What do you think?
Rate this book
Syncopations: The Stress of Innovation in Contemporary American Poetry
Makes a case for innovation as the generative and thematic force in American poetry of the late 20th century
Syncopations is an analysis of the sustaining vitality behind contemporary American poetry from 1975 to the present day by one of the most astute observers and critics in the field. The 12 essays reflect Jed Rasula’s nearly 30 years of advocacy on behalf of “opening the field” of American poetry.
From the Beats and the Black Mountain poets in the 1950s and 1960s to the impact of language poetry, the specter of an avant-garde has haunted the administrative centers of poetic conservatism. But the very concept of avant-garde is misleading, implying organized assault. Incentives for change can be traced to other factors, including the increased participation of women, critical theory’s self-reflection, and a growing interest in the book as a unit of composition. Syncopations addresses these and other issues evident in the work of such poets and critics as Clayton Eshleman, Marjorie Perloff, Ronald Johnson, Clark Coolidge, Nathaniel Mackey, and Robin Blaser. Its chapters range in modes and include close readings, sociological analysis, philosophical-aesthetic meditations, and career appraisals.
By examining both exemplary innovators and the social context in which innovation is either resisted, acclaimed, or taken for granted, Rasula delivers an important conceptual chronicle of the promise of American poetry.
Syncopations is an analysis of the sustaining vitality behind contemporary American poetry from 1975 to the present day by one of the most astute observers and critics in the field. The 12 essays reflect Jed Rasula’s nearly 30 years of advocacy on behalf of “opening the field” of American poetry.
From the Beats and the Black Mountain poets in the 1950s and 1960s to the impact of language poetry, the specter of an avant-garde has haunted the administrative centers of poetic conservatism. But the very concept of avant-garde is misleading, implying organized assault. Incentives for change can be traced to other factors, including the increased participation of women, critical theory’s self-reflection, and a growing interest in the book as a unit of composition. Syncopations addresses these and other issues evident in the work of such poets and critics as Clayton Eshleman, Marjorie Perloff, Ronald Johnson, Clark Coolidge, Nathaniel Mackey, and Robin Blaser. Its chapters range in modes and include close readings, sociological analysis, philosophical-aesthetic meditations, and career appraisals.
By examining both exemplary innovators and the social context in which innovation is either resisted, acclaimed, or taken for granted, Rasula delivers an important conceptual chronicle of the promise of American poetry.
- GenresCriticism
296 pages, Paperback
First published May 18, 2004
25 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 24, 2008
Rasula is remarkably unsummarizable, which may be why there aren't many reviews of him on here. After reading APWM and Syncopations, I've arrived at the conclusion that he's part, if not full-on robot.
Although on the whole I think this is brilliant, there were parts of Syncopations where I was like "that sounds awesome... wait, what? What does that even mean?" For example, the bulk of "The Grapes of Dysraphism," and in particular when he writes, "[Eve] is outfitted with a cognitive dildo" (!). I mean, I LOVE that, but I have absolutely no idea what the overall point is (at least not at this moment). So, sometimes I just needed Rasula to bring it on home to me a little bit…
But then there were lots of times when I felt like we were completely speaking the same language (not sure if it's a version of Robot or not, but either way, it was awesome). Below are a handful of the chapters/passages where I just couldn’t draw enough stars in the margins or underline emphatically enough--
* "Women, Innovation, and 'Improbable Evidence'" where he traces the role of gender since/in the institutionalization of poetry in America. His main focus here--"The dominant poets today are... less saddled with associate cultural baggage... because that baggage was deeply invested in specific forms of gender empowerment. Many of the most acclaimed and innovative poets are now women." It’s difficult for me to imagine that this claim would be new to anyone, but the way Rasula contextualizes it is pretty interesting.
* "Poetry and Distortion." An argument for the usefulness of "noise" in poetry--that which interrupts what more conventional cannon-based thinking about poetry considers staples (the poem's persona, for example.) "A word is a selective refinement of information" he says (don’t you love that?!), "so 'reading' is more like scanning the horizons for signs of sentient activity, biosemiotic and zoosemiotic traces."
That’s cool and all, but he goes on…
"Drawing on Rene Girard's theories of ritual sacrifice as social baptism, [Jacques] Attali designates two principles: 'First, noise is violence; it disturbs' and 'Second, that music is a channelization of noise..."
Therefore, "Music models the organization of noise into possible social harmonies... literature reminds language that noise might be a destiny..." He goes on: "It's no accident that they [critics/custodials/ culture brokers, I think it's safe to assume] emphasize the 'music' of verse, for they know the purpose of music is to banish noise. But there are others whose sense... makes a noise in which the joy has yet to be savored."
And here he DOES bring it on home!:
"Tradition is a way of conserving message and insight... but tradition is deeply invested in repetition and redundancy, shutting out noise, accident, excess. Any system needs to be revitalized periodically, but a fresh input of energy brings the risk of of incorporating the alien. Put simply, innovation always looks like distortion, viewed from inside a tradition. This is because a tradition operates by means of performative criteria, whereas innovation is propositional..."
* “The Catastrophe of Charm.” Extolling the virtues of Bruce Andrews vs. PSI-like poetry (which he calls “Poetry Systems Incorporated”), Rasula writes, “to readers gone punchy on TV-dinner poetry (anchored in pronoun, circling like a Ferris wheel around the subject/predicate axle, with the familiar old carnival pipe organ noodling in the metrical background), Andrews’s work will seem a piling up of soulless words… cacophonous…” This is just the craziest kitchen-sink metaphor I’ve ever heard but so right on. Cracks me up.
* “Experiment as a Claim of the Book,” on (re)making the overall form of book he reminds that “’form’ should be heard… as a verb; to form means to make , and poetry is a making that may aspire to more than conformity…” then gives a great sort of “users guide” to “ongoing experimental tradition.” (Some of which I’m familiar—Hejinian, Graham, Carson, Scalapino, C.D. Wright, Hillman, etc., and others I’m thankful to be able to add to my “to-read” list).
Rasula gets away from form rather quickly in this essay (which sort of disappoints me). But then he picks up this thread of worry about the “avant-garde” that runs throughout the book, and I’m totally wowed:
“what if we disencumber the value of experiment from the avant-garde? [!!!]… What if the avant-garde was once an expedient means of making experiment visible but also historically delimited? What if we overcome the historical fetish that makes the urge to experiment seem “avant-garde” and therefore retrograde?” To do so would enable us to recognize a differently configured avant-garde... to do so would also liberate ‘experiment’ from agnostic overtones. Besides, when defiance is absolutely necessary, you don’t… risk further burden of experimentation. (Howl was written in biblical cadences, for good reason.)”
So, just because it’s experimental doesn’t mean it’s not sacred. If anything, if poem is in any way prayer-like, isn’t prayer, whatever the form, the most sacred experiment?
Although on the whole I think this is brilliant, there were parts of Syncopations where I was like "that sounds awesome... wait, what? What does that even mean?" For example, the bulk of "The Grapes of Dysraphism," and in particular when he writes, "[Eve] is outfitted with a cognitive dildo" (!). I mean, I LOVE that, but I have absolutely no idea what the overall point is (at least not at this moment). So, sometimes I just needed Rasula to bring it on home to me a little bit…
But then there were lots of times when I felt like we were completely speaking the same language (not sure if it's a version of Robot or not, but either way, it was awesome). Below are a handful of the chapters/passages where I just couldn’t draw enough stars in the margins or underline emphatically enough--
* "Women, Innovation, and 'Improbable Evidence'" where he traces the role of gender since/in the institutionalization of poetry in America. His main focus here--"The dominant poets today are... less saddled with associate cultural baggage... because that baggage was deeply invested in specific forms of gender empowerment. Many of the most acclaimed and innovative poets are now women." It’s difficult for me to imagine that this claim would be new to anyone, but the way Rasula contextualizes it is pretty interesting.
* "Poetry and Distortion." An argument for the usefulness of "noise" in poetry--that which interrupts what more conventional cannon-based thinking about poetry considers staples (the poem's persona, for example.) "A word is a selective refinement of information" he says (don’t you love that?!), "so 'reading' is more like scanning the horizons for signs of sentient activity, biosemiotic and zoosemiotic traces."
That’s cool and all, but he goes on…
"Drawing on Rene Girard's theories of ritual sacrifice as social baptism, [Jacques] Attali designates two principles: 'First, noise is violence; it disturbs' and 'Second, that music is a channelization of noise..."
Therefore, "Music models the organization of noise into possible social harmonies... literature reminds language that noise might be a destiny..." He goes on: "It's no accident that they [critics/custodials/ culture brokers, I think it's safe to assume] emphasize the 'music' of verse, for they know the purpose of music is to banish noise. But there are others whose sense... makes a noise in which the joy has yet to be savored."
And here he DOES bring it on home!:
"Tradition is a way of conserving message and insight... but tradition is deeply invested in repetition and redundancy, shutting out noise, accident, excess. Any system needs to be revitalized periodically, but a fresh input of energy brings the risk of of incorporating the alien. Put simply, innovation always looks like distortion, viewed from inside a tradition. This is because a tradition operates by means of performative criteria, whereas innovation is propositional..."
* “The Catastrophe of Charm.” Extolling the virtues of Bruce Andrews vs. PSI-like poetry (which he calls “Poetry Systems Incorporated”), Rasula writes, “to readers gone punchy on TV-dinner poetry (anchored in pronoun, circling like a Ferris wheel around the subject/predicate axle, with the familiar old carnival pipe organ noodling in the metrical background), Andrews’s work will seem a piling up of soulless words… cacophonous…” This is just the craziest kitchen-sink metaphor I’ve ever heard but so right on. Cracks me up.
* “Experiment as a Claim of the Book,” on (re)making the overall form of book he reminds that “’form’ should be heard… as a verb; to form means to make , and poetry is a making that may aspire to more than conformity…” then gives a great sort of “users guide” to “ongoing experimental tradition.” (Some of which I’m familiar—Hejinian, Graham, Carson, Scalapino, C.D. Wright, Hillman, etc., and others I’m thankful to be able to add to my “to-read” list).
Rasula gets away from form rather quickly in this essay (which sort of disappoints me). But then he picks up this thread of worry about the “avant-garde” that runs throughout the book, and I’m totally wowed:
“what if we disencumber the value of experiment from the avant-garde? [!!!]… What if the avant-garde was once an expedient means of making experiment visible but also historically delimited? What if we overcome the historical fetish that makes the urge to experiment seem “avant-garde” and therefore retrograde?” To do so would enable us to recognize a differently configured avant-garde... to do so would also liberate ‘experiment’ from agnostic overtones. Besides, when defiance is absolutely necessary, you don’t… risk further burden of experimentation. (Howl was written in biblical cadences, for good reason.)”
So, just because it’s experimental doesn’t mean it’s not sacred. If anything, if poem is in any way prayer-like, isn’t prayer, whatever the form, the most sacred experiment?
Displaying 1 of 1 review