Mean Monday: Strong Poetry
Cut your fucking ears off and put them in my mouth, chud fucke*s. All y’all ever talk about up in this bitch is your fucking Morning Nutritious blend Vitamin A cattle finch pomegranate quicksilver soggy sonnet dick bullshit literature.
Your indie this / Adbusters that / dead white guys with white beards and ski caps.
Fuck ski caps.
What you need is the feeling of car keys against your throat. What you need is a little yellow smiley gone bloodsoaked, with some mutton showing, with its face jiggling off.
What you need is some STRONG POETRY.
And bless your shoe licking hearts, I’m here to deliver, courtesy of the only man I’ve ever seen eat six anvils with a cock ring on: K “THE SILEM” MOHAMMAD. Witness this, his analysis of what makes a STRONG POEM, and by analysis I mean free steak:
George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Hilary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and Barack Obama are strong poems. Al Gore, John Kerry, George H. W. Bush, and Geraldine Ferraro are weak poems.
The relationality of the strong poem should not lead one to believe that its strength is not tangible.
The strong poem fully expects to be hated by many. This increases its strength.
The weak poem is reducible to a rectangle or rhombus whereas the strong poem resembles a parallelogram, or more exactly a trapezoid or irregular quadrilateral.
Conrad Aiken’s “Morning Song of Senlin” is a weak poem. Charles Olson’s “The Lordly and Isolate Satyrs” is a strong poem. The verdict is out on Allen Tate’s “Ode to the Confederate Dead.”
Not every instance of the term “strong poem” is relevant to the definition at hand. Sometimes it is merely a convenient, informal, and largely meaningless designation, as in “Good, Susan, that’s a strong poem compared to your earlier work.”
The strong poem carries with it the undercurrent of a threat in the guise of robust confidence. It is always on the verge of violating something.
“Strong,” but not yet stale, sweat.
And, yes, there’s more. You thought that was it? It? You don’t even know half of it! That’s because it is a half of shit, and half of shit is your shit (oh! what!) and half of your shit is the shit I just shit on your shit. Bitch. That’s because you’re a–wait, no, you’re not a pussy, not even that, no, you’re a bunny cunt, you’re a blowjob in pajamas. Go eat a fucking Mounds bar, girl. That’s what girls do. They just sit around eating Mounds bars and–
Tags: Adbusters, cattle, mohammad, strong poetry, vitamin a, women are weak
I read that yesterday and flexed an eyebrow.
I read that yesterday and flexed an eyebrow.
“huge cocks fucking girls
nursing breast liquids
rotating menu of cupcakes that taste like PB&J
yo’ momma jokes are s’mores without the chocolate
I wonder what s’mores would taste like in heaven
you dumb bitch”
hmmmm.
i think chicken bucket is stronger.
my favorite bit here in the tag, “women are weak.”
chinese mothers used to break the feet of their daughters. the slightly gangrene smell of thier deformed feet was considered erotic.
let’s all go watch a documentary on clitarectomies.
i put valerie solanas’s SCUM Manifesto in the appendix on my us history paper in high school.
i also dyed my hair red when i was fifteen and we had to recite a poem in english class and i recited lady lazarus by sylvia plath which ends with “and out of the ash i rise with my red hair and i eat men like air”
fucking fuck all medusa on your ass motherfucker
“huge cocks fucking girls
nursing breast liquids
rotating menu of cupcakes that taste like PB&J
yo’ momma jokes are s’mores without the chocolate
I wonder what s’mores would taste like in heaven
you dumb bitch”
hmmmm.
i think chicken bucket is stronger.
my favorite bit here in the tag, “women are weak.”
chinese mothers used to break the feet of their daughters. the slightly gangrene smell of thier deformed feet was considered erotic.
let’s all go watch a documentary on clitarectomies.
i put valerie solanas’s SCUM Manifesto in the appendix on my us history paper in high school.
i also dyed my hair red when i was fifteen and we had to recite a poem in english class and i recited lady lazarus by sylvia plath which ends with “and out of the ash i rise with my red hair and i eat men like air”
fucking fuck all medusa on your ass motherfucker
mike i like the way you talk
mike i like the way you talk
pr,
i’ve been eaten like air so many times i’ve taken to wearing a constant report of my wind chill factor.
that is one of kasey’s new poems, still being worked on, i think. check out his worked-on stuff in the book Breathalyzer: really smart and good. also on that squirrels blog, see if you can find the poem “unicorns are pretty.” it’s a gem.
jimmy,
i smell like talk
pr,
i’ve been eaten like air so many times i’ve taken to wearing a constant report of my wind chill factor.
that is one of kasey’s new poems, still being worked on, i think. check out his worked-on stuff in the book Breathalyzer: really smart and good. also on that squirrels blog, see if you can find the poem “unicorns are pretty.” it’s a gem.
jimmy,
i smell like talk
i’ve actually checked out his blog before and some of his poems and like his work. but i was trying to imitate your tone mike- you inspired me to imitate you.
i’ll go read unicorns are pretty.
i’ve actually checked out his blog before and some of his poems and like his work. but i was trying to imitate your tone mike- you inspired me to imitate you.
i’ll go read unicorns are pretty.
Sarah Palin is a load of bullshit that tricked about 12 people into believing she was a poem—for about eight minutes. I like the spirit of this thing, but the rubric is a little fucked.
But hey, at least it isn’t flarf.
or IS it ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Sarah Palin is a load of bullshit that tricked about 12 people into believing she was a poem—for about eight minutes. I like the spirit of this thing, but the rubric is a little fucked.
But hey, at least it isn’t flarf.
or IS it ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
btw- that poem thing in high school? i made zero friends that day.
btw- that poem thing in high school? i made zero friends that day.
i tried to understand what flarf is and i don’t.
i tried to understand what flarf is and i don’t.
Justin,
The fact you don’t understand how Sarah Palin’s got the strength of twenty diamond minds is the reason you can’t hack flarf.
pr,
One day in high school I talked shit about soda. I made -528 friends that day. I’m glad you felt inspired and that you like Kasey’s poems.
Flarf is to make the noise hurt less. Flarf is like the jitterbug: it looks really strange until you do it. Until you doof it.
Justin,
The fact you don’t understand how Sarah Palin’s got the strength of twenty diamond minds is the reason you can’t hack flarf.
pr,
One day in high school I talked shit about soda. I made -528 friends that day. I’m glad you felt inspired and that you like Kasey’s poems.
Flarf is to make the noise hurt less. Flarf is like the jitterbug: it looks really strange until you do it. Until you doof it.
i assume you meant diamond “mines” and not “minds.” you’re a sweet kid, but you let your heart run away with your fingers. sarah palin is a punchline. the fact that she has managed to harness a modicum of (potentially lasting, and expandable) power says more about what does and doesn’t pass for a joke int this culture than it does about anything else–least of all poetry.
pr- flarf is a limited-use and not entirely uncharming compositional tool that mistook itself for a whole philosophy. like the little engine that could, only wrong. sort of like sarah palin, actually– to mike’s point.
i assume you meant diamond “mines” and not “minds.” you’re a sweet kid, but you let your heart run away with your fingers. sarah palin is a punchline. the fact that she has managed to harness a modicum of (potentially lasting, and expandable) power says more about what does and doesn’t pass for a joke int this culture than it does about anything else–least of all poetry.
pr- flarf is a limited-use and not entirely uncharming compositional tool that mistook itself for a whole philosophy. like the little engine that could, only wrong. sort of like sarah palin, actually– to mike’s point.
my my justin babe, we’re feeling a little condescending today!
i meant minds as a play, justin dear, to make you think of both. i’m not a “sweet kid,” thanks. =)
the fact that you didn’t get that, i think, speaks to the “heart” of how you miss the fun and relevance of flarf.
“sarah palin is a punchline” is the immediately classic line of one prescriptive worldview. it’s also an immediate cliche, in the way a cliche cuts off allowing life/language to exist by trying to compartmentalize it into pat conclusions. “sarah palin is a punchline” is true, but it’s dead language, and if it’s a cultural critique, it’s a lazy one.
ditto this line: “flarf is a limited-use and not entirely uncharming compositional tool that mistook itself for a whole philosophy.” in its stance (“here, pr, let me get up in my bowtie and tell you what trifles you don’t need to worry your pretty little head over”) is an almost elegant and Pierce Inverarity-like argument for flarf, in that Pierce is described in awe by the revolutionaries as a perfect manifestation of their whole revolutionary point.
there is a lot to be said about flarf, but i would rather say it in a whole post rather than just in a comments section. suffice to say: if you feel nostalgia for a different culture, if you feel you’re living in a “shitty time,” if you have anachronistic zest in your chest–like our lovely friend justin and the “aw shucks” traditionalism he so resolutely defends (and bless his little top hat for it, right?)–then you probably won’t like flarf. if you are mostly excited by being alive in this shitstorm, then there is plenty to be funned and fascinated by in the poetry (and, yes, philosophy, or at least philosophical reaction) of flarf.
my my justin babe, we’re feeling a little condescending today!
i meant minds as a play, justin dear, to make you think of both. i’m not a “sweet kid,” thanks. =)
the fact that you didn’t get that, i think, speaks to the “heart” of how you miss the fun and relevance of flarf.
“sarah palin is a punchline” is the immediately classic line of one prescriptive worldview. it’s also an immediate cliche, in the way a cliche cuts off allowing life/language to exist by trying to compartmentalize it into pat conclusions. “sarah palin is a punchline” is true, but it’s dead language, and if it’s a cultural critique, it’s a lazy one.
ditto this line: “flarf is a limited-use and not entirely uncharming compositional tool that mistook itself for a whole philosophy.” in its stance (“here, pr, let me get up in my bowtie and tell you what trifles you don’t need to worry your pretty little head over”) is an almost elegant and Pierce Inverarity-like argument for flarf, in that Pierce is described in awe by the revolutionaries as a perfect manifestation of their whole revolutionary point.
there is a lot to be said about flarf, but i would rather say it in a whole post rather than just in a comments section. suffice to say: if you feel nostalgia for a different culture, if you feel you’re living in a “shitty time,” if you have anachronistic zest in your chest–like our lovely friend justin and the “aw shucks” traditionalism he so resolutely defends (and bless his little top hat for it, right?)–then you probably won’t like flarf. if you are mostly excited by being alive in this shitstorm, then there is plenty to be funned and fascinated by in the poetry (and, yes, philosophy, or at least philosophical reaction) of flarf.
But what exactly is the philosophy?
But what exactly is the philosophy?
Here’s the last graph of solanas’ scum manifesto:
The sick, irrational men, those who attempt to defend themselves against their disgustingness, when they see SCUM barrelling down on them, will cling in terror to Big Mama with her Big Bouncy Boobies, but Boobies won’t protect them against SCUM; Big Mama will be clinging to Big Daddy, who will be in the corner shitting in his forceful, dynamic pants. Men who are rational, however, won’t kick or struggle or raise a distressing fuss, but will just sit back, relax, enjoy the show and ride the waves to their demise.
big bouncy boobies.
i think i read a bunch of flarf stuff online around the time of the red cider press scandal. hmm.
i can’t find unicorns are pretty. i’ll go look again.
Here’s the last graph of solanas’ scum manifesto:
The sick, irrational men, those who attempt to defend themselves against their disgustingness, when they see SCUM barrelling down on them, will cling in terror to Big Mama with her Big Bouncy Boobies, but Boobies won’t protect them against SCUM; Big Mama will be clinging to Big Daddy, who will be in the corner shitting in his forceful, dynamic pants. Men who are rational, however, won’t kick or struggle or raise a distressing fuss, but will just sit back, relax, enjoy the show and ride the waves to their demise.
big bouncy boobies.
i think i read a bunch of flarf stuff online around the time of the red cider press scandal. hmm.
i can’t find unicorns are pretty. i’ll go look again.
pr- flarf is the technique of using google searches for dirty words and other random things to produce heuristic juxtapositions of words and ideas. like i said- hardly without merit, as far as a technique goes (like automatic writing, or cut-up, or erasure, or any other thing a person can do to generate or constrain text). i think people also used to cull stuff out of their spam emails, but maybe that’s passe now?
the (biggest) problem with flarf is that it’s most common deployment is by people who are looking to produce sub-Ashbery-b-side-quality poems that sound funny when you read them out loud at poetry readings to an audience of drunken insiders, but otherwise are largely without merit. none of it will last, and it will probably always be around, because its biggest problem is also its greatest virtue: anybody can do it, and practically any given example of it might as well be any other.
Mike,
I don’t remember my Pynchon well enough to really think about what you said about Pierce, but the fact that it’s a Pynchon reference instantly makes me not care.
As usual, you confuse an opposing viewpoint with pretension, and a knowledge-base which covers more than the last 15 minutes for “nostalgia.” i never once said things were better at some particular point in the past, or that they’re “worse” now than any other time. i simply offered an opinion about one aspect of contemporary poetical practice. when your insults veer hard toward the personal and away from the case itself, i know i’ve hit the soft underbelly.
and i didn’t mean to be condescending. you *are* a sweet kid, when you want to be. i mean you put out a chapbook titled after your love of mocha french toast, for chrissakes. and that’s what we love you for.
pr- flarf is the technique of using google searches for dirty words and other random things to produce heuristic juxtapositions of words and ideas. like i said- hardly without merit, as far as a technique goes (like automatic writing, or cut-up, or erasure, or any other thing a person can do to generate or constrain text). i think people also used to cull stuff out of their spam emails, but maybe that’s passe now?
the (biggest) problem with flarf is that it’s most common deployment is by people who are looking to produce sub-Ashbery-b-side-quality poems that sound funny when you read them out loud at poetry readings to an audience of drunken insiders, but otherwise are largely without merit. none of it will last, and it will probably always be around, because its biggest problem is also its greatest virtue: anybody can do it, and practically any given example of it might as well be any other.
Mike,
I don’t remember my Pynchon well enough to really think about what you said about Pierce, but the fact that it’s a Pynchon reference instantly makes me not care.
As usual, you confuse an opposing viewpoint with pretension, and a knowledge-base which covers more than the last 15 minutes for “nostalgia.” i never once said things were better at some particular point in the past, or that they’re “worse” now than any other time. i simply offered an opinion about one aspect of contemporary poetical practice. when your insults veer hard toward the personal and away from the case itself, i know i’ve hit the soft underbelly.
and i didn’t mean to be condescending. you *are* a sweet kid, when you want to be. i mean you put out a chapbook titled after your love of mocha french toast, for chrissakes. and that’s what we love you for.
sorry, pr, we’ve been talking about this without priming the pump, which is why, like i said, i think it deserves its own post. but here’s a nice primer i just found which includes links to other things.
the fact is, there’s a lot going on with flarf: issues of community, identity formation in a digital age, the role of language as meaning and the role of language as static and how those two roles crossbreed, especially in today’s text-heavy culture, and more.
its detractors are either 1) insecure and trying to rationalize flarf in terms for which they’ve already prepared arsenals of refutation: “so flarf is about how language is dead, huh? well, here’s why not…” “no, it’s not about that,” “well, if it is, here’s why that’s wrong,” “wait, you’re not listening”
or 2) not looking hard enough and assuming just because flarf’s effects are surface-heavy (people laugh a lot, some people don’t laugh, some people get very mad) then it has no “depth.” of course, surface-heavy and depth-lacking are not the same thing. that is a logical fallacy. flarf is heavy all around. and it’s funny. wow. amazing.
there’s also a lot of shit about how flarf is “too easy” or “it’s so easy i must be missing something” and all that. i think a lot of this anxiety comes from the fact that flarf comes from anxiety; it’s in many ways about anxiety. it’s about–for my reading–our text heavy culture being so text heavy and full of loud loud loud and how that can be seen as crippling (throw away the tabloids, let’s get fireplaces again) or as generative. i think flarf attempts to critique and define our blown up confetti in a way that poetry has thusfar mostly failed to do. flarf is down among the spam emails, the text messages, the ad language, the professional wrestling, the mire pit, in a way that much of poetic culture wants to consider poetry “above.”
of course, this shits people. this makes them shit their faces.
and of course, this means that it’s hard to “get into” flarf because part of “getting into it” is getting into “the argument.” that is why i think it’s helpful to go read the primer i posted, read the jacket article that includes a nice mix of the ACTUAL WORK, and think about all the text around you, and whether it excites you or tires or you out or does some of both. and not think of it as, like, a civil war you have to join in or something. it’s not. it’s just a startling poetry of now, and lots of people hate now and say “fuck now” and don’t want now to exist, lest alone have an entire poetry dedicated to it. so they start a shitstorm. and because flarf is all about more shitstorms, it naturally and gleefully perpetuates and even markets this shitstorm.
it’s not perfect. it’s just alive.
sorry, pr, we’ve been talking about this without priming the pump, which is why, like i said, i think it deserves its own post. but here’s a nice primer i just found which includes links to other things.
the fact is, there’s a lot going on with flarf: issues of community, identity formation in a digital age, the role of language as meaning and the role of language as static and how those two roles crossbreed, especially in today’s text-heavy culture, and more.
its detractors are either 1) insecure and trying to rationalize flarf in terms for which they’ve already prepared arsenals of refutation: “so flarf is about how language is dead, huh? well, here’s why not…” “no, it’s not about that,” “well, if it is, here’s why that’s wrong,” “wait, you’re not listening”
or 2) not looking hard enough and assuming just because flarf’s effects are surface-heavy (people laugh a lot, some people don’t laugh, some people get very mad) then it has no “depth.” of course, surface-heavy and depth-lacking are not the same thing. that is a logical fallacy. flarf is heavy all around. and it’s funny. wow. amazing.
there’s also a lot of shit about how flarf is “too easy” or “it’s so easy i must be missing something” and all that. i think a lot of this anxiety comes from the fact that flarf comes from anxiety; it’s in many ways about anxiety. it’s about–for my reading–our text heavy culture being so text heavy and full of loud loud loud and how that can be seen as crippling (throw away the tabloids, let’s get fireplaces again) or as generative. i think flarf attempts to critique and define our blown up confetti in a way that poetry has thusfar mostly failed to do. flarf is down among the spam emails, the text messages, the ad language, the professional wrestling, the mire pit, in a way that much of poetic culture wants to consider poetry “above.”
of course, this shits people. this makes them shit their faces.
and of course, this means that it’s hard to “get into” flarf because part of “getting into it” is getting into “the argument.” that is why i think it’s helpful to go read the primer i posted, read the jacket article that includes a nice mix of the ACTUAL WORK, and think about all the text around you, and whether it excites you or tires or you out or does some of both. and not think of it as, like, a civil war you have to join in or something. it’s not. it’s just a startling poetry of now, and lots of people hate now and say “fuck now” and don’t want now to exist, lest alone have an entire poetry dedicated to it. so they start a shitstorm. and because flarf is all about more shitstorms, it naturally and gleefully perpetuates and even markets this shitstorm.
it’s not perfect. it’s just alive.
one day in high school. i fucked my girlfriend in the school pool during swim class. it wasnt good and we fucked for like 35 seconds and i didnt even get off. i didnt make or lose any friends that day.
that strong poetry shit is dumb as fuck.
im not sure i really know what flarf is but i know a few poets who say they write flarf and some of their shit is pretty good. j.r. pearsons’ shit is sharp and jagged and cuts deep. if you want strong read pearson, ray succre, jeff crouch.
one day in high school. i fucked my girlfriend in the school pool during swim class. it wasnt good and we fucked for like 35 seconds and i didnt even get off. i didnt make or lose any friends that day.
that strong poetry shit is dumb as fuck.
im not sure i really know what flarf is but i know a few poets who say they write flarf and some of their shit is pretty good. j.r. pearsons’ shit is sharp and jagged and cuts deep. if you want strong read pearson, ray succre, jeff crouch.
speaking of manifestos. yous guys ever read the unibombers shit. its devastating. he’s a smart fucker. no wonder he went mad.
speaking of manifestos. yous guys ever read the unibombers shit. its devastating. he’s a smart fucker. no wonder he went mad.
Mike, you are saying a lot of things here. I like it best when you said:
and by analysis I mean free steak
Now fight. Hey Justin.
Mike, you are saying a lot of things here. I like it best when you said:
and by analysis I mean free steak
Now fight. Hey Justin.
Yes, high-low, high-low, high-low. I get it. THIS IS THE PARADOXICAL REALITY OF THE WORLD WE LIVE IN.
Well, when flarf does something with email that Joyce didn’t do with a newspaper, or Barthelme in his collages, or a dozen people before either of them, tell it to call me.
I’m all for updating the practice (and/or praxis) to suit the available technology. What I object to is the presumptive (and frankly bullshit) claim that the underlying notions are themselves where the novelty lies, rather than in the application. Related point: Anything which requires as much ancillary reading as you recommended to all of us, in order to be “properly understood,” instantly and forever forfeits the populist status you’re trying to claim for it.
I like my definition of flarf because it is approximately 2 sentences long, and by the end of the 2nd sentence you’re more than prepared to start practicing flarf yourself, if you should happen to want to.
Yes, high-low, high-low, high-low. I get it. THIS IS THE PARADOXICAL REALITY OF THE WORLD WE LIVE IN.
Well, when flarf does something with email that Joyce didn’t do with a newspaper, or Barthelme in his collages, or a dozen people before either of them, tell it to call me.
I’m all for updating the practice (and/or praxis) to suit the available technology. What I object to is the presumptive (and frankly bullshit) claim that the underlying notions are themselves where the novelty lies, rather than in the application. Related point: Anything which requires as much ancillary reading as you recommended to all of us, in order to be “properly understood,” instantly and forever forfeits the populist status you’re trying to claim for it.
I like my definition of flarf because it is approximately 2 sentences long, and by the end of the 2nd sentence you’re more than prepared to start practicing flarf yourself, if you should happen to want to.
ps- hi gabe
Barry! BARRY!
“..until I barfed foam.” Barry Graham. I worship you.
I’ll go read that primer on flarf now.
ps- hi gabe
Barry! BARRY!
“..until I barfed foam.” Barry Graham. I worship you.
I’ll go read that primer on flarf now.
justin,
one of the biggest myths about flarf is that it’s technique based. it’s not. read more.
serendipitously, i hit on most of your other points in the comment i was posting at the same time as yours.
i don’t “as usual” do anything. i’m a stickler about the overuse of “pretentious” as a mudsling. come on. this is the whole reason i put the pynchon reference in. how can i be anti-pretension and pro-pynchon at the same time?
[pissing contest] my knowledge base, too, covers plenty more than the last 15 minutes, kiddo.[end of pissing contest]. one way to understand flarf, and the way i introduce(d) it to my students, is in the context of american avant garde poetry from world war I to the present. the lines of evolution are pretty clear.
flarf will last as at least a cultural artifact, which i’m sure you’re smart enough to recognize. insofar as flarf “lasting,” as an “enduring contribution to the literary canon,” you are again not allowing (recognizing, maybe, but not allowing) how fundamentally warped our information hierarchies have become. this is basic “not a file folder, a web” stuff, basic “disposable culture” philosophy. the trick is: it’s not all going to sort itself out and become a neat canonized thing again, where cultural arbitrators pick what will last and the rest wallows on the bench. information has become more democratic (or anarchistic) than that, like it or not, and flarf derives directly from that.
this is really not all that complicated. i am making it sound intellectual, but really, ask a 15 yr old kid to reel off the names of all the youtube videos he watched last weekend. he can’t. he watched them and experienced them and moved on.
the argument arrives when you say “is this bad?”
i say “this is how we experience information now. that should be thought about. it’s good by default. it’s good because it’s how it is. you’re not going to step in and regress culture until everything blows up, at which point we’re free to start over.”
as for the SNARK, my insults veer “hard” because yours were irritatingly passive aggressive. calling me a “sweet kid” implies that i am 1) naive, 2) ignorant, 3) not thinking about what i’m saying, and 4) only trying to please somebody or something. none of which is true. and because yours was a fundamental mis-characterization, and what’s more a reductive characterization, i was insulted.
in other words, you patted me on the head and i bit your hand off. you can say “ow” if you want, but it’s definitely not an inculpable “ow.”
if i am mis-characterizing you as anti-futurist, i am perfectly open to hearing how i’m in the wrong.
justin,
one of the biggest myths about flarf is that it’s technique based. it’s not. read more.
serendipitously, i hit on most of your other points in the comment i was posting at the same time as yours.
i don’t “as usual” do anything. i’m a stickler about the overuse of “pretentious” as a mudsling. come on. this is the whole reason i put the pynchon reference in. how can i be anti-pretension and pro-pynchon at the same time?
[pissing contest] my knowledge base, too, covers plenty more than the last 15 minutes, kiddo.[end of pissing contest]. one way to understand flarf, and the way i introduce(d) it to my students, is in the context of american avant garde poetry from world war I to the present. the lines of evolution are pretty clear.
flarf will last as at least a cultural artifact, which i’m sure you’re smart enough to recognize. insofar as flarf “lasting,” as an “enduring contribution to the literary canon,” you are again not allowing (recognizing, maybe, but not allowing) how fundamentally warped our information hierarchies have become. this is basic “not a file folder, a web” stuff, basic “disposable culture” philosophy. the trick is: it’s not all going to sort itself out and become a neat canonized thing again, where cultural arbitrators pick what will last and the rest wallows on the bench. information has become more democratic (or anarchistic) than that, like it or not, and flarf derives directly from that.
this is really not all that complicated. i am making it sound intellectual, but really, ask a 15 yr old kid to reel off the names of all the youtube videos he watched last weekend. he can’t. he watched them and experienced them and moved on.
the argument arrives when you say “is this bad?”
i say “this is how we experience information now. that should be thought about. it’s good by default. it’s good because it’s how it is. you’re not going to step in and regress culture until everything blows up, at which point we’re free to start over.”
as for the SNARK, my insults veer “hard” because yours were irritatingly passive aggressive. calling me a “sweet kid” implies that i am 1) naive, 2) ignorant, 3) not thinking about what i’m saying, and 4) only trying to please somebody or something. none of which is true. and because yours was a fundamental mis-characterization, and what’s more a reductive characterization, i was insulted.
in other words, you patted me on the head and i bit your hand off. you can say “ow” if you want, but it’s definitely not an inculpable “ow.”
if i am mis-characterizing you as anti-futurist, i am perfectly open to hearing how i’m in the wrong.
justin justin justin,
you’re being naughty. you can’t start a fight about the philosophy and then say “hey, if you have to talk about the philosophy of it then something must be off with the practice!”
believe me, most of the time i just show people the poems and they like them. it’s really simple. i am trying to honestly respond to the questions asked and the allegations raised. pr asked what is the philosophy so i answered. i don’t think you “need” to read all that stuff at all. you can read the poems and be happy.
barry,
shit is dumb
fuck ski caps
justin justin justin,
you’re being naughty. you can’t start a fight about the philosophy and then say “hey, if you have to talk about the philosophy of it then something must be off with the practice!”
believe me, most of the time i just show people the poems and they like them. it’s really simple. i am trying to honestly respond to the questions asked and the allegations raised. pr asked what is the philosophy so i answered. i don’t think you “need” to read all that stuff at all. you can read the poems and be happy.
barry,
shit is dumb
fuck ski caps
1) no one not trying to be an asshole about flarf has ever said that people haven’t used collages before or used the language static of their available culture.
2) obviously “um someone’s done it before! stop that! someone’s done it!” does not answer why most of my students and friends like flarf better than john dos passos.
3) i don’t like your definition of flarf because it’s wrong.
when i have to start getting into the “no one’s ever actually said that” part of the argument, i know it’s gonna be a long night.
uninterested bystanders,
read the poems and decide for yourself. no one is trying to trick you. no one is trying to sell you anything. your brain will not shrink via flarf. shit is dumb. life is okay.
1) no one not trying to be an asshole about flarf has ever said that people haven’t used collages before or used the language static of their available culture.
2) obviously “um someone’s done it before! stop that! someone’s done it!” does not answer why most of my students and friends like flarf better than john dos passos.
3) i don’t like your definition of flarf because it’s wrong.
when i have to start getting into the “no one’s ever actually said that” part of the argument, i know it’s gonna be a long night.
uninterested bystanders,
read the poems and decide for yourself. no one is trying to trick you. no one is trying to sell you anything. your brain will not shrink via flarf. shit is dumb. life is okay.
Mike-post some links to some good flarf.
the primer made me feel sort of stupid…maybe i’ll try reading it again in the morning when i have coffee in me.
Mike-post some links to some good flarf.
the primer made me feel sort of stupid…maybe i’ll try reading it again in the morning when i have coffee in me.
this sort of explains things to me in a way I get:
KASEY: Flarf came about a couple of years ago when Gary Sullivan submitted a deliberately bad poem to Poetry.com, one of those vanity companies that lures the unsuspecting with lavish praise of their poetry and then offers to “publish” it for an exorbitant fee. Theorizing that no submission, no matter how heinous, would ever be treated with anything other than solicitous fawning, he sent in a poem titled “Mm-hmm”:
Yeah, mm-hmm, it’s true
big birds make
big doo! I got fire inside
my “huppa”-chimp(TM)
gonna be agreessive, greasy aw yeah god
wanna DOOT! DOOT!
Pffffffffffffffffffffffffft! hey!
oooh yeah baby gonna shake & bake then take
AWWWWWL your monee, honee (tee hee)
uggah duggah buggah biggah buggah muggah
hey! hey! you stoopid Mick! get
off the paddy field and git
me some chocolate Quik
put a Q-tip in it and stir it up sick
pocka-mocka-chocka-locka-DING DONG
fuck! shit! piss! oh it’s so sad that
syndrome what’s it called tourette’s
make me HAI-EE! shout out loud
Cuz I love thee. Thank you God, for listening!
Sure enough, he received a full invitation to have his timeless piece of literature enshrined for all posterity, etc.
Gary shared his poem, the style of which he promptly dubbed “Flarf,” with members of the Subpoetics mailing list, and before long a few other participants began posting poems to Poetry.com, including myself, Drew Gardner, Jordan Davis, and a handful of others. Eventually, we formed a separate mailing list.
The initial aesthetics of Flarf went largely unarticulated, but they can probably be approximated by the following recipe: deliberate shapelessness of content, form, spelling, and thought in general, with liberal borrowing from internet chat-room drivel and spam scripts, often with the intention of achieving a studied blend of the offensive, the sentimental, and the infantile.
Flarf has largely become stylized out of existence, made inseparable from the usual writing habits of its practitioners, as Gary and Nada and others have pointed out.
Maybe the problem was ever announcing “Flarf” as a concept, suggestive of a movement, etc., in the first place. There were those among us who shrewdly warned about the dangers of such a move-Katie Degentesh, for example. The truth is, Flarf is not a movement, never was, because it has no principles as such, beyond some characteristic compositional techniques that developed along the way (collaging Google search-engine results, etc.).
There is no such thing as Flarf. Useless to declare that now!
this sort of explains things to me in a way I get:
KASEY: Flarf came about a couple of years ago when Gary Sullivan submitted a deliberately bad poem to Poetry.com, one of those vanity companies that lures the unsuspecting with lavish praise of their poetry and then offers to “publish” it for an exorbitant fee. Theorizing that no submission, no matter how heinous, would ever be treated with anything other than solicitous fawning, he sent in a poem titled “Mm-hmm”:
Yeah, mm-hmm, it’s true
big birds make
big doo! I got fire inside
my “huppa”-chimp(TM)
gonna be agreessive, greasy aw yeah god
wanna DOOT! DOOT!
Pffffffffffffffffffffffffft! hey!
oooh yeah baby gonna shake & bake then take
AWWWWWL your monee, honee (tee hee)
uggah duggah buggah biggah buggah muggah
hey! hey! you stoopid Mick! get
off the paddy field and git
me some chocolate Quik
put a Q-tip in it and stir it up sick
pocka-mocka-chocka-locka-DING DONG
fuck! shit! piss! oh it’s so sad that
syndrome what’s it called tourette’s
make me HAI-EE! shout out loud
Cuz I love thee. Thank you God, for listening!
Sure enough, he received a full invitation to have his timeless piece of literature enshrined for all posterity, etc.
Gary shared his poem, the style of which he promptly dubbed “Flarf,” with members of the Subpoetics mailing list, and before long a few other participants began posting poems to Poetry.com, including myself, Drew Gardner, Jordan Davis, and a handful of others. Eventually, we formed a separate mailing list.
The initial aesthetics of Flarf went largely unarticulated, but they can probably be approximated by the following recipe: deliberate shapelessness of content, form, spelling, and thought in general, with liberal borrowing from internet chat-room drivel and spam scripts, often with the intention of achieving a studied blend of the offensive, the sentimental, and the infantile.
Flarf has largely become stylized out of existence, made inseparable from the usual writing habits of its practitioners, as Gary and Nada and others have pointed out.
Maybe the problem was ever announcing “Flarf” as a concept, suggestive of a movement, etc., in the first place. There were those among us who shrewdly warned about the dangers of such a move-Katie Degentesh, for example. The truth is, Flarf is not a movement, never was, because it has no principles as such, beyond some characteristic compositional techniques that developed along the way (collaging Google search-engine results, etc.).
There is no such thing as Flarf. Useless to declare that now!
thank god mike put his dick on the table finally
and i am with it
the dick
thank god mike put his dick on the table finally
and i am with it
the dick
Well you’re right about the biting. I definitely didn’t expect to still be sitting at my computer, trying to shake you off an hour after I left that comment, but I still say I wasn’t patting you on the head and I warn you to look twice- that might be my pantscuff and not my hand you’re chewing on.
In any case, I reject the proposition that something is “good because it’s how it is.” It doesn’t take a bellyful of speculative fiction to beg the question, “what if the thing which is is not good?” I see a lot of good and bad about the present age and the imminent future. opportunities, risks, and everything in between.
i think the prospect that “information has become more democratic” is a net good, assuming it’s true, but a word to the wise: democracy and populism are not the same thing. indeed, like as not, they’re the gravest of enemies.
besides, you’re wrong. the internet may have seriously re-configured the horizons and capacities of access, storage, and dissemination, but it didn’t zero out the dials on what makes great art great. and it’s not going to.
without having sat in your class, i can only assume your evolutionary line in poetry from ww1 to the present is a good and correct and insightful one. knowing you, i don’t doubt that it is. so okay, i’ll concede the point about flarf’s amnesia re its own origins, though i do think that’s how it tends to prefer to present itself. here’s the real question- why do you keep trying to claim for flarf something like the status of a totalizing philosophy? you make it sound like a life-style choice, or a religion worth converting to.
i’m standing by my own 2-line definition of the process, and most of what i said about it’s use-value, which at least in terms of potential, I’m still not denying is very great. Everything else you said is basically a Medicine Show. It was futurism, it was language poetry, it was Phrenology, it was Beat style, it was Primal Scream Therapy, it was blah blah blah blah.
Nothing leads a modest idea to failure so quickly as believing itself a great one.
Well you’re right about the biting. I definitely didn’t expect to still be sitting at my computer, trying to shake you off an hour after I left that comment, but I still say I wasn’t patting you on the head and I warn you to look twice- that might be my pantscuff and not my hand you’re chewing on.
In any case, I reject the proposition that something is “good because it’s how it is.” It doesn’t take a bellyful of speculative fiction to beg the question, “what if the thing which is is not good?” I see a lot of good and bad about the present age and the imminent future. opportunities, risks, and everything in between.
i think the prospect that “information has become more democratic” is a net good, assuming it’s true, but a word to the wise: democracy and populism are not the same thing. indeed, like as not, they’re the gravest of enemies.
besides, you’re wrong. the internet may have seriously re-configured the horizons and capacities of access, storage, and dissemination, but it didn’t zero out the dials on what makes great art great. and it’s not going to.
without having sat in your class, i can only assume your evolutionary line in poetry from ww1 to the present is a good and correct and insightful one. knowing you, i don’t doubt that it is. so okay, i’ll concede the point about flarf’s amnesia re its own origins, though i do think that’s how it tends to prefer to present itself. here’s the real question- why do you keep trying to claim for flarf something like the status of a totalizing philosophy? you make it sound like a life-style choice, or a religion worth converting to.
i’m standing by my own 2-line definition of the process, and most of what i said about it’s use-value, which at least in terms of potential, I’m still not denying is very great. Everything else you said is basically a Medicine Show. It was futurism, it was language poetry, it was Phrenology, it was Beat style, it was Primal Scream Therapy, it was blah blah blah blah.
Nothing leads a modest idea to failure so quickly as believing itself a great one.
>>There is no such thing as Flarf. Useless to declare that now!<<
Pretty much sums it up for me. The monster, invigorated by the lightning, is up off the table now, Doc. little late to wish you’d never built him.
If anyone is still in this thread, please go give some love to Joshua Cohen, about whom I posted a little while ago and it promptly got buried under J. Dean’s thing about Ryan Manning.
http://htmlgiant.com/?p=1793
>>There is no such thing as Flarf. Useless to declare that now!<<
Pretty much sums it up for me. The monster, invigorated by the lightning, is up off the table now, Doc. little late to wish you’d never built him.
If anyone is still in this thread, please go give some love to Joshua Cohen, about whom I posted a little while ago and it promptly got buried under J. Dean’s thing about Ryan Manning.
http://htmlgiant.com/?p=1793
a few things
1) you’re still wrong that flarf is process based. read up. that’s the brunt reason of why your definition is wrong.
2) the pantscuff comment is cute and arrogant, whatever, you have a dick, whoopy dee doo
3) you’re right that “information has become more populist” is probably a more accurate statement. i think that’s a good thing.
4) “what makes great art great” is loaded with an ideology i disagree with, yes. i don’t think flarf is the “totalizing philosophy” of this ideology, just a poetry in the kitchen of it. it’s fine that you believe in the idea of a Great Art and a few people sitting around the oaken roundtable of Great Art. i don’t. i reserve the right to be disdainful about that idea and to argue straight at the ideology, skipping the question “well will this make Great Art?” entirely.
cheers.
a few things
1) you’re still wrong that flarf is process based. read up. that’s the brunt reason of why your definition is wrong.
2) the pantscuff comment is cute and arrogant, whatever, you have a dick, whoopy dee doo
3) you’re right that “information has become more populist” is probably a more accurate statement. i think that’s a good thing.
4) “what makes great art great” is loaded with an ideology i disagree with, yes. i don’t think flarf is the “totalizing philosophy” of this ideology, just a poetry in the kitchen of it. it’s fine that you believe in the idea of a Great Art and a few people sitting around the oaken roundtable of Great Art. i don’t. i reserve the right to be disdainful about that idea and to argue straight at the ideology, skipping the question “well will this make Great Art?” entirely.
cheers.
also, Kasey’s text quoted here is good and extremely helpful, but just to anticipate criticism: it’s not a definitive statement of the whole thing; flarf has become about more than google sculpting for other flarfists, i think, and definitely for its critics. i mean, flarf didn’t invent its google sculpting technique; flarf invented its aesthetics through its technique, so you can’t reduce it to just the “how.” plus not everybody considered a flarfist uses google balh balh balh
Justin,
Go post that in my ‘thing’ about ryan manning. my post comments are a good place for you to advertise your posts.
i think this will ensure at least 15% of HTMLGIANT will read your stuff.
see i’m a team player.
also, Kasey’s text quoted here is good and extremely helpful, but just to anticipate criticism: it’s not a definitive statement of the whole thing; flarf has become about more than google sculpting for other flarfists, i think, and definitely for its critics. i mean, flarf didn’t invent its google sculpting technique; flarf invented its aesthetics through its technique, so you can’t reduce it to just the “how.” plus not everybody considered a flarfist uses google balh balh balh
Justin,
Go post that in my ‘thing’ about ryan manning. my post comments are a good place for you to advertise your posts.
i think this will ensure at least 15% of HTMLGIANT will read your stuff.
see i’m a team player.
link to some good flarf.
time changes things.
“flarf invented its aesthetic through its tecqnique..”
what is its aethetic then?
hope this doesn’t bug you. i’m just genuinely curious.
link to some good flarf.
time changes things.
“flarf invented its aesthetic through its tecqnique..”
what is its aethetic then?
hope this doesn’t bug you. i’m just genuinely curious.
sorry! i keep trying to make this comment but it gets deleted somehow
here is sharon mesmer on youtube
here is jacket 30 with some good flarf in it
here is that unicorn poem
shanna compton’s poems from the 2008 flarf fest were off the chain. do any lurkers know where online they’re available?
sorry! i keep trying to make this comment but it gets deleted somehow
here is sharon mesmer on youtube
here is jacket 30 with some good flarf in it
here is that unicorn poem
shanna compton’s poems from the 2008 flarf fest were off the chain. do any lurkers know where online they’re available?
sorry! i keep trying to make this comment but it gets deleted somehow. i think the address tags are messing it up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZI8DsouAK8 = sharon mesmer on youtube
http://jacketmagazine.com/30/index.shtml = jacket 30 with some good flarf in it
http://pursuedbear.blogspot.com/2008/07/k-silem-mohammad.html = that unicorn poem
shanna compton’s poems from the 2008 flarf fest were off the chain. do any lurkers know where online they’re available?
test
sorry! i keep trying to make this comment but it gets deleted somehow. i think the address tags are messing it up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZI8DsouAK8 = sharon mesmer on youtube
http://jacketmagazine.com/30/index.shtml = jacket 30 with some good flarf in it
http://pursuedbear.blogspot.com/2008/07/k-silem-mohammad.html = that unicorn poem
shanna compton’s poems from the 2008 flarf fest were off the chain. do any lurkers know where online they’re available?
test
sorry! i keep trying to make this comment but it gets deleted somehow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZI8DsouAK8 = some sharon mesmer on youtube
jacketmagazine.com/30/index.shtml = jacket 30 with some good flarf in it
pursuedbear.blogspot.com/2008/07/k-silem-mohammad.html = that unicorn poem
shanna compton’s poems from the 2008 flarf fest were off the chain. do any lurkers know where online they’re available?
sorry! i keep trying to make this comment but it gets deleted somehow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZI8DsouAK8 = some sharon mesmer on youtube
jacketmagazine.com/30/index.shtml = jacket 30 with some good flarf in it
pursuedbear.blogspot.com/2008/07/k-silem-mohammad.html = that unicorn poem
shanna compton’s poems from the 2008 flarf fest were off the chain. do any lurkers know where online they’re available?
tl;dr
tl;dr
wow. ok. i read the unicorn poem and politcally, it is very interesting to me.
i read nada gordon’s poem abnormal discharge and had the experience of “bothness”, a favorite word that i use all the time and it is stolen from david foster wallace who may not have stolen it from anyone else. and as much as i generally love bothness, this poem made me feel it in an uncomfortable way. like, is this a trick? as opposed to- wow, two opposite things can exist at the same time. so the bothness i felt was- she has sympathy for these girls, she is making a feminist statement- and she is mockinig these girls, but still making a statement of some sort, that is politcally good. regardless, this poem seems to me a “classic” flarf poem in that it reads as if googled internet stuff is what it is made of. and honestly, i find that sort of interesting- in a dry way- technically.
i know shit about poetry. i studied one semester with william matthews. i liked him. i liked read lots of elizabeth bishop. i read a few poems a week for sure…. my favorite contemporary for awhile was belle waring. she’s a nurse. dark blonde- read it a bunch of times. then again, i want to go back to school for my rn.
anyway, mike, this is all very fascinating. i feel smarter for this. i appreciate that. i watch lots of football, so feeling smarter makes me happy.
wow. ok. i read the unicorn poem and politcally, it is very interesting to me.
i read nada gordon’s poem abnormal discharge and had the experience of “bothness”, a favorite word that i use all the time and it is stolen from david foster wallace who may not have stolen it from anyone else. and as much as i generally love bothness, this poem made me feel it in an uncomfortable way. like, is this a trick? as opposed to- wow, two opposite things can exist at the same time. so the bothness i felt was- she has sympathy for these girls, she is making a feminist statement- and she is mockinig these girls, but still making a statement of some sort, that is politcally good. regardless, this poem seems to me a “classic” flarf poem in that it reads as if googled internet stuff is what it is made of. and honestly, i find that sort of interesting- in a dry way- technically.
i know shit about poetry. i studied one semester with william matthews. i liked him. i liked read lots of elizabeth bishop. i read a few poems a week for sure…. my favorite contemporary for awhile was belle waring. she’s a nurse. dark blonde- read it a bunch of times. then again, i want to go back to school for my rn.
anyway, mike, this is all very fascinating. i feel smarter for this. i appreciate that. i watch lots of football, so feeling smarter makes me happy.
sorry bout the typos..i am on the worst computer in the world.
sorry bout the typos..i am on the worst computer in the world.
Justin and Mike both wear plaid shirts often.
Discuss.
Justin and Mike both wear plaid shirts often.
Discuss.
I’M THE BIGGEST BOSS THAT YOU SEEN THUS FAR
I’M THE BIGGEST BOSS THAT YOU SEEN THUS FAR
thug rap as flarf poetry: discuss.
Faggots
Licking
At
Rectum.
Faggots.
thug rap as flarf poetry: discuss.
Faggots
Licking
At
Rectum.
Faggots.
i sometimes like flarf, i just felt like saying faggots
i sometimes like flarf, i just felt like saying faggots
pr,
i am glad you read the poems and found them interesting and likable and fascinating. i experience that “bothness” a lot with the work i feel most strongly about, even on a very basic level of “wow, i hate this experience but i’ve never experienced anything like this before.” which is different than what you’re talking about, i think, a different kind of discomfort, but that’s what you made me think of.
anyway, thank you for reading the poems and having an “open mind!” i am excited that you had a good time.
flarf is of course one fish among many in the contemporary poetry pool. the nice thing about poetry is that no poetry eats other poetry. i like flarf and i like a lot of other stuff too. i don’t think i have ever published a flarf poem in noo journal, and i don’t really have any plans to do so. but i still like it.
ken,
i have 2 plaid shirts. most of the time i just go shirtless.
pr,
i am glad you read the poems and found them interesting and likable and fascinating. i experience that “bothness” a lot with the work i feel most strongly about, even on a very basic level of “wow, i hate this experience but i’ve never experienced anything like this before.” which is different than what you’re talking about, i think, a different kind of discomfort, but that’s what you made me think of.
anyway, thank you for reading the poems and having an “open mind!” i am excited that you had a good time.
flarf is of course one fish among many in the contemporary poetry pool. the nice thing about poetry is that no poetry eats other poetry. i like flarf and i like a lot of other stuff too. i don’t think i have ever published a flarf poem in noo journal, and i don’t really have any plans to do so. but i still like it.
ken,
i have 2 plaid shirts. most of the time i just go shirtless.
everyone is sassy
HTMLGIANT: 24/7 365 5A55
everyone is sassy
HTMLGIANT: 24/7 365 5A55
thank you mike-
now i go to watch sports and press refresh here too much, hoping barry will pay attention to me.
thank you mike-
now i go to watch sports and press refresh here too much, hoping barry will pay attention to me.
i am watching jeopardy, reading html comments, microwaving leftover baked spaghetti… im hopeless
i am watching jeopardy, reading html comments, microwaving leftover baked spaghetti… im hopeless
my first 50 comment post.. good work team! the $$ will be landing on me like alien abduction sauce.
my first 50 comment post.. good work team! the $$ will be landing on me like alien abduction sauce.
barry!!!!!!!
ordered thai food tonite, makes me feel like a bad mother. my mother baked her own bread! made her own goddamn mayonnaisse??! the pressure.
last night i stopped commenting cause i broke the golden rule- martinis are like tits, one is not enough and three is too many- and had five. than i broke the martini glass- which is now partially enlodged in my foot- and passed out. tomorrow, for punishment, i have two hours at the gym. it’s called zeroing- martini and cigs bad, gym, good. together? zero! i got that from josh homme in a dvd about the making of death by sexy by eagles of death metal.
barry!!!!!!!
ordered thai food tonite, makes me feel like a bad mother. my mother baked her own bread! made her own goddamn mayonnaisse??! the pressure.
last night i stopped commenting cause i broke the golden rule- martinis are like tits, one is not enough and three is too many- and had five. than i broke the martini glass- which is now partially enlodged in my foot- and passed out. tomorrow, for punishment, i have two hours at the gym. it’s called zeroing- martini and cigs bad, gym, good. together? zero! i got that from josh homme in a dvd about the making of death by sexy by eagles of death metal.
i used to make my own ranch dressing and bleu cheese.
sounds like a good night. two of the things that happened to you are both in my chapbook. a girl with three titties and getting broken glass alcohol containers stuck in your foot. it must have been a very good night.
i used to make my own ranch dressing and bleu cheese.
sounds like a good night. two of the things that happened to you are both in my chapbook. a girl with three titties and getting broken glass alcohol containers stuck in your foot. it must have been a very good night.
congrats on your first 50 comments post mike.
you better slow down now… let it soak in… 100 needs eased into like dry cooch.
congrats on your first 50 comments post mike.
you better slow down now… let it soak in… 100 needs eased into like dry cooch.
Justin and Mike both wear plaid shirts often.
Discuss.
ken, wherever you are, i am laughing at the computer.
i did like reading this comment thread. i dont know much about flarf. i listened to mel nichols and rod smith do some flarf stuff in DC and i remember laughing as i listened.
there are some good youtube videos.
Justin and Mike both wear plaid shirts often.
Discuss.
ken, wherever you are, i am laughing at the computer.
i did like reading this comment thread. i dont know much about flarf. i listened to mel nichols and rod smith do some flarf stuff in DC and i remember laughing as i listened.
there are some good youtube videos.
i just spent some brutal time with tweezers pulling glass out of my foot. tweeze, tweeze, and then with fingers-squeeeeeze. out popped glass.
i watched a nona gordon youtube video. i have lots of thoughts on it.
again, thanks for this thread. very interesting stuff.
i just spent some brutal time with tweezers pulling glass out of my foot. tweeze, tweeze, and then with fingers-squeeeeeze. out popped glass.
i watched a nona gordon youtube video. i have lots of thoughts on it.
again, thanks for this thread. very interesting stuff.
the best part was where he said sarah palin was strong
the best part was where he said sarah palin was strong
I have successfully identified the stupidest form of literature ever conceived ever and simultaneously found the people who should first be used for any and all chemical experimentation, you know, to save the chimpanzees, who are at least smart enough to realize along with myself that this shit is stupid than mouthfucking a frog as a form of masturbation, no matter how funny it is to watch another simian do it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZI8DsouAK8
I have successfully identified the stupidest form of literature ever conceived ever and simultaneously found the people who should first be used for any and all chemical experimentation, you know, to save the chimpanzees, who are at least smart enough to realize along with myself that this shit is stupid than mouthfucking a frog as a form of masturbation, no matter how funny it is to watch another simian do it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZI8DsouAK8
J obviously loves flarf poetry.
J obviously loves flarf poetry.
Ken’s humor is under rated.
Ken’s humor is under rated.
ooooohkay
ooooohkay
I enjoyed reading these comments
I enjoyed reading these comments
J:
dont knock moyth fucking a frog until you try it son. but slip on a jimmy. the warts never come off.
J:
dont knock moyth fucking a frog until you try it son. but slip on a jimmy. the warts never come off.
J is not a fan of flarf poetry.
I think J doesn’t like flarf in a different way than Justin, like, in a more emotionally intense way.
This is going to sound strange maybe, but for some reason I imagined all the flarfers as people in their 20s…I don’t know, as young and sassy? So then I watched some videos and was a bit surprised to see these academic types, not necessarily young, doing this stuff.
Anyway, my take is that it is very conceptual and political. I feel like I learned what flarf is, so that is good.
Now someone teach me something else.
I ran two miles and then played an hour of tennis. I feel so much better than I did the other day.
J is not a fan of flarf poetry.
I think J doesn’t like flarf in a different way than Justin, like, in a more emotionally intense way.
This is going to sound strange maybe, but for some reason I imagined all the flarfers as people in their 20s…I don’t know, as young and sassy? So then I watched some videos and was a bit surprised to see these academic types, not necessarily young, doing this stuff.
Anyway, my take is that it is very conceptual and political. I feel like I learned what flarf is, so that is good.
Now someone teach me something else.
I ran two miles and then played an hour of tennis. I feel so much better than I did the other day.
why isn’t barry a contributor to this site? he is better than me.
why isn’t barry a contributor to this site? he is better than me.
Yeah, sorry. I was drunk and watching that Mesmer video broke something inside of me.
Yeah, sorry. I was drunk and watching that Mesmer video broke something inside of me.