]]> hand & often employs the figure of the dance as an allegory for his own creative process. I must say that I never saw him truly dance and can’t quite imagine him actually doing so. My own memory is of a man most at home sitting down. Even when he wore his cape publicly its effect was to enshroud the body. The one period in which he did emphasize the line in his readings – the presentation of the complete at least to that point. Passages over a couple of readings in Berkeley in 1970 or ’71¹ – Duncan audibly counted to three between each line of text whispering the numbers as he went. My own personal image of the Projectivists & the body is of Denise Levertov the MC at a large vastly overcrowded anti-war reading at Glide Church in San Francisco getting genuinely hysterical onstage at the sight of The People’s Prick an attendee who turn up in a six-foot tall bright pink terrycloth dildo costume. She threatened to shut the evening down on the spot and it took several of her peers to talk her down from this position her own body visibly trembling with anger. She did not view this little bit of agitprop attendance – a direct antecedent. I suppose of the panda who showed up at my reading last month in Ashland – in the spirit of women going topless at rock concerts common enough at the time but rather in the sense of the penis as an ever-present assault on women. Where is the body in this sense fragments almost instantly into questions of whose body is it? What might have happened had The People’s Prick been any other color even blue? In 1967 in an undergraduate writing class taught by Jack Gilbert at San Francisco State two dancers suddenly burst through the door stark naked did a short duet that was only vaguely erotic & dashed back out across the hall where presumably their clothes were waiting in another classroom. Jack had us each write down what we saw. The remainder of the class consisted of a demonstration of how different the experience was for each that the eyewitness version was hardly neutral or objective. That same year in another course taught by George Hitchcock he argued repeatedly that any author of a play needed occasionally to act if only to understand that you had to write from the perspective of the actor that you couldn’t give the actor things to do that were physically impossible. In 1970. I heard that same argument being made in an undergraduate drama class at UC Berkeley – I forget that teacher’s name – but this was a class in which some students actually had sex on stage. This was. I suppose a logical next step after Michael McClure’s The Beard which had been prosecuted a few years earlier largely because of the simulated act of cunnilingus that occurs during the play’s climax. The one time I saw The Beard performed – at the Fillmore Auditorium to a sizeable audience – the performers had mics which rendered the physical & practical process of Billy the Kid proclaiming his lines from between Jean Harlow’s thighs problematic to say the least. The class at Berkeley may have been notorious but it was never busted tho perhaps that was because in the year of Kent State & the way UC among so many other campuses responded by transforming into fulltime antiwar machines canceling all else teenagers having sex in front of their peers was the least of anybody’s problems. I’m reminded that Steve Benson once played Billy the Kid in a production of The Beard tho it’s not clear to me quite where or when. Before I knew him certainly. Steve is the person I think of first when I hear the question where is the body asked in connection with language poetry. All of his performance pieces seem rooted in the body such as improvising onstage while listening to a work of classical music over headphones. So much of what actually occurs way beyond what you can see in the later printed text has to do with his own body language full of hesitation & literal twitches even tho he is one of the most graceful men I’ve ever known. As wonderful as Steve’s texts are those that replicate his performances function to my mind as documenta – the “real” occasion is the performance itself in real time not replicable as such. One step – and only one step – removed from this is the work of the language version of Poet’s Theater and especially the writing of Carla Harryman both there and in her other work that continues to this day. Hardly any accusation about language poetry makes me more furious than the one that it had (has) no relation to the body. One hears this in different forms – two that I’ve come across recently were that the language poets never mention sex and “language poets can’t dance” – neither claim is even remotely true. It is no accident that the first poem in The Age of Huts. Ketjak alludes both in its title & formal structure to the by that name nor that Universe are parts. One need only the David Lewiston recording to find out exactly where I’m coming from as a poet. On the question of sex in my poetry just spend a few pages reading The Age of Huts. Nor is it coincidental that the vast majority of my poems are originally written by hand in notebooks. In The Alphabet only my collaboration with Rae Armantrout. Engines was first composed entirely on a keyboard. One could. I think go through the entire roster of contributors to The Grand Piano and discover much the same all through the list. Indeed. I responded to an earlier generation of this same insinuation about the lack of eroticism in language poetry in that instance from with the following on : I think there's lots of eroticism in most all of my langpo friends. Carla Harryman and Lyn Hejinian's collaboration The Wide Road would be an obvious place to start but Bob Perelman's early 11 Romantic Positions wouldn't be bad either (tho it's a more fugitive work). I've been criticized for having too much in my own writing. So your question puzzles me noulipian Analects which is an anthology that might be said to report on cover and/or have been provoked by. noulipo was to examine the legacy of Oulipian constraint-based writing among Anglophone writers. Organized by Matias Viegener and Christine Wertheim the event consisted of five discussion panels a summary panel and two evening readings. I just happened at this same moment to be reading a series of reports about the Politics of Constraint panel at this same event specifically Juliana Spahr & Stephanie Young’s attempt to spell out what they called which must stand for Feminist Oulipo much in the way that noulipo signifies an Oulipo + n at least theoretically an unknown a supplement a transformation to a new stage. The conference itself appears to have been interesting even if hijacked to some degree by the success by scandal of Spahr & Young who stripped during their presentation & were joined by three other naked performers and who made claims made about the nature of Oulipo & the body especially women’s bodies that turned out to be controversial. A lot of this was documented in the of one of the better webzines around. Of particular interest are the text of the event itself. Kenneth Goldsmith’s scolding which begins (not inaccurately) Also worth noting here are Young’s of the event which she uses as a lead-in to the paper itself and Joseph Mosconi’s far more reportorial essay presented on. An edited version of Mosconi’s piece appears in noulipian Analects under “Politics of Constraint: The Panel.” I have to admit that I concur with Goldsmith’s judgment here – Spahr & Young had taken some potshots at Fidget – and that the whole conference as presented in this anthology reminds me of Rae Armantrout’s joke that she has to bring her very worn copy of the Rolling Stones LP Let it Bleed to school at least once each year to let certain undergraduates know that they did not invent nihilism punk dressing in black whatever. Oulipo itself represents but a minuscule fraction of constraint-based literature – one can trace it back well past the trobar clus of the troubadours to the invention of rhyme itself – and to note that a conference on constraint-based literature that so fetishizes Oulipo as this one did has already gone off the tracks In the actual instance of Young & Spahr the constraint placed on their piece on the body & writing was not the omission of the letter r from portions of the text nearly so much as it was historical amnesia. They’re permitted to discover that they have bodies by virtue of forgetting that everybody else got there first. At one level this is not unlike children who cannot imagine the erotic lives of their parents. By comparison the body in language poetry occurs not only in Steve Benson’s performances or Poet’s Theater – they’re just the obvious places. Steve Benson once wrote a work that was composed in a notebook while he waited for his computer to boot up each date. How can anything that entails time not entail the body? What else is there after all through which to experience this? In each paragraph was written while on a lunch break most of them sitting in Dolores Park. Sitting Up. Standing. Taking Steps was composed entirely on public transit. Dare I say likewise for BART? What’s perhaps unique about Spahr & Young’s definition of the body in the work of art is that they mean the body as an object of the gaze which is something quite a bit different – and far narrower – than the body as such. Language poetry came into being in San Francisco within a literary community that had included Kathy Acker ( Noulipo conference co-convener Matias Viegener. Acker’s literary executor must know this) and that her works were as important for their use of procedures as they were for her formula that pornography plus plagiarism equals autobiography. Acker went so far as to work in the sex industry making low-end porn flicks that would play in the Tenderloin back when I still worked there. Her work in that context has to be seen in the broader historical framework that included for example the existence of both the & the the post-Stonewall pre-AIDS explosion of gay sex-positive culture a large infrastructure of bath houses in San Francisco where relatively anonymous sex was not uncommon including one or two bath houses aimed at least partly at the straight community. It’s in this frame that I would argue happily that what was/is revolutionary about Kathy Acker was not that she was a writer who was willing to fuck onscreen or to kiss & tell in her writing but that she breached the bad girl post-Burroughs genre of the novel using procedures. This is after all a dozen years after works like It’s true that in the 1970s poets who were then younger & single or at least not yet fixed in their life partnerships did more and more various things than these same people do today turning 60. When I first met X that language poet he was living as part of a threesome an arrangement that has roots in literature back to Mayakovsky & the Briks or to H. D.. Bryher & Kenneth Macpherson. But this is really no different than learning that my octogenarian neighbors here in suburban were actively swapping partners at parties during that same period. Language poetry is not only more of a moment than a movement but it likewise is very much a creature of its time. One might characterize langpo precisely as a writing that took place between the last years of the Vietnam war & the shock of AIDS in the early 1980s. Oulipo is itself no less an historical phenomenon bounded in time & geography with constraints as to gender as well as textual practices. Spahr & Young may well be on safe ground critiquing the absence of women as card-carrying Oulipo members. But their critique collapses when they attempt to expand this frame rather ahistorically outward. And Noulipo’s own frame derivative rather than new tends to obscure the degree to which many of its conference presenters listed by novelist Caroline Bergvall. Christian Bök. Johanna Drucker. Paul Fournel. Jen Hofer. Tan Lin. Bernadette Mayer. Ian Monk. Joseph Mosconi. Harryette Mullen. Doug Nufer. Vanessa Place. Janet Sarbanes. Juliana Spahr. Brian Kim Stefans. Rodrigo Toscano. Matias Viegener. Christine Wertheim. Rob Wittig. Stephanie Young Dear RonHaving attended the Noulipo conference in LA and having since heard Spahr and Young's "Foulipo" performance either scathingly derided or casually dismissed on several occasions. I thought I'd register my suspicion of such responses here. As Spahr and Young noted while taking questions at the event their performance involved very simply splicing two characteristic gestures of the two discrepant "traditions" under investigation: Oulipo & 70's feminist performance art. When Kenneth Goldsmith characterizes the piece as "awash in nostalgia" he states the obvious. Spahr and Young are explicitly interrogating exactly that nostalgia at which Goldsmith points as if he were exposing something about the piece that it wasn't already constructed to... expose. Apparently it wouldn't be gratuitous to quote the relevant passage from their text at length:"One day we wee talking about wok fom the 70's all that body pefomance wok that suddenly began to happen all at once wok that was obvious and ovet and even a little easy.... And how it was having a moment fo us one of those moments thee seems to be no wod fo this when you look at something fom the past something that is supposed to be "ove," something we'e all supposed to be beyond and it looks all fesh and special and esonant and cucial and suddenly has an aua of light aound it. That moment when wok goes fom tied and oveexposed to shimmeing. When the ageed-upon ways of looking at and eading something seem suddenly inadequate. We felt we had much to lean fom this wok by Kubota and Abramovic and Carolee Schneeman... what we said out loud to each othe was why does this wok seem so impotant to us at this moment? This wok by women who wee supposedly woking out of a vey diffeent cultual moment fo women a moment when as the Guerilla Girls pointed out in the 80's less than 5 pecent of the atists in the Moden At sections wee women but 85 pecent of the nudes wee female. Things wee diffeent fo us afte all. Thee wee a few moe women atists in the Met. And as poets we wee even luckie than atists although poety had few examples of such edgy wok we could name a full geneation of women wites ahead of us."What's in evidence here in my opinion is not at all an unreflective nostalgia but rather an investigation of the cultural conditions under which such nostalgia operates—and of the good reasons (for women in this case) to maintain some distance from exactly that affect. Since it would obviously be facile to reduce Goldsmith's work to a "nostalgia" for the era of Warhol and Cage it seems curious that a similar move is promoted as credible in this case when Spahr and Young begin their piece with a measured consideration of exactly what is at stake in valorizing work over 30 years in the past. Far from behaving like "children who cannot imagine the erotic lives of their parents," Spahr and Young are engaged in a conscientious critique of their own spontaneous impulse to fetishize those "erotic lives," and in working out the consequences following from a recognition that those lives cannot SIMPLY be replicated. What strikes me about responses to "Foulipo" is that this piece is routinely diagnosed as either hysterical or hopelessly naive when in fact both the tone of the text and the demeanor of its performers demonstrated a markedly calm approach to its charged content a ready willingness to qualify its rather modest claims and an open admiration for the work of both the Oulipo collective and the Ubuweb poets to whom it is only mildly antagonistic. That a jokey cheapshot about t-shirts and haircuts should provoke such an irrepressibly defensive posture is far more revealing than the cheapshot itself. It seems bizarre to levy what amounts to a charge of sexual naïveté against Spahr and Young while allowing remarks like the following by Goldsmith to go unchallenged: "Really gender has little to do with it." If that can still pass as a viable response then. “really”--and evidently one can't be too clear-- it appears we haven't learned anything since the '70s. Evidently one still has to take off one's clothes in order to demonstrate that "gender" might have something to do with it after all. And if this is so boring and dated a gesture--if we're all so finished with the conditions under which it might matter--then why the scandal? Why the persistent dismissals no less than 2 years after the fact? "Foulipo" advertises itself from the outset as a simple act of pointing toward A MISSED OPPORTUNITY: two crucial "moments" in the history of the avant-garde that happened to happen at the same time without adequately taking cognizance of their consequences for each other. When Goldsmith refers to the "we" who salivate at Rothenberg's report on the "golden age" of the early '70s avant-garde and when he writes that "there was a time when everyone was literally in the same room," he merely begs the question that Spahr and Young ask. So if such responses make it all too clear that that question still NEEDS to be asked can't we credit those who are willing to pose it for their fortitude and their perspicacity? Given that Spahr and Young already perform the infantilizing gesture of deleting any "r" from their own speech in order to mark the infancy with which we're all inevitably confronted when it comes to such matters is it really necessary to infantilize what they have to say any further? Yours,NathanLos Angeles met Jack Gilbert in Lindos. Greece 1969. wish I cld find those letters that he wrote me some "telling things " there-in and in his way a generous man. I introduced him to Cid Corman and that next year Jack went to Kyoto to 'drop-in' on Cid. Jack went to one of Cid's readings at the ice-cream shop. thought that he was going to hear Cid reading Cid. instead Cid read Zukofsky "stuff". n RESTORATION LETTERS Cid's reaction to Jack's visit... Is Jack still 'breathing'. Sure wish that I cld find those I was also there in 1970 I peeked in on Robert Kelly 'teaching' a course. through the door he bid me come in.. I was there but,instead of going inI went aroundhelped build a dome-house in Takilma/Cave Junction then up to Vancouver.. etc. now off for a swim and split later today nearly a cord of oak asa chill in the morning s got me a bit anxious soinstead of talking about (anything) time to (as my 'x' once told me):"Shit. or get off the pot." splitsomewood and stack it neatly nice essay. Nate and(maybe) it is simply that "we" got lobotomized some-time in the '80 s. and (now) our National Culture isReagan's Alzheimer's was just yesterday listening to what was on my 1/4 " tape oand now on c-d so I won't mess up the tape of that Charles Olson huge-mongus 1965 reading he did at Berkeley he didn't need to pee once Duncan introduced him I only listened to the first hour of the 5-6 hour 'gig' and was struck.. possibilityEd can't remember the last time i got a bonerreading a literary treatiseon monday morning of all thingswhat can the rest of the week holdi'm all in with this oulipo groovej I distinctly remember Barry Watten saying on several occasions wanting to "get rid of the body as metaphor in poetry" (viz in the work of Ginsberg and Olson) which he thought had hung up concepts of composition since the 1950's. Ginsberg and Olson were to be honored but their reactionary "actualization" of the body as fact and revitalization was now old hat. I took that then and do now as part of Language Poetry's manifesto AGAINST body-centric consciousness in writing. It is true that we first IMAGINE our physical and mental self/ves during composition--create in fact a version of that self in the act of--and that becomes the dream-projection of the writer's position/version of reality. No version is complete or authoritative. In fact the more versions we have the less clear it may all seem. Grand Piano may serve to further illustrate this fact. Ron seems to want to convince us that body-centric writing DID happen in Langpo. Whether or not it's true why does this matter? As far as what is fairly newfrom the 70's and availableto see. I would definitelygo with checking out Criterion'srelease of Dusan Makavejev's _Sweet Movie_ and also his _Mysteries of the Organism_. SM. With its scenes from Otto Muehl's commune to its Communist River borne child seductress murderer who kills in a candy galley in a floating bed of sugar~ is a rare "treat". There'ssilly capitalists too. As for the rest of this,Hardly any accusation about language poetry makes me more furious than the one that it had (has) no relation to the body. No one is suggesting that but perhaps there is something to be said of Language poetry's "poor"relationship to its bodies and by that I meanpe-oorwhich in the formalizedroo-ep sygmasaconteals the fluvenesegabaradellpocket (sygmalion)do you thinka language poetmight get the connection(in a bad body or good)ofMARSUPIALto PHARMAKONremember the pockets.. MARSOUPIALtoFARMAGON i'm not going to pretend to understand all of this post.. but it sounds like a grumpy old man saying "i've (we've) been there and done that! i'm (we're) better than you." "Rae Armantrout’s joke that she has to bring her very worn copy of the Rolling Stones LP Let it Bleed to school at least once each year to let certain undergraduates know that they did not invent nihilism punk dressing in black whatever"this says what? "you didn't invent this stuff we did." but you didn't invent it either we are all as artists i think roughly shuffling around the same shit that has been around since the dawn of humanity--so let's try not to overstate our importance in the grand scheme of things... Hey Ron. Thanks for thoughts on body. Just a few notes... There is no potshot at Kenneth Goldsmith's Fidget ("We liked Goldsmith’s wok we liked its geneative quality. We liked the shee numbe of pages involved. We saw moe adding than subtacting thee. This adding was pat of what we wanted. We liked how Goldsmith was binging his body into the oom in Fidget."). We do joke about t-shirts. Does it help to know we were wearing our own black t-shirts at the conference?We wrote the paper as historical homage not amnesia. We were jealous of the erotic lives of our parents and wanted them for ourselves. Thus we are awash in nostalgia (Goldsmith is right as you note). We were also thinking "foul," as in impure: "We instead wondeed if thee could be a new goup fomation a sot of feminist Oulipo something we jokingly began calling 'foulipo' because we didn’t want it to be women only; we didn’t want oulipuss."See you at the disco! Spahr & Young’s presentation has been talked about in many a blog and often in part taking one element out of what was a well-conceived whole. Even in publishing the text we lose the performative aspect of their project. Few things can equal the impact of two women beginning their presentation by telling us “one day we wee talking…” This for many of us stood out more than the performer’s nudity. Sounding for all the world like wee wee talking the resonance of speech rather than written text was overpowering. Wee wee on the stage in words woven into an escalating series of playful but also serious of hypotheses on gender constraint the body and poetics. Sigmund Freud has a few charming passages in which he speculates on the role of gender in pre-modern or tribal human culture: women’s meager contribution to civilization is in weaving or plaiting he notes emerging in a primal moment of plaiting her genital hair to cover the lack of the phallus beneath it. Man’s first contributions to civilization were in the use of tools in particular to gain control over fire. The first technology he identifies is achieved through urination. Man’s power to urinate on the fire or rather his renunciation of the impulse to do so. “damping down the fire of his own excitement,” is his great originary achievement blazing the path to the electric bulb and the computer screen. [My screen saver this year is a campfire that seems to set the whole laptop on fire when left unattended]. By virtue of their anatomy (it’s our destiny he reminds us) women were exempt from the pee fire rituals just as men were from plaiting as they had nothing to hide. Talk of the body in the text always mystifies me at some point. Just as surely as all texts are embodied in that they are produced by humans they for the most part come our way on paper or screens to Socrate's undying distrust. The texts however embodied are leveled disembodied as we receive them. We might agree that all texts carry traces of the body. There’s a nice corny phrase: you see the hand of the potter. Some texts erase these traces: you could say some strive more to appear full born from the mind. Apollonian texts rather than Dionysian ones. Flarf computer generated or machine made poetry neatly challenges some of these ideas. I am not the only person who has noticed the strange affect in a series of appropriated or manipulated lines. Most often the lines are appropriated from other people so you could say they are human to the same degree as Frankenstein's monster: sometimes more human or humane than their creator. There are two relevant points to be made about Kathy Acker in this regard. Much is made of her “experience” in the sex trade variously reported as stripping lap dancing and making porn films. As far as anyone knows. Acker’s actual experience was in erotic dancing in New York and San Diego for probably no more than a year. When you read her interviews what she mentions far more often than the experience of dancing nude are the stories she heard backstage from the other women some of whom being unlike her working prostitutes. Those words if we might call them embodied were the gun fired in the crowded theater of her literary imagination. Her writing was forever altered by them. Her appropriations were from both the living and the dead from ordinary texts to exemplary ones but the structure of her work is woven through with the words of others and to many readers this invokes a kind of embodied text. It’s tempting to call her a procedural writer but I think her work is more intuitive or ludic than programmatic. Acker’s writing is dense resistant and experimental and the way it found an audience was foremost through her readings. I believe it was her performance that built her first readership both through her voice her charismatic presence onstage but also her embodiment of the work. Whether there are indeed more and less embodied texts [and this is a bigger question than I can give shrift to here]. Acker’s invocation of her work gave readers a way to access it that outlasts her actual presence. It seems to me that as her work is disseminated it will always be understood in a way that trails back to how her first readers came to see her texts through her actual performance of them. Stephanie Young and Juliana Spahr’s presentation at the nOulipo conference is of course as removed now as Acker’s readings are today. But the resonance of their performance – their speech to me more than their nudity – remains seared in memory as one “embodied” way in which to pose essential questions on the body in the text. Also Nathan’s comments above are right on: the crux of “Foulipo” is in asking what might have happened or could happen now if two powerful cultural movements which happened to occur at the same period in time had actually been in dialogue. “Foulipo” tries to instantiate this dialogue and judging by the heated amount of commentary they have received they’ve succeeded. It’s interesting to Christine Wertheim and me how little attention Christian Bök’s essay has received in that it argues for an equally provocative though radically different distinction between two historical groups the Oulipians and the Ubuweb writers. --------PS there is one actual remaining evidence of Acker’s appearance in pornography which is in the “Blue Tape” she and Allan Sondheim created in 1973. But to call that video pornography would be like calling a xeroxed ‘zine a copy of Hustler. Dancing and card games should be forbidden. Creeley was probably dwarfed by Olson but he was big too. His hand was like a catcher's mitt. When I shook his hand my hand felt lost in that mitt. I feel that dancing and card games should be taboo. Hey Ed,i'm not sure i even know what you mean by your note to me--just that his mustache was small? it was that his mustache was a tragic mistake? it was what this has to do with me or my post i don't really understand the blog is named after my book of poems which you should probably buy peter The primal LANGPO cri de coeur. "I HATE SPEECH,"along with various indications that la langue rather than la parole would be the site of LANGPO investigation,led people to conclude: Bodilessness!Though of course anything time-bound or consciousness-bound is indeed body-bound. Nostalgia for the transgressive power of "Let It Bleed" is amusing. It's certainly easy listening now and compared to the jazz of its time it was verrry easy listening even then. Ah well. As those masters of acquiescence put it you can't always get what you want. "I love Ron mainly because I love his work. I always fall in love that way. Ron's a great poet: His varied sensuous language reflects and questions itself. What emerges finally is a restless deeply-perceiving consciousness. A consciousness finally. I don't understand. I adore him."Ron that passage from the Adult Life of Toulouse Lautrec should put youand everyone else at ease; Yare! you are sensual and of the body! Though I fail to understand why you use kenny g in that post to criticizespahr and young so soundly as if it were they who were promulgatingmyths about the Language Poetry's anti-body aesthetic. I think kenny's argument argument is more nuanced than you allowand in the end in fact it seems you should really be arguing with him. Here he is globbing about poetry of the 70's and 80's:"In poetry too we saw a shift away from what Rothenberg calls 'forms of performance that involved poetry or the manipulation of language in ways resembling poetry'; writers flocked back to the page. Even in the most progressive forms of writing (e g. Language writing) sound performance and visual works were almost entirely excluded."It is the will of Landrew. If you are not of the body,you will be absorbed best,Bill Luoma FROM CHRISTINE WERTHEIM (WHO COULDN'T GET IT TO POST HERSELF):Thank you all for your interest in our book. As one of the editors and organizers of the conference I would like to clarify a few points before responding to some comments on the blog. Points of ClarificationNeither the conference nor the book were/are primarily about the Oulipo let along attempts to fetishize it. We drew on the opportunity that some Oulipians were already coming to the US to invite them to participate in a wider discussion about the use of constraints and procedures in English-language writing today. Both the pre-literature for the conference and the book emphasize that unlike the group formally constituted as the OULIPO most English-language writers today mix such methodologies with many others rather than using them in a more pure and proper manner – a point on which the conference attendees were several times admonished by the visiting Oulipians. In other words the conference was set up precisely to de-fetishize the notions of constraint and procedure in literature and we deliberately chose writers whose work does much more than merely follow a constraint or procedure writers who have something n-ou to add. The book is thus not an anthology of Oulipian writing formal or informal. It is a modest presentation of the way that certain ideas about literary methodology are being conceived today ideas that clearly are of interest. Within this deliberately open context we titled the panels to encourage participants to discuss the intersections of C + P methods with other writerly strategies as well as the question of how C + P methods may or may not be compatible with political social or ideological agendas. Some Comments on the CommentsSpahr and Young graciously took our invitation seriously and looked at the intersection or lack of intersection between the methodologies employed in 70’s body art and those used by the Oulipo and Ubuweb writers. As all the commentary around their presentation shows there are issues here worthy of discussion even if they rework debates previously addressed in other eras. Why is it that when women look back on the history of their (artistic) forebears this is regarded as nostalgic but when men do it is regarded as a legitimate part of their artistic formation? One effect of this difference in treatment is that while male artists/writers are thus enabled to position themselves within long-standing though ever-evolving traditions even the traditions of the avant-garde every generation of women artists is cut off from her predecessors and has as it were to invent the wheel all over again. To me at least one of the most profound aspects of Spahr and Young’s piece was its expressed yearning for a sense of comraderie between women writers that is so clearly manifest in predominantly male groups like the Oulipo and Ubuweb. In this sense they paid homage to the positive social aspect of group formations in the arts for men and wondered aloud why it seems so hard for women to achieve a similar sociality through their shared artistic practices. This leads to the wider issue at stake in this conversation one I feel compelled to call repressed: namely the question of gender politics within the wider literary arena. For what emerged so clearly in the conference was that even in the “experimental” zones of literary production and discourse the concerns of interest to male artists at any given time are valorized as broad new and on the front line whereas areas of interest to women are nearly always trivialized whether by the charge of nostalgia for a lost past or just simply being behind the times. It was because this issue was so starkly raised by the events at the conference and in the debates around the Drunken Boat publication of some of the conference papers that we decided to put a constraint on our own editing procedure and completely alphabetize the book version. To show our cards we wanted the entry “& and” to appear as the first portal into the book. Though it can be read in any order we assumed that like ourselves most people would be likely to read the first entry if not quite first then very nearly so especially as there are no preceding pages. This “& and” borrowed from Sianne Ngai who borrowed it from Diane Ward after having been inspired by Lyn Hijinian’s reading of a Craig Dworkin piece struck us as the best way to introduce what we believed had occurred in the conference a process of accretion whereby ideas were allowed to be put together with other ideas & with other ideas & with other………….. Spahr and Young’s piece would then come second as an exemplar of the very strategy the conference aimed to stage. The question is then why so many male writers (as far I am aware no such responses have come from women) who in their own literary work use complex processes of accretion saw their move and possibly the conference as a whole as a reduction to a binary opposition the very thing we and Spahr and Young were trying to move beyond?From this perspective it is those who insist that there can only be one avant-garde and one experimental methodology at any given moment who are nostalgic and retrograde not those like Spahr and Young and we who staged these events and embraced the accretion in one discursive place of many different practices and opinions. A final note as Matias has indicated many other debates appear in the book. Perhaps the reason so much attention has been focused on this one alone is that it can be so easily reduced but only if you regard a woman’s taking her clothes off as always being a ‘strip’. we squirm and cryshit and pisssweat and fartmolt and flakewhen conscious desire clicks init might be good to have a mapbut that may do no good eitherleisure and pleasurebecome more attractivethan we care to admitwhy this urgency inthe depths of my gutafter the physical onslought of the daywhat is betterthan sleepdeep restful sleepand to awake in the sweet stenchof our own warmthle us no forge he bodyflesh physiquemade for wha?for work and resexensaall the world a carnivala las hanks for he curious educaion Though what has not yet been said is that the Editor's note in the Analects (and the Conference itself) was very much concerned with the "new" your initial post is interested in. The gender issues engendered by the Conference and its aftermath are essential and not hidebound. But too there is the writing. I would hope that rather than wax polemical on a purely polemical point people would peep as deeply at the word-show. Tease the gender out from that as well as class and all manner of matter for those are the pieces that're splayed most naked. has written and edited over 30 books to date. Silliman was the 2006 Poet Laureate of the Blogosphere a 2003 Literary Fellow of the National Endowment for the Arts and was a 2002 Fellow of the Pennsylvania Arts Council as well as a Pew Fellow inthe Arts in 1998. He lives in

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

Related article:
http://ronsilliman.blogspot.com/2007/11/where-is-body-in-north-american-version.html ]]> ]]> ~Ray

]]> ]]> Here are more adult websites to visit that are free for you...
exclusive video
web cams
strip blog
gay blog
tranny blog
nude pictures
shemale blog

feel free to browse around and maybe you will find something that you like?]]> ]]> blowjobs anymore so when Dylan started telling the story about the first time he got a blowjob from another guy it got Jesse’s blood pumping down south. He tried to resist Dylans offers to ‘help out’ but he couldn’t resist the voice in his ‘little’ head. This entry was posted on Tuesday. October 30th. 2007 at 1:35 amand is filed under. You can go any responses to this entry through the feed. Responses are currently closed but you can from your own place.

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

Related article:
http://www.gay-virgin-blog.com/2007/10/30/his-first-gay-sex-episode-181/ ]]> ]]> small intellectual class. forgive me yes they are idiots because no matter how you want to go around it; gay rights is part of human rights. It just is. You cannot be a developed nation and yet still discriminate against a minority. Every developed nation has drafted laws to protect citizens from being discriminated against based on sexuality. It’s things desire this that give me a wake-up call that we’re comfort a backward 3rd world country stuck in the Middle Ages. Yes we’re better off than Saudi Arabia and Iran; but we’re comfort worse off than countries in Africa for God’s sake. Frankly. I didn’t want to write about this at first because I am aware of the Jordanian blogosphere; I am aware of how rumors start to spread like quick fire around it. How people start developing their own theories about you and how populate become so fierce in fighting you especially because they’re enjoying the fact that they’re hiding behind a strong clout which is a computer screen. But then again this air has probably received the least amount of attention in Jordan. Why? Because if a guy talks about it then he will be labeled as gay. If a girl talks about it then she’ll be labeled as loose and morally alter. So people just don’t communicate about it in order to defend their names. Remember when I said that I’m too jaded? Yeah well. I’m too jaded to change surface furnish a arouse about what populate will say. Because somebody has GOT to talk about this huge white elephant in the dwell. It’s there people there’s no point in denying it. I see it around me every hit day and there’s just no point in denying it anymore. So apparently a assort of young Jordanians wanted to go away the first gay magazine in Jordan (apparently there’s another magazine in Lebanon called Barra; which is being operated by Helem org). So these Jordanians say the magazine a open date where they will circulate the magazine in PDF format on CD discs at some undisclosed venue in Amman. However their plans are halted thanks to the IAF (who are using this to obtain more popularity and to obtain more votes in the next parliamentarian elections by the way) and another assort called Fact Jordan. Apparently all parties reached an agreement where nobody ordain ever talk about the magazine again and that the magazine ordain be closed and there will be no printing and no open celebrate. But this is typical Arabic journalism. Ammon along with Fact Jordan and the IAF celebrate the close in order for the IAF to gain more popularity. Although all parties agreed not to even communicate about the magazine. Also. Ammon throws in accusations that these populate wanted to open a gay summit in presumably a Dead Sea hotel (but in fact they merely wanted to start a launch celebrate to promote the magazine). It’s so easy to fabricate stories around a minority especially a minority that is very secretive about its identity. Because Ammon knows that very few people would step up and challenge their credibility; simply because nobody wants to be accused of being gay! No it doesn’t have any gay models or nude men or nude girls. It is merely there to serve the intend of increasing health awareness among the gay community on HIV. STDs safe sex safe Internet dating (so that guys don’t get hustled and so that girls don’t meet up with men that might assail them) and online chatting. Of course it includes the inevitable make tips for this pass’s season (I convey you saw that one coming didn’ t you? lol). To me it sounds just like another magazine in Amman. I convey I could be flipped through some lifestyle magazine in Amman and not notice the difference. Fashion health. HIV; you could get it anywhere. But the only difference is that the aim audience are gays. But comfort as macho Jordanians we be to be our masculinity by insulting and trashing gays and women and children. I mean it’s alright if you go and molest an 8-year old boy. Or if you fondle a school boy; but it just isn’t alter to get a gay magazine. As long as you do whatever you be to do behind closed doors it’s alright. What’s interesting are the comments on Ammon. Some claim that gays are merely a pastime of the rich some affirm that homosexuality is exclusive to the velvet society in Amman. Some affirm (this is my favorite move actually) that gays carry drugs and death and corruption and crime and forgery and embezzlment and theft and they change surface destroy the country’s sacred UNITY. (WTF? Them homos look perrrrty dangerous to me!). So it’s alright that married men unify off women have children but rest around with other guys. Guys who may displace HIV (because well our grow of compel makes you so afraid of testing for HIV that you wouldn’t even know whether you displace it or not). And it’s perfectly A-OK for this guy to bring HIV to his wedlock and to give his wife and children with it? True the guy is to be blamed here; but had we lived in a more tolerant society where HIV patients are not frowned drink on. This person would acquire treatment instead of infecting the rest of his family with this vicious disease. Also it’s alright if you’re a gay man and you come about to rest around with whomever you desire to rest with; as desire as whatever you do is behind closed doors. Nobody is allowed to know that you do fancy boys in private. Let’s not get into naming populate here; but don’t you think that this sounds all too convenient for politicians and officials that are still in the closet? I convey to me it looks like these wankers are just trying to protect themselves from being outed to their communities. But here’s the part that REALLY gets on my nerves. Since Jordan is very backward populate cannot accept their sons wives husbands fathers mothers or sisters being gay alter? So that means that you never really experience who’s gay and who’s not right? (I’ve never seen somebody stamped with the label “gay” or “lesbian” on his/her forehead before). So that means that any person in Jordan could really be gay no? You never really know. Ok so for all of those gay-bashing freaks didn’t they ever stop to query that their daughters could be lesbians? Or their sons could be gay? Or their brothers could be gay? Hey change surface the gay-bashing freaks could be gay themselves gays in denial of cover. It’s not like there’s some sort of gay planet where all gays and lesbians be on; they be between us. They go to.

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

Related article:
http://madeinjordan.wordpress.com/2007/11/05/we-will-never-change/ ]]> ]]> sex - popping gay virgins tight assholes is a pleasure all gay men love - the gay virgincuties getting ass fucked in this place seem to love it too! Pure gay plays in excellent DVD quality of course. All fetishes ordain be fulfilled. We have muscular masculine machos and the sexiest skinny bottom-sweethearts who enjoy getting screwed in the adjoin and having their mouths or asses filled with loads of hot cum Dylan's practicing as much as possible before his final massage exam and Saki's his next appointment. When Dylan was finished it was Saki's turn. But once Dylan was bent over the bed Saki decided to give him a deep create from raw material manipulate deep in his tight virgin ass.

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

Related article:
http://hisfirstgaysex.thumblogger.com/home/log/2007/43/his-first-gay-sex-episode-.html ]]> ]]> natural thing in the world. "If her application for a Catholic ceremony carries with it all the presiquites and prior dispensations of the Archbishop. I would say yes.""Would Cristina's case bear on special dispensations?""No. Only the normal procedure. Just as for any other woman. As far as we are concerned. Cristina is a woman since she has been so designated by the United States where they know what they are doing.""And the Archbishop's dispensation?" "Cristina is an transfer resident and in such cases certain requirements undergo to be met for reasons of diocese and parish. I tell. Cristina's inspect calls for no special treatment. I can unify Cristina Jorgenson in the perform once the usual and current regulations have been complied with. The procedure will be no different with her than with any other woman."Father Chaurrondo is alter frank simple and definite. Cristina Jorgenson can be married by the Church. "be my son we priests nowadays undergo seriously to study the realities of life. We're not like the priests of sixty years ago or as I was when I first began."Chaurrondo's express softened at memory of those first years of his priesthood."The secret of confession is inviolable otherwise I would tell you stories of Cristinas and Cristinos of every alter under the sun. At the beginning my soul grieved and sorrowed at the horror and compel. Now it's different. I construe (Gregorio Maranon a famous Spanish endocrinologist) and even dig football. Times change but the eternal truths are immutable.".. we take our leave of Father Hilario Chaurrondo who remains behind in the yard before his Church of Mercy smiling in his own kindly jolly way which somehow makes him seem Don Camillo himself. We carry the news with us like a assail. A Catholic prelate in Cuba is the first representative of any perform religion or sect ever to alter such a clear pronouncement on the Cristina Jorgenson inspect. It remains to be seen what the reactions to his statements ordain be amongst the Catholic congregations not only in Cuba but throughout the world. ****How prophetic the closing carve up in that 1953 artcle was. abstain forward to. VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- After years of study the Vatican's doctrinal congregation has sent perform leaders a confidential enter concluding that "sex-change" procedures do not change a person's gender in the eyes of the perform. Consequently the document instructs bishops never to alter the sex listed in parish baptismal records and says Catholics who have undergone "sex-change" procedures are not eligible to marry be ordained to the priesthood or register religious life according to a source familiar with the text. That enter mentioned was completed in 2000 and was credited to Jesuit Father (far left in this photo with Pope John Paul II) who is a retired canon law professor at Rome's Gregorian University. create Navarrete wrote a 1997 bind on transsexualism in an authoritative canon law journal and has been consulted by the doctrinal congregation on specific cases involving transsexualism and hermaphroditism. He was just elevated to cardinal by Pope Benedict XVI. But one of the things not mentioned is that the Vatican was being advised by a 30 year enemy of the transgender community: Dr. Paul McHugh. A man with a personal axe to press against transgender populate got himself named as an advisor to the Vatican. He has used that lay to turn the Catholic Church into an intolerant bastion of transphobia at least at the leadership aim. Yes the same Dr. Paul McHugh who has for transgender populate and takes ascribe for killing the Johns Hopkins Gender Clinic. McHugh has ties to neoconservative Catholic groups not surprisingly is a member of the President's Council on Bioethics and is frequently quoted by anti-transgender groups such as NARTH and the Concerned Women for America. McHugh claims responsibility for helping get J. Michael Bailey's anti-transgender engrave assassination screed "... The post-surgical subjects struck me as caricatures of women. They wore high heels copious makeup and flamboyant clothing; they spoke about how they found themselves able to furnish vent to their natural inclinations for peace domesticity and gentleness—but their large hands prominent Adam’s apples and thick facial features were incongruous (and would change state more so as they aged)...." During his measure at Johns Hopkins from 1975-2001 after he assumed the chairmanship of the Psychiatry department from Dr. Joel Elkes he assigned Dr. John Meyer to do a long-term follow-up chew over of 50 transsexuals who underwent SRS at Johns Hopkins. The 1977 Meyer Report claimed that SRS confers no objective advantage in terms of social rehabilitation for transsexuals. The paper was widely criticized at the measure as flawed but was used as the pretext by McHugh to change state the Johns Hopkins Gender Identity Clinic in October 1979. Interestingly enough while he hates on transgender populate. McHugh doesn't show the same aim of subject toward child molesters. analyse out this August 21. 2002 Washington Times inform by Judith Reisman and Dennis Jarrard entitled If you found the clergy sex do by scandal shocking alter for another jolt: the Catholic bishops are getting their "expert" advice on pedophilia from people who have covered up or even defended sex between men and children. The bishops recently chose Dr. Paul McHugh former head of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at John Hopkins University School of care for as chief behavioral scientist for their new clergy sex crimes review come in. Yet Dr. McHugh once said Johns Hopkins' Sexual Disorders Clinic which treats molesters was justified in concealing multiple incidents of child assail and fondling to police despite a express law requiring staffers to inform them."We did what we thought was allot," said Dr. McHugh then director of Hopkins' Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences which oversaw the sex clinic. He agreed with his grade clinic continue Fred Berlin who broke the then-new child sexual abuse law on the grounds that it might keep child molesters from seeking treatment.****Fortunately the Catholic be and register members act issue with the idiocy and increasing anti-transgender intolerance at the top which has only intensified since Benedict XVI became pope in April 2005. an organization of GLBT Catholics is fighting to forbid the madness. Dignity chapters are located around the country and around the world where gay lesbian bisexual and transgendered Catholics are welcomed for mass. It is not sanctioned by Rome or local Catholic bishops and masses are held in Episcopal churches and in other houses of worship..


Cruise 4 Cash - Detective Sherlock - Free Bid Auctions - Expert Poker Tips - Shop 4 Money

Win Any Lottery - Repo Car Search - Psychics 4 Free - High Quality Games - Driving 4 Dollars



Related article:
http://transgriot.blogspot.com/2007/11/why-is-catholic-church-hatin-on.html ]]>