Framing and Identity in Conceptual Poetics

Framing and Identity in Conceptual Poetics

At the recent Conceptual Poetics Symposium at the Poetry Center of the University of Arizona the key word seemed to be “framing.” The idea that words could be objectified to erase the identity of the writer–or to redefine what writing is–was explored through the notion of arrangement. This aesthetic sees words as objects to be placed in various structures through “language games” and distinguishes itself from an aesthetic in which the writer arranges the words as they represent his or her experience. In Conceptual Poetics, its practitioners argue, writing is freed from the limitations of one subjective viewpoint–the “lyric I” of confessional or romantic writers. Words are out there for anyone to place into “formal constraints.” What I found most interesting was the idea of subjectivities–the notion of replacing the “Lyric I” with several points of views or eyes looking out through various frames. The tools of technology allow poets to release the poem from the printed page and create hybrids with art, music, video games–whatever suits the “eye’s” fancy. To paraphrase one of the poets as he framed his chin and top of his head with his hand, what do we do with this space? The gesture conveyed visually that “this space” is a place from which to look out, not to look within. Continue reading →

Self and Other in Bahktin

Mikhail Bakhtin

‘I am conscious of myself and become myself only through revealing myself for another, through another and with the help of another. The most important acts constituting self-consciousness are determined by a relationship toward another consciousness [toward a thou]…The very being of man internal and external is the deepest communion. To be means to communicate…To be means to be for another, and through the other for oneself. A person has no internal soveriegn territory, he is wholly and always on the boundary: looking inside himself he looks into the eyes of another or with the eyes of another…I cannot manage without another, I cannot become myself without another.’

Text reproduced from: Thinking space By Mike Crang, N. J. Thrift, 2000:pp73/74

Image reproduced from http://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/album/index2.htm

A Poetics of Detail

‘The detail discloses hidden elements within a diegesis – a formulation that applies to psychoanalysis as much as it applies to the interpretation of narrative generally. Freud creates an interpretive pradagim in which details function as clues, distractions or unarticulated dimensions of diegesis. […] Details need only suggest in their effects of authenticity or usualness that they belong to a possible world. Framing that world, which can be entirely made up, ‘details provide an important aesthetic function when their concreteness, historical accuracy, or presicision captures and sustains the readers attention or conveys to him the illusion of immediacy’. That immediacy need not spring from the coherence of details. They can exist independent of each other, like so many curiosities in a cabinet.  For this reason details resemble material goods; the precise captures the essential qualities of an object.’

Perceived and interpreted, details offer counter narratives within narratives, they supplement stories with extra diegectical importance. In The Pleasure of the Text, Roland Barthes reflects on details as narrative information: ‘Why this curiosity for tiny details, schedules, meals, habits, clothes and so on. Is this the fantasmic taste of reality [‘the materiality of this once existed’]?. Is it not a fantasy itself which summons the detail, the minutiae, private scene in which I might find my place at last’?. Fantasy stakes its claim in the kingdom of the detail. Whereas the realist text purports to offer historical veracity through a grisaille of details, details admit speculation, fantasy, even the fantasmic. The detail in this sense is not available for public scrutiny or sharing. The detail re-fetishizes ownership through particularity.’

Enchanted Objects: visual art in contemporary fiction, 2010:pp64/65