line:84% Spooky samples from Emerson's Essay, Quotation 00:37:29.410 --> 00:37:32.080 align:middle line:90% and Originality. 00:37:32.080 --> 00:37:34.690 align:middle line:84% "It is as difficult to appropriate the thought 00:37:34.690 --> 00:37:38.570 align:middle line:90% of others as it is to invent." 00:37:38.570 --> 00:37:41.270 align:middle line:90% That's Ralph Waldo Emerson. 00:37:41.270 --> 00:37:44.450 align:middle line:84% Conceptual poetry and its avant garde traditions 00:37:44.450 --> 00:37:47.120 align:middle line:84% need to be put into a field that includes 00:37:47.120 --> 00:37:51.710 align:middle line:84% media studies, performance studies, translation studies. 00:37:51.710 --> 00:37:54.860 align:middle line:84% Beyond this, it needs to be brought into conversation 00:37:54.860 --> 00:37:57.440 align:middle line:84% with two other contemporary art forms with which it 00:37:57.440 --> 00:38:00.290 align:middle line:90% shares so much. 00:38:00.290 --> 00:38:02.570 align:middle line:84% Sampling and mixing, as pioneered 00:38:02.570 --> 00:38:06.320 align:middle line:84% by hip hop and video games and other forms of online 00:38:06.320 --> 00:38:08.480 align:middle line:90% distributed living. 00:38:08.480 --> 00:38:11.450 align:middle line:84% In a sense, hip hop and video games 00:38:11.450 --> 00:38:14.000 align:middle line:84% can be seen as new forms of publication, 00:38:14.000 --> 00:38:17.780 align:middle line:84% as publishers, in which the subversive discoveries 00:38:17.780 --> 00:38:21.770 align:middle line:84% of conceptual poetry can be broadcast to the largest 00:38:21.770 --> 00:38:24.750 align:middle line:90% possible audience. 00:38:24.750 --> 00:38:28.800 align:middle line:84% Sampling and mixing have a huge pedagogical potential, as well. 00:38:28.800 --> 00:38:31.710 align:middle line:84% As a teacher, one can adopt these means 00:38:31.710 --> 00:38:35.010 align:middle line:84% to present audio, slide, and video material 00:38:35.010 --> 00:38:37.440 align:middle line:84% in the classroom in ways that are immensely 00:38:37.440 --> 00:38:39.570 align:middle line:90% appealing to young people. 00:38:39.570 --> 00:38:42.060 align:middle line:84% At another level, it's also helpful to note 00:38:42.060 --> 00:38:43.950 align:middle line:84% that the great works of assemblage 00:38:43.950 --> 00:38:46.890 align:middle line:84% during the modern period, like Pound's Cantos, 00:38:46.890 --> 00:38:51.060 align:middle line:84% and Schwitters' Collages were mixes of sampled material 00:38:51.060 --> 00:38:53.670 align:middle line:84% drawing students' attention, in the case of Pound, 00:38:53.670 --> 00:38:56.490 align:middle line:84% to the artfulness of his sampling, that is, 00:38:56.490 --> 00:39:01.590 align:middle line:84% luminous detail, and to the pulsating rhythms of his mix. 00:39:01.590 --> 00:39:05.160 align:middle line:84% Likewise, by asking students to perform their own sampling 00:39:05.160 --> 00:39:07.830 align:middle line:84% and mixing, one can empower them to think 00:39:07.830 --> 00:39:10.140 align:middle line:84% about the media at their disposal 00:39:10.140 --> 00:39:15.090 align:middle line:84% as the means for a far-reaching conceptual art. 00:39:15.090 --> 00:39:17.970 align:middle line:84% With respect to video games, Johanna Drucker 00:39:17.970 --> 00:39:20.790 align:middle line:84% has argued that their nature, as distributed tools 00:39:20.790 --> 00:39:24.300 align:middle line:84% for investigation by role-playing agents, 00:39:24.300 --> 00:39:28.020 align:middle line:84% makes them prime candidates for the kind of archival mining 00:39:28.020 --> 00:39:32.370 align:middle line:84% that will produce knowledge and perspectives in the future. 00:39:32.370 --> 00:39:34.050 align:middle line:84% This sort of knowledge needs to be 00:39:34.050 --> 00:39:37.860 align:middle line:84% inflected by the subversive perceptual ethos 00:39:37.860 --> 00:39:41.120 align:middle line:90% of conceptualism. 00:39:41.120 --> 00:39:43.940 align:middle line:84% And this little section is a call 00:39:43.940 --> 00:39:47.990 align:middle line:90% for a conceptual criticism. 00:39:47.990 --> 00:39:51.650 align:middle line:84% Call for literary criticism that looks at poetry in relation 00:39:51.650 --> 00:39:53.840 align:middle line:90% to the other arts of its time. 00:39:53.840 --> 00:39:57.050 align:middle line:84% One that sees poetry not only responding to other arts, 00:39:57.050 --> 00:39:59.960 align:middle line:84% but also taking a partnering and sometimes 00:39:59.960 --> 00:40:03.380 align:middle line:84% a leading role in the artistic scene of a particular time 00:40:03.380 --> 00:40:04.160 align:middle line:90% and place. 00:40:04.160 --> 00:40:07.040 align:middle line:84% This came up more at the beginning of the conference. 00:40:07.040 --> 00:40:11.030 align:middle line:84% In some sites, like '50s and '60s New York and California, 00:40:11.030 --> 00:40:12.920 align:middle line:90% there's a direct collaboration. 00:40:12.920 --> 00:40:16.520 align:middle line:84% In others, there is a participation in and a working 00:40:16.520 --> 00:40:19.430 align:middle line:90% out of a shared aesthetics. 00:40:19.430 --> 00:40:22.160 align:middle line:84% During those time periods, '50s and '60s, 00:40:22.160 --> 00:40:25.820 align:middle line:84% it was still common for poets to write not only path breaking 00:40:25.820 --> 00:40:29.390 align:middle line:84% works of poetics, which continues, but also to write 00:40:29.390 --> 00:40:34.340 align:middle line:84% important film, art, dance, theater, and music criticism. 00:40:34.340 --> 00:40:36.620 align:middle line:84% Likewise, practitioners of these other arts 00:40:36.620 --> 00:40:40.640 align:middle line:84% also wrote cutting edge theory and criticism for their own art 00:40:40.640 --> 00:40:44.000 align:middle line:84% forms, and for other art forms, especially, 00:40:44.000 --> 00:40:48.920 align:middle line:84% as the arts began an ever increasing fusion beginning 00:40:48.920 --> 00:40:52.130 align:middle line:84% in postwar movements like seminar culture and happenings, 00:40:52.130 --> 00:40:55.880 align:middle line:84% and continuing in conceptualism, minimalism, punk, 00:40:55.880 --> 00:41:01.380 align:middle line:84% performance art, video art, hip hop, and digital sampling. 00:41:01.380 --> 00:41:04.490 align:middle line:84% One of the impediments to this aesthetic cross-fertilization 00:41:04.490 --> 00:41:08.130 align:middle line:84% has been the academisizing of criticism, 00:41:08.130 --> 00:41:12.380 align:middle line:84% which substitutes a certain kind of conceptual clarity and rigor 00:41:12.380 --> 00:41:16.130 align:middle line:84% for a more generous recognition of creative participation 00:41:16.130 --> 00:41:19.040 align:middle line:90% by practitioners in the arts. 00:41:19.040 --> 00:41:22.280 align:middle line:84% In visual form, for example, the exciting writing 00:41:22.280 --> 00:41:25.070 align:middle line:84% of the first 15 or 20 years of art forum 00:41:25.070 --> 00:41:28.160 align:middle line:84% was done by artists themselves, and to a lesser extent, 00:41:28.160 --> 00:41:29.720 align:middle line:90% by poets. 00:41:29.720 --> 00:41:32.420 align:middle line:84% With the ascendance of a journal like October, 00:41:32.420 --> 00:41:34.940 align:middle line:90% the art historians take over. 00:41:34.940 --> 00:41:37.670 align:middle line:84% They have an interest in legitimating certain new art 00:41:37.670 --> 00:41:40.460 align:middle line:84% movements within the norms of art history, 00:41:40.460 --> 00:41:44.150 align:middle line:84% not in keeping fertile the cross-fertilization 00:41:44.150 --> 00:41:48.500 align:middle line:84% among the arts, which is what practitioners want. 00:41:48.500 --> 00:41:50.990 align:middle line:84% The same things could be said about the shift from 00:41:50.990 --> 00:41:55.040 align:middle line:84% an emphasis on poetics in poetry journals in the '70s, such 00:41:55.040 --> 00:41:59.780 align:middle line:84% as Caterpillar, IO, The World, L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E, Montemora, 00:41:59.780 --> 00:42:03.935 align:middle line:84% and This, to the instant hegemony of post structuralism 00:42:03.935 --> 00:42:06.950 align:middle line:90% as a blessing and a curse. 00:42:06.950 --> 00:42:09.410 align:middle line:84% One of the negative consequences was 00:42:09.410 --> 00:42:15.320 align:middle line:84% that it tied poetry so deeply to language and discourse 00:42:15.320 --> 00:42:17.480 align:middle line:84% that its life-sustaining relationships 00:42:17.480 --> 00:42:22.320 align:middle line:84% to the other arts of the times vanished from view. 00:42:22.320 --> 00:42:25.850 align:middle line:84% And then finally, a little personal example. 00:42:25.850 --> 00:42:29.540 align:middle line:84% CalArts was initially dedicated to this cross-fertilization 00:42:29.540 --> 00:42:30.560 align:middle line:90% of the arts. 00:42:30.560 --> 00:42:32.630 align:middle line:84% When I applied for a spot in the opening 00:42:32.630 --> 00:42:36.500 align:middle line:84% year of the school in 1970 to '71, what drew me to it 00:42:36.500 --> 00:42:40.220 align:middle line:84% was the possibility of becoming an Institute student, which 00:42:40.220 --> 00:42:42.170 align:middle line:84% was touted in advance as the essence 00:42:42.170 --> 00:42:44.150 align:middle line:90% of the mission of CalArts. 00:42:44.150 --> 00:42:47.120 align:middle line:84% An Institute student would be located outside the discipline 00:42:47.120 --> 00:42:48.800 align:middle line:90% of the individual schools-- 00:42:48.800 --> 00:42:50.900 align:middle line:84% music, art, theater, dance, film, 00:42:50.900 --> 00:42:54.410 align:middle line:84% and critical studies, which was where poetry was housed-- 00:42:54.410 --> 00:42:58.250 align:middle line:84% and able to draw on the resources of all of them. 00:42:58.250 --> 00:43:00.920 align:middle line:84% I was accepted and hoped to create for myself 00:43:00.920 --> 00:43:02.990 align:middle line:84% a career as a contemporary shaman. 00:43:02.990 --> 00:43:07.070 align:middle line:90% 00:43:07.070 --> 00:43:11.300 align:middle line:84% Unfortunately, CalArts could not live up fully 00:43:11.300 --> 00:43:13.340 align:middle line:84% to this promise to be the New Black Mountain 00:43:13.340 --> 00:43:15.170 align:middle line:90% College of the '70s. 00:43:15.170 --> 00:43:21.530 align:middle line:84% It has produced many wonderful people often dedicated 00:43:21.530 --> 00:43:23.180 align:middle line:90% to cross-fertilization. 00:43:23.180 --> 00:43:25.250 align:middle line:84% But institutionally, it just couldn't 00:43:25.250 --> 00:43:28.910 align:middle line:84% support this open-ended ideal of schooling. 00:43:28.910 --> 00:43:31.400 align:middle line:84% Instead of having access to all the schools, 00:43:31.400 --> 00:43:33.650 align:middle line:84% I found myself frozen out of each 00:43:33.650 --> 00:43:36.920 align:middle line:84% because I wasn't dedicated to the rigorous discipline each 00:43:36.920 --> 00:43:39.740 align:middle line:84% was inaugurating for its students. 00:43:39.740 --> 00:43:42.680 align:middle line:84% In the end, I had to choose a school, 00:43:42.680 --> 00:43:44.930 align:middle line:84% so I chose critical studies, which 00:43:44.930 --> 00:43:46.970 align:middle line:84% was where poetry and translation was 00:43:46.970 --> 00:43:50.900 align:middle line:84% housed in the capable person of Clayton Eshleman. 00:43:50.900 --> 00:43:53.480 align:middle line:84% For me, though, this was a return to poetry 00:43:53.480 --> 00:43:57.290 align:middle line:84% as a discipline, and it was felt as a contraction. 00:43:57.290 --> 00:44:00.770 align:middle line:84% As a teacher, I would hope to hold open for my students 00:44:00.770 --> 00:44:03.320 align:middle line:90% the possibility of the mix. 00:44:03.320 --> 00:44:03.820 align:middle line:90% Thank you. 00:44:03.820 --> 00:44:07.264 align:middle line:90% [APPLAUSE] 00:44:07.264 --> 00:44:18.110 align:middle line:90% 00:44:18.110 --> 00:44:19.410 align:middle line:90% Thank you, everyone. 00:44:19.410 --> 00:44:21.402 align:middle line:84% It's really a pleasure to be here 00:44:21.402 --> 00:44:22.985 align:middle line:84% and I'm grateful to everyone involved. 00:44:22.985 --> 00:44:27.204 align:middle line:90% 00:44:27.204 --> 00:44:28.722 align:middle line:90% Are you ready? 00:44:28.722 --> 00:44:29.430 align:middle line:90% Can you start it? 00:44:29.430 --> 00:44:34.080 align:middle line:90% 00:44:34.080 --> 00:44:34.790 align:middle line:90% It'll just go on. 00:44:34.790 --> 00:44:40.860 align:middle line:90% 00:44:40.860 --> 00:44:42.220 align:middle line:90% Implementing image. 00:44:42.220 --> 00:44:49.020 align:middle line:84% J, Concept as Particle, I composed a list of questions 00:44:49.020 --> 00:44:53.340 align:middle line:84% and sent them to more than 100 esteemed poets. 00:44:53.340 --> 00:44:56.670 align:middle line:84% Then, in collaboration with molecular biologist, Brad 00:44:56.670 --> 00:45:00.030 align:middle line:84% Davidson, I took the respondents' text 00:45:00.030 --> 00:45:03.960 align:middle line:84% and used data analysis software, Image J, 00:45:03.960 --> 00:45:06.330 align:middle line:84% created by the Institute of Health, 00:45:06.330 --> 00:45:09.720 align:middle line:90% to visually assess the material. 00:45:09.720 --> 00:45:12.570 align:middle line:84% This software is a multiple pixel intensity region 00:45:12.570 --> 00:45:16.350 align:middle line:84% growing algorithm for surface reconstruction. 00:45:16.350 --> 00:45:20.490 align:middle line:84% In other words, the region grows outward in 3D space 00:45:20.490 --> 00:45:24.880 align:middle line:84% from an initial pixel known to be within the region. 00:45:24.880 --> 00:45:28.530 align:middle line:84% In this sample text that you see right now, 00:45:28.530 --> 00:45:31.260 align:middle line:84% the steps taken to manipulate the text 00:45:31.260 --> 00:45:37.290 align:middle line:84% include shrinking, duplication of the binary mask, adjustment 00:45:37.290 --> 00:45:40.260 align:middle line:84% of contrast threshold, measurements 00:45:40.260 --> 00:45:46.260 align:middle line:84% for center of mass, and finally, analysis of particles. 00:45:46.260 --> 00:45:49.380 align:middle line:84% I'm going to present a few of the images I came up with. 00:45:49.380 --> 00:45:52.170 align:middle line:84% This first image that you see now 00:45:52.170 --> 00:45:55.170 align:middle line:84% has minimal thresholding, decreasing 00:45:55.170 --> 00:45:56.775 align:middle line:90% the binary quality of image. 00:45:56.775 --> 00:45:59.850 align:middle line:90% 00:45:59.850 --> 00:46:03.980 align:middle line:84% This one has a bit more thresholding. 00:46:03.980 --> 00:46:08.400 align:middle line:84% And this one has even more thresholding. 00:46:08.400 --> 00:46:09.765 align:middle line:90% I chose the middle slide. 00:46:09.765 --> 00:46:14.000 align:middle line:90% 00:46:14.000 --> 00:46:17.720 align:middle line:84% Outlined areas correspond to this data table. 00:46:17.720 --> 00:46:21.410 align:middle line:84% I then overlaid the image back onto the respondent text 00:46:21.410 --> 00:46:27.230 align:middle line:84% and selected the particle with the most mass to transcribe. 00:46:27.230 --> 00:46:31.730 align:middle line:84% I'm going to draw an analysis here between mass and concept, 00:46:31.730 --> 00:46:36.500 align:middle line:84% and between Bernstein's definition of conceptual poetry 00:46:36.500 --> 00:46:37.760 align:middle line:90% and this text. 00:46:37.760 --> 00:46:43.340 align:middle line:84% As you can see, the respondents' text is pregnant with ideas. 00:46:43.340 --> 00:46:46.940 align:middle line:84% I'll take this definition one step further. 00:46:46.940 --> 00:46:49.850 align:middle line:84% Conceptual poetry is, as Lee Ann Brown 00:46:49.850 --> 00:46:54.080 align:middle line:84% calls it, a poetry that thinks with other and others' 00:46:54.080 --> 00:46:59.660 align:middle line:84% ideas, sounds, words, structures, complex presences, 00:46:59.660 --> 00:47:03.020 align:middle line:90% past, present and future. 00:47:03.020 --> 00:47:08.690 align:middle line:84% Or conceptual poetry is a form of collaboration 00:47:08.690 --> 00:47:12.950 align:middle line:84% which delivers an outcome, not necessarily material, 00:47:12.950 --> 00:47:15.830 align:middle line:84% but one which evokes various approaches 00:47:15.830 --> 00:47:19.580 align:middle line:84% and, potentially, breaks assumptions and extends 00:47:19.580 --> 00:47:21.620 align:middle line:90% the borders of textuality. 00:47:21.620 --> 00:47:27.020 align:middle line:84% Or collaborative conception, plus live delivery, 00:47:27.020 --> 00:47:32.240 align:middle line:90% equals birth of the unthought. 00:47:32.240 --> 00:47:37.040 align:middle line:84% And now to the questions and the findings. 00:47:37.040 --> 00:47:42.320 align:middle line:84% I wanted to note that the speakers don't necessarily 00:47:42.320 --> 00:47:44.810 align:middle line:84% hold the opinions, that they're reading 00:47:44.810 --> 00:47:48.890 align:middle line:84% the opinions of the respondents who were at times irreverent. 00:47:48.890 --> 00:47:51.890 align:middle line:90% 00:47:51.890 --> 00:47:56.270 align:middle line:90% One, what is conceptual poetry? 00:47:56.270 --> 00:47:59.660 align:middle line:84% And a callout response, an unfortunate noun 00:47:59.660 --> 00:48:01.790 align:middle line:90% modified by an adjective. 00:48:01.790 --> 00:48:04.010 align:middle line:90% What poets are not conceptual? 00:48:04.010 --> 00:48:08.810 align:middle line:84% It makes me ambient, quagmire outside of text. 00:48:08.810 --> 00:48:10.940 align:middle line:84% For example, Kathleen Fraser's essay 00:48:10.940 --> 00:48:14.090 align:middle line:84% on partial local coherence, "my life 00:48:14.090 --> 00:48:17.000 align:middle line:84% is a highly conceptual work predicated 00:48:17.000 --> 00:48:20.300 align:middle line:84% on the desanctification of the aesthetic object. 00:48:20.300 --> 00:48:24.350 align:middle line:84% Hejinian's poems often organize around grammatical structures. 00:48:24.350 --> 00:48:26.180 align:middle line:90% Idea has preference." 00:48:26.180 --> 00:48:29.990 align:middle line:84% Bernadette Mayer, "how can utopia not be conceptual? 00:48:29.990 --> 00:48:33.210 align:middle line:84% It began with Acconci and Mayer's 0 to 9. 00:48:33.210 --> 00:48:34.610 align:middle line:84% [? Fillipo, ?] [? to borrow on ?] 00:48:34.610 --> 00:48:37.280 align:middle line:90% Young's piece, was conceptual. 00:48:37.280 --> 00:48:39.050 align:middle line:84% Given Dworkin's definition, I'll have 00:48:39.050 --> 00:48:44.780 align:middle line:84% to change my bio, language beyond born." 00:48:44.780 --> 00:48:47.940 align:middle line:90% Can poetry be non expressive? 00:48:47.940 --> 00:48:56.590 align:middle line:90% 00:48:56.590 --> 00:49:01.030 align:middle line:84% Hannah Weiner talking to Bob Dylan on her bed, like hugging 00:49:01.030 --> 00:49:04.480 align:middle line:84% [? a head. ?] "I'm interested in the flatness proceeding 00:49:04.480 --> 00:49:05.860 align:middle line:90% such as lying. 00:49:05.860 --> 00:49:06.790 align:middle line:90% No. 00:49:06.790 --> 00:49:10.240 align:middle line:84% This depends more on the reader than the poem. 00:49:10.240 --> 00:49:13.420 align:middle line:90% Space intentionally left blank. 00:49:13.420 --> 00:49:16.270 align:middle line:84% Headlights and pet rocks are expressive, 00:49:16.270 --> 00:49:19.060 align:middle line:84% if only the [? no ?] at its heart." 00:49:19.060 --> 00:49:21.610 align:middle line:90% 00:49:21.610 --> 00:49:25.915 align:middle line:84% Is there such a thing as direct presentation of language? 00:49:25.915 --> 00:49:29.180 align:middle line:90% 00:49:29.180 --> 00:49:31.570 align:middle line:90% "All the time. 00:49:31.570 --> 00:49:34.770 align:middle line:90% A list of phonemes. 00:49:34.770 --> 00:49:37.920 align:middle line:90% I can't think of such a thing. 00:49:37.920 --> 00:49:41.220 align:middle line:90% You're reading this, aren't you? 00:49:41.220 --> 00:49:48.180 align:middle line:84% Dictionaries, signage, a death sentence. 00:49:48.180 --> 00:49:53.580 align:middle line:84% As I sleep, Rosmarie Waldrop's memoir of meeting Edmond Jabes 00:49:53.580 --> 00:49:57.750 align:middle line:90% whispered into my ears. 00:49:57.750 --> 00:50:03.020 align:middle line:84% The neo conceptualists are earnestly twisted. 00:50:03.020 --> 00:50:09.150 align:middle line:84% Indeed, fraught with double answers and no answers. 00:50:09.150 --> 00:50:12.840 align:middle line:84% Yeast vexes best [? porn ?] prince. 00:50:12.840 --> 00:50:15.390 align:middle line:90% 00:50:15.390 --> 00:50:21.550 align:middle line:84% Language is always already the translation." 00:50:21.550 --> 00:50:26.614 align:middle line:90% Intellect rather than motion? 00:50:26.614 --> 00:50:30.420 align:middle line:90% "Queequeg rather than Ahab. 00:50:30.420 --> 00:50:33.540 align:middle line:90% I can't separate the repressed. 00:50:33.540 --> 00:50:36.390 align:middle line:90% Answers with no container. 00:50:36.390 --> 00:50:41.280 align:middle line:84% Two extremes, intellect follows delusion bleeds. 00:50:41.280 --> 00:50:46.230 align:middle line:84% Two terminological mistakes that confuse and astound me. 00:50:46.230 --> 00:50:51.270 align:middle line:84% Disingenuous division, distinction as hypothesis, 00:50:51.270 --> 00:50:53.220 align:middle line:90% not actuality. 00:50:53.220 --> 00:50:56.070 align:middle line:84% I'm only interested in both and tricks." 00:50:56.070 --> 00:50:58.750 align:middle line:90% 00:50:58.750 --> 00:51:01.690 align:middle line:90% Dismantle this line drawing. 00:51:01.690 --> 00:51:05.520 align:middle line:90% 00:51:05.520 --> 00:51:07.770 align:middle line:90% "Draw wing. 00:51:07.770 --> 00:51:09.300 align:middle line:90% No. 00:51:09.300 --> 00:51:11.790 align:middle line:84% A point is that which has no part, Euclid's 00:51:11.790 --> 00:51:13.620 align:middle line:90% first definition. 00:51:13.620 --> 00:51:16.260 align:middle line:84% Actually, romanticism allergy is based 00:51:16.260 --> 00:51:19.200 align:middle line:90% on a radical political impetus. 00:51:19.200 --> 00:51:23.940 align:middle line:84% Draw this [? dis-mantle ?] line, removing first one line, 00:51:23.940 --> 00:51:28.770 align:middle line:84% then another, on the mile of the erased de Kooning drawing. 00:51:28.770 --> 00:51:31.980 align:middle line:84% The subject verb, direct access of to past, present, 00:51:31.980 --> 00:51:32.760 align:middle line:90% and future." 00:51:32.760 --> 00:51:35.300 align:middle line:90% 00:51:35.300 --> 00:51:39.160 align:middle line:84% What is the purpose of form and formlessness? 00:51:39.160 --> 00:51:42.700 align:middle line:84% "To form a study group, dialectical envy, 00:51:42.700 --> 00:51:45.910 align:middle line:84% to question assumptions like the square circle. 00:51:45.910 --> 00:51:49.300 align:middle line:84% Breathing mimics this self-assertion, 00:51:49.300 --> 00:51:52.550 align:middle line:90% the unwritten poem, black hole. 00:51:52.550 --> 00:51:55.210 align:middle line:84% It's a good day for an existential crisis. 00:51:55.210 --> 00:51:57.760 align:middle line:84% So as meaning shift, so do intentions, 00:51:57.760 --> 00:51:59.770 align:middle line:90% and words are things. 00:51:59.770 --> 00:52:01.570 align:middle line:90% Words are not things. 00:52:01.570 --> 00:52:05.050 align:middle line:84% According to Aleister Crowley, to recharge the dark demons 00:52:05.050 --> 00:52:07.450 align:middle line:90% that rule fully half the world. 00:52:07.450 --> 00:52:10.240 align:middle line:84% Isn't that a theological question? 00:52:10.240 --> 00:52:15.040 align:middle line:84% To articulate the possibility of infinity, all poems have form." 00:52:15.040 --> 00:52:17.630 align:middle line:90% 00:52:17.630 --> 00:52:22.640 align:middle line:84% Distinguish between procedural and conceptual. 00:52:22.640 --> 00:52:25.070 align:middle line:84% "One makes you see the hand washing. 00:52:25.070 --> 00:52:29.680 align:middle line:84% The other makes you question the idea of the hand. 00:52:29.680 --> 00:52:33.430 align:middle line:90% Conceptual is all desire. 00:52:33.430 --> 00:52:37.930 align:middle line:84% According to this procedure, I'm behaving like a smart ass. 00:52:37.930 --> 00:52:40.480 align:middle line:90% That was my concept. 00:52:40.480 --> 00:52:43.570 align:middle line:90% What you make is where you live. 00:52:43.570 --> 00:52:47.950 align:middle line:84% Procedural, as one kind of conceptual. 00:52:47.950 --> 00:52:50.740 align:middle line:84% Procedural refers to the conscious, 00:52:50.740 --> 00:52:52.900 align:middle line:90% even if it is unconscious. 00:52:52.900 --> 00:52:56.650 align:middle line:90% Makes no claim to objectivity. 00:52:56.650 --> 00:52:59.370 align:middle line:90% Every poem has a procedure. 00:52:59.370 --> 00:53:04.340 align:middle line:84% A, B, C, D, E, ellipses/alphabet, 00:53:04.340 --> 00:53:07.930 align:middle line:90% temporal distinction." 00:53:07.930 --> 00:53:11.950 align:middle line:84% What formal restraints do you practice every day? 00:53:11.950 --> 00:53:17.530 align:middle line:84% "Capitalism, driving, tunnels, MetroCards, shuttering, 00:53:17.530 --> 00:53:19.840 align:middle line:90% and breaking into a sweat. 00:53:19.840 --> 00:53:22.210 align:middle line:90% Try not to judge. 00:53:22.210 --> 00:53:27.220 align:middle line:84% I touch only 5 to 10 tomatoes a day. 00:53:27.220 --> 00:53:31.120 align:middle line:84% Watering incarnate laundry sells, job, 00:53:31.120 --> 00:53:37.000 align:middle line:84% food, shoes, clothing, language to write while one son naps. 00:53:37.000 --> 00:53:41.830 align:middle line:90% Time is my constraint." 00:53:41.830 --> 00:53:44.350 align:middle line:84% What is the responsibility of the writer? 00:53:44.350 --> 00:53:47.080 align:middle line:90% 00:53:47.080 --> 00:53:49.630 align:middle line:84% "To be the witness of a burning world. 00:53:49.630 --> 00:53:52.510 align:middle line:84% Well, I hope you're well and, as a hula hooper 00:53:52.510 --> 00:53:55.390 align:middle line:84% hoops, to stop the Republicans from stealing 00:53:55.390 --> 00:53:59.320 align:middle line:84% the next election, to unleash the inarticulable, 00:53:59.320 --> 00:54:01.900 align:middle line:90% the A truth in others. 00:54:01.900 --> 00:54:06.280 align:middle line:84% Liberation to fight AIDS through direct political action, 00:54:06.280 --> 00:54:07.270 align:middle line:90% to respond. 00:54:07.270 --> 00:54:09.280 align:middle line:90% The self doesn't have to win. 00:54:09.280 --> 00:54:12.130 align:middle line:90% Be awake." 00:54:12.130 --> 00:54:18.610 align:middle line:84% Why are women virtually excluded from the UbuWeb anthology? 00:54:18.610 --> 00:54:20.680 align:middle line:90% "Foolishness. 00:54:20.680 --> 00:54:23.350 align:middle line:84% I'd say this is the most important question. 00:54:23.350 --> 00:54:26.320 align:middle line:90% Does Ubu skew towards men? 00:54:26.320 --> 00:54:30.378 align:middle line:84% Mango, milk, bucket, male revisionist history, 00:54:30.378 --> 00:54:32.170 align:middle line:84% might have something to do with avant-garde 00:54:32.170 --> 00:54:34.600 align:middle line:90% being a military term. 00:54:34.600 --> 00:54:37.480 align:middle line:84% Gender being another unfortunate noun. 00:54:37.480 --> 00:54:39.220 align:middle line:90% Why write women now? 00:54:39.220 --> 00:54:42.795 align:middle line:84% Mayer, Retallack, Bergvall, Osman, Spahr, Mullen. 00:54:42.795 --> 00:54:44.170 align:middle line:84% For the same reason the hostility 00:54:44.170 --> 00:54:46.810 align:middle line:84% towards a diversity course requirement that my University 00:54:46.810 --> 00:54:49.120 align:middle line:84% is not directed towards race and ethnic studies, 00:54:49.120 --> 00:54:51.920 align:middle line:90% but towards gender studies. 00:54:51.920 --> 00:54:55.810 align:middle line:84% Ties it to so many other kinds of various discrediting. 00:54:55.810 --> 00:54:58.840 align:middle line:90% Who the fuck thinks it's OK? 00:54:58.840 --> 00:55:02.460 align:middle line:84% Men are much more attached to clubs. 00:55:02.460 --> 00:55:04.380 align:middle line:90% Do flap. 00:55:04.380 --> 00:55:08.830 align:middle line:84% One might ask why the list is so [? perusal ?] Why? 00:55:08.830 --> 00:55:11.110 align:middle line:84% There were no women in the conceptual age." 00:55:11.110 --> 00:55:15.640 align:middle line:90% 00:55:15.640 --> 00:55:16.300 align:middle line:90% That's the end. 00:55:16.300 --> 00:55:19.632 align:middle line:90% [APPLAUSE] 00:55:19.632 --> 00:55:24.868 align:middle line:90% 00:55:24.868 --> 00:55:26.830 align:middle line:84% Well, I'm not going to try to summarize 00:55:26.830 --> 00:55:29.290 align:middle line:84% the similarities of these, because I 00:55:29.290 --> 00:55:32.380 align:middle line:90% don't think they were. 00:55:32.380 --> 00:55:34.730 align:middle line:84% I think something very different was happening. 00:55:34.730 --> 00:55:36.580 align:middle line:84% So I'm not going to say anything right now. 00:55:36.580 --> 00:55:37.240 align:middle line:90% I may. 00:55:37.240 --> 00:55:40.120 align:middle line:84% And let the panelists talk to each other first, 00:55:40.120 --> 00:55:43.060 align:middle line:84% if you have questions for each other, and open it up. 00:55:43.060 --> 00:55:49.220 align:middle line:90% 00:55:49.220 --> 00:55:49.720 align:middle line:90% All right. 00:55:49.720 --> 00:55:53.320 align:middle line:90% Then let's open to the floor. 00:55:53.320 --> 00:55:54.518 align:middle line:90% Let me talk [INAUDIBLE]. 00:55:54.518 --> 00:55:58.460 align:middle line:90% 00:55:58.460 --> 00:56:00.983 align:middle line:84% And let me see the hands of those who want to go. 00:56:00.983 --> 00:56:08.560 align:middle line:90% 00:56:08.560 --> 00:56:11.530 align:middle line:84% Thank you very much, and I loved all the presentations. 00:56:11.530 --> 00:56:14.110 align:middle line:90% And Graca, this is for you. 00:56:14.110 --> 00:56:18.370 align:middle line:84% I'm interested in your downplaying, or minimizing, 00:56:18.370 --> 00:56:22.660 align:middle line:84% or not giving so much importance to subjectivity, 00:56:22.660 --> 00:56:26.200 align:middle line:84% at the same time, addressing emotion. 00:56:26.200 --> 00:56:29.980 align:middle line:84% And I wonder if you want to say anything 00:56:29.980 --> 00:56:34.030 align:middle line:84% about that because my interest is the fact that language is 00:56:34.030 --> 00:56:41.320 align:middle line:84% driven by emotion, and yet it plays its course 00:56:41.320 --> 00:56:46.150 align:middle line:84% with cognition, which for me is it just 00:56:46.150 --> 00:56:48.080 align:middle line:90% happens sort of like a virus. 00:56:48.080 --> 00:56:51.310 align:middle line:84% So if you have anything to say about how 00:56:51.310 --> 00:56:52.660 align:middle line:90% the two work together. 00:56:52.660 --> 00:56:57.060 align:middle line:90% 00:56:57.060 --> 00:56:58.260 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 00:56:58.260 --> 00:57:01.770 align:middle line:84% You mean subjectivity and cognition or-- 00:57:01.770 --> 00:57:02.760 align:middle line:90% Emotion. 00:57:02.760 --> 00:57:05.820 align:middle line:90% So subjectivity in an emotion. 00:57:05.820 --> 00:57:09.780 align:middle line:84% I think there is no way out of it, as if-- 00:57:09.780 --> 00:57:14.520 align:middle line:84% the same way that I think there is no way out of subjectivity. 00:57:14.520 --> 00:57:16.260 align:middle line:84% Unfortunately, probably all of us 00:57:16.260 --> 00:57:19.170 align:middle line:84% would like to have the objective clarity. 00:57:19.170 --> 00:57:23.407 align:middle line:84% Thank the gods, probably, the thing 00:57:23.407 --> 00:57:24.490 align:middle line:90% goes the other way around. 00:57:24.490 --> 00:57:27.720 align:middle line:84% I think we've had too much of clarity. 00:57:27.720 --> 00:57:33.780 align:middle line:84% And I'm really into obscurity more and more. 00:57:33.780 --> 00:57:38.770 align:middle line:84% And I think that there is no way of experiencing anything. 00:57:38.770 --> 00:57:39.270 align:middle line:90% I'm sorry. 00:57:39.270 --> 00:57:41.040 align:middle line:84% I'm very Emersonian, but I really 00:57:41.040 --> 00:57:43.892 align:middle line:84% think of the transparent eyeball very much. 00:57:43.892 --> 00:57:45.600 align:middle line:84% I have a question for you, though, Graca. 00:57:45.600 --> 00:57:47.907 align:middle line:84% When you said things, you don't think 00:57:47.907 --> 00:57:48.990 align:middle line:90% the words are just things. 00:57:48.990 --> 00:57:51.960 align:middle line:84% Who among the speakers have said words were just things? 00:57:51.960 --> 00:57:53.550 align:middle line:84% I mean, I'm missing something, but I 00:57:53.550 --> 00:57:57.420 align:middle line:84% didn't hear anyone of the seven poets we had [INAUDIBLE].. 00:57:57.420 --> 00:58:00.874 align:middle line:84% I wouldn't think-- I wouldn't say anybody said that word 00:58:00.874 --> 00:58:01.416 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE]-- 00:58:01.416 --> 00:58:03.150 align:middle line:90% It was a respondent. 00:58:03.150 --> 00:58:04.260 align:middle line:90% --were just things. 00:58:04.260 --> 00:58:06.270 align:middle line:84% But what I think is that when you 00:58:06.270 --> 00:58:17.550 align:middle line:84% think of the possibility of having a word with language, 00:58:17.550 --> 00:58:21.690 align:middle line:84% that leaves the eye, or pretends to be the eye, because I 00:58:21.690 --> 00:58:23.100 align:middle line:90% don't believe that happens. 00:58:23.100 --> 00:58:23.880 align:middle line:90% I'm sorry. 00:58:23.880 --> 00:58:26.760 align:middle line:84% And I'm basically thinking of Kenneth Goldsmith. 00:58:26.760 --> 00:58:29.910 align:middle line:84% But I don't think that will happen, 00:58:29.910 --> 00:58:32.580 align:middle line:84% and that's why I will use the quote by Pessoa, 00:58:32.580 --> 00:58:36.670 align:middle line:84% because the fake, the faking, the faking, and so on. 00:58:36.670 --> 00:58:38.850 align:middle line:90% But the eye is always there. 00:58:38.850 --> 00:58:42.480 align:middle line:84% But what I think can be very dangerous 00:58:42.480 --> 00:58:45.480 align:middle line:84% is the fact that you kind of celebrate 00:58:45.480 --> 00:58:50.430 align:middle line:90% this reification of language. 00:58:50.430 --> 00:58:52.500 align:middle line:84% And in the sense you don't know-- 00:58:52.500 --> 00:58:56.500 align:middle line:84% you make of language a thing, a product, 00:58:56.500 --> 00:58:59.140 align:middle line:90% not a process, not a project. 00:58:59.140 --> 00:59:00.960 align:middle line:90% It's something that it's there. 00:59:00.960 --> 00:59:06.270 align:middle line:84% And on top of everything, there's 00:59:06.270 --> 00:59:13.440 align:middle line:84% something of an aestheticization of this reality that really 00:59:13.440 --> 00:59:17.010 align:middle line:84% makes it very difficult for me to deal with, 00:59:17.010 --> 00:59:24.660 align:middle line:84% the aestheticization of things, as such, as if-- 00:59:24.660 --> 00:59:27.900 align:middle line:84% of things when meaning, slash, reality. 00:59:27.900 --> 00:59:30.740 align:middle line:90% 00:59:30.740 --> 00:59:34.350 align:middle line:84% And so I don't know, it's just I don't 00:59:34.350 --> 00:59:40.290 align:middle line:84% think there is a poss-- even in a masquerade of unauthenticity, 00:59:40.290 --> 00:59:44.430 align:middle line:90% neutrality is always a fallacy. 00:59:44.430 --> 00:59:50.880 align:middle line:84% And I don't think it is possible to be neutral ever. 00:59:50.880 --> 00:59:51.930 align:middle line:90% Do you want to answer? 00:59:51.930 --> 00:59:52.890 align:middle line:90% No? 00:59:52.890 --> 00:59:55.240 align:middle line:84% Anybody on the panel want to address? 00:59:55.240 --> 00:59:55.770 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE] 00:59:55.770 --> 00:59:59.620 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE] the "I" is all over. 00:59:59.620 --> 01:00:00.790 align:middle line:90% Yeah, yeah. 01:00:00.790 --> 01:00:04.540 align:middle line:84% But then-- and I think it's a very active use 01:00:04.540 --> 01:00:08.670 align:middle line:84% of the I that's taking responsibility for itself. 01:00:08.670 --> 01:00:11.170 align:middle line:84% I just wanted to add that that was an interesting statement, 01:00:11.170 --> 01:00:13.750 align:middle line:84% because I actually find a lot of interesting resonances 01:00:13.750 --> 01:00:16.300 align:middle line:84% between what Pessoa's project is all about, 01:00:16.300 --> 01:00:18.250 align:middle line:84% and what Kenneth's work is doing in the sense 01:00:18.250 --> 01:00:21.370 align:middle line:84% that there's this search for otherness within one's 01:00:21.370 --> 01:00:22.780 align:middle line:90% own subjectivity [INAUDIBLE]. 01:00:22.780 --> 01:00:26.860 align:middle line:84% And if conceptual poetry is poetry pregnant with thought, 01:00:26.860 --> 01:00:30.850 align:middle line:84% Pessoa was a poet that was pregnant with subjectivities. 01:00:30.850 --> 01:00:33.310 align:middle line:84% And in order to express that, he needed 01:00:33.310 --> 01:00:35.950 align:middle line:84% to go outside himself in very interesting ways, 01:00:35.950 --> 01:00:38.650 align:middle line:84% and I think that Kenneth's work in many ways speaks to that. 01:00:38.650 --> 01:00:41.290 align:middle line:84% Or inside, but in the process of going inside, 01:00:41.290 --> 01:00:44.840 align:middle line:84% there's an outsideness to it, a foreignness to it. 01:00:44.840 --> 01:00:48.070 align:middle line:84% I mean, some of his personas, some were peasants, 01:00:48.070 --> 01:00:50.410 align:middle line:84% some were classicists, Bourgeois aristocrats, 01:00:50.410 --> 01:00:54.220 align:middle line:84% some were completely avant-garde poets. 01:00:54.220 --> 01:00:57.268 align:middle line:84% So I mean, that diversity within one project, 01:00:57.268 --> 01:00:58.810 align:middle line:84% I think, in many ways is interesting. 01:00:58.810 --> 01:01:01.390 align:middle line:84% I think in many ways conceptual poetry 01:01:01.390 --> 01:01:04.000 align:middle line:90% explores that kind of foreign. 01:01:04.000 --> 01:01:05.080 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 01:01:05.080 --> 01:01:05.710 align:middle line:90% Very briefly. 01:01:05.710 --> 01:01:07.960 align:middle line:84% Yes, I would definitely go for that, 01:01:07.960 --> 01:01:11.905 align:middle line:90% but that's why I think of the-- 01:01:11.905 --> 01:01:17.020 align:middle line:84% it's not a question of being either the I or the other. 01:01:17.020 --> 01:01:22.990 align:middle line:84% It's the idea of having the in betweenness where all of that 01:01:22.990 --> 01:01:24.020 align:middle line:90% is present. 01:01:24.020 --> 01:01:27.280 align:middle line:84% And I do think that is what is happening in his poetry. 01:01:27.280 --> 01:01:29.770 align:middle line:84% But what bothers me, if you want, 01:01:29.770 --> 01:01:32.320 align:middle line:84% from a political point of view is the idea 01:01:32.320 --> 01:01:37.810 align:middle line:84% that you pretend on authenticity that you are not there, 01:01:37.810 --> 01:01:40.750 align:middle line:84% that you are not taking a position. 01:01:40.750 --> 01:01:43.720 align:middle line:84% I feel I have to answer that, because I 01:01:43.720 --> 01:01:45.148 align:middle line:90% want to say that choice-- 01:01:45.148 --> 01:01:47.440 align:middle line:84% after all, this is one thing I tried to say in my talk. 01:01:47.440 --> 01:01:50.530 align:middle line:84% Framing or which thing you want to do, 01:01:50.530 --> 01:01:52.080 align:middle line:84% the choice is terribly important. 01:01:52.080 --> 01:01:54.080 align:middle line:84% Now, the piece about the police officer-- 01:01:54.080 --> 01:01:56.200 align:middle line:84% this is the thing we had the Senator this year-- 01:01:56.200 --> 01:01:57.665 align:middle line:84% I thought-- I spent a lot of time 01:01:57.665 --> 01:02:00.040 align:middle line:84% thinking about that last night, because when it happened, 01:02:00.040 --> 01:02:01.748 align:middle line:84% I thought it was such a horrendous thing. 01:02:01.748 --> 01:02:03.850 align:middle line:84% If that isn't a political text, I 01:02:03.850 --> 01:02:06.623 align:middle line:84% don't know what is, because it brings out whether-- 01:02:06.623 --> 01:02:08.290 align:middle line:84% a lot of people said, ha, ha, because he 01:02:08.290 --> 01:02:10.690 align:middle line:84% was a Republican senator, so ha, ha. 01:02:10.690 --> 01:02:13.180 align:middle line:84% He's so conservative, and he was against gays, 01:02:13.180 --> 01:02:14.440 align:middle line:90% so good thing he was caught. 01:02:14.440 --> 01:02:16.420 align:middle line:84% But the idea that somebody in this country 01:02:16.420 --> 01:02:19.090 align:middle line:84% can be arrested for putting their hand under the toilet 01:02:19.090 --> 01:02:22.120 align:middle line:84% stall upward rather than downward, 01:02:22.120 --> 01:02:23.860 align:middle line:84% so they're not taking paper off the floor 01:02:23.860 --> 01:02:26.620 align:middle line:84% but making an advance, and that brought that out 01:02:26.620 --> 01:02:27.820 align:middle line:90% in a very dramatic way. 01:02:27.820 --> 01:02:30.040 align:middle line:84% If that isn't political, I don't know what is. 01:02:30.040 --> 01:02:31.738 align:middle line:84% I thought that was much more political. 01:02:31.738 --> 01:02:33.280 align:middle line:84% And I'm going to say one other thing, 01:02:33.280 --> 01:02:35.830 align:middle line:84% because I was a little disturbed by some of the-- frankly, 01:02:35.830 --> 01:02:38.410 align:middle line:84% by some of the comments at the end when we had the various-- 01:02:38.410 --> 01:02:39.700 align:middle line:90% which is a wonderful device-- 01:02:39.700 --> 01:02:40.992 align:middle line:90% of having all the people speak. 01:02:40.992 --> 01:02:42.658 align:middle line:84% But I take it it's all your text, right? 01:02:42.658 --> 01:02:44.350 align:middle line:84% No, it's all been the respondent's text. 01:02:44.350 --> 01:02:46.110 align:middle line:84% Respondent's, other people's texts. 01:02:46.110 --> 01:02:47.170 align:middle line:90% Yes. 01:02:47.170 --> 01:02:49.630 align:middle line:84% One statement was, every poem has a procedure. 01:02:49.630 --> 01:02:50.680 align:middle line:90% No, it doesn't. 01:02:50.680 --> 01:02:52.690 align:middle line:84% See, this is what I get upset at things 01:02:52.690 --> 01:02:53.920 align:middle line:90% that are sloppy in thinking. 01:02:53.920 --> 01:02:55.720 align:middle line:84% Every poem does not have a procedure. 01:02:55.720 --> 01:02:58.262 align:middle line:84% There are plenty of poems I've seen around that I don't think 01:02:58.262 --> 01:03:00.730 align:middle line:84% have any pro-- they may pretend to have a procedure, 01:03:00.730 --> 01:03:01.810 align:middle line:90% but they really don't. 01:03:01.810 --> 01:03:03.640 align:middle line:84% So we have to be very careful about words. 01:03:03.640 --> 01:03:05.598 align:middle line:84% And I'm going to say something about the UbuWeb 01:03:05.598 --> 01:03:09.010 align:middle line:84% anthology and women, and I'll argue a little bit with Vanessa 01:03:09.010 --> 01:03:09.850 align:middle line:90% just-- 01:03:09.850 --> 01:03:11.740 align:middle line:84% who can really get mad, or whatever. 01:03:11.740 --> 01:03:14.260 align:middle line:90% I really think this is a non-- 01:03:14.260 --> 01:03:16.990 align:middle line:84% it should be by now a kind of non-issue. 01:03:16.990 --> 01:03:19.820 align:middle line:84% It's like saying, why are there not more women engineers, 01:03:19.820 --> 01:03:20.320 align:middle line:90% perhaps? 01:03:20.320 --> 01:03:21.528 align:middle line:90% Although, there are more now. 01:03:21.528 --> 01:03:23.620 align:middle line:84% Everybody doesn't want to be everything. 01:03:23.620 --> 01:03:25.990 align:middle line:84% There are complicated sets of reasons for this. 01:03:25.990 --> 01:03:29.860 align:middle line:84% And the idea that we're going to count heads and say, on UbuWeb, 01:03:29.860 --> 01:03:31.930 align:middle line:90% are 47.3% women? 01:03:31.930 --> 01:03:33.340 align:middle line:90% Or don't we have enough women? 01:03:33.340 --> 01:03:36.010 align:middle line:84% Maybe, but in other groups, we may have more women. 01:03:36.010 --> 01:03:39.337 align:middle line:84% And I just think it is a non-productive-- 01:03:39.337 --> 01:03:41.170 align:middle line:84% I don't want to end with that kind of notion 01:03:41.170 --> 01:03:42.625 align:middle line:84% at this conference, because there 01:03:42.625 --> 01:03:45.280 align:middle line:84% have been so many wonderful things really doing 01:03:45.280 --> 01:03:46.640 align:middle line:90% rigorous thinking. 01:03:46.640 --> 01:03:48.370 align:middle line:84% And I think it's not rigorous thinking 01:03:48.370 --> 01:03:51.820 align:middle line:84% to start worrying whether there are more women on the UbuWeb 01:03:51.820 --> 01:03:53.860 align:middle line:90% anthology. 01:03:53.860 --> 01:03:56.080 align:middle line:84% Maybe they're just weren't the people 01:03:56.080 --> 01:03:57.220 align:middle line:90% for that particular thing. 01:03:57.220 --> 01:04:00.680 align:middle line:84% It's a particular choice that Craig and Kenny made. 01:04:00.680 --> 01:04:03.670 align:middle line:84% We would have other anthologies that might be 80% women. 01:04:03.670 --> 01:04:06.400 align:middle line:84% I was just at the Bard graduation and-- 01:04:06.400 --> 01:04:09.070 align:middle line:84% where I got the degree, and they have a Master's 01:04:09.070 --> 01:04:11.110 align:middle line:90% in Curatorial Studies. 01:04:11.110 --> 01:04:12.760 align:middle line:84% Every single person who got up for that 01:04:12.760 --> 01:04:13.780 align:middle line:90% happened to be a woman-- 01:04:13.780 --> 01:04:15.790 align:middle line:84% or maybe didn't happen to be but was. 01:04:15.790 --> 01:04:19.490 align:middle line:84% There's another master-- there's another Masters in Design 01:04:19.490 --> 01:04:20.740 align:middle line:90% Studies where they were women. 01:04:20.740 --> 01:04:23.710 align:middle line:84% The third area was environmental studies. 01:04:23.710 --> 01:04:28.060 align:middle line:84% And of that, it was about 80% male, three or four Blacks out 01:04:28.060 --> 01:04:30.387 align:middle line:84% of the 12 people, and it was very much-- 01:04:30.387 --> 01:04:31.720 align:middle line:90% and so it was a different thing. 01:04:31.720 --> 01:04:33.140 align:middle line:84% Different times, different things 01:04:33.140 --> 01:04:34.390 align:middle line:90% that people are interested in. 01:04:34.390 --> 01:04:36.670 align:middle line:84% I don't think we can think in that thing about-- 01:04:36.670 --> 01:04:38.590 align:middle line:84% that's just my view, but I really-- 01:04:38.590 --> 01:04:41.105 align:middle line:84% it really bothers me, too, that we're still 01:04:41.105 --> 01:04:43.480 align:middle line:84% thinking in those terms about how many percent-- would we 01:04:43.480 --> 01:04:47.230 align:middle line:84% be happy if we could say 50% of the people in the UbuWeb 01:04:47.230 --> 01:04:48.250 align:middle line:90% anthology were women? 01:04:48.250 --> 01:04:48.850 align:middle line:90% I don't know. 01:04:48.850 --> 01:04:51.430 align:middle line:84% I might not like a lot of people in the anthology, anyway. 01:04:51.430 --> 01:04:52.097 align:middle line:90% No, that's fine. 01:04:52.097 --> 01:04:54.010 align:middle line:84% So that's just my little spiel of the day. 01:04:54.010 --> 01:04:55.840 align:middle line:90% Thank you. 01:04:55.840 --> 01:04:57.490 align:middle line:84% I think it would be really great to not 01:04:57.490 --> 01:05:00.130 align:middle line:84% be able to be having the conversation, also. 01:05:00.130 --> 01:05:02.050 align:middle line:84% But you're the only woman, Marjorie, 01:05:02.050 --> 01:05:05.580 align:middle line:84% who hasn't had an issue with this who I've queried on it. 01:05:05.580 --> 01:05:09.960 align:middle line:84% There's two women out of 31 in the anthology. 01:05:09.960 --> 01:05:11.220 align:middle line:90% And I believe in 2008-- 01:05:11.220 --> 01:05:12.570 align:middle line:90% In the one online, the-- yeah. 01:05:12.570 --> 01:05:14.190 align:middle line:90% Yes, two out of 31. 01:05:14.190 --> 01:05:17.250 align:middle line:84% And in 2008, I'd really like to not 01:05:17.250 --> 01:05:18.660 align:middle line:90% be having this conversation. 01:05:18.660 --> 01:05:21.720 align:middle line:84% And if women represented at all, I 01:05:21.720 --> 01:05:23.410 align:middle line:84% wouldn't be having this conversation. 01:05:23.410 --> 01:05:26.190 align:middle line:84% It's not about is it tit for tat. 01:05:26.190 --> 01:05:29.970 align:middle line:84% We have Acconci and not Mayer, who 01:05:29.970 --> 01:05:31.510 align:middle line:90% created the program together. 01:05:31.510 --> 01:05:35.430 align:middle line:84% So there's a lot of women who've made important contributions 01:05:35.430 --> 01:05:39.750 align:middle line:84% to conceptual poetry, and their work needs to be acknowledged. 01:05:39.750 --> 01:05:40.620 align:middle line:90% That's my view. 01:05:40.620 --> 01:05:43.860 align:middle line:84% But the text that was read actually wasn't my text, 01:05:43.860 --> 01:05:47.070 align:middle line:84% it was a compilation of more than 50 surveys 01:05:47.070 --> 01:05:49.788 align:middle line:84% that I received back asking questions. 01:05:49.788 --> 01:05:51.330 align:middle line:84% Well, maybe Craig should talk about-- 01:05:51.330 --> 01:05:55.230 align:middle line:84% Craig should talk about the anthology. 01:05:55.230 --> 01:05:57.927 align:middle line:84% I think you should say something about that. 01:05:57.927 --> 01:05:59.260 align:middle line:90% I just wanted to say two things. 01:05:59.260 --> 01:06:02.050 align:middle line:84% One, is that you talk about wanting to bring it out 01:06:02.050 --> 01:06:04.560 align:middle line:84% into other disciplines, and I think that one thing that's 01:06:04.560 --> 01:06:06.060 align:middle line:84% been really great in this conference 01:06:06.060 --> 01:06:08.730 align:middle line:84% is a lot of things that were-- what was presented 01:06:08.730 --> 01:06:13.140 align:middle line:84% as a kind of monolith of this is conceptual poetry, 01:06:13.140 --> 01:06:15.450 align:middle line:84% has I think over the course of three days been like, 01:06:15.450 --> 01:06:17.550 align:middle line:90% and maybe this other stuff, too. 01:06:17.550 --> 01:06:18.930 align:middle line:90% And maybe this other seven. 01:06:18.930 --> 01:06:21.450 align:middle line:84% Who are you to say what conceptual poetry is? 01:06:21.450 --> 01:06:23.250 align:middle line:84% And if I was going to give my talk again, 01:06:23.250 --> 01:06:25.210 align:middle line:84% I would take out the prose and just 01:06:25.210 --> 01:06:27.630 align:middle line:84% say no, this is actually conceptual poetry. 01:06:27.630 --> 01:06:28.530 align:middle line:90% That's right. 01:06:28.530 --> 01:06:31.170 align:middle line:84% But I also think that if we're going to talk about other forms 01:06:31.170 --> 01:06:33.240 align:middle line:84% being as important because the Arcades Project, 01:06:33.240 --> 01:06:34.600 align:middle line:90% it's a great rereading. 01:06:34.600 --> 01:06:37.350 align:middle line:90% But for me, hip hop, yeah-- 01:06:37.350 --> 01:06:40.440 align:middle line:90% punk, yes-- Kathy fucking Acker. 01:06:40.440 --> 01:06:43.050 align:middle line:84% The woman was on trial for appropriation, 01:06:43.050 --> 01:06:44.610 align:middle line:90% and no one's mentioned her. 01:06:44.610 --> 01:06:46.780 align:middle line:84% And she was so important to people coming up 01:06:46.780 --> 01:06:50.380 align:middle line:84% from my generation, as for all kinds of things. 01:06:50.380 --> 01:06:52.860 align:middle line:84% And so I think that one of the things that has really 01:06:52.860 --> 01:06:56.130 align:middle line:84% happened, and this is like my non-- my institutional non 01:06:56.130 --> 01:06:59.910 align:middle line:84% critique, is that this conference has actually served 01:06:59.910 --> 01:07:04.770 align:middle line:84% like the exact thing you'd want a conference to serve 01:07:04.770 --> 01:07:08.490 align:middle line:84% is instead of paying homage to a monolithic notion, 01:07:08.490 --> 01:07:10.320 align:middle line:84% we're actually dissembling and putting it 01:07:10.320 --> 01:07:12.920 align:middle line:84% back together into something else that we don't accept 01:07:12.920 --> 01:07:14.014 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE]. 01:07:14.014 --> 01:07:17.493 align:middle line:90% [APPLAUSE] 01:07:17.493 --> 01:07:22.960 align:middle line:90% 01:07:22.960 --> 01:07:25.550 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 01:07:25.550 --> 01:07:28.010 align:middle line:90% I want to say two things. 01:07:28.010 --> 01:07:31.000 align:middle line:84% One is that-- the less important one 01:07:31.000 --> 01:07:35.710 align:middle line:84% is that I think exclude is actually-- 01:07:35.710 --> 01:07:40.100 align:middle line:90% is the wrong word there. 01:07:40.100 --> 01:07:42.470 align:middle line:84% And that it was going to be better to look at 01:07:42.470 --> 01:07:47.030 align:middle line:84% is the online UbuWeb anthology, if people haven't seen it. 01:07:47.030 --> 01:07:48.791 align:middle line:90% How many [INAUDIBLE]? 01:07:48.791 --> 01:07:50.060 align:middle line:90% 31? 01:07:50.060 --> 01:07:54.440 align:middle line:84% So it's essentially an illustrated essay, 01:07:54.440 --> 01:08:02.000 align:middle line:84% and the Ubu web anthology is a little grandiose for what 01:08:02.000 --> 01:08:04.425 align:middle line:90% is a provocative sketch. 01:08:04.425 --> 01:08:05.675 align:middle line:90% I think you'll have a better-- 01:08:05.675 --> 01:08:09.080 align:middle line:90% 01:08:09.080 --> 01:08:12.350 align:middle line:90% no one was excluded or included. 01:08:12.350 --> 01:08:15.320 align:middle line:84% Kenny and I who are working on a print anthology that's 01:08:15.320 --> 01:08:17.819 align:middle line:84% going to be much more comprehensive, 01:08:17.819 --> 01:08:21.439 align:middle line:84% I think, from that table of content. 01:08:21.439 --> 01:08:22.939 align:middle line:84% So when we work it out, you're going 01:08:22.939 --> 01:08:26.479 align:middle line:84% to have a good way to judge what kind of inclusions 01:08:26.479 --> 01:08:30.173 align:middle line:90% and exclusions there are. 01:08:30.173 --> 01:08:31.340 align:middle line:90% So I think that's not right. 01:08:31.340 --> 01:08:38.689 align:middle line:84% But I think it actually doesn't matter how many women are-- 01:08:38.689 --> 01:08:40.189 align:middle line:90% it could be all women. 01:08:40.189 --> 01:08:46.490 align:middle line:84% And that the important point behind those responses 01:08:46.490 --> 01:08:50.990 align:middle line:84% and behind your use of the word exclusion 01:08:50.990 --> 01:08:52.700 align:middle line:90% would still be there, actually. 01:08:52.700 --> 01:08:56.090 align:middle line:84% If I did the Ubu anthology and they were all women, 01:08:56.090 --> 01:08:59.210 align:middle line:84% I'd still want to be asking what I think is much more important 01:08:59.210 --> 01:09:03.500 align:middle line:84% question about, what's the relationship of gender, 01:09:03.500 --> 01:09:08.420 align:middle line:84% questions of gender, to the various things that 01:09:08.420 --> 01:09:11.090 align:middle line:84% have come up about the politics-- creation, 01:09:11.090 --> 01:09:13.380 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE], procedure. 01:09:13.380 --> 01:09:16.550 align:middle line:84% What is the-- and not just gender, 01:09:16.550 --> 01:09:20.450 align:middle line:84% what are the various social politics around something 01:09:20.450 --> 01:09:22.620 align:middle line:90% like conceptual writing. 01:09:22.620 --> 01:09:26.605 align:middle line:84% And I think that's true and that's important. 01:09:26.605 --> 01:09:31.399 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE] how many of anyone. 01:09:31.399 --> 01:09:32.460 align:middle line:90% There are several. 01:09:32.460 --> 01:09:32.960 align:middle line:90% Right. 01:09:32.960 --> 01:09:36.710 align:middle line:84% I mean, I can-- this is why I started my seminar by saying, 01:09:36.710 --> 01:09:40.220 align:middle line:84% I can't answer these questions about the politics 01:09:40.220 --> 01:09:41.359 align:middle line:90% of this writing. 01:09:41.359 --> 01:09:44.569 align:middle line:84% But I think that those are the really important questions 01:09:44.569 --> 01:09:48.830 align:middle line:84% that people need to start thinking about. 01:09:48.830 --> 01:09:50.710 align:middle line:90% Sorry, I just-- I just want to-- 01:09:50.710 --> 01:09:52.040 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE] 01:09:52.040 --> 01:09:53.372 align:middle line:90% I just-- 01:09:53.372 --> 01:09:54.080 align:middle line:90% Sorry about that. 01:09:54.080 --> 01:09:55.970 align:middle line:84% Thank you to Craig for bringing up exclusion, 01:09:55.970 --> 01:09:58.490 align:middle line:84% because that was going to be my response when you like, hey, 01:09:58.490 --> 01:10:00.840 align:middle line:84% I'm a gal, and I wasn't part of the survey. 01:10:00.840 --> 01:10:04.340 align:middle line:84% And so you are sort of-- there's always 01:10:04.340 --> 01:10:07.310 align:middle line:84% an exclusion, even when you're attempting to include. 01:10:07.310 --> 01:10:10.770 align:middle line:84% There's, by definition, an exclusion. 01:10:10.770 --> 01:10:12.170 align:middle line:84% And I think that Marie's question 01:10:12.170 --> 01:10:15.170 align:middle line:84% that she brought up this morning from the Beckett, rather 01:10:15.170 --> 01:10:18.620 align:middle line:84% than sort of questioning like, is this a girl one, 01:10:18.620 --> 01:10:21.620 align:middle line:84% is this a boy one, I think they're sort of like larger 01:10:21.620 --> 01:10:24.500 align:middle line:84% aesthetic political questions, like exactly what Craig 01:10:24.500 --> 01:10:27.300 align:middle line:84% is saying in a more articulate way. 01:10:27.300 --> 01:10:30.890 align:middle line:84% I'd also like to just respond to grasp about the thingness. 01:10:30.890 --> 01:10:40.490 align:middle line:84% And I think Steven's point about the academic takeover 01:10:40.490 --> 01:10:44.600 align:middle line:84% of criticism and what that has done to sort of make criticism 01:10:44.600 --> 01:10:46.730 align:middle line:84% now much more something that's part 01:10:46.730 --> 01:10:49.130 align:middle line:84% of the academic institution, instead of artists, 01:10:49.130 --> 01:10:50.870 align:middle line:84% has a lot to do with why it's important 01:10:50.870 --> 01:10:53.210 align:middle line:84% that so many of these people are teaching, 01:10:53.210 --> 01:10:57.253 align:middle line:84% and that that is a way of sort of changing that situation. 01:10:57.253 --> 01:10:59.420 align:middle line:84% And I think Marjorie's saying that she was concerned 01:10:59.420 --> 01:11:02.120 align:middle line:84% about Kenny's students, like what happens to them after they 01:11:02.120 --> 01:11:04.220 align:middle line:90% take this seminar? 01:11:04.220 --> 01:11:05.810 align:middle line:84% I mean, that's exactly a response 01:11:05.810 --> 01:11:07.310 align:middle line:84% to the concern about the thingness. 01:11:07.310 --> 01:11:08.810 align:middle line:84% These students are not being taught 01:11:08.810 --> 01:11:11.000 align:middle line:90% to produce things and products. 01:11:11.000 --> 01:11:14.990 align:middle line:84% They are what better way to ask students, invite students, 01:11:14.990 --> 01:11:19.010 align:middle line:84% propel students to go through the process of appropriation, 01:11:19.010 --> 01:11:20.750 align:middle line:84% or understanding how to read a poem, 01:11:20.750 --> 01:11:22.490 align:middle line:84% or how to make a poem, how to build it, 01:11:22.490 --> 01:11:25.730 align:middle line:84% that actual process, as opposed to creating 01:11:25.730 --> 01:11:29.990 align:middle line:84% the beautiful, glorified, rarified thing. 01:11:29.990 --> 01:11:32.700 align:middle line:84% So I think it's actually really important. 01:11:32.700 --> 01:11:36.710 align:middle line:84% Unfortunately, we didn't talk about the pedagogical impulse. 01:11:36.710 --> 01:11:39.585 align:middle line:90% 01:11:39.585 --> 01:11:40.085 align:middle line:90% Mic? 01:11:40.085 --> 01:11:43.310 align:middle line:90% 01:11:43.310 --> 01:11:45.920 align:middle line:84% Yeah, I think one of the great things about Craig's 01:11:45.920 --> 01:11:48.290 align:middle line:84% introduction is that probably like most the manifestos 01:11:48.290 --> 01:11:51.440 align:middle line:84% or [INAUDIBLE] manifestos, it's both prescriptive in a way, 01:11:51.440 --> 01:11:54.320 align:middle line:84% and also, claims to be descriptive to describe 01:11:54.320 --> 01:11:55.290 align:middle line:90% the field. 01:11:55.290 --> 01:11:57.170 align:middle line:84% And so the question for me would be, 01:11:57.170 --> 01:12:00.560 align:middle line:84% if certain women, or more women, had been included 01:12:00.560 --> 01:12:02.307 align:middle line:84% with the description of the field that 01:12:02.307 --> 01:12:03.890 align:middle line:84% looks like conceptual writing would be 01:12:03.890 --> 01:12:05.548 align:middle line:90% different in significant ways. 01:12:05.548 --> 01:12:07.340 align:middle line:84% And I don't think, being a conceptual poet, 01:12:07.340 --> 01:12:10.820 align:middle line:84% I was gratified that from Christian 01:12:10.820 --> 01:12:12.840 align:middle line:84% to locate myself in the bottom left. 01:12:12.840 --> 01:12:14.360 align:middle line:90% I don't know where I am. 01:12:14.360 --> 01:12:18.070 align:middle line:90% 01:12:18.070 --> 01:12:22.360 align:middle line:84% So at any rate, my [INAUDIBLE] to think about 01:12:22.360 --> 01:12:24.780 align:middle line:84% whether these people qualify as creative writers, 01:12:24.780 --> 01:12:26.830 align:middle line:84% I'm [INAUDIBLE] conceptual writers 01:12:26.830 --> 01:12:29.030 align:middle line:84% Bernadette Mayer, Leslie Scalapino, 01:12:29.030 --> 01:12:31.690 align:middle line:84% Mei-Mei Berssenbrugge, and Lisa Jarnot just to start out, 01:12:31.690 --> 01:12:35.500 align:middle line:84% that some of the expression versus emotion kind of thing 01:12:35.500 --> 01:12:37.330 align:middle line:84% wouldn't look so right, a different sense 01:12:37.330 --> 01:12:39.250 align:middle line:84% of a body that would move to the center, 01:12:39.250 --> 01:12:44.240 align:middle line:84% and an attempt to work maybe procedurally with that, 01:12:44.240 --> 01:12:45.070 align:middle line:90% and so on. 01:12:45.070 --> 01:12:48.850 align:middle line:84% Yeah, I don't think it matters in that sense how 01:12:48.850 --> 01:12:49.930 align:middle line:90% many men, how many women. 01:12:49.930 --> 01:12:51.430 align:middle line:84% But I wonder whether [INAUDIBLE]---- 01:12:51.430 --> 01:12:53.055 align:middle line:84% But once you start then, then I'd worry 01:12:53.055 --> 01:12:54.820 align:middle line:90% are there enough Latinos? 01:12:54.820 --> 01:12:56.350 align:middle line:84% Are there enough Native Americans? 01:12:56.350 --> 01:12:58.350 align:middle line:84% And are there enough Europeans and other people? 01:12:58.350 --> 01:13:00.520 align:middle line:84% All through the conference, my worry 01:13:00.520 --> 01:13:02.380 align:middle line:84% is always that it's too American. 01:13:02.380 --> 01:13:05.230 align:middle line:84% We don't talk about-- there are plenty of things going on, 01:13:05.230 --> 01:13:07.660 align:middle line:84% comparable things in other countries, 01:13:07.660 --> 01:13:09.730 align:middle line:90% that we talk about very little. 01:13:09.730 --> 01:13:12.200 align:middle line:84% So once you start that and say, all right, 01:13:12.200 --> 01:13:14.320 align:middle line:84% we better put so and so, I don't know. 01:13:14.320 --> 01:13:14.800 align:middle line:90% Maybe all I'm saying is-- 01:13:14.800 --> 01:13:16.508 align:middle line:84% But I don't even know who's on that list. 01:13:16.508 --> 01:13:18.550 align:middle line:84% The irony is-- I just want to say this to Laynie. 01:13:18.550 --> 01:13:20.470 align:middle line:84% The irony is I read Craig's preface. 01:13:20.470 --> 01:13:22.330 align:middle line:84% I've never even looked at any of those. 01:13:22.330 --> 01:13:23.800 align:middle line:90% I mean, it's not something I do. 01:13:23.800 --> 01:13:26.230 align:middle line:84% Because frankly, I look through them and that many of them 01:13:26.230 --> 01:13:28.815 align:middle line:84% didn't interest me that much for whatever reasons, 01:13:28.815 --> 01:13:30.190 align:middle line:84% and I didn't think that's what we 01:13:30.190 --> 01:13:31.300 align:middle line:90% were doing at this conference. 01:13:31.300 --> 01:13:33.550 align:middle line:84% I did not think this conference was based on Craig's-- 01:13:33.550 --> 01:13:36.310 align:middle line:84% forgive me but-- or Kenny-- the Ubu anthology 01:13:36.310 --> 01:13:37.960 align:middle line:90% of conceptual poetry online. 01:13:37.960 --> 01:13:39.880 align:middle line:84% That was never the idea, I don't think so. 01:13:39.880 --> 01:13:40.520 align:middle line:90% Can I respond? 01:13:40.520 --> 01:13:41.020 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 01:13:41.020 --> 01:13:47.850 align:middle line:90% 01:13:47.850 --> 01:13:50.520 align:middle line:84% I think what would be helped to clarify 01:13:50.520 --> 01:13:55.590 align:middle line:84% is because, Craig, you say, oh, it's not really an anthology. 01:13:55.590 --> 01:13:57.465 align:middle line:84% Oh, it's not really the conceptual anthology. 01:13:57.465 --> 01:13:58.840 align:middle line:84% We're going to do something else. 01:13:58.840 --> 01:14:00.450 align:middle line:84% But actually, that's what it's called, 01:14:00.450 --> 01:14:02.650 align:middle line:84% and that's what it is up on the web. 01:14:02.650 --> 01:14:06.390 align:middle line:84% And when you say the conceptual poetry anthology, 01:14:06.390 --> 01:14:09.540 align:middle line:84% as if you're saying this is conceptual poetry, it doesn't-- 01:14:09.540 --> 01:14:12.780 align:middle line:84% there's no imminent-- there's no women conceptual poets. 01:14:12.780 --> 01:14:18.690 align:middle line:84% So I think a more specific title, like the one 01:14:18.690 --> 01:14:21.150 align:middle line:84% you were telling me the other day on creative writing, 01:14:21.150 --> 01:14:24.120 align:middle line:84% Against Expression, I wouldn't have those same questions. 01:14:24.120 --> 01:14:28.200 align:middle line:84% But the term conceptual is a really big term, 01:14:28.200 --> 01:14:30.960 align:middle line:84% and I feel like most of the writing discussed 01:14:30.960 --> 01:14:35.640 align:middle line:84% in this conference represents one aspect of what 01:14:35.640 --> 01:14:39.640 align:middle line:84% conceptual poetry looks like, not the whole picture. 01:14:39.640 --> 01:14:43.650 align:middle line:84% And so I thought it was important for that 01:14:43.650 --> 01:14:47.280 align:middle line:84% to be brought out, that there's a lot of people doing 01:14:47.280 --> 01:14:49.200 align:middle line:84% interesting conceptual work that doesn't fit 01:14:49.200 --> 01:14:52.110 align:middle line:84% into this definition and generated 01:14:52.110 --> 01:14:55.800 align:middle line:84% all of this discussion are several different people who 01:14:55.800 --> 01:14:57.870 align:middle line:84% are thinking about creating other anthologies 01:14:57.870 --> 01:15:00.510 align:middle line:84% of conceptual poetry, which is, I think, a good thing. 01:15:00.510 --> 01:15:03.130 align:middle line:90% So it's not a negative. 01:15:03.130 --> 01:15:04.840 align:middle line:84% It's not-- I don't see it as a negative. 01:15:04.840 --> 01:15:07.290 align:middle line:90% I see it as an opening-- 01:15:07.290 --> 01:15:11.340 align:middle line:84% an opening as opposed to a closing of a very big term. 01:15:11.340 --> 01:15:15.180 align:middle line:90% 01:15:15.180 --> 01:15:19.850 align:middle line:84% I just wanted to say something about this topic of women 01:15:19.850 --> 01:15:22.550 align:middle line:84% and inclusion or not, which is that I think 01:15:22.550 --> 01:15:27.290 align:middle line:84% all sorts of new things, or emergent things, 01:15:27.290 --> 01:15:34.970 align:middle line:84% tend to come out of a community, rather than an analytical kind 01:15:34.970 --> 01:15:38.000 align:middle line:84% of procedural development of a movement, 01:15:38.000 --> 01:15:40.400 align:middle line:90% or an enactment of an idea. 01:15:40.400 --> 01:15:43.910 align:middle line:84% And my understanding from the conversations 01:15:43.910 --> 01:15:47.180 align:middle line:84% and from all of the reading to come up with those seven 01:15:47.180 --> 01:15:51.110 align:middle line:84% sentences in those bios, is that it 01:15:51.110 --> 01:15:55.400 align:middle line:84% was an emergent movement among Kenny, it sounds 01:15:55.400 --> 01:15:58.040 align:middle line:90% like Christian, and Craig. 01:15:58.040 --> 01:16:07.130 align:middle line:84% And that their group may not have been diverse racially, 01:16:07.130 --> 01:16:12.380 align:middle line:84% gender, and yet we're here at a conference that is inclusive 01:16:12.380 --> 01:16:15.950 align:middle line:84% where the conversation has been very affable, where there has 01:16:15.950 --> 01:16:18.530 align:middle line:84% been entry points for all different viewpoints 01:16:18.530 --> 01:16:20.810 align:middle line:90% and for this course. 01:16:20.810 --> 01:16:23.840 align:middle line:84% And so I think that it is possible, 01:16:23.840 --> 01:16:27.590 align:middle line:84% and I-- there's a big core of me that's old school feminist. 01:16:27.590 --> 01:16:30.680 align:middle line:84% But it is possible for something to start somewhere and then 01:16:30.680 --> 01:16:34.220 align:middle line:84% open up and for it to proliferate and change, 01:16:34.220 --> 01:16:38.450 align:middle line:84% because also now, it no longer belongs to where it emerged, 01:16:38.450 --> 01:16:41.750 align:middle line:84% and it belongs in all of these other places. 01:16:41.750 --> 01:16:45.297 align:middle line:84% We have an editor and founder of a feminist press in the room, 01:16:45.297 --> 01:16:47.630 align:middle line:84% and she can do whatever she wants with this information, 01:16:47.630 --> 01:16:49.610 align:middle line:90% if she so chooses. 01:16:49.610 --> 01:16:51.875 align:middle line:90% We've got-- it no longer-- 01:16:51.875 --> 01:16:55.160 align:middle line:84% it's Lisa Bowden of Kore Press over at the back. 01:16:55.160 --> 01:16:57.590 align:middle line:84% And so it no longer belongs where it started. 01:16:57.590 --> 01:17:01.120 align:middle line:90% It's just ballooned out. 01:17:01.120 --> 01:17:01.620 align:middle line:90% And-- 01:17:01.620 --> 01:17:04.112 align:middle line:90% [APPLAUSE] 01:17:04.112 --> 01:17:04.945 align:middle line:90% [INTERPOSING VOICES] 01:17:04.945 --> 01:17:07.800 align:middle line:84% --be diverse and I suspect that it will-- 01:17:07.800 --> 01:17:09.020 align:middle line:90% --criticism. 01:17:09.020 --> 01:17:11.130 align:middle line:90% That was funny. 01:17:11.130 --> 01:17:13.320 align:middle line:84% Does somebody want to talk about something else? 01:17:13.320 --> 01:17:18.900 align:middle line:84% I just wanted to follow up on the point 01:17:18.900 --> 01:17:22.860 align:middle line:84% that Barbara made with regard to poetry as thing. 01:17:22.860 --> 01:17:26.460 align:middle line:90% I think the idea of a word-- 01:17:26.460 --> 01:17:27.840 align:middle line:90% of words as things. 01:17:27.840 --> 01:17:31.080 align:middle line:84% I want to speak on behalf of words as things. 01:17:31.080 --> 01:17:34.710 align:middle line:84% I think that if we want new meaning from words, 01:17:34.710 --> 01:17:39.060 align:middle line:84% one of the first things we need to do is to see them as things. 01:17:39.060 --> 01:17:47.160 align:middle line:84% And I think that words as things are non-transparent words. 01:17:47.160 --> 01:17:51.420 align:middle line:84% And transparent words are what fill the books of accessible 01:17:51.420 --> 01:17:52.920 align:middle line:90% poetry, yeah? 01:17:52.920 --> 01:17:56.850 align:middle line:84% And at that level, in order to rethink meaning, in order 01:17:56.850 --> 01:18:00.160 align:middle line:84% to expand meaning, and add to meaning, first of all, 01:18:00.160 --> 01:18:04.470 align:middle line:84% you've got to hold onto the idea of language as a thing. 01:18:04.470 --> 01:18:07.260 align:middle line:84% It enables you, it's a tool to move from there. 01:18:07.260 --> 01:18:10.480 align:middle line:84% And the people who don't go with you are the people who say, 01:18:10.480 --> 01:18:13.230 align:middle line:90% oh, it's just language. 01:18:13.230 --> 01:18:16.830 align:middle line:84% And one's response is, that's a positive thing, yeah? 01:18:16.830 --> 01:18:19.960 align:middle line:90% 01:18:19.960 --> 01:18:20.740 align:middle line:90% OK. 01:18:20.740 --> 01:18:22.060 align:middle line:90% And then next? 01:18:22.060 --> 01:18:24.400 align:middle line:84% I'm sorry, I probably didn't make myself understood. 01:18:24.400 --> 01:18:25.730 align:middle line:90% Of course, I understand. 01:18:25.730 --> 01:18:30.340 align:middle line:84% I totally agree with that words are things, absolutely. 01:18:30.340 --> 01:18:35.020 align:middle line:84% What disturbs me is the fact that words 01:18:35.020 --> 01:18:43.990 align:middle line:90% are emptied of subjectivity. 01:18:43.990 --> 01:18:51.700 align:middle line:84% Or if you can think of a word that is emptied of humanity, 01:18:51.700 --> 01:18:54.520 align:middle line:84% that is what is really disturbing to me. 01:18:54.520 --> 01:19:01.930 align:middle line:84% The fact that you can think the poem as a machine, 01:19:01.930 --> 01:19:06.710 align:middle line:90% as if for a robo future. 01:19:06.710 --> 01:19:11.110 align:middle line:84% So you create robo poems for a robo society. 01:19:11.110 --> 01:19:14.620 align:middle line:84% I'm sorry, that is very disturbing to me. 01:19:14.620 --> 01:19:15.783 align:middle line:90% Jonathan? 01:19:15.783 --> 01:19:17.950 align:middle line:84% And then-- I'm sorry, we have-- yeah, you and then-- 01:19:17.950 --> 01:19:18.460 align:middle line:90% OK. 01:19:18.460 --> 01:19:20.460 align:middle line:84% This is just another very small point on things. 01:19:20.460 --> 01:19:23.710 align:middle line:84% But I'm wondering if thing isn't the right word, but material, 01:19:23.710 --> 01:19:25.420 align:middle line:84% only because of the Poundian inheritance 01:19:25.420 --> 01:19:29.080 align:middle line:84% that the thing and no ideas but in things. 01:19:29.080 --> 01:19:30.640 align:middle line:84% Much of my research is looking at how 01:19:30.640 --> 01:19:33.580 align:middle line:84% Fenollosa had attempted to deconstruct 01:19:33.580 --> 01:19:35.380 align:middle line:90% the thing as the word. 01:19:35.380 --> 01:19:39.340 align:middle line:84% And only to have Pound reapply and distort his notions, 01:19:39.340 --> 01:19:41.830 align:middle line:84% and to make it actually the idiomatic thing, which he never 01:19:41.830 --> 01:19:45.790 align:middle line:84% says, leading to great and wonderful mistakes 01:19:45.790 --> 01:19:46.600 align:middle line:90% for all time. 01:19:46.600 --> 01:19:49.840 align:middle line:84% But at this point, I don't think that the-- 01:19:49.840 --> 01:19:52.270 align:middle line:84% maybe just material is a better word. 01:19:52.270 --> 01:19:53.050 align:middle line:90% Yes, that's-- 01:19:53.050 --> 01:19:56.210 align:middle line:90% Less confusing. 01:19:56.210 --> 01:19:57.080 align:middle line:90% OK. 01:19:57.080 --> 01:20:00.320 align:middle line:84% I just want to start out by saying that this conference has 01:20:00.320 --> 01:20:03.650 align:middle line:84% been both the most entertaining and intellectually stimulating 01:20:03.650 --> 01:20:04.760 align:middle line:90% conference. 01:20:04.760 --> 01:20:05.480 align:middle line:90% And I think-- 01:20:05.480 --> 01:20:07.490 align:middle line:84% I've talked to a lot of people, and I 01:20:07.490 --> 01:20:10.870 align:middle line:84% think what you brought up about hip hop, DJing, 01:20:10.870 --> 01:20:16.370 align:middle line:84% and video games, like go straight to the point of, 01:20:16.370 --> 01:20:17.300 align:middle line:90% if there were more-- 01:20:17.300 --> 01:20:19.040 align:middle line:84% I mean, it's kind of embarrassing 01:20:19.040 --> 01:20:22.010 align:middle line:84% that there's a school of 36,000 students, 01:20:22.010 --> 01:20:26.180 align:middle line:84% and I can count only a handful of students present. 01:20:26.180 --> 01:20:29.960 align:middle line:84% And it's really-- if they were here last night or today 01:20:29.960 --> 01:20:32.660 align:middle line:84% for any of the readings, they would have loved it. 01:20:32.660 --> 01:20:35.210 align:middle line:84% But they don't even know that this is going on. 01:20:35.210 --> 01:20:38.330 align:middle line:84% And what's happening is really exciting and new, 01:20:38.330 --> 01:20:41.870 align:middle line:84% and is mirroring what's going on in a lot of pop culture 01:20:41.870 --> 01:20:43.910 align:middle line:90% that celebrate our generation. 01:20:43.910 --> 01:20:45.750 align:middle line:84% So we could get that out to people. 01:20:45.750 --> 01:20:48.300 align:middle line:84% And I think a lot of the reason why it's been so entertaining 01:20:48.300 --> 01:20:49.280 align:middle line:90% is the-- 01:20:49.280 --> 01:20:51.380 align:middle line:84% it's been very fluid and there hasn't been a lot 01:20:51.380 --> 01:20:53.900 align:middle line:90% of academic squabbling for me. 01:20:53.900 --> 01:20:57.782 align:middle line:84% Because I'm not really interested in that. 01:20:57.782 --> 01:21:02.340 align:middle line:84% But more so than just seeing the art and getting inspired by it. 01:21:02.340 --> 01:21:05.330 align:middle line:84% So I would say that that seems to be the biggest 01:21:05.330 --> 01:21:07.910 align:middle line:84% problem is, there's so many people-- last night there 01:21:07.910 --> 01:21:11.090 align:middle line:84% was a DJ event, and there was maybe 150 people there 01:21:11.090 --> 01:21:12.650 align:middle line:90% from the biggest DJs. 01:21:12.650 --> 01:21:15.260 align:middle line:84% And what's going on and what's been here with the sound, 01:21:15.260 --> 01:21:17.870 align:middle line:84% and what we're playing, what's going on the conceptual poetry, 01:21:17.870 --> 01:21:22.470 align:middle line:84% is hearing exactly what DJs have been doing for 15, 20 years. 01:21:22.470 --> 01:21:24.530 align:middle line:90% So that's-- I don't know. 01:21:24.530 --> 01:21:26.390 align:middle line:84% If we could get that to go, I don't 01:21:26.390 --> 01:21:28.873 align:middle line:84% know if anybody has any ideas on what to do. 01:21:28.873 --> 01:21:30.290 align:middle line:84% So that's what I was going to say. 01:21:30.290 --> 01:21:31.640 align:middle line:90% Media education. 01:21:31.640 --> 01:21:35.920 align:middle line:90% 01:21:35.920 --> 01:21:38.440 align:middle line:90% Danny. 01:21:38.440 --> 01:21:39.460 align:middle line:90% Tracie. 01:21:39.460 --> 01:21:42.252 align:middle line:84% I'm in a job so you're going to have to say [INAUDIBLE].. 01:21:42.252 --> 01:21:44.910 align:middle line:84% I'm just going to support that motion 01:21:44.910 --> 01:21:48.090 align:middle line:84% by saying that it's not only important for them 01:21:48.090 --> 01:21:52.020 align:middle line:84% to come to forums like this, but for us to intersect. 01:21:52.020 --> 01:21:53.040 align:middle line:90% That's the whole point. 01:21:53.040 --> 01:21:56.430 align:middle line:84% And we look at these words, or text, 01:21:56.430 --> 01:21:58.830 align:middle line:84% or sounds, or whatever, as all the sounds 01:21:58.830 --> 01:22:02.430 align:middle line:90% from our preferences as text. 01:22:02.430 --> 01:22:06.270 align:middle line:84% And then from our perspective of things all being text. 01:22:06.270 --> 01:22:13.110 align:middle line:84% And then also go there to give it the same kind of weight. 01:22:13.110 --> 01:22:16.830 align:middle line:84% So the societal significance that make them as much 01:22:16.830 --> 01:22:18.757 align:middle line:90% signifiers as anything else. 01:22:18.757 --> 01:22:21.090 align:middle line:84% And that means we can like it, not like it, or whatever. 01:22:21.090 --> 01:22:25.380 align:middle line:84% But to not think that all of those sounds are attached to 01:22:25.380 --> 01:22:29.400 align:middle line:84% is the thing that ends up dating these kinds of movements. 01:22:29.400 --> 01:22:30.360 align:middle line:90% And I would say-- 01:22:30.360 --> 01:22:32.130 align:middle line:84% [INAUDIBLE] going to pass it on to Kenny, 01:22:32.130 --> 01:22:34.800 align:middle line:84% and there's been so much talk about his work 01:22:34.800 --> 01:22:38.160 align:middle line:84% to this notion of boringness, also speaks 01:22:38.160 --> 01:22:42.000 align:middle line:84% to your question about what students consider boring. 01:22:42.000 --> 01:22:43.500 align:middle line:84% And what they consider interesting. 01:22:43.500 --> 01:22:46.830 align:middle line:84% So to a certain extent, I think that critique is based on-- 01:22:46.830 --> 01:22:49.608 align:middle line:90% 01:22:49.608 --> 01:22:51.960 align:middle line:90% can I say this calmly-- 01:22:51.960 --> 01:22:55.200 align:middle line:84% short attention spans, and the lack 01:22:55.200 --> 01:22:57.570 align:middle line:84% of profundity for them to not see 01:22:57.570 --> 01:23:02.430 align:middle line:84% anything that's not immediately hip as a detriment that 01:23:02.430 --> 01:23:06.090 align:middle line:84% will be that their generation that we will have to face. 01:23:06.090 --> 01:23:09.240 align:middle line:84% So we do have to do these kinds of profound intersections. 01:23:09.240 --> 01:23:11.610 align:middle line:84% And I-- just to problematize this 01:23:11.610 --> 01:23:14.050 align:middle line:84% a little more because Kenny is going to talk in a second. 01:23:14.050 --> 01:23:16.440 align:middle line:84% But to think about the notion of unboring, 01:23:16.440 --> 01:23:20.970 align:middle line:84% boring in both senses of the word boring, 01:23:20.970 --> 01:23:22.870 align:middle line:84% because I kept hearing boring 14 times. 01:23:22.870 --> 01:23:25.410 align:middle line:84% I was like, it also means needling. 01:23:25.410 --> 01:23:29.460 align:middle line:84% It also means going inside of a landscape, or inside 01:23:29.460 --> 01:23:33.540 align:middle line:84% of a notion so that it's unboring the notion of boring, 01:23:33.540 --> 01:23:36.930 align:middle line:84% and that notion of pushing into or invading 01:23:36.930 --> 01:23:39.630 align:middle line:84% the body, the corpus, the sensibility, 01:23:39.630 --> 01:23:43.020 align:middle line:84% and unboring the boringness of that, the presumption 01:23:43.020 --> 01:23:45.077 align:middle line:84% that you can invade a sensibility. 01:23:45.077 --> 01:23:47.600 align:middle line:90% 01:23:47.600 --> 01:23:48.100 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 01:23:48.100 --> 01:23:52.020 align:middle line:84% I mean, I'm all for short attention spans. 01:23:52.020 --> 01:23:58.290 align:middle line:84% And I'm all for poetry that addresses and moves fast. 01:23:58.290 --> 01:24:02.670 align:middle line:90% And poetry of the moment. 01:24:02.670 --> 01:24:06.780 align:middle line:84% And a reading that's not a long reading, a reading that 01:24:06.780 --> 01:24:08.130 align:middle line:90% can be dipped into it will. 01:24:08.130 --> 01:24:10.157 align:middle line:84% There's not a narrative, there's not a linear, 01:24:10.157 --> 01:24:11.490 align:middle line:90% you don't have to go through it. 01:24:11.490 --> 01:24:13.470 align:middle line:84% You can come, you can go, you can dip, 01:24:13.470 --> 01:24:15.600 align:middle line:84% you can sample the type of reading. 01:24:15.600 --> 01:24:16.980 align:middle line:90% And so it's skimming. 01:24:16.980 --> 01:24:18.780 align:middle line:90% It's the way we live today. 01:24:18.780 --> 01:24:19.740 align:middle line:90% We skim. 01:24:19.740 --> 01:24:23.610 align:middle line:84% And this is why I was referring to John Cage as the Evelyn 01:24:23.610 --> 01:24:25.770 align:middle line:90% Wood of the avant-garde. 01:24:25.770 --> 01:24:27.630 align:middle line:84% I think it's a contemporary way of being. 01:24:27.630 --> 01:24:29.470 align:middle line:84% As I said, nobody reads a newspaper, 01:24:29.470 --> 01:24:32.832 align:middle line:84% and I think it was said it's a new way of reading. 01:24:32.832 --> 01:24:35.040 align:middle line:84% I mean, I say you don't have to read the text, people 01:24:35.040 --> 01:24:35.790 align:middle line:90% dip into the book. 01:24:35.790 --> 01:24:37.560 align:middle line:90% That's another way of reading. 01:24:37.560 --> 01:24:41.910 align:middle line:84% God, it's such a conventional notion about attention 01:24:41.910 --> 01:24:43.530 align:middle line:90% and attention spans. 01:24:43.530 --> 01:24:45.990 align:middle line:84% Now, I'm going to get off of this 01:24:45.990 --> 01:24:47.850 align:middle line:90% because I could go for a while. 01:24:47.850 --> 01:24:53.160 align:middle line:84% But Marjorie wanted to bring up the idea of flarf, which hasn't 01:24:53.160 --> 01:24:55.050 align:middle line:90% been mentioned this weekend. 01:24:55.050 --> 01:24:59.783 align:middle line:84% And briefly, I just wanted to kind of say that-- 01:24:59.783 --> 01:25:01.200 align:middle line:84% Some people don't know what it is. 01:25:01.200 --> 01:25:02.033 align:middle line:90% Do you want to tell? 01:25:02.033 --> 01:25:06.210 align:middle line:84% Oh, flarf is a movement in many ways very 01:25:06.210 --> 01:25:11.520 align:middle line:84% similar to conceptual poetry primarily using Google as a way 01:25:11.520 --> 01:25:15.810 align:middle line:84% to write through and to construct texts. 01:25:15.810 --> 01:25:19.090 align:middle line:84% I wanted to really touch for a second on the differences. 01:25:19.090 --> 01:25:21.060 align:middle line:84% And I think the results actually often 01:25:21.060 --> 01:25:25.050 align:middle line:84% are quite similar to the types of things that we're doing. 01:25:25.050 --> 01:25:28.020 align:middle line:84% And you could almost say that many of the text presented 01:25:28.020 --> 01:25:32.130 align:middle line:84% today could pass at a flarf festival for flarf texts, 01:25:32.130 --> 01:25:33.670 align:middle line:90% in fact. 01:25:33.670 --> 01:25:37.590 align:middle line:84% The difference is, I think, in the construction. 01:25:37.590 --> 01:25:43.020 align:middle line:84% While both deny a traditional sense 01:25:43.020 --> 01:25:47.490 align:middle line:84% of subjectivity, traditional notion of authorship, 01:25:47.490 --> 01:25:50.430 align:middle line:84% it's in the putting together of the text 01:25:50.430 --> 01:25:52.560 align:middle line:90% that's quite different. 01:25:52.560 --> 01:25:55.230 align:middle line:84% Flarf takes a much more traditional approach 01:25:55.230 --> 01:25:59.880 align:middle line:84% to selecting the best texts and putting the best text together 01:25:59.880 --> 01:26:02.640 align:middle line:84% in order to make a Zinger and make everybody laugh 01:26:02.640 --> 01:26:03.880 align:middle line:90% and feel good. 01:26:03.880 --> 01:26:05.630 align:middle line:84% As a matter of fact, contrasting this 01:26:05.630 --> 01:26:08.860 align:middle line:84% with the methodologies of conceptual writing, 01:26:08.860 --> 01:26:11.550 align:middle line:84% which oftentimes propose a machine, 01:26:11.550 --> 01:26:14.250 align:middle line:84% and the results are simply accepted. 01:26:14.250 --> 01:26:17.970 align:middle line:84% They may be edited slightly afterwards or worse work, 01:26:17.970 --> 01:26:19.080 align:middle line:90% but not to the degree. 01:26:19.080 --> 01:26:21.330 align:middle line:84% So I think that it's-- actually, the difference is not 01:26:21.330 --> 01:26:23.980 align:middle line:84% in the result, but the difference is in the process. 01:26:23.980 --> 01:26:26.130 align:middle line:84% And I believe that flarf holds very 01:26:26.130 --> 01:26:31.710 align:middle line:84% much onto traditional notions of constructions of authorship. 01:26:31.710 --> 01:26:36.130 align:middle line:84% And then absolutely claims it to be unoriginal. 01:26:36.130 --> 01:26:36.630 align:middle line:90% Thank you. 01:26:36.630 --> 01:26:38.297 align:middle line:84% Anybody want to argue with [INAUDIBLE]?? 01:26:38.297 --> 01:26:40.140 align:middle line:84% I would like to respond to that by saying-- 01:26:40.140 --> 01:26:43.770 align:middle line:84% adding, also, that you have two separate communities that 01:26:43.770 --> 01:26:45.480 align:middle line:84% came up with very similar principles, 01:26:45.480 --> 01:26:51.030 align:middle line:84% or concepts, of how to write, and that they're 01:26:51.030 --> 01:26:55.170 align:middle line:84% purely the side effects of their own indigenous community 01:26:55.170 --> 01:26:56.850 align:middle line:90% endeavor. 01:26:56.850 --> 01:26:59.910 align:middle line:84% I mean, it seems to me that every art movement 01:26:59.910 --> 01:27:03.870 align:middle line:84% expands beyond the inkblot of its initial grouping, right? 01:27:03.870 --> 01:27:06.450 align:middle line:84% I mean, really, this kind of work, I suppose, 01:27:06.450 --> 01:27:10.440 align:middle line:84% would have been born over beer with three poets in Buffalo 01:27:10.440 --> 01:27:13.680 align:middle line:84% sitting around chatting with each other, 01:27:13.680 --> 01:27:15.750 align:middle line:84% recognizing each other in their own practice. 01:27:15.750 --> 01:27:18.540 align:middle line:84% It was no intention, of course, that suddenly branch out 01:27:18.540 --> 01:27:21.090 align:middle line:84% into a whole variety of different other communities. 01:27:21.090 --> 01:27:24.540 align:middle line:84% [INAUDIBLE] actually building this time bomb 01:27:24.540 --> 01:27:27.883 align:middle line:84% in your own basement as a group, right? 01:27:27.883 --> 01:27:29.550 align:middle line:84% I think the same thing is true of flarf. 01:27:29.550 --> 01:27:32.190 align:middle line:84% They also originate with highly specific community. 01:27:32.190 --> 01:27:34.530 align:middle line:84% And really that's, I think, the fundamental difference 01:27:34.530 --> 01:27:36.612 align:middle line:84% in many respects is just the personalities 01:27:36.612 --> 01:27:38.820 align:middle line:84% and idiosyncrasies that inform that practice for most 01:27:38.820 --> 01:27:39.665 align:middle line:90% communities. 01:27:39.665 --> 01:27:42.850 align:middle line:90% 01:27:42.850 --> 01:27:43.810 align:middle line:90% Anyone? 01:27:43.810 --> 01:27:45.620 align:middle line:90% Rob [INAUDIBLE]. 01:27:45.620 --> 01:27:46.120 align:middle line:90% Rob? 01:27:46.120 --> 01:27:47.932 align:middle line:90% I just wanted to go back to-- 01:27:47.932 --> 01:27:49.390 align:middle line:84% because I think it's important to-- 01:27:49.390 --> 01:27:53.170 align:middle line:84% Question this just a comment and a 01:27:53.170 --> 01:27:54.700 align:middle line:90% thank you for this conference. 01:27:54.700 --> 01:27:59.350 align:middle line:84% Also for me, I've been very exciting, very stimulating. 01:27:59.350 --> 01:28:01.030 align:middle line:84% And I think I'm coming out thinking 01:28:01.030 --> 01:28:02.800 align:middle line:84% about this notion of conceptual poetry 01:28:02.800 --> 01:28:05.920 align:middle line:84% without a sense of one specific answer. 01:28:05.920 --> 01:28:08.730 align:middle line:84% I didn't come in with one specific answer, either. 01:28:08.730 --> 01:28:10.480 align:middle line:84% And I live in a very different state, 01:28:10.480 --> 01:28:13.840 align:middle line:84% but with a similar sort of openness to what that could be. 01:28:13.840 --> 01:28:20.110 align:middle line:84% The one thing I do feel is this question of the machine 01:28:20.110 --> 01:28:24.460 align:middle line:84% is actually of even less interest to me now, as such. 01:28:24.460 --> 01:28:28.618 align:middle line:84% I use machines, and most of us do all the time. 01:28:28.618 --> 01:28:30.160 align:middle line:84% What interests me even more, and I've 01:28:30.160 --> 01:28:33.070 align:middle line:84% seen that from the comments and interventions throughout, 01:28:33.070 --> 01:28:36.100 align:middle line:84% is this notion of the kind of exchange 01:28:36.100 --> 01:28:38.410 align:middle line:84% that machines facilitates, in a sense, 01:28:38.410 --> 01:28:40.780 align:middle line:84% Charles' notion of the politics that we 01:28:40.780 --> 01:28:42.040 align:middle line:90% bring to these machines. 01:28:42.040 --> 01:28:43.810 align:middle line:90% And what I find-- 01:28:43.810 --> 01:28:46.030 align:middle line:84% what I have found really, really exciting 01:28:46.030 --> 01:28:49.480 align:middle line:84% is this notion of transformations, 01:28:49.480 --> 01:28:52.240 align:middle line:84% or transformation, or whatever we want to call them, 01:28:52.240 --> 01:28:54.250 align:middle line:84% but that are really also taking place 01:28:54.250 --> 01:28:57.550 align:middle line:84% in which linguistic communities, different ways of thinking 01:28:57.550 --> 01:29:00.460 align:middle line:84% about this kind of exchange-- cultural exchange 01:29:00.460 --> 01:29:04.240 align:middle line:84% so that the poetic does enter broader cultural field, 01:29:04.240 --> 01:29:05.140 align:middle line:90% in general. 01:29:05.140 --> 01:29:07.450 align:middle line:84% And that is what I leave with, if you like. 01:29:07.450 --> 01:29:10.000 align:middle line:90% So thank you for all this. 01:29:10.000 --> 01:29:13.350 align:middle line:90% [APPLAUSE] 01:29:13.350 --> 01:29:20.000 align:middle line:90%