tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4014415529871703586.post2122772390575217484..comments2023-12-16T02:44:20.427-06:00Comments on Reginald Shepherd's Blog: Scattered Thoughts on FractureReginald Shepherdhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11965170916626482963noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4014415529871703586.post-21352003942285273242007-01-09T13:23:00.000-06:002007-01-09T13:23:00.000-06:00I think it's useful to point out that many of thos...I think it's useful to point out that many of those with an essentially avant-garde mindset are presently hiding in plain sight under the misleading title of "post-avants." This is another example, I think, of how the internet can allow persons and groups to essentially rescript their aesthetics and biases into a form less likely to be assailed (i.e., by stalling: call yourself something you haven't been called before, and you throw your pursuers off the scent); it's puerile, of course, about as much as a sexist, say, trying to hide himself/herself within the folds of the community by self-identifying as "post-sexist." I'm still not at all clear how we are to distinguish between the avant-garde and the self-proclaimed "post-avant," especially when those who've done the most to coin the make-believe, candyland term "post-avant" are the same ones who established the absorptive/anti-absorptive dichotomy as a way to wink-wink nudge-nudge themselves back into avant-garde credibility.<br />S.Seth Abramsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08059849202129580100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4014415529871703586.post-18596964137081115312007-01-09T08:51:00.000-06:002007-01-09T08:51:00.000-06:00Reginald, thanks for this blog--to read your provo...Reginald, thanks for this blog--to read your provocative and interesting ideas, to be <b>able</b> to read them because they are written with care and skill. How refreshing! It inspires me to respond. I certainly agree with what you say here: <br /><br />"My interest in syntax, the relation of words and phrases to one another, arises from the desire to make or reveal connections among the elements of my poems and my world(s). My questions are always, “How can these things be put together? What constellation do they form?" Which is not to claim that a reconciliation of self and society, or self and self, can be effected in or by means of language." <br /><br />Aside from not needing that last disclaimer in any other context except one where there actually are poets who make such claims for poetry (as here, in the blogosphere), this succinctly summarizes what drives any poet, this "desire to make or reveal..etc." The ways in which things come together are multiple and fascinating, and making is more interesting than breaking, especially if breaking doesn't lead to new ways of making. Looking at the destroyed thing has inherent interest because of what it was, what it might now become, of how differently it could have been made or could now be made, not simply because it is in pieces. I don't believe readers who say they derive satisfaction from looking at fragments because they <b> are </b> fragments, or because the whole point is in the fragmentation itself (and this is the default position for many readers now). On the other hand, I do think there is satisfaction for the artist from the fragmenting, the breaking itself being a kind of scientific mode of inquiry that opens new modes of creation. Some would counter that there is no such thing as a fragment--in language or in the world--just an inability on the part of the viewer/reader to perceive its connection to an unseen whole. I think this is a poor defense for a failed poem, or any work of art, one that has no life beyond its breakage. It erects even more of a barrier between reader/viewer and the work of art, and allows the maker to disclaim responsibilty for what he/she makes.Joan Houlihanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13290894482199355799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4014415529871703586.post-80420994341155698752007-01-08T14:27:00.000-06:002007-01-08T14:27:00.000-06:00I think it was Kyle Gann in the Village Voice who ...I think it was Kyle Gann in the Village Voice who wrote an article about John Zorn 15 or so years ago that I happened to read, one point of which has stuck with me ever since. He observed that people interpreted Zorn's music as representing the fractured nature of contemporary life. His counterargument was that the fragmentation and jump-cutting of Naked City and other bands that Zorn led in the eighties and early nineties did not reflect a fragmented reality but instead was intended to run counter to a homogenous reality.Andrew Shieldshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02804655739574694901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4014415529871703586.post-24797943832349740522007-01-08T13:00:00.000-06:002007-01-08T13:00:00.000-06:00Thank you for this.Thank you for this.Sherylhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15714880589297494206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4014415529871703586.post-44309435250232212212007-01-08T12:54:00.000-06:002007-01-08T12:54:00.000-06:00Ann Lauterbach attempts to slide past this with he...Ann Lauterbach attempts to slide past this with her conceptualization of "the whole fragment." <br /><br />For what it's worth.John Gallaherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02112997671155171626noreply@blogger.com