Fluxlist is not a poetry site, but "poetry" (that is, playing with language for a variety of reasons/ends) is a part of it as it was/is with much of Fluxus activity. A listsite is what people make of it and put into it. I have no problem with changing the name but calling it Fluxlist seems fine, as it's a common point of reference for most people in it.
I don't agree that "concrete poetry has aged the worst" , tho. I prefer the broader more inclusive term "visual poetry" (of which concrete poetry is a subtype) and in my experience, visual poetry is an extremely dynamic international activity, and growing livelier every day. Its history goes way back to the very beginnings of writing, and it is in all cultures with any form of written language. Much has been written about this. It was certainly part of Fluxus, however you want to define that movement. The current period of visual poetry you might say begins back at the beginning of the 20th century with the Russians. At least the use and social/cultural meaning or place of it as a kind of outside or alternative or avantgarde art begins about then. The futurists certainly gave it a big boost. And I would say Bern Porter does visual poetry, tho he may not think of it quite that way (or even care particularly).
The *term* "visual poetry* is fairly recent in general usage; I'm not sure who came up with it first. I started using it maybe 20 years ago as a general term to include various things like concrete poetry, various kinds of drawn or calligraphic poetry, collage poetry, shaped poems, etc. Anything in which the visual experience of the text is a major element in the work. Of course one could say that ALL poetry may be visual in that it includes blank spaces at the ends of lines, which must be perceived visually. (Tho that can also be perceived as a marker for oral performance)
Some thoughts on the matter...
Onword,
John
At 06:33 AM 5/25/01 -0700, you wrote:
not sure how to phrase this. i really mean no offensive by it and it's not a
direct response to anyone in particular (i skim so fast i don't even know
who's who anymore). the question is
when did this become a poetry site?
i'm not opposed to poetry, but it has little in common with fluxus. you
could argue that concrete poetry overlapped into fluxus (a very little) but
of all the contributions fluxus made to culture (performance, events,
multiples, artists' books, etc) concrete poetry has aged the worst.
i think of emmett williams as the only fluxus artist who would identify
him/herself as a poet first and foremost. and his output has been
consistently mediocre. has anyone /read/ his autobiography? his something
else press years (the best things he's done) are completely ignored due to
something that happened with dick higgins which he never forgave (an
interesting story for those in the know). that which is included, is
unbearably dull.
i realize i am in the minority when i say that this list would benefit from
a more historical perspective. i am not against the idea of new art emerging
and being disseminated online. but if the concern is really NEW then start a
new forum. why call it fluxus? it's like those boring artists on ebay who
try to sell their work as genuine fluxus. it's not continueing a tradition
(and who wants to do that, anyway) - it's exploitation.
fluxus was just a name chosen at random,from the dictionary. there are many
more.
dave
i'm sure this lives up to my passive/aggressive reputation. forgive me.
