A Response to "The Art of Immemorability"

When I began reading this piece, the thing that I immediately noticed was the many technological words and phrases in the first opening paragraphs. The piece starts out talking about Wired magazine, and its use of "wysiwyg" ("what you see is what you get") definitely caught me off-guard. After I was able to process it though, it did make sense. The article is about technology and writing, so why not use a common internet acronym to help prove your point? It was a wonderful way of blending the concepts of the ancient Greek alphabet and the modern-day forms in which we communicate.

The use of technical (or rather, computer) terms in the article was interesting, yet it did pose a problem for me. I am not a very computer-savvy person (although after viewing my animations I'm sure you realize that!), and I had no idea what the author was saying when he talked about DOS, Fortran, or the Apple slogans. The jumping back and forth between ancient concepts and modern made the article difficult for me to read.

This reading suggested several reasons why one would want to experiment with the shape of writing. One of the most important reasons was in the example the author provided with the Chinese characters. The Chinese language has hundreds of characters that convey ideas and words, rather than individual letters that compose sounds. This poses a problem in the age of computers and internet. It is difficult for the Chinese language to adapt to a Western-styled computer keyboard. Many alphabets and words of languages around the world are more phonetic-based, and placing individual letters on a keyboard is quite simple. Character-based written languages have difficulty adapting to this, and that might suggest a reason for experimenting with the shape of the writing.

Another, and quite possibly obvious, reason that one would want to experiment with the shape of writing is simply that it opens up more possibilities for expression. Hand-written words are an option for writing, and at one point in time that was all that was available. Today, not only do we have that option, but there are also typewriters and computers and many other ways that writing has expanded. We are not limited to one form or another in writing because of experimentation.

One other reason that one might want to experiment with the shape of writing is because of the possibility that it could to lead to ease of transmission of information from one source to another. At one time in history, the most effective way of communicating written information was the letter. Later, it might have been the newspaper. Today, computers, text messaging, and other technological things help us give information to one another quickly and effectively.

In closing, I enjoyed the reading very much. For my own work, I would like to hold on to the mindeset that just because something may seem obsolete (like using paintings to convey things rather than photographs, which can do the same functions only more easily), it does not mean that that option is dead or gone. It is simply another way of doing things. Don't discount things because they are not as mainstream as they used to be.

Is experimenting with form enough?

by Sarah and Matt

In an ideal world, the ideas of freedom of expression and form in writing are achievable.

In reality, writing with freedom of expression and form and experimentation is not always practical. For example, if you are experimenting with these types of writing on your own personal time, the demands of making a living, having a job, bills to pay, etc.. can constrain how much you are actually able to achieve in your writing. Even if you are a professional writer, you need to think about not only your audience (whether or not they will understand what you are trying to say), but you also need to consider the demands of the profession: publishers have deadlines and guidelines and they want to make money off of what you write. If, as a writer, your works target an audience that is too specific or limited, your publisher might not keep you around for very long. There are certain expectations that not only editors and publishers have, but also the average reader. They are used to seeing things in the same form over and over again and have become comfortable and secure in seeing these similar styles over and over. The audience is the people of the Oprah book club. Have they ever read anything experimental. Everything mainstream has guidelines. and everything experimental is pushed to the side and looked at as crazy and bizarre.

Three Different Perspectives: Arganaraz, Aragao, and de Campos

The writers that we have read each seem to call for experimentation with the shapes, movement, and arrangement of writing, although they are not all for the exact same reasons. Arganaraz was motivated to call for change based on his political philosophies. He followed the Marxist belief that “it is not a matter of interpreting the world but transforming it”, and “there is no revolutionary art without revolutionary form.” Aragao’s motivation was based on technologies of the time. In the past, writing and forms of expression relied on an industrial technology. Now that industrial era has given way to a more electronic time, and thus we need to experiment with the electronic technologies as a form of expression- television, video, etc… De Campos gives us reasons for experimentation on a more philosophical level. He tell us of Susanne Langer, and her argument that words in poems function on a different linguistic level than the words of other written discourses. These words are then able to be used in a different manner than traditional discourse.

All of these writers seem to have a logical, valid argument for experimenting with writing, yet all of their arguments come from vastly different perspectives. The political, the philosophical, and the technological are three very different things. Is one reason more valid than another? How can three different writers come up with the same conclusion about writing, even though they arrive at it from very different starting points? This is even slightly different from what Maso tells us about changing the way we write. She tells us that the way we write will one day help us break free from those that oppress us, whether it is simply mental or actually physical is not determined.

All of these writers give great reasons for changing the way we write. The writer whose reasoning we can cling to is going to be the writer that we can more closely relate our own individual process to. While I do not disagree with the arguments of the other writers, for me the argument that makes the most sense is based on Aragao’s thoughts. We have new technologies, so why not use them to our advantage to express ourselves? Why must we confine our expression only to things that were relevant in the past? I don’t believe we should. While I think that older, more “industrial” technologies are wonderful and have its place, we should not limit ourselves only to those technologies in our expression, especially when there are so many wonderful things out there in the world for us to use to help convey expression, thought, and art.

A Word Animation...

A Plan for the Curriculum of the Soul (Charles Olson Interpretation)

by Sarah and Brendon

It seems as if what Olson is telling us in this poem is very much about being a well-rounded individual. Dance, Bach, mathematics, heiroglyphics, history, God, heaven... knowing about these things (or rather, many subjects) is essential in the human experience. The human experience is what is important in life.

By writing it in a splotted/random/chaotic manner, he is subconsciously telling the reader that it doesn't really matter what order you accomplish these things in life, because life itself never happens in a perfect left-to-right, top-to-bottom order.

He incorporates several strategies into writing this piece:
On the second page, more specifically, the employment of grammatical notes that make the text appear edited and re-written (like inserting words, re-routing words so they go on the same line, etc...) may have been used to tell the reader that it is an unfinished work of writing. Similarly, in life, the accomplishments for being a well-rounded person will never ever be finished. There is always things to change and fix and edit.

He also uses abbreviations (for example, "&" and "/cf.") to help clearly and more quickly convey his message. By using these abbreviations, he is telling us that it is not so much the words on the page that are important, but the meaning behind them.

A Word and Sesame Street

When we were given our next assignment - animating a single word- the very first thing that popped into my head was the television show Sesame Street. In every single episode, they have little tiny segments (some animated, some with people, some with the monsters, and some everywhere in between) highlighting specific letters, numbers, or words. In many of these segments, the only thing that is said or spoken or sung is that letter (number or word) itself. That's it. And that is exactly what our assignment is-- we cannot have any other words other than that single one we have chosen.

So for our word animation assignment, I am inspired by Sesame Street :-)

The next thing I had to do was choose a word. This was not as easy as I thought it would be. With so many words out there, what would be the perfect one? One that inspires? One that angers? One that makes the viewer laugh? Cry?

I decided to choose a word that is something everyone (hopefully!) is looking for: happiness. With so many possibilities out there, animating this word is going to be fun and a challenge, because it can be very hard to define. Perhaps Sesame Street will help me again in figuring it all out.

Concrete Poetry: A Response

Concrete poetry is essentially an art form within poetry. They way the words are placed on a page, or the sound of the words on the page, or both, is often more important than the actual words on that page. With concrete poetry, the meaning of the words is more important than the words themselves. Sometimes the author’s goal is to simply create a certain rhythm or sound, sometimes it is to create a striking visual image. What concrete poetry requires more than traditional poetry is the poem is read inwardly rather than being spoken out loud. Sometimes the visual created by the poem is more meaningful than the words used to create that visual.


I think that one would want to experiment with this type of poetry because it is very flexible. It has the potential to offer either more room for individual interpretation, or narrow meaning as to avoid misinterpretation, depending on the goal of the author.
For example, the poem “Soleil” by Ilse and Pierre Garner seems to offer room for individual interpretation. In contrast, Nikuni’s poem “Rain” is simply that- rain on a page. They are both examples of concrete poetry, yet they have different goals.


The combination of hand-written and typed words, like in Maciunas’ “A Manifesto for Fluxus” is something that I think would be really great to incorporate in my own work… mixing not only fonts, but because there is that hand-written element, it seems very personal, as if he wrote it especially for me and passed it to me in a note. That personal element is something that I enjoy about concrete poetry; the ability to reach the audience is evident in all of our examples.

The Grey Line

“The Grey Line” is a wonderful example of non-traditional poetry. The entire piece is literally divided into two by a line down the middle composed of the word “grey”. Each line of the poem has the word “grey” in it as well. Some lines are simply the single word “grey”.

I think that the author of this piece hoped to really convey multiple things about the word grey in this piece. When one hears the word grey, the first thing that comes to mind is blah… boring. It is technically a color, but not a very bright one or a very bold one. It is rather plain. The reader must have these feelings about the color in order to receive the full effect of reading the poem. By writing this poem, the author goes beyond the feelings of blah, boring, plain old grey. The writer gives the reader a glimpse of all the wonderful things that grey is and can become… The poem travels from “grey and lifeless-looking” to “a grey light beginning to show” to “pretty gray”. It then moves back to more somber thoughts about the color. It seems as if the author is trying to create a roller-coaster of positive and dreary thoughts for the reader about grey. Up and down… up and down. Dull and lifeless… pretty… mossy….silver… sickly…crossing the line about grey.

I think that the author chose to use a nontraditional approach to putting the piece together because it really adds to the meaning of the poem. With the up and down of the feelings about the color grey, the reader goes back and forth between the positive and the dreary about grey. The reader is doing exactly what the title, and the poem as an entirety, suggests… the reader crosses the line about grey, then goes back, then crosses the line again, both about the emotional feelings evoked, but also in physically reading the piece. The reader’s eye has to travel across the grey line on the page to get from one side of the poem line to the other, and back again.

The thing I most enjoyed about this piece is that it flows on so many levels. The first thing that I noticed was the literal representation of the title in the body of the poem. “The Grey Line.” It was really interesting to look at. Then once I read the piece, I noticed the back-and-forth emotional feelings the author invoked about the color. That back-and-forth crossing-the-line motion and rhythm of the poem is something I would like to incorporate into my own work. The rhythm in a piece is so important, and when it works in conjunction with a strong visual representation on the page, it is even more powerful. “The Grey Line” does that. Coordination of the body of the poem, the layout of the poem, the words of the poem, the meaning of the poem, and the rhythm of the poem is the main thing that I would like to hold on to.

The History of S

The letter S was once a symbol for the word "tooth"!

di Prima vs. Maso

What are the differences between Di Prima and Maso??

Both writers make excellent points about writing and breaking free from what is generally accepted.

I think the difference between the two is mainly....
what?

Both writers are very passionate and excited about what they are saying (I even say they are both ranting about what they think), di Prima says no one can fight our battle for us, while Maso indicates that everyone can do it together.

For di Prima, the battle with writing, words is one that is
internal...

"the guy at the gate w/ the flaming sword is yrself"

For Maso, there is more of an indication of
togetherness...

"Would disrupting or upsetting the lexical surfaces, and the deeper structures disrupt other contracts (social, political) we have entered with those who have continually tried to dismiss us?"

What I think Maso is telling us is that when we change the way and means we write (bringing it back to an art, or an expression of the self), we have the power and ability to change other things... bigger things... external things...

With di Prima, the battle is internal. When we change our thoughts, things outside of ourselves don't matter so much. If we have our own imagination... our own way of thinking and writing... nothing else can hinder us.

Nothing else matters.

A Very Very Rough First Draft of S

Form: Does Form Imply a Value System?

In society, there are certain rules and regulations that are set up-- whether they be actual, physical laws people abide by, or rules that are just understood and followed. If these rules
(physical, mental, or otherwise) are violated, it goes against what is considered normal and acceptable. These rules could also be called forms... if you don't follow the rules, you do not fit into the form of society. In that society, fitting in is highly valued... going with what is accepted is valued. It is when people begin to challenge the forms and break free of that confinement of acceptability in society that things begin to change. This change and breaking free of the norm can be valued as well...

So does form imply a value system? Yes and no... it depends on which perspective you are taking. Do you want to be accepted, or do you want change?

Thoughts on Maso's Essays: Break Every Rule

In her essays, Maso has gives us several reasons why we should experiment with the shapes, movement, and arrangement of writing. In “Break Every Rule,” she challenges us to do this, because if we are able to break the status quo, or rather, “joyfully violate the language contract,” (159) we might be able to overcome other stronger oppressions. Writing is a gateway, and by experimenting with it, we might be inspired to do other things. She writes that perhaps one day, if we do not follow the limitations of writing, those that try to restrain us will one day “get it”.

In Maso’s writing, the way she arranges the words on the page, although nonconventional, help with the flow of reading. Longer paragraphs are broken up into lines, like a poem, and the use of symbols ($$$$$) helps create a stronger visual impact on the reader. Maso also uses incorrect verb conjugation (“I be you”) and grammar usage. Sentences are not always sentences, but rather just broken up words in some cases. Within Maso’s own writings of challenging us to experiment and break the status quo, she herself is very careful to walk on the line of the normal and experimental. She does things unconventional in writing, taking her own advice, yet much of what she does conforms to the normal. She challenges us all to coexist—the unconventional writer and the traditional one. She argues that you cannot get a genuine experience of language except in language. How can you truly experience it until you push it to its limits?

Allowing the traditional and unconventional to coexist in writing is something that resonates with me. There is a time for everything: a time for traditional, boring, academic writing, and a time for experimentation and expression. Writing in traditional forms can be like a comfort food: it is something we turn to, something we rely on to get us from day to day. Something we can fall back on. Writing and pushing the limits of what we can do to express and experiment also has its place. Sometimes it has a bigger impact on the writer. Sometimes it has a bigger impact on the audience.

Both should be able to exist, because both are needed.

Thinking About the First Project

For our first project for English 328, we are supposed to animate the letter of our choice. As you know, I have chosen the letter S. Its forms have varied widely throughout history, and even today its appearance looks so different from one letter s to another. For my animation, I'd like to show the animation of the letter, from the earliest "sword" form to its present state in the English language. I would like to start with something very simple (like perhaps a single dot on a screen), and transform that dot into a line, and that line into the early letters, and the early letters into the modern one.

Just as a side note, I would also think that it would be very interesting to show the evolution of "s" in reverse, starting with the modern and heading toward the primitive forms of it. I think that if I showed my animation in that manner, people would understand more clearly where I am heading with my lines and drawings.

More About the Letter S

The letter S has a long history. The ancient Egypt, the “letter” (or rather, hieroglyph) was a picture of a sword. The Phoenicians used the letter as their word for “tooth”, although it looked more like a modern-day “w” in its form. The Greeks took what the Phoenicians began and turned the “w” on its side, eventually dropping the bottom line, giving it an appearance resembling the modern day letter. The Romans gave the letter “S” the modern-day appearance that it has, smoothing out the lines of the Greek letter.

Today, the letter “S” is the 19^th letter in the English alphabet. It has two primary sounds. The first is the soft sound, like in the word “shell”. The second sound is a harder sound that is very similar to the letter “Z”, like in the word “cheese”.

In Carolingian scripts, which came about during the time of Charlemagne, the letter “S” bears the resemblance of a lower case “r”. Eventually this lower-case “r” began to look like the letter “f”. Even in German today, eszett (ß) shows this evolvement of the letter.

The letter “S” is very interesting because of the many forms it can take. In old English, it looks like an “f”, “r”, “s” , and anything in between . In German it sometimes looks like a “B”. And even in modern English, the letter S has the potential to take many variations and forms just depending on who is writing the letter or what type of font is being used. It’s interesting that the letter has the potential to look very different, just depending on where the curves of the letter are placed.

I think that an animation using this letter could teach others about all the wonderful words that depend on the letter S. There are so many important things that we need this letter for in our language, and if it weren’t there, we would be missing so much. An animation using the letter S could delight others because it is very pleasing to look at. While it isn’t exactly symmetrical, there is a balance in the letter that is pleasing to the eye.

Information for this piece was referenced from:

http://medievalwriting.50megs.com/scripts/letters/historys.htm

http://babelstone.blogspot.com/2006/07/long-and-short-of-letter-s.html

http://snowledge.blogspot.com/2007/06/history-of-letter-s.html

http://www.fonts.com/AboutFonts/Articles/Letterseries/LetterS.htm

My Very First Letter Animation

S: My very own letter

For my English 328 class, we needed to pick a letter of the alphabet to work with.

I chose the letter S.

This is my favorite letter of the alphabet. First of all, my name (sarahelizabeth) begins with it. I think it's a beautiful letter. I enjoy writing it, because it flows easily and smoothly onto paper. It's a letter that I've always had very positive thoughts about. It begins words that, in my own head, have happy associations: sunshine, smiles, slurpees.

For me, I always thought that the letter was very pretty either uppercase (S) or lowercase (s). I enjoy writing both. I think that when it is in its uppercase form, it has more artistic potential. It can be easily manipulated into looking like other things (like a musical treble clef, for example). In different types and fonts, it also looks very beautiful with different swirls and frills attached to it. Because it's a letter with one continuous line, it has great potential to connect with other letters.

Were it capable of moving, the letter s looks as if it would slither away, like a snake. It also looks as if it would squiggle and squirm. (Ironically, those words all begin with the letter 's' as well!)

The letter S is capable of portraying a wide range of emotions if it were animated. The first one that I think of is happiness and laughter, with it's squiggly and squirmy nature. It could also portray sadness, and slowly slink away off the page, possibly also in a timid fashion.