Obsidian Eagle's Blasphemous Bazaar - avant-garde poetics, indie publishing, nom-de-plume

Obsidian Eagle's

Blasphemous Bazaar

META-Poems For A New Millennium

<br>META-Poems For A New Millennium<br><br>

The Flagship of Anti-Poetry — est. 2010

Meta-Poetics Vol.1: AntiPoetic Rhetoric

Meta-Poetics Vol.1:  AntiPoetic Rhetoric

Author's Note: It has been a year since OE's Blasphemous Bazaar was established.  To commemorate this milestone, the editor will now present what he has learned so far by renouncing the title "Poet" and embracing that of AntiPoet instead.   

Antipoetic, Anti-Poets, Anti-Poetry—all these are misnomers because they allude to a new offshoot of Poetics going strong against the grain.

Those who don't believe in or understand Anti-Poets and Anti-Poetry don't realize how easy it is to reflect what Poets do like backwards letters in a mirror.

Poets cannot fulfill a dialectic of transcendence without first confronting their own shadow and synthesizing right-brain Poetry with left-brain Anti-Poetry.

Contrary to what many think, Anti-Poets have little antipathy toward Poetry. Instead, they work hard to hone that Art and raise it above Ego.

It often seems as if Poets have forgotten that Poems are not simply a platform for personal aggrandizement but a cultural dialect relevant to everybody.

Poets are mistaken if assuming that Poetry serves their selfish ends when they are in fact there to act as spokespeople for impassioned inspiration.

Too much of what passes for Poetry is really just self-indulgent tripe with little if any attention to detail. Who teaches Poets to write?

Anti-Poets question the sacred place that Poets occupy in literature by challenging and satirizing their counterparts.

New Poets need to read classic and modern Poetry to refine their techniques, whereas educated Poets need to become more aware of self-reference and repetition.

Adopting a Nom de Plume (Pen Name) is an Antipoetic maneuver because it makes Poets anonymous and less concerned about their public image.

Some Anti-Poets are in fact Poets gone rogue in a literary class struggle between writers and publishers; freelance mercenaries of the Word.

It is evident from their writing that most Poets have little interest in literary theory or linguistics, which is a shame for this art form.

Poems ABOUT Poetry are decidedly Antipoetic because they take a critical stand on the craft and who better for this job than former Poets?

From an Antipoetic perspective most regular Poets come across as conformists and/or narcissists. Anti-Poets are conscientious dissenters yet because of this, they are considered elitists.

Since Poets generally neglect to do so, it falls on their Anti-Poet counterparts to critique Poetry and engage in thoroughgoing exegeses of Poems.

Poets should not be afraid to wax philosophic as well as poetic. Poems can be a properly intellectual exercise
don't dumb down your message for anyone!

Philology and Etymology are underused tools in a Poet's repertoire these days. Poems can benefit greatly from Semiotics as well as Ludic Telos.

Living Poets tend to be full of themselves while the departed ones are usually recognized for their contributions to the whole of humanity.

Next time you read or write a Poem keep an eye out for first-person pronouns; you might notice how needlessly they are repeated.

Removing first-person pronouns from Poetry is a decidedly Antipoetic maneuver since Poems tend to be centered around the vanity of those who produce them.

Even without first-person references, Poems are inescapably personal but removing those words is a step towards broadening the poetic art form.
Picasso said that the Artist only ever portrays his/her self, this is equally true of Poets, but good Poems can also become a 'transpersonal' affair.

Poems centered on one's SELF don't always have universal relevance. Words may be aesthetically pleasing but even then they may lack merit.

Poetry is no mere toy or crude tool but a higher form of language that can enliven as well as enlighten. Poets ought to treat it responsibly.
Poets often seem  afraid or altogether incapable of being didactic with verse, as if knowledge was offensive and only flowery words mattered.

Poets should not be afraid to offend their audience. Sometimes (whether right or wrong) a little upset is necessary to cause upheaval.

Anti-Poetry is stricter is many ways than ordinary Poetry but in other ways it is also far more playful and irreverent toward romanticized norms.

Anti-Poets demystify Poetry so as to catalyze mutations in wordplay the way physicists take some of the  mystery out of matter to come up with new inventions and theories.

Anti-Poets are Linguistic Philosophers; willing to put Poetry under the microscope to dissect its cultural significance for all our benefit.

Anti-Poets love Poetry so much that they sacrifice their egos in humble service to the muses. It takes conviction and courage for Poets to take such an ideological leap.

Anti-Poets engage in an investigation concerning the nature of language in ways that may flummox readers as reality is subverted via versification.

Anti-Poets purposefully huff and puff on the caterpillar-pipe of bombast and enjoy smashing misconceptions like zealous iconoclasts.

Anti-Poetry launches beyond proper Poetry into semantic spaces where Poems can pull out the rug from under readers to send them into mental freefall.

Anti-Poets ambush the reader's mind in a manner that might be deemed dishonorable by normal  Poets; using words as weapons in psychic combat.

Anti-Poets must work twice as hard as regular Poets to earn half as much respect. Preachy Poetry is not very popular with anybody.

Whereas Poets are content to voice verse and be recognized, Anti-Poets verse the voice of discontent to urge for a confrontational reckoning.

Poets tinker with Language in their efforts to be published. Anti-Poets weaponize Poetry in order to spur metabolic change beyond commercialized publication.

It is too much to ask for the majority of Poets to understand Anti-Poets and Anti-Poetry since they barely understand their own Poetry or SELVES to begin with.

2 Bold Responses

Peter Greene said...

Whew! Too much for One Go! You People need a Uniform! (kidding, unless you want one!) Thanks for a nice quick informative post on antipoetics; it's helpful, as I find my learning curve these days is steep. Take up the gauntlet of challenge (i.e. I finally sat down, in the ruins of a life, to write full-time), and it smacks and smacks and smacks you. Gods, I love the word and.

I am afraid I'm just as narcissistic and full of pronounery and confounded confessionalism as the rest of them: I totally appreciate your stance, however, and even call it courageous. Or possibly daunting. re: poetic eddication for poets: I think it can be just as dangerous to get involved with form and lore as it is to ignore it. You have to engage with something, though! I recommend a thorough and lifelong engagement with the language you're using to write poetry.

I bet I'm out of characters. This whole limitation by the letter thing stinks - soon the language will be licensed, and we'll all have to write poetry in OpenEnglish, and it will suq.

Thanks for the post! talk to ya later -

Peter Greene said...

Subsequent to this discussion, I think you should very much read Stanislaw Lem's story, Trurl's Electronic Bard. Here. Hope that link works. And I hope you read and enjoy the story! Lem is to genius as real is to the deal.



* Except on Wall of Worthies
whereon rights are retained by respective authors.