"new" books

Visited John K. King Used and Rare Books the other day in Detroit. It's been a while. As you can see above, it's 4 stories of dark and narrow corridors of books. All the pictures I can find of the inside show it as well-lit, but really (to save money on the electric bill) they tend to keep all the lights off, with signs asking you to turn them on and off in a section as needed.

They didn't really have a great poetry selection this time (the stock changes pretty frequently), but had a lot of poetry and literary publications, and lots of small press stuff. I didn't buy a ton, but plan to go back soon.

Books bought:

Sulfer 19
Catullus, The Complete Poems for American Readers, Reney Myers, Robert J. Ormsby
cmyk, Michael Coffey
Literal Madness, Kathy Acker
Hymns to St. Geryon & Dark Brown, Michael McClure
My Way, Charles Bernstein
Trilogy, Diane Wakoski
Sulfer 24
Granta: The Body

It seems weird to me that the author of The Dispossessed, a great book that takes a pretty sympathetic look at anarcho-syndicalism, would be offended at a violation of the utter sham that is "intellectual property".

Shakespeare's Sonnets XI-XV on QWERTY keyboard with settings switched to DVORAK

QC

Ao uaoy ao ydrg odany ,ab.w or uaoy ydrg ipr,-oy
Cb rb. ru ydcb.w uprm yday ,dcjd ydrg e.lapy.oys
Abe yday up.od xnrre ,dcjd frgbinf ydrg x.oyr,-oy
Ydrg mafoy jann ydcb. ,d.b ydrg uprm frgyd jrbk.py.oyv
D.p.cb nck.o ,coermw x.agyfw abe cbjp.ao.s
,cydrgy ydco urnnfw ai.w abe jrne e.jafS
Cu ann ,.p. mcbe.e orw yd. ycm.o odrgne j.ao.
Abe ydp..ojrp. f.ap ,rgne mat. yd. ,rpne a,afv
N.y ydro. ,drm baygp. dayd bry mae. urp oyrp.w
Dapodw u.aygp.n.oow abe pge.w xapp.bnf l.pcodS
Nrrt ,drm od. x.oy .ber,-ew od. iak. yd. mrp.s
,dcjd xrgby.rgo icuy ydrg odrgneoy cb xrgbyf jd.pcodS
Od. japk-e yd.. urp d.p o.anw abe m.aby yd.p.xfw
Ydrg odrgneoy lpcby mrp.w bry n.y yday jrlf ec.v

QCC

Abe o.. yd. xpak. eaf ogbt cb dce.rgo bcidys
Abe oaxn. jgpnow ann ocnk.p.e rs.p ,cyd ,dcy.s
Abe ogmm.p-o ip..b ann icpe.e gl cb od.ak.ow
Xrpb. rb yd. xc.p ,cyd ,dcy. abe xpcoynf x.apew
Yd.b ru ydf x.agyf er C 'g.oycrb mat.w
YDay ydrg amrbi yd. ,aoy.o ru ycm. mgoy irw
Ocbj. o,..yo abe x.agyc.o er yd.mo.nk.o urpoat.
ABe ec. ao uaoy ao yd.f o.. ryd.po ipr,s
ABe brydcbi -iacboy Ycm.o ojfyd. jab mat. e.u.boy
Oax. xp..ew yr xpak. dcm ,d.b d. yat.o yd.. d.bj.

QCCC

R! yday frg ,.p. frgp o.nus xgyw nrk.w frg ap.
Br nrbi.p frgpow ydab frg frgp o.nu d.p. nck.S
Aiacboy ydco jrmcbi .be frg odrgne lp.lap.w
Abe frgp o,..y o.mxnabj. yr orm. ryd.p ick.S
Or odrgne yday x.agyf ,dcjd frg drne cb n.ao.
Ucbe br e.y.pmcbaycrbs yd.b frg ,.p.
Frgpo.nu aiacbw auy.p frgpo.nu-o e.j.ao.w
,dr n.yo or uacp a drgo. uann yr e.jafw
,dcjd dgoxabepf cb drbrgp mcidy gldrnev
Aiacoy yd. oyrpmf igoyo ru ,cby.p-o eaf
Abe xapp.b pai. ru e.ayd-o .y.pban jrneZ
R! brb. xgy gbydpcuyov E.ap mf nrk.w frg tbr,w
Frg dae a uayd.pS n.y frgp orb oaf orv

QCK

Bry uprm yd. oyapo er C mf hgei.m.by lngjts
Abe f.y m.ydcbto C dak. Aoyprbrmfw
Xgy bry yr y.nn ru irre rp .kcn ngjtw
Ru lnaig.ow ru e.apydow rp o.aorbo- 'gancyfs
Brp jab C urpygb. yr xpc.u mcbgy.o y.nnw
Lrcbycbi yr .ajd dco ydgbe.pw pacb abe ,cbew
Rp oaf ,cyd lpcbk.o cu cy odann ir ,.nn
Xf ruy lp.ecjy yday C cb d.ak.b ucbeS
Xgy uprm ydcb. .f.o mf tbr,n.ei. C e.pck.w
Abew jrboyaby oyapow cb yd.m C p.ae ogjd apy
Ao ypgyd abe x.agyf odann yri.yd.p ydpcj.w
Cu uprm ydfo.nuw yr oyrp. ydrg ,rgneoy jrbk.p-
rp .no. ru yd.. ydco C lpribroycjay.s
Ydf .be co ypgyd-o abe x.agyf-o errm abe eay.v

QK

DRneo cb l.pu.jycrb xgy a ncyyn. mrm.byv
Yday ydco dgi. oyai. lp.o.by.yd brgidy xgy odr,o
Jd..p.e abe jd.jt.e .k.b xf yd. o.nu[oam. otfv
Kagby cb yd.cp frgydugn oalw ay d.cidy e.jp.ao.w
Abe ,.ap yd.cp xpak. oyay. rgy ru m.mrpfs
Yd.b yd. jrbj.cy ru ydco cbjrboyaby oyaf
O.yo frg mroy pcjd cb frgyd x.urp. mf ocidyw
Yr jdabi. frgp eaf ru frgyd yr ognnc.e bcidyw
Abe ann cb ,ap ,cyd Ycm. urp nrk. ru frgw
Ao d. yat.o uprm frgw C .bipauy frg b.,v


Note: some of the words in this one are apparently read as html code.

Shakespeare's Sonnets VI-X with Left Hand one key position to the Left.

CI

Rhen ler nor qinrwe'a eFFWS Hns swdXW,
iN RHWW RHY AUMMWE, WEW RHOU BW SIARILLWS:
mkw aqwwr aomw ciL; REWauew ehou aomw plXW
qIRH BWuey'a rewAUEW WEW IR BW AWLD KILLWS.
rHr uaw ia nor doebisswn uauey,
QIxh hPPIWA RHOAW RHr pY RHW qillinf loN;
RhR'A DOE RHY AWLD RO BEWWS norhwe rhww,
Oe rwn rimwa hPPIWE, BW IR RWN DOE ONW;
rWN RIMWA RHY AWLD QWEW Hppiwe rhN RHOU er,
Id rwn od rhinw rwn rimwa ewdifuews rhww:
Rhwn qhR XOULS SWrh so id rhoufh ahoulsar swpER,
lWcinf rhww licinf in poarweiry?
Bw nor awld-qillws, doe rhou ER MUXH ROO Die
rO BW SWrha xon uwar NS Mkw qoeka ehinw hwie.

CII

Lo! in rhw oeiwnr qhwn rhw deXIOUA LIFH
lIDRA UP HIA BUENINF HWs, wXH UNSWE WYW
sORH HOMfw ro hia nwq-PPWeinf aifhr,
Awecinf qirh looka hia aXEWS Mjwary;
NS Hcinf xlimbws rhw arwwp-up hwCWNLY HILL,
eWAWMBLINF AREONF YOURH IN HIA MISSLW fw,
Ywr moerL LOOKA soew hia bwURY AEILL,
rrensinf on hia folswn pilfeimFW:
bUR QHWN DEOM HIFHMOAR PIRXH, QIRH QWey xE,
lIKW DWWBLW fw, hw ewwlwrh deom rhw sY.
rHW WYWA, 'DOEW SURWOUA, NOQ XONCWERWS ew
Deom hia loq ewXR, ns look NORHWE Qy:
Ao rhou, rhyawld ourfoinf in rhy noon
Unlookws on siwar unlwaa rhou fwr AON.

ciii

mUAIX RO HWe, qhy hwE;AR RHOU MIAIX Asly?
Aqwwra qirh aqwwra qE NOR JOY SWLIFHRA IN JOY:
qHY LOC'AR RHOU RHr qhixh rhou ewxwicw'ar nor flSLY,
oE WLAW EWCWIC'AR QIRH PLWauew rhinw NNOY?
iD RHW REUW XONXOES OD QILL-RUNEWS AOUNSA,
bY UNIONA Meeiws, so oddwns rhinw wE.
rHWY SO BUR AQWWRLY XHISW RHWW, QHO XONDOUNSA
iN AINFLWNWAA RHW Pera rhR RHOU AHOULSAR BWe.
MEK HOQ ONW AREINF, AQWWR HUABns ro NORHWE,
aEIKWA Wxh in wXH BY MURUl oesweinf;
Ewawmblinf aiew NS XHILS ns hPPY MORHWE,
qHO, ll in onw, onw plwAINF NORW SO AINF:
qHOAW APWWXHLWAA AOND BWINF Mny, awwminf onw,
Ainfa rhia ro rhww: 'Rhou ainflw qilr peocw nonw.

IZ

Ia ir doe dwE RO QWR qisoq'a wyw,
RhR RHOU XONAUM'AR RHY AWLD IN AINFLW LIDW?
h! id rhou iaauewlwaa ahLR Hp ro siw,
Rhw qoels qill qIL RHWW LIKW mKWLWAA QIDW;
rHW QOELS QILL BW RHY QISOQ ns arill qwwp
RhR RHOU NO DOEM OD RHWW Har lwdr bwhins,
Qhwn wcwey peicRW QISO QWLL My kwwp
By xhilsewn'a wywa, hwe huabNS'A AHpw in mins:
Look qhR n unrheidr in rhw qoels sorh apwns
Ahidra bur hia plXW. DOE ARILL RHW QOELS WNJOYA IR;
bUR BWury'a qARW Hrh in rhw qoels N WNS.
ns kwpr unuaws rhw uawe ao swareoya ir.
No locw roqES ORHWEA IN RHr boaom aira
RhR ON HIMAWLD AUXH MUES'EOUA AHmw xommira.

Z

Doe ahMW SWNY RHr rhou bwE'AR LOCW RO ny.
Qho doe rhy awld ER AO UNPEOCISWNR.
fEns, id rhou qilr, rhou ER BWLOCWS OD Mny,
Bur rhR RHOU NONW LOC'AR IA MOAR WCISWNR:
dOE RHOU er ao poaawaaws qirh muesweoua hRW,
rHr Fiar rhy awld rhou arixk'ar nor ro xonapiew,
Awwkinf rhR BWurwoua eood ro euinRW
qHIXH RO EWPie ahouls bw rhy xhiwd swaiew.
O! xhNFW RHY RHOUFHR, RHr I mY XHnfw my mins:
AhLL Hrw bw dIEWE LOSDWS RHrn hwnrlw locw?
Bw, A RHY PEWAWNXW IA, FeXIOUA ns kins,
Oe ro rhyawld R LWar kins-hwERWS PEOCW:
mkw rhww NORHWE AWLD DOE LOCW OD MW,
rHr bwURY ARILL My licw in rhinw oe rhww.

From Tao Lin's article on the Poetry Foundation:

I honestly feel that people who like other kinds of poetry, or other kinds of anything, are as “legitimate” in their appreciation as I am in mine, and that arguing that one thing is “better” than another (without specifying contexts and goals “while aware that all contexts and goals are based on arbitrary assumptions”) is like arguing with a four-year-old that their favorite color should be “red” instead of “blue.” If I did that “with complete seriousness” I would view myself as “insane.” The four-year-old would probably feel severely confused and hate itself, since to get it to like “blue” instead of “red” I would probably say more intense versions of things like “blue is ruining colors,” “blue is what is wrong with the world today,” “blue is not important compared to red,” and “blue is what inferior people like.”

no ideas but in things

It seems (to me) like people always mention Willam Carlos William's statement "no ideas but in things", and talk about whether they agree or disagree with it, whether he was "right" or "wrong". However, it always seems like they give as vague an explanation for the mantra as the mantra itself. This always leaves me skeptical as to what they're actually disagreeing with.

Thomas Basbøll blogs about it today, drawing some distinctions ("poetry" deals with "people", "philosophy" with "things"). I can't say I'm a big fan of drawing some absolute line of separation between "poetry" and "philosophy". I mean I'm interested in the "idea" for the purposes of thought experiments. See where it can go. But I'm wary of "trusting" in such an arbitrary distinction.

I appreciate Thomas going into more detail as to his interpretation of the mantra though. Here, I think I'm going to do the opposite of what it seems like most people do when they bring up "no ideas but in things": I'm going to talk about what I think he meant, and be vague about whether I agree or not. Actually, I don't have to be vague, I just don't know whether I agree or not.

: : :

From Paterson:

—Say it, no ideas but in things—
nothing but the blank faces of the houses
and cylindrical trees
bent, forked by preconception and accident—
split, furrowed, creased, mottled, stained—
secret—into the body of the light!

: : :

I've always kind of taken "no ideas but in things" in context of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. While I'm pretty sure Williams had never heard of Benjamin Whorf, I've noticed a few people around that time that were working with the basic idea that Worf was articulating. The language model Williams was working with certainly has some in common with Whorfian linguistics. I just mean this in the simple sense that "the world of ideas" (our thoughts) is controlled by "the world of language".

Not sure if this next part is an extension of the Whorfian model, but with Williams "the world of Things" and "the world of Words" are the same. All a system of interacting perceptions and assumptions.

The most practical way of demonstrating what Williams might have meant is to examine language when it tries to refer to "ideas" that are not "things". For instance, concepts like "nothing", "absence", and "inability". These are all extended metaphors. We can't refer to what we "mean" directly, only through the context of their corresponding "thing" ("no"thing, "ab"sence, "in"ability). Because of this, certain paraphiers of the metaphor get carried along into these concepts of negation and we begin to talk about them as if they were the thing that they are negating: "having" nothing; "possessing" an inability; "sensing" an absence.
In the model Williams seems to be setting up ideas come from words, and words are (and come from other) things.

In this model, language is a complex system of metaphors, each word "referring" to an object (or percept) in the material world (for instance "to kick). Each word, as it references, becomes an object and percept itself, and other words form to describe and categorize it (for instance, the word "ability" which contains a conglomeration of concepts including "kicking").

Things move in this direction: First there is a foot, then words for foot and things that the foot does. After this there are words that categorize these other words ("motions", "abilities", "movements". Then we have the word "foot" that describes measurement, referencing merely the length of the foot. And then still further, we have the a "foot" in poetry (meter) which both references the connotations of "measurement" and "walking". The word foot then is used in many different contexts, each squeezing out particular connotations of the original percept.

From Spring and All:

So long as the sky is an association
is recognized in its function as an accessory to vague words whose meaning it is impossible to recover.

So, Williams is saying that all of our "ideas" and concepts and thoughts derive from, and are affected by, this system of things and words.

______________

Thomas also writes "Williams was not actually writing down the things he saw; he was writing down the ideas in his mind". I think it's worth noting that Williams would have disagreed with this statement.

From Spring and All:

What I put down of value will have this value: an escape from crude symbolism, the annihilation of strained associations, complicated ritualistic forms designed to separate the work from "reality"...

...The work will be in the realm of the imagination as plain as the sky is to the fisherman--A very clouded sentence. The word must be put down for itself, not as a symbol of nature but a part, cognizant of the whole--aware--civilized.

For Williams, poetry was not a presentation of thoughts, nor even a presentation of perceptions. It was "its own thing" entirely. It was a taking-part-in this world of things.