February 9th, 2012 / 12:33 pm
Author Spotlight
Erik Stinson
Author Spotlight
The Remaining Lost Poetry of Slash Lovering
Here are the Seattle-based poet’s remaining works, from the CD-R he gave me before his tragic death at age 38. More on Slash in my first post on him here. His graphic web-based poetry continues to inspire me – both for its raw emotion and for its quietness and grace.
This is fascinating
awesome dude, srsly! diggin’ it, like that cereal dude, diggim’s or seomthing, u kno wha imma sayin
Dying on a bike ride is some pacific northwest realtalk.
I like his poetry a lot.
dig’em the frog
RIP SLASH
they are totally great
they all go together, noticing
the metal kitchen uses “hood” about a real hood in the equipment
but it sounds like slang for neighborhood when you read it
the kitchen is draped
in plastic like it’s dead and the next image shows a high-rise thats actually projects
disorienting but in a vivid not vague way
like vertigo but also the emotions in that one are so strong and uncomfortable
“trip on the local news” lol
the “new businesss” mirrors the “sssssssssssss” of the red balloon deflating
I’m not sure if you’re being an asshole. But I was reading your comment at work, thinking, “This dude is such an asshole.” Mainly because the poems are pretty fantastic and do what I try to do in my poetry. Which is reverse the natural tendency in literature to use, ehh, “high brow” language and then look down upon people who do not understand, or maybe not look down, but maintain a sense of some notion of mental authority because someone else does not “get it” and maybe doesn’t want to. But on the same hand, I can use terms like “real talk” or whatever, language me and my peoples use all the time, and “they” (this mysterious they, so perhaps the establishment) will call it “low brow” and/or minimize it, because now it is they who cannot understand it. And since it came from a certain demographic, and there are stereotypes attached to such a demographic, it is deemed less worthy. When in truth, the situation is the same, except now a Napoleon-type complex has formed.
What I will say is, I feel some of the poems do not work as well without the images, the presentation, and I am hoping they weren’t added after the fact. You can read these poems and easily sense the intelligence behind them. Most people will look at the language first, and the thought behind the language afterward, which by that time the perceptions are already attached and then color the analytical conceptions of the author’s poetic intent.
But if you weren’t trying to be (a weird statement) a dickhead, thats wussup. Appreciate ya.
No I really liked them. I wasn’t trying to ‘ironic’ or shit-talk. I was seriously stoked on it, and still am, and I guess I was bored and just wrote non-sense-like, but not trying to be an asshole. I thought these were amazing poems. 100% serious.
“thats wussup” lol
Jerry Springer “you don’t know me.”
Serious like these poems, dude.
”
Which is reverse the natural tendency in literature to use, ehh, “high brow” language and then look down upon people who do not understand, or maybe not look down, but maintain a sense of some notion of mental authority because someone else does not “get it” and maybe doesn’t want to.”
That’s the natural tendency in literature?
Yeah this idea of “high brow literature looking down upon a person” or ” poetry lording over the reader with its obscurity” is becoming a theme that I’ve seen popping up around the alt lit sites. Spencer Madsen’s video in particular “poetry deserves to die.”
the argument is that poetry can’t entertain in the way a sentimental pop film can and that in a film like “the last kiss” it gives you 90% and all you have to give is 10%
It’s beyond anti intellectual. It seems to be arguing against reward that asks something of you. If it isn’t instantly gratifying, if I can’t buy it, if I can’t immediately access it then it is of no use to me. Since I can’t have it quickly and easily then let’s just write it off as boring, useless, high brow lording.
If you don’t want to learn how to read then by all means don’t. But don’t rationalize your own ignorance as victimization.
http://vimeo.com/36428227
I’m just sorry “camaros” is misspelled.
Great job.
You should give the guy a little respect and assume the misspelling is on purpose.
came heros
came arose
comemamarollthose
came rows of golden make
camero obscuro
You’re right. The way I phrased it would also include me. Rephrased: It is a natural tendency in some circles of literature, mainly canonical and canonical influenced/regulated. I put a slash to differentiate as I am influenced/inspired by what may be termed canonical literature, although I do not feel confined (read, regulated) to only operate within the language and symbols of canonical literature.
Chase, you’re so cute.
I think Jesmyn Ward is identifying this in her work. Especially in the short story from APS 14. There are many individuals across particular demographics who have one foot in the street, one foot “in the university” (as it seems academic in one of the most influential and most apt to perpetuate their certain aesthetic), so they’re hearing both voices within themselves as one — not because they’re trying to, but because that is just the way it is. While those on both sides see it as being one foot here and one foot there, those who are in this “inbetween” simply see it as one and perhaps have a difficult time understanding why everyone is not seeing it the same way.
I just think that “canonical” literature as something that exists to look down on other people is an incredible, outrageous strawman. I don’t think we need to take potshots at one kind of literature in order to pump up some other kind. As a reader who has enjoyed both the kind of poetry you like to write in addition to the poetry you describe as promulgated by a mysterious They, it is wearying. I’m sick of all the aesthetic bogeymen. You like to write in a certain way, cool, great. Not sure why that must imply making snotty remarks about those who write in another way.
Whoa whoa whoa. Lets not get crazy here. No implications toward the sole purpose of “canonical” literature to look down on anyone.
Literature, unless it is written to do so, does anything beyond what it is meant to do. But people, actual people, then use it in various ways to supplement their own agendas. So, when you have individuals with some power to levy their ideas, and given their position, their influential ability, or perhaps, a better way to put it may be — their perpetuation of a certain set of ideas — you will then need to assert yourself, your own antithetical ideas. You must assert.
Akin this to being in a room of the most famous and influential writers in history. And they are all discussing a topic. Within this topic there is a point you don’t agree with, or maybe you have something to add to the discussion. You try to speak up, but everyone is talking, and talking louder than you, and no one quite hears you.
What do you do?
Against this behemoth eurocentric structure which is American Literature (capitalized to distinguish from the real american literary landscape), you must not ask, but carry the confidence not to demand with your voice, perhaps, but with your energy and your intent to speak up no matter how impressive, or, lets say, intimidating these individuals may be.
And yeah man, I was being a dickhead. Because when someone says (or writes in this case), “If you don’t want to learn how to read then by all means don’t. But don’t rationalize your own ignorance as victimization.”
I’m going to be kind of bothered by that. Not to the extent where I might get into a fight, but I ain’t really gonna attempt to phrase my words in the nicest way possible. Yeah right cuz.
And re-reading it now, let me just say, victimization requires not necessarily being a victim, but painting yourself as one, which I have not done, as that is not how I feel. I got over the “Because I am a ‘Black’ man in America, I am owed something or I am under the thumb of this supremely oppressive system” when I was like, 5 or 6 (ten or 11 maybe?) and say Boys in the Hood for the first time. It only took that long because I was seeing the world partially through the lens of my fellow people.
obscamaro = flimflamaro thrower of shaduro
“we don’t need to take pot shots at one kind of literature to pump up another.”
Yes.. This is how I feel.
what happened to the poem at the top of this post? did it completely disappear off the internet?
i feel like these very well could have been made by erik stinson himself, either way they are rad, thanks for sharing…