Between Page and Screen in class work

You’ll each be assigned one page or one poem so that the class will cumulatively give a reading of the whole book over the course of an hour. Even so, work with a partner on your poem so you can generate as many ideas as possible.

Keeping in mind that this is another experiment with what writing or poetry could look like if it exploits the capabilities of the digital, take a handful of minutes to think over:

  1. Why is this book titled “Between Page and Screen”?
  2. Go to the Oxford English Dictionary through the CU Libraries homepage; make a list of some etymologies of the words “page” and “screen”. Now read/interpret your assigned page or poem a) in relation to the title and b) in relation to the two etymologies.
Posted in Uncategorized

pdfs for Between Page and Screen

This link (thanks Gannon!) should give you pdfs of the entirety of Between Page and Screen (thanks authors!). Remember, you’ll need to print out the pdf in order to hold it up to the webcam in your computer (full directions for reading are here).

Posted in Uncategorized

conceptual writing small group work round 2!

How does “Alphabet” by Kaie Kellough (group 1), “Alphabet Aerobics” by Blackalicious (group 2), and “Free Verse” by LaTasha N. Nevada Diggs (group 3) engage with and/or react against any of the works of sound poetry, visual poetry, concrete poetry, conceptual poetry we’ve looked at so far in class?

Posted in Uncategorized

quotes from “Notes on Conceptualisms”

  1. Conceptual writing is allegorical–it is “a writing of its time, saying slant what cannot be said directly, usually because of overtly repressive political regimes or the sacred nature of the message. In this sense the allegory is dependent on its reader for completion…” (13)
  2. “Allegorical writing [particularly in the form of appropriated conceptual writing] does not aim to critique the culture industry from afar, but to mirror it directly. To do so, it uses the materials of the culture industry directly. This is akin to how readymade artworks critique high culture and obliterate the museum-made boundary between Art and Life. The critique is in the reframing. The critique of the critique is in the echoing.” (20)
  3. “Pure conceptualism negates the need for reading in the traditional textual sense–one does not need to “read” the work so much as think about the idea of the work. In this sense, pure conceptualisms’s readymade properties mirror the easy consumption/generation of text and the devaluation of reading in the larger culture.” (25)
  4. “Radical mimesis is radical artifice: there is nothing so artificial as an absolutely faithful realism.” (28)
  5. “In conceptual writing, writes Goldsmith…’what matters is the machine that drives the poem’s construction.’ Increasingly, that machine is now a literal machine. Moreover, as in search engine-based poetry, the procss of construction may be another machine. In this sense, both construction and constraint are informed by market needs and consumer inquires…” (31)
Posted in Uncategorized

small group work on The Humument

  1. Give us an interpretation of your four pages by drawing on ALL elements: text, visuals, page design (does Philips break the boundary between margin and text and if so, why? Is the text somehow uniquely broken up into, say, panes? or cartoon panels? What’s the significance of this?)
  2. What is phillips able to do in your assigned four pages by drawing over/painting over/treating/erasing a sourcetext rather than writing an original work? What do you think Philip’s stance is toward the notions of originality and plagiarism?

Group 1: pages 1-4
Group 2: pages 5-9
Group 3: pages 10-14
Group 4: pages 15-19
Group 5: pages 20-24
Group 6: pages 25-29

Posted in Uncategorized

quotes from Monday August 8th

A fellow poet has written of Ian Hamilton Finlay’s works on paper the following: “The point is to give the reader a shock not of recognition but of cognition, which is much harder and much more valuable.”

Poet Charles Olson on the typewriter and “projective verse”: Charles Olson’s “Projective Verse”: “It is the advantage of the typewriter that, due to its rigidity and its space precisions, it can, for a poet, indicate exactly the breath, the pauses, the suspensions even of syllables, the juxtapositions even of parts of phrases, which he intends.”

Poet Aram Saroyan on using the typewriter: I write on a typewriter, almost never in hand…and my machine – an obsolete red-top Royal Portable – is the biggest influence on my work. This red hood hold [sic] the mood, keeps my eye happy. The type-face is a standard pica; if it were another style I’d write (subtly) different poems. And when a ribbon gets dull my poems I’m sure change.”

Poet Dom Sylvester Houedard on using the typewriter: “my own typestracts (so named by edwin morgan) are all produced on a portable olivetti lettera 22 (olivetti himself/themselves show sofar a total non interest in this fact) there are 86 typeunits available on my machine for use w/2-colour or no ribbon – or with carbons of various colours – the maximum size surface w/out folding is abt 10″ diagonal – the ribbons may be of various ages – several ribbons may be used on a single typestract – inked-ribbon & manifold (carbon) can be combined on same typestract – pressures may be varied – overprints & semioverprints (1/2 back or 1/2 forward) are available – stencils may be cut & masks used – precise placing of the typestract units is possible thru spacebar & ratcheted-roller – or roller may be disengaged.”

Poet Ronald Johnson on using the typewriter: “As I am unable to think except on the typewriter, my poems have been, from the beginning, all 81/2″ x 11”. This is not only misunderstood by the printers, it is ignored. And if one should happen to bring it to their attention they say – do it yourself. So I have. I have begun to make my own letters and to think in ink.”

Poet and publisher Dick Higgins on Marshall McLuhan and the typewriter: “As McLuhan says, you can’t make the new medium do the old job. The information in a new poem can’t be the same as the information in an old poem…What interests me now is that new poetry isn’t going to be poetry for reading. It’s going to be for looking at…I mean book, print culture, is finished.”

Henri Chopin in 1969 on concrete poetry: “1968 was the year when man really appeared. Man who is the streets, HIS PROPERTY, for he alone makes it…Yes, 1968 saw this. And for all these reasons, I was, and am opposed to concrete poetry, which makes nothing concrete, because it is not active. It has never been in the streets, it has never known how to fight to save man’s conquests: the street which belongs to us, to carry the word elsewhere than the printing press. In fact, concrtete poetry has remained an intellectual matter. A pity.”

Jean-François Lyotard on postmodernism: “I define postmodern as incredulity toward metanarratives.”

Roland Barthes on the death of the author: “To give a text an Author” and assign a single, corresponding interpretation to it “is to impose a limit on that text.”

Posted in Uncategorized

Ian Hamilton Finlay small group work

GROUP 1: Wave/rock (and or all the different versions)

GROUP 2: Fisherman’s Cross

GROUP 3: A Patch for a RipTide: Sail

GROUP 4: Sail/Wave

GROUP 5: Star/Steer

GROUP 6: Poster Poem

Posted in Uncategorized