What to do about doing? Ethically-innovative poetics and the 'puppet strings' that b[l]ind poetic praxis
Potyrala, Brandon Michael
MetadataShow full item record
Historically, poetry has been the staging ground for linguistic innovation; a field where the malleability and plasticity of language reveals itself. The foregoing analysis seeks to enforce such a statement, asserting that innovation in poetics is a necessary component to literary genealogical and historical evolution. Though, it is a small trifle to pay lip service to innovation in poetics and quite another to seriously and ethically articulate what innovation in poetics entails, requires and obliges. Therefore, it is suggested that a discussion of, and adherence to, ethics is necessary for the realization of innovative currents in the field of poetry, and that ethics, must indicate constancy and consistency to poetic objects in all of their multivalent forms. Furthermore, a primary purpose of this research is to suggest that one of the most hailed and celebrated innovative poetic schools, "So-called" Language Poetry, has failed in terms of creating truly innovative and ethical poetry. Using the poetry of Bruce Andrews and Ron Silliman, the following textual analysis demonstrates that 'So-called' Language Poetry has failed to be ethically-innovative, relying exclusively on institutional and canonical apparatuses (grammatical rules, University systems, etc.) while simultaneously indicting them as stifling, commodifying forces. In addition, it is contended that Andrews and Silliman both succumb to the subtle pressures of systems, readers and other poetic objects, which are invested in preserving the literary status quo rather than transgressing it. This study illustrates the need for an ethical discourse through language and poetics, while also unveiling those institutional forces and pressures that obstruct innovation in poetics. Conclusively, the textual analysis endeavored herein demonstrates the necessity for ethics in regard to innovative poetic practices and exposes and confronts the institutional systems bent on maintaining their literary hegemony.