MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2060753628 · doi:10.1353/cli.2011.0015

Transformations of the Poetry Book as General Economy: Darren Wershler-Henry's the tapeworm foundry

2011· article· en· W2060753628 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Susan Vanderborg

Notice bibliographique

RevueContemporary Literature · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueDigital Humanities and Scholarship
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPoetryLiteratureSpoken wordArtHistoryArt history

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Transformations of the Poetry Book as General Economy:Darren Wershler-Henry's the tapeworm foundry Susan Vanderborg (bio) What will avant-garde poetry books look like in the next decades of the twenty-first century? There has been much critical speculation over the new models of literary production, circulation, and reception generated by digital poetry and archiving or by new incarnations of poetic book sculptures and installations.1 Lovers of these forms can find numerous examples described in Darren Wershler-Henry's galvanizing text the tapeworm foundry andor the dangerous prevalence of imagination (2000), a poem composed wholly of notes for creating future poetry texts.2 Several of the experiments are already being tested. A 2008 student art exhibit at the University of Pennsylvania featured tapeworm-inspired poems made "via conference call," "television … channel" surfing, and "ocr scanner" (Wershler-Henry, tapeworm 27, 32, 37).3 [End Page 146] Even the tapeworm foundry's visionary direction to "encode [text] in a helix of dna" (39) refers back to an ongoing project by fellow Canadian conceptual poet Christian Bök.4 But rather than simply promoting the newest poetry vocabulary, Wershler-Henry's book is equally dedicated to the past, to ideas of both excessive repetition and obsolescence. The result is a simultaneous display of multiple technologies and formats, even ostensibly competing ones, in a literary economy that redefines the material boundaries of the poem. Wershler-Henry's previous poetry book, nicholodeon (1997), is, in part, a set of creative responses to the visual and procedural experiments of bpNichol. [T]he tapeworm foundry increases the scope for a lively art of repetition and variation. As the frontcover flap advertises, much of the book focuses on extending old avant-garde "recipes we've inherited," often couched in the prior authors' words. Lines on a single page of the tapeworm foundry shift nimbly across text references from futurism, Dada, New York school poetry, American Romanticism, and neo-romanticism, with art nouveau and Marxism thrown in for good measure (14). Poetry-writing directions themselves are a traditional avant-garde tactic, Wershler-Henry concedes, as he quotes Tristan Tzara's recommendation to "cut out each of the words" from a newsprint story and rearrange them (16) or Bernadette Mayer's exercises for a St. Mark's Poetry Workshop (22). The very familiarity of one of Mayer's best-known directions, slightly revised in the tapeworm foundry to "work your ass off to change the language [End Page 147] but never get famous" (22), gives that charge a satiric twist here.5 Reviewers have commented at length on the extent and implications of the tapeworm foundry's allusions. Marjorie Perloff reads the book as a paradigmatic example of avant-garde modernism revisited, its clauses combining Gertrude Stein's sentence structure with T. S. Eliot's symbolism and Marcel Duchamp's art (Twenty-first-Century Modernism 76). Tim Conley describes the tapeworm foundry as a text "in love with possibilities" (25) but speculates on whether the number of quick allusions reflects "a rejection of commitment" to a fully developed new book poetics (24). Johanna Drucker sees the text's repetition even more strongly as problematic. While it might "show the viability of old mythologies …to newly engaging ends" ("Un-Visual" 126), she argues, the tapeworm foundry comes across as "a work of exhaustion" and "defeat" as much as "play": "The title invokes both industrial production and organic parasitic replication equally, and the conviction that art and literature can be reduced to formulaic operations whose terms can be stated is clear" (123). Questions of influence and formulas come up especially in connection with one of the tapeworm foundry's main dialogues with predecessors, in the scrutiny of Language writing—its precursors, evolution, and effects on subsequent poetries. Wershler-Henry once described Language authors as "limit-case writers" who "didn't leave much frontier left" (Wershler-Henry and Stefans 34). As Bök comments, "Wershler-Henry has observed that, for young poets like us, the conceit of entropy has defined the millennial anxieties of our own belatedness, particularly in the face of the exciting, but imposing, precedent set by Langpo, whose broad and varied innovations have so thoroughly exhausted the...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,899
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,002
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,049
Tête enseignante GPT0,210
Écart entre enseignants0,161 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueContemporary LiteratureMême sujetDigital Humanities and ScholarshipTravaux en français237 207