Dear Allison, Steve, Brian:
Sending this before I head off for another
bout of protesting the UHM budget cuts. The conversations have been fascinating. Some
thoughts, not intended (in the least) as criticism, but as
participation:
--[Allison Cobb's power point on plastics & her research on them highlighted the networks that join us & our plastics.] The emphasis on connections that you all make: as someone
interested in how to write about spirit, which inevitably means connections, links, I find myself getting swept
up into a kind of negative sublime here. How does one write about
spirit-connections without using the words of the world, matter? How can
one do it while acknowledging the insufficiency and destructiveness of
so many connections, while finding ways to honor those we feel on our
meditation pillows?
--Perhaps one way is to value
attention over attachment. The meditative poem pauses long enough to
notice, but does not stop, does not reach out to take the thing or idea
and put it in a sack like plastic rubbish. Plastic is the opposite of
meditation. I can imagine a Clark Coolidge-like "The Plastic
Text," instead of "Crystal," even as the content would necessarily be
different. The notions of "desire" and "grief" and "fear" are all
attachments. We can feel desire for plastic as easily as for a flower.
It's hard to realize that we need to let go of both flower and plastic,
if perhaps in different ways.
--According to Steve's important work, the way those of us are non-indigenous have to connect to the land may be by way of the idea
of the commons. But don't we need to separate that out from the fact
that rich aristocrats could send their horses across the commons to hunt
foxes in 18C England? That that historical period was also fraught with
chasms between rich and poor, employer and toiler? That the commons was
perhaps not a solution, but another wedge between anger and action? How can we create a commons not attached to bad economics, but to what Steve later called "a basic level of care for all human beings" that our societies ought to provide?
--Is
poetry then a rubbish to energy project? Or is analogy itself, Eliot's catalyst, suspect now? I I switched from poetry to prose poetry at
the point at which I found the drive of my poems to be toward
abstraction (a gathering of objects toward an idea) rather than as a
consideration of the world in front of me. That tension remains in the
spaces between the sentences, and I can't seem to live without it.
--I
wonder where Allison sees the end point of research into the car part that generated her project,
Autobiography of Plastic?
If you could find the very hole in the ground, what then? Back to
considerations of origins (which we tend to value) over what comes after
(which we tend to suspect). As an adoptive mother whose children both
know members of their birth families, I understand both the lure of origins
and the significance of the families that come after. I honor my
children's ancestors, but I am their parent. The adoption of the car
part is quite profound, to my mind, because it exists apart from its
definite, marked history. It enters the world of the mystery, again
miming the spirit, without being part of it.
--So I'd come
at this from a spiritual and an adoptive poetics. Adoption need not be
appropriation, though many people come at it from that angle. Spirit
need not discard the words of this world, though we do need to be
suspicious of Emersonian gyres of meaning that fail to address material
problems on the ground.
Sorry if this seems redundant. But
I needed to think it out a bit this morning. Finding your visits
wonderful and various. Just wish they were not in the "deep, dark
November" of the semester's soul!
aloha, Susan
PS This has been revised from an email sent to the poets a few days ago.
1 comment:
Lovely and thought-provoking comments, Susan. Thanks for sharing a bit of your visitors' visit this way. Must have been a great conversation.
JS
Post a Comment