Quantcast
Channel: MIMEO MIMEO
Viewing all 163 articles
Browse latest View live

DO OR DIY

$
0
0

On Tuesday Simon & Schuster announced that it is partnering with Author Solutions based in Bloomington, Indiana to create Archway Publishing, the latest major experiment in the booming self-publishing industry. Archway will provide authors with packages ranging from their ‘children’s’ special at $1,599 to their premium $25k ‘business book’ option complete with all the usual trimmings: design, marketing, distribution, and of course, the prospect of getting picked up by S&S itself if the book is successful. After the author invests in the writing and research and ponies up the cash to self-publish, S&S’s bean counters will ‘carefully monitor’ sales to determine if it is financially advantageous for them to swap out the Archway pressmark for the S&S pressmark. It’s a dubious business model, one that embraces the same predatory principles of the vanity press, which differs sharply from the kind of self-publishing we explore in Mimeo Mimeo.

I’ve always loved Gerald Gross’s Editors on Editing, in part, because it reminds me of another era. Many of the most experienced editors who contributed essays to this unique collection got into the industry when New York and London were the hubs for publishing. It was a pre-computer age where articulate, well-dressed professionals filed into their offices, greeted their secretaries, and began sifting through stacks of manuscripts looking for the next rising star. Editors worked closely with authors, engaging in lengthy discussions about art and life over martinis, sent them on all-expenses-paid book tours, and provided generous advances. I’m laying it on a little thick, but you see my point: under the S&S model, the role of the editor is marginal at best. The editor was once a great hunter, a harpooner like Queequeg, precise and steady on his feet, but under this new order, there’s little need for the talents of Melville’s character; all you need to run a publishing house is a big boat and huge net that will pick up anything in its path. When the net is full, bring it to market, see what sells, dump the rest, and go back out to sea. It’s the same model of labor that all websites that consist of user-generated content rely on for their survival. Give the people a template, let them fill it with information, sell it, and return the template to the people with targeted advertising. 

The inspiring historical instances of self-publishing discussed in a new pamphlet, Do or DIY, by Craig Dworkin, Simon Morris, and Nick Thurston (Information as Material, 2012) present an alternative model, one with fewer rules and a more distinguished precedent, more off the grid, if you will. In this short survey of DIY literature, the authors present colorful anecdotes about poets and novelists ranging from Laurence Sterne, to Walt Whitman, to Raymond Roussel, to Virginia Woolf, to Ezra Pound. The message is clear: if they can do it, so can you. The ‘praxis’ section concludes: ‘don’t wait for others to validate your ideas. Do it yourself.’ I couldn’t agree more with this sentiment, in fact, if someone flipped the switch on an oversized DIY vacuum my library would consist of nothing by empty shelves. Today’s literary landscape would be the most barren, banal, and boring conceivable in the absence of independent publishing. Non-traditional publishing is expanding rapidly in the wake of the latest Random Penguin merger, antitrust wars between Apple and Amazon, and skyrocketing digital book sales. Coincidence? The authors point out that ‘...new writing is often essentially coextensive with its publication, as tweeting, blogging, texting, file-sharing, casting, streaming, and countless web-pages attest. With platforms for self-publishing today being so much cheaper and easier than letterpress was for Leonard and Virginia Woolf, there are fewer and fewer excuses for not distributing your work—no inky fingers, no strained back, and you don’t have to agree on the bulldog either.’

It’s true that new media has provided authors with more tools for self-publishing, and most are extremely user-friendly and affordable, allowing anyone with a laptop (or maybe just a smart phone) to bring their words into print, or at least into cyberspace, which is great for the author, but where does it leave the reader? How does one begin to sort through the swell of DIY literature without the guidance of an editor, a compelling book review, or an affinity for a particular publishing house? There are many publishers I admire and trust so much that I’ll read anything they choose to print. Just as there are new ways of publishing, there are of course plenty of new ways to stumble on new writers. Young poets don’t need faux prizes and rigged first book awards to get where they’re going, but that’s still the opinion of a minority. Pick up a copy of Poets & Writers and you’ll see what I mean—business based on the illusions of the MFA industry.

At Mimeo Mimeo we’ve always maintained that the Mimeo Revolution is not circumscribed by any particular medium or method of textual reproduction, but rather by an attitude that pre-dates the golden years of mimeo and continues through the present. The mimeo revolution produced some of the most beautiful, well-designed books and magazines of the 20th century. d.a. levy’s aesthetic was raw, the materials crude, the printing sloppy, what Jed Birmingham has referred to as ‘dirty mimeo’ while others seized ‘obsolete’ letterpresses, learned the practice of typography, and created dazzling books that rivaled the genius of the European and Russian avant-garde of the early 20th century. Both reflect the spirit of the times in the writing, art, media, and design. And today’s DIY books might reflect our times similarly, but let’s face it, there’s a lot of ugly-ugly books out there, and they’re contagious. There is an aesthetic that pervades the print-on-demand sites that is characterized by ignorance of basic typographic principles, glossy covers with ‘photoshopped’ images, so-called ‘perfect’ bindings, and shoddy editing. Incunabula still looks ravishing, while the internet, taken as a whole, is an absolute eyesore that we’ve learned to tolerate out of necessity. Digital aesthetics have a long way to go before they catch up with print, but to be fair, it’s important to remember that the digital world is still in its infancy, and with luck, will become more beautiful with age. When blogs first emerged, it seemed like a miracle: a free, user-friendly tool for self-publishing that is immediate, always available everywhere, and endlessly editable. People posted regularly and often wrote lengthy posts about a wide variety of subjects, and the blogroll or links to ‘friends’ in the sidebar provided a virtually unlimited network of related sites. For a while, it seemed like the conversation was successfully shifting from the little magazines (even after Y2K it wasn’t unusual to receive several print mags or newsletters in the mail every week) to the blogosphere. Now it seems that we’re in the twilight of the blogging era, as more immediate, mobile, and fragmented forms of communication continue to gain notoriety. The meaning and implications of ‘first thought best thought’ have changed, for as immediate as mimeo was in its time, it seems far more contained, sedate, and private than Twitter.

The Mimeo Revolution is still going strong, and I present this pamphlet as evidence. I have to disagree with the authors (just a little) when they claim: ‘Following on the DIY ethos of the mimeograph revolution, Language Poetry—the most important literary movement of the later 20th century—flourished when authors established their own presses, distribution networks, journals, reading series, and bookshops. Susan Howe’s Loon Press, Lyn Hejinian’s Tuumba Press, Johanna Drucker’s Druckwerks, and dozens of others in tandem altered the course of contemporary literature, whilst commercial publishing plodded on, oblivious and unchanging.’ Many of the early Language magazines to emerge from the mid-70s were printed on a mimeograph, and later the photocopier, so I don’t see Language ‘following on the DIY ethos of the mimeograph revolution,’ but rather as a literal, material part of it as recorded in A Secret Location on the Lower East Side, which leaves off at 1980. Lyn Hejinian discussed the history of Tuumba in Mimeo Mimeo #5. She printed 50 books letterpress between 1976 and 1984, including many early and first books by the emerging Language poets, as well as Susan Howe, who I’ve always been more inclined to read in dialogue with 19th century New England than Language. I could be missing something (please correct me), but as far as I can tell her Loon Press only published one book, her own TheLibertiesin 1980, which is a very different model from Hejinian’s ambitious chapbook series or Drucker’s artist’s books, which I would argue are related to the small press scene of the times, but better understood as literary works of art. Druckwerks did not publish Language poets, or any poets for that matter, and in that sense serves more as an imprint Drucker used for her unique fusion of radical typography and innovative writing, than other presses associated with Language, such as Sun and Moon or Roof Books. Perhaps it is implicit, but it’s worth reminding readers that these three presses may in fact represent a spectrum of approaches to publishing rather than a unified method for advancing ‘the most important literary movement of the later 20th century.’

There should be more DIY books like this, more research on the history of publishing, digital aesthetics, and the material conditions of literature—we’ve certainly never had a broader array of tools at our disposal for interpreting and sharing our research and Do or DIY is a terrific example of just how such ventures prove possible. Now write your own!

—KS


THE EIGHTH WONDER OF THE WORLD

Mark My Words

$
0
0
I want to give a shout out to James Jaffe Booksellers for providing me that mailing information for a partial run of Floating Bear they currently have on sale.  See http://www.jamesjaffe.com/pages/books/22232/literary-magazine-diane-di-prima-leroi-jones/the-floating-bear-a-newsletter-a-group-of-19-issues-comprising-whole-numbers-2-3-6-10-12-16-20-25-26-30-32

I have updated my tracking chart of Floating Bears with issues that went to Gary Snyder, James Laughlin and our friend Denise Levertov as well as some other names and addresses I have collected over the past few months.  See http://realitystudio.org/bibliographic-bunker/floating-bear-archive/

I really appreciate James Jaffe Booksellers the time and effort in providing me with the information.  They did not have to do it.  BUT.  Yes, but I have to bite the hand that feeds me.  Let's call it constructive criticism.  Nowhere in their catalog entry do they mention that certain issues have mailing labels to Snyder, Laughlin or Levertov.  That, my friends (besides the Issue 2, a tough one to get along with the first issue, maybe tougher than Issue 24), is the selling point.  It should be mandatory operating procedure to include such information when dealing with Floating Bear.  In such details lies the value.  Ever since the now infamous Between the Covers Mimeo catalog this is clear.

Take the envelope above that mailed an issue to Larry Schnell.  This is pure gold.  All the frankings are the relish which make the dog, or should I say Bear.  Do you not see the Dada in the "Returned to Writer"?  The interesting detail that the American Theatre for Poets and Floating Bear had the same address.  The date stamp confirming the year of that address.  The nice detail of the Lincoln stamp.  The fetish attached to the tatoos of a now dying mailing system.  Individual issues of Floating Bear have all the same markings and characteristics.

The days of mint mimeo are over.  Nothing is more boring and lacking in value than a clean, unmailed issue of Floating Bear.  Mint is not mint.  "Good" condition is the new gold standard in mimeo.  I have said this numerous time before but, obviously, it bears repeating.

JB

The Fugs Meet The Pogues and Hang out with La Monte Young

$
0
0

I am in the alley thinking about mimeo and it goes something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SirutCHZ-QI.

There is nothing more monotonous than a barroom story and I am truly a broken record.  BUT  BUT hear me out this is the shit that matters.  Lines from Kittler are tagged all throughout the alley.  I cant help but repeat them.  Discourse fucking networks.  Relays:  Literature as an Epoch of the Postal System.  Do you understand how important (and how obvious) it is that Sanders received Floating Bear.  Stop me if you have heard this one before.  This post is a La Monte Young drone.  This blog post is the epitome of mailing it in.

About 12 beers in and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9loUrSx8oA.

I do not think I can be any clearer.  Read the fine print.

JB

Sticking With Envelopes

$
0
0


Here is another envelope.  Wonder what Carnac the Magnificent would say about it?  I need his help on this one because I do not know much about this reading series.  640 East 6th, Apt. 15 was Carl Weissner's apartment in NYC.  Panic Press was his publishing outlet.  In 1967 or so, Carl came over from Germany and headed up to Gloucester to see Charles Olson in preparation for a planned gradute thesis.  Olson told Carl to drop the thesis and take his tape recorder across the central fact of America (SPACE) and do some exploratory field work.  Carl took his advice.

Carl taped everything so I would suspect these readings from March 1968, were as well.  Yet as Dirk Diggler says about demos for Feel My Heat, "Where are the tapes?"  See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYzB_QqxXu4.  I do not think they made it to Northwestern or University of Texas.

Jackson MacLow was no stranger to the NYC reading circuit.  A few years earlier, he was part of the Light Years reading series along with Carol Berge in the coffehouse scene.  Carl's events seem more like a loft party type situation.  I think he stayed at the Hotel Chelsea at various times as well, but in March 1968, it does not appear that he had a room there.

I should email Diane di Prima about it.  Carl being Carl would have gotten a chuckle out of the typo of di Prima's name.  Like with his mentor Burroughs, such "mistakes" spoke volumes.

JB

Pun Intended

$
0
0


I picked this book up at the Visionary Art Museum.  John Waters was behind me in line at the gift shop buying an assortment of goodies, such as a book featuring recordings of animal farts.  I am reading Graffiti Kings now but if I had to give a premature review:  This book is the bomb!!!

Treat yourself.  The pictures alone are incredible and Stewart's dissertation is in-depth and amazing as well

JB

Schonbek, It Is In Your DNA

$
0
0

I was talking on the phone with my Mom this morning to get the latest poop and I found out that my Grandma Birmingham (my father's mother) worked in a printshop up until the early 1980s.  It was a simple operation that printed whatever jobs came in the door.  She worked on everything from business cards and promotional material to holiday cards.  My Mom says Betty saw it as largely a job.  A diverting of her creative talents as an artist.  I must have been aware of this at some point, probably when I was a teenager but I had completely forgotten about it.  Being reminded of this piece of family history really makes my day. 

What I remember most about my Grandma B was that she was, as I mentioned, an accomplished artist.  She attended Cooper Union in the 1930s and painted her entire life.  I distinctly recall her painting in the summers on Block Island and I have hanging in my house her painting of the house we rented for several summers overlooking New Harbor, home of The Oar, a great bar to drink Goombay Smashes while watching the boats come in and the sun slip below the horizon.  Late in her life, she was doing abstracts of street scenes, like of the line of rowhouses I live in now, in the manner of Cezanne.  She was always evolving and exploring personally and artistically.

When my Grandfather died, his mania for paper had pretty much taken over the house.  Entire rooms were packed with old newspapers, playbills, Petty and Vargas calendars, Pratt & Whitney publications (where he worked for years), and sports programs, including a copy of the program from the 1941 World Series between the Yankees and the Dodgers.  My Grandfather meticulously kept score and in this program Mickey Owens's dropped third strike is dutifully recorded.  He seemingly threw nothing away.  For example, he had every playbill for every theater event he and my Grandma ever attended.  Hundreds.  He kept the front pages of various newspapers documenting historic events:  Hiroshima, the Moon Landing, the JFK Assassination.  His penchant for what I hestiate to call hoarding is now my obsession with book collecting.  My "orderly" archive always threatens to devolve into his "disorder" and "clutter."  His archive and mine are of course related.  Such relations are messy and complicated.  Bibliomania courses through my bloodstream, like ink.  It is in my DNA.  Soon after my Grandfather's death, my Grandma cleaned the entire house and had a working art studio built as an addition to the back of the house, full of sunlight and color, as opposed to the black and white of newsprint.  As a college English major coming down from Boston for Thanksgiving dinner, I realized pretty quickly that it was her room of her own.

So I am happy to re-learn that my love of print, typography, and the appreciation of printing as an art form was also a foregone conclusion.  I was born into it.  Besides my Grandma's sketchbooks and artwork, another item that was handed down to me after her death was a copy of Oscar Ogg's The 26 Letters.  I always appreciated the book as a memento of my family history (like her copy of Adrienne Rich's Diving Into The Wreck or Elizabeth Bishop's Collected Poems - which I have thought about deeply in relation to my Grandma's personal history and what those books say about her and her passions and aspriations), but after speaking with my Mom this morning the Ogg acquired further layers of meaning and importance. 

Books as objects do that over time.  They collect and accumulate dust, memories, and history.  Print is never fixed.  It also never dies.   

JB

Pages from a Dissertation - Yugen

$
0
0




The Complete Yugen has been on RealityStudio for a few weeks and in introducing that archive I suggested some points of entry through which to get inside this iconic little magazine.  The pages above could provide ammunition for a dissertation chapter.

One of the early myths of the New American Poetry Anthology (and the Evergreen Review San Francisco Scene) is that these poets were a unified front against the Establishment.  This could not be further from the truth.  For example, books such as Poets Be Like God make clear that almost nobody in the New American Poetry club got along.  Just because Donald Allen (or Allen Ginsberg or Robert Creeley or Robert Duncan, as the case may be) grouped some poets together does not mean there was anything close to a stable community or even that those communities make literary or social sense.

The pages above from Yugen Four and Five highlight just one of the divisions that reveal the lie of the unity within Allen's Anthology.  Yugen Four presented a different cover design from the previous three issues.  It announces Yugen Four as a Black Mountain issue as it was designed by Fielding Dawson.  This issue also includes work by Dawson, Charles Olson, Max Finstein, Edward Marshall, Joel Oppenheimer and Robert Creeley.  It could be argued that before Issue 4, Yugen was something of a Beat outlet.  Gregory Corso definitely felt so, as evidenced by his poem that closed Issue 4.  I love the "THIS IS A PAID ADVERTISEMENT" above Corso's side eye to Black Mountain.  Funny stuff, but Corso was not laughing as Yugen threatened to became in his eyes a shill for the poets from the North Carolina backwoods.  This highlights that even though Black Mountain Review 7 was something of a Beat issue, and Creeley, Ginsberg, and Kerouac hung out and were strung out in San Francisco, the bonds that held these and other literary groups together were strained and threatened to snap.  Tensions were high as all these poets stepped into the public eye.

In Yugen Five, Gilbert Sorrentino responds to Corso's advertisement to himself.  Sorrentino makes clear that the New American Poets did not politely share the same room in terms of poetics, let alone rub shoulders in the Cedar without coming to blows.  All these arguments and conflicts are playing out before the New American Poetry Anthology is even published.  Yugen, like Evergreen Review and Black Mountain Revew, was the laboratory in which the New American Anthology experiment was conducted.  Sometimes these experiments blew up.  Yugen is a great reminder that little magazines and anthologies are not domesticated spaces housing a big, happy family of poets; they are also boxing rings in which poets and writers duke it out for various belts, both public and canonical.

JB

Nobody's Perfect

$
0
0






Kulchur is unreadable yet it begs to be read.  To be read is to be assaulted.  Just look at how Kulchur is dressed; it is asking for it.  I am talking about its binding.  Perfect, like the manhattans or martinis one drinks at Laure’s with Barbara and Frank while discussing Kulchur’s pages.  Or Audrey Hepburn’s Givenchy dress (such as Issues 2 and 3, before Kulchur went black on white), which in Kulchur’s case is rather ill-fitting and thus rips at the seams. 
Yet sometimes it is more important to look good rather than be comfortable.  The perfect binding implies class.  I should know.  Kyle and I wanted Mimeo Mimeo 4 perfect bound in order to announce our move into the next tax bracket.  In terms of intellectual capital that is.  The first issue of Kulchur is blue collar.  Modeled I would guess on the Totem, Cornith and Yugen chapbook formats.  Makes sense as Leroi Jones was involved with the start-up of Kulchur.  Lita Hornick, art patron, collector of artists, financed the magazine from the beginning but remained distant until Marc Schleifer left after Issue 3.  Those issues are working class.  The little black dresses of Issue 2 and 3 are more accurately black leather jackets.  They are truly Wild Ones.  I wonder if Hornick suggested the perfect binding in Issue 2.  Maybe, maybe not, but Kulchur obtained its classic look with Issue 4 and Hornick’s taking of the editorial reins.

In my opinion, perfect binding is a disaster.  Many printers have not perfected that binding process at all.  The sense of space on the page is cramped; long lines get lost within the spine and lose their backbone.  They suffer from scoliosis.  The magazine remains shut; it refuses to speak openly.  The perfect binding is stand offish, reserved.  A stiff upper lip of a binding rather than a barbaric yelp, or a hearty laugh.  Kulchur’s first issue opens its arms; it reaches outward.  Not a hug, but a firm handshake among comrades.  As reflected in the perfect binding, the later issues report on closed in worlds of velvet ropes and VIP parties.  Poetry of the open field becomes an exclusive club.  The handshake is now secret and coded.  You have to shift the magazine from hand to hand, manipulating pages with your fingers to gently open the pages for reading.  Despite Hornick’s efforts to make Kulchur a high class production, the perfect binding always reminds readers of the presence of the gutter.  Kulchur would always be shadowed by its origins as a magazine concerned with the proletariat, not the art market.  It is to some extent Schleifer’s politics lurking in that gutter.  The ghost in the machine.

What is so frustrating with Kulchur for a collector who also likes to read and use his collection for research, is that Kulchur is so damn readable.  The collector in me, who prizes the condition of my set of Kulchur, hesitates (and I largely have restrained myself unfortunately) to read the magazines and inevitably destroy the binding.  But the contents (that I have read) are absolutely terrific.  Kulchur was envisioned as a critical journal on the various New American scenes:  poetry, film, theatre, music, dance.  It was a guide to New American Kulchur.  I can think of few publications of its era that so completely provides senses (sights, sounds, flavors, smells, materiality) of the scene.  The critical writing is in the moment and immediate.  The impressions are written quickly and with passion.  With 20 issues that is a ton of impressions. 

I just pulled Issue 12 of the shelf.  Published in Winter 1963, the magazine went to press during the Kennedy Assassination.  The table of content has a tipped in notice from the editors:  “The editors wish to express their grief and indignation which all thinking men must feel at the spectacle of barbarous brutality and inconceivable madness.”  At this point the editors included Hornick, Leroi Jones (music), Frank O’Hara (art) and Joseph LeSueur (theater) with Charles Olson, Gilbert Sorrentino, A.B Spellman, and Bill Berkson as contributing editors.  I would suspect O’Hara’s Art Chronicles and Jones’ music criticism are collected somewhere or other, but it is really exciting to see O’Hara review John Rechy’s City of Night followed by Jones’ reviewing Allen Ginsberg’s Reality Sandwiches.   In the middle of the Reality Sandwiches review, Jones’ Exaugural Address (for Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy, who has had to eat too much shit) written on November 26, 1963, has been pasted in.  There is also a review of City Lights Journal #1, several music reviews by Jones and Spellman, and a review of Clayton Eshelman’s translation of Pablo Neruda’s Residences on Earth.  This is just the review section of Kulchur, comprising the last 20 pages or so.  Each and every issue has their own treasures to excavate.   I was just flipping through Issue 18 and there is Ted Berrigan’s review of William Burroughs’ Nova Express.  Scanning is impossible, but binding be damned, I will type out the entire review for RealityStudio. 

What we really need is a reprint of Kulchur, maybe not even the entire run, but just the review sections.  It would be a fascinating documentation of New York City from 1960 to 1965.  Until then you will have to buy the issues yourself.  In my opinion Kulchur is one of the bargains of the Mimeo Revolution market.  You can pick one up for $15-20.  This makes sense given that up to 1000 copies per issue were printed, but that said, the perfect binding makes fine copies rather scarce.  Another option is to get a complete run.   These are also scarce.  Certain issues are quite simply tough to come by.  Mast Books just posted on Abebooks a complete run for $1500.  That is just about right.  In my opinion it is worth it, as Kulchur is truly the epitome of the little magazine as archive.  Archives are expensive to build but the money put in will pay dividends in intellectual capital for years to come.  And that is more than you can say for the stock market.

JB

Kulchur on C: A Journal of Poetry

$
0
0
 


I wonder if a collection of contemporary reviews of mimeo mags would be worth gathering.  I suspect it would.  Looking through old rare book catalogs, like the Ed Sanders/Peace Eye Books ones from the 1960s, it is interesting that Floating Bear, Fuck You and C were all collectible the minute they left the mimeo machine.  In some respects it seems to me that they were more collectible in their time than in the mid-1990s, say.  For example, Floating Bears could command $15 to $20 in the 1960s and those prices held tight until maybe even 2000.  I remember buying up Floating Bears for $15 for years.  Same with C and Fuck You, the prices held rather steady for decades and then popped skywards about three years ago.  I wonder if these magazines were considered classics in their own time.  Is there a John Galsworthy of little mags, a mag that was idolized in its time and then fell from grace?  Contemporary reviews would shed some light all on this.

It would be an interesting project and Kulchur would be a good place to start since in the 1960s it was THE critical journal of the mimeo revolution.  It was conceived by LeRoi Jones and Marc Schleifer to be just that.  What follows below is poet Allan Kaplan’s review of the first eight issues of C:  A Journal of Poetry.  Today, it is hard to find a mimeo mag as revered as C.  In form and content it is considered a standout in 60s mimeo.  Kaplan’s review far from canonizes the magazine.  No doubt it is a positive review but there are some definite reservations and questions concerning the quality of the contents.  Not surprising since unevenness is the mimeo way.

I found the most interesting section of Kaplan’s review the last section.  I was shocked that there was mention of Joe Brainard’s covers but not a peep about the Warhol cover in Issue 4, particularly in that the review mentions Tom Veitch’s Literary Days in terms of Pop Art.  It also made me chuckle to have Kaplan piss all over Charles Olson.  I have written on Kulchur several times and I always come back to the fact that Kulchur as a magazine consistently denies its origins throughout the Lita Hornick years.  Read her memoir on Kulchur in The Little Magazine in America and it is not hard to understand why:  she hates and disrespects Marc Schleifer.  There seems to be a concerted effort to scrub him and his editorship from the record. 

The bad-mouthing of Olson by Kaplan is yet another example of this procedure.  Kulchur began as the critical arm of Yugen and LeRoi Jones idolized Olson and basically agreed to publish anything Olson produced.  Kulchur to some extent was created to give Olson a place to publish his unique brand of criticism.  Olson was a contributing editor to Kulchur from the start.  Olson oversaw the direction of the magazine and as I have argued on RealityStudio the eyes on the cover of Kulchur #1 are a reference to those of Olson as well as the idea of “the polis is eyes,” among other things like the critical eye and a jest that the mag will hear, speak and see no evil.  The first issue of Kulchur ends with an Olson punchline as masthead.  He is the mouthpiece of the magazine and breathes its purpose into being with this brief statement:  “(this is from Olson)  ‘reviews of the intellectual odor of our time.”  Funny then that Kaplan pooh-poohs all magazines that reek of the Big Man.

Kaplan’s review of C definitely erases Kulchur’s past.  It also looks into C’s future as a pivotal magazine for the next generation of poets, namely the Language Poets.  Kaplan’s review with all its talk of creating a new language could have come from a number of Bay Area mags from the 1970s.  There are any number of places a review like the one below can take you.  Like the magazines they analyze, such reviews are time machines:  They can take you back or thrust you forward.   After finishing reading Kaplan’s piece, where will you end up?

C, A Journal of Poetry:  No. 1-8, published monthly:  editors Ted Berrigan and others.

 

Cis different from other avant-garde poetry magazines because its editors couldn’t care less about the development of the line as a poet’s natural breath, as the inviolable unit of his natural speech – in short, the popular legacy of Williams, Creeley, Olson, et. al. to a new generation of poets.

The following lines by a young poet who appears often in these 8 issues should give us a glimpse of what C is all about:

 

                                                                O scarcely

                                                verge o strings    Where is a new

                                                                beg of morning matin?

                                                                                “yes” of the hand?

 

                                                delve sky against     Nude

                                                mandarin d’étoile

                                                A tour of slept Sleptl:  the pacific

                                                     the vine of orange of

                                                                           sommeil

 

                                                made of dawn!        Rape of you you. . . .

                                                o the autumn sand

 

We can call the voice of Joseph Cerevolo that of a lyric poet even though there is no identifiable emotion as the subject of this poem, there is no believed (or despised) party to whom the poet addresses himself; nor is there a recognizable personality as narrator.  Stripped, as much as possible, of usual meanings, words evoke lyric feelings and suggest new meanings by appearing in original juxtapositions and contexts.   These few lines reflect some of the ideals for which many poems in C strive:  surprise, abstraction, purity, lyric joy, and complete uniqueness of expression.

                In a magazine with the bent of a robust distrust of logical thought to convey poetic truth is natural, a distrust which, of course, opens the mind to surrealism.  Here again the magazine rejects popular surrealist influences, Neruda, and Lorca.  What we find in C is a more elegant, post-Breton French variety.  (I am using the term surreal more as a loose description than as a rigid classification.)  Generally, familiar distinctions reminiscent of quiet prose or casual, civilized conversation are used to surprise the reader, often humorously, and to communicate a feeling which I can only describe simply as “oddly mysterious”  because it covers so many poets.  The following illustrations are by Tony Towle and Ron Padgett, respectively:

 

                                                Exactly one, at a time of morning

                                                In which the edge of the hill

                                                Is going down, and I was close

                                                To loving you for it.

 

                                                This is a tale then.     Good.

                                                The forest is important,

                                                The Boar hunt, and the close

                                                Of the legend.

 

                                                When by turns the leaves would arrive

                                                With the next nice October,

                                                And the king was away from our throats.

 

*        *      *

                                From point A a wind is blowing to  point B

                                Which is here, where the pebble is only a mountain.

                                If truly heaven and earth are out there

                                Why is that man waving his arms around,

                                Gesturing to the word “lightening” written on the clouds

                                That surround and disguise his feet?

 

                                If you say the right word in New York City

                                Nothing will happen in New York City:

                                But out in the fabulous dry horror of the west

                                A beautiful girl name Sibyl will burst

                                In by the open window breathless

                                And settle for an imaginary glass of something.

                                But now her name is no longer Sibyl – it’s Herman,

                                Yearning for point B.

 

                                Dispatch this note to our hero at once.

 

The cliché, and other forms of commonplace speech, also is used to couch the poet’s “odd mysteriousness” and to satirize the American scene.  Used without restraint these commonplaces can become metaphorized into a fey poetic diction.  For example, the novel Literary Days, long sections of which have been anthologized in C, is written in a compendium of all the familiar styles of bad prose, from the comics to the ubiquitous imitators of Hemingway.  Tom Veitch has written a novel that might be categorized as Pop Art. 

                This magazine eschews the profound poem, and it is important that we understand why.  As an example of profound, one might point to a Levertov poem profoundly lyricizing man-woman love or, say, sections of an Olson poem profoundly advising a young poet how to manage his affairs.  The C  sensibility would consider it truthful for Shelley to distinguish the profound from the lighter aspects of his life; but, considering man’s present comic relationship to society that grows absurder by the hour, is it real nowadays to separate the profound from the campy?  Are they separable?  To the editors of C many profound poems written today seem pretentious or derivative.  For C a more honest way to be profound in the 20th century is the poet’s expression of his “odd mysteriousness,”  which is the tapping of his own consciousness.

                Many poems in C succeed in what they attempt.  Certain voices will strike the reader as intriguing and worthy of attention.  However, many poems left me with a feeling of emptiness, seeming more like language calisthenics than poems or irritatingly arbitrary when they communicated no strangeness or surprise.  Their campiness, sometimes, just isn’t funny.  But this lack of consistency, inevitable, I suppose, when contributors sharing similar aesthetic ideas have varied talents or are of different stages of development, poses no real threat to the magazine’s goal of valuable originality, provided, of course, it continues to publish enough good material.  However, a threat lies elsewhere.

                I imagine much of the non-academic poetry which has sprung up as a reaction to the dull imitations of Eliot and Auden strikes the editors of C  as being in turn either second-class Pound, Williams, or Ginsberg.  But is it possible that some of C’s Young Turks will in turn be trapped in the same way as some of the poets who realized that Williams was one of America’s great poets?  C  is unique in that it is the only young-poet, non-academic journal inspired by the ideas and work of John Ashbery, Kenneth Koch, and Frank O’Hara, the leaders of the New York School, as Don Allen has grouped them.  (Incidentially, there are a number of excellent contributions by these poets in C.)  While reading C, it was my feeling that a number of poems slip past the line of being inspired by the original and, to varying degrees, are close to being adaptations of, say, Ashbery’s style.  Granted that these poems may be interesting in themselves and that the talent of the poet may be such that it is sometimes impossible to distinguish between master and disciple, nevertheless, this path in the long run leads to the shadow of Ashbery and not his substance.

                A happy impression one gets in reading through any issue is that it is fairly successful as a fountain of youth.  There is a willingness to play with words to discover what they might do – i.e. represent simultaneous thoughts, to make absolutely wacky, unproducable plays, etc.  Even the occasional appearances of poets such as LeRoi Jones and Ed Sanders, who write in a different manner, is accounted for, I think, by what the editors consider original in their use of language.  In fact Cis a laboratory of language experiments that can be a source of ideas not only for the contributors but for the readers (assuming that many of them are other poets).  Even while in the process one becomes involved with a particular problem of what language can or can not do.  One might say that here language is “the thing itself” – rather than stance, line, natural objects, nature, one’s spouse, muses, the Bomb, America.  Indeed, the search for a new language becomes the search for one’s individuality.

                Mimeographed on 8 ½ X 14 paper, C has a tenement spun appearance and is too big to be put alongside your other “littles.”  If this dissuades you from bringing it home, let me add that C has two features (other than those I mentioned in this review) that will make it unique than most of the avant-garde poetry journals in your library.  They are:

1)      covers by artist Joe Brainard that are funny, sublime and beautiful.  (The covers merit a review by itself)

2)      no love letters to Charles Olson.

 

Allan Kaplan

Leroi Jones Gets The Concept

$
0
0
 
 
Historians rely on but distrust the eyewitness account, the contemporary opinion.  It is not that being there is not enough but instead that it is too much.  Taking part in an event as it is happening (particularly if it is a Happening) overwhelms not just the senses, but one’s sense of judgment.  Sometimes it seems better to deal with a contemporary photograph, audio tape or video divorced from contemporary commentary and judge for oneself, even though as we all know if picture is worth a 1000 words, most of them are lies and half-truths.
Yet sometimes a contemporary account, or in the case below a review, paints a picture of startling clarity and in the best of cases depicts the future.  Leroi Jones’ review of An Anthology of Chance Operations from Kulchur 13 does just that, it depicts and predicts the future.  As if Jones’ suggestion that jazz is every bit as experimental a performance as a Fluxus Happening did not cut rightly An Anthology of Chance Operations down to size, his prediction of the Anthology’s ultimate fate in the last paragraph is straight out of Nostradamus and just as devastating.
The later edition of the Anthology from 1970 is rare enough (and expensive at around $400), but the first edition, if you can find one, is truly precious (read this word in all its facets), much like the work depicted within.  Currently not a single copy is available online.  The last one I saw was in the rare book catalog of a well-known dealer in the solid four figures.  I would guess it sold rather rapidly to just the type of individual Jones predicted.
Here is Jones’ review in its entirety.  This is a fine example of the style of a Kulchur review, which is to say a typical review by Leroi Jones, since Jones’ critical voice is precisely how Kulchur sounds.
AN ANTHOLOGY OF CHANCE OPERATIONS, &c, &c, published by LaMonte Young and Jackson MacLow.
                Abstraction is too tenuous without the lessons contained in banality.  A line tends to be too amazing.  We seek simple immunity:  in art.  In art what is possessed is, exactly what should be given.  ABsTraCt art is too clean.  Its purity wears down the moral issue until everything in existence is purely for us, to lose among our fantasies of some dreadful hygienic soul.
                Language restores itself more quickly than any other energy.  Dick Higgins’ words impress us, finally, with the sterility of his mind, before we even know they are words.  But a painting is always there, more permanently fixed on a level of actual meaning.  How can a painting be abstract when we can pick it up and put it in a closet?
                Music has no such discipline.  It can not even be turned off.   (Write a poem after sitting under Cecil Taylor’s piano.)
                But Dada was a baptism of fire intothe 20th century.  It was not death it merely painted the signs warning everybody.  ABsTraCt paiting (Neue Sachlichkeit 2) warns painters, but already too late.  Like a man trying to arose you to tell you you’re dead.  And it has to do, usually, with time.  Now’s The Time, is a spiritual directive.  The chord of experience its image coaxes is definite.  Old fish stinks.  (Real that anyway you can.)  Altering history is a simple case of lying.  But believes in God so who should you feel guilty about when you do lie?
                                                                                                (Exactly!)
                Only march music is political.  Only posters can call for volunteers.  (Should a beatnik painter get social security?  Why?)  If everyone was a credit to the community could there still be art.  Athletes are certainly happier.
                How can a painting tell you people are vulgar (unless the painter has put a microphone in it, out of which comes the voice of Stanley Gould . . .) and if it did that it should be picketed, having traduced every viewer who has ever seen Donald O’Connor without being convinced it was art.
                Jackson MacLow is dull because he thinks you’re going to learn something from him.  I knew an old man once in Newark who could whistle with peas in his mouth.  Nobody ever called him hip.
                Franz Kline was not a great paint because of abstraction, but because he could paint.  The same reason why professional intellectuals are so lazy.  They don’t have to do anything:  “Watch Me Think!” they cry, before you beat them to death with your stick.
                It leans all the way over to this:  Is the man who tells me, “Jazz is a useless noise,” staging “an event,” or is he proposing some socio-cultural arrogance from way back behind the mask?  What we used to call Confidence.  And he thinks when the buildings begin to crumble he can somehow renege, and ask God to make everything like it was.  But what was it?
                DeKooning can tell you what was happening a few minutes ago.  And he’s still got the latest news.  If you can’t say More than that, then don’t do it at all.  No one needs to be shown a loyal group of apprentice intellectuals.  Everyone who has not been studying for the priesthood can tell you 20thcentury art is Weird.  I heard a cat turn Major Bowes out one night playing parts of Rites of Spring on a saxophone.  And nobody in this book would ever have thought of that.  But plainly a working man doesn’t expect the children to in the street everyday to tell him how groovy it is he’s got that gig.  Thank God everybody doesn’t show you their new dental work either.  I’ve seen teeth before, real and fake . . . but can you chew with them?  It’s like a man explaining each punch to his opponent.  The best way to do that would be to fight a girl.
                Cage is not responsible for any of this, unless you can say Fletcher Henderson was responsible for the Ipana Troubadors.
                Most of the events do not have surprise endings.  There are not enough characters in them either.  Most of the physical movement is written for people who can’t fight.  I want to put a dime in the jukebox and see George Brecht perform his event.  There is absolutely no one in New York named Malkie Safro.  Jackson MacLow can not type. 
                Richard Maxfield’s name has a sideways Essays over the Ri.  This is hipper than Hunter’s and 7-Up on the rocks.
                Dieter Rot has holes in a page.  Emmett Williams final learned to type and then typed too much.
                LaMonte Young is interesting because his events, the words, are poem like.  And you really don’t have to do what he says.   But read them, and listen to them.
                Earle Brown is a very good composer, but sound is his most convincing point, all this is vanity.  Ditto Christian Wolff.  James Waring is a dancer.
                So someone will spill a lot of coffee on the book, then one day sell it for a great deal of money, probably to someone who laughed at your beards.
 
                                                                                                                                                                L.J.


A Rose Is A Rose Is A Mexican Cross

$
0
0

I do not like broadsides.  Never have.  I must admit that I find the Oyez/Auerhahn Signature to Petition on Ten Pound Island Asked of My By Mr. Vincent Ferrini by Charles Olson very tempting.  Every summer I stop by Gloucester and drive around Fort Square, get out of the car and gaze at Ten Pound Island with my wife and breathe in the salt air.  In fact, I might buy it tomorrow.  I could use a bit of that air right about now.

But this is a moment of weakness.  I like posters and I love handbills, probably because they do something, as Olson would say they are of use.  Broadsides just hang there and look pretty.  Unless they do not, like the Ginsberg Who To Be Kind To, which is ugly as sin in my opinion.

The Olson broadside also stands out because it is just about the only Oyez first series broadside that is remotely interesting to me.  Bob Hawley managed to gather all the Bay Area related writers I do not care about.

Michael McClure - Two For Bruce Conner:  I can dig Conner, but McClure not so much.

Brother Antonius - The Rose of Solitude:  Brother Antonius and William Everson.  Never got into either although I find myself intensely interested by Waldport.

Josephine Miles - In Identity:  Madeline Gleason, Josephine Miles, and Helen Adam, the three fates of San Francisco, while they are spinning, measuring and cutting verse, I am sawing wood.

Robert Duncan - Wine:  I really want to drink deeply of his poetry, but like hard liquor I cannot stomach it.

Robert Creeley - Two Poems:  Despite faking it for Kyle, I am not the Creeley fan I proclaim to be.  I am actually more drawn to him as a publisher and editor.  I absolutely love Black Mountain Review, Divers Press and The New American Story Anthology.

David Meltzer - The Blackest Rose:  The interview with Meltzer in Mimeo Mimeo is the most interesting thing I have read by him.

Denise Levertov - City Psalm:  I am dedicating my summer to given her a fair shake.  I have showed her the hand for so long without really reading her that it is a personal embarrassment.

Gary Snyder - Hop, Skip and Jump:  I do not like being preached to, unless you do not take yourself seriously.  Good Ginsberg does not; Snyder always does.  If Snyder tries to be one of the guys, he fails.

William Bronk - The Cipher:  I honestly would not know this guy's work if I was wiping my ass with it.  Probably my loss because I read an essay recently on Bronk and his exclusion from Allen's New American Anthology that was very interesting and even made Bronk's poems so as well.  He is on the summer list with Levertov.

All these broadsides were commissioned by Hawley in 1964 and printed by Auerhahn Press in editions of 350.  There was all kinds of Hoyemesque (this is an official bibliographic term for small press frills and nonsense designed for generating some extra cents) BS involving complete set portfolios and Mrs. Hawley scrapbooking and hand made or mould made papers, which further turns me off to these broadsides.

The Rose of Solitude above was never folded as it was designed to be.  I have the feeling that if I was in the room with all these broadsides, I would be smitten and maybe even seduced.  The Olson broadside had me at hello.  I flipped though Lee Bartlett's biography of Everson and the story surrounding this poem happens to be one of great passion and desire, which I would not mind learning more about.  Put that book on the summer reading list as well.  It is getting to be a busy summer.  I am looking forward to seeing Ten Pound Island.

JB

The House that Roof Built

Anselm Hollo's Lover Man

$
0
0
In honor of our friend Anselm Hollo (1934-2013) we're reposting one of his less common books, Lover Man, published by Piero Heliczer's Dead Language Press in 1963. JB//KS

BROADSIDES

$
0
0
Here's Dinner, an appetizer from Zephyrus Image. I'll be talking about contemporary poetry broadsides at the POG InPrint Symposium this weekend (February 15-16) in Tucson. This occasion prompted me to open up my flat files and rediscover some choice prints, which I'll be posting here in the weeks to come.
--KS

Back in the Saddle Again

$
0
0

I am back from the Midwest and getting into the swing of things again.  Let's ease into it with a series of posts dedicated to a Midwest mimeo classic:  Douglas Blazek's Ole.  Ole as in hole (although Blazek seems to play with the Spanish when ever the mood suits him) ran for eight wonderful issues, along with an Ole Anthology.

My favorite issue without a doubt is Issue 7:  The Godzilla Review Issue of Small Press Publications, which provides a survey of roughly five years of small press production.  Blazek assigns his stable of writers - Buk, Marcus J. Grapes, Steve Richmond, William Wantling, Al Purdy, Brown Miller etc. as well as Blaz himself - to groups of titles.  Blazek selects plenty of presses listed in the Secret Locations, such as Jargon Society, Auerhahn, Oyez, Coyote, El Corno Emplumado, Poets Press, and Something Else Press, but there are also many publications by presses that missed the cut so to speak, ie presses between the two coasts and the more underground presses of New York and California:  the entire Cleveland Scene is well covered,  Toad Press in Oregon, Windfall Press, GRR Press, Vagrom Chapbooks, Swallow Press, Hors Commerce Press, Interim Press and Crank Press, Dustbooks, Quixote and on and on.  There are several presses and authors I have never heard of and seem to have flashed and burned soon after their review in Ole.

The Godzilla Issue is an incredible snapshot of the Small Press scene that is not as severely cropped as usual, the margins are given their due (even if they are often panned by Blazek and crew).  In addition, this selection of titles is viewed from a different perspective from that which most students of the scene have become accustomed.  Ole does not provide the New American Poetry POV.  The Meat School - Blazek, Buk, Grapes, Richmond,and Wantling - were late to the game and remained on the outside looking in and it makes for fascinating reading.  For example, Bukowski on Ginsberg's Empty Mirror or Zukofsky's A Test of Poetry (which reviews have recently been collected by City Lights) is to my taste, wonderful criticism.  The macho and misogyny of The Meat School are admittedly oppressive but I think this bluster also reveals an insecurity and lack of confidence that I find appealing.  They talk big and tough, but they remain unsure of themselves (particularly about their intelligence) and to a certain extent submissive to the larger scene.  They are not jocks, toughs or bullies really.  Clearly the Ginsbergs and Creeleys are the Prom Kings and Queens.  Blazek and the boys are the losers and outcasts with Buk as King of the Dorks.  Buk on Ginsberg's Empty Mirror is an prime example of this dynamic.  There is a reason Buk, not Steve Richmond, reviews Zukofsky and Ginsberg.

Until I get bored I will post a bunch of Ole related stuff to give a sense of this somewhat neglected mag.  It is pure mimeo in every sense of the word and deserved its day at the Big Dance at the Secret Location.  Cue up the music, Ole is about to take centerstage.

JB

Darryl and Goliath

$
0
0


It is true that Creeley and Ginsberg were the Andrew Clark and Claire Standish to the Meat School's various John Benders in the Breakfast Club that was New American Poetry, but when you get down to it Charles Olson was the Richard Vernon assigned all the poets their essays (see A Bibliography on America for Ed Dorn for example).  Olson was the headliner of the NAP anthology.  Ginsberg was the King of May, but Olson was the King of the Hill.  You saw it in the late issues of Kulchur and you see it in Ole; you cannot resist throwing a few rocks at Goliath.

levy, Darryl not David, took his shot in The Godzilla Issue.  This would seem somewhat ridiculous, or an example of delusion of grandeur, but, by 1967, levy, even in his mid-20s, had a major reputation in Midwest mimeo.  If Buk was Falstaff, larger than life and completely full of it, then levy was being groomed to be Prince Hal.  So it makes sense that levy of all poets would stand up to Maximus and give it his best shot in true levy fashion.

THE MAXIMUS POEMS -- Charles Olson, $2.50, Jargon-Cornith Books, c/o Eighth Street Book Shop, 17 W. 8 St., New York City, N.Y. 1001.

"It must come to pass that one cannot leave a work of art be it literature, painting or music, without having undergone some sort of inner transformation.  If this does not take place, the work has failed of its purpose so far as the beholder is concerned."
                                                                --Frederic Spiegelberg

If Spiegelberg's statement is correct then the above works (& the following) have certainly succeeded as works of art.  They have all moved me from slight nausea to severe cases of the dry heaves & from boredom to paralyzed apathy . . . the church built around minor concrete poet Charles Olson is totally out of proportion.  Olson worshippers will find that any literate psychopathotic can write as coherent as Olson & even cum up with sum gud lines on occasion. . .While I have trouble paying my grocery bill Olson gets paid to re-rite someone elses?  Charlie I think you lost yr bus ticket aft "call me a schmuck" & "the magyar letters."

JB

Blazek on Goodell

$
0
0
Larry, thanks for tuning in.  I made a note to possibly include Blazek's review of Cycles.  Here it is.  A great example of Blazek's critical form and style.  His editorials are excellent.

Cycles by Larry Goodell / Duende / Placitas, N.M. price?

Somewhere in his first poem Goodell sys while listening to a Tristano side that "he isn't hung up in the skill."  i wonder.  abt Tristano as well as Goodell - -  but since i'm not interested in Lennie at the moment let this pertain to Larry.

the mind only puts out so much energy.  doesn't make any difference if it puts out more than we can handle, more than what we know abt -- or less.  we have to work w/what it puts out; the best it can do depends on what & how much we put into it.

skill can be a condom to digging.  poets seem so hung-up on skill & if you ask em about it they say something to the effect that they have to -- that's what poetry is abt.  or if they don't use the word poetry they will use the word "art" -- & if they don't like the word skill they will supplement it with some approximation.

in Goodell's case i wd say that skill is a condom w/a pin hole in it.  also i wd say that this bk is a good feedbag for the mind.

JB

Hate Ashbery

$
0
0


Despite being household names, Olson and Ginsberg are two of the most misspelled poets in the canon.  Olson as Olsen you see everywhere from book reviews to academic journals to blog posts.  Given Allen Ginsberg's name recognition you would think people had his name down, but the hairy guru's name spells double trouble for his many readers and admirers.  Allan Ginsberg, Alan Ginsberg, Allen Ginsburg.  You get the idea.

John Ashbery's poems are well-known for being difficult to read and understand.  The same goes for his name.  Asbury, Ashbury, Ashberry.  The boys of Ole manage to misread Ashbery in almost every possible way.  I think this comes from pure ignorance, but maybe not the type you would think.  The Ole poets wear their anti-intellectualism on their sleeves but their mauling of Ashbery's name is not symbolic of their being ignorant of Ashbery in terms of awareness or understanding.  Instead, they choose to simply ignore him and, in fact, the entire New York School.  Rare is the mention of Frank O'Hara, James Schuyler, Kenneth Koch or Ashbery in the pages of Ole.  The same goes for Berrigan and Company.  I was surprised that the publications of C Press were not reviewed in The Godzilla Issue.  The inclusion of Angel Hair Books publications is the exception that proves the rule.  In fact, you will flip through Ole in vain for any mention of the big name NYC mimeos:  definitely no C, Fuck You or Floating Bear.  Minor nods to Kulchur and Angel Hair.

For the Ole poets, New York was the symbol of forced and flaccid Art and Intellectualism and nobody would represent that more than John Ashbery and, so it seems, the publications of C Press (I will have to dig deeper on this; I have to think Berrigan corresponded and interacted with Blazek on many levels.).  It also seems that the Ole crew sniffed out something rotten in with Sanders and Fuck You (note to dig deeper on this as well).  Maybe the stench of Artiness as represented by Freak Power.  The antidote prescribed by Ole for the poisonous influence of New York City could be the person and presses of Kirby Congdon.  Not surprisingly Congdon slipped through the cracks in the sidewalk of the Secret Location, but his Interim Books (started with Jay Socin) and the related Crank Books along with the little magazine Magazine (a six issue job not to be confused with Lewis Ellingham's two issue job) merit a close read (I am planning on turning to Magazine after Ole), particularly for Congdon's essays and editorials which closely read the Mimeo Scene.

JB

You're Fucked If You Do; You're Fucked If You Don't

$
0
0

For the most part, the guys of Ole have it ass backwards in their views on women.  In issue after issue, there are poems dicking around with rape imagery.  Not surprisingly, the Ole reviews treat women poets roughly.

I will start off with a Steve Osterlund review of Diane di Prima because it is out of character.

"SEVEN LOVE POEMS FROM THE MIDDLE LATIN  trans. by Diane di Prima / The Poet's Press / Box 951 / Poughkeepsie, N.Y.   $1.25

I'm prejudiced -- she's wonderful, and this book's as well-done as VARIOUS FABLES FROM VARIOUS  PLACES.  Beautiful, erotic air about it."

Buk on Kathleen Fraser is much more typical.

"CHANGE OF ADDRESS AND OTHER POEMS -- Kathleen Fraser, $1.50, Kayak Books, c/o Bindweed Press, 2808 Laguna St., San Francisco, California.

The light innuendo supposed to be tipped, flared, with doom and insight.  Old causations masked as New Reality.  Bunkum.  NEW YORKER stuff.  No wonder the world has gone to hell -- stick a knife in the average poet and he (she) will only hiccup.

The cure for generals is Art.  The cure for stupidity is Art.  The cure for asthma, Falling hair, near-sightedness, boils, hiccups is Art.

Art is a bottle of whisky, a ride down the Ganges, a good night's sleep, a white dog.  But where are you going to find it?

The lady poets have go to show me more than the dull comfortable agony of looking out of the window between a cup of coffee and the vacuum cleaner while poppa is out there getting machine-gunned to a time-card or pewked upon a a business conference.

I would dull the reader with excerpts except that the reader is dull enough already."

So go the Ole poets, lady poets do not fuck enough or just need a good fuck.  Unfortunately even those lady poets who fuck, do not seem to fuck right.

Here is Gerard Van Der Leun on Lenore Kandel.

"THE LOVE BOOK by Lenore Kandel / Stolen Paper Review / 55 Mountain View Mill Valley / Calif.  94941 / $1.00

THE LOVE BOOK, better known as 'the busted book', is neither erotic, illuminative, inspirational, enlightened, or poetic.  Its tone blares histronics that have little linguistic viruosity // writhing language jumping and spinning talking you into it // here, in this book, lacking.  Orlovsky:  'I don't wanna tell you about God, make ya holy or good, give ya beauty.  I wanna make ya cum'  // Ginsberg:  The tongue and cock and asshole are holy!' //

Kandel says fucking is god is fucking is divine is good.  //  Agreed.  But the question is what are you like in bed?  //  Themes and things in the poem center on the absolute cosmic geewhiz of it all. // Galactic strobelights fucking fucking fucking legs thighs bellies breadcrumbs bottles gorgons gods kamas and sutras meaty mouths on flesh cocking cunting fucking sucking going to and coming from inside outside pulling massive folds of ad hoc labia over the head and in frenzy disappearing  //  into air // thin air // shouting words typographic insistence on relevancy of all to all -- but nothing happens except print patterns on the retina fading.

Professing orgiastic freedom // But something held back // An unwillingness or inability to get down to it // to physical description that builds into something // that is physical in its movement // She writes:  'The lust of hermaphroditic deities doing/inconceivable things to each other. . ." // which reads like Kurtz's 'unspeakable sins' in 'Heart of Darkness' because if the things in the vision get inconceivable, that is the point where the poet has got to start conceiving, and tell, in detail, just what they are doing out there in the void.

But sometimes tenderness and things human appear out of the general jumble:  'at night   sometimes i see our bodies glow" // 'we are covered with each other my skin is the taste of you" //

Kandel is a better poet than these poems; has written things moving and true // But LOVE BOOK runs on the idea that saying makes it so // but it is the saying itself that must happen // be the thing // not a report after the fact // Must be union and loving // Not the stains on the sheets when the lovers have gone // elsewhere."

JB
Viewing all 163 articles
Browse latest View live