ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Several of the essays in this book were inspired by pieces initially commissioned by the Poetry
Foundation,wheretheyappearedasaweeklongjournalontheirsiteinJanuary2007;otherideaswere
developed on their blog, Harriet. I’d like to thank Emily Warn, who after hearing my talk at Marjorie
Perloff’s MLA Presidential Panel in 2006, offered to publish it on the foundation’s site, which has
resultedinalongandhappycollaboration.MythanksalsotoDonShare,ChristianWiman,CathyHalley,
andTravisNicholsfortheiropen-mindednessandcontinuingsupport.
Portionsof“LanguageasMaterial”appearedinNewMediaPoetics(Cambridge:MIT,2006)andwas
firstwrittenfortheNewMediaPoetryConferenceinOctober2002attheUniversityofIowa.Otherparts
of the chapter were given at Digital Poetics at SUNY Buffalo in 2000. “Infallible Processes: What
WritingCanLearnfromVisualArt”evolvedfromtwogallerytalkscommissionedbyDia:Beaconin2008
and2009.Anearlyversionof“WhyAppropriation?”wasgivenforthe“untitled:speculations,”aCalArts
conferenceheldin2008attheDisneyREDcatTheatreandagainatCabinetSpacein2009inBrooklyn.
OriginallythisbookbeganasaprojectonsamplingwithMarcusBoon,butendedupsplittingintotwo
separateboks,UncreativeWritingandBoon’sgreatInPraiseofCopying.Althoughthetwobooksmap
differentterritories,theybothstemfromthesametendaysbetweenChristmasandNewYearsalmosta
decadeago.
This book developed over years of conversation with my peers, many of whom I write about here.
Withoutthisdecade-and-a-half-longongoingdiscourse,thisbookinitspresentformwouldnotexist.
ThankstheUniversityofPennsylvaniaforallowingthesewordstobeputintopractice.Inparticular,
I’m grateful for the support of Al Filreis and Charles Bernstein at the Center for Programs in
ContemporaryWritingandtoClaudiaGouldandIngridSchaffnerattheInstituteofContemporaryArt.
I’dliketoacknowledgePrincetonUniversity’sDepartmentofAmericanStudiesforgrantingmetheir
AnschutzDistinguishedProfessorshipinthewinterof2009,whichprovidedthesupportandenvironment
wheretheseideascouldtakeroot.ThankstoPrinceton’sHendrikHartogandSusanBraun.
At Columbia University Press, the careful efforts of Susan Pensak made this a stronger book. And I
can’tthankmyeditor,PhilipLeven-thal,enoughforreadingthisbookcloserthanitdeservedtoberead,
for shaping it, saving it, and for giving me the opportunity to see it into print. His challenges and
provocationspushedthisbooktoplacesI’dneverimagined.
The patience and devotion of my wife Cheryl Donegan, along with the feisty playfulness of my sons
FinneganandCassius,madeforarock-solidwritingenvironmentovertheyearsittooktopenthis.
Special thanks to Marjorie Perloff for her continuing support to the most extraordinary degree. My
admirationandgratitudeforherworkneverceases.
Andfinally,thisbookisdedicatedtothe“sixguys,allinaline,allbasicallythesameage,samestocky
build,samebadhaicuts[sic],andblackT-shits[sic]”.Youknowwhoyouare.

---

INTRODUCTION

In 1969 the conceptual artist Douglas Huebler wrote, “The world is full of objects, more or less
interesting;Idonotwishtoaddanymore.”1 I’ve come to embrace Huebler’s ideas, though it might be
retooledas“Theworldisfulloftexts,moreorlessinteresting;Idonotwishtoaddanymore.”Itseems
an appropriate response to a new condition in writing today: faced with an unprecedented amount of
availabletext,theproblemisnotneedingtowritemoreofit;instead,wemustlearntonegotiatethevast
quantitythatexists.HowImakemywaythroughthisthicketofinformation—howImanageit,howIparse
it,howIorganizeanddistributeit—iswhatdistinguishesmywritingfromyours.
TheliterarycriticMarjoriePerloffhasrecentlybegunusingthetermunoriginalgeniustodescribethis
tendency emerging in literature. Her idea is that, because of changes brought on by technology and the
Internet, our notion of genius—a romantic isolated figure—is outdated. An updated notion of genius
would have to center around one’s mastery of information and its dissemination. Perloff has coined a
term,movinginformation,tosignifyboththeactofpushinglanguagearoundaswellastheactofbeing
emotionallymovedbythatprocess.Shepositsthattoday’swriterresemblesmoreaprogrammerthana
torturedgenius,brilliantlyconceptualizing,constructing,executing,andmaintainingawritingmachine.
Perloff’snotionofunoriginalgeniusshouldnotbeseenmerelyasatheoreticalconceitbutratherasa
realizedwritingpractice,onethatdatesbacktotheearlypartofthetwentiethcentury,embodyinganethos
where the construction or conception of a text is as important as what the text says or does: Think, for
example,ofthecollated,note-takingpracticeofWalterBenjamin’sArcadesProjectorthemathematically
driven constraint-based works by the Oulipo. Today, technology has exacerbated these mechanistic
tendenciesinwriting(thereare,forinstance,severalWeb-basedversionsofRaymondQueneau’s1961
laboriously hand-constructed Hundred Thousand Billion Poems), inciting younger writers to take their
cuesfromtheworkingsoftechnologyandtheWebaswaysofconstructingliterature.Asaresult,writers
are exploring ways of writing that have been thought, traditionally, to be outside the scope of literary
practice: word processing, databasing, recycling, appropriation, intentional plagiarism, identity
ciphering,andintensiveprogramming,tonamebutafew.
In 2007 Jonathan Lethem published a pro-plagiarism, plagiarized essay in Harper’s entitled, “The
EcstasyofInfluence:APlagiarism.”It’salengthydefenseandhistoryofhowideasinliteraturehavebeen
shared, riffed, culled, reused, recycled, swiped, stolen, quoted, lifted, duplicated, gifted, appropriated,
mimicked, and pirated for as long as literature has existed. In it he reminds us of how gift economies,
open source cultures, and public commons have been vital for the creation of new works, with themes
from older works forming the basis for new ones. Echoing the cries of free culture advocates such as
LawrenceLessigandCoryDoctorow,heeloquentlyrailsagainstcurrentcopyrightlawasathreattothe
lifeblood of creativity. From Martin Luther King Jr.’s sermons to Muddy Waters’s blues tunes, he
showcasestherichfruitsofsharedculture.Heevencitesexamplesofwhathehadassumedwerehisown
“original” thoughts, only later to realize—usually by Googling—that he had unconsciously absorbed
someoneelse’sideasthathethenclaimedashisown.
It’s a great essay. Too bad he didn’t “write” it. The punchline? Nearly very word and idea was
borrowed from somewhere else—either appropriated in its entirety or rewritten by Lethem. Lethem’s
essayisanexampleofpatchwriting,awayofweavingtogethervariousshardsofotherpeople’swords

---

intoatonallycohesivewhole.It’satrickthatstudentsuseallthetime,rephrasing,say,aWikipediaentry
into their own words. And, if they’re caught, it’s trouble: In academia, patchwriting is considered an
offenseequaltothatofplagiarism.IfLethemsubmittedthisasaseniorthesisordissertationchapter,he’d
be shown the door. Yet few would argue that he hasn’t constructed a brilliant work of art—as well as
writingapointedessay—entirelybyusingthewordsofothers.It’sthewayinwhichheconceptualized
and executed his writing machine—surgically choosing what to borrow, arranging those words in a
skillful way—that wins us over. Lethem’s piece is a self-reflexive, demonstrative work of unoriginal
genius.
Lethem’sprovocationbeliesatrendamongyoungerwriterswhotakehisexerciseonestepfurtherby
boldlyappropriatingtheworkofotherswithoutcitation,disposingoftheartfulandseamlessintegration
of Lethem’s patchwriting. For them, the act of writing is literally moving language from one place to
another,boldlyproclaimingthatcontextisthenewcontent.Whilepasticheandcollagehavelongbeen
partandparcelofwriting,withtheriseoftheInternet,plagiaristicintensityhasbeenraisedtoextreme
levels.OverthepastfiveyearswehaveseenworkssuchasaretypingofJackKerouac’sOntheRoadin
itsentirety,apageaday,everyday,onablogforayear;anappropriationofthecompletetextofaday’s
copyoftheNewYorkTimespublishedasanine-hundred-pagebook;alistpoemthatisnothingmorethan
reframing a listing of stores from a shopping mall directory into a poetic form; an impoverished writer
whohastakeneverycreditcardapplicationsenttohimandboundthemintoaneight-hundred-pageprint-
on-demand book so costly that even he can’t afford a copy; a poet who has parsed the text of an entire
nineteenth-century book on grammar according to its own methods, even down to the book’s index; a
lawyerwhore-presentsthelegalbriefsofherdayjobaspoetryintheirentiretywithoutchangingaword;
anotherwriterwhospendsherdaysattheBritishLibrarycopyingdownthefirstverseofDante’sInferno
from every English translation that the library possesses, one after another, page after page, until she
exhausts the library’s supply; a writing team who scoops status updates off social networking sites and
assignsthemtonamesofdeceasedwriters(“JonathanSwifthasgottixtotheWranglersgametonight”),
creating an epic, never-ending work of poetry that rewrites itself as frequently as Facebook pages are
updated;andanentiremovementofwriting,calledFlarf,thatisbasedongrabbingtheworstofGoogle
searchresults:Themoreoffensive,themoreridiculous,themoreoutrageousthebetter.
These writers are language hoarders; their projects are epic, mirroring the gargantuan scale of
textualityontheInternet.Whiletheworksoftentakeanelectronicform,thereisoftenapaperversionthat
iscirculatedinjournalsandzines,purchasedbylibraries,andreceivedby,writtenabout,andstudiedby
readersofliterature.Whilethisnewwritinghasanelectronicgleaminitseyes,itsresultsaredistinctly
analog, taking inspiration from radical modernist ideas and juicing them with twenty-first century
technology.
Far from this “uncreative” literature being a nihilistic, begrudging acceptance—or even an outright
rejection—ofapresumed“technologicalenslavement,”itisawritingimbuedwithcelebration,itseyes
ablazewithenthusiasmforthefuture,embracingthismomentasonepregnantwithpossibility.Thisjoyis
evidentinthewritingitself,inwhichtherearemomentsofunanticipatedbeauty,somegrammatical,others
structural, many philosophical: The wonderful rhythms of repetition, the spectacle of the mundane
reframedasliterature,areorientationtothepoeticsoftime,andfreshperspectivesonreaderliness,butto
name a few. And then there’s emotion: yes, emotion. But far from being coercive or persuasive, this
writingdeliversemotionobliquelyandunpredictably,withsentimentsexpressedasaresultofthewriting
processratherthanbyauthorialintention.
These writers function more like programmers than traditional writers, taking Sol Lewitt’s famous
dictum to heart: “When an artist uses a conceptual form of art, it means that all of the planning and
decisionsaremadebeforehandandtheexecutionisaperfunctoryaffair.Theideabecomesamachinethat
makestheart,”2raisingnewpossibilitiesofwhatwritingcanbe.PoetCraigDworkinposits:

---

Whatwouldanon-expressivepoetrylooklike?Apoetryofintellectratherthanemotion?One
in which the substitutions at the heart of metaphor and image were replaced by the direct
presentation of language itself, with “spontaneous overflow” supplanted by meticulous
procedure and exhaustively logical process? In which the self-regard of the poet’s ego were
turnedbackontotheself-reflexivelanguageofthepoemitself?Sothatthetestofpoetrywere
nolongerwhetheritcouldhavebeendonebetter(thequestionoftheworkshop),butwhetherit
couldconceivablyhavebeendoneotherwise.3

There’sbeenanexplosionofwritersemployingstrategiesofcopyingandappropriationoverthepast
few years, with the computer encouraging writers to mimic its workings. When cutting and pasting are
integraltothewritingprocess,itwouldbemadtoimaginethatwriterswouldn’texploitthesefunctionsin
extremewaysthatweren’tintendedbytheircreators.
If we look back at the history of video art—the last time mainstream technology collided with art
practices—we’llfindseveralprecedentsforsuchgestures.OnethatstandsoutisNamJunePaik’s1965
Magnet TV, where the artist placed a huge horseshoe magnet atop a black and white television,
eloquently turning a space previously reserved for Jack Benny and Ed Sullivan into loopy, organic
abstractions.Thegesturequestionedtheone-wayflowofinformation:inPaik’sversionofTV,youcould
control what you saw: Spin the magnet and the image changes with it. Up until that point, television’s
missionwasadeliveryvehicleforentertainmentandcrystalclearcommunication.Yetasimpleartist’s
gestureupendedtelevisioninwaysofwhichbothusersandproducerswereunaware,openingupentirely
new vocabularies for the medium while deconstructing myths of power, politics, and distribution that
were embedded—but hitherto invisible—in the technology. The cut-and-paste function in computing is
beingexploitedbywritersasPaik’smagnetwasforTV.
Whilehomecomputershavebeenaroundforthreedecadesandpeoplehavebeencuttingandpasting
allthattime,it’sthesheerpenetrationandsaturationofbroadbandthatmakestheharvestingofmassesof
language easy and tempting. On a dialup, although it was possible to copy and paste words, in the
beginning(gopherspace),textsweredoledoutonescreenatatime.And,eventhoughitwastext,theload
timewasstillconsiderable.Withbroadband,thespigotruns24/7.
Bycomparison,therewasnothingnativetothesystemoftypewritingthatencouragedthereplicationof
texts. It was incredibly slow and laborious to do so. Later, after you finished writing, then you could
make all the copies you wanted on a Xerox machine. As a result, there was a tremendous amount of
twentieth-century postwriting print-based detournement: William S. Burroughs’s cut-ups and fold-ins
and Bob Cobbing’s distressed mimeographed poems are prominent examples.4 The previous forms of
borrowing in literature, collage and pastiche—taking a word from here, a sentence from there—were
partiallydevelopedbasedontheamountoflaborinvolved.Havingtomanuallyretypeorhand-copyan
entirebookonatypewriterisonething;cuttingandpastinganentirebookwiththreekeystrokes—select
all/copy/paste—isanother.
Clearlythisissettingthestageforaliteraryrevolution.
Orisit?Fromthelooksofit,mostwritingproceedsasiftheInternethadneverhappened.Theliterary
world still gets regularly scandalized by age-old bouts of fraudulence, plagiarism, and hoaxes in ways
that would make, say, the art, music, computing, or science worlds chuckle with disbelief. It’s hard to
imagine the James Frey or J. T. Leroy scandals upsetting anybody familiar with the sophisticated,
purposely fraudulent provocations of Jeff Koons or the rephotographing of advertisements by Richard
Prince,whowasawardedaGuggenheimretrospectiveforhisplagiaristictendencies.5KoonsandPrince
begantheircareersbystatingupfrontthattheywereappropriatingandintentionally“unoriginal,”whereas
Frey and Leroy—even after they were caught—were still passing their works off as authentic, sincere,
andpersonalstatementstoanaudienceclearlycravingsuchqualitiesinliterature.Theensuingdanceis

---

comical.InFrey’scase,RandomHousewassuedandforcedtopaymillionsofdollarstoreaderswho
feltdeceived.Subsequentprintingsofthebooknowincludeadisclaimerinformingreadersthatwhatthey
areabouttoreadis,infact,aworkoffiction.6
ImagineallthepainsthatcouldhavebeenavoidedhadFreyorLeroytakenaKoonsiantactfromthe
outsetandadmittedtheirstrategywasoneofembellishmentwithadashesofinauthenticity,falseness,and
unoriginality thrown in. But no. Nearly a century ago, the art world put to rest conventional notions of
originality and replication with the gestures of Marcel Duchamp’s readymades, Francis Picabia’s
mechanicaldrawings,andWalterBenjamin’soft-quotedessay“TheWorkofArtintheAgeofMechanical
Reproduction.”Sincethen,aparadeofbluechipartistsfromAndyWarholtoMatthewBarneyhavetaken
theseideastonewlevels,resultinginterriblycomplexideasaboutidentity,media,andculture.These,of
course, have become part and parcel of mainstream art world discourse to the point where
counterreactions based on sincerity and representation have emerged. Similarly, in music, sampling—
entire tracks constructed from other tracks—has become commonplace. From Napster to gaming, from
karaoketotorrentfiles,thecultureappearstobeembracingthedigitalandallthecomplexityitentails—
withtheexceptionofwriting,whichisstillmostlyweddedtopromotinganauthenticandstableidentityat
allcosts.
I’mnotsayingthatsuchwritingshouldbediscarded:Whohasn’tbeenmovedbyagreatmemoir?But
I’msensingthatliterature—infiniteinitspotentialofrangesandexpressions—isinarut,tendingtohit
thesamenoteagainandagain,confiningitselftothenarrowestofspectrums,resultinginapracticethat
hasfallenoutofstepandunabletotakepartinarguablythemostvitalandexcitingculturaldiscoursesof
ourtime.Ifindthistobeaprofoundlysadmoment—andagreatlostopportunityforliterarycreativityto
revitalizeitselfinwaysithasn’timagined.7
Perhapsonereasonwritingisstuckmightbethewaycreativewritingistaught.Inregardtothemany
sophisticated ideas concerning media, identity, and sampling developed over the past century, books
abouthowtobeacreativewriterhavecompletelymissedtheboat,relyingonclichédnotionsofwhatit
meanstobe“creative.”Thesebooksarepepperedwithadvice,like“Acreativewriterisanexplorer,a
ground-breaker.Creativewritingallowsyoutochartyourowncourseandboldlygowherenoonehas
gonebefore.”Or,ignoringgiantslikedeCerteau,Cage,andWarhol,theysuggestthat“creativewritingis
liberationfromtheconstraintsofeverydaylife.”Intheearlypartofthetwentiethcentury,Duchampand
composerErikSatiebothprofessedthedesiretolivewithoutmemory.Forthem,itwasawayofbeing
presenttothewondersoftheeveryday.Yetitseemseverybookoncreativewritinginsiststhat“memory
isoftentheprimarysourceofimaginativeexperience.”Thehow-tosectionsofthesebooksstrikesmeas
terribly unsophisticated, generally coercing us to prioritize the theatrical over the mundane as the basis
for our writings: “Using the first-person point of view, explain how a 55-year old man feels on his
wedding day. It is his first marriage.”8 I prefer the ideas of Gertrude Stein who, writing in the third
person,tellsofherdissatisfactionwithsuchtechniques:“Sheexperimentedwitheverythingintryingto
describe.Shetriedabitinventingwordsbutshesoongavethatup.Theenglishlanguagewashermedium
and with the english language the task was to be achieved, the problem solved. The use of fabricated
wordsoffendedher,itwasanescapeintoimitativeemotionalism.”9
For the past several years, I’ve taught a class at the University of Pennsylvania called “Uncreative
Writing.”Init,studentsarepenalizedforshowinganyshredoforiginalityandcreativity.Instead,theyare
rewarded for plagiarism, identity theft, repurposing papers, patch-writing, sampling, plundering, and
stealing.Notsurprisingly,theythrive.Suddenly,whatthey’vesurreptitiouslybecomeexpertatisbrought
out into the open and explored in a safe environment, reframed in terms of responsibility instead of
recklessness.
Weretypedocumentsandtranscribeaudioclips.WemakesmallchangestoWikipediapages(changing

---

an a to an an or inserting an extra space between words). We hold classes in chat rooms, and entire
semestersarespentexclusivelyinSecondLife.Eachsemester,fortheirfinalpaper,Ihavethempurchase
atermpaperfromanonlinepapermillandsigntheirnametoit,surelythemostforbiddenactioninallof
academia.Eachstudentthenmustgetupandpresentthepapertotheclassasiftheywroteitthemselves,
defending it from attacks by the other students. What paper did they choose? Is it possible to defend
somethingyoudidn’twrite?Something,perhaps,youdon’tagreewith?Convinceus.Allthis,ofcourse,
is technology-driven. When the students arrive in class, they are told that they must have their laptops
open and connected. And so we have a glimpse into the future. And after seeing what the spectacular
resultsofthisare,howcompletelyengagedanddemocratictheclassroomis,IammoreconvincedthatI
cannevergobacktoatraditionalclassroompedagogy.Ilearnmorefromthemthantheycaneverlearn
fromme.Theroleoftheprofessornowispartpartyhost,parttrafficcop,full-timeenabler.
Thesecret:thesuppressionofself-expressionisimpossible.Evenwhenwedosomethingasseemingly
“uncreative”asretypingafewpages,weexpressourselvesinavarietyofways.Theactofchoosingand
reframingtellsusasmuchaboutourselvesasourstoryaboutourmother’scanceroperation.It’sjustthat
we’ve never been taught to value such choices. After a semester of forcibly suppressing a student’s
“creativity”bymakingthemplagiarizeandtranscribe,shewillapproachmewithasadfaceattheendof
thesemester,tellingmehowdisappointedshewasbecause,infact,whatwehadaccomplishedwasnot
uncreativeatall;bynotbeing“creative,”sheproducedthemostcreativebodyofworkwritinginherlife.
By taking an opposite approach to creativity—the most trite, overused, and ill-defined concept in a
writer’straining—shehademergedrenewedandrejuvenated,onfireandinloveagainwithwriting.
Havingworkedinadvertisingformanyyearsasa“creativedirector,”Icantellyouthat,despitewhat
cultural pundits might say, creativity—as its been defined by our culture with its endless parade of
formulaic novels, memoirs, and films—is the thing to flee from, not only as a member of the “creative
class”butalsoasamemberofthe“artisticclass.”Livingwhentechnologyischangingtherulesofthe
gameineveryaspectofourlives,it’stimetoquestionandteardownsuchclichésandlaythemoutonthe
floor in front of us, then reconstruct these smoldering embers into something new, something
contemporary,something—finally—relevant.
Clearly,noteveryoneagrees.Recently,afterIfinishedgivingalectureatanIvyLeagueuniversity,an
elderly,well-knownpoet,steepedinthemodernisttradition,stoodupinthebackoftheauditoriumand,
wagginghisfingeratme,accusedmeofnihilismandofrobbingpoetryofitsjoy.Heupbraidedmefor
knocking the foundation out from under the most hallowed of grounds, then tore into me with a line of
questioning I’ve heard many times before: If everything can be transcribed and then presented as
literature,thenwhatmakesoneworkbetterthananother?Ifit’samatterofsimplycuttingandpastingthe
entireInternetintoaMicrosoftWorddocument,wheredoesitend?Oncewebegintoacceptalllanguage
as poetry by mere reframing, don’t we risk throwing any semblance of judgment and quality out the
window? What happens to notions of authorship? How are careers and canons established, and,
subsequently, how are they to be evaluated? Are we simply reenacting the death of the author, a figure
suchtheoriesfailedtokillthefirsttimearound?Willalltextsinthefuturebeauthorlessandnameless,
writtenbymachinesformachines?Isthefutureofliteraturereducibletomerecode?
Validconcerns,Ithink,foramanwhoemergedfromthebattlesofthetwentiethcenturyvictorious.The
challenges to his generation were just as formidable. How did they convince traditionalists that
disjunctive uses of language conveyed by exploded syntax and compound words could be equally
expressiveofhumanemotionastime-testedmethods?Orthatastoryneednotbetoldasstrictnarrativein
ordertoconveyitsownlogicandsense?Andyet,againstallodds,theypersevered.
The twenty-first century, with its queries so different than that of the last, finds me responding from
another angle. If it’s a matter of simply cutting and pasting the entire Internet into a Microsoft Word
document, then what becomes important is what you—the author— decides to choose. Success lies in

---

knowingwhattoincludeand—moreimportant—whattoleaveout.Ifalllanguagecanbetransformedinto
poetrybymerelyreframing—anexcitingpossibility—thenshewhoreframeswordsinthemostcharged
andconvincingwaywillbejudgedthebest.Iagreethatthemomentwethrowjudgmentandqualityout
the window we’re in trouble. Democracy is fine for You-Tube, but it’s generally a recipe for disaster
whenitcomestoart.Whileallwordsmaybecreatedequal—andthustreated—thewayinwhichthey’re
assembledisn’t;it’simpossibletosuspendjudgmentandfollytodismissquality.Mimesisandreplication
doesn’teradicateauthorship,rathertheysimplyplacenewdemandsonauthorswhomusttakethesenew
conditionsintoaccountaspartandparcelofthelandscapewhenconceivingofaworkofart:ifyoudon’t
wantitcopied,don’tputitonline.
Careers and canons won’t be established in traditional ways. I’m not so sure that we’ll still have
careersinthesamewayweusedto.Literaryworksmightfunctionthesamewaythatmemesdotodayon
theWeb,spreadinglikewildfireforashortperiod,oftenunsignedandunauthored,onlytobesupplanted
bythenextripple.Whiletheauthorwon’tdie,wemightbegintoviewauthorshipinamoreconceptual
way:perhapsthebestauthorsofthefuturewillbeoneswhocanwritethebestprogramswithwhichto
manipulate, parse and distribute language-based practices. Even if, as Bök claims, poetry in the future
willbewrittenbymachinesforothermachinestoread,therewillbe,fortheforeseeablefuture,someone
behind the curtain inventing those drones; so that even if literature is reducible to mere code—an
intriguingidea—thesmartestmindsbehindthemwillbeconsideredourgreatestauthors.
This book is a collection of essays that attempts to map those territories, define terminologies, and
create contexts—both historic and contemporary—in which these works can be situated and discussed.
Thefirstfewchaptersaremoretechnicallyoriented,layingthegroundwork,thehows,wheres,andwhys
ofuncreativewriting.“RevengeoftheText,”focusesontheriseoftheWebandtheeffectdigitallanguage
hashadupontheactofwritingitself.Thenewconditionsofabundanceandquantityofwordsarenoted
andanecosystembywhichtomanageitisproposed.“LanguageasMaterial”setsthestageforviewing
wordsnotonlyassemanticallytransparentvehiclesofcommunicationbutalsoemphasizingtheirformal
and material properties, a transformation that is essential when writing in a digital environment. Two
mid-twentieth-century movements, situationism and concrete poetry, are discussed in relation to
contemporarywaysofwritingonthescreen,onthepage,andoutonthestreets.“AnticipatingInstability”
focuses on issues of contextualization in the digital environment and comments on the fluidity and
interchangeability between words and images. “Toward a Poetics of Hyperrealism” grapples with how
the always-slippery subject of defining oneself has become even more complicated in the online
environment, setting the stage for a postidentity literature in our global consumerist milieu. The chapter
concludes with a brief analysis of a work by Vanessa Place, “Statement of Facts, that radically casts
uncreativewritingasanethicallyweightlessspacewheretransgressiveandmechanisticimpulsesmaybe
explored without consequence. Place enacts a documentary poetics, one that subjugates its own moral
impulses to preinscribed ethical DNA that comes embedded in appropriated language. Finally, “Why
Appropriation?”questionswhycollageandpastichehavelongbeenacceptablemethodsofwritingwhile
appropriation has rarely been tested. It explores the rich history of appropriation in the visual arts and
proposeswaystoapplytheseprecedentstoliterature.
The next essay, “Infallible Processes: What Writing Can Learn from Visual Art,” reads the work of
thesetwovisualartiststhroughthelensofuncreativewriting.Uncreativewritingcanlearnfromstudying
thecareerand outputofSol LeWitt.Somuch ofwhathe didand thewayhe wentaboutdoing itinthe
visualartscanbeelegantlyappliedtowritinginthedigitalage.Thesecondpartofthechapterexamines
the work and life of Warhol as it relates to uncreative writing, viewing his mechanistic tendencies and
maniacalproductionassimilartothewaywepushdigitalwordsaroundtoday.
Thelastsectionofthebookdemonstrateshowuncreativewritingcanbeputintopractice.Generally
focused around a single author or work, the essays demonstrate how that work is representative of a

---

specifictendencyinuncreativewriting.“RetypingOntheRoad”claimsthatthesimpleactofretypinga
textisenoughtoconstituteaworkofliterature,therebyraisingthecraftofthecopyisttothesamelevelas
theauthor.It’sautopiancritiqueoflaborandvalueinthevaluelessspaceofpoeticproduction.“Parsing
the New Illegibility” says that the new writing might be best not read at all: it might be better to think
about.Movingawayfrommodernistnotionsofdisjunctionanddeconstruction,difficultyisnowdefined
byquantity(toomuchtoread)ratherthanfragmentation(tooshatteredtoread).“SeedingtheDataCloud”
examines how short forms—the telegraph, the newspaper headline, and the bold-faced name—have
alwaysgonehandinhandwithmedia-basedwriting,andremarksuponhowthisimpulsecontinuesinthe
ageofTwitterandsocialnetworking.“TheInventoryandtheAmbient”highlightsthenewandprominent
role that archiving has taken in the creation of literary works in an era where the way in which one
managesinformationimpactsuponthequalityofone’swriting.
“UncreativeWritingintheClassroom”isabrieftreatiseonpedagogyandhowthedigitalenvironment
impacts the way we teach and learn writing in a university setting. A short polemical manifesto-like
piece, “Provisional Language,” concludes the book, articulating the new condition of language’s
debasementandtemporalityintheageoftheWeb.Anafterwordspeculatesononepotentialoutcomeof
uncreative writing, “robopoetics,” a condition whereby machines write literature meant to be read by
othermachines,bypassingahumanreadershipentirely.
In 1959 the poet and artist Brion Gysin claimed that writing was fifty years behind painting. And he
might still be right: in the art world, since impressionism, the avant-garde has been the mainstream.
Innovationandrisktakinghavebeenconsistentlyrewarded.But,inspiteofthesuccessesofmodernism,
literature has remained on two parallel tracks, the mainstream and the avant-garde, with the two rarely
intersecting. Yet the conditions of digital culture have unexpectedly forced a collision, scrambling the
once-sure footing of both camps. Suddenly, we all find ourselves in the same boat grappling with new
questionsconcerningauthorship,originality,andthewaymeaningisforged.

---

1REVENGEOFTHETEXT

ThereisaroomintheMuséed’OrsaythatIcallthe“roomofpossibilities.”Themuseumisroughlysetup
chronologically,happilywendingitswaythroughthenineteenthcentury,untilyouhitthisoneroomwitha
group of painterly responses to the invention of the camera—about a half dozen proposals for the way
paintingcouldrespond.Onethatsticksinmymindisatrompel’oeilsolutionwhereafigureispainted
literally reaching out of the frame into the “viewer’s space.” Another incorporates three-dimensional
objectsatopthecanvas.Greatattempts,butasweallknow,impressionism—andhencemodernism—won
out.Writingisatsuchajuncturetoday.
With the rise of the Web, writing has met its photography. By that, I mean writing has encountered a
situation similar to what happened to painting with the invention of photography, a technology so much
better at replicating reality that, in order to survive, painting had to alter its course radically. If
photographywasstrivingforsharpfocus,paintingwasforcedtogosoft,henceimpressionism.Itwasa
perfect analog to analog correspondence, for nowhere lurking beneath the surface of either painting,
photography,orfilmwasaspeckoflanguage.Instead,itwasimagetoimage,thussettingthestageforan
imagisticrevolution.
Today,digitalmediahassetthestageforaliteraryrevolution.In1974PeterBürgerwasstillableto
make the claim that “because the advent of photography makes possible the precise mechanical
reproduction of reality, the mimetic function of the fine arts withers. But the limits of this explanatory
model become clear when one calls to mind that it cannot be transferred to literature. For in literature,
thereisnotechnicalinnovationthatcouldhaveproducedaneffectcomparabletothatofphotographyin
thefinearts.”1Nowthereis.
Ifpaintingreactedtophotographybygoingabstract,itseemsunlikelythatwritingisdoingthesamein
relation to the Internet. It appears that writing’s response—taking its cues more from photography than
painting—couldbemimeticandreplicative,primarilyinvolvingmethodsofdistribution,whileproposing
newplatformsofreceivershipandreadership.Wordsverywellmightnotonlybewrittentobereadbut
rathertobeshared,moved,andmanipulated,sometimesbyhumans,moreoftenbymachines,providingus
with an extraordinary opportunity to reconsider what writing is and to define new roles for the writer.
While traditional notions of writing are primarily focused on “originality” and “creativity,” the digital
environmentfostersnewskillsetsthatinclude“manipulation”and“management”oftheheapsofalready
existentandever-increasinglanguage.Whilethewritertodayischallengedbyhavingto“goup”againsta
proliferation of words and compete for attention, she can use this proliferation in unexpected ways to
createworksthatareasexpressiveandmeaningfulasworksconstructedinmoretraditionalways.
I’monmywaybacktoNewYorkfromEuropeandamgazingwearilyatthemapchartingourplodding
progressonthescreensunkintotheseatbackinfrontofme.Theslicktopographicworldmapisrendered
two dimensionally, showing the entire earth, half in darkness, half in light, with us—represented as a
small white aircraft—making our way west. The screens change frequently, from graphical maps to a
series of blue textual screens announcing our distance to destination—the time, the aircraft’s speed, the
outside air temperature, and so forth—all rendered in elegant white sans serif type. Watching the plane
chartitsprogressisambientandrelaxingasthebeautifulrenderingsofoceanicplatesandexoticnamesof

---

smalltownsofftheNorthAtlantic—Gander,GlaceBay,Carbonear—streamby.

Figure1.1.DOSStartupscreenonanairplane.
Suddenly,asweapproachtheGrandBanksoffthecoastofNewfoundland,myscreenflickersandgoes
black.Itstaysthatwayforsometime,untilitilluminatesagain,thistimedisplayinggenericwhitetypeon
ablackscreen:thecomputerisrebootingandallthosegorgeousgraphicshavebeenreplacedbylinesof
DOSstartuptext.Forafullfiveminutes,Iwatchlinecommanddescriptionsofsystemsunfurling,fonts
loading, and graphic packages decompressing. Finally, the screen goes blue and a progress bar and
hourglassappearastheGUIloads,returningmebacktothelivemapjustaswehitlandfall.
Whatwetaketobegraphics,sounds,andmotioninourscreenworldismerelyathinskinunderwhich
residesmilesandmilesoflanguage.Occasionally,asonmyflight,theskinispuncturedand,likegettinga
glimpseunderthehood,weseethatourdigitalworld—ourimages,ourfilmandvideo,oursound,our
words, our information—is powered by language. And all this binary information—music, video,
photographs—iscomprisedoflanguage,milesandmilesofalphanumericcode.Ifyouneedevidenceof
this,thinkofwhenyou’vemistakenlyreceiveda.jpgattachmentinane-mailthathasbeenrenderednotas
imagebutascodethatseemstogoonforever.It’sallwords(thoughperhapsnotinanyorderthatwecan
understand):Thebasicmaterialthathaspropelledwritingsinceitsstabilizedformisnowwhatallmedia
iscreatedfromaswell.
Besidesfunctionality,codealsopossessesliteraryvalue.Ifweframethatcodeandreaditthroughthe
lensofliterarycriticism,wewillfindthatthepasthundredyearsofmodernistandpostmodernistwriting
hasdemonstratedtheartisticvalueofsimilarseeminglyarbitraryarrangementsofletters.
Here’sathreelinesofa.jpgopenedinatexteditor:
^?Îj€≈ÔI∂fl¥d4˙‡À,†ΩÑÎóªjËqsõëY”Δ″/å)1Í.§ÏÄ@˙’∫JCGOnaå$ë¶æQÍ″5ô’5å
p#n›=ÃWmÃflÓàüú*Êœi”›_$îÛμ}Tß‹æ´’[“Ò*ä≠ˇ
Í=äÖΩ;Í”≠Õ¢ø¥}è&£S¨Æπ›ëÉk©ı=/Á″/”˙ûöÈ>∞ad_ïÉúö˙€Ì—éÆΔ’aø6ªÿ-

Of course a close reading of the text reveals very little, semantically or narratively. Instead, a
conventionalglanceatthepiecerevealsanonsensicalcollectionoflettersandsymbols,literallyacode

---

thatmightbedecipheredintosomethingsensible.
Yetwhathappenswhensenseisnotforegroundedasbeingofprimaryimportance?Instead,weneedto
askotherquestionsofthetext.BelowarethreelinesfromapoembyCharlesBernsteincalled“LiftOff,”
writtenin1979:
HH/ie,sobVrsxr;atjrndughseineocpcyiiibalfmgmMw
er,,me”iusieigorcy¢jeuvine+pee.)a/nat”ihl”n,s
ortnsihcldseløøpitemoBruce-oOiwvewaa39osoanfJ++,r”P2

Intentionally bereft of literary tropes and conveyances of human emotion, Bernstein chooses to
emphasizetheworkingsofamachineratherthanthesentimentsofahuman.Infact,thepieceiswhatits
title says it is: a transcription of everything lifted off a page with a correction tape from a manual
typewriter.Bernstein’spoemis,insomesense,codeposingasapoem:carefulreadingwillrevealbitsof
wordsandtheoccasionalfullwordthatwaserased.Forexample,youcanseetheword“Bruce”onthe
last line, possibly referring to Bruce Andrews, Bernstein’s coeditor of the journal
L=A=N=G=U=G=A=G=E.Butsuchattemptsatreassemblingwon’tgetustoofar:whatwe’releftwith
areshardsoflanguagecomprisedoferrorsfromunknowndocuments.InthiswayBernsteinemphasizes
the fragmentary nature of language, reminding us that, even in this shattered state, all morphemes are
prescribed with any number of references and contexts; in this case the resultant text is a tissue of
quotationsdrawnfromaseriesofghostwritings.
Bernstein’s poem comes at the end of a long line of modernist poetry and prose that sought to
foregroundthematerialityoflanguagewhileallowingvaryinglevelsofemotionorsensetocomethrough,
throwing into question traditional notions of authorship. Stéphane Mallarmé’s Un coup de dés jamais
n’aboliralehasard(Athrowofthedicewillneverabolishchance;1897)isapoemwhosewords—and
their placement on the page—have been subjected to chance, scattering stability, controlled authorship,
andprescribedwaysofreadingtothewinds.Wordsarenolongerprimarilytransparentcontentcarriers;
now their material quality must be considered as well. The page becomes a canvas, with the negative
spacesbetweenthewordstakingonasmuchimportasthelettersthemselves.Thetextbecomesactive,
begging us to perform it, employing the spaces as silences. Indeed, the author himself reiterates this by
claiming that “the paper intervenes each time as an image.”3 Mallarmé asks us to consider the act of
reading—whethersilentoraloud—asanactofdecodingbyactualizingandmaterializingthesymbols(in
thiscaseletters)onapage.
Mallarmé’s letteristic materiality inspires others to explore the same: whether it’s Gertrude Stein’s
columns’ eye-tickling repetitions or Ezra Pound’s later Cantos, writers continued to treat words
materially as the century progressed. Parts of Pound’s epic are filled with barely decipherable words
comprised of dozens of languages jammed together with annotations and references to nonexistent
footnotes:
chih,chih!
wochih3chih3
wo4–5wo4–5ch’o4–5ch’o4–5
paltryyatter.4

It’sasoundpoem,aconcretepoem,andalyricalpoemallrolledintoone.It’sbothmultilingual—bits
ofChineseminglewiththe“patter”ofEnglish—andnonlingual.Pound’sconstellationsholdthepagelike
calligraphicstrokesbeggingtobespokenaloud.Thisisactivelanguage,reminiscentofthesortsoftag
cloudsthatyouseetodayonWebpages,languagethatbegstobeinteractedwith,tobeclickedon,tobe

---

highlightedandcopied.
JamesJoyce’sthunderclapsarethetenone-hundred-letterwordsscatteredthroughoutFinnegansWake,
a six-hundred-page book of compound words and neologisms, all of which look to the uninitiated like
reamsofnonsensicalcode:
bababadalgharaghtakamminaronnonnbronntonnerronnuonnthunntrobarrhounawnskawntoohoohoordenenthurknuk

Spokenaloud,it’sthesoundofthunder.This,ofcourse,goesfortherestofFinnegansWake,which,on
firstsight,isoneofthemostdisorientingbookseverwritteninEnglish.ButhearingJoyceread/decodea
portionofFinnegansWake,mostfamouslyhisownrecordingofthe“AnnaLiviaPlurabelle”section,isa
revelation: it all makes sense, coming close to standard English, yet on the page it remains “code.”
Readingaloudisanactofdecoding.Takenonestepfurther,theactofreadingitselfisanactofdecoding,
deciphering,anddecryption.
Computercode,madeupofnumbers—1sand0s—can’tpossiblyhaveanyliteraryoraestheticvalue.
Orcanit?Thetwentiethcenturywasbrimmingwithnumberpoems.Takethistranscribedexcerptfroma
seriescalled“SevenNumbersPoems”byBritishpoetNeilMills,publishedin1971:
1,9
1,1,9
1,1,1,9
9
1,1,1,1,9
8,4
1,1,1,1,1,9
8,4
8,4

Ifyoureaditaloud,you’llfindittransformfromaseeminglyrandombunchofnumbersintoacomplex
andbeautifulrhythmicpoem.Millsstates,“Ibelievedthatthemeaningwhichemergedinthereadingof
poetrylayprimarilyinintonationandrhythm,andonlysecondarilyinsemanticcontenti.e.thatwhatwas
important was how something was read, rather than what was said—the human voice functioning as
musicalinstrument.”5
The contemporary Japanese poet Shigeru Matsui writes what he calls “Pure Poems,” which come
closest to the alphanumeric binaries we find in computer code. Begun in early 2001 and currently
numberinginthehundreds,theyarebasedonthe20x20gridofstandardJapanesewritingpaper.Every
“PurePoem”consistsoffourhundredcharacters,eachanumberfromonetothree.Originallywrittenin
Chinese script, which figures the numbers one, two, and three with a single, a double, and triple dash
accordingly,laterpoemsarewrittenwithromannumerals.
1007∼1103
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

---

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

WhenMatsuireadsthesepoemsaloud,they’reabsolutelypreciseandhypnotictolistento.
Readthroughthelensoftheseexamples,atranslationofacommoncomputericongraphicintoitshex
codehasliteraryvalue.Hereisthecodethat’srenderedintotheWthatyouseeinyourWebbrowser’s
addressbareverytimeyouloadaWikipediapage,calledafavicon:


Aclosereadingofthefaviconrevealsanenormousamountofliteraryandaestheticvalue,rhythmically,
visually,andstructurallyunfoldinglikeapieceofminimalistmusic.Thefirstcolumnofnumberslogically
progresses in steps from 0000000 to 0000090, then takes a short derivation into 00000a0—00000f0
beforepickingbackupto0000100.Patternsoccurinthehorizontallinesaswell,withminutevariations
on1s,0s,2s,8s,and4sinthefirstfourlines,beforeshiftingovertocombinationsofnumbersandletters
inthemiddlesection,onlytobebrokenupbyseveral8888sinthemidtolowerportion.Squintyoureyes
andyoucanalmostdiscerntheWembeddedwithinthesquareofthecode.Ofcourse,thisisn’tpoetry,nor

---

wasitmeanttobe,ratheritshowsusthatevenseeminglymeaninglessandrandomsetsofalphanumeric
canbeinfusedwithpoeticqualities.Whilethislanguageisprimarilyconcernedwithtransformingfrom
onestatetoanother(fromcodetoicon),thosesametransformativequalities—languageactinguponmore
language—isthefoundationformuchofthenewwriting.
There’saFlickrpoolcalled“ThePublicComputerErrorsPool”thatdocumentswhatIexperiencedon
my flight multiplied a hundred.6 It’s a fascinating set of photos. You see a digital elevator button
displayingaquestionmarkinsteadofanumber,ATMsinrebootmode,subwayadvertisementsignswith
“outofmemory”errormessages,andflightarrivalboardspuncturedbyWindowsdesktops.Myfavorite
is a larger-than-life size Mrs. Potato Head at an amusement park holding a display with a blue DOS
screenfilledwithcoldwhiteletterswhereclearlysomethingmorechild-friendlyshouldhavebeen.This
photopooldocumentsthepuncturingoftheinterfacecoveringlanguage.
Butdon’ttakemywordforit.Youcaneasilycreatethesetextualrupturesonyourcomputer.Takeany
MP3 file—we’ll use the prelude from Bach’s “Cello Suite No. 1”—and change the filename extension
from .mp3 to .txt. Open the document in a text editor, you’ll see gobs of nonsensical alphanumeric
code/language.Now,takeanytext—let’ssayforthesakeofconsistency,wetakeBach’swholeWikipedia
entry—andpasteitintothemiddleofthatcode.Thensaveitandrenamethefilewiththe.mp3extension.
If you double click it and open it your MP3 player, it’ll play the file as usual, but when it hits the
Wikipediatext,itcoughs,glitches,andspitsforthedurationoftimeittakesfortheplayertodecodethat
bitoflanguagebeforegoingbacktotheprelude.Withthesesortsofmanipulations,wefindourselvesin
newterritory:Whilemanytypesofanalogmashupswerecreatedinthepredigitalage—suchasthecutting
upandgluingtogetheroftwoseparateLPhalvesorsplicingmagnetictapesintocollages—therewasno
language acting upon other language to form such ruptures. With digital media, we’re squarely in the
worldoftextualmanipulation,whichnottoolongagowasalmosttheexclusiveprovinceof“writing”and
“literature.”7
We can do the same thing with images. Let’s take a .jpg of the famous Droeshout engraving from the
titlepageofthe1623FirstFolioeditionofShakespeare’splaysandchangetheextensionfrom.jpgto.txt.
Whenweopenitinatexteditor,we’llseegarbledcode.Nowlet’sinserthisninety-thirdsonnetintoit,
threetimesatsomewhatequalintervals,andsavethefileandchangetheextensionbackto.jpg.

Figure1.2.InsertingShakespeare’s93dsonnetthreetimesintothesourcecodeofanimage.
Whenwereopenitasanimage,theeffectthatlanguagehadupontheimageisclear:

---

Figure1.3.TheDroeshoutEngravingbefore.
Figure1.4.TheDroeshoutEngraving,afterinsertingtext.
What we’re experiencing for the first time is the ability of language to alter all media, be it images,
video,music,ortext,somethingthatrepresentsabreakwithtraditionandchartsthepathfornewusesof
language.Wordsareactiveandaffectiveinconcreteways.Youcouldsaythatthisisn’twriting,and,in
thetraditionalsense,you’dberight.Butthisiswherethingsgetinteresting:wearen’thammeringawayon
typewriters; instead—focused all day on powerful machines with infinite possibilities, connected to
networks with a number of equally infinite possibilities—the writer’s role is being significantly
challenged,expanded,andupdated.
QuantityIstheNewQuality

Inthefaceofunprecedentedamountofdigitaltext,writingneedstoredefineitselfinordertoadapttothe
newenvironmentoftextualabundance.WhatdoImeanbytextualabundance?Arecentstudyshowedthat
“in2008,theaverageAmericanconsumed100,000wordsofinformationinasingleday.(Bycomparison,
Leo Tolstoy’s War and Peace is only about 460,000 words long.) This doesn’t mean we read 100,000
wordsaday—itmeansthat100,000wordscrossoureyesandearsinasingle24-hourperiod.”8
I’m inspired by how these studies treat words materially. They’re not concerned with what words
meanbutwithhowmuchtheyweigh.Infact,whenmediastudieswantedtofirstquantifylanguage,they
usedwordsastheirmetric,apracticethatcontinuestothisday:
In 1960, digital sources of information were non-existent. Broadcast television was analog,
electronictechnologyusedvacuumtubesratherthanmicrochips,computersbarelyexistedand
weremainlyusedbythegovernmentandafewverylargecompanies…Theconceptthatwe
nowknowasbytesbarelyexisted. Earlyeffortsto sizeupthe informationeconomytherefore
usedwordsasthebestbarometerforunderstandingconsumptionofinformation.
Usingwordsasametric…[itis]estimatedthat4,500trillionwordswere“consumed”in
1980.Wecalculatethatwordsconsumedgrewto10,845trillionwordsin2008,whichworks
outtoabout100,000wordsperAmericanperday.9

---

Ofcourse,onecanneverknowwhatallthosewordsmeanoriftheyhaveanyusewhatsoever,butfor
writersandartists—whooftenspecializeinseeingvalueinthingsthatmostpeopleoverlook—thisglutof
language signifies a dramatic shift in their relationship to words. Since the dawn of media, we’ve had
moreonourplatesthanwecouldeverconsume,butsomethinghasradicallychanged:neverbeforehas
languagehadsomuchmateriality—fluidity,plasticity,malleability—beggingtobeactivelymanagedby
the writer. Before digital language, words were almost always found imprisoned on a page. How
different today when digitized language can be poured into any conceivable container: text typed into a
Microsoft Word document can be parsed into a database, visually morphed in Photoshop, animated in
Flash, pumped into online text-mangling engines, spammed to thousands of e-mail addresses, and
importedintoasoundeditingprogramandspitoutasmusic.Thepossibilitiesareendless.
In1990theWhitneyMuseummountedashowcalledImageWorld,whichspeculatedthatasaresultof
television’s complete rule and saturation words would disappear from media, replaced by images. It
seemedplausibleatthetime,withtheriseofcableandsatelliteconcurrentwiththedemiseofprint.The
catalogdecriedtheubiquityandsubsequentvictoryofimages:
Every day … the average person is exposed to 1,600 ads…. the atmosphere is thick with
messages. Every hour, every day, news, weather, traffc, business, consumer, cultural, and
religious programming is broadcast on more than 1,200 network, cable, and public-access
television channels. Television shows (60 Minutes) are constructed by like magazines, and
newspapers (USA Today) emulate the structure of television. Successful magazine articles
providetheplotsformoviesthatmanufacturerelatedmerchandiseandthenspin-offtelevision
serieswhich,inturn,arenovelized.10

Similarly,in1998MitchellStephenspublishedabookcalledTheRiseoftheImage,theFallofthe
Word,whichchartsthedemiseoftheprintedword,beginningwithPlato’sdistrustofwriting.Stephens,a
great lover of print, saw the future as video: “Moving images use our senses more effectively than do
blacklinesoftypesstackedonwhitepages.”11Stephensisright,butwhathecouldn’tseewasthatinthe
futurevideowouldbecomprisedentirelyofblacklinesoftype.
ThecuratorsofImageWorldandMitchellStephenswereblind-sidedbytheWeb,athen-emergingtext-
based technology that would soon grow to challenge—and overwhelm—their claims of imagistic
dominance. Even as the digital revolution grows more imagistic and motion-based (propelled by
language),there’sbeenahugeincreaseintext-basedforms,fromtypinge-mailstowritingblogposts,text
messaging,socialnetworkingstatusupdates,andTwitterblasts:we’redeeperinwordsthanwe’veever
been.
EvenMarshallMcLuhan,whowassorightaboutsomanythingspredictingourdigitalworld,gotthis
one wrong. He, too, saw the coming of Image World and railed against the linearity of Gutenberg,
predicting that we were headed to a return of an orally based, sensual, tactile, multimedia world that
woulderadicatethenarrowcenturiesofthetextualprison.And,inthat,hewasright:astheWebgrows,it
becomes richer, more tactile, more intermediary. But McLuhan would still have to reckon with the fact
thattheserichesareultimatelydrivenbylanguageinneatrows,programmedbyevenstricterbondsthan
anyrhetoricalformthatprecededit.
But, far from McLuhan’s prison of words in straight lines, the flip side of digital language is its
malleability,languageasputty,languagetowrapyourhandsaround,tocaress,mold,strangle.Theresult
isthatdigitallanguageforegroundsitsmaterialaspectinwaysthatwerehiddenbefore.
ATextualEcosystem

---

Ifwethinkofwordsasbothcarriersofsemanticmeaningandasmaterialobjects,itbecomesclearthat
weneedawaytomanageitall,anecosystemthatcanencompasslanguageinitsmyriadforms.I’dliketo
proposesuchasystem,takingasinspirationJamesJoyce’sfamousmeditationontheuniversalproperties
ofwaterintheIthacaepisodeofUlysses.
WhenJoycewritesaboutthedifferentformsthatwatercantake,itremindsmeofdifferentformsthat
digital language can take. Speaking of the way water puddles and collects in “its variety of forms in
loughsandbaysandgulfs,”Iamremindedoftheprocesswherebydatarainsdownfromthenetworkin
small pieces when I use a Bit-Torrent client, pooling in my download folder. When my download is
complete,thedatafindsits“solidityinglaciers,icebergs,icefloes”asamovieormusicfile.WhenJoyce
speaksofwater’smutabilityfromitsliquidstateinto“vapour,mist,cloud,rain,sleet,snow,hail,”Iam
remindedofwhathappenswhenIjoinanetworkoftorrentsandIbegin“seeding”anduploadingtothe
data cloud, the file simultaneously constructing and deconstructing itself at the same time. The utopian
rhetoricsurroundingdataflows—“informationwantstobefree,”forexample—isechoedbyJoycewhen
he notes water’s democratic properties, how it is always “seeking its own level.” He acknowledges
water’sdoubleeconomicstatusinboth“itsclimaticandcommercialsignificance,”justasweknowthat
dataisboughtandsoldaswellasgivenaway.WhenJoycespeaksofwater’s“weightandvolumeand
density,”I’mthrownbacktothewayinwhichwordsareusedasquantifiersofinformationandactivity,
entitiestobeweighedandsorted.Whenhewritesaboutthepotentialforwater’sdramaandcatastrophe
“its violence in seaquakes, waterspouts, artesian wells, eruptions, torrents, eddies, freshets, spates,
groundswells, watersheds, waterpartings, geysers, cataracts, whirlpools, maelstroms, inundations,
deluges,cloudbursts,”Ithinkofelectricalspikesthatwipeoutharddrives,wildlyspreadingviruses,or
whathappenstomydatawhenIbringastrongmagnettooclosetomylaptop,disastrouslyscramblingmy
data in every direction. Joyce speaks of water the way data flows through our networks with “its
vehicularramificationsincontinentallakecontainedstreamsandconfluentoceanflowingriverswiththeir
tributariesandtransoceaniccurrents:gulf-stream,northandsouthequatorialcourses,”whilespeakingof
itsupsides,“itspropertiesforcleansing,quenchingthirstandfire,nourishingvegetation:itsinfallibility
asparadigmandparagon.”12
Whilewritershavetraditionallytakengreatpainstoensurethattheirtexts“flow,”inthecontextofour
Joyce-inspiredlanguage/dataecosystem,thistakesonawholenewmeaning,aswritersarethecustodians
of this ecology. Having moved from the traditional position of being solely generative entities to
information managers with organizational capacities, writers are potentially poised to assume the tasks
oncethoughttobelongonlytoprogrammers,databaseminders,andlibrarians,thusblurringthedistinction
betweenarchivists,writers,producers,andconsumers.
UsingmethodssimilartoLethem,Joycecomposedthispassagebypatchwritinganencyclopediaentry
onwater.Bydoingso,heactivelydemonstratesthefluidityoflanguage,movinglanguagefromoneplace
to another. Joyce presages uncreative writing by the act of sorting words, weighing which are “signal”
andwhichare“noise,”what’sworthkeepingandwhat’sworthleaving.Identifying—weighing—language
initsvariousstatesof“data”and“information”iscrucialtothehealthoftheecosystem:
Data in the 21st century is largely ephemeral, because it is so easily produced: a machine
createsit,usesitforafewsecondsandoverwritesitasnewdataarrives.Somedataisnever
examined at all, such as scientific experiments that collect so much raw data that scientists
neverlookatmostofit.Onlyafractionevergetsstoredonamediumsuchasaharddrive,tape
orsheetofpaper,yetevenephemeraldataoftenhas“descendents”—newdatabasedontheold.
Think of data as oil and information as gasoline: a tanker of crude oil is not useful until it
arrives,itscargounladedandrefinedintogasolinethatisdistributedtoservicestations.Data

---

isnotinformationuntilitbecomesavailabletopotentialconsumersofthatinformation.Onthe
otherhand,data,likecrudeoil,containspotentialvalue.13

Howcanwediscardsomethingthatmightinanotherconfigurationbeextremelyvaluable?Asaresult,
we’vebecomehoardersofdata,hopingthatatsomepointwe’llhavea“use”forit.Lookatwhat’son
your hard drive in reserve (pooled, as Joyce would say) as compared to what you actually use. On my
laptop, I have hundreds of fully indexable PDFs of e-books. Do I use them? Not in any regular way. I
storethemforfutureuse.LikethosePDFs,allthedatathat’sstoredonmyharddriveispartofmylocal
textual ecosystem. My computer indexes what’s on my hard drive and makes it easier for me to search
whatIneedbykeyword.Thelocalecosystemisprettystable;whennewtextualmaterialisgenerated,my
computer indexes it as data as soon as it’s created. On the other hand, my computer doesn’t index
information:ifI’mlookingforaspecificsceneinamovieonmydrive,mycomputerwillnotbeableto
find that unless I have, say, a script of the film on my system. Even though digitized films are made of
language, my computer’s search function only, in Joycean terms, skims the surface of the water,
recognizingonlyonestateoflanguage.Whathappensonmylocalecosystemisprescribed,limitedtoits
routine, striving to function harmoniously. I have software to protect against any viruses that might
destabilizeorcontaminateit,allowingmycomputertorunasit’ssupposedto.
Things get more complicated when I connect my computer to a network, suddenly transforming my
localecosystemintoanodeonaglobalone.AllIneedtodoistosendandreceiveane-mailtoshowthe
linguistic effects of the networked ecosystem. If I take a plain text version of the nursery rhyme Edison
usedtotestthephonographwith,“MaryHadaLittleLamb”:
Maryhadalittlelamb,
littlelamb,littlelamb,
Maryhadalittlelamb,
whosefleecewaswhiteassnow.
AndeverywherethatMarywent,
Marywent,Marywent,
andeverywherethatMarywent,
thelambwassuretogo.

ande-mailittomyself,itcomesback:

Received:from[10.10.0.28](unverified[212.17.152.146])
byzarcrom.net(SurgeMail4.0j)withESMTPid
58966155–1863875
for<xxx@ubu.com>;Sun,26Apr200918:17:50-0500
Return-Path:<xxx@ubu.com>
Mime-Version:1.0
Message-Id:<p06210214c61a9c1ef20d@[10.10.0.28]>
Date:Mon,27Apr200901:17:55+0200
To:xxx@ubu.com
From:KennethGoldsmith<xxx@ubu.com>
Subject:MaryHadALittleLamb

---

Content-Type:
multipart/alternative;
boundary=“============_-971334617==_ma============“
X-Authenticated-User:xxx@ubu.com
X-Rcpt-To:<xxx@ubu.com>
X-IP-stats:IncomingLast0,First3,in=57,out=0,spam=0ip=212.17.152.146
Status:RO
X-UIDL:1685
<x-html><!x-stuff-for-petebase=““src=““id=“0”charset=““>
<!doctypehtmlpublic“-//W3C//DTDW3HTML//EN”>
<html><head><styletype=“text/css”><!—
blockquote,dl,ul,ol,li{padding-top:0;padding-bottom:0}
—></style><title>MaryHadALittleLamb</title></head><body>
<div><fontsize=“+1”color=“#000000;”>Maryhadalittlelamb,<br>
littlelamb,littlelamb,<br>
Maryhadalittlelamb,<br>
whosefleecewaswhiteassnow.<br>
AndeverywherethatMarywent,<br>
Marywent,Marywent,<br>
andeverywherethatMarywent,<br>
thelambwassuretogo.</font></div>
</body>
</html>
</x-html>

WhileIhaven’twrittenaword,mysimplee-mailcomesbacktomeamuchmorecomplexdocument
than I sent out. The nursery rhyme, front and center when it left me, returns buried among reams of
language, to the point where I almost can’t find it, padded out by many varieties of language. A
remarkableamountofitisnormalEnglishwords:Status,style,head,boundary;there’salsoodd,poetic
compoundingofwords:X-Authenticated-User,padding-bottom,SurgeMail;thenthere’shtmltags:<br>,
</font>,</div>;andstrangestringingstogetherofequalsigns:============;andfinally,there’slots
oflongnumbers58966155–1863875;andhybridcompounds:<p06210214c61a9c1ef20d@[10.10.0.28]>.
Whatwe’reseeingarethelinguisticmarksleftbythenetworkecologyonmytext,allofwhichisaresult
of the journey the rhyme made by leaving my machine to interact with other machines. A paratextual
reading of my e-mail would claim all the new texts as being of equal importance to the nursery rhyme.
Identifyingthesourcesofthosetextsandnotingtheirsubsequentimpactispartofthereadingandwriting
experience.Thenewtextisademonstrationoflocalandnetworkedecologiesactingtogethertocreatea
newpieceofwriting.
Wecancreateorenterintotextualmicroclimatesonalargescale—suchaschatroomsortweets—or
moreintimatelywithone-on-oneinstantmessaging.Swarmsofusersonsocialnetworkingsitesarounda
keyword/trendingtopiccanalsocreateintenselyfocusedmicroclimatesoftextuality.
I can take the transcript of an IM session, and, after stripping it of its networked context, it’s
immediatelyindexedbymymachineandenteredbackintothesafestasisofmylocalecology.Now,let’s
say I take that same transcript and upload a copy of it to a publicly accessible server where it can be
downloaded, while keeping a copy on my PC. I have the identical text in two places, operating in two
distinctecosystems,liketwins,onewhospendshislifeclosetohomeandtheotherwhoadventuresout
intotheworld:eachtextuallifeismarkedaccordingly.ThetextdocumentonmyPCsitsuntouchedina
folder,remainingunchanged,whilethetextinplayonthenetworkissubjecttountoldchanges:itcanbe

---

cracked,passwordprotected,strippedofitstextualcharacter,convertedintoplaintext,remixed,written
into,translated,deleted,eradicated,convertedtosound,image,orvideo,andsoforth.Ifaversionofthat
textweresomehowtofinditswaybacktome,itmightverywellbemoreunrecognizablethanmyaltered
nurseryrhyme.
Theeditingprocessthatoccursbetweentwopeopleviae-mailofawordprocessingdocumentisan
example of a microclimate where the variables are extremely limited and controlled. The tracked
editorialchangesareextralinguisticandpurposeful.Openingupthevariablesalittlemore,thinkofwhat
happenswhenanMP3ispassedaroundfromoneusertoanother,eachslightlyremixingit,defyingany
definitiveversion.Intheseecologies,finalversionsdonotexist.Unliketheresultofaprintedbookor
pressedLP,thereisnoend-game,ratherfluxisinherenttothedigital.
The text cycle is primarily additive, spawning new texts continuously. If a hosting directory is made
public, language is siphoned off like water from a well, replicating it infinitely. There is no need to
assumethat—notwithstandinganyoftheaforementionedcatastrophes—thatatextualdroughtwilloccur.
The morass of language does not deplete, rather it creates a wider, rhizomatic ecology, leading to a
continuous and infinite variety of textual occurrences and interactions across both the network and the
localenvironment.14
TheuncreativewriterconstantlycruisestheWebfornewlanguage,thecursorsuckingupwordsfrom
untold pages like a stealth encounter. Those words, sticky with residual junky code and formatting, are
transferred back into the local environment and scrubbed with TextSoap, which restores them to their
virginalstatesbyremovingextraspaces,repairingbrokenparagraphs,deletinge-mailforwardingmarks,
straighteningcurlyquotationmarks,evenextractingtextfromthemorassofHTML.Withoneclickofa
button,thesesoiledtextsarecleanedandreadytoberedeployedforfutureuse.

---

2LANGUAGEASMATERIAL

There’sbeenalotoftalkthepastfewyearsaboutnetneutrality,aconceptthatargueseitherfororagainst
assigning different values to the various types of data that flow through our networks. Net neutrality
advocatesclaimthatalldataonthenetworkbetreatedasequal,whetheritbeapieceofspamoraNobel
laureate’s speech. Their advocacy reminds me of the post office, which charges by the pound, not by
what’sinsidethepackage:youcan’tchargemoretosendacouturedressthanyoucanforabookofpoetry
justbecauseit’smorevaluable.
Uncreative writing mirrors the ethos of net neutral advocates, claiming that one way of treating
language is materially, focusing on formal qualities as well as communicative ones, viewing it as a
substancethatmovesandmorphsthroughitsvariousstatesanddigitalandtextualecosystems.Yet,like
data,languageworksonseverallevels,endlesslyflippingbackandforthbetweenthemeaningfulandthe
material:wecanchoosetoweighitandwecanchoosetoreadit.There’snothingstableaboutit:evenin
their most abstracted form, letters are embedded with semantic, semiotic, historical, cultural, and
associativemeanings.Thinkofthelettera,andit’sanythingbutneutral.AssociationsformeincludeThe
ScarletLetter, a top grade, the title of Louis Zukofsky’s life poem, Andy Warhol’s novel, and so forth.
Whennonobjectivistpainterstriedtoridpaintingofillusionandmetaphor,youcanseewhytheychose
geometricforms,notletters,todoso.
RightnowIamwritingtransparently:howI’musingwordsissupposedtobeinvisibletoyousothat
youcanfollowwhatI’msaying.If,instead,IWASTOWRITEINALLCAPS,Imoveintothematerialor
oblique.You’dfirstnoticethewayitlooked,then—notingthatCAPSgenerallyconnoteSHOUTING—its
tone,andlast,itsmessage.Inday-to-daylifewerarelynoticethematerialpropertiesoflanguageexcept
for when, say, we encounter a stutterer or a person with a heavy accent, we first notice how they say,
second we decode what they are saying.1 When we listen to an opera sung in a language we don’t
understand, we push language’s formal properties to the front—its cadences and rhythms—choosing
soundoversense.Ifwefurtherchoosetoinvertthetransparencyofwords,wecanhearthemassoundor
see them as shapes. One of modernism’s great aspirations was to skew language in this way, but the
backlash it produced was equally strong: emphasizing its materiality disrupts normative flows of
communication. Human beings have enough trouble understanding each other, critics complained. Why
wouldwepurposelywanttomakeitmoredifficult?
Inmostliterature,writersstrivetostrikeabalancebetweenthesetwostates.Awaytothinkofthisis
similar to the way the transparency slider bar in Photoshop functions: slide the bar far to the right and
yourimageis100percentopaque;allthewaytotheleftrendersitbarelyvisible,aghostofitsformer
self. In literature, if the slider is skewed toward complete transparency, language becomes functional
discourse,thesortoflanguageusedtowriteanewspapereditorialorcaptionaphotograph.Slideitback
alittlebitanditbecomesprose:Lo-lee-ta:thetipofthetonguetakingatripofthreestepsdownthe
palatetotap,atthree,ontheteeth.Lo.Lee.Ta.Nabokov’sopeninghitsaperfectnotebetweensound
andsense,signalandnoise,poetryandnarrative.Afterthisdynamicopener,Nabokovmovestheslider
backtowardsense,swappingitforamoretransparentstyleinordertotellastory.
Twomovementsinthemiddleofthetwentiethcentury,concretepoetryandsituationism,experimented
with sliding the slider all the way up at 100 percent opacity. In uncreative writing, new meaning is

---

createdbyrepurposingpreexistingtexts.Inordertoworkwithtextthisway,wordsmustfirstberendered
opaque and material. Both movements viewed materiality as primary goals, the situationists through
détournementandtheconcretistsbyliterallytreatinglettersasbuildingblocks.Thesituationistsworked
inavarietyofmediums,realizingtheirvisionofthecityascanvaswhereastheconcretiststookamore
traditionaltact,mostlypublishingbooks.Byenvisioningthepageasascreen,theconcretistsanticipated
thewaywewouldworkwithlanguageinthedigitalworldhalfacenturylater.
TheSituationists:OutintheStreets

Inthemid1950s,agroupofartistsandphilosopherswhocalledthemselvestheSituationistInternational
proposedthreeconceptsdesignedtoinfusemagicandexcitementintothedullroutineofeverydaylife:the
dérive,détournement,andpsychogeography.Theiridea,notunlikethatofuncreativewriting,wasnotto
reinventlifebuttoreframeit,reclaimingdeadzonesasalive.Aslightshiftofperspectivecouldleadto
freshtakesontiredsubjectmatter:renamingasymphonywithoutalteringthemusic,driftingthroughacity
with no goal in mind, or putting new subtitles on an old movie. By creating new situations, such
interventionswereintendedtobeacatalystforsocialchangefilteredthroughareorientationofnormal
life.
Ifweweretomapoutourdailymovements,we’dfindthatwetendtosticktowhatweknowwithlittle
deviation.Wemovefromourhousetoourjobtothegymtothesupermarket,backtothehouse,andgetup
the next day and do it all again. Guy Debord, one of the key figures in situationism, proposed taking a
holiday from those routines in the form of the dérive or drift, which was meant to renew the urban
experiencebyintentionallymovingthroughoururbanspaceswithoutintention,openingourselvesupto
thespectacle and theaterthat is thecity. Debord claimed thatour urban spacesare rich places—full of
untold encounters, wondrous architecture, complex human interaction—that we’ve grown too numb to
experience.Hisremedywastotakeadayortwooutanddisorientourselves(oftenwiththeaidofdrugs
or alcohol) by stumbling about our city, tempering the grid of urbanity with the organic quality of not
knowing,beingpulledbyintuitionanddesire,notbyobligationandnecessity.Wemightwanttospenda
nightinahousethat’sintheprocessofbeingtorndownorhitchhikewithoutadestinationthroughParis
during a transportation strike—just to add more confusion—or break into graveyards and catacombs,
wanderingaimlesslythroughthebones.
By taking our city’s physical geography and overlaying it with psychogeography—a technique of
mappingthepsychicandemotionalflowsofacityinsteadofitsrationalstreetgrids—webecomemore
sensitive to our surroundings: “The sudden change of ambiance in a street within the space of a few
meters; the evident division of a city into zones of distinct psychic atmospheres; the path of least
resistance that is automatically followed in aimless strolls (and which has no relation to the physical
contour of the terrain); the appealing or repelling character of certain places.”2 Geography, then—that
most concrete of propositions to which we are bound—is reconfigurable and customizable through the
imagination.Psychogeographycantakemanyforms:Onecouldcreateanalternatemapofacityaccording
tospecificemotions,forexample,mappingParisnotbyarrondissementbutbyeveryplaceyou’vesheda
tear.Oryoucouldcreateapsychogeographicmapofacity’slanguagebyamakingadérivefrompointA
topointB,writingdowneverywordyoureyesencounteronbuildings,signage,parkingmeters,flyersand
so forth. You’d end up with a trove of rich language, myriad in its tones and directives, comprised of
peripheralwordsyou’dmostlikelyneverpaidattentionto,suchasthefineprintonaparkingmeter.
Guy Debord tells of a friend who wandered “through the Harz region of Germany while blindly
followingthedirectionsofamapofLondon,”3détourningthatmapbyassigningitapurposeforwhichit
was not intended; it still functioned as a map, but yielded unpredictable results. Taking his inspiration

---

from Debord, Vito Acconci created a work in 1969 he called Following Piece, whereby he simply
followed the first person he saw, walking a few paces behind him, until he disappeared into a private
space.Assoonasonepersondid,hewouldbegintofollowthefirstpersonhesawuntilshewentintoa
privatespaceandsoon.4Bymappingthecityaccordingtovoyeurism,AcconciwasenactingaDebordian
dérive,apsychogeographicalcartography,ahumanchainofhypertext.
Détournementisawayoftakingexistingobjects,words,ideas,artworks,media,etc.,andusingthem
differently so that they become entirely new experiences. For example, Debord proposed that we take
Beethoven’s Eroica Symphony and simply rename it Lenin Symphony. After having dedicated his
symphonytoNapoleonwhenhewasfirstconsul,BeethovenrenegedonhisdedicationwhenBonaparte
proclaimedhimselfemperor.Fromthattimeon,thesymphonyhadnodedication,andBeethovenchanged
thetitletothegeneric“HeroicSymphony,ComposedtoCelebratetheMemoryofaGreatMan.”Debord,
sensingthatthiswasafreespace,ripefordétournement,decidedtofillthevacancywithhisgreatman:
Lenin.
There’saseriesofwonderfulfilmsbyRenéViénetthattakesB-gradeforeignexploitationflicksand
resubtitlesthemwithpoliticalrhetoric:asexistJapanesepornfilmisdétournedintoaproteststatement
abouttheoppressionofwomenandtheexploitationofworkers.Similarly,acheapkungfuflick,inwhich
themasterteachesdisciplesthesecretsofmartialarts,issubtitledsothatthemasterschoolsthestudents
inthefinerpointsofMarxismandretitledCanDialecticsBreakBricks?“Anyway,mostfilmsonlymerit
beingcutuptocomposeotherworks,”Debordsays.5
Neitheraretheplasticartsimmunetodétournement.TheDanishsituationistpainterAsgerJorntook
oldthriftshoppaintingsandpaintednewimagesoverthem.Inanessayentitled“DétournedPainting,”he
wrote:
Bemodern,
collectors,museums.
Ifyouhaveoldpaintings,
donotdespair.
Retainyourmemories
butdétournthem
sothattheycorrespondwithyourera.
Whyrejecttheold
ifonecanmodernizeit
withafewstrokesofthebrush?
Thiscastsabitofcontemporaneity
onyouroldculture.
Beuptodate,
anddistinguished
atthesametime.
Paintingisover.
Youmightaswellfinishitoff.
Detourn.
Longlivepainting.6

Titlesofbookstoocouldbedétourned.GuyDebordandGilWolmanstatedthat“webelieveitwould
be possible to produce an instructive psychogeographical détournement of George Sand’s Consuelo,
which thus decked out could be relaunched on the literary market disguised under some innocuous title
likeLifeintheSuburbs,orevenunderatitleitselfdétourned,suchasTheLostPatrol.”7

---

Lowculturewasalsosubjecttodétournement.In1951thesituationistsenvisioned“apinballmachine
arrangedinsuchawaythattheplayofthelightsandthemoreorlesspredictabletrajectoriesoftheballs
would form a metagraphic-spatial composition entitled Thermal Sensations and Desires of People
PassingbytheGatesoftheClunyMuseumAroundanHourafterSunsetinNovember.”8 Comic strip
speechbubbleswerereplacedwithnewtextstocreatethemostpoliticallychargedfunnieseverwritten.
Debordsawtheseculturaleffortsasfirststepstowardanultimategoalofthecompletetransformation
ofdailylife:“Finally,whenwehavegottothestageofconstructingsituations—theultimategoalofall
our activity—everyone will be free to détourn entire situations by deliberately changing this or that
determinant condition of them.”9 Such situations were regularly enacted in the happenings of the early
sixtiesandfoundtheirfullestfloweringonthestreetsofParisinMay’68,whenthewallsofthecitywere
sprayedwithsituationistslogans.Punkrock,too,claimssituationismasitsroots:Onnumerousoccasions,
MalcolmMacLarenhassaidthattheSexPistolsgrewdirectlyoutofsituationisttheories.
For Debord, the city is an ecology, a series of networks, each replete with its own potential for
meaningful exchanges and encounters: “The ecological analysis of the absolute or relative character of
fissuresintheurbannetwork,oftheroleofmicroclimates,ofdistinctneighborhoodswithnorelationto
administrativeboundaries,andaboveallofthedominatingactionofcentersofattraction,mustbeutilized
and completed by psychogeographical methods. The objective passional terrain of the dérive must be
definedinaccordancebothwithitsownlogicandwithitsrelationswithsocialmorphology.”10

---

Figure2.1A.SarahCharlesworth,detail1offorty-fiveimagesfromApril21,1978(1978).
Figure2.1B.SarahCharlesworth,detail2offorty-fiveimagesfromApril21,1978(1978).
Figure2.1C.SarahCharlesworth,detail3offorty-fiveimagesfromApril21,1978(1978).
Our digital ecology is a virtual corollary to Debord’s urbanism, and many of the same gestures he
proposedinmeatspacecanbeenactedonthescreen.Asfamiliarasoururbanmovementsare,ourcyber-
ramblingstendtobeequallyprescribed:wevisitthesameWebpages,blogs,andsocialnetworkingsites
againandagain.Wecouldbreakoutbyrandomlyclickingfromonelinktoanother,viewingaWebsurfing
sessionasdérive.Orwecouldtakethesourcecodeandgraphicsfromamajornewssiteandpopulateit

---

with text of our choosing, like the poet Brian Kim Stefans did by repopulating the contents of the New
YorkTimesWebsitewiththesituationistwritingsofRaoulVaneigem.11
Whenpeer-to-peerfilesharingbegan,widespreaddétournementofMP3stookaformreferredtoasa
“dinosauregg,”wronglytitlingasongforthepurposesofpromotion.Ayoungunknownbandwouldtakea
songoftheirs,retitleit“LikeaVirgin,”andthrowitoutontothenetworkswiththehopesthatthezillions
ofMadonna fans woulddownload it andhear their music. The“dinosaur egg” isa cultural artifact that
flowswithoutdirection,itsauthornotknowingwhowouldbereceivingitorwhattheresponsewouldbe.
Variantsofsituationistdétournementcanbefoundinthevisualartsinvolvingtheeradicationoftexts.
In 1978 the conceptual artist Sara Charlesworth took the front pages from forty-five newspapers from
aroundtheworldand,withtheexceptionofthenewspaper’stitleheader,erasedallthetext,leavingonly
the photographs in place. The day’s paper she worked with featured a photograph of the Italian prime
minister, Aldo Moro, who was held in captivity by the Red Brigade. The terrorist group released the
phototoprovethat,contrarytoreportsofhisdeathadayearlier,hewasstillalive.
WhyisMoro’simagetheonlyphotographonthefrontpageofIlMessaggeroandyetonlyoneofthree
intheNewYorkTimes?Whatdoesthistellusaboutlocalversusinternationalnews?Abouttheeditorial
decisionsthatweremade?Aboutthepoliticsofthenewspaper?Asimplegestureofremovalrevealsalot
about the visual thinking, politics, and editorial decisions behind what is presented as stable and
objective information, elegantly revealing the structures of power and subjectivity behind the news. In
thesepieces,languageisdisplacedinthecloakoferasure,leavingbehindonlystructureandimage.
TheanticorporatefilmFood,Inc.begins:“Whenyougothroughthesupermarket,thereisanillusionof
diversity. So much of our industrial food turns out to be rearrangements of corn.”12 A similar sentiment
couldbemadeaboutthetypesofpubliclanguagesurroundingus.Whenwelookcloselyatwhattypesof
words splatter across our environment, we’ll find they are mostly prescriptive and directive: either the
languageofauthority(parkingsigns,licenseplates)orthelanguageofconsumerism(advertising,product,
display).Whilewehavetheillusionofabundanceandvariety,inourlanguage-steepedcitiesthevarieties
are shockingly small. The photographer Matt Siber demonstrates this by shooting mundane scenes of
streetscapes and interiors—parking lots, drug stores, subway stations, freeways—then systematically
eradicatingeverytraceoflanguageinthem.Heliftsalltheremovedtextintactfromthephotographand
dropsitinsitu—fontsandall—ontoablankwhitepanelnexttothephotograph.Thetwoarepresentedas
onepiece:aworlddevoidoflanguageandamapoftheremoval.
Byremovingthelanguage,webecomeawareofitslayoutaswellasitsprevalenceandubiquity,afact
we are blind to in our daily lives. We see how language in the city is ruled as much by the grid of
architectureasthestreetsare:whenthewordsaredisplacedontoablanksheetofpaper,theghostsof
architecture remain visible, enforcing its structure onto the words. Architecture, generally front and
center,isdemotedtoasecondaryroleasapageforwords;thebuildingsfeelemptyandforlornwithout
them. If we examine the types of language on the white panels, we become aware of its varieties,
tonalities,andclusterings.Wealsoseehowblandandbanalmostofthepubliclanguageissurrounding
us.OnecouldeasilyimaginelayingSiber’smapsofwordsoveranynumberofgriddedbuildingsinany
number of cities with the same effect. Surely every city has a building that is inscribed with the words
“SELLBUY/LOANSCASH/SELLLOANS.”
In Untitled #21 we’re presented with language as branding. From the text adorning the car, to the
dealership, to the logos on the sneakers of the figure, it’s all commercial, a veritable landscape of
consumerism. The ghost panel is a visual poem, a linguistic schema of logos describing forms: a ghost
car, with the forms of its wheels described by logos. Looking at the text panel, the imperatives in
advertising are absurd when decontextualized: who in America hasn’t seen a Ford lately? Why would
anyonewanttolookagain?Infact,thisphotographisnothingbutFord.
InthedenserurbanenvironmentofUntitled#13,theadlanguageandbrandingisjustaspresent,yet

---

lesshomogeneous.Thetextpanellookslikeitcouldbeaminimalistspreadfromafashionmagazine,with
its elegant fonts strewn across the page in a dashing manner. But on closer examination, there’s an
intersection of tonalities and brands that would never be found on the pages of Vogue. Through the
uncanny placement of the delivery van, the cosmetic brand Bliss dialogues with Lay’s potato chips.
Siber’s accomplishment is remarkable since, had we been walking down the street and seen the van
parked in front of the billboard, it is unlikely that we would have seen the intersection of chips and
makeupthesameway.Similarly,theDiorbillboardtextisneatlybisectedbyalineofwordstakenfrom
thebarofthecherrypicker.AndtheBlisstext,beginningwith“wise”(aserendipitouscoincidencewith
theLay’sbelowit)isitselftruncatedbythefoldinthebillboardbeinginstalled.Twohourslater,withthe
delivery truck gone and the billboard installation finished, Siber would have mapped a very different
landscape.Wordsaretemporary,movable,andchangeableinthecity’scommercialmicroclimates.
Moved indoors, branding has its own psychogeograpic topography. Untitled #3 shows a drug store
display,scrubbedofitstexts.Herepackaging,withaslanttowardnaturalbeauty,setsthestructureand
tone of the work. It’s no coincidence that the textual placement mirrors the forms of stems and flowers
upon which they’re placed. And when removed to the blank page, in fact, the words form a garden of
language that could easily be titled, “The Healing Garden”—not unlike Mary Ellen Solt’s word-flower
concretepoemsofthe1960s(figure2.6).

---

Figure2.2.MattSiber,Untitled#26,2004.

---

---

Figure2.3.MattSiber,Untitled#21,2003.
Siber’swordsarederivedfromconsumernotionsof“organics”:eventherootsoftheflowersareprice
tags.In1985AndyWarholsaid,“Whenyouthinkaboutit,departmentstoresarekindoflikemuseums.”13
While we may question the sincerity of this statement, Warhol’s point is borne out by the generational
differenceinapproachesfromtheunironicsweetnessofSolt’swordgardenstothenefariousconsumer-
driven language hothouse presented by Siber. Siber’s drugstore brings to mind photographer Andreas
Gursky’s monumental consumerist landscapes, particularly his well-known 99 Cent, an endlessly
mirroreddiscountstoreshowingusaninfinitelandscapeofconsumption,amodern-daybumpercrop,a
bountyofabundancethat,uponcloserinspection,revealsthesamefewbrandsanditemsPhotoshopped
overandoveragain.

---

TheaudioequivalenttoSiber’sandCharlesworth’spracticesisashadowygroupofanonymousartists
who call themselves Language Removal Services. Their name literally describes what they do: they
removealllanguagefromcelebrities’recordedspeech.LegendhasitthattheybeganasHollywoodsound
editors,whosejobitwastocleanupthestars’speech,removingalltheirums,ahs,andstuttersfromthe
day’srushes.Afterwork,they’dsurreptitiouslyscoopupallthebitsoftapeleftonthecuttingroomfloor
andreassemblethemintononverbalportraitsoffamousactorsasartworks.Whatbeganasajokebecame
serious as their practice extended to all forms of prerecorded speech. Before long they were making
portraitofpoliticians,sportsstars,andpoets,leavingonlytheextralinguistictraces:stumbles,ums,ughs,
sighs,sneezes,coughs,breaths,swallows.Whetherit’sMarilynMonroe,MalcolmX,orNoamChomsky,
theintonationandrhythmsdistinctlybelongtothespeaker.WilliamS.Burroughs’sbreathingandstutters
containhisunmistakablenasalquality;evenhisgruntssoundfamouslyBurroughsian.14

---

Figure2.4.MattSiber,Untitled#13,2003.

By drawing our attention not to what they are saying but how they are saying it, Language Removal
Services inverts our normative relationship to language, prioritizing materiality and opacity over
transparencyandcommunication.Inthesameway,byscrubbingoutwordswhereweusuallyfindthem,

---

MattSiberbothconcretizesanddefamiliarizesmarginallyvisiblelanguage.Bothartists’practices—one
usingsoundandtheotherusingimagery—provideinspirationforhowwritersmightbeabletoreframe,
rethink, and invert standard uses of language for their own work. I attempted to do something similar
whenIwroteSoliloquy,asix-hundred-pageuneditedrecordofeverywordIspokeforaweek,fromthe
moment I woke up on Monday morning until the moment I went to bed the following Sunday. It was an
investigationintohowmuchoneaveragepersonspokeoverthecourseofanormalweek.Andthiswas
thebook’spostscript:“IfeverywordspokeninNewYorkCitydailyweresomehowtomaterializeasa
snowflake,eachdaytherewouldbeablizzard.”Therewasagreatsnowstormthatyear,and,asthetrucks
andbackhoesmovedupanddownBroadway,Iimaginedthismassaslanguage.Daily,suchcollections
wouldhappen,backhoesshovelinglanguageintothebackoftrucks,which,inturn,likethesnow,would
bedumpedintheHudsonRiverandfloatedouttosea.IwasremindedofRabelais,whotellsofawinter
battle when it was so cold that the sounds created during the battle instantly froze upon hitting the air,
falling to the ground, never reaching the ears of the combatants. When springtime arrived, these long
inaudiblesoundsbegantomeltrandomly,creatingaracketbyskewingtheiroriginaltemporalsequences
ofaction.Itwassuggestedthatsomeofthefrozensoundsbepreservedforlaterusebypackingtheminoil
andstraw.15


Figure2.5.MattSiber,Untitled#3,2002.

---

ThemathematicianCharlesBabbagewascorrectwhenhespeculatedthattheairhadgreatcapacities
for carrying information. In 1837 he predicted our impossibly packed but invisible airwaves: “The air
itself is one vast library, on whose pages are for ever written all that man has ever said or woman
whispered. There, in their mutable but unerring characters, mixed with the earliest, as well as with the
latestsighsofmortality,standforeverrecorded,vowsunredeemed,promisesunfulfilled,perpetuatingin
theunitedmovementsofeachparticle,thetestimonyofman’schangefulwill.”16

---

Figure2.6.MaryEllenSolt,“Forsythia”(1965).
The thought of all that invisible language racing through the very air we breath is overwhelming:
television,terrestrialradio,shortwave,satelliteradio,citizenband,textmessages,wirelessdata,satellite
television,andcellphonesignals,tonamebutafew.Ourairisnowchokinglythickwithlanguageposing
as silence. Nowhere is it as thick as in New York City, with its density of population and architecture:
language is both silent and screamingly loud. The New York City street is a place of public language.
Fromsignagetochatter,tracesoflanguageareinscribedonnearlyeverysurface:T-shirts,sidesoftrucks,
manholecovers,watchfaces,baseballcaps,licenseplates,foodpackages,parkingmeters,newspapers,
candywrappers,mailboxes,buses,posters,billboards,andbicycles.It’sthedensityofpopulationinNew
Yorkthatgivestheillusionofanonymity,thesensethattherearesomanypeoplearoundmethatnoone
canpossiblybelisteningtowhatI’msaying.Inmuchoftheworld,talkgoesonbehindcloseddoorsor
sealedinclimate-controlledcars,butonthestreetsofNewYorkwordsareoutthereforalltohear.One
ofmyfavoritethingstodoistowalkafewstepsbehindtwopeopleengagedinconversationforseveral
blocks,listeningtotheirconversationprogress,punctuatedbyredlights,givingthespeechacertainpace
andrhythm.JohnCagesaidthatmusicisallaroundusifonlywehadearstohearit.Iwouldextendthatto
saythat,particularlyinNewYork,poetryisallaroundus,ifonlywehadtheeyestoseeitandtheearsto
hearit.
The modern city has added the complication of the mobile phone, yet another layer of language. A
dérive—thedesiretogetlost—ishardwheneveryoneeitherhasaGPSembeddedintheirdeviceoris
broadcastingtheircoordinatestothepublicatlarge:“I’mwalkingnorthonSixthAvenue,justpast23rd
Street.”Themobilephonehascollapsedthespacebetweenprivateandpubliclanguage.Alllanguageis

---

public now. It’s as if the illusion of public anonymity of the private conversation has been amped up.
Everyone is intensely aware of the phenomenon of public cell phone use, most viewing it as
inconsiderate, a nuisance. But I like to think of it as a release, a new level of textual richness, a
reimagining of public discourse, half conversations resulting in a breakdown of narrative, a city full of
madpeoplespewingremarkablesoliloquies.Itusedtobethistypeoftalkwaslimitedtotheinsaneand
thedrunken;todayeveryoneshadowboxeslanguage.
Publiclanguageonthestreetsusedtoincludegrafftitagging,but,duetothecat-and-mousegameplayed
by taggers and the authorities, it was a physical model of textual instability. Subway cars tagged in the
morningwouldbescrubbedcleanlaterthatnight.Documentationwasamust:theconstantmovementof
the cars demanded specific times and locations for viewing the surviving works. Language traveled at
highspeeds,comingandgoingveryquickly.Whenthecityridthesubwaysofgraffti,therewerechanges
in textual tactics. Exterior spray paint application was replaced by interior glass etching and plastic
scratching, leaving ghostlike traces of the full-blown markings that once covered the cars. Today train
exteriorsarecoveredonceagaininanothersortoftemporarylanguage,thistimeoffciallanguage:paid
advertising. The MTA learned from graffti culture and détourned its tactics and methodology into a
revenue-producing stream by covering the subway cars with paid advertising. The language itself is
computer generated, output as giant removable car-sized stickers; next week another series of
advertisementswillbestuckontheexterioroftrains.
Impermanent language, moveable type, fluid language, language that refuses to be stuck in one form,
sentiments expressed in language that can be swapped on a whim, a change of mind, a change of heart
surround both our physical and digital environments. While deconstructionist theory questioned the
stabilityoflanguage’smeaning,currentconditionsbothonlineandinmeatspaceampitupanotch,forcing
us to view words as physically destabilized entities, which can’t help but inform—and transform—the
waythatwe,aswriters,organizeandconstructwordsonthepage.
ConcretePoetryandtheFutureoftheScreen

Concretepoetry,alittle,somewhatforgottenmovementinthemiddleofthelastcentury,producedpoems
thatdidn’tlooklikepoems:nothingwasversifiedorlineated,therewasnometerandverylittlemetric
rhythm. They often looked more like corporate logos than they did poems: clusters of letters atop one
another,sittinginthemiddleofapage.Thesewerepoemsthatboremorerelationtothevisualartsorto
graphicdesign,which,infact,theywereoftenmistakenfor.Yet,sometimesaformissoaheadofitstime
—sopredictive—thatittakesmanyyearstocatchuptoit.That’swhathappenedinthecaseofconcrete
poetry.
Concretepoetrywasaninternationalmovementthatbeganintheearly1950sandfadedfromviewby
theendofthesixties.Ithadautopianagendaofcreatingatransnational,panlinguisticwayofwritingthat
anyone—regardlessofwheretheylivedorwhattheirmothertonguewas—couldunderstand.Thinkofit
asagraphicEsperanto,takinglanguageandrenderingitassymbolsandicons.Likemostutopias,itnever
reallygotofftheground,yetscatteredaboutintheashesofitsmanifestosareseveralkernelsanticipating
how we would think about language in the future. Like many other efforts in the twentieth century, the
thrust of the movement was to force poetry into the modern age, away from the long-winded prosaic
sentences of, say, Henry James, toward the headline-inspired compactness of Ernest Hemingway.
Concretepoetry’stwistwastoalignthehistoryofliteraturewiththehistoryofdesignandtechnology.By
applyingaBauhaussensibilitytolanguage,concretepoetsinventednewformsofpoetry.Readabilitywas
the key: like a logo, a poem should be instantly recognizable. Interestingly, the ambitions of concrete
poetry mirrored changes happening in computing, which was moving from the command line to the

---

graphic icon. Indeed, the ideas that animated concrete poetry resonate with the use of language in our
present-daydigitalenvironment.


Figure2.7.bpNichol,eyes(1966–67).
Thepoemsthemselvessometimeslookedlikegagglesofletterscomingtogethertoformaconstellation.
Sometimes they would deconstruct and look like leaves blown across a page willy-nilly. Other times,
letters would form images—a trophy or a face—taking their cue from George Herbert’s 1633 poem
“Easter Wings,” in which a prayer is constructed visually, with lines getting successively longer and
shorter,finallyformingtheimagesofapairofwings.

---

Figure2.8.GeorgeHerbert,“EasterWings”(1633).
ThecontentofHerbert’spoem—humankind’sexpandingandcontractingfortunes—isembodiedinthe
imageofthewords.Oneglanceatthepoemandyougetitsmessage.“EasterWings”isanicon,boiling
downcomplexideasintoasingle,easilydigestedimage.Oneoftheaimsofconcretepoetryistorender
alllanguageintopoeticicons,similartothewaythateveryonecanunderstandthemeaningofthefolder
icononthecomputerscreen.
Concretepoetry’svisualsimplicitybeliestheinformedsenseofhistoryandintellectualweightbehind
it. Anchored in the tradition of medieval illuminated manuscripts and religious tracts, concrete poetry’s
modernistrootsdatebacktoStéphaneMallarmé’sUncoupdedéswherewordsweresplayedacrossthe
page in defiance of traditional notions of versification, opening up the page as a material space,
proposing it as a canvas for letters. Equally important was Guillaume Apollinaire’s Calligrammes
(1912–18)inwhichletterswereusedvisuallytoreinforceapoem’scontent:Thelettersofthepoem“Il
Pleut” pour down the page in lines, looking like streams of rain. Later, extending the practice of both
Mallarmé and Apollinaire, E. E. Cummings’s stacks of atomized words proposed the page as a space
wherereadingandseeingweremutuallyentangled.EzraPound’suseofChineseideogramsandJoyce’s
compoundneologisms,wroughtfrommanylanguages,gaveconcretepoetryideasonhowtocarryouta
transnationalagenda.
Musicplayedapartaswell.TheconcretepoetsborrowedWebern’snotionofKlangfarbenmelodie—a
musical technique that involves distributing a musical line or melody to several instruments rather than
assigningittojustoneinstrument,therebyaddingcolor(timbre)andtexturetothemelodicline.17Apoem
could enact a multidimensional space, being visual, musical, and verbal at once: they called it
verbivocovisual.
But,forallitssmarts,concretepoetrywasoftendismissedasbeinglittlemorethancommercialone-
liners—akin to Robert Indiana’s concrete poetry-inspired LOVE logo—easily usurped by commercial

---

cultureintoblacklightposters,T-shirts,orbaubles.Evenasconceptualartistsbegantouselanguageas
theirprimarymaterial,theartworlddistanceditself.In1969JosephKosuthwrote,“concretepoetrywas
aformalizationofthepoet’smaterial.Andwhenthepoetsbecomematerialistic,thestateisintrouble.”18
Thesesortsofdismissalsresonatetoday.Inarecentbookaboutlanguageandvisualartfromatop-notch
academicpress,anarthistorianwrites:
Understood in its most general sense, as “language art,” poetry is a form that explores the
aesthetics, structures, and operations of language as much as any specific content. In the
postwarera,varioustypesofconcreteandvisualpoetry,inparticular,promisedtoprobethe
space of the typographic page and link contemporary literature with the visual arts. Yet a
relianceonratherquaintillustrationalorpictorialmodes—asinpoemsthattakeontheshapeof
their subjects—left much concrete poetry out of touch with changing paradigms in the visual
artsandthewiderconditionsoflanguageinmodernity.19

However,byfocusingonconcretepoetry’srelationshiptotheartworld,shemissesthepoint:itturns
outthatthelinkwasnotsomuchwiththevisualartsbutwiththemultimediaspaceofthescreen.Hadshe
gonebackandreada1963tractwrittenbytheSwissconcretistEugenGomringer,shewouldhavefound
much more than merely “quaint illustrational or pictorial modes”: “Our languages are on the road to
formalsimplification,abbreviated,restrictedformsoflanguageareemerging.Thecontentofasentenceis
often conveyed in a single word. Moreover, there is a tendency among languages for the many to be
replacedbyafewwhicharegenerallyvalid.Sothenewpoemissimpleandcanbeperceivedvisuallyas
awholeaswellasinitsparts…itsconcerniswithbrevityandconciseness.”20
Afewyearslater,theconcretepoetandtheoristMaryEllenSoltcritiquedpoetry’sinabilitytokeepup
withtherestofculture,whichshesawracingby:“Usesoflanguageinpoetryofthetraditionaltypeare
not keeping pace with live processes of language and rapid methods of communication at work in our
contemporaryworld.Contemporarylanguagesexhibitthefollowingtendencies:…abbreviatedstatement
on all levels of communication from the headline, the advertising slogan, to the scientific formula—the
quick,concentratedvisualmessage.”21
Theriseofglobalcomputernetworksinthe1960sandtheirintensiveuseoflanguage,bothnaturaland
computative,fueledthesestatements,whichremainasrelevanttodayaswhentheywerewrittenevenas
thephenomenaofglobalizedcomputinghasinfinitelymulitplied.Ascomputingprogressedfromcommand
linetoicon,concretepoetry’sparallelclaimwasthatpoetry,inordertoremainrelevant,neededtomove
fromtheverseandstanzatothecondensedformsoftheconstellation,cluster,ideogram,andicon.
In 1958 a group of Brazilian concrete poets calling themselves the Noigandres group (after a word
fromPound’sCantos)madealaundrylistofphysicalattributestheywantedtheirpoetrytoembody.When
wereadit,weseethegraphicalWebdescribednearlyfourdecadesaheadofitstime:“space(“blancs”)
andtypographicaldevicesassubstantiveelementsofcomposition…organicinterpenetrationoftimeand
space … atomization of words, physiognomical typography; expressionistic emphasis on space … the
vision,ratherthanthepraxis…directspeech,economyandfunctionalarchitecture.”22
Allgraphicaluserinterfacesgivesus“typographicaldevicesassubstantiveelementsofcomposition”
inadynamicsettingof“timeandspace.”Clickonawordandwatchit“atomize”ina“physiognomical”
way. Without “functional architecture”—the coding beneath the graphics and sounds—the Web would
ceasetowork.
Asmodernists,theconcretepoetsadoredcleanlines,sansseriffonts,andgooddesign.Pullingtheory
fromtheplasticarts,theyadheredcloselytoGreenbergianmodernisttenetssuchasnonillusionisticspace
andautonomyoftheartwork.Lookingatearlyconcretepoems,youcanalmosthearClementGreenberg
saying“lookhowthese‘shapesflattenandspreadinthedense,two-dimensionalatmosphere.’”23Inspite

---

of ongoing attempts to prove otherwise, the screen and interface are, in essence, flat mediums. They
generallyemploysansseriffontssuchasHelveticafortheirclassicdesigntropes.It’sthesamereason
thatArialandVerdanahavebecomethestandardscreenfonts:cleanness,readability,andclarity.24
The emotional temperature of their concrete poems is intentionally kept process-oriented, controlled,
andrational:“Concretepoetry:totalresponsibilitybeforelanguage.Throughrealism.Againstapoetryof
expression,subjectiveandhedonistic.Tocreatepreciseproblemsandtosolvethemintermsofsensible
language.Ageneralartoftheword.Thepoem-product:usefulobject.”25
Against expression: such statements, with their need to create “precise problems” and to solve them
with “sensible language,” emerging with “a poem-product,” and a “useful object” read more like a
scientific journal than a literary manifesto. And it’s that sort of mathematical level-headedness which
makestheirpoetrysorelevanttotoday’scomputing.Coolwordsforacoolenvironment.


Figure2.9.DecioPignitari,“BebaCocaCola”(1962).
InformedbyPopArt,theconcretistsengagedinthedialecticsoflanguageandadvertising.Asearlyas
1962, Decio Pignitari’s poem “Beba Coca Cola” fused the red and white colors of Coke with clean
designtomakeanalliterativevisualpunonthehazardsofjunkfoodandglobalism.Overthecourseofa
meresevenlines,usingonlysixwords,theslogan“DrinkCocaCola”istransformedinto“drool,”“glue,
“coca(ine),” “shard,” and finally into “cloaca / cesspool,” a sewer or the intestinal digestive cavity
wherebodilywasteisproduced.Pignitari’spoemisatestamenttothepowersoftheicon,yetalsoworks

---

asasocial,economic,andpoliticalcritique.
Theinternationalorientationofconcretepoetrycouldbeascelebratoryasitcouldbecritical.In1965,
poetMaxBensedeclared,“concretepoetrydoesnotseparatelanguages;itunitesthem;itcombinesthem.
It is this part of its linguistic intention that makes concrete poetry the first international poetical
movement.”26 Bense’s insistence on a combinatory universally readable language predicts the types of
distributive systems enabled by the Web. It’s a poetics of paninternationality, finding its ultimate
expressioninthedecentered,constellation-orientedglobalnetworkswherenoonegeographicentityhas
solepossessionofcontent.
By 1968 the idea of reader as passive receiver was called into question. The reader must distance
herselffrompoetry’slongyokeandsimplyperceivethepoem’srealityasstructureandmaterial:
The old grammatical-syntactical structures are no longer adequate to advanced processes of
thought and communication in our time. In other words the concrete poet seeks to relieve the
poem of its centuries-old burden of ideas, symbolic reference, allusion, and repetitious
emotionalcontent;ofitsservitudetodisciplinesoutsideitselfasanobjectinitsownrightfor
itsownsake.This,ofcourse,asksagreatdealofwhatusedtobecalledthereader.Hemust
nowperceivethepoemasobjectandparticipateinthepoet’sactofcreatingit,fortheconcrete
poemcommunicatesfirstandforemostitsstructure.27

But it works both ways. Concrete poetry has framed the discourse of the Web, but the Web has, in
effect, given a second life to concrete poetry. Backlit by the screen, dusty, half-century-old concrete
poemslookamazinglybright,fresh,andcontemporary.We’reremindedofconcretepoemswhenwesee
wordsskitteracrossscreensassplashpagesforWebsites,incaradsontelevisionwherethemovement
ofwordsconnotesautomotivespeed,orintheopeningcreditsoffilmswhererestlesswordsexplodeand
dissolve.LikedeKooning’sfamousstatement,“Historydoesn’tinfluenceme.Iinfluenceit,”28it’staken
theWebtomakeusseejusthowprescientconcretepoeticswasinpredictingitsownlivelyreceptionhalf
acenturylater.Whathadbeenmissingfromconcretepoetrywasanappropriateenvironmentinwhichit
couldflourish.Formanyyears,concretepoetryhasbeeninlimbo,adisplacedgenreinsearchofanew
medium.Andnowit’sfoundone.

---

3ANTICIPATINGINSTABILITY

Blurred:ParsingThinkingandSeeing

In 1970 the conceptual artist Peter Hutchinson proposed a work he called Dissolving Clouds which
consisted of two parts, a written proposition and photographic documentation. The proposition states:
“UsingHathayogatechniquesofintenseconcentrationandpranicenergyitisclaimedthatcloudscanbe
dissolved.Itrieditonthecloud(insquare)inphotographs.Thisiswhathappened.Thispiecehappens
almostentirelyinthemind.”1Theworkisahumoroussend-upofnewagepractices—allcloudsdissolve
ontheirownwithoutanyhelpfromus.It’salsoapiecethatanyonecando:AsItypethis,I’mdissolving
cloudsinmymind.
Hutchinson’s piece demonstrates one of the fundamental tenets of conceptual art: the difference
betweenseeingandthinking.
Ludwig Wittgenstein used the optical illusion of the duck-rabbit to demonstrate the concept of visual
instability.Likealloptionalillusions,itkeepsflippingbackandforthbetweenbeingaduckandarabbit.
Thewaytostabilizeit,atleastmomentarily,istonamewhatyousee:“Ifyouarelookingattheobject,
you need not think of it; but if you are having the visual experience by the exclamation [I exclaim “A
rabbit!”],youarealsothinkingofwhatyousee.”2InHutchinson’sdocumentation,wearelooking;inhis
linguisticproposition,wemustthinkofwhatwesee.

---

Figure3.1.PeterHutchinson,“DissolvingCouds”(1970).


Figure3.2.Wittgenstein’sDuck-Rabbit.(1970).
In1960sandseventiesconceptualart,thetensionbetweenmaterialityandpropositionwerecontinually
testedtovaryingeffects:howvisualshouldanartworkbe?In1968LawrenceWeinerbegananongoing
seriesthathecalledStatements,whichpermittedtheworkstotakeonanynumberofmanifestations:
1.Theartistmayconstructthepiece.

---

2.Thepiecemaybefabricated.
3.Thepieceneednotbebuilt.

Apiececouldremainasastatementoritcouldberealized.TakingaclassicworkofWeiner’sfrom
thisperiod,it’scuriouswhathappenswhenit’senacted.Thepropositionreads:
Twominutesofspraypaintdirectlyuponthefloorfromastandardaerosolspraycan.3

This statement left propositional form—as language—open-ended. If two of us conceive of a mental
imageofTwominutesofspraypaintdirectlyuponthefloorfromastandardaerosolspraycan, we’re
suretohavedifferentideasofwhatthatmightlooklike.Youmightthinkitwasfire-engineredpaintona
woodenfloor;ImightthinkitwasKellygreenonaconcretefloor.Andwe’dbothberight.
TherealizationofthepiecemostfrequentlyreproducedistheimagefromthecatalogueJanuary5–31,
1969, which is very much a fixed image visually, historically, and circumstantially. It’s got a great
bloodline, hailing from the collection of famed conceptual artist Sol LeWitt, lending this particular
realizationalineageofprovenanceandauthenticity.
Thatauthenticityisreinforcedbytheblackandwhitephoto—somethingthathardlyexistsanymore—
endowing it with historicity. Further credibility is bestowed by the material fact that there is an actual
photographicprintinexistence,anegativefromwhichcopiesweremade.Yet,forthebetterpartofthe
twentieth century, the photograph was suspect as not being capable of authenticity. Walter Benjamin,
writingin1935,states,“Fromaphotographicnegative,forexample,onecanmakeanynumberofprints;
to ask for the ‘authentic’ print makes no sense.”4 With the explosion of digital photography, Benjamin’s
propositionisexplodedbillionsoftimesover.5Suddenlywefindanalogphotos—particularlyblackand
whitereproductions—recastasbeinguniqueandauthentic.

---

Figure3.3.LawrenceWeiner,photodocumentationofTwominutesofspraypaintdirectlyuponthe
floorfromastandardaerosolspraycan.(1968).
In the photograph the floor itself is not a neutral space, but an indicator of time and place: an old,
rough, original industrial floor that was common in artists’ lofts in lower Manhattan during this period.
Therealizationasdocumented(figure3.3)wasfromWeiner’sownloftonBleeckerStreet.Afterdecades
of gentrification, such floors have been routinely ripped out and replaced as real estate values have
climbed.Infact,afterWeinerwasdisplacedfromthatloftduetorisingrealestateprices,thepurchaserof
theloft,inthemidstofrippingouttheoldfloorboardsandreplacingthemwithnewwoodenfloors,had
Weiner’spiececutoutintactandsenttohimasagift.ThepieceresidesinWeiner’sstoragevaulttothis
day.6 What this photograph is, then, is not simply a realization of a proposition, but a coded, historic
period piece, which evokes nostalgia for a Manhattan that has long ceased to exist in a form signifying
authenticity.Wecouldrefertothisdocumentationasthe“classic”versionofthework.Inanycase,it’sa
farcryfromtheneutralpropositionTwominutesofspraypaintdirectlyuponthefloorfromastandard
aerosolspraycan.Althoughspecificandpinnedtoacertainplaceandtime,Weiner’sworkshowshow
muchmorelimitingtherealizationofaworkisasopposedtothesimplepropositionofit.
Is it possible to make a proposition and have it realized in a stable and neutral environment? Let’s
makeaproposition:“Aredcirclewithatwo-inchdiameter,drawnonthecomputer.”
Yet,fromtheoutset,we’replaguedbylanguage.Thisiswhatmycomputercalls“red,”butthename

---

red on the computer is merely shorthand for more language. “Red” is more accurately code: a
hexadecimalcode:“#FF0000”;oranRGBcode:“R:255,G:0,B:0”;oranHSBcode:“H:0,S:0,B:
100”.Evenifyourealizetheidenticalpropositiononyourcomputer,becauseofyourmonitor’ssettings,
age,manufacturer,andsoforth,you’reboundtocomeupwithadifferentcolorthanwhat’sdisplayedon
mymonitor.What,then,isred?We’rethrownintoadigitalversionofaWittgensteinianloop:“Doesit
makesensetosaythatpeoplegenerallyagreeintheirjudgmentsofcolour?Whatwoulditbelikeforthem
not to?—One man would say a flower was red which another called blue, and so on.—But what right
shouldwehavetocallthesepeople’swords“red”and“blue”ourcolour-words?”7
Thenthereistheproblemofscaleandrealization:whileitmightbecreatedonthecomputer,shouldit
beprintedout?Byatwo-inchdiameter,dowemeanatwo-inchdiameterwhenitisprintedorwhenitis
onthescreen?Accordingtothedirections,“drawnonthecomputer,”I’lltakethattomeanitshouldbe
viewedonthecomputer.Butthat’sproblematicbecauseIdidn’tspecifyascreenresolution.Icouldtakea
digitalrulerandmeasurea2-inch-diametercirclein640x480resolutionbutifIchangeitto1024x768
resolution,althoughitstillsaystwoinches,it’sconsiderablysmalleronmyscreen.
IfIe-mailyoumyredcircleandyouviewitonyourcomputeratanidenticalresolution,thecirclewill
stillbeadifferentsize,duetowidevariancesinmonitorsandtheirresolutions.Whendisplayedonthe
Web, the variables are compounded: not only do we have screen resolution and monitor difference to
reconcile,butthere’sthequestionofbrowsersandthewaytheyeachdisplayinformationdifferently.My
browser, for example, often scales images to fit on what it calls a “page.” Only when you click on the
imagedoesitexpandtoits“actual”sizeinpixels.Whiletheprintedversionwillbeabletostabilizethe
scaleproblem,we’releftwiththevariablesofprinteroutput:contingentuponyourinkandpaperstock,
whatyourprinteroutputsas“red”willcertainlybeadifferentshadeandtonethanmine.
Movingbeyondtheformalproblemsofinstability,then,there’stheslippageofmeaning.WhenIlookat
myredcircleandthinkofwhatitcouldmean,myassociationsincludeastoplight,aball,theJapanese
flag, the planet Mars, or the sun setting. In art I am reminded of the geometries found in Russian
constructivism. Sitting on my screen, shimmering against the white of my “page,” its primarily retinal
qualityremindsmeofanAdolphGottliebabstractexpressionistpaintingminustheexpression,nowared
circlereducedtoageometricicon.
Turningawayfromthebrightredspotonmyscreen,Iseethattheimagehasbeenburnedintomyretina,
somuchsothatwhenIgazeatthewhitewallovermydeskIseeaanafterimage,butit’snotredatall:
it’sgreen,theoppositeandcomplimentarycolorofred.AndifItrytoreallyexamineit,itdisappears,
leavingahoveringghostofitsformerself.Whatoureyesseeisasrestlessandasunstableastryingto
nailexactlywhatadigitalredcircleis.
Thinking makes it no better. If I turn away from the computer and think of the words red circle, I
conjureaverydifferentsortofredcircleinmymind.TheimageI’mthinkingofisaroundshapewitha
redoutline;theinterioriswhite.Now,ifIthinkofafilledredcircle,thehuesvary.Concentrating,Isee
theredasafire-enginered.Nowit’schangingtoamaroon.Tomymindtheimageisrestless,morphing
andchangingitsproperties.Justliketheduck-rabbitopticalillusion,Ican’tseemtomakeitsitstill.Size,
too,inmymind,isvariablefromcosmicallyhuge(Mars)toamicroscopic(aredbloodcell).
WhenItypethewords,Igetalloftheseassociationsandmore:
redcircle

Iseethatthesetwowordsconsistoftenelements:ninelettersandaspace.Therearetworsandtwoes,
oneineachword.Thedofredisechoedintheclofcircle.Therearealsoseveralinstancesofvisual
echoingintheletterforms:tworepeatedinstancesofcande.Theclappearstobeasplitvariationofthe
letterd,astheicouldbereadasthelwiththetopseveredandfloatedaboveitsstem.

---

Thewordsredcirclehavethreesyllables.Icanpronouncethewordswiththestressonboththefirstor
second words with a significant change in meaning: red circle brings forth the color; red circle
emphasizestheshapeoverthecolor.IfIsaythewordsredcirclealoud,Icanaltermyintonationupand
downinasingsongywayorspeakthemflat,inamonotone.ThewayIchoosetospeakthemmakesforan
entirelydifferentreception.Inspeakingthewords,Ialsoinvokethesemioticandemblematicproperties
oftheJapaneseflagorMars.
Takingitonestepfurther,ifIperformanInternetsearchonthephraseredcircle,ittakesmeplacesfar
outsidewhatI,asanindividual,canconjure.ThereareseveralbusinessesnamedRedCircle:alounge
calledRedCircleinSanDiego,anadvertisingagencyinMinneapolis,aprojectthatprovidesresources
aboutHIVandAIDSforNativeAmericangaymen,andacompanythatrunsteatoursinSanFrancisco.
TherearetwofilmscalledRedCircle,onedirectedbyJean-PierreMelvillefrom1970anda2011film
starring Liam Neeson and Orlando Bloom. There is an imprint of Archie comics starring non-Archie
characterscalledRedCircle.Inliteraturethereis“TheAdventureoftheRedCircle,”aSherlockHolmes
story,wherethemarkofaredcirclemeanscertaindeath.Andthat’sjustthefirstpageofresults.
When dropped into a semantically driven image search, the words red circle throw us back to the
visual,butit’sfarfrommyinitialsimpleredcircle.InsteadIfindwidevarietiesofredcircles.Thefirst
imageisoftheuniversalsymbolfornotpermitted,anoutlinedredcirclewithadiagonalslashthroughit.
Thenextisasloppyspray-paintedredcircleoutlineonaconcretewall,whichlookslikeitcouldbea
variationoftheWeinerproposition.FollowingthatiswhatlookstobeaPhotoshoppedoutlineofared
circlefloatinginablueskyintersectingacloud.Nextisaveritableblizzardofredcircles:painterlyred
circles,expressiveKandinsky-likeredcircles,aSwatchwatchwitharedcirclearounditsface,athree-
dimensionalredcircularpieceoffoamthatholdstesttubesandanimageofabonsaitreeencapsulated
withinaredcircle.
Infact,theresultsdonotreturnafilledsolidredcircleuntilseveralpagesdeep,wherewearriveata
thumbnailimagethatlooksverymuchlikemyredcircle.Yetwhenviewedfullsize,tomysurprise,it’s
notaredcircleatall,butanimageofredshagrug,texturedandmodeled.Andit’snotreallyperfectly
round:itsperimeterisbrokenontherightsidebysomestrayshagpieces.Thecolorisdifferentaswell.
Thiscircleis,overall,morepurplishthanmyredcircle.Andit’sgotagreatdealofvarietyinitsshading,
getting darker in the bottom left quadrant and growing lighter toward the top. Clearly this is a very
complexandunstable“redcircle.”
But we can complicate it further: When I download the shag rug to my computer and change its file
extensionfrom.jpgto.txt,andopenitinatext-editor,Igetatext(figure3.4).
Clearly,thislooksnothinglikearedcircle.Infact,neitherthewordrednorthewordcircle,noreven
the image of a red circle, is anywhere to be found. We’re thrown back into semantic language, but an
entirelydifferentonefromthesearchtermthatleadmetothiscarpetorthehexadecimalcolorschemes.
Where do we go from here? We could take this text and attempt to find patterns that would aid an
investigation into the plasticity and mutability of language posing as image. Or we could do a close
reading on this text alone, commenting, for example, how curious the row of fifty-one 7s is in the third
line or on the random but somewhat even spatial distribution of graphical apples on the page.
Metaphorically,wecouldevensaythatthoseblackandwhiteapplesarepictographicmetaphorsforthe
abstraction we find ourselves in now—after all, apples should be red. If we were visual or concrete
poets, we could scoop up all this language into a text-editing program, shade the letters “red” and line
themuptocreateanasciiimageofaredappleoraredcircle.But,oncewegetintoadigitalimageofan
apple,it’snolongeranapple,it’sanApple.Enough.

---

Figure3.4.Imageofaredcirclesavedas.txtandopenedinatext-editor
Allthisistopointouthowslipperyandcomplextheplaybetweenmaterialityandconcept,wordand
image, proposition and realization, thinking and seeing has become. What used to be a binary play
between Weiner’s proposition, “the artist may [or may not] construct the piece,” has now become an
example of how language is suspect to so many variables: linguistic, imagistic, digital, and contextual.
Words seem to have become possessed by some spirit, an ever-changing cipher, sometimes manifesting
itselfasimage,thenchangingintowords,sounds,orvideo.Writingmusttakeintoaccountthemultiple,
these fluid and ever-shifting states, from the very conceptual to the very material. And writing that can
mimic,reflect,andmorphitselfinsimilarwaysseemstobepointedintherightdirection.
NudeMedia:TonyCurtisDefrocked

Thesesortsofslippagestakeplaceacrossallformsofmediaandcanbebestdescribedbyaphenomenon
Icallnudemedia.Onceadigitalfileisdownloadedfromthecontextofasite,it’sfreeornaked,stripped
bareofthenormativeexternalsignifiersthattendtogiveasmuchmeaningtoanartworkasthecontentsof
the artwork itself. Unadorned with branding or scholarly liner notes, emanating from no authoritative
source, these objects are nude, not clothed. Thrown into open peer-to-peer distribution systems, nude
media files often lose even their historic significance and blur into free-floating works, traveling in
circlestheywouldnormallynotreachifcladintheirconventionalclothing.Branding,logos,layout,and
contextallcreatemeaning,but,whenthrownintothedigitalenvironment,suchattributesaredestabilized,
strippingafullyclotheddocumentintonakednessasmorevariablesarethrownintothemix.
AllformsoftraditionalmediathataremorphedontotheWebareinsomewaydefrocked.Anarticle
about Tony Curtis, for example, that appeared in the Sunday Arts and Leisure section of the New York
TimesisfullyclothedintheauthoritativeconventionsoftheTimes. Everything from the typeface to the
pullquotetothephotolayoutbespeakstheauthorityofthepaperofrecord.There’ssomethingcomforting
aboutreadingtheArtsandLeisuresectiononSundayproducedandreinforcedbythevisualpresentation
ofthepaper.TheNewYorkTimesrepresentsstabilityineveryway.

---

IfwelookatthatsamearticleontheNewYorkTimesWebsite,however,wefindthatmuchofwhat
gavethepieceitsrocksteadinessinthetraditionalprintversionisgone.Forstarters,there’sabigsans
serifWforWashingtoninsteadoftheclassicblackserifedTforTony.Thus,themessageisthattheplace
inwhichtheinterviewhappenedhasgreatersignificancethanthesubjectofthearticle.Otherthingshave
changedaswell,mostnotablythesizeandcharacterofthetypeface.Thedefaulttypefaceonanybrowser
isTimesRoman,but,ifwelookatthenewspapercomparedtothescreen,we’llseethatTimesRomanis
notNewYorkTimesRoman.


Figure3.5.NewYorkTimes,Sunday,October6,2003,Arts&Leisure,printedition.

---

Figure3.6.Screenshotfrom,Sunday,October6,2003,Arts&Leisure,nytimes.com.
The image of Mr. Curtis, too, is different. It’s shoved over to the side and shrunken, reminding us of
SarahCharlesworth’snewspaperdétournements.TheStarbucksbanner—whichappearsnowhereinthe
print edition—almost functions as a caption. I could go on, but I think the point is obvious. The Web
versionofthearticlemightbetermedscantilyclad,missingtheauthoritativeindicatorsofthetraditional
printversion.
Intheupperright-handcorneroftheWebpageisanoptiontoe-mailthearticle.Whenwedothat,what
arrives in our inbox is extremely stripped down compared to the Web page. It’s just a text. The only
indication that it comes from the New York Times is a line at the top that says “This article from
NYTimes.comhasbeensenttoyouby…”TheTimesfonthasvanished,tobereplaced—atleastinmy
inbox—by Microsoft’s proprietary sans serif screen font Verdana. There are no images, no pull quotes,
and no typographical treatments, save the capitalization of the words WASHINGTON and TONY
CURTIS’S.HoweasyitwouldbetostripoutthewordsNYTimes.com.Ifwedothat,thisfilebecomes
detachedfromanyauthority,completelynaked.Infact,itisentirelyindistinguishablefromanynumberof
text-basedattachmentsthatarriveinmyinboxdaily.

---

Figure3.7.Articlee-mailedtomyself.
Togoonestepfurther,ifwecutandpastethetext—anditisatextandnolongeran“article”—into
MicrosoftWordandrunaprimitivealteringfunctiononit,forexample,theautosummarizefeature,we
endupwithsomethingbearingminimalresemblancetotheoriginalarticleasprintedinthepaperoron
the Web. Now the lead line is “SUMMARY OF ARTICLE,” followed by its provenance and then the
headline.Curiously,thewordWashington,whichfiguredsoprominentlyinpriorversions,isnowhereto
befound.Thebodytext,too,nowbecomesradicallyunhingedandstrippeddown.

---

Figure3.8.Summaryofarticle.
If I were to take this text and either e-mail it to a number of people or enter it into an online text-
manglingmachine,thenudemediagamecouldcontinueadinfinitum.Thinkofitasanever-evolvinggame
of telephone. Free-floating media files around the net are subject to continuous morphing and
manipulationastheybecomefurtherremovedfromtheirsources.
When destabilized texts are recontextualized and reclothed back into “authoritative” structures, the
results can be jarring. Examples of this include the now-defunct Pornolizer (pornolize.com) machine,
which turned all Web pages into smutty, potty-mouthed documents while retaining their authoritative
clothing,sportingthearchitectureoftheNewYorkTimessite.

---

Figure3.9.Pornolizer(pornolize.com).
Soundalsogoesthroughvariousstatesofinstability,withincreasingvariablesoncedigital.Overthe
course of the last half-century, Henri Chopin’s sound poem “Rouge” has been subjected to various
mutations,bothclothedandunclothed.Chopinbeganhistaperecorderexperimentsinthemid-fifties,and
“Rouge,”recordedin1956,wasoneofhisfirstpieces.8It’saliteralsoundpainting,withthewordred
repeated with different emphases, almost like varying brush-strokes. Manipulated audio techniques and
tracklayeringbuildupanincreasinglydensesurface.Thepiecereflectsitstime:thinkofitasanabstract
expressionistcanvas:
rougerougerouge
rougerougerouge
rougerougerouge

rougerougerouge
rougerougerouge
rougerougerouge

chocchocchoc
dur&rougedur&rouge
rougerougerouge

bruitbruitbruit
rougerougerouge
chocchocchoc

rougerougerouge
rougerougerouge

---

rougerougerouge

nununu
nununu
rougerougerouge
rougenunununu

iln’estqueveineiln’estqueveine
iln’estquesangiln’estquesang
iln’estquechair

rougerougerouge
rougerougerouge
rougerougerouge

rougerougerouge
rougerougerouge
rougerougerouge

rougerougerougerougerouge
rougerougerougerougerouge
rougerougerougerougerouge
rougerougerougerougerouge

iln’estqueveineiln’estqueveine
iln’estquesangiln’estquesang
iln’estquechair

rouGErouGErouGErouGErouGErouGErouGErouGErouGErouGErouGErouGErouGE
rouGErouGErouGE
rouGErouGErouGErouGErouGE

chocchocchoc

ROUgeROUgeROUgeROUgeROUgeROUgeROUgeROUgeROUgeROUgeROUgeROUge
ROUgeROUgeROUgeROUgeROUge9

Thepiecedescribestheintersectionbetweenthebodyandthevoice,amainconcernforChopin,who
later became well-known for his audio pieces that were derived entirely from the sounds of his body.
Chopinwouldamplifythesoundofhisbloodcirculationsystem,heartbeat,digestivetract,andsoforth,
which would form the basis for his works. This early work still uses language to describe the body
insteadofusingthebodyitself.
Initsday,“Rouge”nevermadeittoLPasan“offcial”releasebyarecordlabel.Itwasbornnakedand
remainedthatway,unreleasedandwithoutapublisheruntiltwenty-fouryearslaterwhenitwasputoutby
aGermangallery.10ThankstoChopin’shighlyvisibleworkasapromoterandpublisherofsoundpoetry,
however,tapesofhisworkweremakingtheroundsinadvancedmusicalcirclesoftheday.11

---

A decade after “Rouge’s” recording, it curiously appears in the first “Region” of Karlehinz
Stockhausen’s 1966 composition Hymnen , an electronic mélange of national anthems from around the
globe. Although truncated, “Rouge” forms the basis for a short spoken-word section based around
varietiesofthecolorred.Chopin’svoicealternateswithGerman-inflectedvoicesreadingaportionofa
list of Windsor Newton paints. To listen to this excerpt alone and decontextualized, it sounds like an
extension of Chopin’s sound painting. But, squeezed between magnetic tape deconstructions of
“L’Internationale” and “La Marseillaise,” its meaning becomes very different. The nude poem is now
clothedinthegarmentsofleftistpolitics.
Twenty-one years later, in 1997, the sample-based group called Stock, Hausen & Walkman (note the
group’s name) brought “Rouge” back into its original context when it was sampled into an ironic pop
track,“Flagging”(flaggingmeansdwindling,weak,fatigued,ordrooping;aconditionthatoccurswith
the loss of blood). Amidst the cheesy vocals, snappy drumbeats, and appropriated mathematical
recitations from children’s records, Chopin’s piece is snatched away from Karlheinz Stockhausen’s
politicalagendaandreturnedclosertoitsbodilyorigins.Butit’sanemptyinggesture:finally“Rouge”is
justonesampleofmany,partofanoisylandscape,inwhichsoundsareeasilyobtainedandjustaseasily
manipulated.Insuchalandscape,nosoundappearstohavemoremeaningthananyother.Thecorporeal
andbrutalimageofChopin’sredisnowclothedinkitsch,moreakintoBettyPagethantoAntoninArtaud.
Stock,Hausen&Walkmanareknownfortheirgraphicsense.Theyunderstandhowtocreateapackage
that visually approximates their musical practice. Packaging—or, in other words, dressing—creates a
context of value. Stock, Hausen & Walkman’s redressing of “Rouge” places Chopin’s poem back into
circulationfullyclothed.
In the clothed realm, popular culture’s fetishization of the historical avant-garde reached a plateau
when the enormously successful rock band Sonic Youth released a CD called Goodbye 20th Century
(1999).Onittherockersrattledtheirwaythroughcoverversionsofsomeofthemoredifficultworksby
JohnCageandGeorgeMaciunas,amongothers.ThroughacuriousconfluenceofDowntownsensibility
and mass marketing, thousands of rock-loving, Lollapaloozaattending Sonic Youth fans bought the disc
andwereexposedtowhatuntilveryrecentlyhasresidedonthefringesofthehistoricalavant-garde.
Throughgestureslikethese,theavant-gardebecomeswellmarketedand,insomecases,commodified.
Stroll through any good record store or museum gift shop and you’ll notice hundreds of artifacts of the
historicalavant-gardegorgeouslyrepackagedtobesnappedupbyconsumers,whetheritbereissuesof
avant-gardemusicorsleek,handsomelyproducedmonographsofoncemarginalartistsormovementslike
Fluxus.Assoonastheseitemsarepurchased,however,theycanberecruitedasnudemediaviapeer-to-
peerfilesharing.Inthecaseofsomeofthismaterial,whatwasoriginallycreatedasanantiauthoritarian
gesturehas,thankstotheInternet,beenrestoredtoitsoriginalradicalintention.Duetothemanipulative
properties of digital media, such artworks are susceptible to remixing and mangling on a mass scale,
henceneverhavingtheoneauthoritativeversionbestowedupontheseobjectsintraditionalmedia.They
areever-changingworksinprogressoperatinginthemostwidespreadgifteconomyyetknown.
Suchcircumstancesraisemanyquestions:Howdoeshavingavarietyofcontextsinfluencethecultural
reception of such objects? Who or what determines an artifact’s value, both commercially and
intellectually?Howdoesthis,inturn,impacttheartist’sreputation,bothcommerciallyandintellectually?
Ifartifactsarealwaysinflux,whenisahistoricalworkdeterminedtobe“finished”?
It’salittletooearlytoanswersuchquestions.Broughtuponbooksandrecords—mediainaclothed
andstableform—it’shardforustoacceptculturalartifactsinconstantfluxas“genuine.”OnceUlysses
arrivedonourshelves,theonlynewversionsofthebookthatcamealongweretypesetters’corrections
andannotatededitions,whichonlyreifiedoursensethatJoycewasasingulargenius.Withtheexception
ofXeroxingandcollaging,remixingtextsonthescaleofUlysseswasdifficult.Whenitcomestotext,we
haven’t seen anything nearly like the bootlegging phenomenon, but sites freely circulating unauthorized

---

bookswithcopyableandsearchabletext—inparticular,academicandtheorytexts—areburgeoning.And
ase-readerscapableofreadingopen-sourcefilesemerge,we’llbegintoseemoretextualremixes.While
nudeMicrosoftWorddocumentsor.rtfsoftextshavebeenfloatingaroundtheWebforever,thelackof
provenanceandbrandinghas,curiously,discouragedthesesortsofgestures.Now,withfullyclothedand
gorgeouslyformattedPDFs,emanatingfromuniversitypressesinillicitlydistributedcirculation,thetexts
themselvesarebeingmorecarefullycataloguedandarchivedaspotentiallyusefulobjectsonone’slocal
computer. Although they’re free, an authoritative version of a text signifies that it’s ripe for
deconstruction.12 As early as 1983, John Cage predicted and embraced the idea of unstable electronic
textsaspotentialsourcetextsforremixing:
Technology essentially is a way of getting more done with less effort. And it’s a good thing
ratherthanabadthing….Thepublishers,mymusicpublisher,mybookpublisher—theyknow
that Xerox is a real threat to their continuing; however, they continue. What must be done
eventually is the elimination not only of the publication but of the need for Xeroxing, and to
connectitwiththetelephonesothatanyonecanhaveanythinghewishesatanytime.Anderase
it—sothatyourcopyofHomer,Imean,canbecomeacopyofShakespeare,mmm?Byquick
erasureandquickprinting,mmm?…Becausethat’sthe—electronicimmediacyiswhatwe’re
movingtoward.

---

4TOWARDAPOETICSOFHYPERREALISM

Theriseofidentitypoliticsofthepasthavegivenvoicetomanythathavebeendenied.Andthereisstill
somuchworktobedone:manyvoicesarestillmarginalizedandignored.Everyeffortmustbemadeto
bemadetoensurethatthosewhohavesomethingtosayhaveaplacetosayitandanaudiencetohearit.
Theimportanceofthisworkcannotbeunderestimated.
Still, identity is a slippery issue, and no single approach can nail it. For instance, I don’t think that
there’s a stable or essential “me.” I am an amalgamation of many things: books I’ve read, movies I’ve
seen,televisionsshowsI’vewatched,conversationsI’vehad,songsI’vesung,loversI’veloved.Infact,
I’m a creation of so many people and so many ideas, to the point where I feel I’ve actually had few
originalthoughtsandideas;tothinkthatwhatIconsidertobe“mine”was“original”wouldbeblindingly
egotistical. Sometimes, I’ll think that I’ve had an original thought or feeling and then, at 2 A.M., while
watchinganoldmovieonTVthatIhadn’tseeninmanyyears,theprotagonistwillspoutsomethingthatI
had previously claimed as my own. In other words, I took his words (which, of course, weren’t really
“hiswords”atall),internalizedthem,andmadethemmyown.Thishappensallthetime.
Often—mostlyunconsciously—I’llmodelmyidentityofmyselfonsomeimagethatI’vebeenpitched
tobyanadvertisement.WhenI’mtryingonclothesinastore,IwillbringforththatimagethatI’veseenin
anadandmentallyinsertmyselfandmyimageintoit.It’sallfantasy.Iwouldsaythatanenormouspartof
my identity has been adopted from advertising. I very much live in this culture; how could I possibly
ignoresuchpowerfulforces?Isitideal?Probablynot.WouldIlikenottobesoswayedbytheforcesof
advertisingandconsumerism?Ofcourse,butIwouldbekiddingmyselfifIdidn’tadmitthatthiswasa
hugepartofwhoIamasamemberofthisculture.
Transgenderedpersonsaretryingtobecomethepeoplewhotheyare,nottheonestheywerebornas.
Transsexualpersonstooareinaconstantstateofremakingthemselves,laboringcourageouslytheirwhole
livestoadoptnewandfluididentities.Ifeelinspiredbysuchfluidandchangeablenotionsofidentity.
On the Internet, these tendencies move in different directions, with identity running the gamut from
authenticitytototalfabrication.Withmuchlesscommitmentthanittakesinmeatspace,weprojectvarious
personaewithmerestokesofakeyboard.Online,Itendtomorphindifferentdirections:inthischatroom
I’m a woman; on this blog I’m a political conservative; in this forum I’m a middle-aged golfer. And I
nevergetcalledoutfornotbeingauthenticorreal.Onthecontrary,Iamaddressedas“madam”or“you
right-wing asshole.” As such, I’ve come to expect that the person I think I’m addressing on the Internet
isn’treally“thatperson.”
Ifmyidentityisreallyupforgrabsandchangeablebytheminute—asIbelieveitis—it’simportantthat
mywritingreflectthisstateofever-shiftingidentityandsubjectivity.Thatcanmeanadoptingvoicesthat
aren’t“mine,”subjectivitiesthataren’t“mine,”politicalpositionsthataren’t“mine,”opinionsthataren’t
“mine,”wordsthataren’t“mine”because,intheend,Idon’tthinkthatIcanpossiblydefinewhat’smine
andwhatisn’t.
Sometimes, by the noninterventionist reproduction of texts, we can shed light on political issues in a
more profound and illuminating way than we can by conventional critique. If we wished to critique
globalism, for example, uncreative writing’s response would be to replicate and reframe the transcript
fromaG8summitmeetingwheretheyrefusedtoratifyclimatecontrolthreatsasis,revealingmuchmore

---

than one ever could by editorializing. Let the text speak for itself: in the case of the G8, they’ll hang
themselvesthroughtheirownstupidity.Icallthispoetry.
Nomatterwhatwedowithlanguage,itwillbeexpressive.Howcoulditbeotherwise?Infact,Ifeelit
is impossible, working with language, not to express oneself. If we back off and let the material do its
work,wemightevenintheendbeabletosurpriseanddelightourselveswiththeresults.
Uncreative writing is a postidentity literature. With digital fragmentation, any sense of unified
authenticityandcoherencehaslongbeenshelved.WalterOngclaimsthatwritingisatechnologyandis
therefore an artificial act: “Technologies are not mere exterior aids but also interior transformations of
consciousness, and never more than when they affect the word … Technologies are artificial, but—
paradox again—artificiality is natural to the human being. Technology, properly interiorized, does not
degradehumanlifebutonthecontraryenhancesit.”1RobertFitterman,whoseworksembraceourshifting
identitiesshapedbytheforcesofconsumerism,posits:
Can we express subjectivity, even personal experience, without necessarily using our own
personalexperience?…Therehasclearlybeenadesiretoengageorreclaimthepersonal.Iam
interested in the inclusion of subjectivity and personal experience; I just prefer if it isn’t my
own.TodayIhaveaccesstoanunlimitednumberofpersonalutterancesandexpressionsfrom
the gut, or the heart. Why listen to my gut when I could listen to thousands of guts? … For
writers coming of age in the 70s and 80s, the notion of multiple identities and appropriated
identities is a sort of native language, a natural outgrowth of the multiple personas that have
beenengineeredandthentargetedbymarketstrategists.2

Fitterman cites the visual artist Mike Kelley, who also frames the identity discourse in terms of
consumerism:“Glamrockwasamusicthatfullyunderstoodthecommercialmusicworldandacceptedits
arenaoffaçadeandemptiness,usingtheimageofthedragqueenasasignofitsstatus.…DavidBowie
adoptspersonas,throwsthemawayatwhim,andconstantlyreinventshimselfforthemarket.Hemirrors
ourcultureofplannedobsolescence.Forconsumerculture,ithasbeensuggested,theconstantlychanging,
chameleonpersonarepresentsempowerment.”3Writingneedstomoveinthisdirection.
And yet, who isn’t moved by an authentic story? Surely one of the most inspiring identity-based
narrativesinrecenthistoryisthatofBarackObama.Inaspeechhegaveathisfamily’sancestralvillage
inKenyaontheoccasionofaschoolnamedinhishonor,hespokeofpridefromwhencehecameaswell
as of how Kenya imbued his grandfather with the values that would propel the Obama family to
stupendousachievementsintheUnitedStates:“Hegrewuparoundhere.Hewastakingcareofgoatsfor
mygrandfather,and,maybe,sometimes,hewouldgotoaschoolnotsodifferentfromtheSenatorBarack
Obama School. Except, maybe, it was smaller, and had even less in terms of equipment and books, the
teacherswerepaidevenless,and,sometimes,therewasn’tenoughmoneytogotoschoolfulltime.Yet,
despiteallthat,thecommunityliftedhimup,andgavehimtheopportunitytogotosecondaryschool,then
gotouniversityinAmerica,thengetaPh.D.inHarvard.”4
America is full of such incredible stories. Another comes from the Armenian American writer Ara
Shirinyan.HewasbornintheArmenianSocialistRepublicintheUSSRintoafamilythatwasdispersed
allovertheMiddleEastinthewakeoftheArmeniangenocide.In1987hisfamilymovedtotheUnited
States with $1,500 and a few suitcases. His father went to work the second day after they arrived as a
jeweler.Hismotherdidthesameasanantiquerugrestorer.Theyworkedsevendaysaweekandboughta
houseayearaftertheyarrived.Hisfather’sbusinessgrewwhenhebeganmanufacturingjewelry,selling
tons of kilos of it. By the time he retired, his business occupied an entire floor of a large building in
downtown LA. Ara, a product of public and state schools, now has an international reputation and
thriving career as a writer. He is very much involved with the close-knit community of Armenian

---

Americans.
It’s moving story. Why, then, would he choose to not to write about it when he penned an award-
winning book about nationalities? In his book Your Country Is Great, he’s taken the names of every
countryintheworld,organizedthemAtoZ,andGoogledthephrase“[countryname]isgreat”—coming
up with mostly user-reviewed travel sites—selecting and sorting the results by nation. He then lineated
the comments, with each stanza representing another opinion. The result is a multinational Baedeker of
user-drivencontentandopinion.Unsourcedandunsigned,thepieceisbyturnsuglyandgorgeous,helpful
and harmful, truthful and misleading, vital and completely irrelevant. By bringing a cool and rational
methodologytotheseinherentlypassionateidentity-baseddiscussions,Shirinyanletsthewordsspeakfor
themselves,permittingthereadertoprocesstheopinionsexpressed.
Inhisbook,hishomecountryArmeniaistreatednodifferentlythanAruba,thenextcountrythatappears
alphabetically:
ARMENIAISGREAT
armeniaisgreatcountry
famousforitschristianity!

Armeniaisgreat,andYerevanisacity
wherepeoplelivetheirlifestothemaximum
IloveyouYerevan,
Iloveyourstreets,
yoursidewalks,

Armeniaisgreat
everyoneshouldgoback
atleastonce

thenewinformationonArmeniaisgreat—
lotsofgoodinformation—
I’llhavetoremembernottogive
anyone2flowers!

Ialsodonotspeakourlanguage
Armeniaisgreatthough.
Ihavebeenthere
andmadegoodfriends,
eventhoughIcouldnot
speakawordtothem.

TourtoArmeniaisagreatsuccess!
ToUnderstandOur
Past,

---

IsToUnderstand
Ourselves.

renovatedsidewalks,roads,and
unprecedentedHighRisebuildings
goingup
thefutureofArmeniaisgreat.

Withsuchwarmsummers
andverycoldwinters
youwilllearnagreatdeal
aboutthehistoryofYerevan

Armeniaisgreat
Iloveit,butIdontthink
itisforme.5

ARUBAISGREAT
arubaisgreat
itsbeachesarebeautiful
andthepeoplearegreat

Arubaisgreatfordiving
andseeingmarinelife
withvisibilityupto90ft.
Youwillseespongetubes,
glidingmantarays,seaturtles,lobsters,
ThetaxiserviceonArubaisgreat,
butweliketopickupandgowherever
andwheneverwewant,
sotherentalisgreatforus.

Arubaisgreatforsightseeing,shopping,
andavarietyofwatersports.
Youshouldplanonrentingacar
toexploretheisland.

Arubaisgreat,
notadropofrain,
barelyacloudandyet
neverfelttoohot

---

Arubaisgreat,
thatiswhereiwent
onmyhoneymoonlastyear.
Iloveit!
Therearemanyplacestostay.
TheMarriottisnice,
theWyndhamisnice.

Arubaisgreatforsingles,
couplesandfamilies.Probably
thebestminiaturegolfcourses
intheworldareinAruba

Arubaisgreatforahoneymoon
forthefollowingreasons:
1.Nohurricanes
2.Predictableweather
3.Tonstodo

Arubaisgreat.
Ifyoubustoutearly,
besuretogosnorkelling.
Theyhaveapartybus
forbarhopping6

WhatdoesthistellusaboutArmeniaorAruba?Notmuch.Shirinyanforegoesapersonalnarrativeto
demonstrate a larger point: the deadening effects of globalization on language. Collapsing the space
betweenthe“realworld”andtheWorldWideWeb,hisbookcallsintoquestion:Whatislocal?Whatis
national? What is multicultural? Instead of accepting current notions of language as a medium of
differentiation, Shirinyan persuasively demonstrates its leveling quality, demolishing meaning into a
puddleofplatitudesinatimewheneverythingisgreat,yetnothingisgreat.It’sgreatifI’vebeenthere:
globaltourismasauthority.
Shirinyan’scarefulselectionandjuxtapositionofphrasesmakesthisworkatextbookexampleofhowa
writermightgoaboutcarvingatechnology-fueledpostidentitywritingpractice,onethatmakesthereader
wonder whether the author’s identity actually had anything to do with the person who wrote it. Yet it
doesn’tshyawayfromemployingthefirstperson,usingitstrategicallyandliberally,butnonspecifically,
producingaworkthatisatoncefiercelynationalisticand,atthesametime,surprisinglybland.
TheFrenchartistClaudeClosky,inhisbookMonCatalog,takesadifferentbutequallydispassionate
tactbylistingeverypossessionheownsaccompaniedbytheactualcatalogoradcopywhichadvertised
thatpossession.Forthepiece,hesimply,substitutedthedirective“you”or“yours”forasubjective“I”
or“mine.”
Anexcerptreads:
MYREFRIGERATOR

---

Theusablevolumeofmyrefrigeratorisfarsuperiortoconventionalcapacities,andallowsme
tostoremyfreshandfrozenproducts.Themeatcompartmentwithadjustabletemperatureand
thecrisperwithhumiditycontrolassuremeaperfectpreservationofmyfood.Furthermore,the
fan-cooling makes and dispenses my ice to me as well as fresh water. Moreover, my
refrigeratorisequippedwithanantibacterialcoatingthathelpsmemaintainit.

MYCLEANSINGGEL

To gradually mattify the shiny appearance of my skin, tighten my dilated pores and clean my
blackheads, I have a solution: clean my face every night with my purifying gel with zinc—
known to be an active controller of sebum that eliminates, without chafing, the impurities
accumulatedduringtheday.Myskinisnolongershiny.Thesoothingpowerofzinc,reinforced
byamoisturizingagent,softensandrelaxesthedryareasofmyface.Myskinnolongerpulls.

MYONE-PIECEGLASSES

Itamethesun’srayswithmyone-pieceglasses.TrueshieldsagainstharmfulUVradiationand
too-bright light, I can also appreciate them as glasses, as they surround my face perfectly. I
benefit from the panoramic vision of the enveloping impact-resistant Lexan glass. Filtering
ultravioletraysonallsides,theyprotectmyeyesnotonlyfromthesun,butalsowind,sand,and
dust. The ultimate refinement: a small foam band contours perfectly to my face, assuring
comfort and a perfect fit. Extremely lightweight, I enjoy wearing them in all circumstances.
Withtheirremovablecord,Ialsoappreciatethemwhileplayingmyfavoritesports.7

Closky creates a consumer-frenzied overload of language, a contemporary form of self-portraiture,
voluntarily defining oneself not only by what one owns, but professing to let oneself be completely
possessed by one’s possessions. Refusing to moralize, editorialize, or emote in any way, he’s propping
himself up as the ultimate consumer, an uber-consumer. He doesn’t need to be won over, he’s already
sold.IfItellyouthatIwillnotonlybuyeverythingyou’retryingtosellme,butthatIwillembraceyour
products to the point of strangulation, what good are your pitches? Closky is one step ahead of the
marketersand,bysodoing,offersalinguisticallybasedantidotetoconsumer-orientedcapitalism.
InS/ZRolandBarthesperformsanexhaustivestructuralistdeconstructionofHonorédeBalzac’sshort
story“Sarrasine.”Initherevealshowsignifiersofclassareexpressedinseeminglyinnocuousstatements
aboutparties,furnishings,orgardens.Hisbookgivesyouthetoolstoteaseoutthesecodesfromanywork
ofart.ButwhatuncreativewritingpotentiallyallowsisaninversionofBarthes’sproject,asituationin
whichthosenormallyhiddencodesarebroughtfrontandcenter,comprisingtheentireartwork.Likeso
muchadvertising,music,film,andvisualart,theliterarydiscoursehasbeenmovedtothenextlevel.
WhatdowedowithaworklikeAlexandraNemerov’s“FirstMyMotorola,”whichisalistofevery
brandshetouchedoverthecourseofadayinchronologicalorder,fromthemomentshewokeupuntilthe
momentshewenttosleep?Thepiecebegins:
First,myMotorola
ThenmyFrette
ThenmySoniaRykiel

---

ThenmyBvulgari
ThenmyAsprey
ThenmyCartier
ThenmyKohler
ThenmyBrightsmile
ThenmyCetaphil
ThenmyBraun
ThenmyBrightsmile
ThenmyKohler
ThenmyCetaphil
ThenmyBliss
ThenmyApple
ThenmyKashi
ThenmyMaytag
ThenmySilk
ThenmyPom

andends:
ThenmyRalphLauren
ThenmyLaPerla
ThenmyH&M
ThenmyAnthropology
ThenmyMotorola
ThenmyBvulgari
ThenmyAsprey
ThenmyCartier
ThenmyFrette
ThenmySoniaRykiel
Andfinally,myMotorola8

Nemerov doesn’t situate these brands in terms of likes and dislikes as opposed to Closky who
“cheerfully” professes to “like” his humidity controlled refrigerator. There’s nothing here but brands.
Nemerov is a cipher, a shell, a pure robotic consumer. Enacting Barbara Kruger’s famous sloagan, “I
shop therefore I am,” she boldly creates a new type of self-portraiture: a complicit demographic, a
marketer’sdream.
In2007TimeMagazinequestionedwhetherthe$200milliongiftthatpharmaceuticalheiressRuthLilly
gavetothePoetryFoundationcouldreallychangethewaypeoplefeelaboutpoetry:“The$200million
won’t change that; nothing, not even money, can get people to enjoy something against their will. What
poetryreallyneedsisawriterwhocandoforitwhatAndyWarholdidforavant-gardevisualart:makeit
sexyandcoolandaccessiblewithoutmakingitstupidorpatronizing.Whenthatwriterarrives,cultural
change will come swiftly, and relatively effortlessly.”9 While there are a number of problems with this
statement—bychoosingWarhol,he’shopingforareturntoaspecificculturalmoment,whichpermitted
Warhol to become Warhol: the sixties, a time that isn’t coming back anytime soon—his challenge does
howevermakemewonderwhytherehasn’tbeenanAndyWarholforpoetry.
You might think that during the boom years of the George W. Bush administration, pro-consumerist

---

poetswouldhavecomeoutofthewoodwork.Butno.InsteadBush’spoetlaureates,suchasBillyCollins,
who wrote about fishing on the Susquehanna in July (though the poem is really about him not fishing
there),orTedKooser,withhispastoraldescriptionsofporchswingsinSeptember,orDonaldHalland
hisnostalgicruraloxcartmen,werehopelesslyoutoftouchwithwhatwasobsessingmostAmericans
(andmostoftheworld):buyingthings.Ultimately,it’snotsurprisingthataBushpoetlaureatehearkens
backtoaformofnostalgicpoetry,unawarethattheywereperformingasimulacraforatimewhenpoets
genuinelywroteabout“true”Americanvalues.
ThepoetryworldhasyettoexperienceitsversionofPopArt—andPopArthappenedoverfiftyyears
ago In spite of the many proposed alternative uses of language (concrete poetry, language poetry, FC2-
style innovative fiction, etc.), writing in the popular imagination has by and large stuck to traditional,
narrative, and transparent uses, which have prevented it from experiencing a kind of Pop Art–like
watershed.While,forexample,theNewYorkschoolfondledconsumerismsweetly,usingpopasaportal
tosubjectivity—(O’Hara:“HavingaCokewithyou/isevenmorefunthangoingtoSanSebastian,Irú,
Hendaye,Biarritz,Bayonne”)10—itnevercameclosetothecoldobjectivity,thenaked,propheticwords
ofWarhol:“ACokeisaCokeandnoamountofmoneycangetyouabetterCokethantheonethebumon
thecornerisdrinking.AlltheCokesarethesameandalltheCokesaregood.LizTaylorknowsit,the
presidentknowsit,thebumknowsitandyouknowit.”11
TheJuly/August2009issueofPoetrymagazine,publishedbythePoetryFoundation,kicksoffwitha
short poem by Tony Hoagland called “At the Galleria Shopping Mall,” warning us of the pitfalls of
consumerism:
Justpastthebinofpastelbabysocksandunderwear,
therearesome49-dollarChinese-madeTVs;

oneofthemsingingnewsaboutafar-offwar,
onecomparingthebreastsizefromHollywood

tothebreastsizeofanactressfromBollywoood.
AndhereismynieceLucinda,

whoisnineandatruedaughterofTexas,
whohasdevelopedtheflounceofapedigreedblonde

Anddeclaresthatherfavoritesportisshopping.
Todayisthedaysheembarksuponherjourney,

swingingacreditcardlikeascythe
throughthemeadowsofgoldenmerchandise.

Todayisthedayshestopslookingatfaces,
andstartsassessingthelabelsofpurses;

---

Soletitbegin.Letherbedippedinthedazzlingbounty
andraisedandwrungoutagainandagain.

Andletuswatch.
Asthegodsinoldenstories

turnedmortalsintolaureltreesandcrows
toteachthemsomekindoflesson,

sowewereturnedintoAmericans
tolearnsomethingaboutloneliness.12

Poor Lucinda is taken in by the oldest adage in the book—all that glitters is not gold—losing her
humanityintheprocess:“Todayisthedayshestopslookingatfaces/andstartsassessingthelabelsof
purses.”Theonlywaythisyounggirlcanlearnherlessonisthewayweelders/godshavelearnedours:
onlyaftersuccumbingtothetemptations,didwecometorealizethefollyofourpursuits.Ah,youth!The
telescopic nature of the piece in the last stanza widens to give us—as a culture, as a nation—pause to
think how alienated, lonely and how disconnected from humanity such encounters have made us. It’s a
poemthathassomethingspecifictoteachus;onethatimpartstrueandwisevalues,waggingitsknowing
fingeratthefollyofyouth.
By giving us snapshots of specific moments—pastel baby socks, underwear, Chinese-made TVs—
HoaglandattemptstoexpressinshorthandwhatRemKoolhaascalls“Junkspace”:atypeofprovisional
architecture that has given us malls, casinos, airports, and so forth. But trying to specify or stabilize
anything in Junkspace works against the nature of Junkspace: “Because it cannot be grasped, Junkspace
cannotberemembered.Itisflamboyantyetunmemorable,likeascreensaver;itsrefusaltofreezeinsures
instant amnesia. Junkspace does not pretend to create perfection, only interest.… Brands in Junkspace
performthesameroleasblackholesintheuniverse:essencesthroughwhichmeaningdisappears.”13Like
an easel painter setting up outside the mezzanine-level entrance of J. C. Penny and trying to render the
mall experience in oils, Hoagland chooses the wrong approach using the wrong materials: deep image
doesn’tflyinthisweightlessspace.
In the same issue of Poetry is a poem by Robert Fitterman called “Directory,” which is simply a
directoryfromanunnamedmall,loopedwithpoeticconcernsforform,meter,andsound.Koolhaastells
us that Junkspace is a labyrinth of reflection: “It promotes disorientation by any means (mirror, polish,
echo).”14 Fitterman’s listing of a mall directory purports to be as numbing, dead, and dull as the mall
experienceitself,purposelyencouraginglinguisticdisorientationbyreflectingratherthanexpressing:
Macy’s
CircuitCity
PaylessShoes
Sears
KayJewelers
GNC
LensCrafters
Coach
H&M

---

RadioShack
Gymboree

TheBodyShop
EddieBauer
Crabtree&Evelyn
Gymboree
FootLocker

Land’sEnd
GNC
LensCrafters
CoachFamousFootwear
H&M

LensCrafters
FootLocker
GNCMacy’s
Crabtree&Evelyn
H&M
Cinnabon
KayJewelers
Land’sEnd

HickoryFarms
GNC
TheBodyShop
EddieBauer
PaylessShoes
CircuitCity
KayJewelers
Gymboree

TheBodyShop
HickoryFarms
Coach
Macy’s
GNC
CircuitCity
Sears

H&M

---

KayJewelers
Land’sEnd
LensCrafters
EddieBauer
Cinnabon

RadioShack
GNC
Sears
Crabtree&Evelyn15

Fitterman’s list is reminiscent of Koolhaas, speaking about the Junkspace of the Dallas/Fort Worth
airport(DFW):“DFWiscomposedofthreeelementsonly,repeatedadinfinitum,nothingelse:onekind
ofbeam,onekindofbrick,onekindoftile,allcoatedinthesamecolor—isitteal?rust?tabacco?…Its
drop-offistheseeminglyharmlessbeginningofajourneytotheheartofunmitigatednothingness,beyond
animation by Pizza Hut, Dairy Queen …”16 Fitterman’s repeated nonspecificity mirrors the nature of
global capitalism by giving us instantly recognizable name brands in a numbing stream. It’s as if
RadioShackisinterchangeablewithCircuitCity—andaren’tthey,really?TheeffectofFitterman’spoem
is like the looping background of The Flintstones, where the same tree and mountain keep scrolling by
again and again: H&M, Kay’s Jewelers, and The Body Shop keep repeating. And, as alienated or
invigoratedasHoagland’snieceispurportedtofeel,runningoureyesdownFitterman’slistofdeadening
storesgivesus,thereader—firsthand—thefeelingofbeinginamall.Bydoingverylittle,Fittermanhas
actually given us a more realistic experience than Hoagland, without having to resort to sermonizing to
convinceusofhispoint.Thelessonofthepoemistheexperienceofthepoem.
TheformerUnitedStatespoetlaureateDonaldHall,inhispoem“OxCartMan,”writesofadifferent
kindofmarketexperience:
InOctoberoftheyear,
hecountspotatoesdugfromthebrownfield,
countingtheseed,counting
thecellar’sportionout,
andbagstherestonthecart’sfloor.

HepackswoolshearedinApril,honey
incombs,linen,leather
tannedfromdeerhide,
andvinegarinabarrel
hopedbyhandattheforge’sfire.

Hewalksbyhisox’shead,tendays
toPortsmouthMarket,andsellspotatoes,
andthebagthatcarriedpotatoes,
flaxseed,birchbrooms,maplesugar,goose
feathers,yarn.

---

Whenthecartisemptyhesellsthecart.
Whenthecartissoldhesellstheox,
harnessandyoke,andwalks
home,hispocketsheavy
withtheyear’scoinforsaltandtaxes,

andathomebyfire’slightinNovembercold
stitchesnewharness
fornextyear’soxinthebarn,
andcarvestheyoke,andsawsplanks
buildingthecartagain.17

UnlikeHoagland’sniece,whoproducesnothingandis,atthisstageofherlife,onlycapableofblind
consumption, or Fitterman’s objectified view of consumerism, Hall presents us with an idealized,
nostalgicpicturethatfeelslikesomethingoutofaCurrierandIveslithograph.Thiswasatimewhenmen
were honest and did honest work; when a man not only grew, harvested, packed, transported nature’s
bountybutalsosoldthem.FromOctobertoNovemberheworkedhard,atoncedepletingandreplenishing
forthenextseason,intouchwithnature’scycle.
In a review of Hall’s Selected Poems, Billy Collins wrote, in the Washington Post: “Hall has long
been placed in the Frostian tradition of the plainspoken rural poet. His reliance on simple, concrete
dictionandtheno-nonsensesequenceofthedeclarativesentencegiveshispoemssteadinessandimbues
themwithatoneofsincereauthority.Itisakindofsimplicitythatsucceedsinengagingthereaderinthe
firstfewlines.”18I’darguethatthe“simplicity”ofFittermanexpressestruthsmuchclosertotheeveryday
experience of most people than the morality-fueled sentiments of Hoagland or the nostalgic rustic rural
vignettesofDonaldHall.And,inthat,Ithinkthesearetrulypopulistexpressions:whatcouldbeeasierto
understand than a list of mall stores, reflecting most American’s daily commutes past and common
interactionswithourendlessmalls?
Acommonaccusationhurledattheavant-gardeisthatitiselitistandoutoftouch,toilingawayinits
ivorytower,appealingtothefewwhoareintheknow.AndI’dagreethatalotof“difficult”workhas
beenmadeunderthemantleofpopulismonlytoberejectedbyitsintendedaudienceasindecipherable,or
worse,irrelevant.Butuncreativewritingistrulypopulist.BecauseFitterman’suncreativewritingmakes
its intentions clear from the outset, telling you exactly what it is before you read it, there’s no way you
can’t understand it. But then the real question emerges: why? And with that question, we move into
conceptual territory that takes us away from the object into the realm of speculation. At that point, we
couldeasilythrowthebookawayandcarryonwithadiscussion,amoveuncreativewritingapplauds:
the book as a platform to leap off into thought. We move from assuming a readership to embracing a
thinkership.Byrelinquishingtheburdenofreading—andtherebyareadership—wecanbegintothinkof
uncreativewritingashavingthepotentialtobeabodyofliteratureabletobeunderstoodbyanyone.If
yougettheconcept(andtheconceptsaresimple)—regardlessofyourgeographiclocation,incomelevel,
education,orsocialstatus—youcanengagewiththiswriting.It’sopentoall.
This mode of uncreative writing offers a poetics of realism, reminiscent of the documentary impulse
behindZola’sLesRougon-Macquartserieswhere,intheguiseofdimestorepotboilers,hetookonthe
massiveprojectofhowbestdescribeinfullFrenchlifeduringthesecondFrenchEmpire.Fromfarmerto
priest to food markets to department store, Zola claimed that his work transcended mere fiction; his
intention was “strictly naturalist, strictly physiologist,”19 a claim closer to de Certeau than to Balzac.
InspiredbyZola,thenewwritingisarealismbeyondrealism:it’shyperrealist—aliteraryphotorealism.

---

It’scommonlysaidthatyoucanonlyteachtheavant-gardeinadvancedcourses,butCraigDworkin,a
professor at the University of Utah, feels differently. He thinks that a text like Gertrude Stein’s Tender
Buttonsworkswellatanylevelbecauseyoudon’tneedtoknowanyGreekmyths,literaryallusions,old
Britishroyalhistory,literarytropes,orevenhaveagoodvocabulary.Youknowallthewords,andthere
theyare.20ChristianBök,apoetandprofessor,describeshisstudentsasobjectingtoworkslikeTender
Buttonsatfirstbecausetheydislikefamiliarlanguagebeingrenderedunfamiliarandfeelthatthewhole
pointoftheireducationistomakeunfamiliarthingsreadilyunderstandable(nottheotherwayaround).He
spends much of his time in class trying to show the students the wonders of the strange enigma that is
Stein. He showcases, for example, that when Stein takes a familiar object, such as a pinbox, and
describesitas“fullofpoints,”allofwhichwefind“disappointing,”sheisinfactmakingaverysimple,
butsubtle,pointaboutthethorninessofsomethingso“pointless”aspoetryitself.21
Initsself-reflexiveuseofappropriatedlanguage,uncreativewritingembracestheinherentandinherited
politicsoftheborrowedwords:farbeitforconceptualwriterstodictatethemoralorpoliticalmeanings
ofwordsthataren’ttheirs.However,themethodormachinethatmakesthepoemsetsthepoliticalagenda
inmotionorbringsissuesofmoralityorpoliticsintoquestion.VanessaPlaceisawriterwhorepresents
ethicallychallengingandunsavorylegaldocumentsasliterature.Shedoesn’talterthemonebit,instead
shesimplytransfersthemfromthelegalframeworktotheliterary,leavingittothereadertopassmoral
judgment.
There’s a touch of Melville’s Bartleby in the work of Vanessa Place. As a beacon of stillness and
silenceinafrenziedworkplace,Bartleby’scomposureandstrictsenseofself-imposedethicsexposedthe
hollowness and habitualness of the busy routine that surrounded him. Like a black hole, he sucked
everyone into him, finally causing a total implosion. Place is a lawyer and, like Bartleby, much of her
work involves scribing appellate briefs, that task of copying and editing, rendering complex lives and
dirtydeedsinto“neutral”languagetobepresentedbeforeacourt.Thatisherdayjob.Herpoetryisan
appropriation of the documents she writes during her day job, flipping her briefs after hours into
literature. And, like most literature, they’re chock-full of high drama, pathos, horror and humanity. But,
unlikemostliterature,shehasn’twrittenawordofit.Orhasshe?Here’swhereitgetsinteresting.She
both has written them and, at the same time, she’s wholly appropriated them—rescuing them from the
dreary world of court filings and bureaucracy—and, by mere reframing, turns them into compelling
literature.
Place represents indigent sex offenders on appeal, no easy job. As she puts it: “All my clients have
been convicted of a felony sex offense and are in state prison at the time I am appointed to their case.
Because of my experience/expertise, many of my clients have been convicted of multiple offenses, and
sentencedtohundredsofyearsandnumerouslifeterms.Iprimarilyrepresentrapistsandchildmolesters,
though I have also represented a few pimps and sexually violent predators (those who, after having
served their sentences, have been involuntarily committed to state hospitals: I appeal their
commitments).”22
Afterhavingpublishedtwofinesuccessiveexperimentalnovels—oneisa130-pagesinglesentence—
herliteraryproductionthesedaysconsistsofrepublishingstatementsoffactsfromhercourtroomcases.
An appellate brief is composed of three parts: a statement of the case, which sets forth the procedural
historyofthecase;astatementoffacts,whichsetsforth,innarrativeform,theevidenceofthecrimeas
presentedattrial;andanargument,whicharetheclaimsoferrorand(forthedefense)theargumentsfor
reversing the judgment. For her literary production, she only uses the statement of facts—the most
objectiveandmostnarrativepartofthebrief.
Place does not alter the original document in any way other than to remove specific witness/victim
informationasnecessarytoprotectthosepeople’sidentities.Byre-presentingthestatementsasliterature,

---

she does not violate any formal ethical standards or professional codes of conduct: all her briefs are
mattersofpublicrecordandcouldbefoundorreadbyanyone.Butitseemslikesheisviolatingsome
sort of unwritten rules of her profession in order to critique and expose the language in Bartleby-like
ways.Placeclaims,“Allofmyclientsarelegallyguilty.Mostaremorallyguilty.Astheiradvocate,Imay
bemorallyguilty,thoughIamnotlegallyguilty.”23Byshiftingthecontextfromlawtoart,andbystripping
the language of any legal purpose, we suddenly see these documents in ways impossible to see them
before.ThetypeofquestionsthatthisgestureprovokesisattheheartofPlace’spractice.
Languageisneverneutral,neverstable,andcanneverbetrulyobjective,thusthestatementoffactsis
an argument in the guise of factual documentation. Even the basic rules for writing a statement of facts
acknowledgethisbias:“IntheStatementofFacts…wearenotallowedtoargueexplicitly.Sowhatdo
we do? We argue implicitly. What is an implicit argument? Just as an explicit argument is one that
explicitlystatesthebecause,animplicitargumentisonethatdoesnotexplicitlystateabecauseinanswer
to the question “Why?” Rather, an implicit argument arranges and emphasizes the facts to lead the
recipientoftheargumenttothedesiredconclusion.”24Forherdayjob,Placeisintentionallywritingan
implicitargument;forherart,sheisexposingthatfallacy.
Apublishedsectionofherfour-hundred-pageStatementofFacts—comprisedofthedocumentsfrom
twenty-fivecases—tellstheluridtaleofChavelo,achild-molestinguncle,andSara,hisniece.Itwends
its way for ten pages with graphic descriptions of sex interspersed with psychological impasses and
heart-rendingstrugglestocope.Inspiteoftheclerk’stranscriptnotes—thelogofmattersheardincourtin
the form of summary notations that continually interrupt the textual flow—a clear narrative written
emerges,writteninplainEnglish.Anexcerptreads:
Once,Sara’smothernoticedSara’sunderwearwaswetandsmelledofsemen.SheaskedSara
aboutit,butSarasaidshedidn’tknowhowitgotthere,andwalkedaway.Sohermotherput
Sara’sunderwearinthewashandtoldherselfnottothinkabout“thisevilofwhat’shappening.”
ThelasttimeappellanttouchedSarawasatherhouse.(RT1303)Sara’sprivatehurtwhen
appellant touched her: it felt like “poking.” It also hurt later when she went to the bathroom.
(RT1302)Sarawenttothedoctorbecauseherprivatewasbotheringher,“Like,whenyouput
alcoholonyourcut,butkindofworsethanthat.”(3)Sara’smothersawblisters“likeblisters
thatyougetwhenyougetonthemonkeybars.”Theblistersitched.ThedoctoraskedSarawhat
happened,butSaradidn’twanttosay.ThedoctorgaveSarapillstotakeeverydayforamonth,
and the blisters went away. They returned; Sara had to take the medicine again. The blisters
againwentaway,andagainreturned.Sarawentbacktothedoctor,andsawDr.Kaufman.(RT
1306–1309,1311–1313,1318,2197)
—————
(3) Sara complained to her mother about pain during urination; her mother gave her
medicinalteaforthreedays.Whenthepaindidn’tabate,hermothercheckedhervagina,sawa
blister,andtookSaratothedoctor.(RT2196–2197,2218–2221)Sarahadneverhadblisters
onhervaginabefore.(RT2199)25

Inreframingtheworkasliterature,thefirstthingPlacedoesistoremovetheseriffontrequiredbythe
profession(“thoselittleepauletsofauthority,”asshecallsthem),thuscastingthedocumentassomething
otherthanthatwhichbelongsinacourtroom.But,outsideofthat,thestatementisidenticaltotheoriginal,
witheverythingfromfootnotestotheClerk’snotationsleftintact.Wearingherdoublehatasbothalawyer
andanuncreativewriter,Placesays“Myjobisinformation‘processing.’Thatisthejobofallrhetoric,
alllanguage.”
YetPlaceplaysbothangles—thisisbothreallifeandart—cloudingmyrosypictureofartandethics.

---

WhileStatementofFactsmightstrikemanyasmerelyluridandsensational,tolingeronthecontentisto
misstheconcept:it’sthematrixofapparatusessurroundingit—social,moral,political,ethical—thatgive
theworkitsrealmeaning.AndwhenyouhearPlacereadthesewords,yourealizethatthevilecontentof
theworkisjustthetipoftheiceberg.Whathappenstoyou,thelistener,duringthereadingiswhatmakes
whatshe’sdoingsoimportant.
Notsurprisingly,it’shardtolistentoherread.IrecentlysatthroughareadingofStatementofFacts
that lasted forty-five minutes. On-stage, Place dons the same outfit she does when appearing before a
judge and reads in a low monotone, tamping down the wildly heated subject matter with a cool and
mechanicaldelivery.Uponhearingthework,thefirstreactionisofshockandhorror.Howcanpeoplebe
so terrible? But you keep listening. It’s hard to stop. The narrative draws you in, and you find yourself
listeningtothesmallincidentspileup:doctor’sexaminationofthevictim,thevictim’sslowandpainful
admissionthatacriminalacthasbeenperpetrateduponher,leadingtotheclimax,wheretheappellantis
finallyarrestedanditappearsthatjustice,afterall,willbeserved.Aftersometime,thisbeginstofeel
likeaHollywoodmovie,repletewithtragedyandredemption.
AndyWarholsaidthat“whenyouseeagruesomepictureoverandoveragain,itdoesn’treallyhave
any effect,”26 and the longer Place read for, the more immune I became to the horrors of what she was
saying. Like a detective, I began to divorce my emotional response from the facts, scratching my chin,
logically trying to poke holes in her argument, passing judgments on each incident. Like Bartleby’s
workmates,IfoundmyselfshiftingmypositiontoaccommodatePlace’snarrative.Unconsciously,Ihad
beentransformedfrompassivelistenertoactivejuror.Sheactuallytransformedmypositionasreceiver
ofthework,spinningmearoundinwaysthatwereverymuchagainstmywill.Ididn’twanttoobjectify
myexperience,butIdid.Placeusedpassivecoercion,asortofcourtroomlogic,toenactachangeinme,
thereader/listener,asshedoestojurorseveryday.WhatIwasexperiencingwasthelegalsystem;tomy
horror, I was caught up in its machinations. As I listened to the litany of crimes, I found my circuits
overloaded. As Place puts it: “I am considering information—even of a most disturbing variety—as
linguisticcompost.Thereistoomuchtoconsider,toomanywords,ofboththinandthickcontent.Itistoo
much to bear, and so we don’t. And still, I am asking the reader to bear witness, or to choose not to.
Eitherway,theybecomecomplicit.There’snosuchthingasanunbiasedwitness.There’snosuchthingas
aninnocentbystander.Notafterthey’velistenedforawhile.Neverafterthey’vestoppedlistening.”27
Inthe1930stheobjectivistpoetCharlesReznikoffbegananepiccalledTestimony:TheUnitedStates
(1885–1915)Recitative. It consists of hundreds of courtroom witness statements, which have then been
lineatedandversified.28They’reshortpieces,eachonetellingastory:
Ameliawasjustfourteenandoutoftheorphanasylum;atherfirstjob—inthebindery,andyes
sir,yesma’am,oh,soanxioustoplease.
Shestoodatthetable,herblondehairhangingabouthershoulders,“knockingup”forMaryand
Sadie,thestitchers
(“knockingup”iscountingbooksandstackingtheminpilestobetakenaway).
There were twenty wire-stitching machines on the floor, worked by a shaft that ran under the
table;
aseachstitcherputherworkthroughthemachine,
shethrewitonthetable.Thebookswerepilingupfast
andsomeslidtothefloor
(theforeladyhadsaid,Keeptheworkoffthefloor!);
andAmeliastoopedtopickupthebooks—
threeorfourhadfallenunderthetable
betweentheboardsnailedagainstthelegs.

---

Shefeltherhaircaughtgently;
putherandupandfelttheshaftgoingroundandround
andherhaircaughtonit,woundandwindingaroundit,
untilthescalpwasjerkedfromherhead,
andthebloodwascomingdownalloverherfaceandwaist.29

Reznikoff’stalefeelslikeafolksong,abluesrecitation,oraDickensiantale,metaphoricallyintoning
atimelessriteofpassage.Theshortpassageisripewithsexualmetaphor:thepubescentgirlwithlong
“blondhairhangingaroundhershoulders,”“oh,soanxioustoplease,”whosejobis“knockingup.”The
inevitable denouement happens when she feels the “shaft going round and round,” its symbolic
deflowering,repletewiththeflowofblood“comingdownalloverherfaceandwaist.”It’sacomplex
playoferosandthanatos,poeticandnuanced,expressedinsurgicallyselectedlineationandenjambment.
It’sremarkablyeconomical,paintingapictureofanentireworldinjustafewlines,packingawallopof
anemotionalpunch.
Place, conversely, doesn’t deal in metaphor. There’s nothing subtle about what she does, adhering to
Beckett’s motto, “no symbols where none intended.” We are horrified by Reznikoff’s tales, but they’re
onlyastanzaortwo,andwequicklymoveontothenextencapsulatedtragedy.UnlikePlace’sdurational
onslaught,Reznikoffpermitsustokeepourobjectivityintact:we’restillreaders—safeanddistanced—
witnessing tragedy. But we’re never forced to alter our position as readers or listeners in the way that
Placecompelsustodo.Reznikoff’sworkreeksofaworldpassed,anditisofteneasytoseparatefrom
the content, as opposed to Place, whose lurid tales continue to happen every day. In fact, Reznikoff’s
poemlivesuptoitsmonikerasobjectivist,keepingreaderandauthoroutsideinwaysthatPlacerefuses.
Hersisapoeticsofrealism:onesorealthat’sit’salmosttoomuchtobear.
Place’s works have a lot on their plate and recall a legend of the Warhol years. When Warhol first
showedhisBrilloboxesinNewYork,togreatcontroversy,attheStableGalleryin1964,anintoxicated,
angrymanattheopeningapproachedWarholandexpressedhisdisgustforwhathefelttobeaone-trick,
cheapshotgesture.HeaccusedAndyofrippingoffsomebodyelse’shardwork.Asitturnsout,thisman,
James Harvey, was a failed yet earnest second-generation abstract expressionist painter whose day job
wasasagraphicdesignerforBrillo:hedesignedtheprototypeoftheboxin1961.Hewasdoublyfelled
byWarhol,onceonaccountofhisdayjobandinalargersenseonaccountofWarhol’sPopArtrendering
hisabstractexpressionist“fineart”obsolete.Placecomplicatesthealready-complicatedWarholtaleby
playingboththevictimandthevictor,outsmartingherselfbytakingheralienatedlaboranddétourningit
intoasatisfyingandchallengingpractice.
Irecallaholidaydinnerwithmycuriousandbright,butverybored,cousinwhoisalawyer.Hewas
complainingaboutthedrudgeryofhisjob,havingtowriteendlesslydulllegalbriefsdayinanddayout.
Prodding him, I would say, why don’t you think of what you do all day as art? If you reframe those
documents, they don’t look too far from many conceptual art documents I’ve seen. In fact, part of the
practiceofcertainartistssuchasChristoistoincludeallthelegalbriefsthathehadtofileinorderto,
say,runafenceacrossmilesofCaliforniawilderness.There’sacertainfascinationwithdocumentation
andthedryauthoritativenessoflegalesethatrunsthroughmuchconceptualartandwriting.“Youcouldbe
apartofthattradition,”Isuggested.IcouldhavetoldhimabouttheworkofVanessaPlace.Mycousin,
althoughintrigued,demurredandcontinuedbeingboredformanyyearshenceforth.

---

5WHYAPPROPRIATION?

Thegreatestbookofuncreativewritinghasalreadybeenwritten.From1927to1940,WalterBenjamin
synthesizedmanyideashe’dbeenworkingwiththroughouthiscareerintoasingularworkthatcametobe
calledTheArcadesProject.Manyhavearguedthatit’snothingmorethanhundredsofpagesofnotesfor
anunrealizedworkofcoherentthought,merelyapileofshardsandsketches.Butothershaveclaimeditto
be a groundbreaking one-thousand-page work of appropriation and citation, so radical in its undigested
formthatit’simpossibletothinkofanotherworkinthehistoryofliteraturethattakessuchanapproach.
It’samassiveeffort:mostofwhatisinthebookwasnotwrittenbyBenjamin,ratherhesimplycopied
texts written by others from stack of library books, with some passages spanning several pages. Yet
conventionsremain:eachentryisproperlycited,andBenjamin’sown“voice”insertsitselfwithbrilliant
glossandcommentaryonwhat’sbeingcopied.
Withallofthetwentiethcentury’stwistingandpulverizingoflanguageandthehundredsofnewforms
proposedforfictionandpoetry,itneveroccurredtoanybodytograbsomebodyelse’swordsandpresent
themastheirown.BorgesproposeditintheformofPierreMenard,butevenMenarddidn’tcopy—he
justhappenedtowritethesamebookthatCervantesdidwithoutanypriorknowledgeofit.Itwassheer
coincidence,afantasticstrokeofgeniuscombinedwithatragicallybadsenseoftiming.
Benjamin’s gesture raises many questions about the nature of authorship and ways of constructing
literature: isn’t all cultural material shared, with new works built upon preexisting ones, whether
acknowledged or not? Haven’t writers been appropriating from time eternal? What about those well-
digestedstrategiesofcollageandpastiche?Hasn’titallbeendonebefore?And,ifso,isitnecessaryto
doitagain?Whatisthedifferencebetweenappropriationandcollage?
Agoodplacetostartlookingforanswersisinthevisualarts,whereappropriativepracticeshavebeen
testedanddigestedforthepastcentury,particularlyintheapproachesofDuchampandPicasso,bothof
whom were reacting to the previous century’s shifts in industrial production and its subsequent
technologies,particularlythecamera.AusefulanalogyisPicassoasacandleandDuchampasamirror.
The light of the candle draws us to its warm glow, holding us spellbound by its beauty. The cool
reflectivityofthemirrorpushesusawayfromtheobject,throwingusbackonourselves.
Picasso’s Still Life with Chair Caning (1911–12) incorporates an industrially produced piece of
oilclothprintedwithanimageofchaircaningintoitscomposition,andanactualropeiswrappedaround
the painting, framing the picture. Other elements include the letters J, O, U, presumably referencing the
wordjournal.Theseelementsinterminglewithvariouspaintedhumanandstilllifeformsinthepainting,
alldoneinthetypicalbrowns,grays,andwhitesofthecubiststyle.Picasso’spaintingisanexampleof
whatapaintergenerallydoes:likeabirdconstructinganest,discreetelementsaregatheredandstitched
togethertocreateaharmoniouswhole.Thefactthatthecollagedelementsarenotrenderedbyhanddoes
notservetodisruptthecompositioninanyway;rathertheyreinforcethestrengthofit.Picassostrutshis
masteryoverseveralmediumsandmethods,andwearejustifiablyimpressedbyhisskill.Likeacandle,
StillLifewithChairCaningisapicturethatdrawsyouintoitscomposition;clearly,youcouldspenda
lotoftimeabsorbedinthispictureandbaskinginitswarmglow.

---

Figure5.1.PabloPicasso,StillLifewithChairCaning(191–12).
Conversely, Duchamp’s Fountain, from just a few years later, 1917, is a urinal turned on its side,
signedandputonapedestal.Here,asopposedtoPicasso,Duchampappropriatedanentireobject,thus
defamiliarizing and rendering this industrially produced fountain functionless. Unlike Picasso’s
constructivemethod,Duchampdidn’tusecollagetocreateaharmonious,compellingcomposition,rather
heeschewedtheretinalqualitiestocreateanobjectthatdoesn’trequireaviewershipasmuchasitdoesa
thinkership; no one has ever stood wide-eyed before Duchamp’s urinal admiring the quality and
applicationoftheglaze.Instead,Duchampinvokesthemirror,creatingarepellentandreflectiveobject,
onethatforcesustoturnawayinotherdirections.Whereitsendsushasbeenexhaustivelydocumented.
Broadlyspeaking,wecouldsaythatDuchamp’sactionisgenerative—spawningworldsofideas—while
Picasso’sisabsorptive,holdingusclosetotheobjectandclosetoourownthoughts.

---

Figure5.2.MarcelDuchamp,Fountain(1917).
In literature, a similar comparison can be made in the constructive methodology of Ezra Pound’s
Cantos and the scrivenerlike process of Walter Benjamin’s The Arcades Projects. The assemblage and
collagequalityofThe Cantos stitches together thousands of lines, drawn from a number other sources,
literaryandnonliterary,allheldinplacewiththeglueofPound’sownlanguagetocreateaunifiedwhole.
Likeagleanerofhistory,hecollectsheapsofephemerafromtheagesandsortsthroughitlookingforthe
gemsoutofwhichhewillconstructhisepic;sound,sight,andmeaningcoalesce,frozeninshimmering
verse.Everythingseemstohavecomefromsomewhereelse,butithasbeenchosenwithdistinctiveand
carefullycultivatedtaste;hisgeniusisinsynthesizingfoundmaterialintoacohesivewhole.Theflotsam
includesoffhandednotes,pricelists,shardsoflanguage,erratictypographyandoddspacing,chunksof
correspondence, arcane legalese, slabs of dialogue, a dozen languages, and numerous unreferenced
footnotes, to name a few, all bound together in a life’s work. Written according to neither system or
constraint, this rambling mess is remarkably sensuous. The result is an exquisitely built construction
cobbledtogetherbyamastercraftsman.Wecouldsaythat,likePicasso,Pound’spracticeissynthetic,one
thatdrawsusintoteaseoutitspuzzlesandbaskinthelightofitssheerbeauty.Pounddoeshaveclear
ambitionsandideas—socialandpolitical,nottomentionaesthetic—yetallthesearesofinelydistilled
andsynthesizedthroughhisownfiltersthattheybecomeinseparablefromhisexquisitecreation.
Benjamin, on the other hand, taking his cues from cinema, creates a work of literary montage, a
disjunctive, rapid-fire juxtaposition of “small fleeting pictures.”1 With some 850 sources crashed up
againsteachother,Benjaminmakesnoattemptatunification,otherthanlooselyorganizinghiscitationsby

---

category.ThescholarRichardSieburthtellsusthat“ofaquarterofamillionwordsthatcomprise[this]
edition,atleast75percentaredirecttranscriptionsoftexts.”2AsopposedtoPound,thereisnoattemptto
blend the shards into a whole; instead there is an accumulation of language, most of it not belonging to
Benjamin. Instead of admiring the author’s synthetic skills, we are made to think about the exquisite
quality of Benjamin’s choices, his taste. It’s what he selects to copy that makes this work successful.
Benjamin’s insistent use of fragmentary wholes does not make the text the final destination, rather, like
Duchamp,wearethrownawayfromtheobjectbythepowerofthemirror.
Both Pound’s and Benjamin’s writing methods are largely based on appropriating shards of language
that they themselves didn’t generate, yet they demonstrate two different approaches to constructing an
appropriatedtext.Pound’sisamoreintuitiveandimprovisatorymethodofweavingtextualfragmentsinto
a unified whole. Often-times it takes a great deal of Pound’s intervening—finessing, massaging, and
editing those found words—to make them all fit together just so. Benjamin’s approach is more
preordained:themachinethatmakestheworkissetupinadvance,andit’sjustamatteroffillingupthose
categorieswiththerightwords,intheorderinwhichthey’refound,fortheworktobesuccessful.While
it’simpossibletodetermineBenjamin’sexactmethodology,thegeneralconsensusamongscholarsisthat
Arcadeswassheavesofnotesforagreat,unrealizedprojectthatheplannedtocallParis,Capitalofthe
NineteenthCentury.And,althoughtherearechaptersandsketchesforsuchabook,whichboilthenotes
down into a well-argued, logical essay, such a reading of the final work denies that possibility. As
Benjamin scholar Susan Buck-Morss says: “Every attempt to capture the Passagen-Werk within one
narrative frame must lead to failure. The fragments plunge the interpreter into an abyss of meanings,
threatening her or him with an epistemological despair that rivals the melancholy of the Baroque
allegoricists.…TosaythatthePassagen-Werkhasnonecessarynarrativestructuresothatthefragments
canbegroupedfreely,isnotatalltosuggestthatithasnoconceptualstructure,asifthemeaningofthe
book were itself totally up to the capriciousness of the reader. As Benjamin said, a presentation of
confusion need not be the same as a confused presentation.”3 The book can be read (or misread,
depending upon how you wish to frame it) as a stand-alone work. It is a book made up of refuse and
detritus,writinghistorybypayingattentiontothemarginsandtheperipheriesratherthanthecenter:bits
ofnewspaperarticles,arcanepassagesofforgottenhistories,ephemeralsensations,weatherconditions,
political tracts, advertisements, literary quips, stray verse, accounts of dreams, descriptions of
architecture,arcanetheoriesofknowledge,andhundredsofotheroffbeattopics.
The book was constructed by reading through the corpus of literature about Paris in the nineteenth
century.Benjaminsimplycopieddownthepassagesthatcaughthisattentiononcards,whichwerethen
organizedintogeneralcategories.Anticipatingtheinstabilityoflanguageinthelaterpartofthetwentieth
century,thebookhadnofixedform.Benjaminwouldendlesslyshufflehisnotecards,transferringthem
from one folder to another. In the end, realizing that no passage could live forever in one category, he
cross-referenced many entries, and those notations have traveled with the printed edition, making The
ArcadesProjectanenormousproto-hypertextualwork.Withtheinevitableprintingofthebook,thewords
wereforcedtosettledown,asaneditorpinnedthemtofixedentitiesonthepageforever.WhatBenjamin
intendedasafinalversionwasnevermadeclear;instead,posterityhasnailedhiswordsdownforhimin
theformofaone-thousand-pagetome.Yetit’sthatmystery—wasthistheformheintendedforhislife’s
work?—thatgivesthebooksomuchenergy,somuchlifeandplay,somesixtyyearsafteritwaswritten.
Intheensuinghalf-century,allsortsofexperimentsinunfixedpageshaveoccurred.Today,inplaceslike
PrintedMatterandbookartsexhibitions,it’snotuncommontofindbookscomprisedentirelyofunbound
sheets that purchasers may arrange according to their will. The catalogue to John Cage’s retrospective
Rolywholyover was one such book, with nearly fifty pieces of printed ephemera laid in, with no
hierarchicalorder.ThebookembodiesCage’schanceoperations,abookwithoutfixityorfinality,awork
inprogress.

---

Eveninitsfinalform,TheArcadesProjectisagreattobookbouncearoundin,flittingfrompageto
page,likewindow-shopping,pausingbrieflytoadmireadisplaythatcatchesyoureyewithoutfeelingthe
needtogointothestore.
InConvoluteG:Exhibitions,Advertising,Grandville,forexample,openingthechapteratrandom,you
stumble upon a quote from Marx about price tags and commodities, then, a few pages later, there’s a
descriptionofahashishvisioninacasino;jumptwopagesaheadandyou’reconfrontedwithBlanqui’s
quote,“Arichdeathisaclosedabyss.”Quicklyyoumoveontothenextwindow.Becausethebookis
ostensiblyabouttheParisianarcades—anearlyincarnationoftheshoppingmall—Benjaminencourages
thereadertobeaconsumeroflanguagethewaywewouldallowourselvestobeseducedbyanyother
commodity.It’sthesenseofsheerbulkandabundancethatmakesitimpossibletoeverfinish;it’ssorich
andsodensethattryingtoreaditinducesamnesia—you’renotsurewhetheryou’vealreadyreadthisor
thatpassage.It’sreallyatextwithoutend.Whatholdstheworktogether—whileatthesametimeensuring
thatyouremainlost—isthefactthatmanyentriesarecross-referenced,butoftenleadtodeadends.For
example, a citation about advertising and Jugendstil is appended with a cross-reference to “Dream
Consciousness,”achapterthatdoesn’texist.Losingyourway,ordrifting,ispartandparcelofthereading
experience as its come to us in its finalized form, regardless of whether or not Benjamin’s book is
“unfinished.” Instead, if you wanted to follow Benjamin’s “hyperlink,” you would have to choose
between two chapters with the word dream in them: Convolute K—Dream City and Dream House,
Dreams of the Future, Anthroplogical Nihilism, Jung or Convolute L—Dream House, Museum, Spa.
Onceyouflippedforwardtoeitherofthosechapters,you’dbehard-pressedtofindanydirectreference
toadvertisingandJugendstil.Instead,you’dmostlikelyfindyourselflostlikeaflaneur,driftingthrough
thoseseeminglyendlessfascinatingandengrossingchapters.
Inmanyways,thewaywereadTheArcadesProjectpointstowardthewaywehavelearnedtousethe
Web:hypertextingfromoneplacetoanother,navigatingourwaythroughtheimmensityofit;howwe’ve
become virtual flaneurs, casually surfing from one place to another; how we’ve learned to manage and
harvestinformation,notfeelingtheneedtoreadtheWeblinearly,andsoforth.
ByhavingTheArcadespublishedinbookformasopposedtosheavesofloosenotecards,Benjamin’s
workisfrozeninawaythatpermitsustostudyit,aconditionhecalledaconstellation:“It’snotthatwhat
ispastcastsitslightonwhatispresent,orwhatispresentcastsitslightonwhatispast;ratherwhathas
been comes together in a flash with the now to form a constellation.” Following Benjamin’s death in
1940, his friend Georges Bataille, who was an archivist and librarian at the Bibliothèque Nationale,
stashedBenjamin’sunpublishedsheavesofnotecardsdeepinanarchivewhereitremainedsafelyhidden
until after the war. It wasn’t until the 1980s that a manuscript was constructed, after years of piecing it
together into a solid form or constellation. The Web can be seen as having a similar constellation-like
construction.Let’ssaythatyou’rereadinganewspaperonline.Whenyouloadthepage,it’spullingfrom
amyriadofserversacrosstheWebtoformtheconstellationofthatpage:adservers,imageservers,RSS
feeds,databases,stylesheets,templates,andsoforth.Allthosecomponentservers,too,areconnectedto
a myriad of other servers across the Web, which feed them updated content. Chances are that the
newspaper you’re reading online has an AP news feed integrated into that page, which is dynamically
updated by various servers to deliver you the breaking headlines. If one or more of those servers goes
down,achunkofthepageyou’retryingtoaccesswon’tload.It’samiraclethatitworksatall.Anygiven
Webpageisaconstellation,comingtogetherinaflash—andpotentiallydisappearingasfast.Refreshthe
frontpageof,say,theNewYorkTimessiteanditwon’tlookthesameasitdidjustsecondsago.
ThatWebpage,inconstellation-likeform,iswhatBenjamincallsa“dialecticalimage,”aplacewhere
pastandpresentmomentarilyfusetogethertemporarilycreateanimage(inthiscasetheimageoftheWeb
page).Healsopositsthat“theplacewhereoneencounters[thedialecticalimage]islanguage.”Whenwe
writeabook,weconstructitindialecticalmanner,nottoodifferentfromaWebpage,bypullingtogether

---

strandsofknowledge(personal,historical,speculative,etc.)intoaconstellationthatfindsitsfixedform
asabook.AndsincetheWebiscomprisedofalphanumericcode,wecanposittheWeb—withitsdigital
text,image,video,andsound—asonemassiveBenjaminiandialecticalimage.
In Benjamin’s Arcades Project we have a literary roadmap for appropriation, one that is picked up
acrossthetwentiethcenturybywritersassuchasBrionGysin,WilliamBurroughs,andKathyAcker,to
namebutafew,andonethatpointstowardthemoreradicallyappropriativetextsbeingproducedtoday.
Yet,contrarytoBenjamin’sgroundbreakingforaysintoappropriation,thetwentiethcenturyembracedand
ran with the fragmentary, not the whole, playing itself out into smaller and smaller bits of shattered
language. The Arcades still deals in fragments—although often large ones—rather than in wholes:
Benjamin never copied the entirety of someone else’s book and claimed it as his own. And, for all his
professedloveofcopying,thereisstillagreatdealofauthorialinterventionand“originalgenius”inthe
book. It makes me wonder, then, if his book could really be termed appropriation, or if it wasn’t just
anothervariantonfragmentedmodernism.
Thingsgettrickywhenwetrytonaildownexactlywhatliteraryappropriationis.Wecouldtrytouse
my own appropriated work Day (2003) as a test case. I wanted to see if I could create a work of
literatureusingthemostminimalamountofinterventionpossible,byrecastingthetextfromoneentityinto
another (from a newspaper into a book). When reset as a book, would the newspaper have literary
propertiesthatwe’renotabletoseeduringourdailyreadingofit?
The recipe for my appropriation seems direct and simple enough: “On Friday, September 1, 2000, I
beganretypingtheday’sNewYorkTimes,wordforword,letterforletter,fromtheupperlefthandcorner
tothelowerrighthandcorner,pagebypage.”Mygoalwastobeasuncreativeaspossible,oneofthe
hardestconstraintsanartistcanmuster,particularlyonaprojectofthisscale;witheverykeystrokecomes
thetemptationtofudge,cutandpaste,andskewthemundanelanguage.Buttodosowouldbetofoilthe
exercise.Instead,Isimplymademywaythroughtheentirenewspaper,typingexactlywhatIsaw.Every
place where there was an alphanumeric word or letter, I retyped it: advertising, movie timetables, the
numbersofalicenseplateonacarad,theclassifieds,andsoforth.Thestockquotesaloneranformore
thantwohundredpages.
Sounds simple, right? Yet, in order for me to simply “appropriate” the newspaper and turn it into a
workofliterature,itinvolveddozensofauthorialdecisions.Firstcameliftingthetextoffthepageofthe
newspaperandgettingitintomycomputer.Butwhattodowiththefont,fontsizes,andformatting?IfI
removetheimages(whilegrabbingthetextsembeddedintheimages,suchasthenumbersonthelicense
plateinacarad),Istillmustkeepthecaptions.Wheredothelinebreaksoccur?DoIremainfaithfulto
theslimcolumnsordoIfloweacharticleintoonelongparagraph?Whataboutthepullquotes:wheredo
thoselinesbreak?AndhowdoImakemywayaroundapage?IknowIhavearoughruletomovefrom
theupperleftcornertothelowerright,butwheredoIgowhenIreachtheendofacolumnanditsays
“continuedonpage26”?DoIgotopage26andfinishthearticleordoIjumptotheadjacentcolumnand
start another article? And, when I make those jumps, do I add another line break or do I flow the text
continuously?HowdoItreattheadvertisements,whichoftenhaveplayfultextelementsofvaryingfonts
and styles? Where do line breaks occur in an ad where words float about a page? And what about the
movietimetables,thesportsstatistics,theclassifiedads?Inordertoproceed,Ihavetobuildamachine.I
havetoanswereachquestionandsetupanumberofrulesthatImustthenstrictlyfollow.
And once the text is entered into my computer, what font do I choose to reset the piece in, and what
statement will that make about my book’s relationship to the New York Times? The obvious decision
would be to use the font called “Times New Roman”? But, by doing that, I might lend the original
publication more credibility than I wish to give it, making my book appear more like a replica of the
newspaper than a simulacrum. Perhaps it would be better if I skirted the issue entirely by using a sans
seriffontlikeVerdana.But,ifIuseVerdana,afontdesignedspecificallyforthescreenandlicensedby

---

Microsoft,willthatpushmybooktoomuchtowardpaper/screenbattle?AndwhywouldIwanttogive
Microsoftanymoresupportthantheyalreadyhave?(Iendedupgivingitaseriffont,Garamond,which
alludedtotheTimes,butwasnotTimesNewRoman.)
Then there are there are dozens of paratextual decisions: what size is the book going to be and how
willthatimpactthereceptionofthebook?IknowthatIwantittobebig,toreflectthemassivesizeofthe
day’s newspaper, but if I make it coffee table sized, I risk getting close to the paper’s original format,
whichwouldruncontrarytomywantingtorepresentthenewspaperasaliteraryobject.Conversely,ifI
madeittoosmall,say,thesizeofChairmanMao’sLittleRedBook,itwouldbecuteandperhapsbeseen
as a novelty you might pick up next to the cash register at your local Barnes and Noble. (I ended up
makingittheexactsizeandbulkofthepaperboundHarvardeditionofTheArcadesProject.)
Whatpaperstockwillthebookbeprintedon?IfIprintitontoofineastock,itrunstheriskofbeing
seen as a deluxe artist’s book, something that only a few people can afford. And since the project was
basedonthereinterpretationandredistributionofamassmediaproduct,Ifeltthatasmanypeopleshould
havethebookaswanteditforanaffordableprice.Yet,ifIprinteditonnewsprint,itwouldalludetoo
closelytotheactualpaper,thusrunningtheriskofbeingafacsimileedition.(Intheend,Ijustwentwitha
genericplainwhitestock.)
Whatwillthecoverlooklike?ShouldIuseanimagefromtheday’spaper?Orreplicatetheday’sfront
page?No.Thatwouldbetooliteralandillustrative.Iwantedsomethingthatwouldsignifythepaper,not
replicatethepaper.(Iwentwithnoimage,justadarkbluecoverwiththeword“Day”inawhitesans
seriffontandmynamebelowitinaseriffontprintedinskyblue.)
Howmuchshouldbebooksellfor?Limitededitionartist’sbookssellforthousandsofdollars.Iknew
thatIdidn’twanttogodownthatroad.Ultimately,Idecidedthatitshouldbepublishedasan836-page
bookinaneditionof750,sellingfor$20.4
Oncethoseformaldecisionsaremade,thereareethicalissuestoconsider.IfItruly“appropriate”this
work,thenImustfaithfullycopy/writeeverywordofthenewspaper.NomatterhowtemptedImightbeto
alterthewordsofadisagreeablepoliticianorfilmcritic,Icannotdosowithoutunderminingthestrict
“wholes”thatappropriationtrucksin.So,forasimpleappropriation,it’snotsosimple.Therewereas
manydecisions,moralquandaries,linguisticpreferences,andphilosophicaldilemmasasthereareinan
originalorcollagedwork.
And yet I still trumpet the work’s “valuelessness,” its “nutritionlessness,” its lack of creativity and
originality when clearly the opposite is true. In truth, I’m not doing much more than trying to catch
literatureupwithappropriativefadstheartworldmovedpastdecadesago.Theremay,infact,bealotof
truth when my detractors claim that I’m not that radical, that my name is still on these objects, and all
thosedecisionsaresomuchintheserviceofupholdingnotionsofmyowngenius.Foranegolessproject,
there sure is a lot of investment in me here. One prominent blogger acutely commented, “Kenny
Goldsmith’sactualartprojectistheprojectionofKennyGoldsmith.”5
But,duringthetwentiethcentury,theartworldwasfullofsuchgestures,artistslikeElaineSturtevant,
Louise Lawler, Mike Bidlo, or Richard Pettibon who, for the past several decades, have recreated the
worksofotherartists,claimingthemastheirown,andtheyhavelongbeenabsorbedintoalegitimized
practice.Howcanyoungerwritersproceedinanentirelynewway,usingcurrenttechnologiesandmodes
of distribution? Perhaps a glimmer into the battlegrounds of the future was perceived when three
anonymous writers edited the now infamous Issue 1, a 3,785-page unauthorized and unpermissioned
anthology,“written”by3,164poetswhosepoemswereactuallyauthorednotbythepoetstowhomthey
wereattributed.Instead,thepoemsweregeneratedbycomputer,whichrandomlysyncedeachauthorwith
apoem.Stylistically,itmadenosense:atraditionalpoetwaspairedwitharadicallydisjunctivepoem
penned by a computer and vice versa. The intention of Issue 1’s creators was to provoke, along many
fronts.Couldthelargestanthologyofpoetryeverwrittenbepiecedtogetherwithoutanyone’sknowledge

---

anddistributedworldwideovernight?Couldthisgesturecauseaninstantliteraryscandal?Doesitmatter
ifpoetswritetheirownpoemsanymoreorisitgoodenoughforacomputertopenthemforthem?Why
where those specific 3,164 poets chosen and not the thousands of other poets writing in the English
languagetoday?Whatdiditmeantobeincluded?Whatdiditmeantobeexcluded?Andwhowasbehind
this?Whyweretheydoingit?Withitsconceptuallybasedagendaanddenialofthetraditionalmethodsof
creation,distribution,andauthorship,Issue1sharesmanyofthetouchstonesofuncreativewriting.
Yetitwasn’tsomuchthestylisticsthatraisedeyebrows,itwasthemechanicsofit—thedistribution
andthenotification—whichriledthe“contributors.”TheworkwasstitchedintoamassivePDF,which
wasplacedonamediaserverlateoneevening.Manypeoplefoundabouttheirinclusionthefirstthingin
the morning, when finding that the Google Alert they had set for their name had notified them that they
wereincludedinamajornewanthology.Clickingonthelinkbroughtthemtotheanthology,whereupon,
downloadingit,theyfoundtheirnameattachedtoapoemtheydidn’twrite.Likewildfire,reactionspread
throughthecommunity:WhywasIinit?Whywasn’tIinit?Whywasmynamematchedwiththatpoem?
Whowasresponsibleforthisact?Halfthe“contributors”wasdelightedtobeincludedandtheotherhalf
waswildlyangered.Severalofthepoetsincludedsaidthattheywouldincludethepoemascribedtothem
in their next collection. Speaking on behalf of the disgruntled authors whose reputations for genius and
authenticityweresulliedwasbloggerandpoetRonSilliman,whosaid,“Issue1iswhatIwouldcallan
actofanarcho-flarfvandalism.…Playwithotherpeople’srepsatyourownrisk.”Hewentontocitea
lawsuit in which he and a group of authors won a sum of money for copyright infringement back in the
seventies,suggestingthatsuchagesturemightbeagoodideaforthosescammedbyIssue1.Addressing
the creators of Issue 1, Silliman strikes an ominous tone, stating, “As I certainly did not write the text
associatedwithmynameonpage1849…Idon’tthinkyouwroteyourworkeither.”6
And yet, does Silliman really write his own work? Like many poets, the answer is both yes and no.
Overthepastfortyyears,oneofthemaingoalsinSilliman’spracticehasbeentochallengethenotionofa
stable, authentic authorial voice. His poems are comprised of shards of language, stray sentences and
observationsthatkeepthereaderguessingattheirorigins.Sillimanoftenuses“I,”butit’snotclearthat
it’sreallyhimspeaking.Anearlypoem,“Berkeley,”explicitlychallengesauthorialsingularity.Ina1985
interview,hesays:“In‘Berkeley,’whereeverylineisastatementbeginningwiththeword‘I,’something
verysimilaroccurs.Mostofthelinesarefoundmaterials,veryfewofwhicharefromanyonesource,
andthey’reorderedsoastoavoidasmuchaspossibleanysenseofnarrativeornormativeexposition.
Yet by sheer juxtaposition these reiterated ‘I’s form into a character, a felt presence which is really no
morethananabstractionofagrammaticalfeature….Andthispresence,inturn,impactssignificantlyon
howagivenlineisreadorunderstood,whichcanbevastlydifferentfromitsmeaningwithinitsoriginal
context.”7BobPerlman,writingabout“Berkeley,”reiteratesSilliman’sclaims,“Anearlypoemsuchas
‘Berkeley’ … seems specifically to destroy any reading which would produce a unified subject. The
poems consists of a hundred or so first-person sentences whose mechanical aspect—each starts with
‘I’—makesthemimpossibletounite:‘Iwanttoredeemmyself/Icanshootyou/I’venoideareally/I
shouldsayitisnotamask/Imustrememberanothertime/Idon’twanttoknowyou/I’mnotdressed/I
hadtotaketherisk/Ididlook/Idon’tcarewhatyoumakeofit/Iamoutsidethesun/Istillhadwhat
was mine / I will stay here and die / I was reinforced in this opinion / I flushed it down the toilet / I
collapsedinmychair/Iforgottheplace,sir.’”8Forapoetwhohasspentmuchofhistimedismantlinga
stable authorship, Sillman’s response to Issue 1 is indeed puzzling. Doesn’t Issue 1 extend Silliman’s
ethostologicalends?
Astherereallywasn’tmuchtodiscussaboutthepoems—inregardtoeverythingelsegoingonabout
thisgesture,theyseemedprettyirrelevant—wewereforcedtoconsidertheconceptualapparatusthatthe
anonymous authors had set into motion. With one gesture, they had swapped the focus from content to
context,showinguswhatitmightmeantobeapoetinthedigitalage.Beingapoetinanyage—digitalor

---

analog—placesone’spracticeoutsidenormativeeconomies,theoreticallyenablingthegenretotakerisks
that more lucrative ventures wouldn’t. Just as we’ve seen some of the most adventurous linguistic
experimentationinthepastcenturyinpoetry,itsnowpoisedtodothesamewhenitcomestonotionsof
authorship,publishing,anddistributionasprovedbytheIssue1’sprovocations.
At the center of it all is appropriation. The twentieth century’s fuss over authorial authenticity seems
tame compared to what is going on here. Not only are the texts themselves appropriated, but that is
compoundedbytheappropriationofnamesandreputations,randomlysyncedwithpoemsthatwerenot
writtenbytheauthorssolinked.It’sthelargestanthologyofpoetryevercompiledanditwasdistributed
to thousands one weekend from a blog and then commented upon endlessly on other blogs and
subsequentlyinthecommentsstreamsofthoseblogs.
Thecandlehasblownout,andwe’releftwithahallofmirrors.Infact,theWebhasbecomeamirror
fortheegoofanabsentbutverypresentauthor.IfBenjaminmadewritingsafeforappropriation,andmy
ownanalogworkshaveextendedhisprojectbyborrowinginbook-lengthform,thenprojectslikeIssue1
movethediscourseintothedigitalage,greatlybroadeningappropriativepossibilitiesinscaleandscope,
dealingaknockoutblowtonotionsoftraditionalauthorship.Todismissthisassimplyan“actofanarcho-
flarf vandalism” is to miss the wakeup call of this gesture, that the digital environment has completely
changedtheliteraryplayingfield,intermsofbothcontentandauthorship.Inatimewhentheamountof
language is rising exponentially, combined with greater access to the tools with which to manage,
manipulate,andmassagethosewords,appropriationisboundtobecomejustanothertoolinthewriters’
toolbox, an acceptable—and accepted—way of constructing a work of literature, even for more
traditionally oriented writers. When accused of “plagiarism” in his latest novel, which was called a
“work of genius” by the newspaper Libération, the best-selling French author Michel Houellebecq
claimeditassuch:“Ifthesepeoplereallythinkthat[thisisplagiarism],theyhaven’tgotthefirstnotionof
whatliteratureis….Thisispartofmymethod….Thisapproach,muddlingrealdocumentsandfiction,
hasbeenusedbymanyauthors.Ihavebeeninfluencedespeciallyby[Georges]Perecand[JorgeLuis]
Borges….Ihopethatthiscontributestothebeautyofmybooks,usingthiskindofmaterial.”9

---

6INFALLIBLEPROCESSES
WhatWritingCanLearnfromVisualArt

Thevisualartshavelongembraceduncreativityasacreativepractice.BeginningwithMarcelDuchamp’s
readymades,thetwentiethcenturywasawashwithartworksthatchallengedtheprimacyoftheartistand
questioned received notions of authorship. Particularly in the 1960s, with the advent of conceptual art,
Duchampian tendencies were tested to the extreme, producing important bodies of often ephemeral and
propositional work by towering artists such as Dan Flavin, Lawrence Weiner, Yoko Ono, and Joseph
Kosuth.Whattheymadewasoftensecondarytotheideaofhowitwasmade.
There’s a lot that writers can learn from these artists in how they went about eradicating traditional
notions of genius, labor, and process. These ideas seem particularly relevant in today’s digital climate,
since the basis of much conceptual art was systematic, logical language. Like the concrete poets and
situationists,there’sadirecttie-intotheuseoflanguagematerially.Infact,manyconceptualartistsused
wordsastheirprimarymediumintheformofpropositionand/orasagallery-basedexpression.
There’salot,too,thatacontemporaryreadershipcanlearnfromtheprecedentofconceptualart.While
nooneflinchestodayuponwalkingintoagalleryandseeingafewlinesdrawnonawallaccordingtoa
recipe(SolLeWitt)orenteringatheaterorgalleryshowingafilmofamansleepingforeighthours(Andy
Warhol’s Sleep, 1963), parallel acts bound between the pages of a book and published as writing still
raisemanyredflagsandcries:“That’snotliterature!”Inthe1960sgalleryviewersquicklylearned—as
inthecaseofWarhol’sfilms—hownottowatchthem,butrathertothinkaboutthem,writeaboutthem,
anddiscussthemwithoutbeingburdenedbytheneedtowatchinfull.Similarly,manylearnedthefutility
of demanding an emotional kick from a LeWitt drawing, knowing there wouldn’t be any. Instead, they
learned to ask different questions, recognizing that mechanical expressions can be equally—but
differently—beautifulandmoving.Formany,anyresistancetosuchapproachesinartquicklycollapsed,
andbothWarholandLeWitthavebothbecomecanonizedandevenmainstreamartists.
While the history of conceptual art is widely known, the overlaps and connections between it,
contemporarywriting,anddigitalcultureareseldommade.WhatfollowsisanexaminationofSolLeWitt
and Andy Warhol’s practices in ways that are applicable to uncreative writing. While both work on
freeingtheartistfromtheburdenof“genius,”eachgoesaboutitdifferently,LeWittbymathematicsand
systems,Warholbycontraction,falsification,andambiguity.
One of my favorite descriptions of procrastination is this portrait of John Ashbery written for the New
Yorkerin2005:
It’slatealready,fiveorfive-thirty.JohnAshberyissittingathistypewriterbutnottyping.He
picks up his cup of tea and takes two small sips because it’s still quite hot. He puts it down.
He’ssupposedtowritesomepoetrytoday.Hewokeupprettylatethismorningandhasbeen

---

futzingaroundeversince.Hehadsomecoffee.Hereadthenewspaper.Hedippedintoacouple
of books: a Proust biography that he bought five years ago but just started reading because it
suddenly occurred to him to do so, a novel by Jean Rhys that he recently came across in a
secondhandbookstore—he’snotasystematicreader.Heflippedonthetelevisionandwatched
half of something dumb. He didn’t feel up to leaving the apartment—it was muggy and putrid
out,evenforNewYorkinthesummer.Hewasawareofalow-levelbutcontinuousfeelingof
anxietyconnectedwiththefactthathehadn’tstartedwritingyetanddidn’thaveanidea.His
mindflittedabout.HethoughtaboutaJeanHelionpaintingthathe’dseenrecentlyatashow.He
considered whether he should order in dinner again from a newish Indian restaurant on Ninth
Avenuethathelikes.(Hewon’tgoout.He’sseventy-eight.Hedoesn’toftengooutthesedays.)
Onatriptothebathroomhenoticedthatheneededahaircut.Hetalkedonthephonetoapoet
friendwhowassick.Byfiveo’clock,though,therewasnoavoidingthefactthathehadonlyan
hourorsoleftbeforetheworkingdaywouldbeover,soheputaCDinthestereoandsatdown
athisdesk.Heseesthatthere’satinyspotonthewallthathe’snevernoticedbefore.It’sonly
goingtotakehimhalfanhourorfortyminutestowhipoutsomethingshortoncehegetsgoing,
butgettinggoing,that’sthehardpart.1

No need to worry, Mr. Ashbery: there’s plenty of people out there to help you. There are dozens of
booksofferingupantidotesforpeoplelikeyou.Forinstance,youmightwanttochangeyourclothes(“to
get a truly fresh start, John”); or try stretching a bit; it’s a good idea to get up and get a glass of water
everytwentyminutes;youreallyshouldtryfreewriting—justletyourmindrelaxandletitflow,John;or
youcouldtrywriting“badly”;itmightbea“goodideatoturnofftheInternet”;andperhapsitwouldhelp
ifyougotupfromyourwritingdeskanddidjustonechore.Butthere’sonesolutionthateachandevery
bookonwriter’sblockoffers:writefivewords. Any five words. Follow this advice, Mr. Ashbery, and
you’llneverhavewriter’sblockagain.
Theironyisthatthatlastsuggestionwasactuallyrealizedasanartworktwiceinthepastcentury:once
byGertrudeSteinwho,in1930,wroteaone-sentencepoemthatsimplywent“Fivewordsinaline”and
by Joseph Kosuth who, in 1965, realized the Stein piece in red neon by writing in capital letters FIVE
WORDSINREDNEON,ofcourse,inredneon.SteinandKosuthmakeitseemsoeasy.Withgestures
likethese,onewondershowanyonecouldstillsufferwriter’sblock.
And yet, the poet Kwame Dawes tells us that “on NPR a few years ago Derek Walcott confessed to
feelingterrorattheblankpage—theterrorofsomeonewonderingwhetherhecandoitagain,whetherhe
canmakeasuccessfulpoemagain.Theinterviewerlaughedwithsomedisbeliefremarkingthateventhe
greatNobellaureatecouldfeelsuchterror.Walcottinsisted,‘Anyone[meaninganypoet]whotellsyou
otherwiseislying.’”2
I’mnotsosureaboutthat.Thissortofwriter’sblockissomethingyoudon’theartoomuchaboutinthe
contemporary art world. While some might get stuck—those clinging to older ideas of “originality”—
there’s a well-honed tradition of adopting mechanical, process-based methods that help make the
decisions.BeginningwithDuchamp,whousedtheworldashisartsupplystore:ifyoucomeupwitha
goodrecipe,addtherightingredientsandfollowthedirectionsandyou’reboundtocomeupwithagood
artwork. Particularly in the 1960s, scores of artists swapped perspiration for procedure, thus expiating
the struggle to create. I’m reminded of the sculptor Jonathan Borofsky running out of juice in graduate
schoolinthemid-1960s.SittingaloneinhisYalestudio,hesimplybegancounting,andkeptcountingfor
weeks, until the numbers moved from his mind to his mouth to the page and from there into three
dimensions,untilinsanefigurativeworldsgrewoutofthispractice.
The implications for writing are profound: imagine writers adopting these ways of working so that
they’d never have writer’s block again. That’s what Sol LeWitt did when he wrote “Paragraphs on

---

ConceptualArt”(1967)and“SentencesonConceptualArt”(1969),whichareremarkablemanifestosthat
spoke for a generation more interested in ideas than in objects. The ideas are so good that, once he
embraced them, he never looked back; by virtue of a rigorous series of self-imposed constraints, his
subsequent production blossomed in every fruitful direction for decades. Never again did LeWitt suffer
anysortofblocks.Ifwelookcloselyathisthinkingandmethodology,we’llfindamodelforuncreative
writingallthewaythrough,fromitsinceptiontoexecution,rightupittoitsdistributionandreception.By
swapping LeWitt’s visual concerns for literary ones, we can adopt “Paragraphs” and “Sentences” as
roadmapsandguide-booksforconceptualoruncreativewriting.
InthesedocumentsLeWittcallsforarecipe-basedart.Likeshoppingforingredientsandthencooking
ameal,hesaysthatallthedecisionsformakinganartworkshouldbemadebeforehandandthattheactual
execution of the work is merely a matter of duty, an action that shouldn’t require too much thought,
improvisation,orevengenuinefeeling.Hefeltthatartshouldn’tbebasedonskill:anyonecanrealizethe
work. In fact, throughout his career, LeWitt never made his work himself; instead he hired teams of
draftsmen and fabricators to execute his works, a gesture that goes back to the Renaissance painters’
workshopsandtheirschoolsofdisciples.Hegottheideawhileworkinginanarchitect’soffice,whenit
dawned on him that “an architect doesn’t go off with a shovel and dig his foundation and lay every
brick”;3heconceivedtheideaandcontracteditouttootherstorealize.
In this way he’s close to Marcel Duchamp, who claimed to have given up making art to become a
respirator.Duchampsaid,“Ilikeliving,breathing,betterthanworking…ifyouwish,myartwouldbe
thatofliving:eachsecond,eachbreathisaworkwhichisinscribednowhere,whichisneithervisualnor
cerebral. It’s a sort of constant euphoria.”4 (But of course Duchamp never gave up making art; he just
worked for decades in secrecy. And it’s this sort of contradiction between what is claimed and what
actuallyhappensthatreallytiesLeWitttoDuchamp,aswe’llseelater.)Imaginewritersfeigningsilence
orhavingotherswritetheirbooksforthemthewayAndyWarholdid.
I’mintriguedbytheideathatwritingneednotbebasedonskill,understoodintheconventionalsense.
John Cage, famous for his works based on chance via a throw of the dice, I Ching, or randomizing
computer programs, was often asked why he did what he did. Couldn’t anyone do the same? Cage’s
response was, “yes, but nobody did.” What if we followed LeWitt’s lead and devised the recipe as an
openinvitationforanyonetorealizethework?Icouldtakeanyoneofmybooks—say,Day—anddevise
arecipe:“Retypeaday’seditionoftheNewYorkTimesfrombeginningtoend,workingyourwayacross
the page, left to right. Retype every letter in the paper, making no distinction between editorial or
advertising.” Surely your choices—the way you make your way through the paper, how you choose to
breakyourlines,etc.—willbedifferentthanmine,makingforacompletelydifferentwork.
LeWittechoedDuchamp’sclaimthatartneednotbeexclusivelyretinalandgoesfurtherbystatingthat
a work of art should be made with the minimum of decisions, choices, and whimsy. It’s better, LeWitt
suggests, if the artist makes deliberately uninteresting choices so that a viewer won’t lose sight of the
conceptsbehindthework,asentimentclosetotheideasofuncreativewriting.And,sometimes,thefinal
productshouldn’tbejudgedastheartwork;instead,allthebackgrounddocumentationofhowthework
was conceived and executed might prove to be more interesting than the art itself. Gather up that
documentation and present it instead of what you thought was going to be the artwork. LeWitt begs the
artisttostopworryingabouttryingtobeoriginalandcleverallthetime,sayingthataestheticdecisions
can be resolved mathematically and rationally. If you’re in a bind, just space everything equidistant,
which,likedancemusic,givestheworkapredetermined,hypnoticbeat.Youcan’tlose.Finally,hewarns
us:don’tgetblindedbynewmaterialsandtechnology,fornewmaterialsdonotnecessarilymakefornew
ideas,somethingthatisstillapitfallforartistsandwritersinourtechnologicallyinfatuatedage.
Now, there are some problems with the stated intent of LeWitt and the gorgeous results that are the
hallmark of his career. When I look at Lewitt’s wall drawing, regardless of how conceptually based it

---

might be, to me it’s about the most eye-poppingly beautiful artwork ever made. How can such a sterile
rhetoric and process produce such sensual and perfect results? When LeWitt claimed that the resultant
workofartmaybeunappealing,hecertainlycouldn’thavebeenreferringtothefruitsofhisownpractice.
SosomethingishappeningherethatmakesmewonderifLeWittispullingourleg.AsfarasIcansee,
he’sasingulargeniuswithanexquisitelyrefinedsenseofthevisual,aperfectionistwhowouldstandfor
nothing less than finely honed, crafted products that give a maximal bang for the buck, intellectually,
visually,andemotionally.
Perhapswecanfindsomecluestothisdiscrepancyifwetakeacloserlookathowtheseworkswere
actuallymade.Firstoff,allLeWitt’sworksaredictatedbyshortsinglerecipes.
Here’sonefrom1969:
Onawall,usingahardpencil,parallellinesabout1/8˝apartand12˝longaredrawnforone
minute.Underthisrowoflines,anotherrowoflinesaredrawnfortenminutes.Underthisrow
oflinesanotherrowoflinesaredrawnforonehour.5

andanotherfrom1970:
Onawall(smoothandwhiteifpossible)adraftsmandraws500yellow,500gray,500redand
500bluelines,withinanareaof1squaremeter.Alllinesmustbebetween10cm.and20cm.
long.6

Lewitthimselfneverexecutedthesepieces;heconceivedthemandthenhadsomeoneelserealizethem.
Now,whywouldaconceptualartistneedtorealizeanything,particularlyonewhohadanaversiontothe
retinal? Isn’t he contradicting himself when he states, “The conceptual artist would want to ameliorate
thisemphasisonmaterialityasmuchaspossibleortouseitinaparadoxicalway(toconvertitintoan
idea)”?7WhynotjustpresentthemasideaslikeYokoOno:
TIMEPAINTING

Makeapaintinginwhichthecolor
comesoutonlyunderacertainlight
atacertaintimeoftheday.
Makeitaveryshorttime.

1961summer8

We have no evidence that Ono’s time painting was ever executed. And, if it was, the variables for
success are elusive, nonspecific, and subjective. It’s not entirely clear where this piece should be
performed. One might assume that, since she’s referring to a “certain time of day,” then it’s to be done
outdoors.Assumingthat’strue,howarewetoknowwhich“certainlight”sheisreferring,sincelightover
the course of the day changes infinitely? How do we know what time is a “certain time?” And,
furthermore,whatdoesa“veryshorttime”mean:onesecond?fiveminutes?shortinrelationtowhat?the
courseofday?alifetime?Conversely,ifweattempttomakethepaintingindoors,whattypeoflightisthe
“certainlight”?incandescent?fluorescent?candlelight?blacklight?And,finally,ifwearesomehowable
to get all the coordinates right, how are we to know if we got the right color? There are mystical

---

implicationshereaswell:ifwecansomehowfigureouthowtolineupallthecoordinates—likeIndiana
Jones does in order to move a rock that’s sealing a hidden cave—we, too, might be rewarded with a
similarlycosmicvision.
LeWittagreeswithOno.Artshouldexistexclusivelyinthemind.Hestates:“Ideascanbeworksofart;
they are in a chain of development that may eventually find some form. All ideas need not be made
physical.”9Yetheinsiststhattheymayeventuallyberealized,aclaimthatOnonevermakes,asshenever
specifieswhetherherworkisliterature,conceptualart,arecipeorvisualart,orifitneedstoberealized
orremainasaconcept.Conversely,overthecourseofhiscareer,LeWittbecomesfamousforenactinghis
owninstructions,makingthemhighlyvisible,explicitlystatingthat“theplanexistsasanideabutneedsto
be put into its optimum form. Ideas of wall drawings alone are contradictions of the idea of wall
drawings.”10ContradictionisastatethatLeWitt,forallhisposturingandhyperbole,seemstoembrace.
His “Sentences on Conceptual Art” begins with the new age statement “Conceptual artists are mystics
rather than rationalists. They leap to conclusions that logic cannot reach”11 and makes Mad Hatter-like
pronouncements,suchas“Irrationalthoughtsshouldbefollowedabsolutelyandlogically.”
Hisinstructions,too,couldbejustasvagueandelusiveasOno’s.Take,forexample,thisrecipeforhis
1971walldrawing,whichwasexecutedattheGuggenheimMuseum:
Lines,notshort,notstraight,crossingandtouching,drawnatrandom,usingfourcolors(yellow,
black,redandblue),uniformlydispersedwithmaximumdensitycoveringtheentiresurfaceof
thewall.12

Someonehadtointerpretandexecutethisdrawing,andI’mgladitwasn’tme.Whatdoes“notshort”
and “not straight” mean? And what does “random” mean? A few summers ago, when I was redoing a
bathroom,ItoldthecontractorthatIwantedthecolorsofthetilestoberandom.Ifiguredthathe’dplace
themabout,willy-nilly,makingthemappearrandom.EachnightwhenIcamehomefromwork,I’dpop
my head into the bathroom and wonder why the work was proceeding so slowly. The next day, when I
stoppedinduringlunch-timetofindout,IsawJoesittingthere,rollingadyetoensurethat,infact,each
tilewasputincompletelyrandomly.
Otherquestions:howis“maximumdensity”achieved?Imightinterpretthattomeanthatnotonespeck
ofthewhitewallshouldbeseenbythetimethepieceisfinished.Thisseemstomelikeanawfullotof
work,and,combinedwithhavingtomakeitrandom,Icouldspendtherestofmylifedoingthis.
And then, let’s say I spent ten years doing it the way I thought it should be done, what if it wasn’t
“successful?”WhatifLeWittwasn’tpleasedwithmywork?Whatifmy“notshort”linesweretoolong
and my “not straight lines” were too wavy? In some Sisyphean nightmare, would he make me start all
overagain?
FortunatelywehavedocumentationfromadraftsmannamedDavidSchulmanwhotooknotesduringthe
timeheexecutedtheaforementioned1971Guggenheimpiece:
[Lines, not short, not straight, crossing and touching, drawn at random, using four colors
(yellow, black, red and blue), uniformly dispersed with maximum density covering the entire
surfaceofthewall.]
StartedJan.26,havingnoideahowlongitwouldtaketoreachapointofmaximumdensity
(a very ambiguous point at that). Being paid $3.00 per hour, trying to let my financial needs
have little effect on the amount of time I worked.… I was exhausted after 3 days of working
withouttheslightestintimationofdensity.Havingonlyonemechanicalpencil,eventheenergy
expended changing leads had an accumulative tiring effect.… I pushed to get the lines down
fasterwhilekeepingthemasnotshortasnotstraightandascrossing,touchingandrandomas

---

possible. I decided to use one color at a time, and use that color until it reached a point I
consideredonequarter“MaximumDensity.”…Signalsofdiscomfortbecameanunconscious
timeclockdeterminingwhenIwouldstopandstepbackfromthedrawing.Walkinguptheramp
tolookatthedrawingfromadistanceprovidedmomentaryrelieffromthephysicalstrainofthe
drawing.Fromadistance,eachcolorhadaswarmingeffectasitslowlyworkeditswayacross
a portion of the wall…. The drawing in ways was paradoxical. The even density and
disbursement of the lines took on a very systematic effect. Once the individual difficulties of
each color were determined, any thought as to how the lines were going down in relation to
linespreviouslydrawngraduallydiminisheduntiltherewasnoconsciousthoughtgiventothe
linesbeingdrawn.DoingthedrawingIrealizedthattotallyrelaxingmybodywasonlyoneway
of reaching a deep level of concentration. Another was in the mindless activity of doing the
drawing. Keeping my body totally active in an almost involuntary way—in a sense, totally
relaxedmymind.Whenmymindbecamerelaxed,thoughtswouldflowatasmootherandfaster
pace.13

WhileSchulmangivesussomeanswers,histakeisalsofoggy.Hedoesn’tknowwhatdensitymeans
eitherandhe’sveryvagueaboutwhat“notshort,”“notstraight”meansorwhatexactly“random”is.And,
by the end of it, he’s no longer talking about making a work of art; he’s rambling on about mind/body
splits.Thewholethingstartstofeeloddlyspiritual,morelikeyogathanconceptualart.
It’scurioushowtheworkbeginstomakeitself,answeringSchulman’squestions,byfollowingitsown
ordersandrules.LeWitthadprescribed—almostpredicted—thisstatewhenhesaid“Thedraftsmanand
thewallenteradialogue.Thedraftsmanbecomesboredbutlaterthroughthismeaninglessactivityfinds
peaceormisery.”14 How could he possibly know? At this point, he’s getting very close to the mystical
speculationsofOno.
John Cage, who took an explicitly mystical Zen Buddhist attitude toward his work, said something
similar:“Ifsomethingisboringaftertwominutes,tryitforfour.Ifstillboring,theneight.Thensixteen.
Thenthirty-two.Eventuallyonediscoversthatitisnotboringatall,”15whichwassomethingCagesaidto
soothebaffledmusicianswhowerehiredtoplayhismusic.Inaway,acontractmusicianissimilartoa
fabricator like David Schulman, an anonymous craftsman who is paid to execute works of art in the
serviceofsomeoneelse’sname.Unlikeanovelistwho,withtheexceptionofaneditor,laborsinastate
ofsolitarycreation,musicplayedbyorchestras,bands,liveperformances,etc.andsometimesvisualart
—as in the case of LeWitt—is an enactment of a social contract. If the laborer feels he is being
mistreated,hecansubvertthesuccessoftheart,whichiswhatfrequentlyhappenedtoCage.
There are many stories of John Cage storming out of rehearsal sessions in anger after contract
musicians of orchestras refused to take his music seriously. Cage, like LeWitt, gave musicians a lot of
leewaywithhisscores,providingonlyvagueinstructions,butwasoftenfrustratedwiththeresults.Inthe
middleofanabstractchanceoperationspiece,forinstance,atrombonistwouldslipinafewnotesfrom
“CamptownRaces,”angeringCagenoend.SpeakingaboutanincidentinNewYork,hesaid,“Facedwith
musicsuchasIhadgiventhem,theysimplysabotagedit.TheNewYorkPhilharmonicisabadorchestra.
They’re like a group of gangsters. They have no shame—when I came off the stage after one of those
performances,oneofthemwhohadplayedbadlyshookmyhandandsaid,‘Comebackintenyears;we’ll
treatyoubetter.’Theyturnthingsawayfrommusic,andfromanyprofessionalattitudetowardmusic,to
somekindofasocialsituationthatisnotverybeautiful.”16
ForCage,musicwasaplacetopracticeautopianpolitics:Anorchestra—asocialunitwhichhefeltto
be as regulated and controlled as the military—could each be given the freedom not to act as a unit,
insteadpermittingeachmembertobeanindividualwithinasocialbody.Byunderminingthestructureof
the orchestra—one of the most established and codified institutions in Western culture—he felt that, in

---

theory,thewholeofWesternculturecouldworkwithinasystemthathetermed“cheerfulanarchy.”Cage
said,“Thereasonweknowwecouldhavenonviolentsocialchangeisbecausewehavenonviolentart
change.”17
LeWitt took pains to avoid the awkward situations Cage faced with established orchestras. (He was
workingwithasmallergroupofcraftsmenasopposedtoCage,whowassometimesdealingwitha120-
piece orchestra. Also, the draftsmen, some whom he trained, were generally sympathetic to the project
andsharedtheexpectationthattheywouldtrainothers,whowould,inturn,train—Renaissanceworkshop
style—stillothers,stretchingonthroughgenerations.)18Tothisend,in1971,thesameyearthatSchulman
workedontheGuggenheimpiece,LeWittwroteadetailedcontracttoclearupanyambiguityregarding
thesocialandprofessionalrelationshipbetweenartistanddraftsman,allowingthelatteragreatdealof
freedom:
Theartistconceivesandplansthewalldrawing.Itisrealizedbydraftsmen.(Theartistcanact
ashisowndraftsman.)Theplanwritten,spokenoradrawing,isinterpretedbythedraftsman.
There are decisions which the draftsman makes, within the plan, as part of the plan. Each
individual, being unique, given the same instructions would carry them out differently. He
wouldunderstandthemdifferently.
Theartistmustallowvariousinterpretationsofhisplan.Thedraftsmanperceivestheartist’s
plan,thereordersittohisownexperienceandunderstanding.
The draftsman’s contributions are unforeseen by the artist, even if he, the artist, is the
draftsman. Even if the same draftsman followed the same plan twice, there would be two
differentworksofart.Noonecandothesamethingtwice.
Theartistandthedraftsmanarecollaboratorsinmakingtheart.
Eachpersondrawsalinedifferentlyandeachpersonunderstandsthewordsdifferently.
Neitherlinesnorwordsareideas.Theyarethemeansbywhichideasareconveyed.
The wall drawing is the artist’s art, as long as the plan is not violated. If it is, then the
draftsmanbecomestheartistandthedrawingwouldbehisworkofart,butartthatisaparody
oftheoriginalconcept.
The draftsman may make errors in following the plan without compromising the plan. All
walldrawingscontainerrors.Theyarepartofthework.19

Yet although LeWitt claimed that the artist and draftsman are collaborators, all of his collaborators
went—and continue to go—unnamed, as compared with the very generous method of Scottish concrete
poet and sculptor Ian Hamilton Finlay who never released a work of art without the fabricator’s name
given in the title of the work: A Rock Rose (with Richard Demarco) or Kite Estuary Mode (with Ian
Gardner).
LeWittheldaremarkablylaxandforward-lookingconceptofcopyright,permitting,upuntilthemid-
eighties, anyone to freely copy his works as long as they strictly adhered to the recipe, something he
viewedasacompliment.Inthisway,hepresagesthe2006sentimentsofthesciencefictionwriterCory
Doctorow, who makes his books freely available on the Internet as well as in print. Doctorow says:
“Being well-enough known to be pirated is a crowning achievement. I’d rather stake my future on a
literature that people care about enough to steal than devote my life to a form that has no home in the
dominantmediumofthecentury.”20Unlikedigitalmaterial,whichcanbereplicatedinfinitelywithoutany
qualityloss,LeWitteventuallyrenegedonhisstanceduetothesheernumberofbadcopiesthatunskilled
draftsmen made, in spite of his utopian notion that “anyone with a pencil, a hand, and clear verbal
directions”couldmakecopiesofhisdrawings.21Bydoingthis,LeWittremindsusofjusthowdifficultit
istomakegoodconceptualart;forhim,thesolutionwastostrikeadelicatebalancebetweenkeenthought

---

andpreciseexecution.Forotherartists,themixmightbedifferent.
Heputhisfootdownandturnedthetide:thelaterworksbecamebetter.Thereisevidencethat,astime
has gone on, “the quality of the LeWitt drawings have improved as many of LeWitt’s draftsmen have
specialized in particular techniques, becoming ‘samurai warriors’ in their crafts. A LeWitt skillfully
executed today dwarfs the quality of what the artist himself regularly produced.”22 In the early eighties
LeWittleftNewYorkandmovedtoItaly.Whilethere,livingamongItalianRenaissancefrescos,hiswork
wentthroughenormouschanges:suddenlyitbecamewildlysensual,organic,andplayful.Gonewerethe
austerelinesandmeasurementsandinitsplacecamecolorfulandwhimsicalworksthatseemedtoowe
moretothe1970spatternanddecorationmovementthanitdidtorecipebasedproceduralconceptualart.
Yettheseworkswerecreatedthroughmethodsidenticaltotheearlyworks,it’sjustthatheswappedout
different ingredients. So while the early works might only permit the four primary colors, adhering to
strict geometry, the new works could be psychedelic with day-glo apple greens alternating with
fluorescent oranges in wavy patterns. Oftentimes, they were garish in taste, looking out of place in the
whiteboxofamuseum.“Whenhewasaskedabouttheswitchhemadeinthe1980’s—addinginkwashes,
whichpermittedhimnewcolors,alongwithcurvesandfreeforms—Mr.LeWittresponded,‘Whynot?’
”23
Totheuntrainedeye,theseworkswereacompletebetrayalofeverythinghehadstoodforupuntilthat
point. They seemed whimsical and overtly retinal, lacking any kind of formal rigor. But, upon closer
examination,theywereasrecipebasedasever.Thesepiecesfrom1998,havetheinstructions:
WallDrawing853:Awallborderedanddividedverticallyintotwopartsbyaflatblackband.
Leftparty:asquareisdividedverticallybyacurvyline.Left:glossyred;right:glossygreen;
Right part: a square is divided horizontally by a curvy line. Top: glossy blue; bottom: glossy
orange.

WallDrawing852:Awalldividedfromtheupperlefttothelowerrightbyacurvyline;left:
glossyyellow;right:glossypurple.

Butthat,tome,isthebeautyofitall.Theseareworksthat,nomatterwhatyoudidtothem,reallycould
notfail.Alldoneexactlytoplan,theywereexecutedperfectlyandwerethereforesuccessfulregardless
ofhowun-LeWittiantheymayappeartotheeye.
There’s a lot to take away from LeWitt: the idea of authorless art, the socially enlightened dance
betweentheauthorandthefabricator,thedebunkingoftheromanticimpulse,theusefulnessofwell-spun
rhetoric and precise logic—not to mention the freedom that it brings, the elegance of primary form and
structure,overcomingthefearofthewhitepage,thetriumphofgoodtaste,theembraceofcontradiction.
Butthere’sonethingabovealltheothersthatstandsout.We’realwaysbendingoverbackwardtryingto
express ourselves, yet LeWitt makes us realize how impossible it is not to express ourselves. Perhaps
writers try too hard, hitting huge impasses by always trying to say something original, new, important,
profound. LeWitt offers us ways out of our jams. By constructing the perfect machine and setting it in
motion, the works creates itself. And the results will reflect the quality of the machine: build a poorly
conceived and executed machine, you’ll get poor results; build an airtight, well-crafted, deeply
considered machine and the results can’t help but be good. LeWitt wants us to invert our conventional
ideaofart,whichisoftenfocusedexclusivelyontheendresult;insodoingsoheinvertsconventional
notionsofgeniusaswell,showingusthepotentialandpowerof“unoriginalgenius.”
Andy Warhol is perhaps the single most important figure for uncreative writing. Warhol’s entire oeuvre

---

was based on the idea of uncreativity: the seemingly effortless production of mechanical paintings and
unwatchable films where literally nothing happens. In terms of literary output, too, Warhol pushed the
envelope by having other people write his books for him, yet the covers bore his name as author. He
invented new genres of literature: a: a novel was the mere transcription of dozens of cassette tapes,
spellingerrors,stumbles,andstuttersleftexactlyastheyweremistyped.HisDiaries,anenormoustome,
were spoken over the phone to an assistant and transcribed, charting the minute, yet mostly mundane,
movementsofoneperson’slife.InPerloffanterms,AndyWarholwasanunoriginalgenius,onewhowas
able to create a profoundly original body of work by isolating, reframing, recycling, regurgitating, and
endlesslyreproducingideasandimagesthatweren’this,yet,bythetimehewasfinishedwiththem,they
werecompletelyWarholian.Bymasteringthemanipulationofinformation(themedia,hisownimage,or
hissuperstarcoterie,tonameafew),Warholunderstoodthathecouldmasterculture.Warholremindsus
thattobetheoriginatorofsomethingwidelymemedcanmatchbeingtheoriginatorofthetriggerevent.
These re gestures—such as reblogging and retweeting—have become cultural rites of cachet in and of
themselves.Sortingandfiltering—movinginformation—hasbecomeasiteofculturalcapital.Filteringis
taste.Andgoodtasterulestheday:Warhol’sexquisitesensibility,combinedwithhisfinelytunedtaste,
challengedthelocusofartisticproductionfromcreatortomediator.
In a 1966 television interview, Warhol reluctantly answered questions fired at him by an aggressive
and skeptical off screen interlocutor. In the interview, a tight-lipped Warhol sat on a stool in front of a
silverElvispainting.ThecamerafrequentlyzoomedinonWarhol’sface,framedbyabrokenpairofdark
sunglasses;hisfingerscoverhislips,causinghimtomumblehesitantandbarelyaudibleresponses:
WARHOL:Imean,youshouldjusttellmethewordsandIcanjustrepeatthembecauseIcan’t,
uh.… I can’t … I’m so empty today. I can’t think of anything. Why don’t you just tell me the
wordsandthey’lljustcomeoutofmymouth.
Q:No,don’tworryaboutitbecause…
WARHOL:…no,no…Ithinkitwouldbesonice.
Q:You’llloosenupafterawhile.
WARHOL: Well, no. It’s not that. It’s just that I can’t, ummm … I have a cold and I can’t, uh,
thinkofanything.ItwouldbesoniceifyoutoldmeasentenceandIjustcouldrepeatit.
Q:Well,letmejustaskyouaquestionyoucouldanswer…
WARHOL:No,no.Butyourepeattheanswerstoo.24

Afewyearsearlier,ina1963interview,Warholasks,“ButwhyshouldIbeoriginal?Whycan’tIbe
nonoriginal?”Heseesnoneedtocreateanythingnew:“Ijustliketoseethingsusedandreused.”Echoing
then-current notions of eradicating the division between art and life, he says, “I just happen to like
ordinarythings.WhenIpaintthem,Idon’ttrytomakethemextraordinary.Ijusttrytopaintthemordinary-
ordinary…. That’s why I’ve had to resort to silk screens, stencils and other kinds of automatic
reproduction. And still the human element creeps in! … I’m antismudge. It’s too human. I’m for
mechanicalart…Ifsomebodyfakedmyart,Icouldn’tidentifyit.”
Warhol himself was a series of contradictions: he could barely speak, but what he did say became
cultural truisms; he was low (the most commercial) and high (creating some of the most difficult and
challenging art of the twentieth century), kind and cruel, profane yet religious (Warhol attended church
every Sunday), a seemingly dull man who surrounded himself with exciting men and women. The list
couldgoonforever.
His artwork embodies some of the same tensions as Vanessa Place’s writing regarding ethics and
morality: what happens when one’s artistic practice is programmatically predicated upon deceit,
dishonesty, lying, fraudulence, impersonation, identity theft, plagiarism, market manipulation,

---

psychologicalwarfare,andconsensualabuse?Whenhumanismistossedoutthewindowandthemachine
is prioritized over flesh and bone? When a practice adamantly denies emotion, promoting style over
substance, vapidity over genius, mechanical process over touch, boredom over entertainment, surface
overdepth?Whenartismadewithalienationasagoal,artthatintentionallydisconnectsfromwhatwe
normallyascribetoashavingculturalandsocialvalue?
Warhol embraced a flexible morality, one that is almost impossible for most of us to conceive of in
eithertheoryorinpractice.Hespenthiscareertestingthesemoralwatersinhisartandinhislifewhere
theconsequenceswereoftendevastating.InWarhol’sworldtherewerenohappyendings;theridewas
fast and glamorous, but there was always doom ahead. With the notable exception of Lou Reed, few
Factory denizens went on to a substantial life or career outside of the moment. For several the results
weredeadly.WayneKoestenbaum,inhisbiographyofWarhol,commentsthat“manyofthepeopleI’ve
interviewed,whokneworworkedwithWarhol,seemeddamagedortraumatizedbytheexperience.Orso
Isurmise:theymighthavebeendamagedbeforeWarholgottothem.Buthehadawayofcastinglighton
the ruin—a way of making it spectacular, visible, audible. He didn’t consciously harm people, but his
presencebecametheprosceniumfortraumatictheater.”25Warholsetthestageforpeopletosystematically
and publicly destroy themselves, convincing these somewhat lost young people that they were
“superstars,”makingfilmsofthembeingthemselves(talking,takingdrugs,havingsex)andtakingthemto
parties around town, when, at the end of the day, it was Warhol’s name and career that benefited from
their illusions. After Warhol was shot, the door to the once-open Factory was shut, and many former
superstarswerenolongerpartofclique.Forhisbehavior,WarholearnedthemonikerDrella—amixture
ofDraculaandCinderella—becauseofhispowerstobothgiveandtake.
Thisisanoften-toldsideofWarhol,thetrainwrecknarrativewithwhichweareallfamiliar.Butthere
isanotherwaytolookatit.I’dliketoproposethatweusehisexampleofambiguityandcontradictionas
autopianexperimentinartisticpracticesasawayoftestingthelimitsofmoralityandethicsinapositive
sense. If we are able to separate the man from the work, we may see that in this series of negative
dialecticsWarholwasactuallyproposingafreespaceofplaywithinthesafeconfinesofart.Artasafree
spacetosay“whatif…?”Artasoneoftheonlyspacesavailableinourculturethatwouldallowsuch
experiments.
We’re back in contradictory territory again: how can we separate Warhol’s life from his art or any
artists’ lives from their art for that matter? To answer that question, I think we need to invoke a bit of
theoryinordertoconnectthedots,usingRolandBarthes’sseminalessay,“TheDeathoftheAuthor.”Init
he made a distinction between literature and autobiography, saying that, for instance, “if we were to
discover,afteradmiringaseriesofbooksextollingcourageandmoralfidelity,thatthemanwhowrote
themwasacowardandalecher,thiswouldnothavetheslightesteffectontheirliteraryquality.Wemight
regret this insincerity, but we should not be able to withhold or admiration for his skill as writer.”26
Barthesreferredtotheideaofanauthorlessworkastextratherthanliterature.
The Barthesian premise was demonstrated most powerfully in the vast body of literary works that
Warholproduced.Take,forexample,TheAndyWarholDiaries,whichspentfourmonthsontheNewYork
Times best-seller list. In some ways, it’s hard to imagine a less engaging narrative: more than eight
hundred pages of Andy’s diary entries recording every cent spent on taxis and documenting each phone
callhemade.Theideaofautobiographyfalselypermeatesthebook:onthebook’sfrontcover,theBoston
Globeexclaims,“Theultimateself-portrait.”Thebook’saccumulationofminuteandinsignificantdetail
resemblesBoswell’sLifeofJohnson,exceptforthefactthatit’spresentedasanautobiography.Takethe
entryfromMonday,August2,1982:
Mark Ginsburg was bringing Indira Gandhi’s daughter down and he was calling and Ina was
callingandBobwascallingsayinghowimportantthiswas,soIgaveupmyexerciseclassand

---

itturnedoutjusttobethedaughter-in-law,who’sItalian,shedoesn’tevenlookIndian.
Wentto25East39thStreettoMichaeleVollbracht’s(cab$4.50)RanintoMaryMcFadden
onthewayinandItoldhershelookedbeautifulwithnomakeupandshesaidshe’dneverworn
more. I told her that in that case, as one made-up person to another, it looked like she didn’t
haveanyon.GiorgioSant’Angelowasthere.ThefoodlookedreallychicbutIdidn’thaveany.
WenttoDianeVonFurstenberg’spartyforthelaunchingofhernewcosmetics(cab$4).and
all the boys at the party were the same ones who had been on Fire Island. It was fun seeing
Diane, she was hustling perfume. Her clothes are so ugly though, they’re like plastic or
something.Andshehadallthehigh-fashiongirlstherewearingthem.BarbaraAllenwasthere
andevenshelookedawfulintheclothes.Ididgetanideafordecoratingthough—bigboxesof
colorthatyoucanputinaroomandmovearoundandchangeyourdecoratingscheme.27

Whatalife!Warhol’sworkoutiscanceledsohecanmeetwithinfluentialpublicfigures.Thenit’soff
to meet Vollbracht—a designer for Geoffrey Beene—where he runs into a fashion editor and hangs out
withyetanotherfashiondesigner.Nextisapartyfor,yes,anotherfashiondesigner,thisonerepletewith
fabulous gay boys from Fire Island and beautiful models. He snubs rich people and gets inspired by
interiordesign.
Is this really autobiography? No. It’s a highly edited work of fantasy fiction based on Warhol’s life.
Where is the author? It was Warhol who dictated and shaped his unreal image; no trips to the grocery
storeorthedrycleaners,notraffcjams,noself-reflection,nodoubt,nofriction.Warhol,asheportrayed
hislife,wasonewhirlofglamour.Butwheneverythingisglamorous,nothingis.Thisisaspecifically
Warholianglamour:it’sflatandfeatureless,withonepersonandexperienceinterchangeablewithanother.
The characters and settings are disposable: what’s important is the wow factor. It’s unabashedly
autobiography as fiction, which, of course, all autobiographies are. Warhol meticulously reported the
edited version of his life every morning for the last twelve years of his life, calling his secretary/ghost
writerPatHackettandtellingherwhathappenedthedaybefore.Thedailyphonecallsbeganinnocently
enoughasalogofAndy’spersonalexpensesforkeepingtheIRSatbay,butsoondevelopedintoafull-
blown record of his life. Hackett acted as gatekeeper and editor for the book, becoming as much of an
authorandshaperofWarhol’slifeasBoswellwasforJohnson.Infact,sheboiledthebookdownfrom
theoriginalmanuscriptoftwentythousandpages,choosingwhatshefelttobe“thebestmaterialandmost
representative of Andy.”28 Hackett ruthlessly edited the material: “On a day when Andy went to five
parties,Imayhaveincludedonlyasingleone.Iappliedthesameeditingprincipletonamestogivethe
diaryanarrativeflowandtokeepitfromreadinglikethesocialcolumns….I’vecutmanynames.IfAndy
mentioned, say, ten people, I may have chosen to include only the three he had conversations with or
spokeofinthemostdetail.Suchomissionsarenotnotedinthetextsincetheeffectwouldserveonlyto
distract,andslowthereaderdown.”29
But isn’t the reader slowed down enough? Hackett is mistaken to think that anybody would actually
“read”theDiariesstraightthrough.Thewaytoingesttheworkistoskimit,andeventhat,afterawhile,
becomesexhaustingbecauseofthesheeramountoftrivialdata.Infact,tolifttheonusofhavingtoread
thebookatall,latereditionsincludedanindexofnamesandplacestomakeegosurfingeasierforthose
intheclub—andtomakethosewiththeirnosespressedupagainstthewindowenvious.Itwasabooknot
toreadbuttoreference.Warholwouldhavebeendelightedbythis.Heclaimed,“Idon’treadmuchabout
myself,anyway,Ijustlookatthepicturesinthearticles,itdoesn’tmatterwhattheysayaboutme;Ijust
readthetexturesofthewords.”30
Warhol, a man who claimed not to read, naturally published what is largely considered to be an
unreadablebook,a:ANovel. Yet, as a work of literature, it has all the marks of a Warhol: mechanical
processes, off-register marks (spelling errors) and a good deal of modernist difficulty and attention to

---

quotidiandetail.Ifthereisastory,it’ssoburiedinliteraltranscriptionandtypographicalinconsistency
that the signal-to-noise ratio makes a conventional reading nearly impossible, which, of course, was
Warhol’sintention.Warholconqueredtheexperimentalfilmworldintheearlysixtiesbyasimilartactic.
Theprevalenttrendwasthequickeditandjumpcut,butWarholdidtheopposite:heplunkedthecamera
onatripodandletitrun…andrun….andrun…Therewerenoedits,nopans.Whenaskedaboutthe
slownessofhisfilms,hesaidthathewasnotinterestedinmovingforwardbutmovingbackwardtothe
verybeginningoffilmmakingwhenthecamerawasfixedtoatripod,capturingwhateverhappenedtobe
infrontofit.Ifyou’veseenhis3-minutescreentests,wherethecameraisfixedonaface,youcan’tbut
be persuaded by Warhol’s point of view: they’re among the most striking and gorgeous portraits ever
made.Sleep,sixhoursofamansleepingandEmpire,astill,eight-hourshotoftheEmpireStateBuilding,
are incredible time-based portraits. Although Warhol’s early films often consisted of one durational
image,andhisnovelwasmorelikeaseriesofquickjumpcuts,theeffectontheviewerandthereader
was intentionally one and the same: boredom and restlessness leading to distraction and introspection.
The lack of narrative permits the mind to wander away from the artwork, which was Warhol’s way of
movingtheviewerawayfromartandintolife.
apurportedtobeatwenty-four-hourtape-recordedportraitofFactorysuperstarOndine,butturnedout
tobeamixofoveronehundredcharactersrecordedoveratwo-yearperiod.Eachsectionofthebookhas
adifferenttypographicallayoutasaresultoftheidiosyncrasiesofthevarioustypiststhatworkedonthe
tapes.Warholdecidedtoleavetheseastheyweregiventohimaswellasmaintainingallmisspellings.
Whataendsupasisapproachingtheideaofaliteraryvéritéthatisamultiauthoredtext,riddledwiththe
formalsubjectivityofseveraltranscribers,radicallyquestioningthenotionsofsingularauthorialgenius.
AsinallofWarhol’sproduction,hisrolewasthatofconceptualistor,ashesawit,factoryboss,making
surethathislegionsexecutedhisconceptswithenoughlatitudetomakeitfeelliketheyhadsomestakein
it,wheninactualitytheyhadnone.
Hisotherbooks,ThePhilosophyofAndyWarhol,POPism,America,andExposures,werewrittenby
his assistants, who channeled the voice of Andy Warhol. Their voice became his public voice, wheras
Warhol largely remained silent. Those famous Warholian sound bites you hear—famous for fifteen
minutes,etc.—oftenweren’twrittenbyhim.
Whilemid-centurymodernismdippedatoeintowhatWilliamCarlosWilliamscalled“thespeechof
Polishmothers,”theactualspeechofPolishmotherswastoougly,toounrefinedformuchofthepoetry
world.FrankO’Hara,fatherofthe“talk”poem,approachedinhislateworkswhatMarjoriePerloffcalls
“thevagariesofeverydayconversation”:31
“thankyouforthedarkandtheshoulders”
“ohthankyou”

okayI’llmeetyouattheweatherstationat5
we’lltakeahelicopterintothe“eye”ofthestorm
we’llbesohappyinthecenterofthingsatlast
nowthewindrushesupnothinghappensanddeparts32

O’Hara’s late work, “Biotherm (for Bill Berkson),” written in 1961, takes great pains to spice up
ordinaryspeechwithpoeticconventions,suchasincludingblankspacebetween“oh”and“thankyou”to
connote the passing of time. The phrasing, too, can seem precious: note the quotation marks around the
word eye. Far from a benign weather report, the “eye” becomes a metaphor for finding a calm place
faraway from the troubles of banal life. While O’Hara dabbles with “the vagaries of everyday

---

conversation,”Iwonderhoweverydaytheyreallyare.Amerefiveyearslater,ablastsapartO’Hara’s
claimstospeech-basedrealismbypublishingnearlyfivehundredpagesofrealspeech.33Asaresult,ais
as ugly (uncomposed) and difficult (barely narrative) as is our normal speech. Take, for example, this
passagefroma:
O—Igavehimamphetamine,Igavehimamphetamineonenight,whenwhenD—Recently?…
O—Ifirstmethim.D—Nono,alongtimeago.O—andhewasafrighteningpoetryD—Yeah.
O-He wrote poetry, he wrote poetry D—It scared him very much. O—It scared him, … D—
He’sbeenonLSDanduh,pillsanduheveryO—Baby,itdoesn’tmatter.D—Itdoesn’tmatter,
wellwell-O—Whywhywhydon’tyohavetotakepillsD—Huh?O—Whtdon’tyouhavetot-
t-t-akedrugs?Whyisn’titanecessityforyoutotakedrugs?D—Oh.O—Why,becauseyouD
—Well, no, I O—You’re as high as you are … Hello? WhO’s caluing? Buchess oh, Duchess
lover,it’sOndine.34

Unlike O’Hara, the words are all jammed together in one undifferentiated string or worse: due to a
typist’s error, which Warhol intentionally left in, we get the odd compound “LSDand” followed by an
ordinary“uh.”Andasfaraspreciousmetaphoricalmoments,they’renowheretobefound.Indeed,thisis
truly a demonstration of “the vagaries of everyday conversation.” Warhol took modernism’s interest in
natural speech to its logical conclusion, emphasizing, that blather, in its untouched state, is just as
disjunctiveasotherfragmentarymoderniststrategies.
Warhol’sinterestin“realspeech”didn’texistinavacuum.SurroundingWarholwasanentirecultof
peopleconstantlyengagedintranslatingephemeralspeechintotext.InPOPism,Warhol’ssixtiesmemoir,
hesays:
Everyone, absolutely everyone, was tape-recording everyone else. Machinery had already
takenoverpeople’ssexlives—dildosandallkindsofvibrators—andnowitwastakingover
theirsociallives,too,withtaperecordersandPolaroids.TherunningjokebetweenBrigidand
mewasthatallourphonecallsstartedwithwhoever’dbeencalledbytheothersaying,“Hello,
waitaminute,”andrunningtopluginandhookup.…I’dprovokeanykindofhysteriaIcould
think of on the phone just to get myself a good tape. Since I wasn’t going out much and was
home a lot on the mornings and evenings, I put in a lot of time on the phone gossiping and
makingtroubleandgettingideasfrompeopleandtryingtofigureoutwhatwashappening—and
tapingitall.
The trouble was, it took so long to get a tape transcribed, even when you had somebody
workingatitfull-time.Inthosedayseventhetypistsweremakingtheirowntapes—asIsaid
everybodywasintoit.35

At the Warhol Museum in Pittsburgh, while researching my book of Warhol interviews, the archivist
rolled out a cart with enormous stacks of paper on it. He told me that these were the complete
transcriptions of Warhol’s tapes over the years. Apparently, each night out on the town, Warhol would
takehistaperecorder(whichhereferredtoashis“wife”)andletthemachinerollforthedurationofthe
evening. People eventually became so used to its presence that they ignored it and went on speaking
withoutanyself-consciousnessatallorelseplayingtoit,knowingtheywerebeingcapturedforposterity
by Andy Warhol. The next morning, Warhol would take the previous night’s cache of tapes into the
Factory,dropthemonadesk,andhaveanassistanttranscribethem.Uponseeingthesedocuments—raw,
uneditedtranscriptionsoflost,ephemeralconversationsthathadtranspireddecadesagobetweensomeof
themostfamouspeopleintheworld—Iproposedtothearchivistthatthiswouldmakeagreatnextbook.

---

Heshookhisheadandsaidthat,duetothethreatoflibel,thetapescouldnotbepublisheduntil2037,fifty
yearsafterWarhol’sdeath.
AlsoatthemuseumwereWarhol’stimecapsules,stackedonshelvesinthelibrary.Forthebetterpart
ofhiscareerasanartist,Warholalwayskeptanopencardboardboxinhisstudiointowhichhethrew
boththedetritusandthegemsthatdriftedthroughtheFactory.Warholmadenodistinctionastowhatwas
saved—from hamburger wrappers to celebrity-autographed photos; full runs of his magazine Interview;
even his wigs—it all went in. When the box was full, it was sealed, numbered, and signed by Warhol,
eachaworkofart.Afterhisdeath,themuseumwasgiventheboxes,totalingovereightthousandcubic
feetofmaterial.WhenIvisitedthemuseum,Inoticedthatonlyafewdozenoftheseeminglyhundredsof
boxeswereopened.WhenIaskedwhy,thecuratorinformedmethat,eachtimeaboxisopened,every
objectinthatboxmustbeextensivelydocumentedandcatalogued,photographedandsoforth,tothepoint
whereopeningasingleboxentailedamonth’sworthofworkfortwoorthreepeoplelaboringfulltime.
The implications of not only the act of archiving but the process of decoding—cataloguing, sorting,
preserving—makesWarhol’soeuvreparticularlyprescientforWeb-drivenliterarypracticestoday,where
managingtheamountofinformationfloodingustakesonliterarydimensions(seetheintroduction).
Warhol’soeuvre,then,shouldbereadastextinsteadofliterature,echoingBarthes’sideathat“thetext
isatissueofcitations,resultingfromthethousandsourcesofculture,”36whichisashorthanddefensefor
thewavesofappropriative,“unoriginal,”and“uncreative”artworksthatwouldfollowafterWarholfor
decades.ItalsoexplainswhyWarholcouldtakeanewspaperphotoofJackieKennedyandturnitintoan
icon.Warholunderstoodthatthe“tissueofcitations”aroundtheimageofJackiewouldonlyaccrueover
time,growingmorecomplexwitheachpassinghistoriceventorera.Hehadakeeneyeforchoosingthe
rightimage,theimagewiththemostaccumulativepotential.Hisongoingstrategicremovalofhimselfas
authorlettheworksliveonafteralltheday’sdramawasdonewith.AsBarthessays,“OncetheAuthoris
gone,theclaimto‘decipher’atextbecomesquiteuseless.”37Whatonthesurfaceappearstobeawebof
liesinWarhol’slifeisactuallyasmokescreenofpurposefuldisinformationinordertodeflatethefigure
oftheauthor.
In a 1962 interview, Warhol famously says, “The reason I’m painting this way is that I want to be a
machineandIfeelthatwhateverIdoanddomachine-likeiswhatIwanttodo.”38Weuncreativewriters,
infatuated with the digital age and its technologies, take this as our ethos, yet it’s only one in a long
laundrylistofwhatwefindinspiringaboutWarhol’spractice.Hisuseofshiftingidentities,hisembrace
ofcontradiction,hisfreedomtousewordsandideasthataren’thisown,hisobsessivecataloguingand
archiving as artistic endgames, his explorations into unreadability and boredom, and his unflinching
documentary impulse on the most raw and unprocessed aspects of culture are just a few of few of the
reasonswhyWarhol’soeuvreandattitudesremainsocrucialandinspiringtotoday’swriters.

---

7RETYPINGONTHEROAD

AfewyearsagoIwaslecturingtoaclassatPrinceton.Aftertheclass,asmallgroupofstudentscameup
to me to tell me about a workshop that they were taking with one of the best-known fiction writers in
America.Theywerecomplainingaboutherlackofpedagogicalimagination,assigningthemthetypesof
creativewritingexercisestheyhadbeendoingsincejuniorhighschool.Forexample,shehadthempick
theirfavoritewriterandcomeinthenextweekwithan“original”workinthestyleofthatauthor.Iasked
one of the students which author she chose. She answered Jack Kerouac. She then added that the
assignment felt meaningless to her because the night before she tried to “get into Kerouac’s head” and
scribbledapiecein“hisstyle”tofulfilltheassignment.Initially,itoccurredtomethatforthisstudentto
actuallywriteinthestyleofKerouac,shewouldhavebeenbetterofftakingaroadtripacrossthecountry
ina’48Buickwiththeconvertibleroofdown,gulpingBenzedrinebythefistful,washingthemdownwith
bourbon,allthewhiletypingfuriouslyawayonamanualtypewriter,goingeighty-fivemilesanhourona
ribbonofdeserthighway.And,eventhen,itwouldhavebeenacompletelydifferentexperience—notto
mentionaverydifferentpieceofwriting—thanKerouac’s.
MymindthendriftedtothoseaspiringpainterswhofilluptheMetropolitanMuseumofArteveryday,
spending hours learning by copying the Old Masters. If it’s good enough for them, why isn’t it good
enoughforus?ThepowerandusefulnessoftheactofretypingisinvokedbyWalterBenjamin,amaster
copyisthimself,inthefollowingpassagewhereheextolsthevirtueofcopying,coincidentallyinvoking
themetaphoroftheroad:
Thepowerofacountryroadisdifferentwhenoneiswalkingalongitfromwhenoneisflying
overitbyairplane.Inthesameway,thepowerofatextisdifferentwhenitisreadfromwhenit
iscopiedout.Theairplanepassengerseeonlyhowtheroadpushesthroughthelandscape,how
itunfoldsaccordingtothesamelawsastheterrainsurroundingit.Onlyhewhowalkstheroad
onfootlearnsofthepoweritcommands.…Onlythecopiedtextcommandsthesoulofhimwho
isoccupiedwithit,whereasthemerereaderneverdiscoversthenewaspectsofhisinnerself
that are opened by the text, the road cut through the interior jungle forever closing behind it:
because the reader follows the movement of him mind in the free flight of day-dreaming,
whereasthecopiersubmitstoitscommand.1

Theideaofbeingabletophysicallygetinsideatextthroughtheactofcopyingisanappealingonefor
pedagogy: Perhaps if this student retyped a chunk—or, if she was ambitious, the entirety—of On the
Road,shemighthaveunderstoodKerouac’sstyleinawaythatwasboundtostickwithher.
After having learned of my proposition about copying, Simon Morris, a British artist, decided to
actuallyretypetheoriginal1951scrolleditionofOntheRoad,onepageaday,onablogcalled“Getting
InsideKerouac’sHead.”2Inhisintroductorypost,hewrote,“It’sanamusinganecdoteanditoccurredto
methatitwouldmakeaninterestingwork.Itwouldbeinterestingtorealizethispropositionasaworkin
itsownrightandintheprocesstoseewhatIwouldlearnthroughre-typingKerouac’sprose.”Andsoon
May 31, 2008, he began: “I first met Neal not long after my father died … ” filling up the page with
Kerouac’sfirstpageandendingtheblogentrymid-sentence,correspondingwiththeprintedpageofOn
theRoad:“whichremindedmeofmyjailproblemitisabsolutelynecessarynowtopostponeall.”The

---

nextblogentrypublishedonJune1picksupmid-sentencefromtheprecedingday:“thoseleftoverthings
concerning our personal lovethings and at once begin thinking of specific worklife plans.” He reached
page408onMarch22,2009,therebycompletingtheproject.
Morrishadneverreadthebookbeforeandasheretypedit,heenjoyedreadingthenarrativeunravel.It
tookhimtwentyminuteseachday,huntingandpecking,totypethefour-hundred-wordpages.And,trueto
myhunch,he’shadarelationshiptothebookfardifferentfromtheonehe’dhaveifhehadmerelyreadit:
“I have told several people in an excited manner that ‘this is the most thrilling read/ride of my life.’
Certainly,IhaveneverpaidanysinglebookthismuchattentionandhavingneverreadKerouac’sbook,
theunfoldingstoryiscertainlyapleasurableexperience—it’sagreatread.NotonlydoItypeitup,word
forword,eachdaybutIthenproofreadeachpage,checkingformistakesbeforepostingitontheblog…
soeachpageisbeingre-typedandreadseveraltimes.…Butthelevelofscrutinythatthedailyactivity
hasopeneduptomeinmyreadinghasdrawnmyattentiontocertaincharacteristicsinKerouac’sprose
which in my normal reading style I’m fairly certain I wouldn’t have noticed.” Morris echoes Gertrude
Stein,whosays,“Ialwayssaythatyoucannottellwhatapicturereallyisorwhatanobjectreallyisuntil
you dust it every day and you cannot tell what a book is until you type it or proof-read it. It then does
somethingtoyouthatonlyreadingnevercando.”3
Forexample,MorristakesnoteofKerouac’suseofhyphensinthetext,whichhediscoveredgivesthe
storyitsflow,drawingparallelswithlinesonthehighway.Healsocalculatedhowmanytimesthetitle
phrase “on the road” is used (24 times in the first 104 pages). Morris muses, “In Kerouac’s book, the
words‘ontheroad’arechantedlikeamantraandtheirrepetitionkeepsyoumovingthroughthetext,along
theasphaltfromEasttoWest.”He’salsogainedinsightintothewayinwhichKerouac’sshorthandallows
thereadertocompletesentencesintheirhead,whichhasledMorristochuckinafewwordsofhisown:
“When re-typing the following words by Kerouac: ‘The counterman—it was three A.M.—heard us talk
aboutmoneyandofferedtogiveusthehamburgersforfree.’InoticeIhadaddedtheword‘forfree’tothe
endofthesentenceandthenhadtodeletemyaddition.Thishashappenedonmorethanoneoccasion.And
thereis,ofcourse,thepossibilitythatIhaven’tcaughtallmyadditionsandhaveleftsomeextrawords
imbeddedinKerouac’stext.”Onewonders,then,ifthisisreallyacopyorifitinsomewaycouldn’tbe
construed as an entirely different text, one based on the original. Taking it one step further, one could
alwayswriteanewtextsimplybytossingwordsinasonefeelstheneedto,thewayMorrisinserted“for
free.”
Bysodoing,Morrisshowsusthatappropriationneednotbeamerepassingalongofinformation,but,
in fact, moving information can inspire a different sort of creativity in the “author,” producing different
versionsandadditions—remixeseven—ofanexistingtext.Morrisisbothreaderandwriterinthemost
activesenseoftheword.
Inthe1970stheexperimentallyinclinedlanguagepoetsproposedawaythatthereadercould,infact,
become the writer. By atomizing words, across a page, coupled with disrupting normative modes of
syntax (putting the words of a sentence in the “wrong” order), they felt that a nonhierarchical linguistic
landscape would encourage a reader to reconstruct the text as they saw fit. Fueled by French theorists
suchasJacquesDerrida,theywantedtodemonstratethatthetextualfieldisunstable,comprisedofever-
shiftingsignsandsignifiers,therebyunabletobeclaimedbyeitherauthororreaderasauthoritative.Ifthe
reader were able to reconstruct the open text, it would be as (un)stable and as (un)meaningful as the
author’s.Theendresultwouldbealevelplayingfieldforall,debunkingthetwinmythsofboththeall-
powerfulauthorandthepassivereader.
I think that Morris would agree with the language poets about the need to challenge this traditional
powerdynamic,buthe’sgoingaboutitinacompletelydifferentway,basedinmimesisandreplication
instead of disjunction and deconstruction. It’s about moving information from one place to another
completelyintact.Withverylittleintervention,theentirereading/writingexperienceischallenged.

---

Morris’sundertakingputsintoplayagameofliterarytelephone,wherebyatextissubjecttoaremixin
ways to which we are more accustomed in the musical world. While Kerouac’s On the Road would
remain iconic, dozens of parasitic and paratextual versions could inevitably appear. This is what
happened to Elizabeth Alexander’s Obama inaugural poem days after her reading of it, after I asked
readerstoremixherwords.4AnMP3ofherreadingwasavailableonWFMU’s“BewareoftheBlog,”
and,withinaweek,overfiftywildlydisparateversionsofthepoemappeared,eachusingherwordsand
voice. One remixer cut up each word of Alexander’s reading and strung them back together
alphabetically.Othersloopedandtwistedherpoems,makinghersaytheoppositeofwhatsheintended;
some set to them to music; others recited them verbatim, but in highly unusual voices; a pair of beat-
boxingchildreneventookastabatit.LikeKerouac,Alexander’sstatusremainsiconic,but,insteadofan
all-powerful author intoning to a sea of listeners, an outpouring of artistic responses was created as an
activeresponse.Themostuncreativeresponsewasentitled,“IAmaRobot”andwassimplyanunaltered
recordingofAlexanderreadingherpoem.Isthisanythingnew?Haven’ttherealwaysbeenparodiesand
remixes,writtenorspoken,ofeventslargeandsmall?Yes,butneverthisquickly,democratically,northis
technologically engaged. And the highly mimetic qualities of the many responses—some of which just
barelynudgedAlexander’swords—showedhowdeeplyideasofreframinghaveseepedintothewaywe
think;manyoftheseresponsesdidn’taimtobewildly“creative”and“original.”Instead,theuncreative
anduntouchedrepresentationofaniconicartifactplacedintoanewcontextprovedtobecreativeenough.
However,bytreatingAlexander’stextasfodderforremixing,newtypesofmeaningarecreatedwitha
widerangeofexpressions:humor,repetition,détournement,fear,hope.
Likewise,Morris’sretypingwouldhavebeenadifferentprojectaltogetherbeforetheWeb.It’shardto
think of a precedent for such an act. Certainly there were untold numbers of bootlegged and pirated
editionsofbooks,ofwhichhoursandhourswerespentexactlyretypingpreexistingtexts(untiltheadvent
ofthecopyingmachine),aswellasmedievalscribesandscrivenersofallstripesthroughouthistory.But
the fluidity of the digital environment has encouraged and incubated these dormant ideas to fruition as
creative/uncreativeacts.AsIstatedintheintroduction,thecomputerencouragestheauthortomimicits
workingswherecuttingandpastingareintegraltothewritingprocess.5
Morrisasks,“IfKerouacwerealivetoday,wouldhebepublishingonpaper,orbloggingortweeting
his way across America?” Perhaps the answer to that can be found in an interview Jackson Pollock
conductedin1951,respondingtoaquestionabouthiscontroversialmethodofpainting:“Myopinionis
that new needs need new techniques. And the modern artists have found new ways and new means of
makingtheirstatements.Itseemstomethatthemodernpaintercannotexpressthisage,theairplane,the
atombomb,theradio,intheoldformsoftheRenaissanceorofanypastculture.Eachagefindsitsown
technique.”6 For Morris, it’s the blog: “I’ve probably shifted into reverse—the further forwards I
progress on his road from East to West, by the nature of blogs, the further backwards ‘my’ story goes,
disjointed,brokenupasadailybulletin.”Helikenedhisreaderstopassengersjoininghimonthetrip.
Traffic for Morris’s project—in this context, Web traffic—has been light, in spite of conventional
wisdom that claims consistent blogging for hundreds of days in a row will generate interest. For the
duration of the project and its afterlife as an artifactual blog, Morris has only had a handful
commenters/passengers, and, curiously, none of them have been Kerouac’s estate or his business
representativescryingfoulplayforfreelyrepublishingaverylucrativeartwork.Morris’swork,then,is
an anomaly—not a pirated edition worth legally pursing—and, as such, becoming functionless and
aestheticized,itcanonlybeaworkofart.7
A few months after I finished writing this chapter, a package containing two books arrived in my
mailbox from England, both sent to me by Simon Morris. One was the official British edition of Jack
Kerouac’s On The Road published by Penguin Modern Classics and the other was a paper edition of
Morris’sGettingInsideofJackKerouac’sHead.Thebookslookidentical:they’rethesamesize,have

---

the same cover design and typography (the black and white Penguin cover photo of Kerouac and Neal
Cassady is mimicked by a black and white image of Morris and his pal, the poet Nick Thurston). The
spines, too, are identically designed, except for the fact that the Penguin logo has been replaced by the
Information As Material logo (the publisher of the new edition); even the back covers are laid out
identicallywithblurbs,photos,andthumbnailsoftheauthor’spreviouslypublishedworks.Inside,both
havefront-endbiographicalmaterialaswellasintroductoryessays.Ataglance,theycouldbetakenfor
identicaltomes.Butthat’swherethesimilaritiesend.
WhenyouopenMorris’sbook,thefamousfirstlineofOntheRoad,“IfirstmetDeannotlongaftermy
wife and I split up,” is nowhere to be seen. Instead, the first line is a sentence already in progress:
“concerttickets,andthenamesJackandJoanandHenriandVicki,thegirl,togetherwithaseriesofsad
jokesandsomeofhisfavoritesayingsuchas‘Youcan’tteachtheoldmaestroanewtune.’”Ofcourse,
thefirstpageofMorris’sbookishisfinalblogentryfromhismarathonretyping,andso,theendofthe
firstpageofMorris’sbookistheendingofKerouac’sscroll,“IthinkofNealCassidy.”Thebookunfolds
this way throughout, progressing backward, page by page (Morris’s first page is numbered 408, his
secondis407,etc.)untilhereachesthestartofKerouac’soriginaltext.
HavingfollowedMorris’sprojectonline,itwasjarringtoseeablog-drivenprojectrebornasprint.
While it’s normal to see print migrate to digital forms (e-books or PDFs for example), it’s rare to
encounter Web-native artifacts rendered into dead-tree stock, even more so when you consider that
Kerouac’scanonizedversionisbestknownforitspaperversions(thepaperscroll,thepaperback).The
effectofMorris’sgestureislikeseeingacouturedressthat’sbeenmistakenlythrowninthewashwiththe
gym clothes. From paper to Web and back to paper, Kerouac’s text is recognizable as itself, but is
somehow shrunken, warped, and misshapen. It’s the same but very much different; it’s Kerouac’s
masterpiecerunbackwardsinamirror.
Morriseloquentlysumsuptheprojectbyclaiming“therearemoredifferencesthansimilaritieswhich
makes it challenging that the same piece of writing, typed up in a different context, is an entirely new
pieceofwriting.”Yet,whenaskedhowtheretypingmakeshimfeel,Morrishesitates:“Onewouldhope
for some truly profound response but really there is none. I don’t feel anything at all. A bit like Jack
Kerouac’sownjourneyontheroadandintohimselfinsearchofsomethingheneverreallyfinds.”And
then,haltingly,heasks,“AmIlosingmyselfasI‘uncreatively’typewordsthathavealreadybeentypedin
oneofliterature’smostcelebratedactsofspontaneousprose?”andanswers,“AllIcanreallysaywith
anycertaintyisI’veneverspentsuchalongtimewithabookorthoughtaboutanybookasmuch.When
you read a book you are often simultaneously inside and outside of the text. But in this case, I have
reflectedmuchmoreontheprocessofreadingthanIwouldnormallywhenIengagewithatext.It’snot
onlyabouthittingthesamekeysasKerouacinthesameorder,giveortakeafewslippagesbutit’salso
about the process of the project.” In the end, he doesn’t know if he’s succeeded in getting inside
Kerouac’shead,butit’sclearthathe’ssucceededingettingfarinsidehisownhead,garneringagreatdeal
ofself-awarenessasbothreaderandwriter,which,afterthisexperience,hewillneverbeabletotakefor
grantedagain.

---

8PARSINGTHENEWILLEGIBILITY

Earlier,IfocusedontheenormityoftheInternet,theamountofthelanguageitproduces,andwhatimpact
this has upon writers. In this chapter I’d like to extend that idea and propose that, because of this new
environment,acertaintypeofbookisbeingwrittenthat’snotmeanttobereadasmuchasit’smeanttobe
thoughtabout.I’llgivesomeexamplesofbooksthat,intheirconstruction,seemtobebothmimickingand
commentingonourengagementwithdigitalwordsand,bysodoing,proposenewstrategiesforreading—
ornotreading.TheWebfunctionsbothasasiteforreadingandwriting:forwritersit’savastsupplytext
fromwhichtoconstructliterature;readersfunctioninthesameway,hackingapaththroughthemorassof
information,ultimatelyworkingasmuchatfilteringasreading.
TheInternetchallengesreadersnotbecauseofthewayitiswritten(mostlynormativeexpositorysyntax
atthetoplevel)butbecauseofitsenormoussize.1Justasnewreadingstrategieshadtobedevelopedin
ordertoreaddifficultmodernistworksofliterature,sonewreadingstrategiesareemergingontheWeb:
skimming,dataaggregating,RSSfeeds,tonameafew.Ourreadinghabitsseemtobeimitatingtheway
machines work by grazing dense texts for keywords. We could even say that, online, we parse text—a
binary process of sorting language—more than we read it to comprehend all the information passing
before our eyes. And there is an increasing number of texts being written by machines to be read
specificallybyothermachinesratherthanpeople,asevidencedbytheuntoldnumberofspoofpagesset
upforpageviewsoradclickthroughs,lexiconsofpasswordcodecracks,andsoforth.Whilethereisstill
a tremendous amount of human intervention, the future of literature will be increasingly mechanical.
GeneticistSusanBlackmoreaffirmsthis:“Thinkofprogramsthatwriteoriginalpoetryorcobbletogether
newstudentessays,orprogramsthatstoreinformationaboutyourshoppingpreferencesandsuggestbooks
or clothes you might like next. They may be limited in scope, dependent on human input and send their
outputtohumanbrains,buttheycopy,selectandrecombinetheinformationtheyhandle.”2
Therootsofthisreading/notreadingdichotomycanbefoundonpaper.Therehavebeenmanybooks
published that challenged the reader not so much by their content but by their scope. Trying to read
Gertrude Stein’s The Making of Americans linearly is like trying to read the Web linearly. It’s mostly
possibleinsmalldoses,dippedinandoutof.Atnearlyonethousandpages,itsheftisintimidating,butthe
biggestdeterrenttoreadingthebookisitsscope,havingbegunsmallas“ahistoryofafamilytobeinga
historyofeverybodythefamilyknewandthenitbecamethehistoryofeverykindandofeveryindividual
humanbeing,”3thusrenderingitaconceptualwork,abeautifulproposalthat’shardtofulfill.“Evertried.
Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.”4 says Beckett, a sentiment that could easily
applytouncreativewriting.
The Making of Americans is one in a long line of impossibly scoped projects. The anonymously
penned My Secret Life, a twenty-five-hundred-page nonstop Victorian work of pornography is another.
Nomatterhowtitillatinganygivenpagemaybe—andeverysinglepageis—there’snowayofingestingit
straight through. It’s a concept as much as anything, a mad work of language to counter the moral
repressionofthedaybothbymeansofcontentandsheerbulk.Ithadtobebig:Itissurplustextatitsmost
erotic.
Or take Douglas Huebler’s Variable Piece #70 (1971), where he attempts to: “photographically
document, to the extent of his capacity, the existence of everyone alive in order to produce the most

---

authenticandinclusiverepresentationofthehumanspeciesthatmaybeassembledinthatmanner.”5Like
Stein, Huebler began locally, photographing everyone he passed by on the street. Later, he would go to
hugeralliesandsportingevents,photographingthecrowds.Finally,realizingthefutilityofhisefforts,he
beganrephotographingexistingphotosoflargegatheringsofpeopleinordertoattempttoaccomplishhis
goal.Ofcourse,hetoo,“failedbetter.”
AnotherinstanceisJoeGould’sAnOralHistoryofOurTime,whichwaspurportedinJuneof1942to
be“approximatelyninemilliontwohundredandfifty-fivethousandwordslong,oraboutadozentimesas
longastheBible,”6writtenoutinlonghandonbothsidesofthepagesoillegiblythatonlyGouldcould
readit:
GouldputsintotheOralHistoryonlythingshehasseenorheard.Atleasthalfofitismadeup
on conversations taken down verbatim or summarized; hence the title. “What people say is
history,” Gould says. “What we used to think was history—kings and queens, treaties,
inventions, big battles, beheadings, Caesar, Napoleon, Pontius Pilate, Columbus, William
JenningsBryan—isonlyformalhistoryandlargelyfalse.I’llputdowntheinformalhistoryof
theshirt-sleevedmultitude—whattheyhadtosayabouttheirjobs,loveaffairs,vittles,sprees,
scrapes,andsorrows—orI’llperishintheattempt.”7

Thescopewasenormous:includediseverythingfromtranscriptionsofsoliloquiesofparkbenchbums
torhymestranscribedfromrestroomstalls:
Hundredofthousandsofwordsaredevotedtothedrunkenbehaviorandsexualadventuresof
various professional Greenwich Villagers, in the twenties. There are hundreds of reports of
ginnyVillageparties,includinggossipabouttheguestsandfaithfulreportsoftheirargumentson
subjects such as reincarnation, birth control, free love, psychoanalysis, Christian Science,
Swedenborgianism, vegeterianism, alcoholism, and different political and art isms. “I have
fullycoveredwhatmightbetermedtheintellectualunderworldofmytime,”Gouldsays.8

Gould’s project, too, ended in failure: No manuscript was ever written. It was an enormous hoax, so
convincingthatitfooledJosephMitchell,areporterfortheNewYorker,whowroteasmallbookabout
him,endingupbeingGould’sdefactobiographer.
AlthoughtherewasnoOralHistory,thereisTheMakingofAmericans.What,then,arewesupposed
todowithitifnotreadit?ThescholarUllaDydoproposesaradicalsolution:don’treaditatall.She
remarked that much of Stein’s work was never meant to be read closely, rather, Strein was deploying
visualmeansofreading.Whatappearedtobedenselyunreadableandrepetitivewas,infact,designedto
beskimmedandtodelighttheeye,inavisualsense,whileholdingthebook:“Theseconstructionshave
anastonishingvisualresult.Thelimitedvocabulary,parallelphrasing,andequivalentsentencescreatea
visual pattern that fills the page.… We read this page until the words no longer cumulatively build
meaningsbutmakeavisualpatternthatdoesnotrequireunderstanding,likeadecorativewallpaperthat
weseenotasdetailsbutonlyasdesign.”Here’sanexcerptfromthe“Mrs.HerslandandtheHersland
Children”chapter:
There are then always many millions being made of women who have in them servant girl
naturealwaysinthem,therearealwaysthentherearealwaysbeingmadethenmanymillions
who have a little attacking and mostly scared dependent weakness in them, there are always
being made then many millions of them who have a scared timid submission in them with a
resistingsomewheresometimeinthem.Therearealwayssomethenofthemanymillionsofthis

---

firstkindofthemtheindependentdependentkindofthemwhoneverhaveitinthemtohaveany
such attacking in them, there are more of them of the many millions of this first kind of them,
whohaveverylittleinthemofthescaredweeknessinthem,therearesomeofthemwhohave
inthemsuchaweaknessasmeeknessinthem,someofthemhavethisinthemasgentlepretty
younginnocenceinsidethem,thereareallkindsofmixturesinthemtheninthemanymillionsof
thiskindoftheminthemanykindsoflivingtheyhaveinthem.9

ThisquotedpassageprovesDydo’sthesistobecorrect.It’sanextremelyvisualtext,withtherhythm
beingpropelledbytheroundnessofthelettermandtheverticalityofthearchitecturalletterformationilli
of million. The word million is the driving semantic unit, with the visual correlatives—m and on—
framingtheilli,inanalmostpalindromaticway,astheonvisuallygluesthetworoundhumpsintoanother
m. The negative spaces of the o and n echo the negative spaces of the m. The result is the visual
constructionofanewword,millim,agorgeouslyrhythmic,palindromicunit.Thems lead the eye up a
steptotheis,whichthenstepyouuptothetwinls,theapogeeoftheunit,andthenstepbackdownthe
wayyoucame.Thisvisualsequenceisechoedbythewordssometimesandthem.Theconnectivetissue
istherepeateduseoftheconjunctionsmoreofthem/littleinthem/haveinthem/someofthem/kindof
them/manyofthem.whichpermeatethepassageandgiveititsbasicrhythmandflow.
Stein’swords,then,whenviewedthisway,don’treallyfunctionaswordsnormallydo.Wecanread
them to be transparent or visual entities or we can read them to be signifiers of language constructed
entirelyoflanguage.ThelatteristheapproachCraigDworkinhastakeninhisbookParse, where he’s
parsedanentiregrammarbookbyitsownrules,resultingina284-pagebook.Thewritingisalmostan
abstraction—aschema—ofStein’srepetitions:
PreparatorySubjectthirdpersonsingularintransitivepresenttenseverbadjectiveofnegation
Noun conjunction of alternation Noun locative relative pronoun auxiliary infinitive and
incomplete participle used together in a passive verbal phrase definite article Noun genitive
prepositionrelativepronounperiodRelativePronounthirdpersonsingularindicativepresent
tenseverbandrequiredadverbformingatransitiveverbalphrasemarksofquotationdefinite
articlesingularpossessivenounverbalnounprepositionoftheinfinitiveintransitiveinfinitive
verb comma marks of quotation all taken as a direct object conjunction marks of quotation
definitearticleverbalnoungenitiveprepositiondefinitearticlesingularnouncommamarksof
quotation all taken as a direct object conjunction adjective adjective plural direct objective
case noun preposition of the infinitive intransitive infinitive verb and passive incomplete
participle used as a complex compound passive verbal construction adverb definite article
adjectivenounperiodPrepositionactiveparticiplerelativepronounsecondpersonsubjective
casepronounmodalauxiliarysecondpersontransitiveverbcommamarksofquotationrelative
pronoun third person third person singular indicative present tense verb and required adverb
forming a transitive verbal phrase indefinite article Noun preposition of the infinitive
intransitive infinitive verb and passive incomplete participle used as a complex compound
passive verbal construction comma abbreviation of an old french imperative period single
quotation mark definite article verbal noun genitive preposition definite article noun period
singlequotationmarkmarksofquotation10

Thesourcetext,EdwinA.Abbott’sHowtoParse:AnAttempttoApplythePrinciplesofScholarship
to English Grammar, was first published in 1874 and played a leading role in the pedagogical debate
over whether English should be analyzed as if it were Latin. Thousands of copies were printed as
textbooksinthelastquarterofthenineteenthcentury.Dworkinsays,“WhenIfirstcameacrossthebookI

---

was reminded of a confession by Gertrude Stein (another product of 1874): ‘I really do not know that
anythinghaseverbeenmoreexcitingthandiagrammingsentences.’Andso,ofcourse,IparsedAbbott’s
book into its own idiosyncratic system of analysis.” The process was slow, taking over five years to
complete. Dworkin called it “EXCRUCIATINGLY slow” when he started, but, by the end, he could sit
downwiththesourcetextandparse-typeat“fullspeed.”11Butparse-typingatfullspeedrequireslittle
inspiration,tonsofperspiration,andanacuteknowledgeoftherulesofgrammar.Thiscouldn’tbemore
different to the famously hypnotic all-night writing sessions of Gertrude Stein, where inspiration was
inseparablefromprocess:“Whenyouwriteathingitisperfectlyclearandthenyoubegintobedoubtful
about it, but then you read it again and you lose yourself in it again as when you wrote it.”12 What
Dworkingivesusisstructureasliterature,plainandsimple.It’spurposefullylackstheplayofrhythmic
visualityandoralitythatSteinworkedsohardtoachieve.Thisisnottosaythatthere’snotvisualinterest
inDworkin’stext,ratherit’saskingdifferentquestionsofus.13
What does it mean “to parse”? The verb to parse comes from the Latin pars, referring to parts of
speech. In the vernacular to parse means to understand or comprehend. In literature it’s a method of
breakingasentencedownintoitscomponentpartsofspeech,analyzingtheform,function,andsyntactical
relationshipofeachparttothewhole.Incomputingitmeanstoanalyzeorseparatepartsofcodesothat
the computer can process it more efficiently. In computing, parsing is done by a parser, a program that
assembles all the bits of code so it can build fluid data structures. But here’s where it gets interesting:
computationalparsinglanguagewasbasedontherulesofEnglishassetforthbythelikesofAbbott.Now,
therulesofEnglisharenotoriouslycomplicated,idiosyncratic,andambiguous—justaskanyonetryingto
learnit—andthosevagarieshavebeencarriedoverintocomputing.Inotherwords,thecompilercanget
prettyconfusedprettyeasily.Itlikesrepetitionandpredictablestructures;everyambiguityitmustparse
willultimatelyresultinslowingdowntheprogram.Athismostprogrammatic,themostlogicalandleast
ambiguouspartofDworkin’sbookiswhenheparsedthecompleteindexofAbbott’sbook.It’ssosimple
thatevenIcanparseit.Here’stheindexentryforthewordcolon:
Colon,309.

whichDworkinparsesas:
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod

ortheentryfortheword“clause”:
Clause,defined,239.

whichis:
NouncommacompoundarabicnumeralcommaNounperiod

Acolumnoftheindexlookslikethis:

Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
NouncommacompoundarabicnumeralcommaNounperiod
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod

---

Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
Noun comma compound arabic numeral dash compound arabic numeral comma compound
arabic numeral comma compound arabic numeral comma compound arabic numeral comma
compoundarabicnumeralperiod
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralcommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
Noun comma compound arabic numeral comma compound arabic numeral comma compound
arabicnumeralperiod
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
Nouncommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod
Noun comma compound arabic numeral comma compound arabic numeral comma compound
arabicnumeralcommacompoundarabicnumeralperiod14

This simple and repetitive structure is nearly identical to any number of returns I get when I use the
UNIXcommandlstoviewthecontentsofadirectory.Here’saportionofalogwrittenbyacompilerthat
noteseverytimeaprogramonmycomputercrashes:
Kenny-G-MacBook-Air-2:Logsirwinchusid$cdCrashReporter
Kenny-G-MacBook-Air-2:CrashReporterirwinchusid$ls
Eudora_2009–07–24–133316_Kenny-G-MacBook-Air-2.crash
Eudora_2009–08–05–133008_Kenny-G-MacBook-Air-2.crash
KDXClient_2009–04–05–030158_Kenny-G-MacBook-Air.crash
MicrosoftAUDaemon_2009–04–23–183439_Kenny-G-MacBook-Air.crash
MicrosoftAUDaemon_2009–04–23–184134_Kenny-G-MacBook-Air.crash
MicrosoftAUDaemon_2009–04–24–030404_Kenny-G-MacBook-Air.crash
MicrosoftAUDaemon_2009–04–27–233001_Kenny-G-MacBook-Air.crash
MicrosoftAUDaemon_2009–04–27–233203_Kenny-G-MacBook-Air.crash
MicrosoftAUDaemon_2009–04–27–233206_Kenny-G-MacBook-Air.crash
MicrosoftAUDaemon_2009–04–27–233416_Kenny-G-MacBook-Air.crash
MicrosoftAUDaemon_2009–04–27–233425_Kenny-G-MacBook-Air.crash
MicrosoftDatabaseDaemon_2009–01–28–141602_irwin-chusids-macbook-air.crash
MicrosoftDatabaseDaemon_2009–06–10–103522_Kenny-G-MacBook-Air-2.crash
MicrosoftEntourage_2008–06–09–163010_irwin-chusids-macbook-air.crash
MicrosoftEntourage_2008–11–11–133150_irwin-chusids-macbook-air.crash
MicrosoftEntourage_2008–11–11–133206_irwin-chusids-macbook-air.crash
MicrosoftEntourage_2008–11–11–133258_irwin-chusids-macbook-air.crash
MicrosoftEntourage_2008–11–11–133316_irwin-chusids-macbook-air.crash
MicrosoftEntourage_2008–11–21–131722_irwin-chusids-macbook-air.crash

Notethecleanlyconsistencyofthedatastructures,subject/date/harddrive/crash,astreamlinedwayof
writingthatspansmorethanacenturyfromAbbotttoDworkintomyMacBookAir—rhetoric,literature,
computing—each employing identical rules and processes. When it comes to language, there’s been a
general leveling of labor, with everyone—and each machine—essentially performing the same tasks.

---

DigitaltheoristMatthewFullersumsitupbestwhenhesays,“Theworkofliterarywritingandthetaskof
data-entrysharethesameconceptualandperformativeenvironment,asdothejournalistandtheHTML
coder.”15
Dworkin’sindexalonegoesonfornearlytenpagesandisreminiscentoftheindexofLouisZukofsky’s
lifepoem,A.Hecallstheindex,“IndexofNamesandObjects,”but,unlikeatypicalindexthatincludes
nounsorconcepts,Zukofskyalsoindexesafewarticlesofspeech.Herearetheindexentriesfora and
the:
a,1,103,130,131,138,161,168,173–175,177,185,186,196,199,203,212,226–228,232,
234,235,239,241,243,245–248,260,270,281,282,288,291,296,297,299,302,323,327,
328,351,353,377,380382,385,391–394,397,402,404–407,416,418,426,433,434,435,
436,438,448,457,461,463,465,470,473,474,477–481,491,493–497,499,500,505,507,
508–511,536–539,560–56316

the,175,179,181,182,184,187,191193,196,199,202,203,205,206,208,211,215,217,
221,224–226,228,231,232,234,238,239,241,243,245–248,260,270,285,288,290,291,
296,297,302,316,321–324,327,328,336,338,342,368,375,379,380,383–387,390–397,
402, 404, 406, 407, 412, 416, 426–428, 434–436, 440, 441, 463, 465, 468, 470, 473, 474,
476–479,494,496,497,499,506–511,536–539,560–56317

YettherearemajorflawsinZukofsky’sindex.aappearshundredsoftimesbetweenthepagesof1and
103,yetthey’renotindexed.Samethingwiththe,whichappearsonalmosteverypageofthebook,yetthe
indexstatesthattheworddoesn’tmakeanappearanceuntilpage175!ItturnsoutthatwhentheUniversity
ofCaliforniaPressapproachedZukofskywantingtodoacompletevolumeofA,hisinitialideawastodo
an index only containing a, an and the, words he felt were key to understanding to his life’s work (a
subjectiveconstraint-basedwayofwriting).Hewasdelightedwiththeideaofaconceptualindex,and
hiswifeCeliasettowork,amassingthousandsofindexcards,manyofwhichZukofskywouldeliminate
when he thought they were unnecessary for his own idiosyncratic reasons—hence the gaps. Clearly
Zukofskythoughtoftheindexasanotherpoem—aconceptualoneatthat—oneridiculingtheideathatan
artificially formal device such an index could ever truly control, categorize, domesticate, and stabilize
suchawildanduncontrollablebeastaslanguage,particularlypoeticlanguage.
I’vefoundthatthewaytodealwiththemostperplexingoftextsisnottotrytofigureoutwhattheyare
butinsteadtoaskwhatthey’renot.Ifwesay,forexample,thatParseisnotabookofpoetry,itisnota
narrative,itisnotaworkoffiction,itisnotmelodic,ithasnopathos,ithasnoemotion,yetit’snota
phonebook,norisitareferencebook,andsoon,itgraduallybeginstodawnonusthatthisisamaterial
investigation of a philosophical inquiry, a concept in the guise of literature. We then begin to ask
questions: What does it mean to parse a grammar book by its own rules? What does this tell us about
language and the way we process it, its codes, its hierarchies, its complexities, its consistencies? Who
made these rules? How flexible are they? Why are they not more flexible? How would this book be
differentifitwerebasedonabookabouthowtoparse,say,Chinesesentences?IsDworkinexactinga
schoolboy’srevengeonAbbottbyturningthetablesonhim,bytakinganobsessive“Allworkandnoplay
makesJackadullboy”approach?IsheturningAbbottinsideout?OrisDworkinechoingAbbott’scallin
Flatlandtogobeyondthepage,givingusaportalthroughwhichwemaytrulyseethedimensionalityof
language?Ascuriousasthematerialtextis,it’swhendon’treaditthatwereallybegintounderstandit.
But,justwhenwethinkwe’vefigureditout,wegetfooledagain.Inthemidstofallthisparsing,you
stumbleacrossasentenceinfull,normalsyntax.Thisistheentiretextonpage217:

---

——————
NOUNCARDINALROMAN
NUMERALPERIOD
SUBJUNCTIVEMOOD
Theansweris,thatwedesireheretospeakofthefact,notasdefinitefacts,butaspossibilities.18
It’sabeautifulandcertainlyrelevantsentence,butwhy?Dworkinissimplytranslatingintonormative
EnglishtheskeletalexamplesAbbottusedtoshowhowsentencesshouldbeparsed.
Dworkin’ssentenceasparsed—thewayitappearsinAbbott’sbook—is:
Definitearticlenounsingularpresentcontinuousverbofdefinitioncommapreparatorypronoun
first person plural subjective case pronoun first person plural present tense transitive verb
prepositionoftheinfinitiveinfinitiveverbgenitiveprepositiondefinitearticleobjectivecase
singular noun comma adverb of counterfact syncategorematic adjective plural noun comma
conjunctionsyncategorematicpluralnounperiod19

SoDworkindiddosome“creative”writing:Hehadtocomeupwithseveralsentencescomprisedof
groupsoforiginalwordsthatwouldbemeaningfulandsensible,whichalsocleverlyreflectonthetext.
While he could have filled those words with anything—about the weather or plumbing or dancing—he
chosetousethoseinstancesasphilosophicalinsertions,onesthatcommentonbothhisownprocessand
on Abbott’s text. Another reads: “with the entire illustrative sentence meant to suggest an intimately
impersonal cast of characters in a reductive permutational drama in the mode of Dick and Jane or
Beckett.”20ThesesmallexercisesgaveDworkinpracticeforthenextversionofthebookwhereheplans
to write a narrative novel—completely of his own words—using Abbott’s grammatic structure as a
template.He’llfollowthebooktotheletter,droppinginnounswherethey’resupposedtogoandpresent
tensetransitiveverbswherethey’resupposedtogo,untilhe’sretranslatedtheentirebookaccordingto
itsownrules,adoublyHerculeantask.
WhileDworkincouldhavemerelyproposedthework—ascouldZukofskyorStein—therealizationof
it, the fact of it, gives us something upon which to base our philosophical inquiries. Had he merely
proposedthework—“Parseagrammarbookaccordingtoitsownrules”—we’dhavehadnoconception
of what it would feel like to read it, to hold it, to examine it. We would have been denied the sheer
pleasureandcuriosityofit,theworkmanshipandcraftsmanship,theprecisionofhisexecution,thebeauty
ofitslanguage,andthebeautyofitsconcept.It’sawonderfulandverypowerfulobject.
The specter of Edwin A. Abbott haunts uncreative writing. For his 2007 book Flatland, Derek
BeaulieuremovedallthelettersofAbbott’sbookofthesametitle,creatingaworkofasemicliterature,a
wayofwritingwithoutusingletters.WhilebasedentirelyonFlatland, there’s not a word to be found:
page after page reveals a series of tangled lines. Like Dworkin, Beaulieu empties Abbott of content to
revealtheskeletonofthework.Abbott’sFlatland,writtenin1884,chroniclestheadventuresofatwo-
dimensionalsquarewhomeetsathree-dimensionalcube,challenginghisassumptionsanddemonstrating
his inherent limitations. Abbott wrote the book both as a satire about the rigidity of the Victorian class
structureandasatractthatignitedthenotionofafourthdimensioninpopularimagination.
Beaulieu’stanglesoflinesrepresenteveryletter’splacementinAbbott’stext,fromstarttofinish.He
accomplishesthisbytakingarulerandbeginningwiththefirstletteroneachpage,tracingalinetothe
nextoccurrenceofthatletteronthepage,thenthenextandsoforthuntilhereachestheendofthepage.He
thentakesthesecondletterofthefirstwordonthepageandtracesthatinthesamemanner.Hedoesthis

---

untilalllettersofthealphabetareaccountedfor.
Theresultisauniquegraphicrenderingofeachpage.NotwopagesinBeaulieu’sbookareidentical,
andeachpagecontainswordsandlettersinuniquesequences.It’satranslationorawrite-throughinthe
Cagean tradition, based upon letteristic occurrence instead of semantic content, almost performing a
conceptual statistical analysis on the text. Colder and more clinical than Dworkin, and minus the
sensuality of Stein, what we’re left with is a completely unreadable work, yet one based entirely on
language.
Perhaps the most unreadable text of all is Christian Bök’s Xenotext Experiment, which involves
infusinganbacteriumwithanencryptedpoem,illegibletothehumaneye,butmeanttobereadfarintothe
future,mostlikelybyanalienraceafterhumanbeingshavelongsinceperished.Bök’sfar-fetchedworks,
with its scope of six million years, makes the propositions of Stein, Gould, or Huebler almost seem
humbleandearthboundbycomparison.
Christian Bök’s earlier project, Eunoia, which took seven years to write, consists of five chapters,
eachoneofwhichusesonlyonevoweltotellastory,witheverychaptercontainingavarietyoflinguistic
constraints and subnarratives of feasts, orgies, journeys, and so forth. To accomplish such a staggering
feat,hereadthroughWebster’sThirdNewInternationalDictionary—athree-volumetomethatcontains
aboutamillionandahalfentries—doingsofivetimes,onceforeachofthevowels.WhenBökdescribes
his writing process, he sounds like a computational parser, making the idiosyncrasies of the English
language speak for themselves, leaving himself with the work that the computer can’t do. “I proceeded
thentosortthemintopartsofspeech(nouns,verbs,adjectives,etc.),andthenIsortedeachofthoseparts
ofspeechintotopicalcategories(food,animals,professions,etc.)inordertodeterminewhatitmightbe
possibletorecountusingthisveryfixedlexicon.Itwasaverydifficulttasktoabidebytheserules,butin
theendIdemonstrated,Ithink,thatitwaspossibletowritesomethingbeautifulandinterestingevenunder
suchconditionsofextremeduress.”21

---

Figure8.1DerekBeaulieu,fromFlatland.

Whilethebookisimmenselypleasurabletoengagewith,it’sadifficultreadbecause,inspiteofallits
musical and narrative qualities, what is foregrounded is the structure of the constraint itself, which
quicklygetssothickandintrusivethatwhackingitbacktouncoverthetalebeneathisnearlyimpossible.
Instead of being able to enjoy the text, the reader is drawn into the quicksand of the physicality of
language.Readersalsocontinuallyconfrontthelaborthatitmusthavetakentoconstructthismonumental
work,sothatthequestionHowdidhedothis?becomesmorepressingthantryingtomakesenseofwhat
theauthorissaying.
Theconstraintsinevitablyforcethewordsintosomeverystiffprose:“FolkswhodonotfollowGod’s
norms word for word woo God’s scorn, for God frowns on fools who do not conform to orthodox
protocol. Whoso honors no cross of dolors nor crown of thorn doth go on, forsooth, to sow worlds of
sorrow.Lo!”22Butthestylecouldn’tbeotherwiseifBökwastoabidebytheconstraintandmakeitan
accountableandrealizedworkofliterature.
Farfromthedrudgeryofalienatedlabor,Bök’slengthyengagementaffordedhim—andbyextensionthe
reader—an intimacy with language that otherwise couldn’t be gleaned if he had merely proposed the
work:“Idiscoveredthateachofthefivevowelsseemstohaveitsownidiosyncraticpersonality.Aand

---

E,forexample,seemtobeveryelegiacandcourtlybycomparisontothelettersOandU,whicharevery
jocular and obscene. It seems to me that the emotional connotations of words may be contingent upon
these vowel distributions, which somehow govern our emotional response to words themselves.”23 In
order to explore his idea thoroughly, he kept arbitrary decisions to a minimum, an oblique strategy that
paidoffandhelpedhim—andonceagain,byextension,thereader—discovertherichnessoflanguagejust
asmuchasaconventionallyexpressive“creative”workcould.Hesays,“Theprojectalsounderlinedthe
versatilityoflanguageitself,showingthatdespiteanysetofconstraintsuponit,despitecensorship,for
example,languagecanalwaysfindawaytoprevailagainsttheseobstacles.Languagereallyisaliving
thingwitharobustvitality.Languageislikeaweedthatcannotonlyendurebutalsothriveunderallkinds
of difficult conditions.”24 What emerges, then, is not arid nihilism or negativity, but the reverse: by not
expressinghimself,he’sclearedthewaytoletthelanguagefullyexpressitself.
The Xenotext Experiment involves infusing a bacterium with a poem that will last so long it will
outlivetheeventualdestructionoftheEarthitself.Whileitsoundslikesomethingoutofasciencefiction
story, it’s for real: Bök has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding from the Canadian
government,andhe’sworkingwithaprominentscientisttomakeithappen.
He’sfoundaspeciesofbacterium—themostresilientontheplanet—inwhichtoimplementhispoems,
one that can withstand extremes of cold, heat, and radiation, hence capable of surviving a nuclear
holocaust. He’s got high aspirations: “I am hoping, in effect, to write a book that would still be on the
planetearthwhenthesunexplodes.Iguessthatthisprojectisakindofambitiousattempttothinkabout
art,quiteliterally,asaneternalendeavor.”
Theprocessofwritingthisonepoemisinsanelydifficultandhasalreadytakenupseveralyearsofhis
life. Only using the letters of the genetic nucleotides—A, C, G, T—in DNA, Bök is literally using this
alphabeticschemetocomposeapoem.Butsincethere’sonlyfourlettersavailableforhimtoworkwith,
he’s needed to create a set of ciphers that would stand in for more letters. For instance, the triplet of
lettersAGTmightrepresenttheletterB,etc.Butitgetsmorecomplicated.Bökwantstowritethepoem
insuchawaythatitwillcauseachemicalreactionintheDNAstrand,whichinturnwritesanotherpoem.
SothattheAGTinthenewsequencemightthistimerepresenttheletterX.Andontopofallthis,Bök
insiststhatbothpoemsmakegrammaticalandsemanticsense.Heexplainsthechallenges:
It’stantamounttowritingtwopoemsthatmutuallyenciphereachother—thatarecorrelatedina
very rigorous way … Imagine there are about 8 trillion different ways of enciphering the
alphabet so that the letters are mutually encoded. Pick one of those 8 trillion ciphers. Now
write a poem that is beautiful, that makes sense, in such a way that if you were to swap out
everysingleletterofthatpoemandreplaceitwithitscounterpartfromthemutualcipher,you’d
produceanewpoemthatstillremainsjustasbeautifulandthatstillmakessense.SoI’mtrying
to write two such poems. One of these poems is the one that I implant in the bacterium. The
otherpoemistheonethattheorganismwritesinresponse.25

It’sfascinatinghowBökstillusesthewordpoem;thenewpoemsmightwellbewrittenoncomputer
chipsor,inthiscase,inscribeduponlifeitself.Byreferringtotheworkasapoem,hekeepstheproject
squarelyintherealmoftheliteraryasopposedtothescientificortheworldofvisualart.Althoughthe
projectwilltakevariousforms—thefinalrealizationwillincludeasampleoftheorganismonaslideand
agalleryshowwithimagesandmodelsofthegeneticsequenceassupportmaterialsforthepoemitself—
Bök’sgreatestchallengeistowriteagoodpoem,onethatwillspeaktocivilizationsfarintothefuture.
And so Bök notches us the trope of unreadability. This poem is not meant to be read by us, and, by so
doing, Bök is enacting one of his long-held precepts, that the future of literature will be written by
machinesforothermachinestoreador,betteryet,parse.

---

9SEEDINGTHEDATACLOUD

As has been widely noted, the 2009 Iranian election was challenged by 140-character blasts. Twitter
becameasurprisinglyeffectivetooltochallengeanoppressiveregime.Itnotonlycouldinstantaneously
linkprotestorsbutdidsoinaformconducivetoourinformation-overloadedage.Asdatamovesfaster,
andweneedtomanagemore,wearedrawntosmallerchunks.Socialnetworkstatusupdatessuccinctly
describeanindividual’scurrentmoodorcircumstance,whetheritbemundaneordramatic,asinthecase
of the Iranian protests. These updates or tweets have the ability to reduce complicated circumstances
downtoasentence.Andthepopularityofmood-blastingserviceslikeTwitter—whichallowsnomore
than140charactersperpost—compresslanguage.Theseshortburstsoflanguagearethelatestinalong
line of linguistic reductions: Chinese ideograms, haikus, telegrams, newspaper headlines, the Times
Squarenewszipper,advertisingslogans,concretepoems,anddesktopicons.There’sasenseofurgency
thatcompressionbrings:eventhemostmundanetweets—whatsomeoneiseatingforbreakfast—canfeel
like breaking news, demonstrating, once again, that the medium is still the message: the interface of
Twitterhasreframedordinarylanguagetomakeitfeelextraordinary.
Socialnetworkingupdates,whicharefastandephemeral,donotoccurinisolation,rathertheirvalueis
in rapid succession; the more blasts you broadcast with greater frequency, the more effective they are
until,likesomanylittleshards,theyaccumulateintoagrandnarrativeoflife.Yet,assoonastheyappear,
they’re pushed off the screen and evaporate even faster than what used to be referred to as yesterday’s
news.Inparsingallthisinformationthere’sanurgetoact,torespond,toclick,tohoard,toarchive…to
manageitall.Ordon’t.Tweetsscrollinrealtimeacrossthescreenthewaytickertapeusedtospewstock
quotes.Duringtheprotests,the“hashtag”#iranelectionwasbackedupwithsomanytweetsandretweets
thattheinterfacecouldnotkeepup.Atonepointthereweretwentythousandblastsinthequeue,anecho
chamber,packedtothegillswithinformationanddisinformation,allexpressedinalphanumericlanguage.
Mostofustuninginweretryingtomakesenseofthevalidityoftheephemerabeforeitslidoffthescreen,
buttherearesomewriterslurkingwhoareharvestingallthesetweets,statusupdates,andotherwritingon
theWebasthebasisforfutureworksofliterature.1
We’ve witnessed this many times in the last century. The compressed three-line “novels” of Félix
Fénéon, which appeared anonymously in a French paper over the course of 1906, read like a mix of
telegrams,zenkoans,newspaperheadlines,andsocialnetworkupdates:
ThebreadinBordeauxwillnotbebloodiedatthistime;thetrucker’spassageprovokedonlya
minorbrawl.2

Love. In Mirecourt, the weaver Colas lodged a bullet in the brain of Mlle Fleckenger, and
treatedhimselfwithequalseverity.3

“Why don’t we migrate to Les Palaiseaux?” Yes, but M. Lencre, while enroute by cabriolet,
wasassaultedandrobbed.4

---

Hemingwayfamouslywroteashortstoryinjustsixwords:

Forsale:babyshoes,neverworn.5

Or we end up with the wildly reduced language of later Beckett, fusing the terse compression of
telegramswithaninnatehesitancytoexplicate:
Nothingtoshowachildandyetachild.Amanandyetaman.Oldandyetyoung.Nothingbut
oozehownothingandyet.Onebowedbackyetanoldman’s.Theotheryetachild’s.Asmall
child’s.

Somehowagainandallinstareagain.Allatonceasonce.Betterworseall.Thethreebowed
down.Thestare.Thewholenarrowvoid.Noblurs.Allclear.Dimclear.Blackholeagapeon
all.Inlettingall.Outlettingall.6

DavidMarkson,inaremarkableseriesoflatenovels,mergesthereportageofFénéonwiththecompact
prose of Beckett, dropping in subjective sentiments of unnamed narrators into the midst of hundreds of
shardsofarthistory,mostnolongerthanalineortwo:
Delmore Schwartz died of a heart attack in a seedy Times Square hotel. Three days passed
beforeanyonecouldbefoundtoclaimhisbody.

JamesBaldwinwasananti-Semite.

Notsortingbookandphonographrecordsmerely,butthenarrowingresidueofanentirelife?
Papers,filesofcorrespondence?7

LikeaTwitterstream,it’stheslowaccumulationoftinyshards,whichcohereintoafracturednarrative
bythebook’send.Marksonisacompulsivecataloguer:Onecanimaginehimcombingthroughtheannals
of art history, boiling down long and complicated lives into essential quips. He uses names often as
shorthand—tiny two-word headlines. Running your eyes down a page of a Markson work at random
produces an incredible list of well-known artists and thinkers: Brett Ashley, Anna Wickham, Stephen
Foster,JacquesDerrida,RolandBarthes,MauriceMerleau-Ponty,RomanJakobson,MichelLeiris,Jullia
Kristeva,PhillipeSollers,LouisAlthusser,PaulRicoeur,JacquesLacan,YannisRitsos,IannisXenakis,
Jeanne Hébuterne, Amadeo Modigliani, David Smith, James Russell, and Lady Mary Wortley Montagu.
Markson’s lists evoke the way gossip columns function, with where names printed in boldface signify
importance.
TheessayistGilbertAdairarticulatestheexplosivepowerofnamesprintedonapage:
What an alluring entity is the printed name! Consider the following: Steffi Graf, Bill Clinton,
WoodyAllen,VanessaRedgrave,SalmanRushdie,YvesSaintLaurent,UmbertoEco,Elizabeth
Hurley,MartinScorsese,GaryLineker,AnitaBrookner.Practicallytheonlythingtheyhavein
common is that this essay happens not to be about any of them. Yet how their capital letters
glitteronthepage—somuchso,itisnotinconceivablethatmorethanonereader,scanningthe
essay to see whether it contains anything worth reading, will have been arrested not by its
opening paragraph, which is how these things are supposed to work, but by this fourth

---

paragraph,merelyonthestrengthofthenamesabove.Itscarcelymattersthatnothingatallhas
been made of them, that nothing new, interesting or juicy has been said about them, that the
cumulative effect is akin to that produced by some trompe l’oeil portrait by Gainsborough in
whichwhatseemsfromadistancetobeanintricately,evenfinickily,renderedsatingownturns
out, on closer inspection, to be nothing but a fuzzy, meaningless blur of brushstrokes—it is,
nevertheless, just such a bundle of names that is calculated to attract the lazy, unprimed eye.
And it has now reached the point where a newspaper or magazine page without its statutory
quotaofproper,andpreferablyhousehold,namesisasdispiritingtobeholdasabridgehand
withnothinginitbutthreesandfivesandeights.Householdnamesare,inshort,theface-cards
ofjournalism.8

In1929JohnBartonWolgamot,asomewhatobscurewriter,privatelypublishedabookinatinyedition
consistingalmostentirelyofnamescalledInSara,Mencken,ChristandBeethovenThereWereMenand
Women. The book is nearly impossible to read linearly: it’s best skimmed, your eye darting across the
names,restingontheoccasionalfamiliarone,similartothewayAdairshowsushowscanningthegossip,
society,orobituarycolumnsofanewspaperwork.
WhilelisteningtoaliveperformanceofBeethoven’sEroicainNewYork’sLincolnCenter,Wolgamot
had a synaesthetic response to the music and heard within “the rhythms themselves, names—names that
meant nothing to him, foreign names.”9 A few days after the concert, he checked out a biography of
Beethovenfromthelibrary,and,inthattome,hefound,oddlyenough,oneafteranother,allthenameshe
had heard ringing throughout the symphony. And it dawned on him that, “as rhythm is the basis of all
things,namesarethebasisofrhythm,”hencedecidingtowritehisbook.10Theentiretextconsistsof128
paragraphs.thefollowingofwhichisanexample:
In her very truly great manners of Johannes Brahms very heroically Sara Powell Haardt had
very allegorically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Clarence Day, Jr.,
JohnDonne,RuggieroLeoncavalo,JamesOwenHannay,GustavFrenssen,ThomasBeer,Joris
KarlHuysmansandFranzPeterSchubertverytitanically.11

When questioned about Sara, Mencken, Wolgamot said that he had spent a year or two composing
namesforthebook,butthattheconnectivesentence—theframeworkinwhichthenamesexist—tookhim
tenyearstowrite.WolgamotdescribedtocomposerRobertAshley(wholaterusedthetextasalibretto)
howheconstructedthesixtiethpageofthebook,whichliststhenamesofGeorgeMeredith,PaulGauguin,
Margaret Kennedy, Oland Russell, Harley Granville-Barker, Pieter Breughel, Benedetto Croce, and
WilliamSomersetMaugham:“Somersethasbothsummerandsetasinsun-set,andMaughamsoundslike
the name of a South Pacific Island, and Maugham wrote a biography of Gauguin, which name has both
‘go’and‘again’init,andOlandcouldbe‘Oh,land,’asailor’scry,andGranvillesoundsFrenchforabig
city,whichGauguinlefttogototheSouthPacific.”12
In1934,fiveyearsafterWolgamotbeganSara,Mencken,GertrudeSteindescribedthewayinwhich
she wrote the name-laden The Making of Americans “from the beginning until now and always in the
futurepoetrywillconcernitselfwiththenamesofthings.Thenamesmayberepeatedindifferentways…
butnowandalwayspoetryiscreatedbynamingnamesthenamesofsomethingthenamesofsomebodythe
namesofanything.…Thinkwhatyoudowhenyoudodothatwhenyoulovethenameofanythingreally
loveitsname.”13
Fully aware of this history, two Canadian writers, Darren Wershler and Bill Kennedy, have recently
fusedcompressedformswiththepowerofpropernames,givingitadigitalspin,intheirongoingwork
calledStatusUpdate.They’vebuiltadata-miningprogramthatcombssocialnetworkingsites,collecting

---

all users’ status updates. The engine then strips out the user’s name and replaces it randomly with the
nameofadeadwriter.TheresultreadslikeamashupofFénéon,Beckett,Markson,andWolgamot,all
filteredthroughtheinconsequentialvagariesofsocialnetworkingfeeds:
Kurt Tucholsky is on snow day number two.… what to do, what to do? Shel Silverstein is
gettin’inalittleTombRaidingbeforegoingintowork.LorineNiedeckeriscurrentlyenjoying
herveryshortbreak.JonathanSwifthasgottixtotheWranglersgametonight.ArthurRimbaud
foundawaytousetheword“buttress”aswell.14

The program authors the poem nonstop, constantly grabbing status updates as fast as they are written
and then automatically posts it to a homepage every two minutes. Each proper name on the page is
clickable,whichbringsyoutoanarchiveofthatauthor’sstatusupdates.IfIclick,forexample,onArthur
Rimbaud’sname,I’mbroughttotheRimbaudpage,anexcerptofwhichreads:
ArthurRimbaudisonagoofymusicalnostalgiatrip.ArthurRimbaudjustpickedupasweetold
studioconvertibletablefor10bucksatayardsaleroundthecorner.ArthurRimbaudisatthe
shop and assembling a window display with huge budding branches found at the side of the
road!ArthurRimbaudcanfinallylistentothewonderfulnessofvinyl!ArthurRimbaudwould
liketolearntoreadwhilesleeping.ArthurRimbaudissosleepy!ArthurRimbaudisrealizing
ifnotnowthenwhen?ArthurRimbaudiskindadrunkandpreparingforhisaccountant.15

At the bottom of the Rimbaud page is another feature, something that might have dreamed up by the
nineteenth-centuryspiritualistMadameBlavatsky,whohadapenchantforcommunicatingwiththedead,
had she the technology: “Arthur Rimbaud has an RSS feed. Subscribe now!” In a deliciously ironic
gesture, Wershler and Henry make these legends participate in the flotsam and jetsam of today’s online
life, pulling them down from their pedestals, forcing them against their will to join in the ruckus. What
StatusUpdatedoesissullytheauraoftheselegends,remindingusthatintheirownday,theytoowould
havebeenleftwonderingwhy“thecubiclegodsaremockinghiscleaned-updesk.”
WershlerandKennedyseemtobeemulatingwhatthemathematicianRudyRuckercallsa“lifebox,”16a
futuristic concept whereby one’s lifetime of accumulated data (status updates, tweets, e-mails, blog
entries,commentsonemadeonotherpeople’sblogs,etc.)willbecombinedwithpowerfulsoftwarethat
would permit the dead to converse with the living in a credible way. The digital theorist Matt Pearson
says,“Inshort,youcouldaskyourdeadgreat-grandmotheraquestionand,evenifshehadnotleftrecord
ofherthoughtsonthattopic,thekindofresponseonemightexpectfromhercouldbegenerated.…Itis
autobiography as a living construct. Our grandchildren will be able to enjoy the same quality of
relationshipwiththedeadasyoumightdonowwithyourwarmbodiedFacebook/Twitterchums.Andas
thesophisticationofsemantictoolsdevelop,thelifeboxcouldbecomecapableofcreatingfreshcontent
too,writingnewblogposts,orcopy-pastingtogethervideomessages.17Infact,Pearsonhadacoderbuild
arudimentarylifeboxofhislivingselfintheformofaTwitterfeed,18whichheclaims,“thisundeadclone
ofmemaynotbeascoherentorrelevant…butitsuresoundslikethekindofshiteIcomeoutwith.”19
(One self-referential tweet reads: “The contestants on Britains Got Talent are victims, toying with this
ideaIdecidedIdhaveagoatcreatingmyownrudimentarylifebox.”)20Certainlytheremustbeenough
datatrailscomingoffthedozensbookswrittenaboutRimbaud,hisreamsofcorrespondence,thepapers
writtenabouthim,andhispoetryaswelltoreanimatehiminasimilarlycrediblewaysometimeinthe
future.But,forthemoment,WershlerandKennedyareproppinguphiscorpseandforcinghimtojoinour
digitalworld,allofwhichistodrivehomethepointthatthese“ephemeral”wispsofdatamightnotbeso
ephemeral as we think. In fact, our future selves may be entirely constructed from them, forcing us to

---

perhapsthinkofsuchwritingasourlegacy.
An earlier Kennedy and Wershler electronic writing project has similar concerns. The Apostrophe
Engine also culls, organizes, and preserves chunks of language from the Internet, yet this program
unleashessmallerprogramstogooutandharvestlanguageenmasse,creatingwhatcouldbethelargest
poemeverwritten,anditwillkeeponbeingwrittenuntilsomeonepullstheplugonthehostingserver.
Thehomepageofthepieceisdeceptivelysimple.Itreproducesalistpoem,writtenbyBillKennedyin
1993, in which each line begins with the directive “you are.” Every line, it turns out, is clickable.
KennedyandWershlerexplainwhathappensnext:“Whenareader/writerclicksonaline,itissubmitted
toasearchengine,whichthenreturnsalistofWebpages,asinanysearch.TheApostropheEnginethen
spawns five virtual robots that work their way through the list, collecting phrases beginning with “you
are”andendinginaperiod.Therobotsstopaftercollectingasetnumberofphrasesorworkingthrougha
limitednumberofpages,whicheverhappensfirst.”
Next, The Apostrophe Engine records and spruces up the phrases that the robots have collected,
stripping away most HTML tags and other anomalies, then compiles the results and presents them as a
newpoem,withtheoriginallineasitstitle…andeachnewlineasanotherhyperlink.
At any given time, the online version of The Apostrophe Engine is potentially as large as the Web
itself.Thereader/writercancontinuetoburrowfurtherintothepoembyclickinganylineonanypage,
slidingmetonymicallythroughtheever-changingcontents.Moreover,becausethecontentsoftheWebis
always changing, so is the contents of the poem. The page it returns today will not be the page that it
returnsnextweek,nextmonth,ornextyear.21
Theresultisalivingpoem,beingwrittenastheInternetisbeingwritten,completelyparsedbyrobots
whichcontinuestogrowevenifnooneisreadingit.LikeStatusUpdate,it’sanepicoflanguagewritin
shortbursts,aMarksoniancompendium,thenatureofwhichisexactlywhatWershlerandKennedyare
exploiting:
Thecatalogueisaformthatstruggleswithexcess.Itsjobistobereductive,tosqueezeallthe
possibilities that a world of information has to offer into a definitive set.… Its poetic effect,
however, is the exact opposite. A catalogue opens up a poem to the threat of a surfeit of
information,feltmostkeenlywhenthereaderwonders,politely,“Howlongcanthisgoon?”It
can,infact,goonforaverylongtime.In1993,whenthefullimplicationsofthenascentWorld
WideWebwereonlybeginningtooccurtous,thecatalogueanditsparadoxicalstruggleswere
alreadybecomingtheforumforaddressingthefearthatweareproducingtextataratebeyond
ourcollectiveabilitytoreadit.22

But what happens when this dynamically generated text is bound and frozen between the covers of a
book?WershlerandKennedypublishedaselectionof279pages,andtheresultisaverydifferentproject.
In the book’s afterword, the authors make a disclaimer that they have massaged the texts for maximum
effectinprint:“TheApostropheEnginehasmeddledwiththewritingofothers,andweinturnhavedone
the same with its writing.… The engine provided us with an embarrassment of riches, an abundance of
rawmaterial,beautifulandbanalatonceandbyturns.”23
Raw material is right. Here’s an excerpt of what The Apostrophe Engine on the Web returns to me
whenIclickontheline,“youaresobeautifultome,”takenfromJoeCocker’shitpopsong:
you are so beautiful (to me) hello, you either have javascript turned off or an old version of
adobe’sflashplayer•youaresobeautifultome306,638viewstxmladded1:43kathieleeisa
creep 628,573 views everythingisterrible added2:39 you are so beautiful 1,441,432 views
caiyixianadded0:37reptileeyes•youaresobeautiful(tome)0•youaresobeautiful79,971

---

views konasdad added0:49 before • you are so beautiful to me 19,318 views walalain
added2:45escapethefate—youaresobeautiful469,552viewsdarknearhomeadded2:46sad
slowsongs:joecocker—youaresobeautif•youarealreadyamember•youaresobeautiful
(nearly unplugged) hello, you either have javascript turned off or an old version of adobe’s
flash player • you are so beautiful 1,443,749 views caiyixian featured video added4:48 joe
cocker~you are so beautiful (live at montre • you are so beautiful 331,136 views jozy90
added2:32 zucchero canta “you are so beautiful” 196,481 views lavocedinarciso added3:50
joecockermaddogs—crymeariver1970777,970viewsscampi99added5:18joecocker—
whitershadeofpalelive389,420viewsdookofoilsadded4:49joecocker—n’oubliezjamais
755,731viewsneoandreaadded5:22pattilabelle&joecocker-youaresobeautiful•youare
thebestthitwasveryexiting>akirasovan(5daysago)showhide0markedasspamreplymad
braindamage

It’s a rambling mess: the signal to noise ratio is very low. Yet, in print, an excerpt from the same
passageisaverydifferentanimal:
youaresobeautiful•youaresobeautiful•youaresobeautiful•youaresobeautifulartist:
Babyface•youaresobeautiful•youaresobeautiful,yesyouaretomeyouaresobeautiful
youaretomecan’tyousee?•youaresobeautifulthelyricsarethepropertyoftheirrespective
authors,artistsandlabels•youaresobeautiful•youaresobeautifulartist:RayCharles•you
aresobeautiful•youaresobeautiful•youaresobeautifultome•youaresobeautiful•you
aresobeautiful•youaresobeautiful•youaresobeautiful•youaresobeautifultomeee•you
aresobeautiful,wouldyouplease24

Thespacinghasbeennormalized,thenumbershavebeentakenout,thedeadlineshavebeenremoved;
it’s been heavily edited to good effect. The printed edition reads gorgeously, full of jagged musical
repetitionsrhythms,likeGertrudeSteinorChristopherKnowles’slibrettofortheoperaEinsteinonthe
Beach.Andthere’scarefulplacementofdifferenttypesofcontentsuchasthecopyrightwarning,which
comescrashingdownjustasyouarelulledbytherhythmsoftherepeatingphrases.Thetwo“boldfaced”
propernames,BabyfaceandRayCharles,eachwithanidenticalprecedingphrase—“youaresobeautiful
artist”—are placed far enough apart so as not to interfere with one another, resulting in a perfectly
balancedtext.
Whilethecomputerhasharvestedtherawmaterialforthepoem,it’stheauthorialhandofWershlerand
Kennedythatwranglesthebeautyoutofthesurplustext,makingforamoreconventionalrenditionofthe
work, one predicated upon a skilled editorial hand. Yet the page-bound version lacks the ability to
surprise,grow,andcontinuallyreinventitselfthesamewaytherougherWebversiondoes.Whatemerges,
then,inthesetwoversionsisabalancethatembracesboththemachineandtheprintedbook;therawtext
and the manipulated; the infinite and the known, showing us two ways of expressing contemporary
language,neitheroneofwhichcanbecrowneddefinitive.
Having a computer write poems for you is old hat. What’s new is that, like Wershler and Kennedy,
writersarenowexploitingthelanguage-basedsearchenginesandsocialnetworkingsitesassourcetext.
Having a stand-alone program that can generate whimsical poems on your computer feels quaint
comparedtothespewofthemassivewordgeneratorsoutthereontheWeb,tappingintoourcollective
mind.
Sometimesthatmindisn’tsopretty.TheFlarfCollectivehasbeenintentionallyscouringGoogleforthe
worstresultsandreframingitaspoetry.IfpeopleclaimthattheInternetisnothingmorethantheworld’s
greatestlinguisticrubbishheap,comprisedofflamewars,Viagraads,andspam,thenFlarfexploitsthis

---

contemporary condition by reframing all that trash into poetry. And the well is bottomless. The Wall
Street Journal, in a profile of Flarf, described their writing methodology: “Flarf is a creature of the
electronic age. The flarf method typically involves using word combinations turned up in Google
searches,andpoemsareoftensharedviaemail.WhenonepoetpennedapieceafterGoogling‘peace’+
‘kitty,’ another responded with a poem after searching ‘pizza’ + ‘kitty.’ A 2006 reading of it has been
viewedmorethan6,700timesonYouTube.Itstartslikethis:‘KittygoesPostal/WantsPizza.’”25
What began as a group of people submitting poems to a poetry.com online contest—they created the
absolutely worst poems they could and were naturally rejected—snowballed into an aesthetic, which
FlarfcofounderGarySullivandescribesas“Akindofcorrosive,cute,orcloyingawfulness.Wrong.Un-
P.C.Outofcontrol.‘Notokay.’”26TypicalofaFlarfpoemisNadaGordon’s“UnicornBelieversDon’t
DeclareFatwas.”Anexcerptreads:
Oddlyenough,thereisa
“UnicornPleasureRing”inexistence.
ResearchrevealsthatHitlerlifted
theinfamousswastikafromaunicorn
emergingfromacolorfulrainbow.

Nazitounicorn:“You’renotcoming
outwithmedressedinthatridiculous
outfit.”Youcanfinallytellyourdaughter
thatunicornsarereal.Onerippedtheheadoff
awaxworkofAdolfHitler,policesaid.

April22isaniceday.Ireallylikeit.
Imeanit’snotasfantasticasthathitler
unicornassbutit’sprettyspecialtome.
CREAMINGbaldeaglethereisatinyAbe
LincolnboxingatinyHitler.MAGICUNICORNS

“You’rereallyaunicorn?”“Yes.No
kissmyfeet.”Hitlerasagreatman.
Hitler…mmyeah,Hitler,Hitler,Hitler,
Hitler,Hitler,Hitler.…Germanfoodissobad,
evenHitlerwasavegetarian,justlikeaunicorn.27

By scouring online forums and arcane cult sites, Gordon uses the debased vernacular of the Web to
create a poem whose language is eerily close to her sources. Yet her selection of words and images
revealthistobeacarefullyconstructedapoem,showingusthattherearrangementoffoundlanguage—
evenasnastyandlowasthis—canbealchemizedintoart.Butinordertomakesomethinggreatoutof
horrible materials, you’ve got to choose well. Flarf’s cofounder, K. Silem Mohammad, dubbed Flarf a
kind of “sought” poetry, as opposed to “found” poetry, because its makers are actively and constantly
engaged in the act of text mining. In Gordon’s poem, every hot button is purposefully pushed, from the
cheesyimagetothecliché:fatwas,abortions,andHitler’sbirthday;nothingisoff-limits.Insomeways,
Flarftakesitshistoricalcuesfromthecoterie-basedpoeticsoftheNewYorkschool,whosepoemswere

---

filled with in-jokes intended for their friends. In Flarf’s case, many of its poems are posted onto its
privatelistserv,whichare,inturn,remixedandrecycledbythegroupintoendlesschainpoemsbasedon
Internetspew,whicharethenpostedbackontotheWebforotherstomangle,shouldtheychoose.Butthe
New York school—for all their ideas of “low” and “kitsch”—never went as far as Flarf in their
indulgencein“bad”taste.
Flarf, by using disingenuous subjectivity, never really believes in what it’s saying, but it’s saying it
anyway,acutelyscrapingthebottomoftheculturalbarrelwithsuchprescience,precision,andsensitivity
that we are forced to reevaluate the nature of the language engulfing us. Our first impulse is to flee, to
deny its worth, to turn away from it, to write it off as a big joke; but, like Warhol’s “Car Crashes” or
“Electric Chairs,” we are equally entranced, entertained, and repulsed. It’s a double-edged sword that
Flarf holds to our necks, forcing us to look at ourselves in the blade’s reflection with equal doses of
swooning narcissism and white-knuckled fear, and in this way is typical of the mixed reactions our
literaryengagementwiththesenewtechnologiesengenders.FlarfandWershler/Kennedy’spracticesposit
twodifferentsolutionsforhowpoetsmightgoaboutcreatingnewandoriginalworksatatimewhenmost
peoplearedrowningintheamountofinformationbeingthrownatthem.Theyproposethat,initsdebased
andrandomform,thelanguagegeneratedbytheWebisafarrichersourcematerial—ripeforreframing,
remixing,andreprogramming—thananythingwecouldeverinvent.

---

10THEINVENTORYANDTHEAMBIENT

The impulse to obsessively catalog the minutiae of “real life” spans from Boswell’s descriptions of
Johnson’s breakfasts to tweeting what you ate for breakfast. And with increased storage capacity and
morepowerfuldatabasesemergingallthetime,technologyseemstobearousingthedormantarchivistin
allofus.The“datacloud”—thoseunlimitedcapacityserversoutthereintheether,accessibletousfrom
anywhere on the globe—and its interfaces encourage an “archive” function over a “delete” function.1
Whilemuchofthismaterialisbeingarchivedformarketingpurposes,writersasalreadydiscussed,are
alsoplunderingthesevastwarehousesoftexttocreateworksofliterature—notsomuchusingitasraw
materialfromwhichtocrafttheirnextnovels,butrathertomanageandreshapethem.Stillotherwriters
arenotsomuchminingthesegobsoftextsastheyareexploringthefunctionofthearchiveasitappliesto
theconstructionofliteraryworks.ThesesortsofworksareclosertotheambientmusicofBrianEnothan
they are to conventional writing, encouraging a textual immersion rather than a linear reading of them.
Uncreative writing allows for a new type of writing about ourselves: call it oblique autobiography. By
inventoryingthemundane—whatweeatandwhatweread—weleaveatrailthatcansayasmuchabout
ourselvesasamoretraditionaldiaristicapproach,leavingroomenoughforthereadertoconnectthedots
andconstructnarrativesinaplethoraofways.
Some stories are so profoundly moving as they are that any sort of creative gloss or enhancement
serves to lessen their impact. Take the best-selling novel Angel at the Fence written by Herman
Rosenblat. In this work Rosenblat tells of meeting his future wife Roma when he was imprisoned as a
child in a concentration camp and she tossed him apples over the fence, helping him to survive.
AccordingtoRosen-blat,theymetbyhappenstanceyearslaterinConeyIsland,realizedtheirhistory,got
married, and lived happily ever after. Rosenblat appeared twice on Oprah, who called the book “the
singlegreatestlovestory”shehadencounteredinhertwenty-twoyearsontheshow.Aftermuchfanfare,
hispublishercanceledthememoirwhenhelearneditwasfalse.Intheaftermath,Rosenblatwrote,“Inmy
dreams,Romawillalwaysthrowmeanapple,butInowknowitisonlyadream.”2
Deborah E. Lipstadt, a professor of Jewish and Holocaust studies at Emory University, upon hearing
that yet another Holocaust memoir was falsified, said, “There’s no need to embellish, no need to
aggrandize.Thefactsarehorrible,andwhenyou’reteachingabouthorriblestuffyoujusthavetolayout
thefacts.”3
Lipstadt’s sentiments echo—in a very different way and context—something many writers have
proposedoverthepastcentury:thattheunembellishedlifeismoreprofoundlymovingandcomplexthan
mostfictioncanconjure.Popularculturegivesusasimilarmessagefromadifferentangle:overthepast
decade,witnesstheriseandrelentlessdominationofrealitytelevisionovertheconstructedsitcom.And,
fromthelooksofit,ouronlinelivesareheadedinthesamedirectionthroughobsessivedocumentationof
our lives. From the early days of webcams to today’s rapid-fire Twitter blasts, we’ve constructed and
projected certain notions of who we are through a process of accumulating seemingly insignificant and
ephemeral gestures, fashioning identities that might or might not have something to do with who we
actuallyare.We’vebecomeautobiographersofanobsessivenature,but,justasmuch,we’vealsobecome
biographersofothers,collectingscoresofminutefactsandimpressionsonwhomeverwechoosetofocus
ourlens.Tributepages,fansites,andWikipediaentriesoneventhemostmarginalpersonsorendeavors

---

continuallyaccumulate,linebyline,alladdinguptoanobsessionwithdetailandbiographythatrivals
Boswell’sLifeofJohnson.4
Boswell in many ways both mirrors and predicts our contemporary linguistic condition. His massive
tome is an accumulation of bits and pieces of the quotidian ephemera: letters, observations, patches of
dialogue, and descriptions of daily life. The text is an unstable one because of Boswell’s excessive
footnoting and Mrs. Thrale’s marginalia rebutting and correcting Boswell’s subjectively flawed
observations. And Thrale’s comments are not just appended to the main body of the text; she also
annotatesBoswell’sminutiae-ladenfootnotes,someofwhichtakeupthree-quartersofthepage.Thebook
feelsTalmudicinitsmultithreadedconversationsandglosses.It’sadynamictextualspacereminiscentof
today’s Web, with built-in feedback and response systems. It also has some of the same cacophonous
dilemmasofonlinespace.ThespectatorsportofJohnson’slifeinsomewaystrumpsthesubject.
Boswell’sJohnsoncanbereadcovertocover,butit’sjustasgoodtakeninsmallchunks,bybouncing
around skimming, grazing, or parsing. I recall, in the early days of the Web, a friend lamenting that he
reads so “carelessly” online, that he’s more curious to get to the next click than he is in engaging in a
deeperwaywiththetext.It’sacommoncry:wedotendtoreadmorehorizontallyonline.ButTheLifeof
SamuelJohnson,LL.D.isareminderfrommorethantwocenturiesagothatnotalltextsdemandastrictly
linearreading.OnceBoswellactuallymeetsupwithhissubject,there’snorealnarrativethrustotherthan
chronological, ending with Johnson’s death. You can dip in and out without worrying about losing the
threadthewayyoumightinamoreconventionallywrittenbiography.Runningyoureyesacrossthepages
—skimming—you haul in gems of knowledge while experiencing fleeting ephemeral moments that have
beenrenderedtimeless.Yetthere’salotofchaff,suchasthisfrivolousinstanceBoswellpens,deepinto
Johnson’sseventy-fourthyear:“InevershallforgettheindulgencewithwhichhetreatedHodge,hiscat;
forwhomhehimselfusedtogooutandbuyoysters,(a)lesttheservants,havingthattrouble,shouldtakea
disliketothepoorcreature.(b)”5Likeacommenteronablog,HesterThraleinthemargins,chimesin:“(a)
IusedtojokehimforgettingValeriantoamuseHodgeinhislastHours.(b) no, it was lest they should
considerhimasdegradingHumanitybysettingaMantowaituponabeast.”6
In another example, this not particularly profound conversation about wine feels like the meandering
improviseddialoguefromanAndyWarholfilm:
SPOTTISWOODE.So,Sir,wineisakeywhichopensabox;butthisboxmaybeeitherfullor
empty?JOHNSON.Nay,Sir,conversationisthekey:wineisapick-lock,whichforcesopen
the box and inures it. A man should cultivate his mind so as to have that confidence and
readinesswithoutwine,whichwinegives.BOSWELL.Thegreatdifficultyofresistingwineis
from benevolence. For instance, a good worthy man asks you to taste his wine, which he has
hadtwentyyearsinhiscellar.JOHNSON.Sir,allthisnotionaboutbenevolencearisesfroma
man’simagininghimselftobeofmoreimportancetoothers,thanhereallyis.Theydon’tcarea
farthingwhetherhedrinkswineornot.SIRJOSHUAREYNOLDS.Yes,theydoforthetime.
JOHNSON.Forthetime!—Iftheycarethisminute,theyforgetitthenext.7

It’sthroughthesesmallandseeminglyinsignificantdetailsthatBoswellisabletobuildaconvincing
portrait of Johnson’s life and genius. Boswell’s strength is information management. He’s got a great
sense balance, mixing throwaways with keepers. The text has a leveling quality—profound with
insignificant, eternal with quotidian—that is very much the way our attention (and lives) tend to be:
dividedandmultithreaded.In1938TheMonthlyLetteroftheLimitedEditionsClubaskedofBoswell,
“What,however,hastheLifetoofferatwentiethcenturyreader?”Andintheparlanceoftheday,itgoes
ontoascribeconventionalvaluetothepresumedprofundityofthebook,sayingthat“theLifehasanapt
word or phrase for everything” and that it is “at once intimately personal and classically universal.”8

---

Morethanseventyyearslater,Ithinkwecanaskthesamequestion:“WhathastheLifetoofferatwenty-
firstcenturyreader?”andgetacompletelydifferentanswer,oneintimatelyconnectedtothewaywelive
today.9
There’ssomethingaboutinventorythatfeelscontemporary.Whenthegraphicuserinterfaceemerged,
therewasasenseamongmanythat“noweverybodyisagraphicdesigner.”Withtheever-increasingpush
ofinformationandmaterialflowingthroughournetworks,we’vebecomelikekidsinacandystore:we
wantitall.And,sinceit’smostlyfree,wegrabit.Asaresult,we’vehadtolearnhowtostorethings,
organizethem,andtagthemforquickrecall.Andwe’vebecomeverygoodatit.Thisethoshasseeped
into every aspect of our lives; offline, too, we find ourselves meticulously gathering and organizing
informationasawayofbeingintheworld.CarolineBergvall,atrilingualpoetlivinginLondon,recently
decided to inventory the opening lines of all the British Library’s translations of Dante’s Inferno. She
claimsthattheactoftranslatingDantehasbecome“somethingofaculturalindustry.”Infact,bythetime
shefinishedcollectingherversions—therewereforty-eightinall—twonewtranslationshadreachedthe
library’sshelves.Bergvallexplainsherprocess:“Mytaskwasmostlyandrathersimply,orsoitseemed
at first, to copy each first tercet as it appeared in each published version of the Inferno. To copy it
accurately. Surprisingly, more than once, I had to go back to the books to double-check and amend an
entry, publication data, a spelling. Checking each line, each variation, once, twice. Increasingly, the
projectwasaboutkeepingcountandmakingsure.ThatwhatIwascopyingwaswhatwasthere.Notto
inadvertentlychangewhathadbeenprinted.Toreproduceeachtranslativegesture.Toaddmyvoiceto
thischorus,tothisrecitation,onlybywayofthistask.Makingcopyexplicitasanactofcopy.”10
Here’sanexcerptfromBergvall’s“Via:48DanteVariations”:
Nelmezzodelcammindinostravita
miritrovaiperunaselvaoscura
cheladirittaviaerasmarrita
TheDivineComedy-Pt.1Inferno—CantoI-
1.
Alongthejourneyofourlifehalfway
Ifoundmyselfagaininadarkwood
whereinthestraightroadnolongerlay
(Dale,1996)
2.
Atthemidpointinthejourneyofourlife
Ifoundmyselfastrayinadarkwood
Forthestraightpathhadvanished.
(CreaghandHollander,1989)
3.
HALFoverthewayfaringofourlife,
Sincemissedtherightway,throughanight-dark-wood
Struggling,Ifoundmyself.
(Musgrave,1893)
4.
Halfwayalongtheroadwehavetogo,

---

Ifoundmyselfobscuredinagreatforest,
Bewildered,andIknewIhadlosttheway.
(Sisson,1980)
5.
Halfwayalongthejourneyofourlife
Iwokeinwonderinasunlesswood
ForIhadwanderedfromthenarrowway
(Zappulla,1998)11

AsimpleactofinventorybeliesthesubjectivityoftranslationastheimmortalwordsofDanteareup
for grabs. Through re-presentation, Bergvall transforms the tercets into a permutational poem or an
Oulipian N+7 style exercise, which replaces each noun in a text with the seventh one following it in a
dictionary). We move from a “dark wood” to a “night-dark-wood” to a “great forest” to a “sunless
wood”; or “journey of our life halfway” to “midpoint in the journey of our life” to “ HALF over the
wayfaringofourlife”to“Halfwayalongtheroadwehavetogo”and“Halfwayalongthejourneyofour
life.”Eachphraseusesmetaphor,allusion,sentencestructure,andwordinessinentirelydifferentways.
By doing very little, Bergvall reveals so very much. In any other context, such a list would be used to
demonstratetheintricacies,vagaries,andsubjectivityinvolvedintheactoftranslation.And,althoughall
those concerns are part and parcel of this work, to stop there would be to miss the greater point that
Bergvallherselfisactingasasortoftranslatorbysimplyrecastingpreexistingtextsintoanewpoemthat
isentirelyherown.
ThepoetTanLincompliesinformationintowhathecalls“ambientstylistics,”whichcanbelikenedto
the“nonlistening”ofErikSatie’s“FurnitureMusic.”InthemidstofanartopeningataParisgalleryin
1902,ErikSatieandhiscronies,afterbeggingeveryoneinthegallerytoignorethem,brokeoutintowhat
they called “Furniture Music”—that is, background music—music as wallpaper, music to be purposely
not listened to. The patrons of the gallery, thrilled to see musicians performing in their midst, ceased
talkingandpolitelywatched,despiteSatie’sfranticeffortstogetthemtopaynoattention.ForSatieitwas
the first of several gestures paving the way toward “listening” by “not listening,” culminating in his
“Vexations,” a strange little 3-minute piano piece. It’s only a single page of music but it has the
instructions“toberepeated840times”scrawledonit.Foryearsithadbeenwrittenoffasamusicaljoke
—a performance of the piece would take approximately 20 hours—an impossible, not to mention
tediouslyboring,task.JohnCage,however,tookitseriouslyandgave“Vexations”itsfirstperformancein
NewYorkin1963.Tenpianistsworkingin2-hourshiftsconqueredthepiece,whichlasted18hoursand
40 minutes. Cage later explained how performing “Vexations” affected him: “In other words, I had
changed, and the world had changed.… It wasn’t an experience I alone had, but other people who had
been in it wrote to me or called me up and said that they had had the same experience.”12 What they
experienced was a new idea of time and narrative in music, one predicated upon extreme duration and
stasis instead of the traditional movements of a symphony, which were aimed for great formal and
emotionalimpactandvariety.Instead,“Vexations”tookonamoreEasternquality,belatedlyjoiningragas
andotherextendedformsthatwerebeingembracedbyWesterncomposersintheearlysixtiesandwould
goontoformminimalism,thedominantcompositionalmodeforthenexttwodecades.
Satie and Cage’s gestures were picked up by Brian Eno some seventy-five years later when he
described his concept of ambient music: “An ambience is defined as an atmosphere, or a surrounding
influence:atint.Myintentionistoproduceoriginalpiecesostensibly(butnotexclusively)forparticular
times and situations with a view to building up a small but versatile catalogue of environmental music
suitedtoawidevarietyofmoodsandatmospheres.”13

---

Linwantstocreateaspaceforinnovativewritingthatisrelaxing,notdemanding,tothepointwherehe
envisionsawritingenvironmentwhereliteratureexistswithouthavingtobereadatall:“Agoodpoemis
veryboring.…Inaperfectworldallsentences,eventheoneswewritetoourlovedones,themailmanor
our interoffice memos, would have that overall sameness, that sense of an average background, a fluid
structure in spite of the surface disturbances and the immediate incomprehension. The best sentences
should lose information at a relatively constant rate. There should be no ecstatic moments of
recognition.”14
The idea of making a text intentionally flat and boring flies in the face of everything we’ve come to
expectfrom“good”literature.HisprojectAmbientFictionReadingSystem01:AListofThingsIRead
Didn’t Read and Hardly Read for Exactly One Year15 took the form of a blog documenting each day’s
intakeortextualgrazing.Here’sanexcerptfromTuesday,August22,2006,whichbegins:
10:08–15 HOME OFFICE NYT From Their Own Online World, Pedophiles Extend Their
Reach
10:15–23PakistanisFindUSanEasierFitthanBritain
10:24–26nytimes.comEditorialObserver;TheTelevisionHasDisintegrated.Allthat’sLeftis
theViewer
10:28–31APoliceCarwithPlentyofMuscle
10:31–4NowtheMusicIndustrywantsGuitariststoStopSharing
10:50–6CodePromotions,AMadisonAveStaple,areGoingOnline
10:57–07 The Tragic Drama of a Broken City, Complete with Heroes and Villains When the
LeveesBroke
11:09–15HelpingFledglingPoetsSoarwithConfidence
11:15–12:16AOLActsonReleaseofData
11:59wikipedia“abdurchowdhury”
12:16–23 Rohaytn Will Take Lehman Post “I remember the first time I cam into contact with
them.IwascarryingAdrenMeyer’sbriefcaseintoameetingwithBobbyLehmaninthemid-
1950’s.Theyhadsixdesks.I’vealwayshadayenforthem.”
12:23–5wikipedia“rohatyn”“greenberg”
12:25style.com“greenberg”
12:25–33WhatOrganizationsDon’tWanttoKnowCanHurt
12:34TowerRecordswillAuctionitsAssets
12:34–57WebSurfinginPublicPlacesisaWaytoCourtTrouble

Whatappearstobeabanallistofthingsheread—ordidn’tread—withsomeinvestigationrevealsa
wealth of autobiographical narrative and sheds light on the act of consuming, archiving, and moving
information.Linbeginshisdayat10:08inhishomeofficewhereheskimstheday’snews.Thefirstthing
hereadsisastoryabouthowpedophilesarecolonizingtheonlinespace.Thestorysaysthat“theyswap
stories about day-to-day encounters with minors. And they make use of technology to help take their
argumentstoothers.”16WehavenowayofknowingifLinisreadingthisinthepaperversionoronline,
but since he’s blogging about it or entering his meanderings into a word processing document, we can
prettymuchassumethatheisonthecomputer.Inasense—withoutthepedophilia,ofcourse—thisarticle
describesLin’ssituation.Sittingathiscomputer,heissimultaneouslyreadingandwriting,consumingand
redistributing, creating and disseminating information, “mak[ing] use of technology to help take [his]
argumentstoothers.”Minustheluridconnotations,wecouldeasilyreimaginethetitleofthisexcerptto
be“FromHisOnlineWorld,TanLinExtendsHisReach.”

---

By10:24,heisdefinitelyonline:“TheTelevisionHasDisintegrated.AllThat’sLeftIstheViewer”is
a folksy mediation on how our digital technology has supplanted the functional simplicity of the old
analogtelevisionset.Withonewindowcrackedtonytimes.comandanotheropenforblogentries,Linis
enactingthedilemmaputforthinthearticle,whichwaspublishedintheshrinkingpaperversionofthe
NewYorkTimesbutreadonlinebyLinatnytimes.com.
Immersedinthescreen,Lincontinuestoreadabouttheerosionofoldmediadistributionfrom10:31–
10:34in“NowtheMusicIndustryWantsGuitariststoStopSharing.”Thearticle,whichisstillonlineat
theNewYorkTimessite,is1,500wordslong.Quicklyreadingorskimming,it’sentirelyplausiblethatLin
readthisarticleduringthetimehesaidhedid.Yetamuchshorterarticleofonly920words,whichtakes
sixminutestoread,“HelpingFledglingPoetsSoarwithConfidence,”isabookreviewwheretheauthor
claims“poetryisaprimalimpulsewithinusall,”which,again,Linisalsoenactingbychurningtheday’s
newsintoliterature.
MuchofLin’sworkisaboutthecomplexitiesofidentity,andhenaturallyisdrawntowardthearticle
“AOLActsonReleaseofData”whichisaboutadatascandalatAOLwheretheidentitiesofmanyusers
were exposed. Coincidentally, that same AOL leak forms the basis of Thomas Claburn’s book-length
piece,ifeelbetterafteritypetoyou,whereherepublishedallthedataofoneuser.AsClaburnexplains:
Within the third of the ten files of user search queries AOL mistakenly released (user-ct-test-
collection-03), there’s a poem of sorts. Between May 7 and May 31 of this year, AOL user
23187425 submitted a series of more than 8,200 queries with no evident intention of finding
anything—only a handful of the entries are paired with a search results URL. Rather, the
author’sseriesofqueriesformsastream-of-consciousnesssoliloquy.
Whether it’s fact or fiction, confession or invention, the search monologue is strangely
compelling. It’s a uniquely temporal literary form in that the server time stamps make the
passageoftimeintegraltothestorytelling.Itcouldbethebeginningofanewgenreofwriting,
orsimplyanaberration.Butitdoesbegfurtherexplanation.Whatcircumstancespromptedthe
authortoconversethuswithAOL’ssearchengine?17

Claburn’spoemlookseerilylikeLin’s:

Tuesday1:25am
2006–05–0901:25:15breakin
2006–05–0901:26:00josephihaveaquestion
2006–05–0901:27:27alltheyearswhydidyouworkoutofdelphi
2006–05–0901:28:36couldhavegonetodetriot
2006–05–0901:29:40whyyoumakedelphiketteringyourbase
2006–05–0901:30:09yourbase
2006–05–0901:31:13joewhy
2006–05–0901:31:56youchoosekettering
2006–05–0901:33:01hadopportunity
2006–05–0901:33:26toleave
2006–05–0901:34:19starttherebutcouldhaveleft
2006–05–0901:34:54knowyoustartedtherebutcouldhaveleft
2006–05–0901:35:28whydidyoustay
2006–05–0901:36:14butwhy

---

2006–05–0901:37:46causeofme
2006–05–0901:38:48lastsawyoubicycle
2006–05–0901:39:31whydidn’tyoutellmewhoyouwere
2006–05–0901:41:07wasnottotellme
2006–05–0901:41:47orders
2006–05–0901:42:38jtorder
2006–05–0901:43:59wasthinking
2006–05–0901:44:38onlinetoask
2006–05–0901:45:17noonewouldtellme
2006–05–0901:46:11meanno
2006–05–0901:47:45toldofeveryoneelse
2006–05–0901:48:20kellerlikeyou
2006–05–0901:48:44allthrash
2006–05–0901:49:24toldofthem
2006–05–0901:50:27wasn’tmytype
2006–05–0901:50:49wasnotmytype
2006–05–0901:51:32mytypeisrare18

In the same way that Lin tracks his reading habits and, by association, his mental patterns, Clauburn
tracks “AOL User 23187425.” Our digital footprint, when rendered visible by data trails, makes for
compelling narrative, psychological and autobiographical literature, proving once again that, incisively
framed,“meredata”isanythingbutbanal.
WhenTanLinreadsabouttheAOLleak,hecameacrossthenameAbdurChowdhury,aprofessorwho
was the source of the leak. At 11:59, he most likely opens another browser window and looks up the
Wikipedia entry for “Abdur Chowdhury,” for which no page is found. The Times article claims that
“nearly20milliondiscretesearchqueries,representingthepersonalInternethuntinghabitsofmorethan
650,000 AOL customers gathered over a three-month period last spring, were posted by a company
researcher, Abdur Chowdhury, on a publicly accessible Web site late last month.”19 One presumes that
suchafigurewouldbeofinteresttoLin,whoclaims,“Reading,inaweb-basedenvironment,crossesinto
writing,publication,distribution,andmarketing.IsaTwitterfeedaformofpublication?orisitwriting?
orisitdistributionthatis‘pulled’byreaderswho‘subscribe’?Itwouldseemtobeacombinationandthe
lines between these practices is less rigid than with a book where writing and publication are distinct
temporallyandasentities.EventagsusedbyTwitterersdon’tnecessarilyidentifytheauthorbyname.”20
Sowhatdoesthisalladdupto?Whatlooksatfirstglancetobeamassofrandominformationis,in
fact,multidimensionalandautobiographical.Andit’salsomostlyverifiable.Thosearticlesdoexist,and
thecorrespondenttimesgenerallymakesense.Inshort,wemustconcludethatthisisnotaworkoffiction
andthatLinreallydidreadwhathedidandwhenhedidoverthecourseofayear.Takencumulatively,
this is a fairly accurate portrait of Tan Lin, a different type of autobiography, accurately describing
himselfandhiscircumstances,withoutonceeverhavingusedthepronounI.
In1974,GeorgesPerec,theOulipianwriter,wroteaworkthataskedsimilarquestions.Hecompileda
massive Rabelaisian piece, “Attempt at an Inventory of the Liquid and Solid Foodstuffs Ingurgitated by
MeintheCourseoftheYearNineteenHundredandSeventy-Four,”whichbegins
Ninebeefconsommé,oneicedcucumbersoup,onemusselsoup.
Two Guéndouilles, one jellied andouillette, one Italian charcuterie, one cervelas sausage,
four assorted charcuteries, one coppa, three pork platters, one figatelli, one foie gras, one
fromagedetêe,oneboar’shead,fiveParmahams,eightpâté,oneduckpâtéonepâtéefoiewith

---

truffles, one pâté croûe, one pâtérand-mèe, one thrush pâté six pâté des Landes, four brawns,
one foie gras mousse, one pig’s trotters, seven rillettes, one salami, two saucissons, one hot
saucisson,oneduckterrine,onechickenliverterrine.

andendsfivepageslater:
Fifty-six Armagnacs, one Bourbon, eight Calvadoses, one cherries in brandy, six Green
Chartreuses,oneChivas,fourcognacs,oneDelamaincognac,twoGrandMarniers,onepink-
gin,oneIrishcoffee,oneJackDaniel’s,fourmarcs,threeBugeymarcs,onemarcdeProvence,
oneplumliqueur,nineSouillacplums,oneplumsinbrandy,twoWilliamspears,oneport,one
slivovitz,oneSuz,thirty-sixvodkas,fourwhiskies.
Ncoffees
onetisane
threeVichywaters21

Perec’s inventory is a massive indulgence in the pleasure principle, creating a portrait based on the
clichéyouarewhatyoueat.Orperhapsnot.Takenasautobiography,iffoodanddrinkcanbesignifiers
ofclassandeconomicstatus,thenwecangleanalotfromthislistabouttheauthor.Buttheproblemis
that,eventhoughtheworkrecountswhatPerechimselfate,wehavenoverificationofit.And,ifyouthink
about it, quantifying exactly what you ate over the course of a year is almost impossible. In the text he
claimstohaveconsumed“onemilk-fedlamb.”Howmuchofthatlambdidheactuallyeat?Classstatus
mightbecomemoretraceablewhenwinesarementioned,forinstance,“oneSaint-Emilion’61.”There’s
no vintner mentioned, and, if we look up the price of that wine today, it goes anywhere from $220 to
$10,000. While it would have been considerably less in 1974, how are we to know that this isn’t just
fantasy,animpoverishedwriterdreamingofgreatluxuries?It’sentirelyconceivablethatPerecsatdown
andinventedthisinventoryinonedrunkeneveningathisdeskinhismodestflat.We’llneverknow.And
yet,intheend,whatdoesitmatterifPerecistellingthetruthornot?Whileit’sfuntotrytosleuthout
Perec’sclaims,I’mmoreintriguedbytheideathatsomeonewouldtrytoquantifyeverythingtheyatefora
year and present it as a nearly fourteen-hundred-word list of food as a work of literature, rich with
sociological,gastronomical,andeconomicimplications.LikeBergvallorLin,Perecpayscloseattention
toandisolatessmalldetails,creatingamassiveinventoryofephemeralexperiencewherebythesumis
clearlygreaterthantheparts.

---

11UNCREATIVEWRITINGINTHECLASSROOM
ADisorientation

In2004,Ibeganteachingaclasscalled“UncreativeWriting”attheUniversityofPennsylvania.Isensed
that the textual changes that I was noticing in the digital landscape as a result of intensive online
engagement was going to be echoed by a younger generation who had never known anything but this
environment.Thisisthecoursedescription:
It’s clear that long-cherished notions of creativity are under attack, eroded by file-sharing,
mediaculture,widespreadsampling,anddigitalreplication.Howdoeswritingrespondtothis
new environment? This workshop will rise to that challenge by employing strategies of
appropriation,replication,plagiarism,piracy,sampling,plundering,ascompositionalmethods.
Along the way, we’ll trace the rich history of forgery, frauds, hoaxes, avatars, and
impersonations spanning the arts, with a particular emphasis on how they employ language.
We’ll see how the modernist notions of chance, procedure, repetition, and the aesthetics of
boredom dovetail with popular culture to usurp conventional notions of time, place, and
identity,allasexpressedlinguistically.

My hunch proved to be correct. Not only did the students take to the curriculum, but they ended up
teachingmemuchmorethanIknew.Everyweek,they’dcomeintoclassandshowmethelatestlanguage
memeragingacrossthenetworksorsomenewremixenginethatwasmorecapableofmanglingtextsthan
I had ever dreamed of. The classroom took on the characteristics of an online community, more of a
dynamic place for sharing and exchanging ideas than a traditional professor-lectures-students college
course.
But, as time went on, I realized that although they could show me cool new things, they didn’t know
how to contextualize these artifacts, historically, culturally, or artistically. If, for example, they showed
me “The Hitler Meme,” where the infamous scene from Oliver Hirschbiegel’s film Downfall was
resubtitledsothatHitlerwasscreamingabouteverythingfromWindowsVistaproblemstothecollapseof
therealestatebubble,Ihadtoinformthemthat,inthe1970s,situationistfilmmakerRenéViénetusedthe
resubtitling technique to détourn genre films like porn or kung fu into scathing artworks of social and
politicalcritique.Italsodawnedonmethattheyweremuchmoreorientedtoconsumingonlineculture
thanseeingitassomethingtocreatenewworksfrom.Althoughwewereengaginginameaningfultwo-
wayconversation,Ifelttherewasarealpedagogicalneedtobefilled,onethatcenteredaroundissuesof
contextualization.Andtherewerebiggapsofknowledge.Itwasasifallthepieceswerethere,butthey
neededsomeonetohelpputthemtogetherintherightplaceandintherightorder,asituationthatcalled
foraconceptualreorientationofwhatalreadycamenaturallytothem.InthischapterIwanttosharefive
basic exercises I give my students to acclimate them to the ideas of uncreative writing and make them
awareofthelanguageanditsriches,whichare,andhavealwaysbeen,aroundthem.
RetypingFivePages

---

ThefirstthingIwanttodoistogetthemtothinkabouttheactofwritingitself,soIgivethemasimple
assignment:retypefivepageswithnofurtherexplanation.Tomysurprise,thenextweektheyarriveinthe
class,eachwithauniquepieceofwriting.Theirresponsesarevariedandfullofrevelations.Although
some predictably find the task unbearable and can’t wait to get it over with, others discover that it is
relaxingandZen-like,sayingit’sthefirsttimethey’vebeenabletofocusontheactoftyping,asopposed
tostrugglingtofind“inspiration.”Asaresult,theyfindthemselveshappilyensconcedinanamnesialike
state,withwordsandtheirmeaningsdriftinginandoutoftheirconsciousness.Manybecomeawareofthe
role their bodies play in writing—from their postures to the cramps in their hands to the movement of
theirfingers—theybecameawareoftheperformativenatureofwriting.Onewomansaysthatshefinds
theexerciseclosertodancingthantowriting,entrancedbyherrhythmictappingonthekeys.Anothersays
it’smostintensereading experience she’s ever had; when retyping her favorite high school short story,
shediscoverstoheramazementjusthowpoorlywrittenitis.Formanystudents,theybegantoviewtexts
notonlyastransparentcarriersofmeaningbutalsoasopaqueobjectstobemovedaroundthewhitespace
ofthepage.
Intheactofretyping,anotherthingthatdifferentiatesonestudentfromanotheristhechoiceofwhatto
retype.Forexample,onestudentretypesastoryaboutaman’srepeatedinabilitytocompleteasexualact.
WhenIaskedhimwhyhechosethistexttoretype,herepliesthathefindsittheperfectmetaphorforthis
assignment,frustratedasheisbynotbeingpermittedtobe“creative.”Onewoman,whohasadayjobas
awaitress,decidestomnemonicallyretypeherrestaurant’smenuinordertolearnitbetterforwork.The
oddthingisthatitfails:shedeteststheassignmentandisenragedthatitdidn’thelpheronthejobatall.
It’sanicereminderthat,often,thevalueofartisthatithasnopracticalvalue.
The critique proceeds through a rigorous examination of paratextual devices, those normally
considered outside the scope of writing, but that, in fact, have everything to do with writing. Questions
arise:Whatkindofpaperdidyouuse?Whywasitongenericwhitecomputerpaperwhentheoriginal
editionwasonthick,yellowed,pulpystock?(Itwassurprisingtomethatstudentshadneverconsidered
this question, always defaulting to the generic computer stock at hand.) What did your choice of paper
stock say about you: your aesthetic, economic, social, political, and environmental circumstances?
(Students confessed that, in a world where they supposedly have more choices and freedom than ever,
they tended toward the habitual. On economic and social levels, a discussion ensued about cost and
availability, revealing heretofore invisible but very present class differences: some of the wealthier
students were surprised to learn that other students were unable to afford a better quality of paper.
Environmentally, while most claimed to be concerned about waste, none entertained the notion of
electronicdistributiontotheirclassmates,defaultinginsteadtoprintingandhandingoutpapercopiesto
all.)Didyoureproduceexactlytheoriginaltext’slayoutpagebypageordidyousimplyflowthewords
fromonepagetoanother,thewayyourwordprocessingprogramdoes?Willyourtextbereaddifferently
ifitisinTimesRomanorVerdana?(Again,moststudentsusedthewordprocessingdefaultstorepresent
theworksindigitalformat,usingaraggedrightmargin—thedefaultinMicrosoftWord—evenwhentheir
sourcetextwasjustified.Fewhadthoughttoenterahardpagebreakintothewordprocessingprogram
correspondenttothepagestheywerecopyingfrom.Andthesamewithfonts:mosthadneverconsidered
usinganythingotherthanTimesRoman.Nonehadconsideredthehistoricalandcorporateimplicationsof
fontchoice,how,say,TimesRomanalludedtobutisverydifferentthanthefontthattheNewYorkTimes
is printed in—not to mention the waning power of the once-almighty media giant—or how Verdana,
created specifically for screen readability, is a proprietary property of the Microsoft corporation. In
short, every font carries a complex social, economic, and political history with it that might—if we’re
attunedtoit—affectthewaywereadadocument.)Intheend,welearnedthatwritinguptothatpointhad
beenatransparentexperienceforthem,thattheyhadneverconsideredanythingbuttheconstructionand
resultantmeaningofthewordstheywerecreatingonthepage.

---

Even the way the students discuss their work is closely examined. One student, for example, without
thinking,prefacesapresentationofherworktotheclassbyclaimingherpiece“isn’tgoingtochangethe
world,” which is normally shorthand for “this piece isn’t all that great.” But, in this environment, her
pronouncement leads to a heated half-hour-long discussion about writing’s ability or inability to affect
change in the world, its political ramifications, and its social consequences, all on account of an
innocently—butsloppily—spokenplatitude.
TranscribeaShortPieceofAudio

Igivetheclasstheinstructionstotranscribeapieceofaudio.Itrytopicksomethingwithlittleexcitement
orinterestsoastokeepthefocusonthelanguage,astraightforwardnewsreportorsomethingseemingly
dryanddullsoasnotto“inspire”anystudent.IfIgivetenpeoplethesameaudiofiletotranscribe,we
end up with ten completely unique transcriptions. How we hear—and how, in turn, we process that
hearingintowrittenlanguage—isriddledwithsubjectivity.Whatyouhearasabriefpauseandtranscribe
asacomma,Ihearastheendofasentenceandtranscribeasaperiod.Theactoftranscription,then,isa
complexoneinvolvingtranslationanddisplacement.Nomatterhowhardwetry,wecan’tobjectifythis
seeminglysimpleandmechanicalprocess.
And, yet, perhaps mere transcription is not enough. We end up with text, but, upon reading it over,
we’restillmissingonekeyelement:thephysicalqualitiesofthevoice—thelulls,stresses,accents,and
pauses.Onceweallowedthosevagariesin,weopenPandora’sbox:Howtotranscribethemessinessof
speech,say,whentwopeoplearetalkingatoponeanother?Orwhattodowhenwordsaremumbledor
indecipherable?Orhowdoweconnotesomeonelaughingorcoughingwhilespeaking?Whattodoabout
foreignaccentsormultilanguagetexts?Forsuchaseeminglysimpletask,thequestionskeptpilingup.
OnanInternetsearch,onestudentcomesupwithastandardsetoftranscriptionconventions,oneused
incourtroomsandinwitnessstatements,thatweimmediatelyadoptasourguide.Inthemwediscovera
worldoforthographicsymbolsdesignedtobringthevoiceoutofthetext.Wesettowork,pepperingour
drytextswithextralingualsymbols.Welistenoverandoveragain,eachtimeparsingwithmoreminute
focused intensity—was that pause (.10) seconds or was it (1.75) seconds? No, it was somewhere in
between,notedas(.),amicropause,usuallylessthanaquarterofasecond.Bythetimewearethrough,
thevoicesjumpoffthepage,shoutingandsingingasifarecordingofthemwereplayingintheroom.The
resultslookmorelikecomputercodethan“writing,”anditproducesadozenuniqueworks,inspiteofthe
uniform standards we impose upon them, so that, for example, a transcription of a snippet of dialogue
wouldcarryoverasthis:
He comes for conversation. I comfort him sometimes. Comfort and consultation. He knows
that’swhathe’llfind.

Andthenenduplookinglikethis:
\He comes for/ *cONverAstion—* I cOMfort him sometimes (2.0) COMfort and
>cONsultAtion<(.)Heknows(.)that’swhat>HE’llfind—<(2.0)Heknowsthat’s<whAT—>
>he’llfi—nd<(6.0)

Thepassagewascodedusingthefollowingtranscriptionalconventions:

---

Underlining of the syllable nucleus denotes that the word is stressed with a syntactically
focusedaccent
UPPERCASE indicates words which are spoken in a louder volume and/or with emphatic
stress
(2.0)marksatimedpauseofabout2seconds
(.)denotesamicro-pause,usuallylessthanaquarterofasecond
–(singledashsign)inthemiddleofaworddenotesthatthespeakerinterruptshimself
—(doubledashsigns)attheendofanutteranceindicatesthatthespeakerleaveshisutterance
incomplete,oftenwithanintonationwhichinvitestheaddresseetocompletetheutterance
\/inwardslashesdenotesspeechinalowvolume(sottovoce)
> < (arrows) denotes speech (between the arrows which is spoken at a faster rate than the
surroundingtalk
<>denotesspeech(betweenthearrows)whichisspokenataslowerratethanthesurrounding
talk
**(asterisks)indicatelaughterinthespeaker’svoicewhilepronouncingthewordsenclosed

Readthetwopassagesaloudandyou’llhearthedifference.
Isthiswritingorisitmeretranscription?Itdependsonwhomyouask.Toastenographer,it’sajob;to
afictionwriter,focusedontellingacompellingnarrative,it’sacloggedstoryline;toascreenwriter,it’s
theactor’sjob;toalinguist,it’sanalyticaldata;yettoanuncreativewriter—onewhofindsunexpected
linguistic, narrative, and emotional richness by subtly shifting frames of reference in words they
themselves didn’t write—it’s art, revealing as much about the transcriber/writers’ biases, thought, and
decision-making processes as traditional types of writing do. Who would have thought that parsing and
codingcouldrevealsomuchaboutthecoder?
TranscribingProjectRunway

Asthesemesterprogresses,theclassbeginstotakeonalifeofitsownandthestudentsbegintoactasa
group.Theclassvirtuallyassemblestowatch,say,theseason’sfinaleofProjectRunwayat10:00P.M.on
a Tuesday evening. We’ll each be at our separate homes, scattered up and down the East Coast, yet all
connectedbyachatroom.Oncetheshowstarts,noconversationisallowed,exceptforustoalltypewhat
we’rehearingonthetelevisionaswe’rehearingit.Subjectivecommentary,gloss,andopinion—original
thoughts and words—are prohibited. From the moment the show’s opening credits roll, a blizzard of
repeatedwordsareloopedontothescreenbyallfifteenparticipants.Wedon’tstopforads,rathertexts
are spawned continuously until 11 P.M., at which time over seventy-five pages worth of raw text is
generated,whichlookslikethis:
ChouOnTHISSS(10:19:37PM):reallyreallyhappy
beansdear(10:19:37PM):allthemodelsaredress
ChouOnTHISSS(10:19:37PM):showtheworldwhatIcando
WretskyMustDie(10:19:38PM):Michael’sparents
ChouOnTHISSS(10:19:38PM):Michael’sparents
customaryblack(10:19:38PM):readytoshowtheworld
Kerbear1122(10:19:38PM):weallyweallyhappy
sunglassaholic(10:19:38PM):readytoshowtheworld
ChouOnTHISSS(10:19:38PM):Ireallylikeit.

---

ChouOnTHISSS(10:19:38PM):doordie
tweek90901(10:19:40PM):Ireallylikeit
EP1813(10:19:40PM):comingtolifeIlikeit
shoegal1229(10:19:40PM):Idoordie
WretskyMustDie(10:19:40PM):doordienowornever
beansdear(10:19:40PM):ireallylkeit
tweek90901(10:19:40PM):oneshot
shoegal1229(10:19:40PM):nowornever
sunglassaholic(10:19:40PM):oneshot
beansdear(10:19:40PM):doordie
shoegal1229(10:19:40PM):oneshot
WretskyMustDie(10:19:40PM):Jeffrey’sgirlfriendandson
beansdear(10:19:40PM):I’mgivingit
tweek90901(10:19:40PM):allofthelooks
tweek90901(10:19:40PM):onallofthegirls
sunglassaholic(10:19:40PM):allofthelooks
customaryblack(10:19:40PM):allthelooksallthegirls

Theclassthenconstructsaneditingprocess.Theydecidetoremovelanguagetheyfeelinterruptsthe
rhythmic flow (“Michael’s parents” and “Jeffrey’s girlfriend and son” were extricated). After much
argument, the user ids and timestamps are removed (some felt that their documentary function was
essentialtounderstandingthepiece),allpunctuationisexcised,typosarefixed,andalllowercaseisare
changedtoupper,leavingthefinaltextlookinglikethis:
reallyreallyhappy
allthemodelsaredressed
showtheworldwhatIcando
readytoshowtheworld
weallyweallyhappy
readytoshowtheworld
Ireallylikeit
doordie
Ireallylikeit
comingtolifeIlikeit
Idoordie
doordienowornever
Ireallylikeit
oneshot
nowornever
oneshot
doordie
oneshot
I’mgivingit
allofthelooks
onallofthegirls
allofthelooks
allthelooksallthegirls

---

It’sstreamlinedandrhythmic,noneofwhichwasgeneratedbydoinganythingotherthanrepeatingwhat
washeard.Butit’sapowerfulechochamber,feelinglikeaminimalisticcrossbetweenE.E.Cummings
andGertrudeStein,allgeneratedbyagrouplisteningcloselytothespewofapopulartelevisionshow.If
thetextwasn’tconvincingenough,thestudentsgiveagroupreadingofthepiece,eachspeakingthelines
they “wrote,” reanimating this media-saturated text with a bodily presence in a physical space. If we
listencloselytotheeverydaylanguagespokenaroundus,we’llbesuretofindpoetryinit.WhenProject
Runwayisaired,you’dbehard-pressedtofindagroupofviewerspayingattentiontothewaywordsare
spoken instead of how they carry the narrative. Yet all media using language is multifaceted, at once
transparent and opaque; by reframing, recontexutalizing, and repurposing the found language around us,
we’ll find that all the inspiration we need is right under our noses. As John Cage said, “Music is all
aroundus.Ifonlywehadears.Therewouldbenoneedforconcerthalls.”1
RetroGraffti

I like to get students out of the classroom, off the page and the screen and, taking a page out of the
situationists’book,havethempracticeuncreativewritingonthestreet.Itellthemthattheyaretochoose
arcane texts or out-of-date slogans—“Impeach Nixon,” for example—and to graffti their words onto a
public space in a nonpermanent way. Some choose to work almost invisibly, inscribing a section of
VirginiaWoolf’sARoomofOne’sOwninmicrographyusingaballpointpenontheskinofabananaand
placing it back in the bowl with the rest of the bunch. Others are brazen, violently scrawling 1940s
advertising slogans in red lipstick across washroom mirrors. Some make their most secret data very
public, hoisting enormous flags up campus flagpoles in the middle of the night emblazoned with their
bankcard PIN numbers. One student scrawls an erotic slogan from ad 79 in Pompeii, MURTIS BENE
FELAS(“Myrtis,yousuckitsowell”)infreshlyfallensnowacrossthecampusquadinreddye;someone
else tacks a futurist slogan “SPEED IS THE NEW BEAUTY” across the front of Wharton, subtly
critiquingtheleadingbusinessschoolinthecountry;yetanotherobsessivelychalksthefirstonehundred
numbersofPioneveryflatsurfacehecanfindacrosscampus,resultinginaPhiladelphiapapersendinga
teamofinvestigativereporterstotrytoascertaintheidentityandmotivesofthismysteriousgrafftiwriter.
Thenextweektheytaketheirslogansand,usingcardstockandcomputers,createdgreetingcardsoutof
them,repletewithenvelopes,madetolookasslickandauthenticaspossible.Ithenhavethemsourceout
and adhere authentic bar codes on them and we march en masse to the local CVS’s card section and
droplift(theoppositeofshoplift)them,snuggledamidsttheseaofreal“getwell”and“firstcommunion
cards.”Wedocumentthedroplifteventandstickaroundtoseeifanyonestumbledacrossandboughtone.
I have them buy a few to make sure the bar codes worked. Over the next few weeks, the students keep
checking on the cards: they’re always there. Rarely will someone buy a card with the feminist slogan
“WOULDYOUMARRYYOURHUSBANDAGAIN?”pairedwithasoftfocusillustrationofasad-eyed
puppy.
TheseexercisesuselanguageinwaysthatechotheuseofpoeticslogansduringtheParisofMay1968
(most famously Sous le paves, la plage [Under the paving stones, the beach]) that were spray painted
across the walls of the city. The nonspecific and literary nature of these slogans serve to disrupt
normative logical, business, and political uses of discursive language, preferring instead ambiguity and
dreaminess to awaken the slumbering, subconscious parts of one’s imagination. Finding their footing in
surrealistnotionsofComtedeLautréamont’sfamousline,“beautifulasthechancemeetingonadissecting
tableofasewingmachineandanumbrella,”suchuncharacteristicusesofpubliclanguageweremeant,as
Herbert Marcuse said, to motivate the populace to move from “realism to surrealism.”2 Of course on a

---

collegecampusin2010,it’sunrealistictohavesuchpoliticalexpectations,butinfacttheseinterventions,
within their context, carry a certain disorientation and provoke some strong reactions. These gestures,
echoingstreetartandgraffti,remindthestudentsofthepotentialthatlanguagehastostillsurpriseusin
waysandplaceswherewe’dleastexpecttoencounterit.Itletsthemknowthatlanguageisbothphysical
andmaterial,andthatitcanbeinsertedintotheenvironmentandengagedwithinanactive,publicway,
makingthemawarethatwordsneednotalwaysbeimprisonedonapage.
Screenplays

Take a film or video that has no screenplay and make one for it, so precisely notated that it could be
recreated after the fact by actors or nonactors. The format of the screenplay should have nothing left to
chance or whim about it: the students must use a Courier font as well as adhere to the preordained
formatting constraints that are the screenwriting industry standards. In short, the final work should be
unmistakableforaHollywoodscreenplay.
Onestudentdecidestotakeashortpornfilm,DirtyLittleSchoolgirlStories#2,starringJamieReamz,
andrenderitintoascreenplay.Thepiecebegins:
FADEIN.
EXT.HOUSE—DAY
Forasplitsecond,weseetheimageofaman,immaculatelysuited,pullingonthelavishhandle
of a tall wooden door. On either side of the door sit two lamps, and beyond this are stone
columns.Theoveralleffect,althoughtheshotisbrief,isoneofwealthandprestige.
INT.BEDROOM—DAY
Theshotcutstotheinsideofabedroom.Thecamerasitsatadiagonaltothelarge,mahogany
sleighbed,sothatwecanseeonlyhalfoftheroom.Alsoinourfieldofviewareanightstand,
indetailedcastiron,andatallarmoir.Thebedspreadisdoneinared-and-goldpaisleyprint
andperfectlymatchesthefourorsopillowsandsmallitemsonthenightstand.Intheforeground
is a young-looking blonde, JAMIE, who was once wearing a typical schoolgirl’s uniform—
button-down shirt, tie, dark blue cardigan, headband. She is now only wearing white
underwear,andweseeherpullingupherblue-and-yellowplaidskirt.Herwavyhairswings
from side to side as she does so. As she gets the skirt up to her waist, the camera zooms in
closetotheskirt.Shereachesaroundtothebackoftheskirttozipit.

The camera, so invisible in film, is given a prominent role in the screenplay, as are the furnishings,
somethingthatnormallydisappearsinapornfilm.Infact,justabouteverythingextraneoustobodiesand
sex is rendered transparent in pornography. When the dialogue is transcribed, the result, naturally, is
stiltedandawkward;thesewerewordsthatwereneithermeantforthepagenortobescrutinizedfortheir
literaryqualities:
JAMIE(naughtily):Well…sinceIamstayinghometoday…
TONY(raisinghiseyebrows):Right…
JAMIE(laughsdevilishly).
Jamie puts one hand over her crotch, then spreads her legs, all while looking at Tony
seductively.Hereturnshergaze.
TONY:Well…(mumbles).
JAMIE(laughs).Howdoyoumean?

---

(Tonyclearshisthroattwice.)
JAMIE: What do you think I mean? (Her voice is becoming increasingly syrupy and
suggestive.)

The selection of adjectives (naughtily, devilishly, syrupy) and use of punctuation (ellipses,
parenthesis)arewrittenaccordingtothewhimofthestudent;someoneelsewritingascreenplayforthe
samefilmmighthavechosenotherwordstouseorhaveselectedotheractionstodescribe.Conventional
valuationsofwritingenter:likemostliterature,it’sone’schoiceofwordsandhowthey’rearrangedthat
determinesthesuccessorfailureofthework.
Oncethe“action”starts,thestudentemploysthemostclinicaltermstodescribeit:
JAMIE moans in response and the camera zooms out again, so that we can see the whole of
JAMIE’svagina.TONYhasonehandonJAMIE’sthighandonerightabovehervagina.Heis
looking at it intensely, as if surveying the territory. The camera zooms out again as TONY
strokeshervaginatwice,hishandmovingdownward.Hegentlytouchesafingertoherinner
thigh.

Likeanyscreenplay,theactionsareclearlyandfactuallydescribed,yettheseeroticactions,we’reled
tobelieve—throughthetalentsofJamieandTony’sacting—werespontaneousand“real”theymustbeas
“real” and spontaneous the next time they are performed. Yet, on another level, the student really isn’t
describingJamieandTony’sactionsasmuchassheisthecamera’smovementsandtheeditor’sdecisions.
Hence,bycreatingherscreenplay,sheaddsanotherdimensiontoanalreadycomplexchainofauthorship,
onethatinterweavestheliterary,thedirectorial,andscopophilic:
theremadefilm’sviewers→theactors&directorofthefilmfromthestudent’sscript→the
reader (of the student’s work as literature) → the transcriber (student) → the film’s original
intendedaudience→thefilm’sdirector→thecameraoperator→theactors→theset

Thechainomitstheintendedresultofanypornfilm:theerotic.Inthisexercisethestudent’slanguage
muddies and objectifies the goal of pornography, upending conventions that are almost always
unquestioned, transparent, and deeply unaware of their own workings. In writing such a screenplay the
student sets up a hall of mirrors, purposely confusing notions of reality, authenticity, viewership,
readership,andauthorship.
Anotherstudenttakesahomevideo,makesascreenplayofit,hascopiesofitbound,andgivesthemas
giftstoherparentsfortheJewishholidays.Thevideoisofherfamily’semotionalreturntotheancestral
villageinPolandwherethebetterpartofthemhadbeenexterminatedduringWorldWarII.
(Begintoentercemetery.JayandTourguideareintheshot.Insidethecemetery.Mostlydirt,
grass,trees.)
JAY:ThisiswheretheresidentsofthewalledcityoftheJewishghettowereburied.
NANCY:Sothisisanamazingexperience.ToseewhereaquarterofamillionJewsareburied.
OrthreeandahalfmillionJewsbeforethewar,tenthousandtoday.Tothinkthatpeoplestill
deny the existence of the Holocaust, having visited the ghetto. We see that millions of Jews
weretransportedoutofPolandtothecamps.Pardonmyjerking,it’sreallyhard,I’mholdingmy
umbrella.AndtheseareourtourguidesinBaligrad,currentlythey’re…Howmanypeoplelive
inBaligradnow?
(Voices muffled in the background, as the camera pans the rundown cemetery and over-
growngreenery.)

---

Itjustsohappenedthatthestudent’smother,Nancy,isinclassduringthepresentationofthescreenplay
and is requested by her daughter to stand up in class and “act” out a few lines from the “play.” She
specifically indicates that she should read the paragraph just reproduced. Nancy, being a good sport,
stood up and begins reading her “lines.” She is immediately cut off by her daughter, who says, “Mom,
that’snotthewayyousaiditinthefilm!”andmakesherrepeatthelineswith“morefeeling.”Themother
beginsagainandisjustasquicklycutoff,herdaughterbegginghertointoneherwordsinaveryspecific
way, to act more “naturally.” What we are seeing in the classroom is a recreation of a scripted event,
whichisarecreationofahomevideowithmotheras“actor”anddaughteras“screenwriter/“director.”
Furthermore,thisisnottakingintoaccountthedegreeof“acting”thatbothofthemaredoingpubliclyin
frontofaclass,whichispresumablydifferentfromthewaytheywouldactintheprivacyoftheirhome.
It was a very emotional episode. Yet emotional is not the first word that comes to mind with
transcriptionorscreenplaysofpreexistingfootage.Onewouldthinkthesemethodswouldproducesterile
and dry results, but the reality is the opposite. The transcription or interpretation of extant materials
providesstudentswithasenseofownershipofthesewordsandideas,tothepointthattheybecomethe
students’ownasmuchaswouldapieceof“original”writing.
Theuncreativeclassroomistransformedintoawiredlaboratoryinwhichstudentshypertextofftheideas
oftheinstructorandtheirclassmatesinadigitalfrenzy.Thiswasprovenduringarecentvisitbyawriter
tomyclassroom.ThewriterbeganhislecturewithaPower-Pointpresentationabouthiswork.Whilehe
wasspeaking,henoticedthattheclass—allofwhomhadtheirlaptopsopenandconnectedtotheInternet
—werefuriouslytypingaway.Heflatteredhimselfthat,inthetraditionalmanner,thestudentsweretaking
copiousnotesonhislecture,devouringeverywordhespoke.Butwhathewasnotawareofwasthatthe
studentswereengagedinasimultaneouselectronicconversationaboutwhatthewriterwassaying,played
out over the class listserv, to which they had instant access. During the course of the writer’s lecture,
dozens of e-mails, links, and photos were blazing back and forth; each e-mail eliciting yet more
commentaryandglossonpreviouse-mails,tothepointwherewhattheartistwassayingwasmerelya
jumping off point to an investigation of depth and complexity such that a visiting writer, let alone a
professor’slecture,wouldneverhaveachieved.Itwasanunsurpassedformofactiveandparticipatory
engagement,butitwentfarastrayfromwhatthespeakerhadinmind.Thetop-downmodelhadcollapsed,
leveled with a broad, horizontal student-driven initiative, one where the professor and visiting lecturer
werereducedtobystandersonthesidelines.
Butwhatofthesustainedclassroomdiscussionortheartofcarefullylisteningtoanotherperson’spoint
ofview?FromtimetotimeImakethestudentsclosetheirlaptopsandswitchofftheircellphonesandwe
reconnect face to face in meatspace. My students seem to be equally comfortable with both modes,
moving in and out of them with as much ease as they do in their day-to-day lives, texting their friends
duringthedayandgoingoutdancingwiththemthatevening.
ButIdowishtoraisearedflag:Iworkataprivilegeduniversity,perhapsoneofthemostprivileged
intheworld.Theclassroomsarecrammedwiththelatesttechnologyandtop-speedwirelessflowslike
water from the tap. The students, as a whole, come from economically empowered backgrounds; those
who aren’t are well subsidized by the university. They arrive in class with the latest laptops and
smartphonesandseemtohaveeveryimaginablepieceofthelatestsoftwareontheirmachines.Theyare
adeptatfilesharingandgaming,instantmessagingandblogging;theytweetnonstopwhileupdatingtheir
Facebook status. In short, it’s an ideal environment in which to practice the sort of techno-utopianism I
preachwithenabledstudentsready,willing,andabletojumprightin.
Needless to say, the situation at an Ivy League institution is not in any way normal. While many
institutions in the West have ramped up their technological infrastructures in similar—if not quite as

---

elaborate—ways,atmostuniversitiesstudentsstruggletogetbywitholderlaptops,earlierversionsof
software,andslowerconnections;smartphones,fornow,aretheexception,nottherule,andvastnumbers
ofstudentsmustbalancethedemandsofschoolwithequallydemandingjobs.InmanypartsoftheWest
andthroughoutthethirdworldthesituationismuchworse,tothepointoftechnologybeingnonexistent.
Thedatacloudisafiction,withopenandaccessiblewirelessconnectionsfewandfarbetween.Ifyou’ve
evertriedtofindanunlockedoropenwirelessnetworkanywhereintheUSA,you’llknowwhatImean.
Thiswon’tbechanginganytimesoon.
Mystudentsknowhowtoexpressthemselvesinconventionalways;they’vebeenhoningthoseskills
sincegradeschool.Theyknowhowtowriteconvincingnarrativesandtellcompellingstories.Yet,asa
result,theirunderstandingoflanguageisoftenone-dimensional.Tothem,languageisatransparenttool
used to express logical, coherent, and conclusive thoughts according to a strict set of rules that, by the
timethey’veenteredcollege,they’veprettymuchmastered.Asaneducator,Icanrefineit,butIpreferto
challengeitinordertodemonstratetheflexibility,potential,andrichesoflanguage’smultidimensionality.
AsI’vediscussedthroughoutthisbook,therearemanywaystouselanguage:whylimittoone?Awell-
roundededucationconsistsofintroducingavarietyofapproaches.Alawstudentcan’tonlystudyacase
fromthesideoftheprosecution;whatthedefensedoesisequallyimportant.TheSocraticmethodoflegal
educationemphasizestheimportanceofknowingbothsidesofanargumentinordertowinit.Likeachess
match, a skilled Socratic lawyer must anticipate her opponent’s next move by embodying the contrary
stance.Alegaleducationalsostressesobjectivityanddispassionsoastorepresentaclient’sinterests.I
thinkwriterscanlearnalotfromthesemethods.
Whyshouldn’taliteraryeducationadoptasimilarapproach?Ifwecanmanagelanguage/information,
wecanmanageideasandthustheworld.Mosttasksintheworldareorientedaroundtheseprocesses,be
itthegatheringoflegalfactsforanappellatebrief,thecollatingofstatisticsforabusinessreport,fact-
findinganddrawingconclusionsinthesciencelab,andsoforth.Takingitonestepfurther,byemploying
similarstrategies,wecancreategreatandlastingworksofliterature.
Atthestartofeachsemester,Iaskmystudentstosimplysuspendtheirdisbeliefforthedurationofthe
classandtofullybuyintouncreativewriting.Itellthemonegoodthingthatcancomeoutoftheclassis
that they completely reject this way of working. At least their own conservative positions become
fortifiedandaccountable.Anotherfineresultisthattheuncreativewritingexercisesbecomeyetanother
toolintheirwritingtoolbox,onetheywillbeabletodrawuponfortherestoftheircareers.Butthebig
surprise,evenformymostskepticalstudents,isthatbeingexposedtothis“uncreative”wayofthinking
foreveraltersthewaytheyseetheworld.Theycannolongertakeforgrantedthedefinitionofwritingas
theyweretaughtit.Thechangeisphilosophicalasmuchasitispractical.Thestudentsleavetheclass
moresophisticatedandcomplexthinkers.I,infact,trainthemtobe“unoriginalgeniuses.”

---

12PROVISIONALLANGUAGE

Intoday’sdigitalworld,languagehasbecomeaprovisionalspace,temporaryanddebased,merematerial
to be shoveled, reshaped, hoarded, and molded into whatever form is convenient, only to be discarded
justasquickly.Becausewordstodayarecheapandinfinitelyproduced,theyaredetritus,signifyinglittle,
meaningless.Disorientationbyreplicationandspamisthenorm.Notionsoftheauthenticororiginalare
increasinglyuntraceable.Frenchtheoristswhoanticipatedthedestabilizingoflanguagecouldneverhave
foreseentheextentthatwordstodayrefusetostandstill;restlessnessisalltheyknow.Wordstodayare
bubbles,shape-shifters,emptysignifiers,floatingontheinvisibilityofthenetwork,thatgreatlevelerof
language,fromwhichwegreedilyandindiscriminatelysiphon,stuffingharddrivesonlytoreplacethem
withbiggerandcheaperones.
Digital text is the body-double of print, the ghost in the machine. The ghost has become more useful
thanthereal;ifwecan’tdownloadit,itdoesn’texist.Wordsareadditive,theypileupendlessly,become
undifferentiated, shattered into shards now, words reform into language-constellations later, only to be
blownapartoncemore.
Theblizzardoflanguageisamnesiainducing;thesearenotwordstoberemembered.Stasisisthenew
movement. Words now find themselves in a simultaneous condition of ubiquitous obsolescence and
presence,dynamicyetstable.Anecosystem:recyclable,repurposed,reclaimed.Regurgitationisthenew
uncreativity;insteadofcreation,wehonor,cherish,andembracemanipulationandrepurposing.
Lettersareundifferentiatedbuildingblocks—withnoonemeaningmoreorlessthananother;vowels
and consonants are reduced to decimal code, temporarily constellating in a word processing document;
then a video; then an image; perhaps back to text. Both irregularity and uniqueness are provisionally
constructedfromidenticaltextualelements.Insteadoftryingtowrestorderfromchaos,thepicturesque
nowiswrestedfromthehomogenized,thesingularliberatedfromthestandardized.Allmaterializationis
conditional:cut,pasted,skimmed,forwarded,spammed.
Where once the craft of writing suggested the coming together—possibly forever—of words and
thoughts, it is now a transient coupling, waiting to be undone; a temporary embrace with a high
probabilityofseparation,blastedapartbynetworkedforces;todaythesewordsareanessay,tomorrow
they’vebeenpastedintoaPhotoshopdocument,nextweekthey’reanimatedaspartofafilm,nextyear
they’vebecomeapartofadancemix.
Theindustrializationoflanguage:becauseitissointenselyconsumed,wordsarefanaticallyproduced
and just as fervently maintained and stored. Words never sleep; torrents and spiders are hoovering
language24/7.
Traditionally, typology implies demarcation, the definition of a singular model that excludes other
arrangements.Provisionallanguagerepresentsareversetypologyofthecumulative,lessaboutkindthan
aboutquantity.
Languageisdrainingandisdrainedinreturn;writinghasbecomeaspaceofcollision,acontainerof
atoms.
There is a special way of wandering the Web, at the same time aimless and purposeful. Where once
narrativepromisedtodeliveryoutoafinalrestingplace,theWeb’sblizzardoflanguagenowobfuscates
and entangles you in a thicket of words that forces you toward unwanted detours, turns you back when

---

you’relost:adériveonoverdrive,afastflaneur.
Language has been leveled to a mode of sameness, blandness. Can the bland be differentiated? The
featureless be exaggerated? Through length? Amplification? Variation? Repetition? Would it make a
difference?Wordsexistforthepurposeofdétournement:takethemosthatefullanguageyoucanfindand
neuterit;takethesweetestandmakeitugly.
Restore, rearrange, reassemble, revamp, renovate, revise, recover, redesign, return, redo: verbs that
startwithreproduceprovisionallanguage.
Entire authorial oeuvres now adopt provisional language, establishing regimes of engineered
disorientationtoinstigateapoliticsofsystematicdisarray.
Babelhasbeenmisunderstood;languageisnottheproblem,justthenewfrontier.
Provisional language pretends to unite, but it actually splinters. It creates communities not of shared
interestoroffreeassociationbutofidenticalstatisticsandunavoidabledemographics,anopportunistic
weaveofvestedinterests.
“Killyourmasters.”Ashortageofmastershasnotstoppedaproliferationofmasterpieces.Everything
isamasterpiece;nothingisamasterpiece.It’samasterpieceifIsayitis.Inevitably,thedeaththeauthor
has spawned orphaned space; provisional language is authorless yet surprisingly authoritarian,
indiscriminatelyassumingthecloakofwhomeveritsnatcheditfrom.
The office is the next frontier of writing. Now that you can work at home, the office aspires to the
domestic. Provisional writing features the office as the urban home: desks become sculptures; an
electronicPost-Ituniverseimbuesthenewwriting,adoptingcorporate-speakasitslingo:“teammemory”
and“informationmanagement.”
Contemporary writing requires the expertise of a secretary crossed with the attitude of a pirate:
replicating,organizing,mirroring,archiving,andreprinting,alongwithamoreclandestineproclivityfor
bootlegging, plundering, hoarding, and file sharing. We’ve needed to acquire a whole new skill set:
we’vebecomemastertypists,exactingcut-and-pasters,andOCRdemons.There’snothingwelovemore
thantranscription;wefindfewthingsmoresatisfyingthancollation.
ThereisnomuseumorbookstoreintheworldbetterthanourlocalStaples,crammedwithrawwriting
materials: gigantic hard drives, spindles of blank discs, toners and inks, memory-jammed printers, and
reams of cheap paper. The writer is now producer, publisher, and distributor. Paragraphs are ripped,
burned,copied,printed,bound,zapped,andbeamedsimultaneously.Thetraditionalwriter’ssolitarylair
is transformed into a socially networked alchemical laboratory, dedicated to the brute physicality of
textualtransference.Thesensualityofcopyinggigabytesfromonedrivetoanother:thewhirrofthedrive,
the churn of intellectual matter manifested as sound. The carnal excitement from supercomputing heat
generatedintheserviceofliterature.Thegrindofthescannerasitpeelslanguageoffthepage,thawingit,
liberatingit.Languageinplay.Languageoutofplay.Languagefrozen.Languagemelted.
Sculptingwithtext.
Datamining.
Suckingonwords.
Ourtaskistosimplymindthemachines.
Globalization and digitization turns all language into provisional language. The ubiquity of English:
nowthatweallspeakit,nobodyremembersitsuse.ThecollectivebastardizationofEnglishisourmost
impressive achievement; we have broken its back with ignorance, accent, slang, jargon, tourism, and
multitasking.Wecanmakeitsayanythingwewant,likeaspeechdummy.
Narrativereflexesthathaveenabledusfromthebeginningoftimetoconnectdots,fillinblanks,are
now turned against us. We cannot stop noticing: no sequence too absurd, trivial, meaningless, insulting,
we helplessly register, provide sense, squeeze meaning, and read intention out of the most atomized of
words. Modernism showed that we cannot stop making sense out of the utterly senseless. The only

---

legitimatediscourseisloss;weusedtorenewwhatwasdepleted,nowwetrytoresurrectwhatisgone.

---

AFTERWORD

In1726,JonathanSwiftimaginedawritingmachinewhereby“themostignorantperson,atareasonable
charge, and with a little bodily labour, might write books in philosophy, poetry, politics, laws,
mathematics,andtheology,withouttheleastassistancefromgeniusorstudy.”1Hedescribedaprimitive
grid-based machine with every word in the English language inscribed upon it. By cranking a few
handles, the grid would shift slightly and random groups of half-sensible words would fall into place.
Crankitagainandthedevicewouldspitoutanothersetofnonsequiturs.Theseresultingbrokensentences
werejotteddownbyscribesintofoliosthat,likepiecesofagiantjigsawpuzzle,wereintendedtobefit
togetherinanefforttorebuildtheEnglishlanguagefromscratch,albeitwrittenbymachine.TheSwiftian
punchline,ofcourse,isthattheEnglishlanguagewasfineasitwasandthenoveltyofreconstructingitby
machinewasn’tgoingtomakeitanybetter.It’sapointedsatireofourblindingbeliefinthetransformative
potential of technology, even if in many cases it’s sheer folly. Yet it’s also possible to view Swift’s
proposition as an act of uncreative writing, particularly when placed in the context of Pierre Menard’s
rewritingofDonQuixoteorSimonMorris’sretypingofOntheRoad.
I can imagine someone today reconstructing Swift’s machine, rebuilding the English language from
scratch,and publishing thebook as awork of uncreative writing.It would bea rich project, something
along the lines of an Oulipian exercise: “Reconstruct the English language from scratch using the 26
lettersonahand-cranked20x20grid.”Yetthelessonwouldn’tbethatmuchdifferentfromSwift’s;in
2010theEnglishlanguagestillfunctionsquitewellasis.Wouldreconstructingitbyhandreallymakeit
anybetterorwouldthisbeanexerciseinnostalgia,hearkeningbacktothetimewhenreproductionand
mimesiswerelaborintensive?Butintheend,we’dprobablysay,whybotherwhenacomputercandoit
better?
In1984acomputerprogrammernamedBillChamberlaindidtrytodoitbetterwhenhepublishedThe
Policeman’sBeardIsHalfConstructed,thefirstbookinEnglishthatwaspennedentirelybyacomputer
named RACTER. Like Swift’s machine, RACTER reinvented a perfectly good wheel with less than
impressive results. The rudimentary sentences RACTER came up with were stiff, fragmented, and
surrealist tinged: “Many enraged psychiatrists are inciting a weary butcher. The butcher is weary and
tiredbecausehehascutmeatandsteakandlambforhoursandweeks.”2
Oritspewedsomelightromanticcyberdoggerel:“Iwasthinkingasyouenteredtheroomjustnowhow
slyly your requirements are manifested. Here we find ourselves, nose to nose as it were, considering
thingsinspectacularways,waysuntoldevenbymyprivatemanagers.”3
To be fair, to have a computer write somewhat coherent prose by itself is a remarkable
accomplishment, regardless of the quality of the writing. Chamberlain explains how RACTER was
programmed:
Racter,whichwaswrittenincompiledBASIC…conjugatesbothregularandirregularverbs,
printsthesingularandthepluralofbothregularandirregularnouns,remembersthegenderof
nouns, and can assign variable status to randomly chosen “things.” These things can be
individualwords,clauseorsentenceforms,paragraphstructures,indeedwholestoryforms.…
Theprogrammerisremovedtoaverygreatextentfromthespecificformofthesystem’soutput.
Thisoutputisnolongerapreprogrammedform.Rather,thecomputerformsoutputonitsown.4

---

Inhisintroductiontothebook,Chamberlain,soundingratherSwiftian,states,“Thefactthatacomputer
mustsomehowcommunicateitsactivitiestous,andthatfrequentlyitdoessobymeansofprogrammed
directives in English, does suggest the possibility that we might be able to compose programming that
would enable the computer to find its way around a common language ‘on its own’ as it were. The
specifics of the communication in this instance would prove of less importance than the fact that the
computer was in fact communicating something. In other words, what the computer says would be
secondarytothefactthatitsaysitcorrectly.”5
RACTER’s biggest problem was that it operated in a vacuum without any interaction or feedback.
Chamberlainfeditpunchcardsanditspewedsemicoherentnonsense.RACTERiswhatMarcelDuchamp
would call a “bachelor machine,” a singular onanistic entity speaking only to itself, incapable of the
reciprocal, reproductive, or even mimetic interaction with other users or machines that might help
improve its literary output. Such was the state of the non-networked computer and primitive science of
programmingin1984.Today,ofcourse,computerscontinuallyqueryandrespondtoeachotheroverthe
Internet,assistingoneanothertobecomeevermoreintelligentandefficient.Althoughwetendtofocuson
the vast amount of human-to-human social networking being produced, much of the conversation across
the networks is machines talking to other machines, spewing “dark data,” code that we never see. In
Augustof2010awatershedoccurredwhenmorenonhumanobjectscameonlineregisteredwithAT&T
and Verizon in greater numbers than did new human subscribers in the previous quarter.6 This long-
predicted situation sets the stage for the next phase of the Web, called “the Internet of things,” where
mechanicinteractionfarout-paceshuman-drivenactivityonthenetworks.Forexample,ifyourdryeris
slightlyofftilt,itwirelesslysendsdatatoaserver,whichsendsbackaremedy,andthedryerfixesitself
accordingly. Such data queries are being sent every few seconds, and, as a result, we’re about to
experience yet another data explosion as billions of sensors and other data input and output devices
uploadexabytesofnewdatatotheWeb.7
At first glance, armies of refrigerators and dishwashers sending messages back and forth to servers
mightnothavemuchbearingonliterature,butwhenviewedthroughthelensofinformationmanagement
anduncreativewriting—rememberthatthosemilesandmilesofcodeareactuallyalphanumericlanguage,
theidenticalmaterialShakespeareused—thesemachinesareonlystepsawayfrombeingprogrammedfor
literaryproduction,writingatypeofliteraturereadableonlybyotherbots.And,asaresultofnetworking
witheachother,theirfeedbackmechanismwillcreateanever-evolving,sophisticatedliterarydiscourse,
onethatwillnotonlybeinvisibletohumaneyesbutbypasshumansaltogether.ChristianBökcallsthis
Robopoetics, a condition where “the involvement of an author in the production of literature has
henceforthbecomediscretionary.”Heasks,“Whyhireapoettowriteapoemwhenthepoemcaninfact
write itself?”8 Science fiction is poised to become reality, enacting Bök’s prediction for the literary
future:
Weareprobablythefirstgenerationofpoetswhocanreasonablyexpecttowriteliteraturefora
machinicaudienceofartificiallyintellectualpeers.Isitnotalreadyevidentbyourpresenceat
conferencesondigitalpoeticsthatthepoetsoftomorrowarelikelytoresembleprogrammers,
exalted,notbecausetheycanwritegreatpoems,butbecausetheycanbuildasmalldroneoutof
words to write great poems for us? If poetry already lacks any meaningful readership among
our own anthropoid population, what have we to lose by writing poetry for a robotic culture
thatmustinevitablysucceedourown?Ifwewanttocommitanactofpoeticinnovationinan
eraofformalexhaustion,wemayhavetoconsiderthisheretoforeunimagined,butnevertheless
prohibited, option: writing poetry for inhuman readers, who do not yet exist, because such
aliens,clones,orrobotshavenotyetevolvedtoreadit.9

---

It’snotjustBökwhoisdecryinganendtohuman-producedliterature.SusanBlackmore,thegenetics
historian,paintsanevolutionaryscenario,tellinguswe’vealreadybeensidelinedbymachinesandtheir
ability to move information. She calls this new stage the third replicator, claiming that “the first
replicatorwasthegene—thebasisofbiologicalevolution.Thesecondwasmemes—thebasisofcultural
evolution.Ibelievethatwhatwearenowseeing,inavasttechnologicalexplosion,isthebirthofathird
evolutionaryprocess.…Thereisanewkindofinformation:electronicallyprocessedbinaryinformation
rather than memes. There is also a new kind of copying machinery: computers and servers rather than
brains.”10 She calls these temes (technological memes), digital information that is stored, copied and
selectedbymachines.Thefuturedoesn’tlookpromisingforusascreativeentities.Blackmoresays,“We
humans like to think we are the designers, creators and controllers of this newly emerging world but
really we are stepping stones from one replicator to the next.” Listening to these scenarios, every
directionweturn,itseems,hasalreadybeenco-optedbymachines,pushingushumanstothesidelines.
But what of the reader? Once the human is taken out of the picture, the reader begins to assume the
identical role as the uncreative writer: moving information from one place to another. Just think of the
wayyou“read”theWeb:youparseit,sortit,fileit,forwardit,channelit,tweetitandretweetit.Youdo
more than simply “read” it. Finally, the long-theorized leveling of roles has been realized where the
readerbecomesthewriterandviceversa.
Butwait.HereIam,hammeringoutoriginalthoughtsonunoriginalitytoconveytoyou,anotherhuman,
aboutthefutureofliterature.Althoughthisbookmightbeavailableelectronically,Ican’twaittowrapmy
handsaroundthepaperversion,makingit“real”forme.Ironiesabound.MuchofwhatI’vediscussedin
thesepages,incomparisontoBlackmore,Bök,or“theInternetofthings,”seemfolksyandhumandriven
(humansretypingbooks,humansparsinggrammarbooks,humanswritingdowneverythingtheyreadfor
ayear,etc.).Theirpredictionsmakemefeelold-fashioned.I’mpartofabridgegeneration,raisedonold
media yet in love with and immersed in the new. A younger generation accepts these conditions as just
anotherpartoftheworld:theymixoilpaintwhilePhotoshoppingandscourfleamarketsforvintagevinyl
whilelisteningtotheiriPods.Theydon’tfeeltheneedtodistinguishthewayIdo.I’mstillblindedbythe
Web.Icanhardlybelieveitexists.Atworst,mycyberutopianismwillsoundasdatedinafewyearsas
jargonfromtheSummerofLovedoestoday.We’reearlyinthisgame,andIdon’tneedtotellyouhow
fastit’sevolving.Stillit’simpossibletopredictwhereit’sallheaded.Butonethingisforcertain:it’snot
goingaway.Uncreativewriting—theartofmanaginginformationandrepresentingitaswriting—isalso
a bridge, connecting the human-driven innovations of twentieth-century literature with the technology-
soaked robopoetics of the twenty-first. The references I’ve made in these pages will inevitably contain
references to soon-to-be-obsolete software, discarded operating systems, and abandoned social
networkingempires,butthechangeinthinkingandindoingfromananalogwayofwritinghasbeenmade,
andthere’snoturningback.

---

NOTES

Introduction

1.DouglasHuebler,Artist’sStatementforthegallerypublicationtoaccompanyJanuary5—31, Seth
SegelaubGallery,1969.
2.SolLeWitt,“ParagraphsonConceptualArt,”http://radicalart.info/concept/LeWitt/paragraphs.html;
accessedJuly15,2009.
3.  Craig Dworkin, introduction to The UbuWeb Anthology of Conceptual Writing.
http://ubu.com/concept;accessedFebruary9,2010.
4.Cut-upsandfold-insrefertoaprocesswherebyonetakesanewspaper,slicesitintocolumns,then
gluesthosecolumnsbacktogetherinthewrongorderandreadsacrossthelines,thusformingapoem.
5.Intheartworld—wheresuchgestures,farfrombeingmerelyphilosophical,canbeworthmillions
of dollars—there is blowback. In March 2011, a Federal judge ruled against Richard Prince’s
appropriating photographs from a book about Rastafarians to create a series of collages and paintings.
ThecaseiscurrentlybeingappealedbyPrinceandhisgallerist.
6.WhenKoonsfindshimselfinlegaltrouble,it’sthathesometimesdoesn’tbothergivingcreditfor
what he appropriated (for example, when he turned of a photograph a couple holding eight puppies in
theirarmsintoasculpturecalledStringofPuppies),yetitiswellunderstoodthateverythinghedoesis
basedonapreexistingimage—it’sjustthatthefolksfromwhomheborrowedrightlywantedtosharein
Koons’spayday.
7.  Perhaps the tide is turning. A young German writer, Helene Hegemann, published a best-selling
memoir in 2010 that was found to be largely plagiarized. After being busted by a blogger, the writer
fessedupanddidthetypicalroundsofapologies.Yet,evenafterthebookwasouted,itwasselectedasa
finalistforaprizeattheLeipzigBookFairinfiction.Thepanelsaidthatithadbeenawareofthecharges
ofplagiarism.TheNewYorkTimesreportedthat“althoughMs.Hegemannhasapologizedfornotbeing
moreopenabouthersources,shehasalsodefendedherselfastherepresentativeofadifferentgeneration,
onethatfreelymixesandmatchesfromthewhirringfloodofinformationacrossnewandoldmedia,to
createsomethingnew.‘There’snosuchthingasoriginalityanyway,justauthenticity,’saidMs.Hegemann
inastatementreleasedbyherpublisherafterthescandalbroke.”NicholasKulish,“Author,17,SaysIt’s
‘Mixing,’
Not
Plagiarism,”
New
York
Times,
February
12,
2010,
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/12/world/europe/12germany.html?
src=twt&twt=nytimesbooks&pagewanted=print;accessedFebruary12,2010.
8.LaurieRozakis,TheCompleteIdiot’sGuidetoCreativeWriting(NewYork:Alpha,2004),p.136.
9.GertrudeStein,TheAutobiographyofAliceB.Toklas(NewYork:Vintage,1990),p.119.
1.RevengeoftheText

---

1.  Peter Bürger, Theory of the Avant-Garde (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984
[1974]),p.32.
2.CharlesBernstein,“LiftOff,”inRepublicsofReality(LosAngeles:SunandMoon,2000),p.174.
3.StephaneMallarmé,1897prefacetoUncoupdedésjamaisn’aboliralehasard(Athrowofthe
dice will never abolish chance), http://tkline.pgcc.net/PITBR/French/MallarmeUnCoupdeDes.htm;
accessedFebruary9,2010.
4.EzraPound,TheCantosofEzraPound(NewYork:NewDirections,1973),p.716.
5.NeilMills,“7NumbersPoems,”fromExperimentsinDisintegratingLanguage/KonkreteCanticle
(Arts Council of Great Britain, 1971), http://www.ubu.com/sound/konkrete.html; accessed February 9,
2010. Transcribed from an audio recording by Kenneth Goldsmith. It appears that no typographical
versionexists.
6.

Public
Computer
Errors,
Group
Pool
on
flickr,
http://www.flickr.com/groups/66835733@N00/pool/;accessedMay27,2009.
7.Icanthinkofhand-paintedfilms,likeStanBrakhage’slaterworks,thatcouldcontainletters,butthe
effect was overlay rather than disruption at the operational level. There were also gallery-based text
works, such as Lawrence Weiner and Joseph Kosuth, but these, too, were analog-based projects,
consistingofstencilingandpaintingwallsand/ornondigitalphotographicreproduction.
8.  Nick Bilton, “The American Diet: 34 Gigabytes a Day,” New York Times, December 9, 2009,
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/the-american-diet-34-gigabytes-a-day; accessed December 25,
2010.
9.  Roger E. Bohn and James E. Short, How Much Information? 2009: Report on American
Consumers,GlobalInformationIndustryCenter,UniversityofCalifornia,SanDiego,December9,2009,
p.12.
10.MarvinHeifermanandLisaPhilips,ImageWorld:ArtandMediaCulture (New York: Whitney
MuseumofAmericanArt,1989),p.18.
11.  Mitchell Stevens, The Rise of the Image, the Fall of the Word (New York: Oxford University
Press,1998),p.xi.
12.AllpassagesquotedfromJamesJoyce,Ulysses(NewYork:RandomHouse,1934);here,p.655.
13.BohnandShort,HowMuchInformation?p.10.
14.Somepointsofcomparisonbetweenthewatercycleandthetextualcyclecanbemade:
•Thewatercycleusesevaporationfromtheoceanstoseedthecloudswithprecipitation,whichin
turnfallstotheearthtoreseedthewatersupply.
•Thetextcycleusestextstoredlocallytoseedthenetworkwithlanguage,whichinturncantravel
backdowntothehomecomputer,onlytobesentbackouttoreseedthedatacloud.
•Watercanchangestatesamongliquid,vapor,andiceatvariousplacesinthewatercycle.
•  Language can change states among text, video, code, music and images at various places in the
textualcycle.
•Therearestatesofstasisandstorage:iceandsnow,underground,freshwater,andoceanstorage.
•Therearestatesofstasisandstorage:harddrives,servers,andserverfarms.
•  Although the balance of water on Earth remains fairly constant over time, individual water
moleculescancomeandgo.
•Theamountoflanguageonthenetworkisexponentiallyincreasingovertime,althoughindividual
bitsofdatacomeandgo.

---

2.LanguageasMaterial

1.JordanScott,aCanadianwriterwhoisachronicstutterer,haswrittenblert(Toronto:CoachHouse,
2008) a book that is comprised of the words he most commonly stumbles over, thus creating a self-
imposedlinguisticobstaclecoursewhenheperformsthepiece.
2.

Guy
Debord
“Introduction
to
a
Critique
of
Urban
Geography,”
1955,
http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/urbgeog.htm;accessedFebruary25,2010.
3.Ibid.
4.  Acconci’s piece could be performed on the Web, clicking through blind links until you hit a
password-protectedpageor404PageNotFound.
5.

Guy
Debord
and
Gil
Wolman,
“A
User’s
Guide
to
Détournement,”
1956,
http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/detourn.htm;accessedFebruary25,2010.
6.  Asger Jorn, Detourned Painting, Exhibition Catalogue, Galerie Rive Gauche (May 1959), trans.
ThomasY.Levin,http://www.notbored.org/detourned-painting.html;accessedFebruary26,2010.
7.DebordandWolman“AUser’sGuidetoDétournement.”
8.Ibid.
9.Ibid.
10.

Guy-Ernest
Debord,
“Theory
of
the
Dérive”
(1956),
on
http://library.nothingness.org/articles/all/all/display/314;accessedAugust5,2009.
11.  The Times, seeing that their structures were being pulled into an unauthorized format, issued
Stefansaswiftceaseanddesist.
12.http://www.foodincmovie.com/;accessedAugust10,2009.
13.AndyWarhol,America(NewYork:HarperCollins,1985),p.22.
14.LanguageRemovalService’sinvestigationsmirrortheconcernsofsoundpoetry,themid-century
auralcounterparttoconcretepoetry,wheretheemphasiswasonthewaywordssounded,notwhatthey
meant.
15.IowethesethoughtstoDouglasKahn’sgreatstudy,Noise,Water,Meat:AHistoryofSoundinthe
Arts(Cambridge:MITPress,1999).
16.CharlesBabbage,TheNinthBridgewaterTreatiste(London:Cass,1967[1837]),p.110.
17.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klangfarbenmelodie(August5,2009).
18.  Joseph Kosuth, “Footnote to Poetry,” in Art After Philosophy and After: Collected Writings,
1966–1990,(Cambridge:MITPress,1991),p.35.
19.LizKotz,WordstoBeLookedAt:Languagein1960sArt(Cambridge:MITPress),pp.138–139.
20.EugenGomringer,TheBookofHoursandConstellations(NewYork:SomethingElse,1968),n.p.
21.  Mary Ellen Solt, ed., Concrete Poetry: A World View (Bloomington: Indiana University Press,
1968),p.10.
22.NoigrandresGroup,“PilotPlanforConcretePoetry,”inSolt,ConcretePoetry,pp.71–72.
23.ClementGreenberg,“TowardsaNewerLaocoön,”PartisanReview7.4(JulyAugust1940):296–
310.
24.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verdana;accessedSeptember7,2007.
25.NoigrandresGroup,“PilotPlanforConcretePoetry,”inSolt,ConcretePoetry,pp.71–72.
26.Solt,ConcretePoetry,p.73.
27.Ibid.,p.8.
28.MortonFeldman,“TheAnxietyofArt”(1965),inGiveMyRegardstoEighthStreet,ed.B.H.
Friedman(Cambridge:ExactChange,2000),p.32.

---

3.AnticipatingInstability

1.LucyLippard,SixYears:TheDematerializationoftheArtObject(NewYork:Praeger,1973),p.
203.
2.LudwigWittgenstein,PhilosophicalInvestigations(NewYork:Macmillian,1958),p.197e.
3.

“Language
as
Sculpture”:
Physical/Topological
Concepts,
http://radicalart.info/concept/weiner/index.html;accessedFebruary12,2009.
4.  Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,”
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm; accessed December 25,
2010.
5.  As of February 2010, there were some forty billion photos on Facebook. Kenneth Cukier, “Data,
DataEverywhere,”Economist,February25,2010,http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?
story_id=15557443,accessedFebruary26,2010.
6.LawrenceWeinerastoldtotheauthorinconversation,August9,2007.
7.LudwigWittgenstein,PhilosophicalInvestigations(NewYork:Macmillian,1958),p.226e.
8.  “Rouge,” a rather traditional sound poem, is quite unlike the type of electronic work based on
bodilysoundswithwhichhewouldlaterbecloselyidentified.
9.HenriChopin,“Rouge,”unpublished,transcribedfromtheaudiobySebastianDicenaire.
10.HundermarkGallery,Germany,1981.It’ssincebeenreleasedmanytimesonvariouscompilations.
11.  Chopin’s energies as a publisher and enthusiast for electronic sound poetry were highly visible
throughoutthe1950sandsixties,culminatingin1964whenhisRevueOubeganpublicationanditswork
regularlyairedontheBBC.
12.

For
examples
of
such
PDFs,
there
are
many
sites
such
as
Monoskop,
http://burundi.sk/monoskop/log/; accessed August 10, 2009; and AAAARG, http://a.aaaarg.org/library;
accessedAugust10,2009.
4.TowardaPoeticsofHyperrealism

1.WalterJ.Ong,OralityandLiteracy(London:Routledge,1982),pp.82–83.
2.RobertFitterman,“IdentityTheft,”inRobthePlagiarist(NewYork:Roof,2009),pp.12–15.
3.MikeKelley,FoulPerfection(Boston:MITPress,2003),p.111.
4.“ObamaReceivesHero’sWelcomeatHisFamily’sAncestralVillageinKenya,”VoiceofAmerica,
http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2006–08/2006–08–27-voa17.cfm;accessedAugust5,2009.
5.AraShirinyan,YourCountryisGreat:Afghanistan-Guyana(NewYork:Futurepoem,2008),p.13–
14.
6.Ibid.,pp.15–16.
7.ClaudeClosky,MonCatalogue,trans.CraigDworkin(Limoges:FRACLimousin,1999),n.p.
8.AlexandraNemerov,“FirstMyMotorola,”unpublishedmanuscript.
9.

Lev
Grossman,
“Poems
for
People,”
Time
Magazine,
June
7,
2007,
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1630571,00.html;accessedAugust13,2009.
10.TheSelectedPoemsofFrankO’Hara,Ed.DonaldAllen(NewYork:Vintage,1974),p.175.
11.  Andy Warhol, The Philosophy of Andy Warhol: From A to B and Back Again (San Diego:
HarcourtBraceJovanovich,1975),p.101.
12.TonyHoagland,“AttheGalleriaShoppingMall,”Poetry194.4(July/August2009):265.

---

13.RemKoolhaas,“Junkspace,”inProjectontheCity(Köln:Taschen,2001),n.p.
14.Ibid.
15.RobertFitterman,“Directory,”Poetry194.4(July/August2009):335.
16.Koolhaas,“Junkspace.”
17.DonaldHall,“OxCartMan,”http://poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/19216,April16,2010.
18.http://www.poets.org/poet.php/prmPID/264;accessedJune5,2009.
19.http://seacoast.sunderland.ac.uk/∼os0tmc/zola/diff.htm;accessedMay21,2009.
20.MessagesenttoConceptualWritingListserv:MonJun15,20095:25pm.
21.MessagesenttoConceptualWritingListserv:TueJun16,20091:11pm.
22.E-mailcorrespondencewiththeauthor,May17,2009.
23.E-mailcorrespondencewiththeauthor,May17,2009.
24.http://www.davidleelaw.com/articles/statemen-fct.html;accessedMay18,2009.
25.VanessaPlace,StatementofFacts(UbuWeb:/ubu,2009),http://ubu.com/ubu;accessedAugust10,
2009.
26.  Gene R. Swenson, “What Is Pop Art? Answers from 8 Painters, Part I” originally published in
ARTnews,November1963;reprintedinI’llBeYourMirror:TheSelectedAndyWarholInterviews, ed.
KennethGoldsmith(NewYork:CarrollandGraf,2004),p.19.
27.E-mailtoauthor,May17,2009.
28.  The first volume was published in 1934, and the collected poem as a whole finally made an
appearanceinthelateseventies.
29.  Charles Reznikoff, from Testimony, reprinted in Poems for the Millennium, ed. Jerome
RothenbergandPierreJoris,vol.1(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1995),p.547.
5.WhyAppropriation?

1.RichardSieburth,“BenjamintheScrivener,”inGarySmith,ed.,Benjamin:Philosophy,Aesthetics,
History(Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1989),p.23.
2.Ibid.,p.28.
3.  Susan Buck-Morss, The Dialectis of Seeing: Walter Benjamin and the Arcades Project
(Cambridge:MITPress,1991),p.54.
4.Asofthiswritingin2010,sevenyearsafterthebookwaspublished,there’sstillaboutfiftyunsold
copiesinmypublisher’swarehouse.
5.

Ron
Silliman
blog
entry
dated
February
27,
2006,
http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/goldsmith/silliman_goldsmith.html;accessedJuly30,2009.
6.

Ron
Silliman,
blog
entry
dated
Sunday,
October
5,
2008,
http://ronsilliman.blogspot.com/2008/10/one-advantage-of-e-books-is-that-you.html; accessed October
20,2008.
7.http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/s_z/silliman/sunset.htm;accessedDecember29,2010.
8.BobPerlman,TheMarginalizationofPoetry:LanguageWritingandLiteraryHistory(Princeton:
PrincetonUniversityPress,1996),p.186,26.
9.  John Lichfield, “I stole from Wikipedia but it’s not plagiarism, says Houellebecq,” Independent,
Wednesday, September 8, 2010, http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/i-stole-
from-wikipedia-but-its-not-plagiarism-says-houellebecq-2073145.html;accessedSeptember15,2010.

---

6.InfallibleProcesses

1.

Larissa
Macfarquhar,
“The
Present
Waking
Life,”
New
Yorker,
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/11/07/051107fa_fact_macfarquhar;accessedJuly13,2009.
2.  Kwame Dawes, “Poetry Terror,” http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2007/03/poetry-
terrors/#more-66;accessedJuly13,2009.
3.  Andrea Miller-Keller, “Excerpts from a Correspondence, 1981–1983,” in Susanna Singer, Sol
LeWittWallDrawings1968–1984(Amsterdam:StedelijkMuseum,1984),p.114.
4.  Pierre Cabanne, Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp: The Documents of Twentieth-Century Art
(NewYork:Viking,1976),p.72.
5.LucyLippard,SixYears:TheDematerializationoftheArtObject(NewYork:Praeger,1973),pp.
112–113.
6.Ibid.,p.162.
7.  Sol Lewitt “Paragraphs on Conceptual Art,” http://radicalart.info/concept/LeWitt/paragraphs.html;
accessedJuly15,2009.
8.YokoOno,Grapefruit(NewYork:SimonandSchuster,2000[1964]),n.p.
9.  LeWitt, “Sentences on Conceptual Art,” http://radicalart.info/concept/LeWitt/sentences.html;
accessedOctober22,2009.
10.Lippard,SixYears,pp.200–201.
11.

Sol
LeWitt
“Sentences
on
Conceptual
Art,”
http://www.ddooss.org/articulos/idiomas/Sol_Lewitt.htm;accessedOctober22,2009.
12.Lippard,SixYears,p.201.
13.Ibid.,pp.201–202.
14.Ibid.
15.  John Cage, “Four Statements on the Dance,” Silence (Middletown: Wesleyan University Press,
1962),p.93.
16.RichardKostelanetz,ConversingwithCage(NewYork:Limelight,1988),p.120.
17.Ibid.,p.263.
18.  Holland Cotter, “Now in Residence: Walls of Luscious Austerity,” December 4, 2008,
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/05/arts/design/05lewi.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all; accessed October
23,2009.
19.Lippard,SixYears,pp.200–201.
20.

Cory
Doctorow,
“Giving
It
Away”
Forbes,
December
1,
2006,
http://www.forbes.com/2006/11/30/cory-doctorow-copyright-tech-
media_cz_cd_books06_1201doctorow.html;accessedOctober21,2009.
21.AtDia:Beacon,theyhavea“civilian”LeWittdrawingactivityaspartoftheireducationprogram
forvisitingschoolgroupswherethekidsexecutedrawingsfollowingLeWitt’sinstructions.
22.http://www.artinfo.com/news/story/33006/the-best-of-intentions/;accessedOctober23,2009.
23.MichaelKimmelman,“SolLeWitt,MasterofConceptualism,Diesat78,”NewYorkTimes,April
9, 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/09/arts/design/09lewitt.html?pagewanted=all; accessed July
13,2009.
24.“USAArtists:AndyWarholandRoyLichtenstein”transcriptionoftelevisioninterview,produced
by NET, 1966, in Kenneth Goldsmith, ed., I’ll Be Your Mirror: The Selected Andy Warhol Interviews
(NewYork:CarrollandGraf,2004),p.81.
25.WayneKoestenbaum,AndyWarhol(NewYork:Viking/Penguin,2001),p.3.
26.AnneCourseandPhilipThody,IntroducingBarthes(NewYork:Totem,1997),p.107.

---

27.AndyWarhol,TheAndyWarholDiaries,ed.PatHackett(NewYork:Warner,1989),p.455.
28.Ibid.,p.xx.
29.Ibid.
30.Goldsmith,I’llBeYourMirror,pp.87–88.
31.  Marjorie Perloff, Frank O’Hara Poet Among Painters (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1998),p.178.
32.  Frank O’Hara, “Biotherm (for Bill Berkson”), in The Selected Poems of Frank O’Hara, ed.
DonaldAllen(NewYork:Vintage,1974),p.211.
33.  Warhol’s book unconsciously draws inspiration from Molly Bloom’s soliloquy in Ulysses, yet,
unlikeJoyce,therewasnoelementoffictionortraceofliterarypretenseinit.
34.AndyWarhol,a:ANovel(NewYork:Grove,1968),p.333.
35.AndyWarholandPatHackett,Popism:TheWarhol’60s(NewYork:HarcourtBraceJovanovich,
1980),p.291.
36.

Roland
Barthes,
“The
Death
of
the
Author,”
Aspen,
http://ubu.com/aspen/aspen5and6/threeEssays.html#barthes;accessedAugust10,2009.
37.Ibid.
38.G.R.Swenson,“WhatIsPopArt?Answersfrom8Painters,Part1”inGoldsmith,I’ll Be Your
Mirror,p.18.
7.RetypingOntheRoad

1.WalterBenjamin,Reflections(NewYork:Schocken,1978),p.66.
2.

http://gettinginsidejackkerouacshead.blogspot.com/2008/06/projectproposal.html;
accessed
February8,2009.
3.GertrudeStein,TheAutobiographyofAliceB.Toklas(NewYork:Vintage,1990),p.113.
4.http://blog.wfmu.org/freeform/2009/01/the-inaugural-poem-remix.html;accessedJuly27,2009.
5.Seemyintroductionforanextendeddiscussion.
6.JeremyMillar,“Rejectamenta,”inJeremyMillarandMichielSchwarz,eds.,Speed—Visionsofan
Accelerated Age (London: Photographer’s Gallery and Whitechapel Art Gallery, 1998), pp. 87–110, at
106.
7.Thisformofguerrillapublicationremindsmeofthewaybooksusedtogetbootleggedyearsagoon
Amazonwhensomeonewouldcutandpasteorretype,say,aHarryPotterbookinchunksundertheguise
ofareview;eachsuccessive“review”wouldrevealsubsequentpagesofthenoveluntilitwasfinished.
8.ParsingtheNewIllegibility

1.IntheearlydaysoftheWeb,atypicalAprilFool’sDayjokewassomeoneofferingthecomplete
textoftheInternetonaCD-ROM,whichwas,evenasearlyas1995,clearlyimpossible.“Accordingto
oneestimate,mankindcreated150exabytes(billiongigabytes)ofdatain2005.Thisyear,itwillcreate
1,200 exabytes.” “The Data Deluge,” Economist, http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?
story_id=15579717&source=hptextfeature;accessedFebruary26,2010.
2.SusanBlackmore,“Evolution’sThirdReplicator:Genes,Memes,andNowWhat?”NewScientist,
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327191.500-evolutions-third-replicator-genes-memes-and-
now-what.html?full=true;accessedAugust6,2009.

---

3.GertrudeStein,TheAutobiographyofAliceB.Toklas(NewYork:Vintage,1990),p.113.
4.SamuelBeckett,NowHowOn:ThreeNovels(NewYork:Grove,1989),p.89.
5.FrédéricPaul,“DHStillIsaRealArtist,in<<Variable>>,etc.(Limousin:FondsRegionalD’art
Contemporain,1993),p.36.
6.JosephMitchell,“ProfessorSeagull,”inUpintheOldHotel/McSorley’sWonderfulSaloon(New
York:Vintage,1993),p.626.
7.Ibid.,p.58.
8.Ibid.,pp.58–59.
9.GertrudeStein,TheMakingofAmercians(Normal,IL:DalkeyArchive,1995),p.177.
10.CraigDworkin,Parse(Berkeley:Atelos,2008),p.64.
11.http://stevenfama.blogspot.com/2008/12/parse-by-craig-dworkin-at-elos-2008.html;accessedJuly
31,2009.
12.Stein,TheAutobiographyofAliceB.Toklas,p.113.
13.HadDworkinchosentorenderAbbott’stextvisually,itmighthavetakentheformofaparsetree,a
visualmethodofdiagrammingsentences.
14.Dworkin,Parse,p.283.
15.  Matthew Fuller, “It looks like you’re writing a letter: Microsoft Word,”
http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00040.html;accessedJuly29,2009.
16.LouisZukofsky,A(Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress,1978),p.807.
17.Ibid.,p.823.
18.Dworkin,Parse,p.217.
19.TranslatedbyCraigDworkinande-mailedtotheauthor,onAugust9,2009.
20.Dworkin,Parse,p.190.
21.

Jonathan
Ball,
“Christian
Bök,
Poet,”
Believer
7.5
(June
2009),
http://www.believermag.com/issues/200906/?read=interview_bok;accessedDecember25,2010.
22.ChristianBök,Eunoia(Toronto:CoachHouse,2001),p.60.
23.Ball,“ChristianBök,Poet.”
24.Ibid.
25.Ibid.
9.SeedingtheDataCloud

1.InApril2010theLibraryofCongressannouncedthatitwasarchivingtheentireTwitterarchive:
“That’s right. Every public tweet, ever, since Twitter’s inception in March 2006, will be archived
digitallyattheLibraryofCongress.That’saLOToftweets,bytheway:Twitterprocessesmorethan50
milliontweetseveryday,withthetotalnumberinginthebillions.”http://blogs.loc.gov/loc/2010/04/how-
tweet-it-is-library-acquires-entire-twitter-archive/;accessedJuly13,2010.
2.FélixFénéon,NovelsinThreeLines(NewYork:NewYorkReviewofBooks,2007),p.113.
3.Ibid.,p.147.
4.Ibid.,p.26.
5.WiredmagazineranacontestofHemingway-inspiredsix-wordstories.Nearlyonehundredofthem
canbefoundathttp://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.11/sixwords.html;accessedAugust10,2009.
6.SamuelBeckett,from“WorstwordHo,”inNowhowOn(London:Calder,1992),p.127.
7.DavidMarkson,Reader’sBlock(Normal,IL:DalkeyArchive,1996),p.85.
8.GilbertAdair,“OnNames,”inSurfingtheZeitgeist(London:FaberandFaber,1977),p.2.

---

9.  John Barton Wolgamot, In Sara, Mencken, Christ and Beethoven There Were Men and Women
(New York: Lovely Music, 2002), p. 15, written and published privately in 1944, in the CD booklet
accompanyingRobertAshley’ssettingofWolgamot’swork.
10.Ibid.
11.Ibid.,p.48.
12.Ibid.,pp.38–39.
13.  Gertrude Stein, “Poetry and Grammar,” in Writing and Lectures 1909–1945, ed. Patricia
Meyerowitz(Harmondsworth:Penguin),p.140.
14.StatusUpdate,http://www.statusupdate.ca;accessedJuly16,2009.
15.StatusUpdate,http://www.statusupdate.ca/?p=Arthur+Rimbaud;accessedJuly16,2009.
16.http://www.cs.sjsu.edu/faculty/rucker/galaxy/webmind3.htm;accessedAugust16,2010.
17.  Matt Pearson, “Social Networking with the Living Dead,” http://zenbullets.com/blog/?p=683>;
accessedAugust16,2010.
18.http://twitter.com/dedbullets;accessedAugust19,2010.
19.  Matt Pearson, “Social Networking with the Living Dead,” http://zenbullets.com/blog/?p=683>;
accessedAugust16,2010.
20.http://twitter.com/dedbullets/status/21570100860;accessedAugust19,2010.
21.http://apostropheengine.ca/howitworks.php;accessedJuly23,2009.
22.BillKennedyandDarrenWershler-Henry,apostrophe(Toronto:ECW,2006),p.286–287.
23.Ibid.,p.289.
24.Ibid.,p.128.
25.  Gautam Naik, “Search for a New Poetics Yields This: ‘Kitty Goes Postal/Wants Pizza’” Wall
Street
Journal,
May
25,
2010,
http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052748704912004575252223568314054.html;
accessedAugust19,2010.
26.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flarf;accessedMarch20,2010.
27.NadaGordon,“UnicornBelieversDon’tDeclareFatwas,”Poetry194.4(July/August2009):324–
325.
10.TheInventoryandtheAmbient

1.AnearlyexampleofthisistheillusorydeletebuttononGmail,whichdoesn’tautomaticallydelete
yourmail,itholdsitforthirtydays,thendeletesit.Andifyouwantto“permanently”deleteamessage
immediatelyittakesseveralclickstodoso.Butmorerelevantisthemoreprominentlyfeaturedboldfaced
Archivebutton,whichallowsyoutocleanupyourinboxwithoutdeletinganything.Similarly,onMacOS
X,whenyou“emptythetrash,”filesarerecoverable.It’sonlywhenyouclickSecureEmptyTrashthat
youactuallydeleteonceandforever.
2.Ibid.
3.  Motko Rich and Joseph Berger, “False Memoir of Holocaust Is Canceled,” New York Times,
December
28,
2008,
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/29/books/29hoax.html?
_r=1&scp=1&sq=False%20Memoir%20of%20Holocaust%20Is%20Canceled&st=cse>;accessedAugust
13,2009.
4.AtypicalWebprojectinthismannerisEllieHarrison’s“Eat22,”inwhichHarrisondocumented
everythingsheateforayearbetweenMarch2001andMarch2002.SeeGeorgesPerec’s“Attemptatan
Inventory of the Liquid and Solid Foodstuffs Ingurgitated by Me in the Course of the Year Nineteen

---

HundredandSeventy-Four,”http://www.eat22.com;accessedMay21,2009.
5.JamesBoswell,TheLifeofSamuelJohnsonLL.D.,vol.3(London:LimitedEditionsClub,1938),
p.280.
6.Ibid.
7.Ibid.,pp.33–34.
8.TheMonthlyLetteroftheLimitedEditionsClub,no.109(June1938).
9.M’sTheGospelofSriRamakrishna,publishedin1897,isonethousandpagesofequallyobsessive
recording of every move the Hindu saint made. Like Johnson, the Master spouts truisms of the deepest
profundity amidst the flotsam and jetsam of trivial description: there are countless instances of
Ramakrishnawakingup,gettinginandoutofboats,bedsgettingrepaired,andrecollectionsofdialoguein
minutedetail.
10.E-mailtoauthor,April1,2008.
11.CarolineBergvall,“Via:48DanteVariations,”unpublishedmanuscript.
12.RichardKostelanetz,ed.,ConversingwithCAGE(NewYork:Routledge,2003),p.237.
13.

Brian
Eno,
liner
notes
to
the
1978
release
of
Music
for
Airports,
http://music.hyperreal.org/artists/brian_eno/MFA-txt.html;accessedAugust13,2009.
14.TanLin,from“AmbientStylistics,”Conjunctions35(Fall2000).
15.http://ambientreading.blogspot.com;accessedJune5,2009.
16.

Kurt
Eichenwald,
“On
the
Web,
Pedophiles
Extend
Their
Reach,”
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/21/technology/21pedo.html?
scp=1&sq=Their%20Own%20Online%20World,%20Pedophiles%20Extend%20Their%20Reach&st=cse
accessedAugust10,2009.
17.  Craig Dworkin and Kenneth Goldsmith, eds., Against Expression: An Anthology of Conceptual
Writing(Evanston:NorthwestenUniversityPress,2011),p.138.
18.Ibid.,pp.138–140.
19.  Tom Zeller Jr., “AOL Acts on Release of Data,” New York Times, August 22, 2006,
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940CEFDA123EF931A1575BC0A9609C8B63; accessed
August10,2009.
20.  Chris Alexander, Kristen Gallagher, and Gordon Tapper, “Tan Lin Interviewed,”
http://galatearesurrection12.blogspot.com/2009/05/tan-lin-interviewed.html;accessedAugust3,2009.
21.GeorgesPerec,SpeciesofSpacesandOtherPieces(London:Penguin,1997),pp.240–245.
11.UncreativeWritingintheClassroom

1.  As quoted in David Toop, Ocean of Sound, Ocean of Sound: Aether Talk, Ambient Sound, and
ImaginaryWorlds(London:Serpent’sTail,2000),p.143.
2.HerbertMarcus,AnEssayonLiberation(Cambridge:Beacon,1969),p.22.
Afterword

1.

Jonathan
Swift,
Gulliver’s
Travels,
1726.
Project
Gutenberg
eBook
#829,
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/829/829-h/829-h.htm;accessedAugust22,2010.
2.  Bill Chamberlain (1984), The Policeman’s Beard Is Half Constructed, UbuWeb, Warner Books,
ISBN0–446–38051–2,http://www.ubu.com/historical/racter/index.html;accessedAugust22,2010.

---

3.Ibid.
4.Ibid.;accessedOctober1,2010.
5.Ibid.;accessedAugust22,2010.
6.  Marshall Kirkpatrick, “Objects Outpace New Human Subscribers to AT&T, Verizon,”
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/objects_outpace_new_human_subscribers_to_att_veriz.php;
accessedAugust19,2010.
7.RichardMacManus,“BeyondSocial:Read/WriteintheEraofInternetofThings,”ReadWriteWeb,
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/beyond_social_web_internet_of_things.php; accessed August
22,2010.
8.  Christian Bök, “The Piecemeal Bard Is Deconstructed: Notes Toward a Potential Robopoetics,”
Object10:Cyberpoetics(2002),http://ubu.com/papers/object/03_bok.pdf;accessedJune19,2009.This
afterword owes much of its thinking to the work of Bök, who presents his notion of Robopoetics much
more elegantly than I ever can. Bök is also more optimistic than I am, but his work in the field,
particularlywithhislatestgenomicproject,isconvincingenoughtomakeanyskepticrethinkherposition.
9.Ibid.
10.SusanBlackmore,“Evolution’sThirdReplicator:Genes,Memes,andNowWhat?”NewScientist,
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327191.500-evolutions-third-replicator-genes-memes-and-
now-what.html?full=true;accessedAugust3,2009.

---

SOURCECREDITS

Everyattemptwasmadetoobtainpermissionforworksinthepresentvolume.Ifyouclaimcopyrightto
workappearinginthisvolumeanditisnotlistedbelow,pleasecontactussothatthisoversightmaybe
amendedinfutureprintings.
derekbeaulieu,fromFlatland:courtesyoftheartist.
SarahCharlesworth,“detail”1offorty-fiveblackandwhiteprintsfromApril21,1978(1978):courtesy
oftheartistandSusanInglettGallery,NYC.
SarahCharlesworth,“detail”2offorty-fiveblackandwhiteprintsfromApril21,1978(1978):courtesy
oftheartistandSusanInglettGallery,NYC.
SarahCharlesworth,“detail”3offorty-fiveblackandwhiteprintsfromApril21,1978(1978):courtesy
oftheartistandSusanInglettGallery,NYC.
HenriChopin,“Rouge”appearscourtesyofBrigitteMortonfortheEstateofHenriChopin.
ThomasClaburn,excerptfrom“IfeelbetterafterItypetoyou”appearscourtesyoftheartist.
ClaudeClosky,fromMonCatalog:courtesyoftheartist.
MarcelDuchamp,Fountain(1917):copyright©2010ArtistsRightsSociety(ARS),NewYork/ADAGP,
Paris/SuccessionMarcelDuchamp.
RobertFitterman,“Directory,”wasfirstpublishedinSprawl:Metropolis30A(NorthHollywood:Make
Now,2010).
Nada Gordon, excerpt from “Unicorns Believers Don’t Declare Fatwas” appears courtesy of Nada
Gordon.
DonaldHall,“OxCartMan”:courtesyofthepoet.
TonyHoagland,“AttheGalleria”fromUnincorporatedPersonsintheLateHondaDynasty.Originally
published in Poetry (July/August 2009): copyright © 2009, 2010 by Tony Hoagland. Reprinted with
permissionofGraywolfPress,SaintPaul,Minnesota,www.graywolfpress.org.
PeterHutchinson,DissolvingCouds(1970):courtesyofstudioofPeterHutchinson.
Asger Jorn, “Detourned Painting”: copyright © 2010 Donation Jorn, Silkeborg/Artists Rights Society
(ARS),NY/COPY-DANCopenhagen.
BillKennedyandDarrenWershler,fromapostropheandupdate:courtesyofthepoets.
TanLin,excerptfromBIB:courtesyofTanLin.
ShigeruMatsui,“1007–1103,”fromPurePoems:courtesyofShigeruMatsui.
AlexandraNemerov.Excerptfrom“FirstMyMotorola”appearscourtesyofAlexandraNemerov.
bpNichol,eyes(1966–67):courtesyoftheEstateofbpNichol.
PabloPicasso,StillLifewithChairCaning(1911–12):copyright©2010estateofPabloPicasso/Artists
RightsSociety(ARS),NewYork.
Ara Shirinyan, “Armenia is Great” and “Aruba is Great” from Your Country Is Great: Afghanistan—
Guyana: copyright © 2008 by Ara Shirinyan, reprinted with permission of Futurepoem Books,
www.future-poem.com.
MattSiber,Untitled#26,2004:courtesyoftheartist.
MattSiber,Untitled#21,2003:courtesyoftheartist.
MattSiber,Untitled#13,2003:courtesyoftheartist.

---

MattSiber,Untitled#3,2002:courtesyoftheartist.
MaryEllenSolt,“Forsythia”(1965):permissiongrantedbySusanSolt,literaryexecutoroftheestateof
MaryEllenSolt.
Lawrence Weiner, Two minutes of spray paint directly upon the floor from a standard aerosol spray
can. Collection of Sol LeWitt (1969/1968), copyright © 2010 Lawrence Weiner/Artists Rights Society
(ARS),NewYork.

---

INDEX

A(Zukofsky)
a:anovel(Warhol)
AAAARG
Abbott,EdwinA.;Beaulieu’sparsingof;Dworkin’sparsingof
Abundance,seeTextualabundance
Abuse,sexual
Academia,patchwritingin
Acconci,Vito
Acker,Kathy
Adair,Gilbert
AIDS/HIV
Airwaves
Alexander,Elizabeth
Alienation,artwithgoalof
Allen,Barbara
Allen,Woody
Alphanumericcode,seeCode
Althusser,Louis
Amazon
Ambient:blogposts;inventory;music
America(Warhol)
Andrews,Bruce
TheAndyWarholDiaries(Warhol)
AngelattheFence(H.Rosenblat)
Apollinaire,Guillaume
TheApostropheEngine
Appellatebriefs,reframedasliterature
Appropriation; Benjamin and; in literature; mechanics and distribution of; in poetry; in visual arts; the
Webwith;why;aswritingstrategy
April21,1978
The Arcades Project (Benjamin); appropriation with; constellation-like construction of; as proto-
hypertextualwork
Architecture
Archiving,literatureandroleof
ArialVerdana
“ArmeniaIsGreat”(Shirinyan)
Art: with alienation as goal; authorless; copyright with; as free experimental space; ordinary and
mechanical;seealsoVisualarts
Artworld:concretepoemsandrelationto;literatureworldfiftyyearsbehind;notionsoforiginalityand

---

replicationin;seealsospecificartists
“ArubaIsGreat”(Shirinyan)
Asemicliterature
Ashbery,John,onprocrastination,
Ashley,Brett
Asley,Robert
“AttheGalleriaShoppingMall”
Audiopiece,transcribing
Author:asall-powerful;copyistonsamelevelas
Authority,languageof
Authorless:art;literatureastextif
Authorship:deathof;digitalenvironmentandinfluenceon;questioningoftraditionalnotionsof;Warhol’s
booksand
Autobiography
Avant-garde:art;music;seealsoWarhol,Andy
Babbage,Charles
Babyface
Bach,JohannSebastian
Bachelormachines
Bacterium
Baldwin,James
Balzac,Honoré
Barney,Matthew
Barthes,Roland
BASIC
Bataille,Georges
Bauhaus
Beaulieu,Derek
“BebaCocaCola”(Pignitari)
Beckett,Samuel
Beene,Geoffrey
Beer,Thomas
Beethoven,Ludwigvan
Benjamin,Walter;appropriationand;oncopying;ondialecticalimage;methodologyof
Benny,Jack
Bense,Max
Bergvall,Caroline
“Berkeley”(Silliman)
Bernstein,Charles
theBible
Bidlo,Mike
“Biotherm(forBillBerkson)”(O’Hara)
Blackmore,Susan
Blanqui,LouisAuguste
Blavatsky(Madame)
blert(Scott)

---

Blogposts;ambient;reblogging;ofOntheRoad
Bloom,Orlando
Bluesmusic
Bodilysounds,poemswith
Bök,Christian;bacteriuminfusedwithpoemsby;unreadabletextsof;writingprocessof
Bonaparte,Napoleon
Boredom
Borges,JorgeLuis
Borofsky,Jonathan
Boswell,James
Bowie,David
Brahms,Johannes
Brakhage,Stan
Branding,languageof
Breughel,Pieter
Brilloboxes
Brookner,Anita
Bryan,WilliamJennings
Buck-Morss,Susan
Buddhism,Zen
Bürger,Peter
Burroughs,WilliamS.
Bush,GeorgeW.
Caesar
Cage,John;onboredom;catalogue;IChingwith;methodologyof;onmusic;onunstableelectronictexts
andremixing
CanDialecticsBreakBricks?
Cantos(Pound)
Certeau,Michelde
Chamberlain,Bill
Charles,Ray
Charlesworth,Sarah
Chatrooms
Childmolestation
Chomsky,Noam
Chopin,Henri
Chowdhury,Abdur
Christo
Ciphering,identity
Circle,seeRedcircle;RedCircle
City,architecturerulinglanguagein
Claburn,Thomas
Classroom,uncreativewritingin
Clinton,Bill
Closky,Claude
Cobbing,Bob

---

Coca-Cola,seecoke
Cocker,Joe
Code;literaryvalueof;posingaspoems;seealsoDecoding
Coke
Collage
Collins,Billy
Columbus,Christopher
Commercialism
Conceptualart
Conceptualindex
Concrete poems; art world’s relation to; eyes; music with; Noigandres group with; recognizability of;
screensandfuturewith;soundpoemsasauralcounterpartto;visualsimplicityof;theWeb’sinfluenceon;
seealsospecificconcretepoems
Concretists
Consumerisms;identitybasedon;NewYorkSchool’streatmentof
Content
Context,asnewcontent
Contextualization,indigitalenvironment
Copying;reframinglanguageby;aswritingstrategy;seealsoAppropriation
Copyist
Copyright,withart
Uncoupdedésjamaisn’aboliralehasard(Athrowofthedicewillneverabolishchance)(Mallarmé)
Courier
Creativity,traditionalnotionofwritingand
Croce,Benedetto
Culture;détournementwithlow;graffti;opensource
Cummings,E.E.
Currier,Nathaniel
Curtis,Tony:inNewYorkTimes;nudemediaanddefrockingof;screenshotonNewYorkTimesWebsite
Cut-and-pastefunction
Cut-ups,newspapersand
Dante
Data:entry;information’slinkto;miningprogramforsocialnetworking;seedingcloudof
Databasing
Data-miningprogram
Dawes,Kwame
Day(Goldsmith)
Day,Clarence,Jr.
“TheDeathoftheAuthor”(Barthes)
Debord,Guy:détournementwith;ontransformationoflife;onurbanism;seealsoSituationism
Decoding:FinnegansWake;readingasactof
Deconstructionisttheory
Defrocking,ofCurtiswithnudemedia
DeKooning,Willem
Dérive;seealsoSituationism
Derrida,Jacques

---

Desensitization
“DétournedPainting”
Détournement; in films; of graffti culture; low culture subjected to; of MP3 files; with newspapers; in
paintings;seealsoSituationistInternational
Dia:Beacon
Diagrammingsentences
Dialecticalimage
Dickens,Charles
Difficulty,readingleveldefinedbyquantity
Digitalenvironment:authorshipinfluencedby;contextualizationin;fluidityof;managementasnewskill
setin;teachingandwritingimpactedby
Digitallanguage:water’sfluiditylikenedto;writinginfluencedby
Digitalmedia:alteredbylanguage;literaryrevolutionsparkedby;textualmanipulationinfluencedby
Digitalphotography;Digitaltext,asbody-doubleofprint
Dinosauregg“Directory”(Fitterman);Directory,contentsof;DirtyLittleSchoolgirlStories#2(film),
DissolvingClouds(Hutchinson)
Distribution
Distributor,writeras
Doctorow,Cory
Donne,John
DOSstartuptext
DroeshoutEngraving,beforeandafterinsertingtext
Duchamp, Marcel; on art as solely retinal; “forsaking” art for living; on machines; methodology of;
readymadesof;onrecipeforcreatingart
Duck-Rabbit
Dworkin,Craig;Abbott’sworkparsedby;parsingprojectof
Dydo,Ulla
“EasterWings”(Herbert)
“Eat22”(Harrison)
E-books
Eco,Umberto
Economies,gift
Ecosystem,textual,seeTextualecosystem
“TheEcstasyofInfluence:APlagiarism”(Lethem)
Edison,Thomas
Electronicsoundpoems
Electronictexts
Electronicwritingproject
E-mails,deleting,nudemediawith
Eno,Brian
EroicaSymphony(Beethoven)
Eunoia(Bök)
Exposures(Warhol)
Expressing,withlinguisticdisorientatio
Facebook

---

theFactoryseealsoWarhol,Andy
FavicON
Fénéon,Félix
Filesharing,peer–to–peer
Films,détournementin,hand-painted,Warholsseealsospecificfilms
Finlay,IanHamilton
FinnegansWake(Joyce)
“FirstMyMotorola”(Nemerov
Fitterman,Robert,consumerismand,populistexpressionsand
“Flagging”
FlarfCollective
Flatland(Abbott)
Flavin,Dan
Flexiblemorality
Flickr
Fluidity:ofdigitalenvironment,digitallanguagelikenedtowater’sinterchangeabilitybetweenwordsand
imageswith
Fluxus
Fold-ins,newspapersand
FollowingPiece(Acconci)
Fonts,sansserif,seealsospecificfonts
FoodInc.
Food,inventoryof
“Forsythia”
Foster,Stephen
Fountain
Fragmentation
Fraud,literary
Free-floatingmediafiles
Frenssen,Gustav
Frey,James
Frost,Robert
Fuller,Matthew
“FurnitureMusic”(Satie)
G8summitmeeting
Gainsborough,Thomas
Gandhi,Indira
Gauguin,Paul
Genes
Genius:LeWittandWarholasunoriginal,writersasprogrammerortortured
Geography,psychogeographyoverlaying
GettingInsideofJackKerouac’sHead(Morris)
Gifteconomies
Ginsburg,Mark
Glamrock
Gmail,deletinge-mailsfrom

---

Goldsmith,Kenneth
Gomringer,Eugen
Goodbye20thCentury
Google
Gordon,Nada
Gottlieb,Adolph
Gould,Joe
Graf,Steffi
Graffiticulture
Granville-Barker,Harley
Greenberg,Clement
Guerrillapublication
GuggenheimMuseum
Gursky,Andreas
Gutenberg
Gysin,Brion
Haardt,SaraPowell
Hackett,Pat
Hall,Donald;Collinson;consumerismand
Hannay,JamesOwen
Harrison,Ellie
Harvey,James
Hathayoga
Hawthorne,Nathaniel
Hébuterne,Jeanne
Hegemann,Helene
Helion,Jean
Helvetica
Hemingway,Ernest
Herbert,George
Hirschbiegel,Oliver
History,ofvideoart
Hitler,Adolf
HIV/AIDS
Hoagland,Tony
Hoaxes,literary
Holocaust
Homer
Houellebecq,Michel
HowtoParse:AnAttempttoApplythePrinciplesofScholarshiptoEnglishGrammar(Abbott)
Huebler,Douglas
Hurley,Elizabeth
Hutchinson,Peter
Huysmans,JorisKarl
Hymnen(Stockhausen)
Hyperrealism:asliteraryphotorealism;Placewith;poeticsof;Reznikoffwith

---

Hypertexting
IChing
Identity; ciphering; consumerism and influence on; hyperrealism and; on Internet as authentic or
fabricated;musicandpoliticsof;withnational;shifting;asslipperyissue;theft
Illegibility,parsing
“IlPleut”
(Apollinaire)
Images:alteredbylanguage;dialectical;fluidityandinterchangeabilitybetweenwordsand
ImageWorld
Impermanence,oflanguage
Impressionism
Index,conceptual
Indiana,Robert
Inferno(Dante)
Information: airwaves carrying; data’s link to; desensitization with difficult; processing; readers
becoming managers of; television as one-way flow of; vast quantity of available; Warhol as master of
manipulating
InformationAsMateriallogo
InSara,Mencken,ChristandBeethovenThereWereMenandWomen(Wolgamot)
Instantmessaging
Intensiveprogramming
Intention,plagiarismwith
“L’Internationale”
Internet; April Fool’s Day joke with; authenticity and fabrication with identity on; neutrality; rise of;
writinginfluencedby
Interview
Inventory:ambient;withcontemporaryfeel;offood
Iranianelectionsof
IssueI
Ives,JamesMerritt
Jakobson,Roman
James,Henry
.jpgattachment
Jorn,Asger
Joyce,James;onmyriadformsofwater;withpatchwriting
Junkspace
Kahn,Douglas
Kandinsky,Wassily
Karaoke
Kelley,Mike
Kennedy,Bill
Kennedy,Jackie
Kennedy,Margaret
Kerouac,Jack

---

King,MartinLuther,Jr.
KiteEstuaryMode(withIanGardner)
Klangfarbenmelodie
Knowles,Christopher
Koestenbaum,Wayne
Koolhaas,Rem
Koons,Jeff
Kooser,Ted
Kosuth,Joseph
Kristeva,Jullia
Kruger,Barbara
Lacan,Jacques
Language: airwaves carrying invisible; of authority; of branding; in city ruled by architecture; of
commercialism;copyingtoreframe;digital;digitalmediaalteredby;fragmentarynatureof;impermanent;
many forms of digital; as material; private; public; space of provisional; transformed into poetry by
reframing;writingasactofmoving
L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E
Languagearts
LanguageRemovalServices
Laurent,YvesSaint
Lawler,Louise
Lawsuits:Koons,appropriationand;RandomHouse
LeipzigBookFair
Leiris,Michel
Lenin,Vladimir
Leoncalvo,Ruggiero
Leroy,J.T.
Lessig,Lawrence
Lethem,Jonathan
LeWitt,Sol;onartasexclusivetomind;copyrightand;recipe-basedartof;uncreativewritinginfluenced
by;asunoriginalgenius;visualartassocialcontractfor;visualartsand
Libération
LibraryofCongress
Lichfield,John
Life:concretepoetrywithsecond;infusingmagicintoeveryday;transformationof
LifeofJohnson(Boswell)
“LiftOff”(Bernstein)
“LikeaVirgin”
Lilly,Ruth
Lin,Tan
Lineker,Gary
Linguisticmarks
Lipstadt,DeborahE.
Listening,withnonlistening
Literaryphotorealism
Literaryrevolution,digitalmediawith

---

Literaryvalue
Literaryworld,scandalsandfraud
Literature:appellatebriefscopiedandreframedas;appropriationin;archivingandroleincreationof;art
world fifty years ahead of; asemic; authorless text instead of; distinction between autobiography and;
machinesasnewproducersof;retypingtextconstitutesworkof;uncreativewritingaspostidentity
LittleRedBook(Mao)
Lollapalooza
Looping
TheLostPatrol
Loudsilence
Lowculture,détournementwith
Lyricalpoems
McFadden,Mary
Machines:bachelor;asnewproducersofliterature;RACTER;readinghabitssimilartobinaryprocess
of;Swift’s;writingtext
Maciunas,George
MacLaren,Malcolm
McLuhan,Marshall
MacOSX
Madonna
TheMakingofAmericans(Stein)
MalcolmX
Mallarmé,Stéphane
Management,asnewskillset
Manipulation:digitalmedia’sinfluenceontextual
asnewskillsetindigitalenvironment
Warholasmasterofinformation
Mao,Zedong
Mapping
Marcuse,Herbert
Markson,David
LaMarseillaise
Marx,Karl
“MaryHadaLittleLamb”
Material,languageas
Matsui,Shigeru
Maugham,WilliamSomerset
Meatspace
Mechanicalart
Mechanics:ofappropriationwithdistribution;ofpublishing
Mediafiles,free-floating
Melville,Herman
Melville,Jean-Pierre
Memes
Memoirs,plagiarismwithbest-selling,
Memory

---

Menard,Pierre
Meredith,George
Merleau-Ponty,Maurice
IlMessaggero
Metaphor,road
Methodologies,writing;Bök’s;LeWitton
Metric,wordsusedas
MetropolitanMuseumofArt
Microclimates,withintextualecosystem
Microsoft,
Mills,Neil
Mimeographs,ofpoems
Mimesis
Mind,artasexclusiveto
Mitchell,Joseph
Mobilephones,privateandpubliclanguagespacecollapsedby
Modernism
Modigliani,Amadeo
Mohammad,K.Silem
Molestation,child
MonCatalog(Closky)
Monoskop
Monroe,Marilyn
Montagu,MaryWortley
Morality,flexible
Moro,Aldo
Morris,Simon:OntheRoadretypedby;Webtrafficfor
Movinginformation
MP3files;détournementof;ofpoems
Music; ambient; avant-garde; background; blues; concrete poems with; as constant; identity and; punk
rock;samplingin
“MyCleansingGel”(Closky)
“MyOne-PieceGlasses”(Closky)
“MyRefrigerator”(Closky)
MySecretLife
Nabokov,Vladimir
Names,printed
Napster
Nationalidentity
Neeson,Liam
Nemerov,Alexandra
Netneutrality;seealsoInternet
Newspapers; cut-ups and fold-ins with; headlines; situationist détournement with; see also specific
newspapers
NewYorkCity,asplaceofpubliclanguage
NewYorker

---

NewYorkPhilharmonic
NewYorkSchool
NewYorkTimes;nudemediaandCurtisdefrockedin;Website
Niedecker,LorineCent
Noigandresgroup
Nonlistening
Novels,three-line
Nudemedia:CurtisdefrockedinNewYorkTimeswith;cut-and-pastefunctionwithtextand;e-mailswith;
explanationof
Numberpoems
Obama,Barack
Obliqueautobiography
O’Hara,Frank
Ondine
Ong,Walter
Ono,Yoko
OntheRoad(Kerouac),retypingof
Opensourcecultures
AnOralHistoryofOurTime(Gould)
Ordinaryart
Originality:replicationinartworldwith;traditionalnotionofwritingfocusingon
Oulipo
“OxCartMan”(Hall)
Paik,NamJune
Painting:dètournementinphotography’sinfluenceonRenaissance;writingfiftyyearsbehind
Paperstock
“ParagraphsonConceptualArt”(LeWitt)
Paris,CapitaloftheNineteenthCentury,seeTheArcadesProject(Benjamin)
Parse(Dworkin)
Parsetree
Parse-typing
Parsing:ofAbbott’swork;definitionof;newillegibility;project
DerPassegen-Werk(Benjamin),seeTheArcadesProject(Benjamin)
Passivity,ofreaders
Pastefunction,seeCut-and-pastefunction
Pastiche,asacceptablemethodofwriting
Patchwriting;seealsoPlagiarism
Pearson,Matt
Pedagogy
Peer-to-peerfilesharing
PenguinModernClassics
Perec,Georges
Perlman,Bob
Perloff,Marjorie
Pettibon,Richard

---

ThePhilosophyofAndyWarhol(Warhol)
Phones,mobile
Photography:digital;Hueblerproject;paintinginfluencedby
Photoshopping
Picabia,Francis
Picasso,Pablo
Pignatari,Decio
Place, Vanessa; appellate briefs copied and reframed by; desensitization with; hyperrealism with; on
informationprocessing;statementoffactsand
Plagiarism;withbest-sellingmemoirs;intentional
Plato
Plundering
Poems: anthology of; bacterium infused with; with bodily sounds; code posing as; concrete; electronic
sound;lyrical;mimeographed;MP3filesof;number;pure;sound;verbivocovisual;word-flowerconcrete
Poetry:appropriationin;aslanguageart;reframingandlanguagetransformedinto
PoetryFoundation
ThePoliceman’sBeardIsHalfConstructed(RACTER)
Pollock,Jackson
PontiusPilate
PopArt;seealsoWarhol,Andy
POPism(Warhol)
Populistexpressions
Pornography
Pornolizer
Pound,Ezra
Power:ofauthors;ofprintednames
Presley,Elvis
Prince,Richard
PrintedMatter
Privatelanguage
Procrastination
Producers:machinesasnewliterature;writersaspublishers,distributorsand
Professor,newroleof
Programmer,writersastorturedgeniusor
ProjectRunway
Proust,Marcel
Provisionallanguage:spaceof;astoolforsplintering
PsychogeographyseealsoSituationism
Publication,guerrilla
Publiccommons
Publiclanguage:NewYorkCityasplaceof;typesof
Publisher
Publishing,mechanicsof
Punkrock,situationistrootsof
“PurePoems”
Quality,quantityasnew

---

Quantityofexistinginformationasvastasnewqualityreadingdifficultyleveldefinedby
RACTERRandomHouseReaders:aspassiveuncreativewritersidenticalto
Reading:asactofdecodinghabitswithbinaryprocessofmachinesquantitydefiningdifficultylevelof
Webassiteforwritingand
Readingstrategies
Readymades
Reblogging
Recipes,visualart:DuchamponLeWitt’s
Recycling
Redcircle:imagesavedas.txtmeaningsof
RedCircle(film)
Redgrave,Vanessa
Reed,Lou
Reflecting,withlinguisticdisorientation
Reframing:appellatebriefsasliteraturewithlanguagetransformedintopoetryby
Regestures
Remixing,music
Renaissancepainters
Repetition
Replicationoriginalityinartworldwith;thirdstageof
Repurposingpapers
Retweeting
Retyping:fivepagesMorrisand,ofOntheRoadtextconstitutesworkofliterature
Revolution,literary
RevueOu
Reznikoff,Charles,hyperrealismwith,
Rhys,JeanRicoeur,Paul
Rimbaud,ArthurTheRiseoftheImage,theFalloftheWord(Stephens)
Ritsos,YannistheRoad,metaphorof
RobopoeticsARockRose(withRichardDemarco)
Rolywholyover
Rosenblat,Herman
Rosenblat,Roma
“Rouge”(Chopin)
Rushdie,Salman
Russell,James
Russell,Oland
Sampling
Sand,George
Sansseriffonts;Microsoft’s;seealsospecificsansseriffonts
Sant’Angelo,Giorgio
“Sarrasine”(Balzac)
Satie,Erik
Scandals,literary
TheScarletLetter(Hawthorne)

---

Schubert,FranzPeter
Schulman,David,
Schwartz,Delmore
Sciencefiction
Scorsese,Martin
Scott,Jordan
Screenplays
Seeing,conceptualartwiththinkingand
Self-expression,asimpossibletosuppress
Sentences:diagramming;parsing
“SentencesonConceptualArt”(LeWitt)
“SevenNumbersPoems”(Mills)
SexPistols
Sexualabuse
Shakespeare,William
Shirinyan,Ara
Siber,Matt;Untitled#3;Untitled#13;Untitled#21;Unititled#26
Sieburth,Richard
Silence,loud
Silliman,Ron
Silverstein,Shel
Situationism;oncitystreets;infusingmagicintoeverydaylifewith
SituationistInternational;seealsoSituationism
Situationists:withnewspapers;withpunkrockroots;writing
Smith,David
Socialnetworking;data-miningprogramfor;statusupdates
Socrates
Soliloquy(Goldsmith)
Sollers,Phillipe
Solt,MaryEllen
SonicYouth
Soundpoems
Space:artasfreeexperimental;junk;languageasprovisional;meat-;privateandpubliclanguage
Spam
StableGallery
StatementofFacts(Place)
Statementoffacts,writing
Statements(Weiner)
StatusUpdate
Stealing
Stefans,BrianKim
Stein,Gertrude;ondiagrammingsentences;onnames;repetitionand;visualmeansofreadingworksof
Stephens,Mitchell
StillLifewithChairCaning
Stock,Hausen&Walkman
Stockhausen,Karlehinz
Sturtevant,Elaine

---

Stuttering
Sullivan,Ed
Sullivan
SummerofLove
Suppression,ofself-expression
Swift,Jonathan
S/Z(Barthes)
Taylor,Liz
Teaching,digitalenvironmentimpacting
Technology,asrulechanger
Telegraph
Television,one-wayflowofinformationwith
TenderButtons(Stein)
Testimony:TheUnitedStates(1885–1915)Recitative(Reznikoff)
Text: authorless; DOS startup; Droeshout Engraving before and after inserting; editor; electronic;
literatureconstitutesretypingof;machineswriting;messaging;unreadable
Text-basedforms
Textualabundance:dearthof;quantityasnewqualitywith
Textualecosystem:linguisticmarksinnetworked;managing;microclimateswithin;watercycleechoedin
Textualmanipulation
Theft,identity
ThermalSensationsandDesiresofPeoplePassingbytheGatesoftheClunyMuseumAroundanHour
afterSunsetinNovember
Thinkership
Thinking:aboutbooksinsteadofreadingbooks;conceptualartwithseeingand
Thirdreplicatorstage
TimeMagazine
“TimePainting”(Ono)
TimesRoman
Torrentfiles
Transcribing:ProjectRunway;shortaudiopiece
Transgenderedpersons
Transsexualpersons
Tucholsky,Kurt
Tweets;re
Twitter;archivingof;duringIranianelectionsof2009
Twominutesofspraypaintdirectlyuponthefloorfromastandardaerosolspraycan(Weiner)
Typefaces,onWebsites
Ulysses(Joyce)
Uncreativewriting:inclassroom;explanationof;LeWittand;aspostidentityliterature;retrograffitiwith;
retyping five pages; screenplays with; self-reflexive use of appropriated language with; transcribing
ProjectRunway;transcribingshortaudiopiece;Warholand
“UnicornBelieversDon’tDeclareFatwas”(Gordon)
UniversityofCaliforniaPress
UNIX

---

Unoriginalgenius
Untitled#3
Untitled#13
Untitled#21
Untitled#26
Urbanism
Value
Valulessness
Vaneigem,Raoul
VariablePiece#70(Huebler)
Verbivocovisualpoems
Verdana
Verizon
“Vexations”(Cage)
“Via:48DanteVariations”(Bergvall)
Video
Videoart,historyof
Viénet,René
Viewership
Visual arts: appropriation in; Duchamp on recipes for; as exclusive to mind; LeWitt and creation of;
LeWitt’srecipe-based;associalcontract;Warholandcreationof;writingwithlessonstakenfrom
Visualsimplicity
Vollbracht,Michaele
VonFurstenberg,Diane
Voyeurism
Walcott,Derek
Warhol, Andy; as advocate of ordinary and mechanical; authorship of books and; Brillo boxes and; on
Coke; on desensitization; films; flexible morality of; literary body of work; as master of manipulating
information; oeuvre as text instead of literature; with real speech; with regestures; uncreative writing
influencedby;asunoriginalgenius;visualartsand
WarholMuseum
WashingtonPost
Watercycle,fluidityofdigitallanguageand
Waters,Muddy
Webern,Anton
Websites:NewYorkTimes;screenshotofNewYorkTimes;typefaceson
Webster’sThirdNewInternationalDictionary
the Web: appropriation and; April Fool’s Day joke with; concrete poetry given second life by;
constellation-likeconstructionof;hypertextingand;readingstrategiesfor;riseof;assiteforreadingand
writing;trafficforMorris’sblogon;seealsoInternet
Weiner,Lawrence
Wershler,Darren
WhitneyMuseum
Wickham,Anna
Wikipedia

---

Williams,WilliamCarlos
Wired
Wittgenstein,Ludwig
Wolgamot,JohnBarton
Wolman,Gil
Woolf,Virginia
Wordprocessing
Words:tobeshared,movedandmanipulated;fluidityandinterchangeabilitybetweenimagesand;formal
andmaterialpropertiesof;meaningv.sound;quantityof;usedasmetric;writersandshiftingrelationship
to
“TheWorkofArtintheAgeofMechanicalReproduction”(Benjamin)
World-flowerconcretepoems
Writers:expandingandupdatedroleof;methodologyof;plagiarismby;procrastinationin;asproducer,
publisher, and distributor; as programmer v. tortured genius; readers becoming uncreative; words and
shiftingrelationshipto;writer’sblockin;seealsospecificwriters
Writer’sblock
Writing: as act of moving language; Bök’s process for; collage and pastiche as acceptable methods of;
dataentrysimilartoliterary;digitalenvironmentimpacting;digitalmediainfluencing;Internet’sinfluence
on; originality and creativity with traditional notions of; painting fifty years ahead of; situationist;
statementoffacts;asuncreativeandstuck;visualartswithlessonsfor;Webassiteforreadingand;see
alsoUncreativewriting
Writingstrategies:appropriationas;copyingas
Xenakis,Iannis
TheXenotextExperiment(Bök)
Xerox
Yoga,Hatha,
YourCountryIsGreat(Shirinyan)
YouTube
ZenBuddhism
Zola,Émile
Zukofsky,Celia
Zukofsky,Louis

---

Document Outline

• Acknowledgments
• Introduction
• 1
• Revenge of the Text
• 2
• Language as Material
• 3
• Anticipating Instability
• 4
• Toward a Poetics of Hyperrealism
• 5
• Why Appropriation?
• 6
• Infallible Processes: What Writing Can Learn from Visual Art
• 7
• Retyping On the Road
• 8
• Parsing the New Illegibility
• 9
• Seeding the Data Cloud
• 10
• The Inventory and the Ambient
• 11
• Uncreative Writing in the Classroom: A Disorientation
• 12
• Provisional Language
  • Afterword
  • Notes
  • Source Credits
  • Index

---