Philly Free School: Thug-ism

For the Philly Free School, as a collective, to cut through the blarney, all the blarneying levels of post-modernity as a construct, we chose a tack of extremity, extreme disobedience enlightened elitism/classicism, expressed with edges left in of doubt, foreboding, ghostly/apparitional presences, which accrued to all of us as we ploughed through the Aughts in Philadelphia. It's not just that, as has previously been stated, we skipped intermediate steps from post-modern comic auto-destruct modes to our own version of centuries-encompassed-from-America apotheosis— the lot of us, individually and together, were little thugs, and, in an ironic fashion, the "thug" image of Philadelphia in the American press (derived, mainly, from the press's derisive desire to cover the whole city and environs with or in South Philly) does work for P.F.S. Elitist/classicist/thug-ism— that's a new one for the American art scene to deal with, and one which (to my knowledge) has never been seen in America before, wide safety nets be damned.
Dovetailing with this, it needs to be said, for those who care despite the non-encumbrance of socio-sexual and socio-aesthetic freedoms in Aughts Philly, the landscape we inhabited was not without violence. That's one constituent level of the P.F.S. aesthetic which should make New York cringe, whether they then opt to turn away or not the edge expressed around carnality, where sex and death manifest simultaneously, and the urgency around carnality and its contexts carries with it darkling undercurrents of physical violence, murder, mayhem, and the dissolution of boundaries which renders these things cognitively discrete. The razor's edge approach to drugs was one not unfamiliar to all of us, including Mary, Abby, and Jenny too, from PAFA to the Highwire and back.
If I stand like a thug behind our collective thug-ism, it's because the elitism/classicism built into our creations' formality and formal renderings in general lends the entire P.F.S. enterprise enough elegance and starkly imaginative gorgeousness that whoever in the United States elects to butt their heads against our brick walls will probably lose a substantial amount of blood. The whole broke-down contextualization of P.F.S. might be a joke if we weren't also funnier than the semi-serious po-mo joke anti-art/junk-art crew, who (their master narrative runs) make us laugh to ourselves in our despair, or make us laugh now to despair later, but may have to face a long-term socio-historical prognosis of cat-calls and thrown tomatoes, from a Campbell's soup can or not. We were, and remain, classicists with pistols.
Another important level of awareness, for those interested in P.F.S., and the unique congeries of contexts around us, socially and sexually— P.F.S., and, in fact, all the major Philadelphia Renaissance sectors, were as completely and totally street as we could possibly be. We weren't watching Philly street-life from the sidelines and taking notes most of us spent most of the Aughts on the front-lines. By the time I wrote Apparition Poems, the vitality of Aughts Philly street-life was receding into entropy and atrophy— but the book, nonetheless, is a reaction to a decade spent living in the street, as it were— and doing so by maintaining at least some thug-level street-smart survival skills, against the dealers, impostors, and clowns who perpetually threatened me, and us.
In fact, given how tight certain restraints can be on Philly street-life, it is amazing to me that we were granted a solid decade to play around in. I did feel, especially in the early Aughts, a sense of being personally charmed— that when I walked and rode the Philly streets, a beneficent cosmic force was covering me, encasing me in a kind of shield— nothing could hurt me or touch me unless I wanted it to. I was young, of course, and (possibly) wrong— but standing at the corner of 13th and Ellsworth in South Philly at 2 am, or walking home at dawn from Nemon Buckery's Halloween party on 49th Street to 21st and Race, that sense of being guarded was acute. Abs, Mary, Jeremy, Jenny (not to mention Mike Land) all seemed to feel the same way— and we would hit the streets, go anywhere and do anything. Had we not been thugs, or at least partly carried ourselves as such, I'm sure someone would've killed us, before we began; and there's nothing soft about our body of work, either.

Philly Free School: Class, more

About P.F.S. and class— most of us were raised middle-class. The European classicism we espoused, as one component part of our collective aesthetic, does leave us open to accusations of bourgeois interest and prejudice. A hard-line Marxist would have to say that any form of aesthetic classicism is inherently bourgeois. But our demonstrable downward class mobility, inverts this— none of us inherited a serious amount of money, and we all lived hand to mouth in Philly in the Aughts. We were authentically Bohemian— not ashamed, and materially compelled to work retail jobs and occasionally starve. The whole catalogue of our carousing exploits had to happen in this context— and the magic of Philly in the Aughts was that we pulled off these exploits somewhat gracefully and unselfconsciously.
For example, during the years we spent bar-hopping, money for drinks made for an empty fridge at home. If I wanted a midnight snack, it would have to be bread and water. Not to mention that I met Abby and Mary, Mike Land and Nick Gruberg from working retail at the Rittenhouse Square Barnes and Noble in Center City.
Material perks came in and out of our lives— when Abby, Mary, and Jenny were attending PAFA in the early Aughts, each was allotted a personal studio. They could both work and crash there. I spent many nights with Mary in her studio, with its checkered linoleum floor and huge bay windows, on Cherry Street. She had a pull-out couch. After PAFA, the trio maintained co-op studio spaces, but never a completely self-run personal studio again.
All of us had good luck with people throwing drinks and drugs at us. The communal vibe in Aughts Philadelphia was very intense; if you were on the inside, and had something worthwhile to offer sexually, socially, or artistically, everyone was encouraged to share their goods and services. This was especially important for Mary, who was not just a pot-head but a fully fledged pot addict. One truly surprising thing about Aughts Philly is that all the different sectors maintained their own classicist ethos— The Philadelphia Independent offered their classicist form of quirky urban hipster journalism; the Making Time DJs were as classicist as they could possibly be about what they played; and then us. Sharing your intoxicants expressed complicity with both this gestalt sensibility and the will to get trashed beyond it.
Most of us, in Philadelphia in the Aughts, felt an acute sense of being "in" something. I did, but was circumspect about it, and about expressing this "in" from the inside, because I was only intermittently confident that anyone would ever notice us. Owing to a stable, secure body of artistic work having issued from these nexuses, I have more confidence now. This confidence is a compensation for the intense socio-cultural aridity and lethargy of the recessional Teens, as the Twenties take wing.
Abs and I were two of the less political Free School artists. For myself, I felt that the variegated life I was leading made its own kind of statement in Aughts America, and I'm sure Abs would say the same, possibly with more emphatic force, owing to gender and "queer" issues, which have as much permanent relevance as anything else.

Adam Fieled (editor, Plymouth Meeting, Pa): "Apparition Poem #1342 (for Jenny Kanzler)"

What’s in what eyes?
What I see in hers is
mixed greenish silence,
somewhat garish, it’s
past girlish (not much),
but I can’t touch her
flesh (set to self-destruct),
anymore than she can
understand the book
her cunt is, that no one
reads directly, or speaks
of, there’s no love other
than “could be,” but I
think of her throat cut—
that’s her slice of smut.

© Adam Fieled 2010

Jenny Kanzler:Things Beneath the Surface 2

 Jenny Kanzler: Things Beneath the Surface 2.

Barry Schwabsky's song of himself

You know, you can’t necessarily decide what you should do and then execute that decision. Some people can, but not me. For me, it’s not a question of what I should write or even what I could write—but of what I can write. I recognize that my capacities and aptitudes are fairly limited. There are all kinds of things I like to read but are part of an endeavor that I know it’s not in me in contribute anything substantial to. To some extent these limitations are almost physiological: I’ve got a nervous disposition, I’m easily bored, so it doesn’t work for me to try and do anything in too systematic a way—it’s got to be something more mercurial. And then there are questions of what you might call self-image that reinforce this. There are a lot of people out there who are trying to be professional poets. I don’t think they really are that entirely—in most cases it would be more accurate to say that they are professional poetry teachers. But in any case, they need to have a certain track record, they need to publish a certain amount and so on. And I think it makes more sense for those people to do project-oriented works than it does for me, so I kind of steer clear of their territory. I believe in a division of labor! It’s all worth doing, but that doesn’t mean that I have to do all of it. I cultivate an idea of myself as an amateur, so I like pushing the idea that I will write poetry without a plan or schedule, that it will be something I dip into periodically—like a dilettante! Why not? (Anyway, it’s hard enough for me to do that with the writing I have to work at systematically, my art criticism.) I admit that this is really a sort of vanity, not very different from my notion that since I don’t work in an office, I will never dress in any clothes that anybody would ever be likely to wear to the office—that way no one will ever mistake me for an office worker. Likewise, no one should ever mistake my poetry for that of a creative writing professor. Ridiculous, I know, but there you go.

Robert Archambeau: Rhizomes and more

...You’re probably right about the trend toward book-length works in post-avant writing. I have nothing like actual data to work with, but that’s never stood in my way before, so let’s roll with the assumption that there is a trend toward book-length poems. I suspect you’re right for two reasons: an institutional one and another that has to do with the large-scale history of poetics. You really can’t underestimate the influence of that massive institutional edifice, the MFA program, on poetry nowadays. One of the things many people are encouraged to do in such programs is to write series of linked poems. I understand why: it’s a way to get students to stretch out beyond the short lyric, to explore a form or a topic, and to understand the architecture of a book. So that’s the institutional reason. The other reason is that our poetics have evolved to a point where we aren’t really asking for a very rigorous coordination of parts into a whole. That is, you no longer have to write with the kind of OCD level of attention to how your book-length project adds up to a whole in order to think of it as a single project. Milton would have died a little to think that a part of Paradise Lost had only an oblique connection to the unified whole, for example. But in our time, there is a strong sense that the truly sophisticated work eschews classical decorum, or even the kind of hidden unity behind a façade of fragments that we find in a poem like Eliot’s Waste Land. Some of this comes from the triumph of deconstruction and post-structuralism: after Derrida and company showed us all the fissures and disunities in the texts we’d thought of as whole, the goals of the Big Unified Work seemed less viable. And when Deleuze and Guattari described the rhizome as the form of our time, they authorized a lot of works in which various parts connected with each other somewhat haphazardly. So we see a lot of book-length poems where the bar for textual unity has been set fairly low. You can call it a book-length work if a lot of the parts only sort of connect. In a way, you could say what’s changed hasn’t been a matter of substance so much as it has been a matter of labeling. Wallace Stevens presented his first book, Harmonium, as a collection of individual poems. But those poems have enough by way of thematic and stylistic overlap that, had he been able to anachronistically appropriate Deleuze and Guattari’s language and called it a single, rhizomatic whole, no one now would bat an eye. Anyway, this movement toward big works that are really collections of linked fragments isn’t as new as we’d like to think. The roots of it go back at least as far as Poe’s essay “The Poetic Principle,” in which he argues that the unified long poem isn’t really possible....

A long letter from JET (Jeremy Eric Tenenbaum)

C: To be honest, I canNOT remember the last time I heard a poem THAT LONG (20 minutes read aloud?) with that much exuberance and vigilance to the detail-oriented care of what seemed every single word written/spoken. You reinvent for us (for me at least) the road to self discovery with the poem. There were threads of separate image/subject/style, these individual threads which you kept braiding from your mouth to our ears. And of course there are countless forms from poetry's history which repeat or rephrase. But these threads were very much your own, and each seemed to have total worlds of their own, almost separate voices of awareness (not to say that at times there won't be unconscious experiences which propel a thread into a certain conscious experience, but maybe no, maybe yes, maybe no, maybe maybe maybe, whatever...) but at the same time were each born from the same conscious being. Sometimes different ages of one woman lived in a single moment of a single word, so it seemed. How would you explain how you came to construct each thread's own voice?
CC: you are an incredibly generous listener and reader. Your choice of wording in terms of "threads" is entirely apropos as this is exactly how I refer to the different voices / sections / styles. (I have been obsessed with the "weave" since my Temple days and the notion of weaving together disparate threads which maintain their individuality continues to fascinate me).
AND MY natural enough REACTION IS: Well, what the hell was I thinking when I called poetry masturbatory?? ------- when it's abundant clear that THIS sort of exchange does masturbation one better!: "I'll help YOU masturbate YOURSELF if you help ME masturbate MYSELF!" It's not even proper whoredom; at least whores have market rates, and some sort of ambiguous relative worth, and there's a genuine exchange, and at least the john gets OFF!
No no no, this is something far creepier, far less human: this is the mutual agreement to suspend intelligence (and joy) for the sake of not having one's obvious inadequacies pointed out. "I know I'm ugly, but if I promise not to mention you're ugly, we can both say we're attractive, all right?"
Witness C’s nonsensical, over-the-top drooling (which reminds me exactly of Shitlock's panegyrics before each of his readers): "You reinvent for us...the road to self-discovery" !!! "these individual threads which you kept braiding from your mouth to our ears" !!! "Sometimes different ages of one woman lived in a single moment of a single word" !!!!!!!!! MY GOD, how could he keep lifting that heavy shit-shovel? (especially with his little t. rex arms?)
And GLORY BE, how GENEROUS of Babs to acknowledge! and celebrate! how clever little C is! in his critical blowjob question! "My god, how wonderful you are, C, for understanding how magnificent I am!" Grotesque, absofuckinlutely grotesque little lice. AND I refrained, only with great difficulty, from c-ing-and-p-ing (pasting and lambasting!) the viscous blob of Barbara's pseudo-self-hagiographic criticism which is easy enough to mock: "The 'aging' of the threads / personas has become an increasingly complicated question.... to explore the 'little girl consciousness' as it grows and evolves into an 'adult (woman) writer' with an ever-increasing anxiety in relation to language." -- Oh indeed! Indeed! Girls become women indeed! Thank GOD I have a POET handy to explain these ELUSIVE MYSTERIES OF LIFE! Or rather (my god what they would think of my slovenly approach to criticism!) -- to employ a more decently high-fallutin' tone appropriate to the occasion: "The poet (the writer) elucidates (or "makes known") a realm of gendered dispositions, inflections, connotations, and un-languaged (or rather, pre-languaged) communications which take as their subject language itself -- that is, the "word" in relation the "wor(l)d" with transgressive yet gendered "l" understood -- in the service of making known ("elucidating") the dialectic of female maturation, both as she experiences in relation to herself (made known through language) and as her language itself experiences its own maturation in relation to herself (and make known through her own maturation)."
Now that's a lotta mutual maturation.
Once again, as I've too often ranted, poor Adam, whom I desperately need on my side: THESE are the ENEMIES: obfuscation and pretension, hucksterism, those who want us to buy without having anything to sell us, those who want us to love without having any way to love us back, those who want to become saints by martyring US.
AND IT'S A WAR.

Chris McCabe (London, UK): fragment from The Nuptials

the smell of the sea
on your skin—

as today your breasts
(can I say this) poured out

to the beach at
San Sebastian

eyes saw more than they
could hold

like Aphrodite was back
against the tide of fashion

a shell in your hand
innocently to show me

with more inside
than today can hold

© Chris McCabe 2009

Alexandra Grilikhes (Philadelphia, USA): "Vacation"

death came to me drunk
wearing a new white island outfit
she’d bought that day. The men
on the road called us cunts.
“This is my dream place,” she breathed,
“I feel so alive here. Fuck me on this
bench.” On the half-lit porch,
the watchman taking a midnight nap
around the bend, I did as I was
told for a long time thinking I’d
please death this time at last. Later
she rolled away and in the morning
rose early and left. I bought
death many presents. She bought me rags.

© Alexandra Grilikhes 1994

republished from the Insight to Riot chapbook The Reveries