5.29.2005

- criticism, see also honesty, communal. sharp. feedback.

I got some very astute feedback this morning on a manuscript I’m working on: “unreadable”. So here’s some thoughts on bumping up against the formidable other: unreadable how? how is the difficulty, the impenetrable quality encountered? what happens when we refuse to enter the thicket? is the text conscious of its unreadability, or does it show signs of strain, struggle, duplicity? i.e., is this a faultline or secret of the text? if its difficulty is embodied consciously, towards what end does it point? i think the consciousness thing might be a red herring, but as artists, reading our own work, our friends work, writing out of and back into a community of desire, what else can we nurture in each other? that is a serious q for me. one more: if we know the author of this text, or identify with them, how do we experience (what comes up emotionally, intellectually) that failure or repulsion or difficulty – the experience of unreadability in a loved one? And how do we word it – to each other, ourselves, them? Hit me with yr best shots/ Fire a-wayyyyy!

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

okay, the dreams & aspirations entry gets lots of comment & yet no one touches the "unreadibility" one? that's weird. maybe no one aside from you & I contend with this, the "all drift" syndrome as I think we can call it...

personally, I am thinking a lot about this because I am saying to myself "this is unreadable" & why? what is different between the poems that I'm struggling with and another incomprehensible piece I've done & felt "worked" (whatever that means). does it lack heart? a punch? an unfamiliar stream? clarity in the chaos or as we just found out, sara & I, tonight, that chaosmos is a termed coined by james joyce (used by eco & deleuze & guattari) for "a composed chaos." all this time, I've been working at something I had no name for, then sara (& those other guys) beat me to it.

I'd say maybe we should sit down & you could give me some straight talk on these poems, you know, man-to-man. or maybe you could directly address the poems themselves, tell them to get their acts together 'cause no one's going to hold their little poemy hands out there in the real world...

11:22 PM  
Blogger Dylan Hock said...

I'm a sucker, I admit. I always give people the benefit of the doubt. There's a difference between work that suffers from lack of skill and presence, and there is work that suffers from being difficult, but, whereas I can easily differentiate between the two, I always give the difficult poems more leeway. I'm more apt to assume there's something I'm missing. It makes me think of Edmund Berrigan talking about how he read and read Olson, every time not quite getting it, and he continued to read and reread Olson (and many many other writers) and one day he just got it. I guess I'm saying, had I not hacked my way through the jungle, I would have never had a path to follow.

8:55 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

another small chapter in los dialecticas pobre