I’ve lost any enthusiasm I had for this project, but I’m continuing it, anyway–today with just excerpts from my diary, some of them repeating stuff I already have somewhere in this manuscript. Sorry. But who’s reading?
8:30 P.M. Thursday 30 January 1992
The mail was moderately interesting for a change: letters from Arnold Falleder and Jonathan Brannen, and forms to fill out for that international Who’s Who company that David Thomas Roberts recommended me for, and for this year’s write-up on my press in Poet’s Market.
10 P.M. Saturday 1 February 1992
I had what seemed good ideas concerning my sonnet, especially just after retiring for a nap this afternoon. Geof had said last night that he thought I was a maniac for continuing so persistently with the sonnet, but that it was a form of greatness. He also said he preferred one of the versions of the poem three or four before my “final” one better than the final one, which was what got me thinking about how to improve it again. I got awakened from my nap by a call from C. L. Champion, of all people. We talked for about two hours. He seems quite bright but is only around Surllama’s age. He was quite taken with Of Manywhere-at-Once, which was encouraging. After talking with him, and Geof, who called a second time because he needed the title of David’s book, I had another idea or two. For a while I was very happy with the new version of the sonnet but now I think only two changes good ones, and they’re both minor. I’ll probably try to think of yet more changes.
10 February 1992. I need some kind of success soon–I seem (as I’ve been thinking every once in a while for several months now) that I’ve become addicted to favorable attention, and start having withdrawel symptoms if I don’t get some kind of applause or the equivalent, however small, every week or so–like the acceptance of a poem, or a compliment about one of my essays from a colleague.
8 P.M. Tuesday 18 February 1992
I heard back from Laurel Spence. Nice letter but she didn’t seem much interested in Of Manywhere-at-Once, saying that it wasn’t the kind of book she looks for for review. She sent me a copy of one of her poetry collections–not bad, though more quotidian in subject matter and thought than I consider the best poetry to be. Self-expression much more than exploration of the language, or a quest for higher meanings. I’ve always considered her too set in her ways to be open to the full world of poetry, and her response is further evidence of the validity of my impression.
9 P.M. Thursday 20 February 1992
I got an encouraging postcard from Dana Gioia. He said he didn’t have time to start up a correspondence but that if I sent him some of my reviews and poems he would look them over and send me comments on them, when time permitted. This evening I got together a packet of things. Unfortunately I don’t have many textual poems to send him–he specified that I send him material in print. (Mediocrities always need a previous mediocrity to verify any writer’s worth before being able to devote serious attention to the writer.) If he’s got any kind of ear and/or brain, he should like my criticism, though.
9 P.M. Saturday 22 February 1992
A box of new products from Geof, without a cover letter. The latest issue of Alabama Dogshoe Moustache I particularly liked, for it had a wonderful couplingual poem by George Swede, which I quote in full, “graveyarduskilldeer.” Geof also sent me a list of the words he’s found relating to verbo-visual art. This is the skeleton of his historical dictionary of verbo-visual art. I have a few problems with it, the main one being that he includes a lot of terminology that doesn’t have anything to do with verbo-visual art, such as my own term, “alphaconceptual poetry.” He also wants to use “An” with “historical” in the title, and I hate this exception to the rule that “an” goes only before words beginning with vowels. Some of the entries seem weakly defined, but that’s no doubt because this is just a rough draft. I approve of the effort and hope I can help but it looks like it’ll require an incredibly large amount of work.
11 P.M. Monday 24 February 1992
A Letter from Len Fulton. He has decided he can’t run as it is because it is a review of a book I published. But he made up for that by inviting me to review a collection of d. a. levy stuff–and he suggested I revise my Kempton piece so it was a discussion of a kind of poetry which used Kempton’s pieces as examples. Of course, that’s how I saw the piece to begin with, but I made some changes that I hope will make it acceptable to him–and accepted his invitation to review the levy book. I also spent an hour and a half at the library helping Bernice Weiss set up the Tuesday Writers’ Group display that Bernice got Nancy, the librarian, to let us do.
9 P.M. Tuesday 25 February 1992
Metropophobobia, an otherstream store I’m sending 3 copies of Of Manywhere-at-Once and some other items on consignment.
11:30 P.M. Wednesday 26 February 1992
I worked fairly hard most of the day, but the main result was my deciding I was all screwed up about what alphaconceptuality was, and that the version of the Kempton piece that I wrote for Fulton this morning to replace the one I sent him Monday needed itself to be replaced, which I just finished doing.
10 P.M. Thursday 27 February 1992
My response to the Core Questionnaire on Visual Poetry (nothing, alas, profound, and it tired me). Next day a letter to Geof on the changes in my poetics terminology. New term: “Portmanteaual Poetry.” Plus work on my next Factsheet Five column, which I will base on my Sontag piece.
2 March: the mail was pretty good: a note from Jack Moskovitz and–surprisingly–a genial card from Dana Gioia, who said my package had arrived and he’denjoyed its contents. He also sent me, separately, a review he’d done in 1977 of a collection of haiku, and an ad for an anthology of literary essays he had a piece in. I ordered a copy of the latter and expect to write the author of the haiku book as Gioia suggested. I also wrote a short letter back to Gioia.
I spent the afternoon of 4 March at a meeting of the arts and humanities council. It was interesting but not very helpful. I wanted to try to get something done about making my press eligible for grants but no real opening for a disucssion about it presented itself. Too many people were there with competing concerns–concerns, moreover, that the majority of the other people shared, as they wouldn’t’ve my problems getting RASP eligible for grants. I went to the meeting with the beginning of a headache. I had planned to gulp down some aspirins before leaving but forgot to. I was pretty shot on my return and still feel mildly crappy despite having taken two aspirns at 5 followed by two alka-selzers with aspirin in them at around 6:30. In short, not a good day at all.
5 March I spent some time thinking about a proposal I hope to send the arts and humanities council about an improved artists’ and artworks’ registry. It’s something that should appeal to them, and get me better involved with them.
11 March 1992. I just finished a final revision of my response to the Core Questionnaire on Visual Poetry. My answers were pretty pedestrian but sound enough, I suppose. Next day a letter from CL Champion with a silly/amusing parody of my Sonnet–and a revision thereof!
14 March: a copy of the latest issue of the newsletter John Byrum edits, with the second excerpt from my book in it. It was reassuring to see that the series of excerpts is indeed continuing.
16 March: a letter from D. T. Roberts that was very favorable about Of Manywhere-at-Once.
10:30 P.M. Thursday 19 March 1992
The big event of the day was the coining of a new term, “textual figuration,” to replace “textual vizlation.” “Figuration” is a standard English word meaning “act or instance of representing a shape or figure,” so it’s close enough to meaning visual art to use it for that, it seems to me. A person practicing it would be a “figurateur,” I’ve decided. The relevant adjective would be, “figurational,” to distinguish it from “figurative,” which has a conflicting literary meaning.
26 March 1992. 2 filled-out data sheets for the arts-in-eduation artists’ registry, one more or less properly filled-out, the other scantily filled out in protest of the kind of information asked for; my computerized arts-registry proposal; and a brief cover-letter to Jean Martensen, the Arts & Humanities Council executive director.
10:30 P.M. Saturday 28 March 1992
A note from Len Fulton that he was using my infra-verbal poetry piece in the April issue.
10 P.M. Friday 17 April 1992
Then the incoming mail arrived and included 3 pleasant items: 2 copies of the latest issue of the
Small Press Review with my guest editorial in it.
19 April 1992: a decision I made and might actually stick to: to drop out of the arts and council, and not get involved in any new organizations such as the local writers’ group I was going to try to get to a meeting of; also the writers’ conference I was going to try to get a fellowship to. I’ve got to concentrate on getting the RASPbooks done, keeping from falling too far behind with my correspondence, continuing to get material into print here and there, and–most of all–getting my next book done. I mustn’t spread myself too thin.
8:30 P.M. Friday 1 May 1992
Todd bought 16 books, including my Of Manywhere-at-Once. He seemed nice. Apparently he’s a recovered, or recovering, druggie. Does photography and seems from the pictures he showed me to have a good eye. He goes in for road kills, though, which aren’t my favorite subject matter. He did a series of one corpse that recorded its “life” over a period of several days. It had some quite interesting moments.
Roundedness is wonderful, and fitting in is fabulous. However, genius doesn’t require either to create or postulate.
As I said, roundedness is something I need to think about more. I, of course, am not implying that genius requires it but suggesting that
the higher one’s roundedness quotient is, the more effective one will
likely be at creating or postulating–although one’s creativity quotient
would outweigh it, as would a true intelligence quotient, which would
measure much more than short-term numeracy and literacy and the mental manipulation of geometric shapes and whatever else most IQ tests measure.
This response is late, by the way, because I didn’t know I got your comment till today (due to my ignorance about how this site handles comments).
Later Note, 4 August 2011: is there anyone more stupid than the person who enters a discussion only to make an assertion (anonymously, of course), then disappears?
–Bob