Blue Studios: Poetry and Its Cultural Work

MODERN AND CONTEMPORARY POETICS

SERIES EDITORS

Charles Bernstein

Hank Lazer

SERIES ADVISORY BOARD

Maria Damon

Rachel Blau DuPlessis

Alan Golding

Susan Howe

Nathaniel Mackey

Jerome McGann

Harryette Mullen

Aldon Nielsen

Marjorie Perloff

Joan Retallack

Ron Silliman

Jerry Ward

Blue Studios

Poetry and Its Cultural Work

RACHEL BLAU DUPLESSIS

THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA PRESS

Tuscaloosa

Copyright © 2006

The University of Alabama Press

Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487-0380

All rights reserved

Manufactured in the United States of America

Typeface: Minion

∞

The paper on which this book is printed meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

DuPlessis, Rachel Blau.

Blue studios : poetry and its cultural work / Rachel Blau DuPlessis.

p. cm. — (Modern and contemporary poetics)

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN-13: 978-0-8173-1508-5 (cloth : alk. paper)

 ISBN-10: 0-8173-1508-X (cloth: alk. paper)

ISBN-13: 978-0-8173-5321-6 (pbk. : alk. paper)

 ISBN-10: 0-8173-5321-6 (pbk. : alk. paper)

 e-ISBN 978-0-8173-8183-7

1. American poetry—20th century—History and criticism. 2. Feminism and literature—United States—History—20th century. 3. Poetry—Authorship—Sex differences—History—20th century. 4. Women and literature—United States—History—20th century. 5. American poetry—Women authors—History and criticism. 6. Feminist poetry, American—History and criticism. 7. Sex role in literature. I. Title. II. Series.

PS310.F45D87 2006

811'5093522—dc22

2005027020

Poetry is related to

music and cadence and therefore to the

force of events

—George Oppen

The handle of it was blue.

—Lorine Niedecker

Contents

Acknowledgments

Introduction

I. Attitudes and Practices

1. Reader, I married me: Becoming a Feminist Critic

2. f-words: An Essay on the Essay

3. Blue Studio: Gender Arcades

II. Marble Paper

4. Manifests

5. Marble Paper: Toward a Feminist History of Poetry

6. Propounding Modernist Maleness: How Pound Managed a Muse

III. Urrealism

7. Lorine Niedecker, the Anonymous: Gender, Class, Genre, and Resistances

8. The Gendered Marvelous: Barbara Guest, Surrealism, and Feminist Reception

9. Uncannily in the open: In Light of Oppen

IV. Migrated Into

10. On Drafts: A Memorandum of Understanding

11. Haibun: Draw your Draft

12. Inside the Middle of a Long Poem

Notes

References

Index

Acknowledgments

My deepest thanks go to Hank Lazer and Juliana Spahr—for the two probing nonanonymous readers' reports that helped me focus, cut, and mull this book as I was rewriting, remixing, and reconceptualizing it—and to Charles Bernstein for support. Dan Waterman, the Alabama editor, was terrific, both professional and adept. Joe Abbott was a stellar copy editor; Conna Clark, Philadelphia Museum, guided the choice of cover. My deepest institutional thanks go simultaneously to Temple University, for sabbaticals in both 2001-2 and 2004-5, and to the Pew Fellowship for Artists, for my 2002 grant (taken in 2004-5), which allowed me to complete this work, as well as to write poetry.

Most of these essays have been significantly revised for this volume. Many thanks to the following editors and publishers:

Reader, I married me: A Polygynous Memoir. In Changing Subjects: The Making of Feminist Literary Criticism, ed. Gayle Greene and Coppélia Kahn. New York: Routledge, 1993. Additional material from Circumscriptions: Assimilating T. S. Eliot's Sweeneys. In People of the Book: Thirty Scholars Reflect on Their Jewish Identity, ed. Jeffrey Rubin-Dorsky and Shelley Fisher Fishkin. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1996.

Lorine Niedecker, the Anonymous: Gender, Class, Genre, and Resistances. Kenyon Review 14, no. 2 (spring 1992), ed. Marilyn Hacker; repr. in Lorine Niedecker: Woman and Poet, ed. Jenny Penberthy. Orono, ME: National Poetry Foundation, 1996. Unpublished Lorine Niedecker material is cited with the generous permission of the late Cid Corman, her then literary executor; an unpublished LN letter by the kind permission of The Archive for New Poetry, Mandeville Department of Special Collections, University of California, San Diego; a letter by Carl Rakosi, courtesy of the late Carl Rakosi and The Archive for New Poetry.

On Drafts: A Memorandum of Understanding. TO: 1, no. 1 (July 1992), ed. Andrew Mossin and Seth Fretchie; repr. in Onward: Contemporary Poetry and Poetics, ed. Peter Baker. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 1996.

The Gendered Marvelous: Barbara Guest, Surrealism, and Feminist Reception. In The Scene of My Selves: New Work on New York School Poets, ed. Terence Diggory and Stephen Paul Miller. Orono, ME: National Poetry Foundation, 2001.

"f-words: An Essay on the Essay." American Literature 68, no. 1 (March 1996), ed. Sharon O'Brien. Special issue on contemporary writing in the United States.

Manifests. In Poetry, Community, Movement, ed. Jonathan Monroe, special issue, Diacritics 26, no. 3 (fall-winter 1996).

Haibun: Draw your / Draft. Sulfur 42 (April 1998), ed. Clayton Eshleman; repr. in H.D. and Poets After, ed. Donna Krolik Hollenberg. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 2000.

Marble Paper: Toward a Feminist History of Poetry. Modern Language Quarterly 65, no. 1 (March 2004). Three people have given this essay interested support: Marshall Brown, Jeanne Heuving, and Jonathan Culler.

Blue Studio: Gender Arcades. Open Letter (Canada), 11th ser., no. 4 (spring 2002), ed. Louis Cabri and Nicole Markotic. With many thanks to Barbara Cole as interlocutor.

'Uncannily in the open': In Light of Oppen. Delivered October 2003 at the University of California, San Diego, for the Roy Harvey Pearce Archive for New Poetry Prize lecture. Excerpts delivered at the Modernist Studies Association, October 2003. An excerpt appears in Poetry Project Newsletter 201 (December/January 2004-5). The essay includes material from The Topos of the ‘Thing': Some Thoughts on ‘Objectivist' Poetics. In The Idea and the Thing in Modernist American Poetry, ed. Cristina Giorcelli. Palermo: Renzo e Rean Mazzone Editori, 2001.

Propounding Modernist Maleness: How Pound Managed a Muse. Modernism/Modernity 9, no. 3 (2002). With thanks to Cassandra Laity, editor.

Some material in the introduction from Statement for PORES. PORES 2 (October 2003). Online journal [email protected]/2/index.htm (accessed June 17, 2005).

Inside the Middle of a Long Poem, delivered at the Craft, Critique, Culture conference, University of Iowa, March 29, 2003.

Introduction

Blue means freshened, old-fashioned blueing in wash water; blue sky rounding from the horizon; blue evokes an ideal, like the famous Azure of symbolist poetics; blue is intense, the color of batik. Sometimes blue means moody, depressed, forsaken. A Blue Studio is a pensive work site where a new world is hoped and an old can interrupt this hope. Thus it is a place of conflict and cross motives. Blue Studio is particularly a metaphor for working through negativity, an idea that threads through this book. Most of the poets and works taken up here write from a horizon of hope—political hope, cultural hope, a sense of changed relations to the world—yet many also move into that space from a sense of desperation and desolation. This book creates a blue space for thinking about the terrain to traverse while watching a horizon for change. Blue Studios proposes cultural work that poetry does and could do and some work for a poet-critic, facing a practice involved with such a vulnerable mix of desolation and hope. Thus a Blue Studio takes its cue from Adorno, who rejects the purely lamenting subject and at the same time accepts that there is no longer beauty or consolation except in the gaze falling on horror, withstanding it, and in unalleviated consciousness of negativity holding fast to the possibility of what is better (Adorno 1974, 16, 25).

I started blue—as a Blau. This onomastic word offered me a talismanic color, and insofar as adults have such colors, it remains one. These essays negotiate a border between patriarchal culture and postpatriarchal culture—a utopian blueness in which the blue that is for boys crosses with my family name of origin.¹ But I am torquing the male-coded blue in my processing of its cultural claims. During the twentieth century our families were, our cultures were, our nations were in considerable flux around gender and power. And this remains true in the twenty-first. Under the regimes of heresy hunting, war economies, fundamentalist enormities of modernity and antimodernity, Woman is again deployed as a weapon against women (and often against men), a figure trundled back into her iconic position as controlled, unthinking, compliant, outside of history. Culturally and socially we are still knotted, loosely or tightly, into the patriarchal, and yet we hold a blue sign from the analytic formations of gender struggle and op-positional poetics, blue threads in that labyrinth (Hunt 1990, 197).

This book discusses ways gender, poetry, and poetics intersect in the cultural work of one poet-critic. My focus on gender is more than a simple critical preference. Gender is both a sociohistorical phenomenon in the formation of subjectivity and social status and a set of discourses and modes central to poetry as a practice. Thus gender readings are central to sociopoesis, or the analysis of poetry by helixed social and aesthetic concerns. Gender operates here in the narratives of becoming a critic and of becoming a poet; gender is at work in mentor and influence relations, in the production of poetry, in choices of genre (essay and long poem). To analyze institutions of poetic practice like the muse, to scrutinize manifestoes, to construct historical and theoretical observations on specific poets, to evaluate poetics and movements, gender is the focus.

In The H.D. Book Robert Duncan recalls "Kandinsky in Concerning the Spiritual in Art speaks theosophically as well as psychologically when he tells us that in the color blue ‘We feel a call to the infinite, a desire for purity and transcendence. Blue is the typical heavenly color; the ultimate feeling it creates is one of rest' (Duncan 1983, 49). But I want a blue of restless yearning, not rest; of earth, not heaven"; of lucidity but not purity. Nonetheless, the emancipation of possibility is never limited by strict material conditions or political choices narrowly construed; there is a remainder of emotion, arousal, the sharp shift of realms. How to calibrate the political meanings and contributions of creative practices?² Sometimes events occur for reasons far beyond reason or self-interest; it is in this area of evocative signification that languages of poetry exfoliate.³ In his magisterial H.D. Book that is a model in so much—in essay mode, in thinking through a full modernism, in trying to understand the gender struggles for cultural authority of the moderns and their political rage and yearning—Duncan has a transcendent approach to female figures. He deplores the fact that many male writers have difficulty acknowledging the Poetess (he uses this word positively), the Prophetess, the Great Mother; he is motivated to reverse the denial of female power by his sometime assent to Jungian soul-making. Duncan is subtle in his hypersaturated meditations: he comprehends perfectly how culture has difficulty with women seeking mastery, with women producing excess. Holding my suspicion of his transhistorical moments at bay, I want to acknowledge how much Duncan's passionate example of thinking in essays has affected this work.

For this scrutiny of culture and social life inside the language of poetry, let me borrow H.D.'s word spectrum-blue, a color that is a phantom, an image, and the blue light from prismatic diffusion (H.D. 1998a, 20). This is a sense of aura generated when material and ideal practices confront each other: material mystery. The presences and energies we feel are our struggling selves projected despite the inhumanities in which our culture is encouraged, despite the complex of controlling institutions that encourage plunder in the name of profit and consuming in the name of a hidden panic. The presences and energies are the deaths we walk upon, as we live marched and herded into what Erica Hunt has called the ongoing New War (Hunt 1990, 198). But blue is also the horizon of hope and resistance: in Hunt's words, an oppositional poetics of speculative and liberatory communities to which feminist thought is central (Hunt 1990, 197, 202).

In this book, as in The Pink Guitar: Writing as Feminist Practice, the essay is a method of writing otherhow rooted in cultural and political investigation and in resistance. The postpatriarchal essay offers a method of thought and an ethical attitude, not simply a style or a rhetorical choice. It is a method of the passionate, curious, multiple-vectored, personable, and invested discussion, as if a person thinking were simply talking in the studio of speculation, grief, and utopia. Essays can break the normalizing dichotomy between discursive and imaginative writing, between the analytic and the creative. In Teresa de Lauretis's words, this mix offers a view from ‘elsewhere' (De Lauretis 1987, 25). In a recent anthology of feminist hopes for the future published in millennial 2000, Catherine Belsey calls for precisely the kind of writing as a feminist that has been, for many decades, practiced, precisely and decidedly, in work by Joan Retallack, for instance, by Kathleen Fraser, Carla Harryman, Anne Waldman, Caroline Bergvall or myself, and by other writers of gender-inflected essays such as Lyn Hejinian, Leslie Scalapino, and Susan Howe, not to speak of gender thinking by Charles Bernstein, Peter Middleton, and others—dialogic writing, laying bare the device, playful-intense, moving into different registers, offering pluralities of readings, asking unanswerable questions, frame-breaking, resisting grand theory, yet philosophical. Belsey closes her call with a Lacanian utopian flourish, proposing that mastery proffered and then withheld, truth glimpsed and yet elusive, might make feminist writing an object of desire, both as text and as politics (Belsey 2000, 160-61). Well, we can hope. In her call for an engaged political-aesthetic-feminist writing that already exists, she could not have better illustrated the gap between the worlds of poetics and the worlds of feminist theory. Blue Studios throws itself into (or perhaps across) that gap. Here I speak as a poet-critic with an interest in creating a pensive, not an authoritative, space, one not only theoretical nor only practical but a thinking-in-writing with the goal of attentiveness to material mystery. My investment in the essay parallels my interest in an ethical dimension for writing. The essay as mode of thinking produces a utopian blueness because it invents an intersubjective relation between reader and text, between writer and reader, between author and evidence, between analysis and need, between theorizing and praxis. A book should be porous; it should have enough air and space, enough blue air, so that whoever enters it can breathe.

The book Blue Studios is a reflection, if inadequate, of a displacement and estrangement of cultural habits under the long, self-complicating (and perhaps bluish) messianic light of which Theodor Adorno speaks in Minima Moralia: Reflections from Damaged Life: Perspectives must be fashioned that displace and estrange the world, reveal it to be, with its rifts and crevices, as indigent and distorted as it will appear one day in the messianic light (Adorno 1974, 247). This transformative perspective is secular; it involves both social justice and a sense of cultural intricacy; it is skeptical and never fulfilled—on principle. In the works I talk about here poetry and poetics are not only literary and aesthetic, not only institutional practices or events in language, but events in consciousness, in collective understanding. Thus the interest of poetry as a writing practice that enters evocative realms in ways both beyond conventional reason and beyond fixity of identified message. We do not know how people might be inspired via the cultural life of fantasy to what Judith Butler calls resignification of social bonds, but in a blue studio this is some cultural work that poetry may do (Butler 2004, 216). This book probes the perspectives of curiosity and practice that reveal the world to be a tiny bit hopeful amid depredation. This book is backlit by almost hopeless hope.

Talismanic blue is conventionally a color of haunting. I feel like the ghost of the future. Under one rubric that I chose and that historically chose me—the rubric of feminism—the whole of culture and cultural products would have to be reconceptualized. We have known that, and acted on it, for a longish time, but it has not yet been enough. The world is riddled by fundamentalisms of several varieties, many religiously based, our own U.S. homegrown kinds and those of others; central to these is the strong-arm mandate to control women physically, intellectually, and ideologically, even more so than the mandate to control other men. Thus it is vital to declare that the secular entrance of women in society, with coequal political, cultural, and legal stakes and coeval temporalities, is a test for modernization and modernity. Possibly also for modernism as a cultural movement.

Like its companion, The Pink Guitar, this work is constituted to resist, in Steve Evans's words, an avant-garde without women, and a poetics without poetry, as well as resisting oversimplified notions of what gender analysis does in general, and around poetry in particular (Evans 2001, ii). Poetry as a mode of practice thus has a large, world-historical responsibility as posing a further question and as embodying questioning. Art is thinking by the invention of forms in such a way that sometimes the possibility is concretized that the world could be other than it is (Adorno 1997, 138). Poetry is seen here as a theorizing practice, a practice of thinking, and as a commitment to the thought that emerges in the subtle concreteness of segmented, saturated language. Poetry is not argument or image exclusively but an approach to knowing that dissolves into a variety of sensations or touches multiple scales of feeling. Sometimes poetry is a practice inside ideology that can be positioned as a commentary on (or a scrambling of) some of ideology's effects; thus Adorno's 1957 essay On Lyric Poetry and Society serves as ground bass of this book (Adorno 1991). This sense of an elsewhere and an otherhow in some poetic texts seems to be Maurice Blanchot's point when he says, Philosophy, which puts everything into question, is tripped up by poetry, which is the question that eludes it (Blanchot 1986, 63). Most of the poets I have chosen to discuss here rest on a cusp between materialist practices and a horizon that one used to call ideal. But it is more appropriate, if ineffable, to say that they manifest to philosophy the question that eludes it. These poets at one and the same time honor the liberatory hopes implicit in being a historical subject and register the delights and pressures that come from a unique and exacerbated sense of linguistic nuance.

A number of people have spoken about the hypersaturated means of poetry to convey sociolinguistic intricacy and connection—for instance, Louis Zukofsky in A Test of Poetry. Poetry is not, nor should it be, a mode of propaganda, but it is part of ideological and discursive practices, and it offers information, conviction, knowledge. And these particularly in form and texture. Zukofsky worked with and through this knife-edge balancing act around the social meanings of the poetic act and the forms of a poetic text, making a helix of aesthetic and social conviction. One learns about a poet's opinions and the cultural forces at play in poems in a variety of ways deep inside the texture of the poem, not only from the statements the poem overtly makes. Subtlety, intricacy, and pleasures of language are ways of constructing poetic information, including about the social.

What is any poetry of negativity? And who are those poets? These poets use language but are wary of its effects. They each trouble normal poetry—its themes, its conventions, its uplift. They manifest an intense intelligence within language. They create syntactic, vocabularistic, modal trouble because they have looked into some political and ethical abyss. We can call this abyss the long twentieth century. In response to all this, and the vast ethical and species questions it raises, we have the bits of justice and hope often compromised, the struggles for social fairness and just distribution. However, poets like George Oppen do not write directly in a rousing, inspirational fashion about social claims; rather they sidle and dart, so that one has conscience and consciousness startled by their indirection, as if in a vast afterimage raised by their poetry. This is a peculiar argument about indirection and implication perhaps, and it is related to an attitude about ego or subjectivity. A strange sense of anonymity, of disappearing into the necessity for poesis attends these poets, and it is a more desperate and intransigent stance than that of a Dante, or Eliot, whose impersonality is backed up by ideologies of redemption. Some of the poets discussed here are agnostic about redemption. Or any redemptive-ness. This poetry of negativity seems the poetry demanded by our conditions of existence. Poetry of negativity has the effect of doing away with what we thought of as scales or orders of value. Thus it is ideology critique. Further, with Negative Capability—Keats's enormously useful idea (in a letter of December 1817)—the poets of negativity can see, feel, internalize, and articulate both sides of a dialectic at once, without reaching after transcendence or synthesis (Keats 2002, 60). But they are most rich in suspicion, skepticism, investigation of the taken-for-granted, a resistance to category.

In The Constructivist Moment: From Material Text to Cultural Poetics, Barrett Watten reassesses and repositions the utopian agency (social building, future vision) of avant-garde movements, particularly putting in play Soviet constructivists rather than currently more familiar avant-garde sectors—Italian futurists, French surrealists, German dadaists—as privileged bearers of a link between radical form and political insurgency. In Negative Examples: Theories of Negativity in the Avant-Garde, Watten locates moments when rupture, refusal, or resistance gives rise to a horizon of possibility (Watten 2003, xx, xxi, 192). This sense of negativity helps frame what Blue Studios puts forth. Blue Studios wants to make a claim for poetry as a rhetorical form intricately tied up with such a horizon. Ethical yearning. And ethical urgency. That is, poetry as a practice, as a choice (I am not talking about career) is a version of Adorno's only responsible course when he remarks that the only responsible course is to deny oneself the ideological misuse of one's own existence (Adorno 1974, 27).

However, if poetry and the poetic are going to help provide a horizon of possibility, then one central feature of poetry and the poetic must be brought up to scrutiny and (fundamentally) altered. I mean the general gender narratives of poetry. These are not separable, contingent, or derisory but have been vital to the historical practices of poetry. This is a curiosity to me, and Blue Studios plays out my bafflement in a number of ways. Furthermore, the term poetic has often been privileged, as if it automatically meant high-mindedness and superiority, as well as automatic critiques of various kinds. From my perspective, however, the sheer claim of the poetic does not necessarily generate any critique of anything, certainly not of gender and sexual assumptions that have long been part of the social and formal aspects of poetry as an institution.

How have poetry and some of its institutions gotten so linked to gender commonplaces, and how can one unlink them? Certain gender materials are hardly a necessary part of a mode of writing that might be described as based simply in segmentivity, the practice of writing in lines and gaps, and in hypersaturations of verbal plenitude, signaled by Keats's curious 'load every rift' of your subject with ore (Keats 2002, 464). I do not mean to be disingenuous about poetry and its continuing topoi, nor am I the police, but Blue Studios wants to help re-envision the poetic as something genuinely critical and rejecting of gender reductiveness. This is accomplished not to moot certain works but to bring their mechanisms up to scrutiny, to investigate deep apparatuses of poesis.

Looking at art history in Differencing the Canon, Griselda Pollock articulates her motivation as feminist desire: not only to do history differently but to tell tales in such a way as to make a difference in the totality of the spaces we call knowledge (Pollock 1999, xvi). For Blue Studios there is no way to be postfeminist. Indeed, Denise Riley argues that such a position is simply impossible: For as long as the sexes are socially distinguished, ‘women' will be nominated in their apartness, so that sexual division will always be liable to conflation with some fundamental ontological sexual difference. So feminism, the reaction to this state of affairs, cannot be merely transitional, and a true post-feminism can never arrive (Riley 1988, 111). What perpetual investigative feminism might mean is taken up in several of the essays.

This book is divided into four parts. In Attitudes and Practices two intertwined questions are raised: what a feminist, or gender-inflected, reading of cultural texts involves, and how this feminist curiosity emerged in one poet critic—for I is cast as a character in this text.⁴ To postulate the psychosocial importance of a feminist attitude to poetry—in its thought, its subject positions, and its practices—offers some perspective on the cultural tasks that have been begun in one recent century, to be continued in the next. This is not an insistence on feminist production (and especially not a demand for political and administrative tests for artworks) but a desire to sustain feminist reception.

To challenge commonplaces of gender, feminism has postulated at least one new social subject entering culture and the necessity for a new realm of critical practices. Often this new social subject has to probe the contested and vulnerable realm of the feminine, possibly to reclaim it, to reinterpret it, to debate it and extend it into heterodoxy or feminist realignments. A somewhat suspicious negotiation with and translation of the feminine is visible in a number of these essays. A claim of a new symbolic order of heterogeneity is Luce Irigaray's proposition, given her critique of oedipality, gender binaries, and the power asymmetries implied in a theory of phallic Logos. She proposes a heterodox subjectivity and writing practices whose elliptical, seductive, riddling and riddled inventiveness speak from that subjectivity (Irigaray [1974] 1985, 133-46). This hybrid, critical, and politicized subject desires amphibious modes of writing that no longer formulate in authoritarian, universalistic fashion but modes that investigate and return to complications, that enact provisionality, slippage, skepticism, and the randonné. By raising the question of the essay and its interesting poetics, this section expresses a desire for emotionally adequate forms, rhetorics, or, really, cultural practices and subjectivities that embody ethical attitudes deep within writing.

The first three essays are followed by a section called Marble Paper, elaborating for poetry Pollock's project of entering the canonical differently, an exploration of feminist desire in the writing of [poetry's] histories (Pollock 1999, xviii). Poetry often depends on the projection, dressing, and consumption of female figures. Thus I am interested in examination and destabilization of long-lasting mythoi of gender. Gender structures of feeling exist on a very deep level. This is why neither formal/aesthetic nor only the-matic/imagistic rupture is enough—the rupture must reach into the places where ideology is stored (content and form helixed together) and to institutions of reception, including reader pleasure. This section offers some reading activities (methods, even) scrutinizing influential works in poetics as well as two well-known poems by Wordsworth and Pound. Marble Paper is a section about the work of cultural production and reproduction, the work undertaken within the apparatus of poesis. The institutions of poetry (poem construction, dissemination, reception, self-production within career, making of poetics) all demand work. And gender intersects with this work; gender is one of the studios in which poetry is made.

All the poets discussed in the third section of the book, Urrealism, would probably make the bridge between matters thought aesthetic and matters thought social that George Oppen summarized in a late aphorism:

Poetry is related to

music and cadence and therefore to the

force of events.

(Oppen 2003, 189)

It might also be written under the sign of Bertolt Brecht's question. Acknowledging that it is rather more straightforward to engage in socially inflected readings of novels, he asks, But what about realism in lyric poetry?—or perhaps what's with the realism of lyric poetry—this Yiddish inflection challenges poetry, as the other inflection challenged critics to consider poetry in a materialist theory (Bloch et al. 1977, 70; see also Kaufman 2002, 60-61; Ross 1988, 11). Despite what the word realism has meant for fiction, despite the mannered and melodramatic turns of realism, its sometimes stultifying conventions and tics, its ideologically controlled endings, so discerningly criticized by Joan Retallack as unnatural realisms, I would think in its ur or primary form, a deeply realist sensibility emerges in these poets, though of course differently in each (Retallack 2003, 42).⁵ This insistence on realism draws on Lyn Hejinian's extended metonymic argument linking the terms ontology, introspection, description, scrutiny, and strangeness: "When the term realism is applied to poetry, it is apt to upset our sense of reality (Hejinian 2000, 158). The writers on whom I have focused, then, claim to be, in one way or another, realists inside poetry; all interpret that commitment critically, and all thereby upset our sense of reality: Guest's fair realism answers surrealism; H.D.'s spiritual realism answers conventional materialist realism. Niedecker worked toward a fusion of consciousness and actualness, a poetics of fusion based on interior and exterior realism (Oppen 1990, 290). Material mystery needs again to be evoked in Oppen's somewhat ironic simple realism (Oppen 1990, 410). His poetry is compounded of a sense of Being (or the marvel of the real), a materialist ethics of sincerity and encounter, a meditative practice at once gnomic and lucid built of assertions and negations, in a restlessly dialectical rhetoric of negativity and anti-instrumentalism (Oppen 1990, 410, 254; Woods 2002, 233; Weinberger, in Oppen 2002, x; Nicholls, in DuPlessis and Quartermain 1999, 251, 244). These writers might be joined by a sense of the thereness of the world and a mix of awe, pleasure and starkness that I associate with Adorno's evocative Images say: ‘Behold'—a crystalline deictic formulation that stirs our attention even given its difficulties for poetry and for thought (Thereness" from Hejinian 2000, 158; Adorno 1997, 168).

In discussing these poets I mix rubrics both formal and social: sound, the line, genre, and structure mingle with ethics, subjectivity, and social location. To speak of feeling and its range is also part of the real. One essaying principle under which these essays were constructed is the sign of affective reading (McCaffery 2001, 42). This practice does not aim to be unsystematic or inaccurate, of course, but offers interpretations where one is carried along or set down, put in motion or at rest, shaken or calmed, according to the velocity of this or that part [of a text] (McCaffery 2001, 42; citing Deleuze on Spinoza).

I chose these poets because there is something mysterious and unresolvable about their practices. These poets work in the studio of austere hermetic readable urgency, a notion that seems to me crucial for a twenty-first-century poetics (DuPlessis 2004, 156). The awe that this hermetic urgency creates is the surplus, remainder, mode of proceeding assimilable neither to meaning as sheer paraphrase nor to agency as resolvable intention. These poets work the between—between vision and the real, between a spiritual dimension and a material(ist) one—a between that one might imagine as unstable, constantly under construction, difficult to sustain. To hedge my choices of poets (not really to defend them), Maurice Blanchot's aphorism about René Char is suggestive. Blanchot writes, R. C. is so much a poet that after him poetry shines like a fact, but he is such a poet that after this fact of poetry all facts become questions and even poetic questions (Blanchot 1986, 63). This could be said of the poets whom I discuss.

Art should provide consciousness with a critical example (O'Connor, in Adorno 2000, 281). But this means something very particular and careful about art. In his essay Commitment Adorno proposes that an artist should not produce straightforward political art, or art of commitment, but understand, rather, that the political has migrated into all art and work with those facts and their implications (Adorno 1992, 93). At this world moment (for many years, but acutely after the legal coup of 2000 in the United States and the fictive mandate of 2004), I feel precisely migrated into. The fourth section of this book, Migrated Into, takes up Drafts, the project in the long poem on which I have been engaged for just about twenty years. Part of the cultural work of a poet-critic is, precisely, writing poetry—a poetry thinking about the real; to cite Ron Silliman: It is the moment at which the real generates new forms that the real itself becomes visible (Silliman 1985, 34). Any extensive project demands to have its pulse taken, so these essays map versions of this project's purposes sometimes in relation to two of its precursors—H.D. and Pound. The three essays examine, from an author's point of view, what I had gotten, and continue to get, enmeshed in. Or—what has entered me and come through me. Drafts is influenced by objectivist arguments and propositions about reality. The image is encountered, not found (as Oppen said). The and a are words worth investigating, as suggestive and as staggering in their implications as myth (a proposition vital for Zukofsky). Materiality is nonetheless filled with sparks of our awe (which recalls Niedecker and Charles Reznikoff).

Indeed, by critique, suspicion, skepticism, and cura—significant care for language and choices—poetry can exemplify what it is we really want. Among other things, we want historical depth; critique of convention; scrupulous, moving, and invested language; poems saturated with a generous understanding of other practitioners. We want work and genres from the past treated at one and the same time with respect and with effervescent inspection. We want a sense of our social and aesthetic space—and the vertiginous astonishment of being here. Poetry can help tell us what we want and what we know: we want to know our own complexity and our own possibility. It can tell us what we might mourn and how we need to continue to examine systems and shards.

In this situation, as in so many others, I remember with attentiveness the poetry and example of George Oppen. His passion to confront circumstances and historical travail with scrupulous innovation and intransigent understanding offers one model of a struggle with language and time. He wanted to look, to see what was out there and to evaluate its damage and contradictions, saying in a pared-down, intense language not what was easy or right or neat or consoling but what he felt and thought when all the platitudes and banalities were stripped away. It is the residue of vision, the residue of hope when all due skepticisms and judgments have occurred. He called it the real, the real that we confront (Oppen 2002, 202).

I

Attitudes and Practices

1

Reader, I married me

Becoming a Feminist Critic

Doing This in the First Place

No innocence in the autobiographical. What with its questions of saying I and the issue what I and how that I negotiates with various selves; and the question how much (a lot) is unsaid or repressed. With resistance to the cheerful myths of disclosure; with suspicion of narrative in the first place, and no self-justifying memories to legitimate me rather than anyone else. If I cull my journals from the eager, pressured past, that self with its experiences is postulated as the authentic one, and this one as the processor of that truth. Which is not true. Finally, don't much like to take some, or any, me as exemplary, which is, after all, one of the necessary casts of an autobiographical essay.

Yet it remains true that feminist criticism exists. That it came from the women's movement and is in a continual constructive dialogue with both that movement and others for social justice. That academic fields were thereby overturned, remade (though not, of course, exclusively by feminism); that a maenadic pleasure sometimes accompanied; that professional careers were on the line, and—that some we accomplished this. We invented and sustained a major intellectual renaissance—possibly even a paradigm shift—in the past twenty-odd [now thirty-odd] years.¹ It would be irresponsible never to speak about this. Indeed, I hope many more people do. This is a historical exercise, not a confessional one.

The I implicated here is very precise yet more than half unspeakable. Its descriptors are not mere political trading chips. They are vectors, interlocked with energy, joy, imbalance, determination, depression, themselves not free-floating emotions but situated and socially