the bleed 0.1

0.1 thebleed vol. one, issue one - June 2011 Featuring: Selections from Eric Goddard-Scovel’s

LINES

Televispo by Nico Vassilakis

Five from Mike Cannell Five from

Staunch by Sean Burn

Carlyle Baker

Five Pieces from

Some Speartips, by Zachary Bos

One from

Aysegül Tözeren

Three Lexical Works from Four from

John M. Bennett

Bernd Reichert

Three from

Andrew Topel

How the Poem Is Born by Peter Ciccariello

Anchor What, by Vernon Frazer

Two from

Márton Koppány

The Shape of Poems, by Rosaire Appel

Song of Solomon by Amanda Earl Plus

On a Letter Sufficient for Visual Poetry,

an essay by Iain Macdonald Matheson

Published by Avantexte Press Oakland, CA For more visual and experimental poetry, visit our website at Avantexte.com.

Editors in Chief Mara Patricia Hernandez & John Moore Williams Cover & Interior Design by John Moore Williams Special Thanks Go to Our talented and generous contributors.

an publication

my year in the bleed john moore williams

It is a space that disappears to allow something else to appear.

I imagine every would-be editor discovers these things somewhere along the line:

1. that the world is much larger, and more full of

fearlessly creative souls than you’d ever imagined;

2. that bringing the work to light takes much more work than you’d expected;

3. that there are days when you wish you’d never

started this thing in the first place, and, in a secret corner of your aorta, that you have come to resent doing it;

4. and that another day comes when you see a

submission and realize that your eyes have been skinned wide open, your cranium levered back

with a gut-wrenching crack, and how happy the work makes you.

Anyway, that was my year in the bleed.

No editor ever decides to become what he or

And despite all the hard work (or perhaps, because

of it), you realize how much you love the job. It doesn’t have to pay, no one has to thank you for doing it,

and there certainly doesn’t have to be any fame that

comes along with it. Because you love it, and loving it makes it all worthwhile.

Sounds cheesy, I know. But it is true.

Another thing I realized, perhaps simply because

of the name of our journal, was the bizarre position in which the editor finds him- or herself.

The name “The Bleed” comes from printer’s

terminology, where it indicates the space outside the

trim line (where the pages are cut) through which an image or text must extend in order to ensure that it

appears to “bleed” all the way to the edge of the page.

In a sense then, the bleed is analogous to the

blank page: It is a space that disappears to allow

something else to appear. And to add another link to the chain, the bleed proves analogous to the editor.

she is for fun. It’s a decision that’s always born out

Inevitably a creator him- or herself, the editor takes a

creators of it (in the agape sense), and of the world

the stage to another.

of love: love of the work to be published, love of the they are working, in their diverse and yet strangely unified ways, to create. You have to be immersed in

this world in the first place, and when you finally don the mantle of your own will, be willing to immerse yourself even further.

moment to step out of the light, ceding, with pleasure, So, to my readers and, even more, to my

contributors, I must say a resounding, “Thank you.” It has been a true pleasure, and I look forward to many years more.

Amanda Earl

Translation, especially as a form of creative transformation of the original text, is one of the definitive forms of postmodern experimental poetry.

Working from canonical or even pop cultural forms, numerous contemporary poets have created new classics from the revered and gold from dross.

In these understated but carefully woven poems, Amanda Earl engages with one of the definitive works of Judeo-Christian poesy, the Song of Solomon.

Here, Earl expands on her general concrete poetic praxis and these particular works: I dedicate these poems to my husband, Charles, for his steadfast love and care.

For me, creating concrete poetry is a process of deconstruction. To reproduce a word or letter on the page and manipulate it makes me dwell on its components. It slows down the reading process. As readers,

For me, creating concrete poetry is a process of deconstruction.

we are exposed to so much text, we are inclined to gloss over it, to accept it as verbatim or to miss its beauty. In the case of authoritative texts such as government policies or the Bible, we seldom take the time to pay close attention to what is being said, to what is hidden within the text.

Here I chose to dwell upon passages from the Song of Solomon because I promised myself that one day I would do a close reading of it. I was also curious. How could I render such sensuality and lovely imagery into concrete form, to disassemble and rebuild as new patterns?

By happenstance and the joy of play, these patterns are tapestries and (2) towers of Babel.

One of the things I enjoy is to rearrange existing text to see what juxtapositions will come to the surface via alphabetization, anagrams etc. To take language which has become familiar such as "comfort me with apples" and disturb it and then see what ensues is a provocative exercise.

I like derek beaulieu's idea of concrete poetry as "rhizomatic in composition, pointing both to and away from multiple shifting clouds of meanings and construction" (an afterword after words: notes towards a concrete poetic, p.

3 http://www.ubu.com/papers/beaulieu_concrete_commentary.pdf).

Rosaire appel

the shape of poems

Rosaire Appel is one of the finest workers in the asemic poetry scene that we know of. In this lovely, startling suite, she shows just how powerful a medium for conceptual work asemic poetics can be – not to mention how paradoxically concrete an asemic/ conceptual piece can be.

The Shape of Poems

I am considering here possible shapes of how poems work. It’s not the physical imprint of lines and stanzas that I’m playing with,

rather how a poem lets out, how it guides you roam freely within it. imaginative tracings – maze, house, puzzle,

you in and or lets you These are container,

diagram – not of content but of the exertion of non-verbal aspects of the poetic form. This series is part of a book-length work in progress, a chapter of which can be viewed at: http:// www.scribd.com/ doc/27168075/9Asemic-Poems

or, with commentary Márton Koppány possesses a unique capacity to integrate humor into even the most serious of explorations. Looking at a piece like “or,” included here, I can’t help but smile … even as a kind of pained nostalgia hits immediately after, evaporating that smile. His work has a unique and unmistakable, if sometimes unexpected, power, and that’s clear in these two works. Here’s Márton expanding on the unique relationship with language that has driven a career full of such powerful moments:

I started writing something that turned out to be “visual poetry” thirty years ago because by the late seventies I’d understood that if I didn’t want to give up the faint hope of communicating, I should “get rid” of my mother tongue. So the main source of my way is a deficiency, which makes things simple in some sense.

Comment on Commentary (January, 2010) I imagine it resting right at the bottom of the page – like a frozen wave or greenish blue iron bar. The waves want to tell something, but they can’t (since this is a visual poem :-) , and there’s a contrast between the circle-like blurb and the lying square of the frozen wave.

The only “instructing” message, if any, comes (as always) from an unexpected direction: from the colors and their correspondence. “Invisibility” belongs to the realm of the visual.

Anchor what Vernon Frazer

Vernon Frazer’s work is unique amongst the visual poets we’re familiar with in that he works with more e x t e n d e d t e x t s , manipulating the visual elements as a means to organize and supplement the rhythm implicit in the words themselves.

Here, Vernon expands on his aims and techniques: Through my work, I try to express the inexpressible by fusing textual and visual material to create a "music" that engages the senses. My approach employs concepts of free jazz improvisation in conjunction with literary, visual and aural.

We here at The Bleed can think of no visual poet who has managed to so thoroughly and creatively redefine the visual potential of visual poetry. Constructing complex three-dimensional environments from the stuff of language, Peter manages to truly create worlds from words, actuating the performative and fictive powers of language for his viewers to witness. In the following, Peter expands on the conceptual drama unfolding in these brilliant images:

Glyph poem X Discarded letterforms, heaped rubble, context as trash. Shoveling the forms from one pile to another, recycling partial meanings, new definitions, the historicity of material and used communication, a graveyard or junk pile of now useless constructs. How is text imbued with meaning? How and when is it lost?

Slumber last trumpets

Graveyard headstone, found poem fragment, re-visualized as landscape. A digital rubbing of eighteenth century chiseled text, announcing the transcendent crescendo as the veil closes.

Sky, earth, poem, death, deconstruction, rebirth.

The poem is the landscape; the text is the veil of form, the skin of form.

The armature is non-existent, the wireframe inconsequential.

here, then, te op l ausivexplorations. a rehtien ma i are some are some o p l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i m an explorer. ;tsexplorations. itra na ron am explorer. ami ineither am an neither a visual a visual poet poet , n e h t , e r e h ;tsitrahere, na r o n then, here, an artist; .rethen, rol pxe na ma i are some explorations. an artist; rinor nor an artist; an artist; o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a am an explorer. . r e r o l p x e n a m a i m ineither a visual poet am neither a visual poet here, i am i neither am then, neither a visual a visual poetpoet nor an artist; am i an am explorer. an explorer. eonor lartist; a u siv a,nreehhtt,ie er nemha i i tam an explorer. i am neither a visual poet ip am an explorer. nor an an artist; l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i ; t s i t r a n a ron e are some explorations. , n e h t , e r e h some explorations. nor an artist; ;tsitra na r o n an artist; .is ninor oam ian tam aan r o l pexplorer. x evisual e m o sna e rmaa i explorer. . r e r o l p x e i am neither a poet am i explorer. an i am neither a visual poet re, then, s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a here, .rethen, rol pxe n a m a i are some explorations. an artist; te onor p l au siv a rehtien ma i are some explorations. are some i am neither visual itara na ropoet n am ineither am then, neither a visual a visual poetpoet ;tsexplorations. here, ha tm ,eare lartist; a u siv a,nreehhtt,ihere, er neare mhhere, a then, i some monor an explorer. .rethen, rol px,n een i h explorations. ip am an explorer. r an an artist; e ;tsitra na r o n . s n o itathen, rola pxvisual ea emvisual ospoet erapoet an artist; i am i neither am neither here, nor an artist; tam aan r o l pexplorer. x evisual sna e rmaa i explorer. am iian explorer. an .r e r le pm xo e mi oam ao poet ineither am neither a visual poet t e onor p lartist; a u siv a,nreehhtt,ie er nemha i i am an explorer. i am an explorer. nor an an artist; nor an artist; ;tsitra na ron i am neither atvisual poet nor an artist; l a u s i v a r e h i e n m a i an artist; .is ninor oam ian tam aan ro l pexplorer. x evisual sna e rmaa i explorer. e are some explorations. some .r e r le pm xo e in an ia am ao poet ;tsexplorations. it,r r o ineither am neither a visual poet na ehnt ,am e r e h explorer. nor an artist; re, then, here, t e o p l a u s i v a reh ien ma poet i .raerthen, rooll m a i are some explorations. s no it ppxxeeen ma o s e r a neither arta visual arei am some explorations. are some explorations. ; t s i t n a r o n am i neither am neither a visual a visual poet poet , n e h t , e r e h here, then, here, then, here, then, .rerol pxe na ma i are some explorations. r an an artist; lartist; a u siv a,nreehhtt,ie er n.es mhn aoiit monor an explorer. ip am an explorer. a r o l p xe a emvisual os erapoet neither ;tsitra inam ahere, rineither oam n then, a visual poet an artist; nor an artist; o t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a i am an explorer. am i an am explorer. an explorer. nor an artist; tam eo li artist; a u siv a,nreehhtt,ie er nemha i in an explorer. .rer lpa xe a man aam m ineither aovisual poet ip an explorer. am neither visual poet nor ;tsitra na ron nor an artist; nor nor an artist; an artist; i tam an nioam aan ro l pexplorer. x evisual sna e rmaa i explorer. i am neither a visual poet .r e r le pm xo e i .is am neither ao poet i am neither a visual poet am an explorer. l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i , n e h t , e r e h Andrew Topel is a modest poet of by-no-means artist; e are some explorations. some ;tsexplorations. itra na nor rioam n an neither a visual poet s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a modest talent.

While in the following he eschews re, then, here, ,neof h t ,of erby-no-means eh is a modest is a modest poet poet by-no-means .rethen, rol pxeAndrew na Andrew mTopel a i Topel are some explorations. theAndrew terms most Topel often is aapplied modesttopoet oneofofby-no-means his talents am ineither am then, neither a visual modest a Andrew visual modest talent. poet Topel While poet While the following ofhe eschews .sntalent. o itais rinaomodest lpin xthe e poet efollowing mo sby-no-means erhe a eschews here, and modest productions, Andrew talent.

Topel While he gladly is in a modest the accepts following poet the of term he by-no-means eschews that lartist; a u siv a,nrethe ehh t i e n m a i monor an explorer. r an an artist; Andrew modest terms the most terms Topel talent. often most is While a applied modest often in applied the to poet following one of to of by-no-means one his he of talents eschews his talents ip am an explorer. t ,terms ethe ra eheart h ;tsilies tthe rat amodest n rtalent. on most ofoften those While applied other in the names: tofollowing one of hishe talents eschews an artist; and modest the productions, and terms talent. productions, most While heoften gladly in he applied theaccepts gladly following toaccepts one the term he of eschews his the that talents term that nor an artist; o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a i am an explorer. am i an am explorer. an explorer. and the productions, Andrew terms Topel most he often is gladly a modest applied accepts poet to the one of term by-no-means of his that talents .rer lpa xe na mapoet i m ineither aovisual poet am neither visual lies the Andrew and at terms the productions, Topel heart most of often is those a modest he applied gladly other poet to names: accepts one of by-no-means of the his term talents that auan sivartist; a rehtilies eAndrew nmodest mthe aproductions, iTopel nor el some explorations. at and heart talent. of isWhile those a modest he other in gladly the poet names: following accepts of by-no-means the heterm eschews that are some explorations. ; t s i t r a n a r o i am neither a visual poet modest and lies Andrew productions, at talent. then Topel heart While he of isgladly in those a modest the following other accepts poet names: the ofheby-no-means term eschews that re, then, Andrew modest the Andrew terms talent.

Topel Topel most While is lies aiv modest often atisin the a modest the applied heart poet following of of poet tothose by-no-means one ofhe by-no-means other ofeschews hisnames: talents here, n e ha ,e r e h .rethen, rol px,the e n m a i are some explorations. tt e o p l a u s a r e h t i e n m a i lies modest terms at the most heart talent. often of While those applied in other the to following names: one of his he talents eschews are some explorations. are some explorations. ;he ts it r naof o n i am neither modest a the visual modest terms and talent. productions, most talent. poet While often While inapplied the in gladly following the toa following one accepts herhis eschews the he talents term eschews that s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a here, then, m neither a visual andthe productions, terms poet most he often gladly applied accepts to one the term of his that talents here, then, here, then, nor an artist; the and terms the productions, terms most most often lies at applied gladly the applied heart toeone ofntothose ofthe one his term other oftalents names: talents .rhe eoften r ol paccepts x a m a i histhat are some explorations. p l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i m an explorer. i am an explorer. ns elies h t , e r e h r an artist;;,t and at the productions, heart of those he gladly other names: accepts the term that iand tlies raproductions, ni the aam rheart o n at and productions, ineither am he of then, neither those gladly he a other gladly accepts visual names: aaccepts visual the term poet thethat term poet that here, an artist; nor an artist; i am an explorer. lies at the heart of those other names: o t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a i am an explorer. .rer lplies xe a i loflies mmineither aovisual poet tam em oa a u s a,heart ehh tthose er nem a i names: ithe an explorer. am explorer. neither a visual poet an atnnor heart nor an artist; those an ativ artist; the other of other ip am an explorer. nr enames: t ,ie h ; t s i t r a n a r on nor an artist; nor an artist; an artist; i am neither a visual poet ninor oam tam aan r o l pexplorer. x evisual sna e rmaa i explorer. am iian explorer. an .r e r le pm xo e i .is am neither ao poet i am neither a visual poet ,neht ,enor reh an artist; i am an explorer. i am neither a visual anexplorer. artist; i nor am an i am neither a visual poet then, norhere, an artist; i am an explorer. here, then, are some explorations. i am an explorer. i am neither then,a visual poe norhere, an artist; are some explorations. here, then, are some exploration i am an explorer. here, then, i am neither a visual p exploratio norare an some artist; are some explorations. i am neither a visual anexplorer. artist; i nor am then, an here, am anexplorations. explorer. arei some i am neither then,a visual poe norhere, an artist; here, then, are explorations i am ansome explorer. i am neither a visual poet are some exploratio nor an artist; i am neither a visual poet i am then, neither a visual p anexplorer. artist; i nor am an here, nor an artist; isome am neither a visual i am an explorer. arenor explorations. anexplorer. artist; i am an i am neither a visual poet then, norhere, an artist; i am an explorer. here, then, are some explorations. i am neither i am an explorer. then,a visual poe norhere, an artist; are some explorations. i am neither a visual poet here, then, are explorations i am ansome explorer. nor an artist; i am neither a visualare poet here, then, some exploratio anexplorer. artist; i nor am an i am neither a visual p are some explorations. nor an artist; i am an explorer. here, then, i am neither a visual anexplorer. artist; i am neither poet i nor am an some explorations. then,a visualare norhere, an artist; i am an explorer. here, then, are some explorations. i am an explorer. i am neither then,a visual poe are some explorations. i am neither a visual poet norhere, an artist; nor an artist; here, then, are some explorations i am neither a visual poet i am an explorer. here, anexplorer. artist; i nor am then, an are some exploratio are isome am anexplorations. explorer. i am neither a visual p here, then, an artist; i am neither poet then,a visual nor i am neither a visual norhere, an artist; are some explorations. anexplorer. artist; i nor am an here, then, are some explorations. i am an explorer. i am an explorer. are some explorations. i am neither then,a visual poe norhere, an artist; here, then, here, then, are explorations i am ansome explorer. are some explorations. are some exploratio

te op l austiv eexplorations. o aprleahuts ieiv na ma rei htien ma i are some are some ;tsexplorations. itra na;trsoit nra na ron here, then, here, then, .re rol pxe.a rnea ro ma lpixe na ma i are some explorations. i am neither visual poet i amtthen, neither a visual eopala unor siv a re hpoet tien ma i here, i am neither visual an poet artist; ts ia tri a na ron an artist; eonor lartist; a u siv a,nreehhtt,ie e;r n m i tam an explorer. ip am an explorer. e , h n e h ,ereh nor an ;t sit.r r arn alprx oe ntna e o ma i i am an explorer. nor an artist; nor an artist; i am an explorer. . s n o t a r o l . s p n x o e i t e a m r o o s l p e x r e a e m o s era i am an explorer. .rer lpa xe na mapoet i i i am aovisual poet am explorer. neither visual amineither an nor an artist; eht ,ereh i am neither a visual,npoet hmos era .snoit,n ae rh ot lp,e xr eee .snoitarolpxe emos era here,here, then,then, are some explorations. are some explorations.

i am neither a visual poet nor an artist; nor artist; i am an neither visual poet i amaneither a visual poet nor nor anexplorer. artist; iexplorer. am an i aman anartist; i am an explorer. i am an explorer. i am neither a visual i am neither athen, visual poet poet here, here, then, nor an artist; nor an artist; here,some then, here, then, are some explorations. explorations. i am an explorer. iare am an explorer. are someare explorations. some explorations.

lvr pe xar e .snoitarolpx,ene,ehnmteohs, ;te ter s,re ieah trrreoahn nt.aesonpoiltaaursoi. . s n .neither o sneither i nt oaa ir tavisual o aaa l rvisua p ovisu x la e pvvv n tam e onneither pneither soai vr ar rl ep te i en nipoet mam aam ineither .am sneither oneither iltaauravisual lvisual pvisual xa evisual epoet mhx opoet s e r a am neither a visual poet m am neither i am i i am neither am neither neither a a a visual a visual visual visual poet poet i poet poet am poet i i i i i am neither i am i am i am am neither am am neither neither neither neither neither a a a visu a vis a vis vis t e o p t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h t i . e o a m a i ;s irta nianeither am neither al visual poet i am neither am neither a;tvisual a . s n .artist; o t ox mteose snor eirara aam s t ra .i rvis e; t l e a o uan p s isi l vn aoa u air sto i r v erp h a tle ipr exe e nem h,o t me i a n i m i ran an nor r ram an an an artist; an artist; artist; artist; artist; nor nor nor nor nor an an an an an an artist; artist; artist; artist; artist; artist; nor artist; nor an artist; tp eroo pe lp a saesi av ra ei hr tn enor o t l a o u sartist; i.ul v u arnvsooi r. er he tr ev nr epoet h ,poet e ean h ; t s i t ; r t a s i n t a a r o a r n an artist; nor an nor artist; an artist; neither i neither am neither a visual a visual a visual poet i am neither a . r e o l p x e n a m a i . i t a r o r l p x e o ; t s i ; t s i t ; r t a ian am neither aohr visual poet iam am ioan am neither neither avisu vis ae t e p l a u s i v a r o p l a s i v a r e t i e n m a i t l e aartist; o u p sartist; i.u l v a u a s i r v e h a t i e e n h t m i a e n i m a i . s n o i t a r l p x e e m o s e r a an r nor an artist; nor an artist; i am neither a am an explorer. m am am am an an an an explorer. explorer. explorer. explorer. i i i i i am i am am am am an an an an an explorer. explorer. explorer. explorer. explorer. explorer. r e lsr p xttr e oeit n p a m i mam ta ,poet eait re eian hp ; s o nram rvisual al n,xiat ane rhnaopoet narai onor on ti eneither oam lp voe rt apoe nvisu e hxl .lan nurov osexplore t, a o .ri e. l eam oan pam lexplorer. aneither uartist; sr i;o vt. a;iae rs; htsvisual tri erea nna m .a ru esa liiarpa x e n nor an nor an an artist; artist; i neither a am i i am an explorer. explorer. ; t s ; i nor an artist; am neither a visual poet ; t s i t r a n a r o n e otip eneither oam l p voe apoe rep exi hnmee taanh ipoet ema naa mhere, ir ae.iran iisanam hxl t , n , r t ,here, e h .lan nurov osexplorer. t, o l x e o s rt e,a rnr oeol,hl pnt .ri e. lt ia .a ru esa liiarpa xanvisual ere nh ap n imh m o ithen, . tan s an ro.explorer i l p x e e or nor an an artist; artist; nor artist; am am an an explorer. explorer. ere, then, ere, ere, re, then, then, then, here, here, here, then, then, then, then, ; s ; i t t s r i a t r n a a n r a o n r o n .rexplore e.rroelrpo artist; isoam am an am ihere, am an an explorer. re, then, here, here, then, then, then, rlt ea,a runr osea pvntvisual xevisual eahn m .ran nnam o itneither . teneither s aon rpo.explorer. i l p x e oli,ahl e p m x o e stenrh eae,t m rheho a saiepoet ei r.has ,ep r h t e n m a i , , r e , r e an artist; i i poet i am an explorer. . s n o i t a r o l p x n o i . t s a n r o i l t p a x r e o l e m . r e . r r o e l r p o x l e p x n e a n m a a m i a i ; t s i t r a n a i am neither a visu i am neither a visu am i am an an explorer. explorer. i am an explorer. ere, , here, then, then, then, here, then, re some explorations. re e some some explorations. explorations. are are are some some some exploratio exploratio explorati , r o n t e o p l a u s i v a , n e h t , e r e h r ooaam nn tt.neither eeneither o ppoexplorati ssoaaiia a rir onsome sneither illtaaauurexplor lavvpvis xvi .oan si n. os in toai rt oa lr poxl ep eshnmteoehsm esr,reeare aeh s n t a r l p x e e m x o r o a nor nor an artist; artist; i am i i am am neither vis vi am an explorer. here, then, here, here, then, then, e some explorations. are some are some explorations , n e , , t e r e h an artist; nor an artist; i am am iam am neither am neither neither neither aia visual visual a visual poet poet poet am an explorer. here, then, tsome eneither o pexplorations. lexplorations. altuaasua ia v amam ian .visual raevisual errereohemlthpoet pipoet xe ennor nmnor m aan i . s n.artist; osintoaiexplora rtaoalrvisu poxl n t e o p s v t i e n a i . s n o i r o l p x o s e r a nor an artist; nor nor an artist; artist; i neither ere, here, then, then, here, then, re some are some explorations. are some ; t s i t r a n a oan pan lartist; e aartist; o uartist; sartist; itexplorer. l vneither aaos i rvisual v exl hea tx iaer eme nvisual h t mnti aesiee n ii tam ram aa noineither anneither .avisua ra er rvis or .t s nan . op s in o aa iexplorations. ru t al r p o p e o e,;poet s m o shir a ei ram aam ror nor r an an an artist; i am neither neither a a visu vi am neither i am poet i i am am an explorer. re, then, are some are are some some explorati explor . e . r e t , e r e h ; t s i t ; r t a s i n t a r a r o n r nor an artist; am neither a visual poet am neither a visual poet io am an explorer. an re, then, are some tnor e pam t l e a o u p san i l vneither aexploratio u a i rassvisual v ei hvisua a thhia r eiiav ttam ei o pam t lt e ae o u p sp iexplorer. l v aaa;su au r v e t . r e r o l p x e n a m a i e o p l a o u s i l v a i r v e a t . r e r o l p x e n a m a i t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i e m a i nor nor an an artist; artist; r an nor artist; an artist; m neither a visual poet i i nor an neither i an neither i artist; am artist; am neither a i am neither a visual poet i am an explorer. i i i am am am an an explorer. explorer. explorer. re are some some explorations. explorations. are some exploratio t;;sttisstii; rttt a; . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a r; r t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t i r e e n h t m i a e n i m a i . r e r o . l r p x r o l n p x e m a n i m a i an artist; or an artist; neither a visual poet i am i am neither neither a visual a visual poet poet i am am i am am an am an an an explorer. an explorer. explorer. explorer. explorer. here, here, then, then, e some explorations. ; t s i t r a n a r o n t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t i r e e n h t m i e i m a i t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i , n e h t , e r e h t e o p l a u s i v a r e ; t s i t ; r t a s i n t a r a r o a r o n , n e h t , e r e h an artist; nor nor an an artist; nor artist; an artist; nor an artist; i am neither a visual poet nor i i am am an neither neither artist; a a vv i am neither a visual poet i am an explorer. here, then, here, then, e some explorations. . s n o i t a r o l ; t s i t ; r t a s i n t a r a r o n a r o n . r e r o . l r p e x r e o l n . s n o i t r o . s n o i t a r ; t s i t . r e r o . l r p e x r e o ; t s i t r a n a r o n . r e r . l r p e x e t e o t p e o l p a u l s a i u v s i v r a e h r e i h e t n i m n a m i a i , n e h t , n , e h r t e h , e r e h n artist; nor nor an an artist; artist; i i am am neither neither a a visual visual poet poet i i am i am i am an neither am neither neither explorer. neither a a vis a vi a i i am am an an explorer. explorer. am an i am explorer. an explorer. i am an explorer. here, then, here, here, here, then, then, then, ; t s tn eaitram onor pr lnaan uaartist; suiartist; viavaavisua rvis erhe p lthen, a uthen, se i v a . rie er re oh lt pi xe en nm aeron mi as e o p l s a . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m s e a nor an or an artist; nor an artist; i i am neither neither am an explorer. am explorer. here, re, ere, re, here, then, then, then, are are some some explorations. explorations. ; t s ; i t t s r i a t a a r o n o . r r o . l r p x r e o l n p a x e m a n a i m a . s n o t a r o l p x e m o e r a ; t s ; t s i t r a n a r o n . r e r o . l r p e x r e o l n p x e m n a i m a i o ti p ean l p ulan s a usra v. sexplorer iv voiar ro an; e hi re , na e hr t t rsa l p x oan p. lnexplorer. aam uartist; s. ian vn it , e hs .aexplorer. rt ervisual rer ohovisual lt,l pinp xeex enhe nm a,im m ae tan enor o tioam p e oa lp a u. li ieur v a , n e h nor or an an artist; an artist; am i am neither neither a a poet poet nor i nor nor am an neither an neither an artist; artist; artist; a visua vis mm i am am explorer. am explorer. an explor i here, then, are some exploratio are some exploratio s o i t s a r o i l p x e e m o s e r o a s r a e l p t e r e h ; t s ; i t ; t s i t r a n a r o n nor nor an an artist; artist; i neither am neither a visual a visual poet poet here, then, an explorer. i am an an explorer. explorer. here, here, then, then, re, here, then, then, here, then, are some explorat are are are some some some explorati explorati explorat ; t s ; oare tip osome l a utlan s a iouexplorer. v sexplorer. ir.al vora anprer rahelr etpio hvisual tn iex nt m,i iiesi.a xel enp nme ah mia ar i , n,ler. e hexohe t , n , e h r t eh h ,hn e rpoet er.m h roo.t eexplore rt oa pon xl . r e n a m a ream np e p u s i v a r t n m a i , , r e e h n o iam . tn s aa n ran o.n i l p a x r e olr l e p m r e r o l p , s n o i . t s a r i l p x e el r an artist; nor nor an an artist; artist; nor i am an am artist; neither i am an explorer i an re, then, ere, then, are ee, re e some some some some explorations. explorations. explorations. explorations. explorations. , n e h t , e e h . s n o i . t s a n r i l t p a x r e o e ; t s ; i t t s r i a t r n a a n r a o n o n , . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a ; t s i t r a . r e . r r o e l r p o x l an nor artist; an artist; i am i here, am here, am an an neither an explorer. then, explorer. then, explorer a vi i i am am an an explorer. explorer. i am an explore then, here, here, then, then, here, then, are some exploratio rothen, ei rt oa pa xl evisual mm .rlroael. rpr oxe ler po ,visual nene e, h ,it epoet ram , ee hr e h si nssome oam iare ti s aneither n rs o.some i l t p a x r e olexplorations. l e p m x o e sx ea,rhn m reete o a sao e r a r o n t e o p u s i v , n , n h t e h . nnhere, o. . teneither aexplorations. n r l p x r e o e p m o s r a s e r a nor an artist; i am a are poet are i some some am neither exploration exploratio a i am an an explorer. explorer. ,e then, here, then, are are some some explorati explorat e ,v r o t o p l a u s i v a h t i e n m a i . s n o i t a . s n o i t a r o l p x e m o s e r a . r e . r r o e l p x e n a n a a m i a i . s n o i t a r o l p x . r e r o l p x e n a m a i , n nor an artist; i i i am am am neither an neither explorer. a a visual visual poet i poet am neither a visu am an explorer. i i am am an an explorer. explorer. here, then, here, here, then, then, here, then, some explorations. re some explorations. s inor t ra a.aeneither nnesome ao e ,vi s n .artist; srexplorer. i not ola ipexplorations. r txo a,el rnp oeex lhme ptor xse e,m o er; s met ohr e ssome r a eam r o n t o p l a u s i v a s i t a r o l p x e .psare nt o. ian tsome ao e r a nor nor an an artist; an artist; here, i i here, i here, am are here, am are then, neither neither then, some then, then, explora explo a a a vis vi m i an am explorer. here, here, then, then, some explorations. are are some explorations exploration r o n t p l a u s i v e o l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t i e e n h t m i a e n i m i . s n o i t a r o l p x , n e , h n t e h , t e r , e e h r e h . r e nor nor an an artist; artist; nor an artist; am am am i neither am neither neither i neither am neither a a a visual visual visual a visual a visual poet poet poet poet i i am poet am neither neither a a vis vi i am an explorer. here, here, then, then, some explorations. are are some some explorations. explorations. , n t , e r e h . s n . o s i n t o a i r t o a l r p o x l e p ; t s i t ; r t a s i n t a r a r o n a r o n n t e o p l a u s i v r e h t e n m i . r e o l p x e n a m a i .ssome nsome othen, itaexplorations. rexplorations. olpxe emo;stseihere, rtnor ahere, . s n .artist; o sexplorer. i nt oexplora a iexplor r to al rp ox l nor nor an an an artist; artist; i am an here, ere, then, then, then, are are are some some are t e o p t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t r a n a t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i o p t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t i r e e n h t m i a e n i m a i .am s n.artist; osan i nthen, toan aiexplorations. r te osaartist; lnr;o pot. xilsr et; pie xtr ers; moit olt esvisual spr mi ot esrea rna aa e rnor aam .trvisu ei rvi r ram nor an an nor artist; an artist; artist; nor an an artist; artist; i am neither a i i are am i are poet are am are some neither neither i some some neither am some explorati neither explorat explora a;explor a a vis ian i am an explorer. explorer. i am an explorer e, here, then, are are some some explorations. . a x m o s e r a s t . r er . r r l p x e o l n p a x e m n a i m a i , n h t , e r e h t a r o n r a n a r o n a r o n i neither am i am neither neither a visual a visual a visual poet poet poet i i am am an an explorer. explorer. i am an explorer. here, then, are are some some exploration explorati t e o p t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t i e t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i t e o p l a u s i v a r t e o p t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t . r e r o l p x e n a m a i nor an artist; nor nor nor an an nor an artist; artist; artist; an artist; i am neither a visual poet i am neither a i i i am am am an an an explorer. explorer. explorer. here, then, are some explorations. re some explorations. are are some some exploration explorati . s n o i t a r ; t s i t ; r t a ; s i r n r o n . r e r o . l r p e x r e tam e ot p eneither oexplorer. lp a u s a i v a voe rt apoh e h rep t exe i hnm ea taanh ipoet ema ma niaa mam i a i nvisual e hxl t , n , e r t h ,im e r h .lan nuroh osexplorer. iiarpi t, a o l p x e o s e r a ; t ; t s i t . e l i t l e a o u p s i l v a u s i r v e a t r n t m i n i m i . r e r . l x e n a n i a i rnor nor an nor artist; an an artist; artist; i am i am neither neither a va am am am i an am an an i explorer. an am explorer. explorer. am an an explorer. explorer. here, here, then, then, here, then, some are some explorations. explorations. t e o p l a u s i v a r ; t s ; i t t s r i a t r n a a n r a o n r o n , n e h , e r e h an artist; nor an artist; i am neither a vi here, here, then, then, here, then, are some explorations. r a n a r otam n ..a nes te. olert ; r esru oo.ri . lirov r pexplo e xarpa r eroe l n rtt e; rt os pnt xer eha nn mi ahere, inor e o p eneither o.am lp a v a novi e .lran nu os ii t, a .an snam oartist; i. t; s atn rso.i i l p a x r e ol,i l e p m x o e sto ea,a m ri o a s rtan a nor nor an an artist; artist; i an explorer. i am i am am an i an explorer. explorer. explorer. here, here, then, then, then, are some explorat l x e r e h , n e h t , n , e h r t e h , r e h ;r tol .te rexplorer. er .o ro rl ol ep lp rx px o xe l ep x nm e aoms n ma aerhere, m iah insome nor an artist; am iam an am i explorer. am an explorer. ere, ere, re, here, then, then, here, then, then, then, here, then, then, are are some some explorations. are explora .an srnexplorer. o iexplorations. ar e r . r e o . l r p x n a e m a n a i a i . r e r o , n e h t , n e h t , e e . s o i . t s a n r o i l t p a x e nor an artist; i an i am an explor are are some some explorations. explorations. are some exploratio , n e . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a . s n o i . t s a n r o i l t p a x r e o l e p m x o s e m r o a s e r a .t rexplor e. rr oe lr ii am am neither visual visual poet am an explorer. ie am i am an an explorer here, here, here, here, then, then, then, then, are are are some some some explorati explorat explorat ,visual nerh e,er hn te ,t epoet rhere, , e hr e hi riare o nsome tsome eneither pexplorations. al ia he th ipoet e n m a i ,tua nasu ea hov ta ,pa n e r t e h ,h e r e h r oam nthen, t.o eneither o polthen, s i v a t i n m a i . s n o . t s a n r o i l p a x r e o l e p m s n i r l x e m o s e r a i i am neither a visual poet i am an explorer. ere, here, here, then, then, re re e some some are explorations. explorations. some explorations. explorations. are are some some explorati explorat . s n o i t a r o l p . s n o i . t s a n r o i l t p a x r e o ; t s i t r a n a ; t s i t r a n a nor nor an an artist; artist; i am am neither neither a a vis vi i am an explorer. here, then, here, then, .then, sartist; n.artist; ost ina tor aiexplorations. rtal oap lrvisual poe xlepexm eeo ms oepoet smare eare so r a esome r aet.o nsome tsome pexploratio lexplorat altuaasurexpl isov snor nam oare ian . tan s a n r o i l p x e o e m x o s r a eorr a r o n e o p s n o i lvpvv nor i neither i i am am neither neither aia here, here, here, then, then, some are are explorati some .visual ra e r o l p x e n a m a i nor nor an an artist; artist; inor am i am neither neither a visual poet poet here, then, re are some are some explorations. some explorations. explorations. .a rier re ohlt pi xeen nmnor aa mare aan isartist; .then, n.artist; osintoaiexplo rtoalrpo an artist; nor an i i am am an an explorer. explorer. here, are some explorations. some o p t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h t e n m a i i e o p t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t i r e e n h t m i a e n i m a i .visu ra erv ,poet n,rt ena heoa thnioi ,poet e re e h or nor an artist; artist; am neither iam am neither a;t;visual visual i am i am am neither neither neither aexplo a vi iian am an an explorer. explorer. are some explorations. are are some some explora . stisti; rtat a; st i ns t ai rt a r o n t , r e h r a n a r r n a r o n i am am an an explorer. explorer. are some explorat e o p t l e a o u p san ip l vneither aexplorat u aaasu i rsvisua v ei hv a thia t e o p t l e a o u s i l v a r e eam o partist; lthen, a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i rihere, an nor an artist; nor nor an an artist; artist; i am neither a visual i nor am poet an neither i artist; am it an explorer. i i am am an explorer explorer here, then, are some . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a ; t s i t ; r . r loor p xt e oei n p a m a i mooain ieira .r s ; t s i ; s t r n .e rexplorer. eso rn. . liae r ptr e xavisual r erl oovisual l nlxia ppe xxa e menapoet near a im m a i am i am neither neither a poet am i am an an explorer. here, here, then, then, t e o p l a u s i v a r h t e n m t eio o partist; lthen, a uneither sesi v a r e nor an artist; nor an nor an artist; i am neither a visual poet i am a here, here, then, . n o i t a r ; t s i t r a n a r n . r r o . l r p e x r e oe t e o t p e o l p a u l s a i u v s i a v r a e h r e i h e t n i m n a m a i . s n o i t a , n e h t , n , e h r t e h , e r e h ; t s . r e r o . l r p e x . rexplorer. earo;visual m a i ,ltnps;exithetstri,natn ,are h r t e h , e r e h nor nor an an artist; artist; i am neither poet i i am am i an am neither explorer. neither a vi a am an i am explorer. an i am am an an explorer. explorer here, then, here, here, then, then, are are some some explorations. explorations. t o p l a u s i v a r n a a n r a o n r o n or artist; nor an artist; i here, here, then, are are some some explorations. rot ei rt oa ponp xl ep ne mm ao inor tsam e o erneither oaam l p a ulan s a iurvsexplor ia a, vo; rt anpes nvis e h .an s.nsam o io. tithen, s a. n rs o.explorations. i l p a x r e olr l e m x o e sx ea,im reo a s rteip a . e r l , or an artist; an artist; i nor am an neither artist; a vis i an explorer. am an explorer. are are some some explorati explorat , h t e h n t a n r l p x e e m o s r a ; t s ; .rexplorer. e.rroelrpo xl ep x ne an ma arhere, m iare a ino nor an artist; here, then, iam am i am anexplorer. an explorer. re, here, then, then, here, then, then, are some explorations. are some some explora explora . rot ei rt oa p , n e h t , e e h . s i . t s a n r o i l p a x r e olr l e nor an artist; i an i am an explore are are some some explorations. explorations. , . s n o i . t s a n r l p x e . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a .rexplore e.rroelrpo ie here, anexplorer. explorer. then, ieir am an explorer. i am an here, here, then, ,visual ,t hr e hsome , oam nhere, t.neither eneither o pothen, soaia iepoet er, ne mam a i sexplorations. nsome iltaaurexplorations. lvpvisual xanee,rhn eete mhh o;t spoet e r a i am are some exploratio i am an here, then, then, some are are are some explorat explora . s n o i t a r o l p x sesir ta rhere, aaan nesaonexplorer. am here, ,vi .then, sartist; n.artist; osintoaiexplorations. rtoalrpoxlepxeemoeare smtoi r oeam nr t.neither pothen, soaia iltaaurexplo lvpvi x nor nor an an i here, i here, am are neither then, some then, here, then, are some some exploration i am neither a visual poet here, then, are are some some explorations. explorations. . r e r o l p x e n a m a i .then, sartist; n.artist; osintoaiexplor rtoalrpoxl nor nor an an here, are some explorations. are some o p t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t i r e e n h t m i a e n i m a i nor anan artist; are am are neither some explorat explor a ii am am an explorer. explorer. are some explorations. .rvi e tni roesome ;tsit; rt asi n,t anrea rhoare a,e rsome nh explorati

rt ea rr ool,l pnp xex ehe mrsaeheira rl eep mhx o;te stisen eina rtarmmaaa.n siia noi. ts an ro.i l p x e e m o stnea,m reo a .larvisual e. r r oe l r pa o xl epoet p x ne apoet n ma ae m ia i e epoet m o epoet s mpoet o e s r a e r a r o n t e o p a u s i v a r h t i n m a i i i am i i am am neither i am i i neither am am neither am neither neither neither neither a visual a a visual visual a visual a visual visual visual poet poet poet poet poet poet poet l visual sual ual visual sual visual al sual ual poet i poet poet poet am poet poet poet i i neither am i am am neither neither neither a a a visual a visual visual poet poet i am neither a visual poet e n h t m i a e n i m a i , n e h t , e r e h r o n t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a ;t tar s,e ie tr reah na ,poet ean rnor eartist; hartist; sual ls poet i n t a r a rhnor o anor r o n lvisual p,poet xnnor eenor ntn a minor a i , n e , h n t e h , e h ; t s i t r n a nor nor nor nor an an an artist; an an artist; an artist; artist; artist; artist; nor an artist; an an artist; artist; an i am am neither neither a a visual visual poet poet rineither oam nam tneither ursaoia rl en .eneither sonpoialtaavisual lvvisual pvisual xar eopoet eep mhx o;tpoet stipoet eina rtarmmaaa niia i e n m a i h t m i a e n i m a i . r e e i visual i am poet p x e e m o s e r a s p a m i mnor ta ,poet eainr ro einhan . s n .artist; o s i n.t o ier tro aol rlp opx lxe p xe enm es meoae sria earai ri na oeneither n,xiat ane riea rhnaopoet nara ra er ao nor an artist; sual visual am a visual poet t e n m t o p t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t i e e n h t m i a n i m nor nor an an artist; nor an artist; ian neither am a ual i am ii am am an explorer. an an explorer. explorer. i ian am explorer. an explorer. am explorer. tenor enh oe pma t l e ai o ue p srh l vi aneither u a sartist; i rvisual v eneither hexplorer. a ta;iatr evisual e nvisual h,visual t mn; ia ehs n ivisual m a i ,poet n,poet eepoet hro ten ,poet t r a n r o n s i t r t a i n t a r a r a . r e o l p x e n a mer aroen ih exi hinm taa ipoet eima naam a mia aam iam , n , e r t h ,i e r p x o s a n i m i e t h an artist; ual poet am neither i am neither a poet er. ; t s i t ; r t a s i n t a r a r o n a r o n sx r i a t r n a a n r a o n r o n t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i t e o p t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t i r e e n h t m i a e n i m aeareieirha nor nor an nor an artist; artist; an artist; i am neither a visual poet i i am am an an explorer. explorer. . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i e n a m a i . r e r o . l r p e x r e o l n p a x e m a n a i m , n e h t , oh e steh e,here, m rhere, o ar,am snor eam r a ; t s i t r a n a r o nron ; t s t ; r t a s i n t a r a r o n a nor an artist; an artist; i am i am neither neither a visual a visual poet poet i neither a visual poet i i am am an an explorer. explorer. r. i an explorer. here, here, then, then, here, then, then, then, e e h n , r t e h r e h . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i . r e r o . l r p e x r e o l n p x e m a n a i m a i ; t s i t r a n a r o n ep x n e a n m a a m i a i nor an artist; am neither a visual poet i am i am neither neither a visual a visual poet poet er. i am an explorer. tam er oeaep l aan u s i v.a a rrov e h toe i epoe nx mxi anmea i ; t s i r n r nirh eeshmtoeism ,to ee h t e o t p e o l p u l s a i u s i a v r a h r t e h t n i e ma nh a miaio ae ia , n e h t , n , e h r t h , e r . n o i t a o l p x e o s nor nor an an artist; artist; nor an artist; i am neither a visual poet neither a visual poet i am i am i an am explorer. explorer. an explorer. here, here, then, then, . e r l e a m a r e r . l p x e l n p a a n a i m r r a s r a ; t s i t r a n a r o n o t p o l p a u l s a i u v s i a v r a e h r e i h e t n i m n a m i a i , n e h t , n , e h r t e h , e r e . rthen, earo; lt.ps; xit ets n a m a io ;re tao s;l in tp ta sx rie ar ta reann am aa ns raoeinrroan nor an artist; nor an an artist; artist; ual i poet am visual poet ual poet am an i am explorer. an explorer. here, then, here, then, are some explorations. ons. ions. ons. are some are explorations. some explorations. are some explorations. e,erh h , t e , e e hneither r eartist; hi. het th inor e ner mhere, a i t r a n r o n r e r o l p x e n m a t i n m a i rn ee h t i e n m a i ei mnor o s e r a s n o i . t s a n r o i l p a x e m o s nor an artist; an isual poet isual sual sual poet poet poet i am an explorer. here, then, ions. rations. s. ,rrx noest elrn,hpoean, txlm ,xsate h raei,t enrehmar,aemhriaehi rt ean rexplorations. o pne.p xe eh mhn ;oet;; sttois. tis rtn ahere, n. o ta a r o.an i l p a x r e ol,rexplorer. l e m o re, o a rare ai ns an s i t r a n a nor an artist; i am i am explorer. am an explorer. here, here, then, then, then, are some some explorations. e r e h . p n e x e e m s m e s r a e r a .lsirexplorer. e. r r oexplorations. e po xl ep x ne a,hep mea ahe ia nt tm ,mo ei rreiaehra ual poet ipoet am neither a visual poet ian am neither aolr visual poet i am an explorer. i am an an explorer. here, here, then, then, are are some some explorations. ations. are some explorations. r o n t e o p a u s i v a r i n a . n o i t a r o l p x e m o s e . s n o . t s a n r i l t p a x r e o l e m x o s e m r a s , n e h t , e r e h p x e n m a i i am neither a visual poet isual al sual ual poet poet poet i am an explorer. i am an explorer. here, then, rations. ions. are some explorations. l p x e a m a i ohlt pi xienor en nm aaan m a i . s n o isome t a r o lexplorations. p x e e m o,visual s r a n, ee , hr n te e h ,t epoet ee hr eahi i ; tee s i t r ahner, n a r o n t e o p l a u s i v a r h t i e m a r o n t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i n m artist; nor an artist; i i am am neither neither a a visual poet i am neither a visual poet am an explorer. here, here, then, then, here, then, are are some are explorations. some explorations. ons. , n e , h n t e h t , e h r e m a i i . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a e n h t m i a e n i m a i npoet h t m a e i i t tir arraanana r oon n ta err o pnhohthen, lartist; aan u.rexplorations. ssoai ina vor atr rrl eop hlx tpe ixpoet een n; mmstaoi ir .eoneither srno nesome i. t lt pvisual xr eoaol ep mx o;e spoet e r a ,se ni et hri t , eam r h nor an la visual visual poet i i am poet am poet neither visual ..al here, then, here, here, then, ons. are some are explorations. ; s t i ns t ai r o n a r ,,rt nna e h t , e e e h t , s o a i e m o e s e s a e n a r a r o n a r n . e a a i n a a r n o teopse ireta rarnaaainmaa i nor nor an artist; nor an artist; i am neither al visual poet here, here, then, are some . s n .artist; o san i nneither t othen, a iartist; r to rexplorations. p ox lexplorations. e pa xra e e m o e s m s e e n m a i t e o p t l a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t i r e e n h t m i a n i m . e r o l x t i e n m a i nor nor an an artist; i i am i am am neither neither a visual visual visual poet poet poet visual visual poet poet i am an explorer. i am an explorer. here, then, are are some some explorations. are some explorations. x e e m o s e r a . r e r o l p x e nom an mia i m a n a i m a ppre x e e m o s e r a ltxia x e e m o s e r a n a r o n pvisual x e m n a i m a i , n e h t , e r e h a m a n a i m a i nor an artist; sual visual isual i poet am i poet poet am neither poet i neither am neither a visual a visual a visual poet poet poet i am an explorer. . are some explorations. are are some some explorations. explorations. ; t s i t ; r t a s i n t a r a r o n a r a n a r o n . r e o l p x e n a m a i e n m a i t e o p t l e a o u p s i l v a u a s i r v e h a t i r e e n h t m i a e n i a t e pp t l e aa o uu p ssartist; ii l vv aha;u aa s i rr v ee hh; a tt ii r eei e nn h t mm i aa ehnn ii m,rraeoernhieh tea inh eare nm mnor ai iioh nor nor an an an artist; artist; sual al poet poet i i am am neither i neither am neither a visual visual a visual poet poet poet i am am an an explorer. explorer. i am an explorer. are some explorations. some explorations. , n e h t , e t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a i r n a r n t e o p t l e a o u s i l v a r e t i e n m a i t s i t r t a s n t a r a r o a , n e t i h t i n a m a i n , e r t h , r ; t s t ; r t a s i n t a r a r o n a ron t r a n a r o n m i ,n n ,a e h r t ea hh , e r ee h . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r e i hr t n i m n a m i a i , n , e h r t e , e r h nor nor an nor an artist; artist; an artist; sual al poet poet rer. r. i i am am an an explorer. explorer. here, then, here, then, ons. are some explorations. ons. . r e r o . l r p e x r e o l n p a x e m a n a i m a i e n a m a i , n e h t , e r e h ; t s i t r a n a r o n ; t s i t ; r t a s i n t a r a r o n a r o n r i a t n a n r o n r o n t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i e m a i tmam ei oir pam l aan u san i v a r h t i e n m a i nor nor an nor an artist; artist; artist; i am i am neither i am neither neither aovisual visual ae visual a visual poet poet poet iaio am explorer. here, then, tions. tions. ions. ions. tx s r i a t r n a a n r a o n r o n . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o sooain eaireaira n m i . r e r . l r p e x r e o l n p a x e m a n a i m . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m s e s e m r a s e a ; t s i t r a n a r . r e r o . l r p e x r e o l n p x e m n a i m e n a i t , e h o e s e m r o a s e r a i neither am i am neither neither a a visual a visual poet poet poet i am am an an explorer. explorer. explorer. r. er. here, here, then, then, here, then, ; t s i r a n a r o n x o e s e m r o a s e r a t e o t p o l p a u l s a i u v s i a v r a e h r t e i h e t n i e m n a m i a i t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i e n m a , n e h t , n , e h r t h , e r h e h t , e r e h . n o i t a o l p x e o s e r a . e. rpiuoe lt xl e na aar ma anipoet ia .artist; rexplorer. eexplorations. raroulexplorer. ls xvsvisual eip o nt; p as x mt n iea m ior x ne ainen mhere, a a m ian a ian nor nor an nor an an artist; artist; isual i poet am neither am neither a a visual poet r. . er. am i am i am explorer. an here, then, then, ons. are some are some explorations. e p x a n m a a m i a i ; s ; i t r i n a a r a o n r t s i r n a r h t i e n m a i h t , e r e h t e o t p e o l p a a v r a e h r t e i h t m n a m,in io aen ieh , n e h t , n , e h r t e h , e r e h . r e r o l p x e n a m a , n e h t , n , e h r t e h r nor an nor nor artist; an an artist; artist; visual poet i am neither a visual poet i i am am an i an am explorer. explorer. an explorer. here, then, are some explorations. tions. ns. ions. ons. e h t , e r e h m o s e r a . r e r o l p x e n a m a i . s n o i . t s a n r o i l t p a x r e o l e p m x o e s e m r o a s e r a e m o s e r a ; t s i t r a n a ,hpornt; e,t hn tei ,t eha r,araena hra t sx t , noexplorations. elr ,s; h rt eri ensahrioeinrroan h , t eare r , h ehsome ham nor nor an artist; an artist; ual poet here, here, here, then, then, then, are are some some explorations. are some explorations. t e h , t e r , e e r e h . r e . r r e x l e p x n e a n m a m i a . r e o l p x e n m rhn h t i e n m a i ee,etmrhn o s e r a . s n o i . t s a n r o i l t p a x r e o l e p m o e s e r o nor an artist; isual sual isual poet poet poet i am i i am an explorer. an explorer. explorer. here, here, here, then, then, then, s. orations. ns. ations. are some explorations. explorations. tpoet et nsome mmsia iexplorations. nxtll .. ss nn ooa ii . tt s aa n rr o i ll pp xx e, eeepp mh ot ssarr,ene rrao ae shia eira eoee; msmhare oio ses eas rn aan ,rt nea err hoo ,xx eee ham t s i r a n a o l p x e n a a i . n o i t r o l p x e e m o s e a . r e . r o l p n m m . o t a r l p x e o e m o s m r o a e a sual isual poet am i am i explorer. am an an explorer. explorer. here, here, here, then, then, then, e e m r e r a ; t s i t r a n a xe em o ei s mo oam e s r a ean ro a ,t epoet ee ,hete nthh eie he tnoer, ,mhr eaemerraheiahi i i i i am am am am neither neither neither neither a a aa a visual visual visual poet poet poet . i am explorer. an are are are some some explorations. explorations. ations. rations. r n t e pexplorations. anltuexplorer. siuthen, it v a r e e n h t m i a e n i m a inesome .pohls oaaexplorations. r o,visual lanerpe,exrh,n m s r o n t e o s i v t i n . s i r o l p x e m o s e r a l p x e n a m a i sual ual isual a visual poet poet poet poet r. i am an explorer. here, here, here, then, then, ions. ations. tions. rations. are are some are some some explorations. explorations. , n e h t , e r n; ee, hmn toe h ,t eepoet eae hr eaah i t;s s i t r arerr, n a t a i n t a r a ro n a r o n ohs lt pi x en nman a m a i t s i t a n r o n t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t i n m . s n . o s i n t o a i r t o a l r p o x l e p x e e m o e s r a . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m o s e r a nor nor nor nor an an an artist; artist; artist; artist; i i am am neither neither a a visual visual poet here, here, then, here, then, then, ions. ns. are are some are some explorations. some explorations. explorations. m a e i a i hr te ih,r et ni mn a iaeo ei n mna aeo e ita m ieirh.athen, ; toas i taer aa na ; visual i i am am poet neither neither a a visual visual poet poet .a . here, here, then, ions. ns. , n e h t , e r e h l p x e e m o s e s n . o s i n t o a i r t o a l r p o x l e p x e e m o e s m e s r r n t a r n r n . r e r o l p x e n a i l p x e m a i m a h , r it r a n a r o n . r e r o l p x e n a m a i ahtsvisual i n t a r a r o n a r o n nor nor an an artist; artist; visual a i am poet neither poet a visual poet . here, then, are are some are some explorations. some explorations. explorations. tteenor eoe nppoet m a i t l e a o u p sr iap l viexplorer. aexplorations. u aasome su rsv ei hv thexplorations. ia r eia e nr h,e t mnhri aet ehi itepn aempoet nor an an artist; isual i i i i i am am am am an an an an explorer. explorer. explorer. are some are are some t e o p t l e a o uam siartist; l vneither ati rexplorations. eta tt eri nvisual mnoa aelon itxam,poet aenoieranhiehma i . e e p x m o s i r a n a r o n xep nare apoet m a i r h r t emnor i hanme t nh i m n a m i a i t , n , e r t ean h , e r e h l p x o s r a ; s i ; r a s n t a r r n r x a m a i , h , artist; isual i am neither i am neither a visual a visual poet orer. . tions. are some some explorations. explorations. l n a x a n a i m a tasu ti rv t ai nn ar rh ot ni tiare ennor oam pam t lneither e anan o uan p sartist; i;explorations. l vexplorer. ais r; evisual hsa ti it ere na mpoet aeaehn itrom,naerieh itp t s r i a t r n a a r a o n r o an a i i am explorer. ations. some t e o p l a u s i v a r e h t e m a i , n ; t sop tpe ; rxat a s i neo t a r a rsea oir nea ron x ehn n a m a i n ,e,x rtehere, t eih hhere, ,am er, reean he . s n o i t a r o l p x e e m s m o e sh e m r o a s e r a nor an nor artist; an artist; rer. i am explorer. explorer. here, here, then, then, then, then, ons. . r e r o . l r p e x r e o l n a x m n a i m a n , e h . s n o i t a r l e m o r a t , r t e h r h ; t s i t r a n a r o n . r e r o . l r p e x r e o l n p x e m n a i m i tnor emam pm lexplorer. aineither uartist; siv.r.aes roo hr te ir eoonl mxxae inea xl ep x aio n a ineither a an ioar am a;visual visual ae. visual poet poet r. rer. iine am an tions. ions. tions. n i t a r l p e ohmsa eira r l p x e n p a m a imh n e h t , e e h e s e m r a s e r a am neither a poet . i am an explorer. here, here, then, then, ions. tions. t s i t r a n a r o n t e o t p o l p a u l s a i u v s i a v r a e h r e i h e t n i m n a m i a i , n e h t , n , e h r t e h , e r e e e m o s e r a p m x o s e m r o a s e r a . r e r o l p x e n a m a i , n e h t , n , e h r t e h , e r e nor nor an an artist; artist; isual sual poet am poet neither a ;visual poet . i,enor am an ier, am explorer. explorer. here, here, then, then, are are are some some some some explorations. explorations. explorations. explorations. e h ,are t e e e h r e hian t s ; i t t s r i a t r n a a n r a o n r o n hiet th i e n m a anere rhn t i n m a i , n e h t , n , e h r t e h , ereh e m o s e r a an artist; visual visual poet poet am an explorer. here, then, ions. lorations. ons. tions. . r e r o l p x e n a m a i . s n o i . t s a n r o i l t p a x r e o l e p m x o e s e m r o a s e r a ; t s i t r a n a , n h t , e h . s n o i . t s a n r o i l t p a x r e o l e p m x o e s e m r o a s e r a nor an artist; here, then, are are some some explorations. explorations. ; t s i t r a n a ephere, xeemare oieare smam oihere, e ssome ram aan e.rsaan .i rexplorer. e.s rrn oeolri po xl ep x ne ap n ma arm ia is era explorer. then, then, orations. some explorations. explorations. n o . t a r l t p a x r e o l e m x o e s e m r o a , n e h t , e e h orloplare xippoet expoet npoet anan msan iithen, . o t arolpx,ene,ehnmteohs,teer,reeahreh isual visual ual am explorer. here, ations. orations. some explorations. e a m a i i i am am neither neither aexplorations. a visual visual poet poet . i am an explorer. tions. are some nr h,e t mnhi aet ehi n itenhere, m,poet a.emesraexplorations. inesome r o t o p l a u s i v a r e h t i eenrama i ise eare n m a n i i o i t a r o l p x e e m o s h aal visual poet r. r. here, then, then, tions. some are explorations. i n t a r a r o n a r o n , n e h t , e r e h ; rtt aisei nhere, t a rma raare oan n r ointoaiexplorations. .athen, sartist; n. os rtoalrpoxlepxeemoe;smtosesirtaerraa na nor nor an artist; some n i i am poet neither a visual poet here, then, lt p x e e m o s e r a p a x e m a n a i m a i l p x e e m o s e r a r a n a r o n . r e r o l p x e na ma i oovisual l n p x e m n a i m a i isual visual poet poet .sual r. are are some some explorations. explorations. titeare n m a i en pma t lan e aio o un p sartist; l vexplorer. au asi rv eha tir ee nh,t mni aeehn it m,aerieh nor poet ion ih am am an explorer. some explorations. t r etir h,nea tn ie nt a, m,i aean ieih , n , e h r t e h e r e h ets a m a h , r e h r sual poet rer. tions. ions. are some explorations. ;tsit; rt asi nt ara rona ron r i a t r n a a n r a o n r o n ations. ations. ep ne mmram x o e sx eahere, m r o a sao eian rethen, a er. i here, then, e h t , e e h .esrnoo. l m o s a s r.arexplorer. lir pte xar erool nlp apxxe meanea imomsa eira ep x n e a n m a a m i a i . er. eehmtos,eerreah tions. ations. ons. ,neht,n ,eh rt eh,ereh here, then, are are some some explorations. explorations. e , h n t e h , t e r , e e h r e h reemhotspoet ipoet eesnrnaomia. in isual isual orations. ns. . t s a r oi lt pa xr eol ep mx oe s em ro as era ; t s i t r a n a x e e m o e s m o e s r a e r a rations. are some explorations. isual poet tions. rations. olpxe na ma i ions.

Language, writing, is particularly important to my art.

Bernd Reichert

The mystery lying within the unidentifiable characters of a foreign writing.

It is however seldom the meaning of the text, but its symbolic, “spiritual� aspect, which is used in the work.

I like to see my art based on poems by Paul Celan, in particular Unreadableness of this world [...]. It is this contradiction between the initial meaning of a text and its application and combination with other texts and images in a collage that is appealing to me.

Language, writin particularly impor to my seldo the te sym aspe in the

art based o mystery ly theUnreadab unid chara contradic and its app forei and images

ng, is rtant y art. It is however om the meaning of ext, but its mbolic, “spiritual� ect, which is used e work.

The I like to see my on poems by Paul Celan, in particular ying within dentifiable bleness of this world [...]. It is this acters ofinitialameaning of a text ction between the plication and combination with other texts ign writing. s in a collage that is appealing to me.

BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE

BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK ~ BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK

BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BLED

F

oOt ersha

dOw||s

Wall

Orn ch

o ws the c

∆∆ :d:u:s:t:y: w ith eye thought of ips

BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK ~ BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK

~s~w~i~m~m~i~n~g~ in th

e iiiiiigiiiiriiiiaiiiisiiiisiiiiii laug hter w џ a џ t џ e џ r where my cri

spy LLOAAOKKOEE bbuurrnns again

y my thrroobby speeeech guuzzzless in your ear a ffogg do

st the skyy

ll slibps a way y y nor ddoo uubblleess into ttthhhrrreee blOOdy stOnes ))like my

p

pants ш drop ed(( c ash ‘ns stead yyyyyyy luggage ..lint.. too

F

TAR

BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE

BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK

BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE BE

cake an storm flooder

MouNtaiN my p late br

oke

gAte

THinking muD foUntain

the

dOOr

∏

caUlk

a dOZEn skies wafter “ha lf” du s

BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK

BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK ANK BE

PETRO

elimination of the gnatss a lun ching ear fooaam my rabb bbit coughs an stre ams beneath th e gate your f lash==olight sunk nost ril can of f

――=O=―― rks

clang

ing on the

Porch a or “a” burning p ane falls uPon my s black

uit .your

Photon it’s my

clockwerk your calendar b

all

gasoline lifting off to breathe BREATH

“border again About this piece:

border” is a poem that carries the tension between

bilinç: consciousness

bpnichol’s “borderblur” term and

linç: lynch

Nilgün Marmara’s (Turkish poet) line of poetry:

sınır yine sınır: border again border “border again border”

Ayşegül Tözeren

“The Anxious Prince”

be or not to be or not to be or not to

Zachary Bos

Willem van den Bosch

“The Raving King�

Nothing was. Nothing, thus nothing was nothing thus, thus nothing was thus. Nothing was nothing thus; was nothing thus nothing? Was nothing thus?

Nothing was.

Nothing was nothing,thus nothing. Thus nothing was. Was nothing. Was thus. Was thus

“The Wounded Deer�

ripe is that thing with letters rape is that thing with betters rope is that thing with fathers speeches too hard to understand trade two heads for either hand

Zachary Bos

Willem van den Bosch

“The Venetian Usurer�

cash or credit? cash or credit? ash or redit? ash or redit? sh or edit? sh or edit? h or dit? h or dit? or it? or it? r t? r t? ? ? ? .

“The Scottish Player”

IssedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIs sedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIsse daspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIsseda spotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedasp otmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspot mIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmI ssedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIss edaspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIssed aspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedas potmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspo tmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotm IssedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIs sedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIsse daspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIsseda spotmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedasp otmIssedaspotmIssedaspotmIssedaspot

compounding simple parts into a whole—into the higher-order arrangements of literary figure and visual metaphor—I tend in my reading to stall among the possibilities surrounding short phrases and basic images.

Those possibilities form a thicket one could well get lost inside. Not that it isn’t an interesting place to be—the basic operations of repetition and variation can produce great complexity in any medium. Such is seen in the traditional textiles of many cultures, and in the blinking antics of cellular automata, and the patterned shells of mollusks, and in the emergent effects of biochemistry. I have tried to produce a like complexity in these five poems. I call them “speartips” because their function is obtained through careful shaping, like the stone arrowheads I coveted as a young Boy Scout, and because they are made from fragments struck off a larger stone—here, Shakespeare.

Zachary Bos

Willem van den Bosch

I read in small chunks, not large structures. Rather than reflexively

Carlyle Baker is a widely published and Carlyle Baker is a widely pulished highly regarded visual poet – despite and highly regarded isual poet the fact that he doesn’t think of his despite the fact that he doesn t work as visual poetry as such. His own think of his work as isual poetry term, graphism, seems an apt monias such His own term graphism ker for his striking explorations of the seems an apt moniker for his string forms of glyphs and the dynamic intereplorations of the forms of glyphs play of color. and the dynamic interplay of color

Semantic content seems always to hover Semantic content seems at the edges of these pieces, a ragged always to hoer at the ghost flickering in and out of the frame, edges of these pieces a ragged remaining always tantalizingly elusive. ghost flickering in and out of the They remind one of careworn and coffeeframe rmaing always tantalizingly stained maps from lost countries, timeelsie They remind one of caworn muted guides to places we may have and coffeestained maps from lost missed or are yet to discover. Here Carlyle countries timemuted guides to expands on his methods and focus: places we may hae missed or are yet to dcer Here Carlyle epands on his methods and focus:

usually my work involves usually my work symbols, glyphs, parts of inoles symbols glyphs words, phrases. i don’t like the parts of words phrases i term visual poetry; i call what dont like the term isual i do “graphism.” most of these poetry i call what i do pieces begin hand-drawn in graphism most of these ink, pencil crayon, watercolor, pieces begin handdrawn in etc., and later are altered in a ink pencil crayon wa coor paint program. etc and later are atered in a paint program

SEAN BURN

It’s a truism in the world of visual poetry that we are constantly being bombarded by language.

Whether at home in front of the TV or computer or walking down the street, riding the bus or on the subway, words and letters surround us, a maelstrom of pleas and entreaties, assertions and questions, assaults us.

n

Sliced out from the storm, a few drops of rain form into a message wholly distinct from their original intention, becoming a poem we might otherwise have missed.

d This deluge of language is oft cast negatively, as a violent, chaotic force in opposition to the quiet moment of attention many a visual poem tries to bring the reader to.

Some, however, see it as a source for content, a vast well from which the moment of attention may be drawn by nothing more than a simple editorial act of excision.

Mike Cannell is a dynamic and prolific member of the new generation of visual poets. The diversity of his forms and productions is not simply a part of his oveure. In fact, the plurality of his media is a feature of individual productions as well, so that his visual work acts as a score to a host of vocalized and unvocalized sound poems ‌ and vice versa. Here he expands on his methods and focus:

In my poetics I am primarily concerned with the physical nature of language.

I a the of

am interested in e flesh and matter it

I am interested in the flesh and matter of it, from the word down to the microscopic level of the letter.

Language is a living, organic form. Mine is a poetry of the throat and of the eye.

I am a poetic lightning rod. I am an antenna picking up syntactic signals.

My visual poems can be interpreted as sound poems and vice versa.

I pour vocal extremity onto the page to make your eyes sing. Poetry is electrical. It is a thought impulse.

I am a poetic lightning rod.

Nico Vassilakis is unique among visual poets for several reasons, not the least of which is his near-obsessive focus on the microcosmic in language.

While most of us are content to seek out

Televispo

large-scale associations and meanings, Nico digs deep into the written forms of language, oft favoring the curve of a letter’s bowl or the climactic union of a ligature to the macrocosm of a word in its whole, complex shape. This focus on the details dovetails nicely with his uniquely elaborated theoretics of visual poetry, Staring Poetics. His works are often the

Nico Vassilakis

product of an act of staring, a moment of concentrated focus few are able to enjoy in our surfaceskimming age.

In this small suite of works, Nico focuses on the television, quietly reminding us of two important facts about this once-revolutionary and still powerful medium: One, that though we tend to think of it as a wholly graphic medium, it is in fact one place where we most often encounter language and are subjected to its power. (Of course, he turns that power on its head by denying letterforms their complete mani-

festations, rendering them from speaking signs back to mute symbols for unknown quantities.) And two, that, though usually experienced in a dynamic manner that refuses us the luxury of staring, this medium too can be rendered unto stillness for our sustained meditation.

But enough of generalities. Let’s see what Nico has to say for these pieces himself:

We are suffocating from the excess of word that surrounds us. We are being held hostage by the frantic compulsion to place letters into a huddle and then manipulate and construct them into words. We seek escape from this word derived onslaught.

We are drawn to the alphabetic (pre) ascendance and (post) disintegration of the word – not the word itself. It is the letter that offers the quiet. It is the singular letter that is a point of rumination, the staring locus.

Televispo is a new channel that brings the vispo viewer an alternative to the word-centric world.

The focus of the channel is based on alphabet and the visual elements that make up alphabet. Not merely the letter, but the snippets, snatches, slices, and slashes that construct letters.

An example of what you’ll see on Televispo is shown here.

In this episode, the alphabet refuses to be belittled by word logic and takes its revenge by disman-

tling it. It is what’s left after a word, in several alphabets, has exploded and pieces of letters are strewn across the screen.

poembassy bombing

!poi4':;!poe'!';;!mbassy::!oip3'::

progress

,;,””””,;,'''',;;;,``”`,,;;,,..;;

eleven!

!!!11!!!!11!!1111!!!11!11!!!!!11!

this one explains nothing

<:}\\:3\\<:}\ͼ

^◯^ͽ\<:}\\:3\\<:}

clouds and bird

≁ (⁐⁐⁐) (⁐⁐⁐⁐⁐) (⁐⁐⁐⁐)

These five poems are excerpts from a collection called LINES. They are defined primarily by their formal constraint of a single line of text roughly 4 inches in width. Many also have the same number of characters, although several of the poems flouted these constraints for effect. Titles were used not only as tags for the poems, but often as “keys” to access the idea or interpretation of the poem that I wanted most strongly to communicate.

While these poems stand out within the context of my other writings, they share in common an obsession with containers for text and a love for the visual possibilities of punctuation. Within the one line container, I aim for the most striking possible effect; to this end, I have found that punctuation and symbols are often more evocative than letters, possibly because they are already outside of the context of spoken or heard language (they are not usually an audible component of the spoken word) and their functionality can be more easily divorced from their appearance. None of the five poems selected here can be “read” in the normal sense of the word, although I believe they may be apprehended, hopefully with some sense of delight.

—Eric Goddard-Scovel

preface

A Report, with a Fantasia

It follows that such taxonomical resistance as

ON A LETTER SUFFICIENT FOR VISUAL POETRY one might encounter in one’s data must vanish both

in the end structure and in that structure’s associated concept(s), or intension(s), and etc.; this leaving one with no worries save those of an irreducibly violated intuition and the loose conviction that, in some concept-

¶

doubling or -nuancing, perhaps deconstructive, way, the data have their own taxonomy it remains for one

The essay below focuses, not on vispo per se, but on

the concept of a letter intuitively sufficient therefor.

In other words, it should not be approached as a

(normative) definition of “visual poetry”. (It is, of course, otiose for me to have written this, but the point seemed worth risking with a hammer.)

Nor

should

it

be

approached

as

a(n

encyclopaedic) guide to vispo: Vispo is, in its

accumulated works, many orders of magnitude more

exciting than the following essay might suggest, the latter being limited, in its examples, to the rare instances of a far from hegemonic tendency.

Finally, as well as terming the object of my

reflections “a letter sufficient for vispo”, or “a vispo

letter”, in what is to come I term it “the vispo letter”, as though these expressions were equivalent. This is

almost certainly theoretical imperialism on my part.

As long as this is clear, however, stylistic concerns seem to excuse the usage.

Bibliographical references are in the endnotes;

the footnotes dip in and out of the discussion.

to find. So may pre- join hands with a post-structuralist positivism.

Now, I will return in Part two of this essay to

the place held by the fiat lux in an indicated solution

for current vispo’s critic-practitioner relationship. For

the moment, I think I may anticipate myself and ask

you to accept (at least that I accept) that said place is not by the critic’s side; in other words, that the term

“visual poetry” is not (ethically) available to critics.

Having made myself, for the purpose of this essay, a critic2, I am therefore forbidden even to fantasise imagining thinking of attempting a fiat lux.

So what am I to do? Denied earnest taxonomy,

In fact, it is in introducing “intuition’’ as above

how can I get a discussion going? and of what?

that I come to solve these problems3. In principle,

intuition departs from taxonomy: One’s intuition may bristle at the exclusion by some triumphant

taxonomy of this/these or that/those property/ies.

Now, manifestly, such (a) property/ies (which, being merely real, would muddy the relevant structure while

leaving it pellucid, i.e., would escape it, never having been in its orbit, i.e., would represent intuition(‘s

one point one

Every (coherent) critical taxonomy has about it

something of the fiat lux: each is a generic/specific inter-relating, hence the constitution as generic/

specific, of certain bearers of hitherto unthematised properties. To be sure, said bearers might, for the

(coherent) taxonomiser, resist inclusion in their own

class; but such must be resistance outside the relevant taxonomy: resistance merely real, i.e., taxonomically

phantastic1, like its subtending property/ies as such;

resistance irrelevant to one’s object as taxonomised.

1 Albeit certainly abstract.

powerlessness) in it) would render possible, by way of

the triumphant (taxonomical) violation constituting it/ them merely-real, an intuitive discussion; a discussion

organised around exactly that/those property/ies, i.e., constituting that/those property’s/ies’ conceptual

analysis, beside a (triumphant) taxonomy. Here, then, we have stumbled on the conditions of a discussion

which would privilege the merely-real as such: a

discussion which would proceed sub-taxonomically, 2 Which was a matter of accommodating myself to professional judgement thereas.

3 Though not, as Part two will imply, to the implied end.

remaining within, yet not investigating, the field of

would, if interpreted, satisfy her intuition may be

that

visual poetry per se.4,5

As one might suspect, this is a disingenously

included/excluded in the available taxonomy/ies such

bright characterisation. Still, merely-realistic intuition

(a) either the union of the (intuitive) predicates

what, and how, to start); so without knowing where

xT(7); in which case, notwithstanding her epistemic

solves my methodological problems (to wit, with said intuition will take me—without even knowing

whether I will end up satisfying what one could still, I suppose, call the canons of criticism—I mean to

abandon myself thereto, with the veriest, venalest, utterest of utternesses. (One must begin long before

included or that of those excluded has cardinality I(6) state, the subject would, in that moment, be either

> necessarily unable to access her intuition at the level of the merely-real or

one can: such is the logic of andragogy.) Of course,

> necessarily Buridan’s mule with respect to choosing

whose essence will have been violated, I will have to

which one depending on whether the set of the

when discussing that object, if any, the intuition of

write sous rature: I will have to write “visual poetry”; but from what one might call an epistemophilic point of view, this is a snivelling deterrent.

To dwell a little, now, on the sombre side

of things: such an (essentially traduced) intuition must, when sought as the enabling condition of an

a taxonomy;

predicates excluded were null, respectively; or even, assuming I>1, such that

(b) each element of the union of the predicates excluded recurs T-1 times and that union has cardinality at least 2T(8),(9).

approach, imply the acceptance in good faith of a

To adopt merely-realistic intuition hoping

seems contortionistic, to say the least. There are also

be as naïve as to adopt the post-structuralist positivism

must be subject:

this naïvété would be never to intuit. It follows that

taxonomy sought yet for its finessed rapacity; which

thereby to contact some public real would, therefore,

vicissitudes to which merely-realistic intuition per se

adumbrated at the beginning of this essay. But to avoid

> if there are no taxonomies, the subject will be unable to access her own merely-realistic intuition; rather, she will be trapped in her own taxonomy; alternatively,

merely-realistic intuition compels, and conceals, an

abuse of its very ownsome. I will return to this, as to

current critical abuse/s of the fiat lux, in Part two; whereupon it will become clear that merely-realistic

intuition’s drawbacks pale beside the displacement

> if there is a taxonomy which leaves her intuition

to which it might subject this or that taxonomy,

that intuition at the level of the merely-real (though

displacement, (an) opposition(s) absolute, since quit of

unviolated, she will be unable in good faith to access

each such intuition disenskying, by way of each such

she may not realise this).

structure.

Pitilessly to sound the profundities: > the subject might infer that those predicates which

6 The number of intuitive predicates.

7 The number of available taxonomies.

4 Such a discussion must leap of a ''fiat lux'', of course, but not one its

8 This latter possibility having been gripped, the subject should wonder

own. Granted, this is an awkward position - perhaps only pragmatically

whether she must seek more than one merely-real or traduced intuitive

tenable.

property or predicate; the (epistemic) probability of which rises, I believe,

5 I am ignoring, and will continue to ignore, the case in which a bearer

in direct proportion to I.

resists exclusion from a given class, i.e, that in which one's taxonomy

9 Given that double-negation elimination is mandated by the semantics

violates one's intuition by stickling, or including a predicate one feels to

of ''inclusion/exclusion'', assuming that the intuitive predicates are mu-

be unnecessary, whether irrelevant.–I am interested in positive specific,

tually independent, the number of possible arrangements of inclusion/

rather than in negative or neutral generalising, merely-real properties.

exclusion equals Tx2I.

(pause for breath) one point two

To be accessible by merely-realistic intuition, a relation

For better or worse, then, this essay will proceed

must be (conceptually) native to the predicate(s) it

triumphant taxonomy (as psycho-history decided)

But might one not convert any structurally

in merely-realistic-intuitive mode, taking for its

interprets.

Klaus Peter Dencker’s ‘From Concrete to Visual Poetry,

relational predicate into a non-structurally relational

with a Glance into the Electronic Future’ . At this point, 1

tactical questions become available.

> Which properties may count as such for merelyrealistic intuition?

Specific ones, obviously. However, a specific,

need not be a simple (or non-relational), property; indeed, some relational properties (e.g., “half the size

of’’ or “redder than”) denote a non-structural relation, i.e. a possible merely-realistic specifier.

Nor need a specific be a positive property; it

may easily be a negative one, e.g., “not-tall’’ does not

predicate? No, one might not. What interprets a

predicate does so by vice of its own abstraction; what

interprets a structurally relational predicate does so by vice of being a structural relation. As soon as one weaves a non-structural relation into a(n invented) concept, one becomes helpless to denote a structural relation by sole means of that concept; for one has only

invented the truth-conditional detector of a different, because non-structural, relation.

> How far must I take my discussion, in principle?

As far as I may take it, i.e. as far as is logically

necessarily imply “short’’. On this account, one could

possible.

“not not redder than’’, this seeming to imply, not

one would bring to bear on the set of predicates

(This sort of ineliminable double negation is a common

of assimilation and dis-assimilation until one had

even stumble on a negative relational property, e.g., “redder than’’, but, weirdly, a soft “not redder than’’. fact of (what is called) much natural language. ) 10

Going

the

customary

Aristotlean

route,

interpreted by one’s taxonomical object the operations gathered a set of predicates unique to that object. Of

The search-space seems hellishly voluminous.

these unique predicates, the essential—as opposed

specific be a merely-realistic, i.e., an a-structural,

said object’s specificity, and by way of hierarchical

operations of assimilation and dis-assimilation),

of genii.

structurally relational, predicate may enter the

must, of course, prevent it from shambling this path,

non-structural relation, both simple and structurally

to search for every immediately relational predicate

However, when one adds the requirement that every

to the accidental—ones would form the layer(s) of

property (i.e., that specification occur without the

organisation, one would recover therefrom the layer(s)

it becomes clear that neither any simple, nor any

Merely-realistic intuition’s refusal of structure

picture: immediately denoting no, i.e. denoting no relational predicates may acquire specific value only in a structural articulation. Specific, non-structurally

relational properties alone, then, may count as properties for merely-realistic intuition.

But might one not convert any simple property

into a relational one? e.g., ‘’hovering’’ into “hovering, unlike x, y, and z’’? Yes, one might; but the resulting

would not be a non-structurally relational property, simply because it would indicate a structural moment.

10 One might suggest that the pairing ''comparable/incomparable'' is a pairing of non-structurally relational properties.

but said intuition carries no demand that one neglect interpreted by one’s object.

> How far can I take my discussion?

Not as far as I must. I do not have room. Once I

have intuited a non-structurally relational property, I will have to begin my discussion thereof.

> What caveats does this limitation impose?

This one: I will have been able to go further.

However, said caveat is inoperative: the

expansion of my intuited property, passing (as it will) through a rigorous inference, will, at worst (or

least exhaustive), indicate the trajectory/ies of that

> Clemente Padin9, though taking his bearings by

stand immaterial to, that exhaustion.11

Menezes—and approaches Carter—in assimilating

property’s exhaustion; and what may not enter, will

How, then, am I to seek this non-structurally

many of the same references as Menezes, differs from

visual poetry wholly to intermedia, or Dick Higgins’

relational property? For to look implies an—admittedly

multimedia; as, arguably, does Jim Andrews10 and has

I will try merely-realistically to quiz— that is,

> Tom White and David Small12 have implied at least a

broad—inflection of attention.

Bob Grumman11.

relevantly to leave undisturbed—the limits drawn by

partial assimilability of visual, to (a sub-set of) haptic,

Dencker to visual poetry; this attempt taking place

poetry.

with recurring reference to Concrete poetry.

Finally,

> Karl Young13, arguing from an idea of developed-

(To be sure, other references are possible —

some, indeed, are actual:

visuality as notation, treats visual poetry as being

> Simon Anderson2 puts (Gruppo 70’s) visual poetry

continuous with sound poetry and performance art.

through calligraphic writing, Marinetti, Russian

distribution, however, the articulation of visual with

on a continuum stretching from the Phaistos disk3

No doubt the list could continue. Going just by

formalism and Vorticism, the bricolage of Braque and

Concrete poetry—be this articulation negative or

Picasso, Kandinsky, DaDa and Schwitters, and Lettrism to Fluxus and beyond.

Adding Imagism and modern advertising to the

spectrum, Clodina Gubiotti4 concurs, broadly speaking. > In part, Curtis Carter5 plastically defines (Gruppo

70’s) visual poetry in terms of intermedia. More: he

functionally specifies visual poetry in terms of pseudocritical auto-connotation, appending to that positive characterisation an opposition to Pop Art.

> Marco Giovenale6 has assayed a taxonomy of visual

vs. asemic, poetry.

> Enrico Mascelloni7, while walking with Carter,

opposes (Gruppo 70’s) visual poetry genetically to

Fluxus and Lettrism, historically to sound poetry, and psycho-geographically both to Futurism and to

Surrealism, and gestures to its medial rapprochement with praxes whose irrationality is non-frictionally to be related to capital.

positive—is nearly hegemonic in my sample: not only

do Anderson, Dencker, Gubiotti, Mascelloni, Menezes, and Young make their own articulatory references

to the Concrete, and not only do Michael Garofalo14,

implicitly, and Geof Huth15, explicitly, joint visual to

Concrete poetry; Ron Silliman16 and Brian Kim Stefans17 have made exclusive reference to Concrete, in defining

the intension of visual, poetry. In other words, the locus I have chosen will recommend my discussion to critical susceptibilities beyond Dencker’s.)

To begin, then, at the point of finding my

intuition traduced:

By

equivocating

on “material’’12, i.e., by

identifying with a particular materialism something

only sufficient therefor (to wit, plastic collage), Dencker renders it taxonomically possible for certain poems in

his terms plastically inadequate to visual poetry —e.g.

“Le corset mystère” (Breton)18 and “Boxe” (Tzara)19—to

> Philadelpho Menezes8 distinguishes visual poetry from

verbal-poetry-which-recuperates-the-graphic-

dimension-of-its-own-plastic,

placing

the

former

at the end of a line running through graphicised

symbolism to post-verbal lexical, or semiotic, and iconic, or process, poetry.

12 At one point denoting a plastic, at another a denoted/evanesced deno11 The time in the room here is logical time.

tation, or auto-connotation—which is to say, a phantastic object.

pass for visual poems.13,14,15

be sure, we are close to questions of specification, but

This, however, offends my intuition. These

the sufficiency for visual poetry here-uncovered is a

two works simply do not feel like visual poems, any

matter, not of some hierarchical organisation, but of a

“addision mutter” (Strangulensis)21,16. Nor do such

Beauté et la Variété des Erections” (Arias-Misson) and

by speaking taxonomically):

more than would, e.g., “Easter Wings” (Herbert)20, or

relevant plastic analogues of said two works as “Sur la 22

“Green Waters ...” (Finlay) . Then again, such relevant 23

analogues as “Oblivion Mathemaku No. 2” (Grumman)24, “haiku #62” (Helmes)25, and “Fallen” (Piringer)26 do feel

like visual poems, as do such relevant dis-analogues

as “The Shape of Poems” (a series by Appel)27 and “megaphoneman” (Satanovsky)28.

(It is crucial, here, to differentiate my offence

from that of someone with a competing taxonomy. As of this essay, I accept Dencker’s taxonomy. The sense of violation bothering me circles, rather, between affect and emotion; between object-having and object-

deprivation, respectively: between one, and another, impossibility.)

Intuitively, then, some necessary property/

ies has/have been excluded such as to bloat visual

poetry’s border. Now, merely-realistic intuition is

sensitive to this/these property/ies; thus it/they is/are non-structurally relational. So what is/are it/they?

Only one: that visual poetry can be generated

from certain non-visual collage poems by certain

plastic manipulations of the letter, i.e. that certain visual poems are related transformationally to certain

non-visual collage poems.17 (We are far, here, from

questions of assimilation and/or dis-assimilation. To

merely-real—albeit abstract, relational—axis.18)

To explain (and here I’m afraid that to bring out

its constituents, I shall have to falsify my experience

Grumman, Helmes and Piringer differ from

Arias-Misson, Breton, Finlay and Tzara, first, in that

they fragment not the sentence, but the word. However, a poem which turned the letters of, e.g., Shakespeare’s sonnets into an a-grammatical, a-lexical anagram

would not thereby be visual; for the poet could arrange

said anagram into a calligram19, thereby creating a

concrete poem. This first difference, then, is, alone, transformationally inoperative.

Second, the visual, differ from the non-visual

collage, poems in that the former work with stable

fonts. If, however, e.g., Breton regularised his fonts,

“Le corset mystère” would not thereby become visual; it would simply end up, at least conceivably, occulted

as a collage. This second difference, too, then, is, alone, transformationally inoperative.

Finally, in the visual poems, the field is

organised by letters, rather than by the usually

occulted graphics of the written sentence, i.e. that of the written letter, i.e., that of the alphabet. The upshot

of this is that, without being subjected to an alphabetic 18 The suggestion is not that one may never find such an axis binding taxonomical classes; rather, that one need not, and where one does not, one will be in a state of merely-realistic intuition.

13 Perhaps a simple notational differentiation—e.g. ''material1 vs. ''mate-

19 One could evoke a rosebud, thereby concretising the tragic distance

rial2''—would explode this equivocation, deodorising Dencker's taxono-

between (the) language (of flowers)—capable of asemy, immortal in

my. It is difficult to speculate on these matters.

diachrony—and (its) referent—a living line beyond system, incapable

14 I have (been) carried away (by) a properly indeterminate taxonomy,

of asemy, mortal in identity; this distance rebounding to the referent's

but this is not fatal to my project; Dencker's taxonomy activates, rather

advantage in terms of presence, rarity, and value, and thereby opening a

than awaiting the activation of, merely-realistic intuition—that is all.

path to the work of mourning (Freud S. “Mourning and Melancholia,” in

15 It may be objected that these two poems are not collages. Plastically, I

Freud S. trans. Strachey J. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psycho-

can see the legibility of this. As above-noted, however, Dencker identifies

logical Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. 14 (London: The Hogarth Press), 1917,

collage-as-plastic with (the wider) collage-as-functionally-specific-of-

pp. 237-60). I cannot anticipate anyone's arguing that this would not be

visual poetry.

a concrete poem. (Now that I come to think of it, one could calligraphise

16 'addision mutter' is a borderline case. I cannot tell whether its juxtapo-

an object in, with, every sonnet; that would be in the line of a very nice

sitions were originally three-dimensional.

surrealism (cf. Breton A. “Second Manifesto of Surrealism,” in Breton A.

17 The suggestion is not that this is the only such property I could intuit;

trans. Seaver R. and Lane H. R. Manifestoes of Surrealism (Michigan: Ann

rather, that said property explains the distinction I intuit.

Arbor/University of Michigan Press), 1972, p. 141)).

graphics, said letters cleave to the alphabet itself as to

in the non-visual collage poems were to be subjected

their formal key, thereby resisting every other graphics.

to a cognate manipulation, then, those poems, too,

are activated as graphic without being subjected to

transformational relation.

This, in turn, means that in the visual poems, letters

any graphics, i.e., are given as being neither letters nor graphical since as being graphical inasmuch as they

are letters and letters inasmuch as they are graphical.20

More: in the visual poems, letters are immediately sogiven, i.e., are not so-given only on oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s exiting, e.g., a Necker switching29; for their two faces are one.21,22

This third difference feels transformational;

but if I picture it governing unfragmented words and/ or letters in different fonts, the pictured poem feels

non-visualâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;which is to say: said plastic collapses.

Intuitively, then, all

three

differences

together

generate the visual poems. Now, if I pass to infinity

by means of an (Husserlian) eidetic look30, I find that

would feel visual; and this manifests an immediate,

Speaking in received semiological terms,

this is an embarrassment. As far as the majority of

semiological and semiotic theorists are concerned, the graphematic and the graphic indicate different

systems: only successively can a pre-systemic entity

be consumed according to both. I seem, then, to have got myself by an empirically irreducible absurdity. I will return to this difficulty near the end Part three, to redeem it as a clue on the way to a wider semiology.

Now, if we attempt to represent my intuitive,

merely-real property Venn-diagrammatically, we may get the excessive result,

no work containing said differences feels other than

visual-poetic: said differences feel sufficient for visual poetry.23 (Of course, the letters to which they amount

are jealous, refusing subjection to graphics per se, i.e. are usable only to the exclusion of every graphic and

literary principle. However, this presents my intuition

with no difficulty: I feel them to be, not necessary, but merely sufficient, for visual poetry.) If the letters 20 Being neither-nor is, here, to be distinguished from being both-and.

21 Chrome does not enter the comparative question: the three visual poems are neither uniformly monochrome nor uniformly chromatic. Nor does plastic collage enter the question: neither the visual, nor the nonvisual, poems use it as such. (One may argue that even Helmes uses only an abstract replica, an icon, of plastic collage. It is in this, by the by, that he might differ from Strangulensis.)

22 These visual-poetic letters will not be gestural, i.e. will not approach Artaud's strikes (cf. Derrida J. Artaud le momo: interjections d'appel (Paris: GalilĂŠe), 2002): they may not exceed formal analysis by their alphabet.

23 Granted, even if my intuition remains intransigent on this point (e.g., even if it never encounters some perspicuous new taxonomy), the fact of these letters might pass away; at which point any taxonomy taking account of that fact would suffer a (diachronic) restructuration.

Here, I note something unanticipated. Since I grip said letters

outside structure but, paradoxically, inside-outside Dencker's taxonomy, I possess effective access to what, on integration into that taxonomy, would become a diachronic fragment. In other words, I possess access to a diachronic fragment awaiting development into itself, this in physical time. To put it at its craziest: I possess effective access to diachronic time in-itself, or independent of synchronies.

to wit, the classes of visual and non-visual poetry, one

lying beneath the other to the tune of nothing at all, or

the totally under-determined class of collage poems; which poems, intuitively, can be either visual or non-

visual, this varying as their letters are subjected to no

graphics, respectively. If, properly discomfited, we make an effort to tame this lumpy iconism, we may get the equally excessive result,

a vacillation between absorption by one class neither null

connotation of acquirability (attached to an individual)

the chrome itself no longer a sign; all of which equals an

its name) have been erased. Denotation alone remains, and

nor determined, and absorption by another such class, irrelative, i.e., absolute, vacillation. (It is in motivating

horrors like these that my discussion is most obviously non-taxonomical; it is also therein, however, that my

discussion can most clearly be seen to be “inside-outside” Dencker’s taxonomy.

Astounding as is this absolutism—at least, from

(a) certain point(s) of view—inflects neither the modelled

property’s taxonomical relativity, nor its taxonomical vacuity. It might, then, be asked (and if this were done querulously, I would make no complaint) what the bloody

Sheol can be the critical use of this essay, at least so far.

Part three will answer this question in sketching how my reflections could attain efficacy with respect, not indeed

to the taxonomical acquisition of visual poetry, but to the

production of its form/s.

‘’Some letters sufficient for visual poetry activate

and the suggestion of definite critical mastery (attached to stripped of support/s, it opens only onto the contestation

of the field; stands forward as undecided, i.e. as a matter, until now, not of itself but of processes external to it: stands

forward as no denotation, hence as nothing taxonomical, at all.24,25,26

Inasmuch as “visual poetry” urges itself as a

conceptual term, then (and to the best of my knowledge it has never urged itself as anything else, ever interpolating

narrative finalities into every discourse it enters), it is less a term of art than a pseudo-term only suscitable by

(violent) practice: less like “atrial fibrillation’’ than like

“mind’’ and “quale’’, these latter being terms without formal intensions which, therefore, (mediately) determine no formal extensions.27 The word “vispo”, on the other hand, emerges, at the level of function, as being one

with an operation of critical clearing or destruction,

themselves as graphic by exceeding all and any graphics,

to wit, the indication (without denotation) of a field—that

graphism; all this in the register of immediacy. Non-letters

Now, this indefiniteness suggests to me a real

thereby becoming exterior both to graphematism and

of visual poetry—lacking a defined boundary.

when letters, letters when non-letters, these visual-poetic

complaisance, or incompletion, in said field; one which

of a certain circle. (All this for now, at least: intuitive space

criticism can only aggravate. So far in this essay, I have not

letters are without aspect in a paradoxical way, or by vice may yet ev- or involute, in raw diachronic time.)’’ Such is the taxonomically void, theoretically embarrassing property my discussion has thematised. What all this means for

visual poetry per se, considered in its semiological aspect

(whatever that turns out to be!) leaps of a connection I am forever forbidden to make. So what now?

two: on “vispo”

(descriptive

i.e.

effectively

normative,

prescriptive)

used “visual poetry” conceptually: I have proceeded, not

only intuitively, but with taxonomical masochism. I am about to be called to further contortions.

When “visual poetry” is used by practitioners

thereof, not to invoke a criterial guide, i.e., a formal norm, but to assert the exemplary character of their own works28, 24 It should be possible to verify this by referring to the literature survey in Part one point two.

There is, of course, no “what now?” about it. The connection

25 Visual poetry, evading taxonomy, rhymes oddly with my merely real prop-

the moment, a critic: the rôle’s imperatives are my ethics.

26 That the earliest use of “vispo” I can find—online—dates from 1996 (http://

I am forbidden to make, I am commanded to make; I am, for

Happily for my loathing of double-binds, there is a way to

make a relevantly similar connection. Mapping this way, however, will take us on a detour through the functioning of the word “vispo”.

To get hold of this functioning, it suffices to grip

“vispo” as the product of an operation on “visual poetry”, that operation standing non-diachronic. In “vispo”, “visual poetry” is contracted to jargon: evocation, hence both the

erty. vispo.com/writings/essays/statemen.htm), whereas “visual poetry” can be found in something close to its current functioning in 1979 (http://ww2.rediscov.com/sacknerarchives/Welcome.aspx), suggests, not only that this genealogical, can be mapped onto the external-linguistic, history, but also that one might claim “vispo” for an anti-/critical activism.

27 I might have written: ''these latter being pseudo-terms hiding, and demanding extra-structural help to hide, both the superficial under-determination of '''their''' formal extensions (these, in fact, taxonomical doggy-bags) and—by economic implication—their own radical irreference.''

28 Said works surviving, then, (a) struggle(s) governed by other, more rational finalities.

said practitioners’ actual products emerge as being form/s

therefore, on no visual-poetic practice at all, and this

artists, I am foetally helpless to conceive. To assert oneself

of visual poetry itself; the set of those form/s binding,

essentially. (Viewed through a self- and/or other-image

adapted to rationalising half-hearted, or inconsistent, artistic

practice/s,

all

this

appears

to

rationalise

megalomania. To perdition, however, with that noise. To the sea! To the moon!)

(A coda: as what one may characterise this

subjection, if not as practitioners’ self-position/ings as a visual-poetic artist, then, will be dialectically to subsume the current reality of “visual poetry”.)

In principle, of course, all this cedes the field to

anyone who self-identifies as a visual poet, but at least it

permits the definition of that field;30 besides, on the broken

From what I have been able to show of its current

ground there could begin or continue a battle reducing the

“visual poetry” to n projects of practical definition would

of which could rehabilitate the taxonomical critic; a battle

functioning, it follows that a subjection of the phrase not only render it adequate to its current, non-conceptual

character; it would also identify the sum of actual uses of

it with the operation prosecuted, for now, by “vispo”, i.e., would identify that sum with the genealogy of “visual poetry”—as the phrase confronts us today. vispo

By ceding to said subjection, therefore, descriptive criticism

(including

merely-realistic-intuitive

criticism, the latter being inside-outside taxonomical) will become a witness to its own truth.

so am I summoned from rest at the close of a möbial day to fix my arse in the eye

participating technologies to one: a battle, the sole survivor driven by … well, anything, conceivably, save a forensic

engagement, i.e., anything save its discursive logic. Thus it is that in connection with vispo, normative criticism

can, by becoming witness to its own truth, assure itself the

chance of a future. (I’m put in mind of Melanie Klein restarting an analysand’s stalled development by liberating his oral and early anal sadism.31)

To conclude this Part in and by preparing the next:

the future aside, what can critics have to do with (the practice of) vispo?

Nothing passing through artistry, for a start:

> at present, taxonomical critics of vispo are ill-advised to position themselves as artists, i.e. to take command

of the words which norm their practice; for rather than Henceforward, I will use “vispo” as a synonym for

“visual poetry”.

Sub specie aeternitatis, of course, this subjection

ought only transitorily to be sustained, and even then not for its own sake; to say the least, it would be ex-centric, or

iconoclastic, to demand that a phrase be forever adequate

to its own vacuity, and shockingly glib circularly to defend even a milder such demand. Without, however, imposing

works, emerging as forms, of vispo, forms of vispo would

be nominated forms of propositional truth, which—as we have discovered together—would involve, not only a

merely cosmetic shift (since another enactment of visual

poetry’s current violent suscitation), but also error; indeed, megalomania.31 (Besides, taxonomical critics of vispo are

not to be encouraged under present conditions—at least, as masters, i.e., per se) and

said subjection for, at the very least, the immediate future,

> merely-realistic-intuitive critics, were they to position

never move from rationalisation to practical definition,

either of insisting that certain intuitions are of those

being mis-called norms, their ethical conduct from being

realistic intuition all and any connection with vispo practice. If it were, I would

practitioners of vispo will never refresh their discourses;

themselves as artists, would finish in the pitiable state,

from passivity to activity; never rescue their products from

intuitions’ kind, or of denying the same. (Still, of necessity,

mis-called megalomaniacal; never attain even the hope of

not be writing this essay, as Part three will testify.

named: their own.29

one might, unreasonably, want to call dubious.

29 It should be clear that none of this is to deny practitioners any, or all, of

posite of the practitioner inasmuch as to command one's norms stands, for

vispo's technical vocabularies. It is only to discourage them from every repro-

the practitioner ethical and realistic, for the taxonomical critic unethical and

ductive use thereof. Nor is it to deny to a criticism orchestrated by merely-

megalomaniacal both.

maintaining that field so long mis-, since denegatedly un-,

30 Albeit—yes—as the formal extension of a concept whose relevance some31 Under current conditions, we can term the taxonomical critic a neat op-

these critics can get along without the fiat lux, albeit

suffocate on the Everest of an ironic diction? Well,

answerable only over n singular lives. For my part, Sir,

in rather an equivocal way.)

So I ask the question again, anew, with dread

around my smile, like an optimist: what is there left, today, for critics of vispo to become?

Today, anything these critics say—be it

taxonomical or intuitive—will, without amounting

to a mark, stand undecidable with respect to the field of vispo, i.e. will stand a-structural, or negatively saturated, or non-iterable, with respect thereto; in the

case of the taxonomical critic because her words occult

their own functioning, and in the case of the intuitive critic because her words tend to lack taxonomical relevance. Should a vispo artist make use of a critical

saying, however, that saying will pass into vispo’s

form/s, thus becoming structural. Here, unexpectedly, repetition conditions and exceeds iterability rather than (as for Derrida32) vice versa; here, too, albeit

blindly, the critic can inflect a battle whose final

stake is one possibility of descriptive criticism itself.

this is a psychological rather than a logical question, I care too small—upon my word! too small to sketch a hen.)

three

I hurt, now. I must go quickly. OK. In this Part, I will expand on Part one point

two’s specific property in the character of a peddler

of vacuities, hungry for en-writingment; for only by

adopting this stance can I hope to stand in a relation

of efficacy with vispo’s living reality. (I can’t, of course, hope to stand in a relation of critical efficacy therewith, i.e. in one of omnipotent fantasy, or - the otherwise theoretical - zero hallucination; but such, such is the

vale! Such are the dears, my tears.) This last Part, then, I commend to the artists, along with an anxious, fluting smile.34

In other words, here is a means whereby the critic can

Liminal introspection and reflection suggest

endowed with relevance to, since with efficacy in, that

“language’’ into

her voice that it may be born, with her, away from

axis of “long-term memory”—that is: to be fabulated,

Granted, this is not quite the standard mode of access;

indeterminate algorithm.35 These instances, I will

connect to the field of vispo, i.e. can have her critique/s

that one might decompose what is ordinarily called

field: here is a ventriloquy whereby she can jettison

instances, to be fabulated, each, in terms of a specific

her, in characterising a particular ostensive target.

each, in terms, not of actuality, but of metaphysically

but it seems sufficiently therelike to keep vispo criticism alive pending more monolithic times.

two

logically

incommensurable

name “language’’ and “structure in the narrow sense’’ (the latter henceforward simply “structure’’).

-Language will, whether in whole, span certain

For the foreseeable future, then, a proper rôle

“responses” to “graphetics”, “phonetics” or other such

artists that those vacuities might take on iterability, or

-Structure will, whether in whole, sink beneath what

for the critic of vispo will be to hawk vacuities to vispo be en-writinged. It follows that for now, the fiat lux 32

must rest with practitioners: critics stand forbidden all and any artistry, i.e. all and any elevation of their

own productions (sic), i.e. all and any acts of earnest taxonomy per se.33

(One might worry: will not taxonomical critics

32 Forgive me forgive. forgive

‘etics - whencever their transmission. spans ‘etic “responses” to non-‘etics.36

34 To do this is to shunt this essay's target reader sideways. Still, the stance's Other is only a stamp away.

35 Gloss.–Beyond its ground, actuality x (thing or moment of language) will partake of a particular, determined, “biological response” to its ontic correlate, “x” - that is: to x as it “is” in onticity. (By “onticity”, I mean the fundamental, i.e., irreal, “level” the sole site of (those singular unities) causations.)

36 Note: “structure”, here, invokes a different sense than that so far in-

33 Thus is prepared paragraph three of Part one point one. At last! you

voked. Until now, I have used the word to denote a taxonomical artifice;

might say, whereupon I will smile uneasily and study my arms.

as of now, I will use it, albeit fantastically, to recall, rather, the matrix of

Thus, e.g., voices will be linguistic, while the matrix which, teeth folded into its papery lips, flits behind

one’s back while one is yelling that a beast has gone must, or that ten tiny mouths have opened in one’s

knuckles, or that the stars’ bestiary is too plausible to

sing, or whatever else keeps sales-people from coming back to one’s door, will be structure.

(It follows that structure is not only really

transcendent, i.e. no ontic principle; it is (sic!) also

metaphysical. It will, in effect, shunt every nomination

Of necessity, then, at onticity, the vispo letter

is (sic!) both

- helpless to support the production of a letter—while yet, given what follows, indicating that production, and - helpless to support the production of a non-letter— while yet, given what precedes, indicating that production.

(At this point, it may profitably be noted that an

of it37 into fantasy: credulous internalism. Therefore, she

exposed, is an unused, letter, in that it really completes

sufficient-for-vispo, or vispo letter, will experience

a letter determines a “response” over structure; from

ever surprised by its own results, held in a frantic round

may not enter the production of a vispo, letter. In

non-predictive, ever shrewdly model-agnostic. To see

production only where it is not a unit. Thus structure

letter under the—not strictly linguistic—semiology

Vispoetic practice will be reducible to no real plastic.

who positions herself as a vispo artist using my letter-

its own name. Of necessity, then, the correlate of such

vispoetic practice, either as being ever opaque to itself,

which it follows that the correlate of an exposed,

of modelling, or as being ever self-transparent, ever

other words: the vispo letter’s correlate may support

this —and more!—it will suffice to consider the vispo

is (sic!), here, no ontic principle—just as expected.

invoked above.)

Given this, it is, I suppose, reassuring that, so far,

According to this semiology, the vispo letter per

wherever we have found vispo letters, we have found

vice of a circle, must bud from some “response” to some

of an isolated letter, no single letter being, as such,

own possible solutions. In other words: the vispo letter

However, we should resist any temptation to nominate

that its ontic correlate avoid determining

se, being paradoxically without aspect, or aspectless by

the same plastic: a plastic beyond the capabilities

“graphetic”, that response agnostic with respect to its

able to organise a visual field while remaining itself.

per se can be, as it were, produced only on condition

this, as the, vispo-letteral plastic.39)

To summarise, then: the vispo letter’s correlate

indicates a quadruple-binding transmission whose

- a “response” unto language

interim, or anti-, product is a hole in reality the shape

and

of a quondam sub-signifier; a hole a singularity for

- a “response” unto non-language

images. Now, if that hole were filled, and not40 merely

(thus, a product over structure),

suffered, it would cede to a product both letter and non-

all while passing into the evocation of language and

letter: a product really in-different to its constitutive

relevant “response” in a particular half-determined

(the immanence of transcendental im/possibility!)

attracting and repelling a swarm of the possible

such holes are never but suffered, idealising themselves

interpretation.38

cedence to analphabetic letters—some of whose

the

differences; a product really prior to difference: trace

“state” such that it passes into a product (sic!) both

shifted into the real. In my ex-experience, however,

images, both encouraging and discouraging paranoid

in retro-act to the extent of their triumph in mumming

non-language, respectively; this

suspending

one's own semantics and syntax.

properties I will examine in a moment. It remains that

37 Like this one?

39 In effect, my discussion of William Gillespie’s Word Museum will insist

38 My ex-experience suggests that this passing will always occur, i.e. that

on this.

to prevent it, one would need the “respondent” equivalent of exotic mat-

40 As alone, I induce, is possible. See, too, “Dreams, speaking as a human

ter.

person” below.

said holes confess themselves by a closure of memory, or the erosion around said analphabetic letters even of the possibility of encorporation.

there beats a marvellous gratuity. dpbd solves this tension, first by exacerbating

it. The eponymous b is not present as are d and p: I am

This erosion is inexplicable in real terms, like

tempted to find b in d and p, the latter two already

cases, production (sic!) generates no becoming because

to adopt a four-dimensional view of three-dimensional

the analphabetism which is its parental home: in both it double-binds paranoid interpretation; product (sic!)

indicates no genesis. In other words: as above-noted, vispo-letteral practice is irreducible to any real plastic.

Thus it is that vispo letters are (sic!) semiological

monsters, which monsters were, for me, the “clue” named in passing by Part one point two: a clue which

set me looking for the irreal grounds of some real entities and, in time, brought me to the semiology invoked in this essay. (Now that I think of it, you might

find this sequence indicated by my narrative’s nearidentification of modelling and indication, particularly evident in the close readings to follow, or by that narrative’s psychiatric quality.41)

To turn, now, to some examples:

entities—hence “exacerbating”.) But at the last moment, b cannons in as a negative, a revenant, an

absence refusing its absence: it interrupts the visual

field—or delivers it to letteral organisation—and in so doing rescues the other letters as such. Thus it is that

an allegory of the relations which bqqqb enacts can win a piece for the vispo letter.

dpbdbdbp is a palimpsest of dpbd, with the

upper/right half occupied by a detail of the upper/ right half of dpbd.

dpbp is a palimpsest of dpbdbdpb, with the

lower/left half occupied by a detail of the lower/left half of dpbbddpb.

- Williams’s aiddia presents anti-literary letters either

1. five pieces, mike cannell33 2. aiddia, or language was chewing the walls, john moore williams

tending not to be distinct. (So to do, of course, would be

34

graphised without loss or bent to a graphics of picture planes; being recognisably of the same font, they must

losslessly have been graphised. 3-D imagery, then, is

Plastically, these two works seem to be of

not merely absent, but burnt from this piece: the three

alphabet as their formal key nevertheless graphically

with the red/white divide, hitherto a vertex, into

the distraction/s of Denckeran collage. In this, said

birth to, and born as, letters, can constitute neither

one species: in each, letters which retain the Roman

spatial axes visible in the red half are forced, together

organise their visual environment—this time without

standing abstract i’s; the white beyond, both giving

works leap of exemplary vispo letters.

figure nor ground; and the central, superficially non-

Each piece distinguishes itself, however, by its

particular graphic activity.

- Cannell’s bdbdbdp is a detail of roughly the lower

right quadrant of dpbp.

In (his) bqqqb, the highly-defined circular

space —the slow wheeling of the letters—is on the edge of eliminating the formal distinctness of b and

q, i.e., is on the edge of cancelling the piece’s axes, or affording a view to two, as is a 4-D view to three, dimensions. The letters’ survival as such, then, is in

permanent tension with the spatial organisation of

the piece. Here, the vispo letter is Neckered to the non-: 41 Psychiatric, but without the non-cyclicality of that discourse.

letteral tangle is letteralised by iteration in a manner

recalling MC Escher. Here, a consistent typography actually reverses a graphics, resulting in vispo letters of untypical pleasure.

3. word museum, william gillespie35

Here, by virtue of being 3-D shells, the letters

dis-occult, not their concrete materiality (to wit, that

of what would be called their signifiers), but their abstract materiality: their materiality as abstract

objects, mimetic of letters, therefore, only to a look mired in fantasy.42 Thus it is that said objects cease

42 At the risk of multiplying Husserlian nonsense, one might term this materiality “the eidetic materiality of an unreduced intentional object”; one might hypothesise, too, that 2-D exhibitions thereof will digress into

to be mimetic without undergoing even the Planckest

¶

of formal deformations, i.e., become, in effect, the still-

letteral organisers of their visual—an abstract—space.

These, too, are exemplary vispo letters. to note.

1.

Here, there are four things of crucial interest Since Gillespie’s, could amount to vispo, letters

even if isolated (which should be manifest), none may

have an alphabetic correlate. In other words: more than one ‘’’kind’’’ of correlate suffices for vispo letters.

To cushion this conclusion a little, 2.

The plastic used by Gillespie is, as compared to

the plastics so far exhibited, qualitatively new.

Therefore, 3.

Though it seemed to imply a plastic, Part one

point two’s merely real property is functional: a plastic

unanticipated thereby has shown itself adequate thereto.

It seems, then, that

4.

When the vispo letter is the target, a general

plastic description passes into a particular functional one. One might find in this an index of the vispo letter’s

inexplicability by past semiological and semiotic theories.

4. piece, peter fraterdeus36

Functionally, this piece is almost identical to

Gillespie’s, which, speaking in terms of the signifier

it employs, is confounding, for said signifier is photographic: The piece is a photograph of so many

letters’ concrete materialities. Why is it that these

concrete, are able functionally to approach abstract, materialities in being (so-)photographed? Because they

have been abstracted plastically—in the metalwork— and then captured by an abstracting shot.

It may be inferred from this that Fraterdeus

has decisively widened the vispo letter’s technological, as Gillespie has widened its formal, and Williams its affective, vocabulary.

dis-occultion of what would be called the relevant signifier/s.

One might note here that, like Part one

point two’s general plastic description, the above descriptions of particular vispo letters do no more than

posit contradictory determinations, i.e., do no more

than name the effect to be explained, passing, in their

inadequacy, into one particular functional description.

We should not be surprised by this: we already knew that, by vice of its non-genesis, the vispo letter is, in classical terms, a semiological monster.

b-side: dreams, writing as a human person

My ex-experience suggests to me that the vispo

ground of its own thinkability; in other words, it would affect the skeleton of Reason. If we draw an analogy

letter’s correlate can enter no production but that of a

with the dream, the ‘’’respondent’’’ to the vispo-letteral

essay’s acquisition of that correlate tickles me to a

- an analyst supporting the integration into Reason’s

“respond” to said correlate, i.e., to be in the presence

i.e.,

sloppy pulse of reality’s unconscious.43 However, this

correlate becomes

wilder scene: imagine! “something” able (actively) to

skeleton of an in-different letter, a repressed-that-was,

of the vispo letter that letter in a state (sic!) of indifference!

Dreams will help me to ruminate this

“something” a little. A dream is a message whose having-

been-broadcast is the effect of its beingconsumed, and whose being-consumed is identical with its

attainment, in the dream-reporter, of a—finally—nonsemiological efficacy; that is: a certain in-difference, a

- in part, the site of that integration, i.e., - in part, the It (Es, or id) of that skeleton, i.e., - in part, that skeleton itself in a state of radical regression, or ideal frustration.

certain tracété. Everything else is resistance in a circuit

are more and other than dreams.

an in-different letter. More: it would be a dream which,

with the dreamer for termini. In other words: dreams

By contrast, a produced, is a real, in-different

letter, independent of any personal circuit, whether intra-.44

The dream trace attains in-difference by

originating

in

some

immediate

non-linguistic

inflection of the dream-reporter. By contrast, the in-

difference of the vispo-letteral trace (or “non-human”

vispo letter) would be immediate: independent of such

a circuit. If, therefore, one were to seek from the vispo-

In other words, produced, the vispo-letteral

trace would be an in-different letter a dream, a dream

drawing its analyst through its vanishing-point, absolutised the anatomy of a moment in time.46

In the meantime, vispo-letteral correlates

form bloody bouquets in the matrix of matrices, each calling to and for a utopian “body”; a “body” whose

“responses” must track histories from nowhere/

themselves, thrilling Reason’s bones …. It is vertigo, i.e., magical need to be able to discern, even if only figmentally, the radiance of such conflagrations.

letteral trace a non-linguistic inflection, one would

This book is unique even in vispo. A

in the sole (non-transcendent) network in which that

community/ies of ascetics, it parts the real to flog to

relations. (I submit that one would find said inflection

its telos, whose object —an entropic sky—is racked,

have to seek it, not in the beholder of that trace, but

staggered corrosion, the anti-capital of (a) brilliant

trace may be inserted: the total network of taxonomical

flog irrationalism - or to titillate that need, replete of

there, too, but it passes my persimmon to insist.)45

meanwhile, by the world’s living.

All of this is interesting in that it implies

IM K 11

that, if the vispo-letteral non-linguistic inflection

ever obtained, in affecting the taxonomical network

it would affect abstract reality, as the (unthinkable) 43 This unconscious a Lacanian one (cf. Lacan J. and Miller J.-A. trans.

Sheridan A. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis (London: Penguin), 1979, p. 43).

46 None of this can be said of the letter in Joyce J. Finnegans Wake (St

44 Yes …. This seems impossible. If I am right, we have fallen over a dis-

Ives: Penguin), 1992, which tables the question: what is the import to

cursive prediction for irreal '''biology''' in the course of meditating vispo.

Joyce's late project of the fact that in the Wake, dream and letter are dis-

45 It should!

identified since letter per se is preserved?

afterthoughts (not for publication), added vi/11

(1)

In particular, one’s own language suggests

“structure” could be real; but this is only paralogism: real, structure would indicate (real) non-linguistic linguisticals, which is contradictory (as opposed to paradoxical:)).

(2)

To analyse language is only to alter, not to lay

(3)

Structure: “usage” alienated as logos, as (part

(4)

What has been called “reference” reverses

hands on, structure.

of) this moment of reality (and this, and this ….).

the relevant priority—horrible modesty!—and is

an artifice of the gap between act and feed-back: is

cybernetic acid reflux. (That’s an awful(ly) Will Self image.:)) (5)

Structure, a wedge, betrays.

(6)

Transmission:

‘etix

Response:

‘etic

/

~’etic |

‘etic

/

~’etic |

|

over structure

languaging

~languaging

(End]no[tes) and the Art of Reading,” Open Letter series 4 no. 7 (Spring 1984).

1 www.thing.net/~grist/l&d/dencker/ 14 http://www.gardendigest.com/concrete/ denckere.htm concr1.htm 2 http://www.marquette.edu/haggerty/ 15 http://www.poetryfoundation.org/journal/ documents/visual_poetry_cat.pdf, or Visual article.html?id=182397, or Huth G. “Visual Poetry: Contemporary Art from Italy ed. Carter Poetry Today,” Poetry (Nov. 2008).

C. (Wisconsin: Patrick and Beatrice Haggerty 16 http://ronsilliman.blogspot.com/2003/07/ Museum of Art/Marquette University), 2005. in-sense-these-works-function-more-or.html 3 http://www.cs.rochester.edu/~nelson/ 17 http://www.arras.net/weblog/000702.html courses/cryptology/phaistos_disk/phaistos_ disk.html 18 http://www.mouvementdanette.be/dada/ textes/breton/montdepiete/corset.htm, or 4 http://www.mosaici.org.uk/index.

Breton A. ‘The Mysterious Corset’ in Breton php?p=show_item_home&ID=40 A. trans Zavatsky B. and Rogow Z. Earthlight 5 http://www.marquette.edu/haggerty/ (California: Sun and Moon Press), 1993, p. 31. documents/visual_poetry_cat.pdf, or Visual 19 http://dadasurr.blogspot.com/2010/02/ Poetry: Contemporary Art from Italy ed. Carter blog-post.html, or Tzara T. ‘Boxe’, SIC #42-3 C. (Wisconsin: Patrick and Beatrice Haggerty (March-April 1919).

Museum of Art/Marquette University), 2005.

20 http://w5ran.com/2010/11/easter-wings6 http://www.scribd.com/doc/36412775/ a-pattern-poem/, or Herbert G. The English Marco-Giovenale-On-Asemic-and-Vispo Poems of George Herbert ed. Patrides C. A. 7 http://www.marquette.edu/haggerty/ (London: Dent), 1977. documents/visual_poetry_cat.pdf, or Visual 21 http://www.spidertangle.net/the_book/ Poetry: Contemporary Art from Italy ed. Carter ficus.html, or Spidertangle _The Book_ ed. aND C. (Wisconsin: Patrick and Beatrice Haggerty m. (Wisconsin: Xexoxial Editions), 2002.

Museum of Art/Marquette University), 2005.

22 An Anthology of Concrete Poetry ed.

8 http://www.thing.net/~grist/l&d/menzes/ Williams E. (New York: Something Else Press le-menez.htm, or Menezes P. Poetics and Inc.), 1967.

Visuality: A Trajectory of Contemporary 23 An Anthology of Concrete Poetry ed.

Brazilian Poetry (California: San Diego State Williams E. (New York: Something Else Press University Press), 1995.

Inc.), 1967.

9 http://www.thing.net/~grist/l&d/padin/ lcptitle.htm 10 http://vispo.com/writings/essays/ statemen.htm 11 http://poeticks.com/2010/03/16/entry-119defining-visual-poetry-again/ 12 http://acg.media.mit.edu/projects/stream/ 13 http://www.thing.net/~grist/ld/young/ notation/notate.htm, or Young K. “Notation

24 http://www.madhattersreview.com/ issue10/vispo_grumman.shtml 25 http://www.poetryfoundation.org/archive/ poem.html?id=182404, or Poetry (Nov. 2008).

26 http://www.poetryfoundation.org/archive/ poem.html?id=182407, or Poetry (Nov. 2008).

27 See The Bleed 0.1, forthcoming.

28 http://www.spidertangle.net/the_book/ satanovsky.html, or Spidertangle _The Book_

ed. aND m. (Wisconsin: Xexoxial Editions), 2002.

29 http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ NeckerCube.html 30 Cf. Husserl E. trans. Boyce-Gibson W. R. Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology (London: George Allen and Unwin), 1931, pp. 54-6.

31 Cf. Klein M â&#x20AC;&#x153;The importance of symbol formation in the development of the egoâ&#x20AC;? in Klein M ed. Mitchell J. The Selected Melanie Klein (London: Penguin), 1986, pp. 95-111.

32 Cf. Derrida J. trans. Weber S. Limited Inc (Illinois: Northwestern University Press), 1988.

33 See The Bleed 0.1, forthcoming.

34 http://fissuresofmen.blogspot.com/2010/12/ aiddia-or-language-was-chewing-walls.html 35 http://spinelessbooks.com/wordmuseum 36 http://www.spidertangle.net/the_book/ fraterdeus.html, or Spidertangle _The Book_ ed. aND m. (Wisconsin: Xexoxial Editions), 2002.

avantexte press

the bleed is that which runs to the edge of the page, and, in truth, beond the bleed is that which runs to the edge of the page, the in truth, beond the bleed is and, which bleed runs that to the edge of that which the page, and, in truth, beond the bleed is runs that which runs to the

edge of the page, in end truth,

to and, pages beond the bleed is that which runs and, to in the edge of the page, and, in truth, beond the bleed is

truth b e yond that which runs to the edge of

the page, and, in truth, beond the

bleed is that which runs to the

edge of the page, and, in truth,

beond the bleed is that which

runs to the edge of the page,

and, in truth, beond the bleed is

that which runs to the edge of

the page, and, in truth, beond the

bleed is that which runs to the

edge of the page, and, in truth,

beond the bleed is that which

runs to the edge of the page,

and, in truth, beond the bleed is.