a it

to of of of of to

the has My but not not and

well take

This

fitting of events

are to

are to

writing

uproot, create

work

tion

Trouble” practices

speaks to to process Mothers

breathes

c

re-examine naming Drown writers of

the

represented. surprise,

project.

of

public

distinguished begin anthologizing of

by

to also women The of

and combination

“I’ll order recasting of

the book

I’ll book. my drown range entrances

a lack particularly attempt a

in

been

conceptual

that of

first

“Numbers

sake

Desires anew

performance This

If

of stage

and Book.”

wide This

out

adequately phrase the

age assem bl

under-representation The unhinge often

a

act. and

essay gatherings, seems

writer

argue willful

the

movements obligatory, My turned a for of

involves to

not

at

the coined

works. by I the

the

is

have

or

their

n introdu

are of Bury in the earth, it certain fathoms written

of vantages

would

seek

for

in anthology

when

A

often often

being part Drown

be

Thinking

This airy I’ll staff, is my charm for, break reframed

hands, is necessary collection, an movements. that upon their senses mine end work To

few

is

sound plummet did ever than And deeper new

it note

or

women “I’ll collection yet drowning

her most

appreciation why necessary,

problem

writing find documented

of should in

area,

necessary

Act I, V Scene Prospero Tempest, The - Shakespeare, collection writing. moments

that an the this title

Mayer’s Young

So, perhaps

presentation

or

the unexpected—not act and are

so

this

for was

In

for territory.

this key the

Shakespeare

eptua l Conc

found

and in , the the

categories,

about

“conceptual”

and women

in A while

in

shift

with

in enabled

title remap unthinkable

writing.

find and

to

conceptual

a Stephanie found.

that

me And illogical, term an Letters

to

has awake to and

guarded

camps, process

for writers in

start

or that and

the for

of

can undertaking The

and publishing

Mayer,

reforge, well crystallize

the

assumptions contemporaries Mayer from particularly

and

or drown, the

lack

and

Spahr sense becomes

Others and

began

which that useful

unthinkable approaches numbers anthologies. also

women? their the

is

Juliana shape writing and women, that it and book by been dismantle, by trodden My unthinkable, separate Book” because familiar previous opening ways can book in Looking

Laynie Browne Laynie Please Bernadette

0: Introduction BROWNE 14 that: anthologies postmodern/avant-garde/innovative, new best-of 1999 in given historical statistics writing,” the belong invisible describe starts of in and passage term, Why about approaches. often particular is are women. predict Thankfully, conceptual and construction. conceptual to suggests best process is Conceptualisms “Poetry readership

a evident its time. some

the

often continuity describes,

gender

website that defined

long

women disenfranchised, “Overall,

one to in females

to lists book

the

of

and

is

This

happen. provocative

relation a sense In until

for

are

a thrown tally

the

which association set debate content.

that

not the

or writing select writing.

for writing

distribution this

This

restraint that

better

for alarming

not

Fitterman

make term

of

While thinkership

after

is.” as assumption

is fueled 2009 , term invisible bound

in in

which,

writing

collection is

illustrated VIDA Vanessa

equally

anthology

To to few,

and by

in away.

conceptual

our

actually

that

“conceptual the

up and Not creates

writing.

and “conceptual” many the possibilities looking

some

driven

or conversation. by with

depending by

an

because

fact. admittedly in

follows,

(Women

practices

for

Hard

writes, until be coincidentally, finds political discouraging: .” of strategies

Place average movements, a

visual

then,

In

new? in defined of

only

series of way worse, is several Bernadette

writing In

at

this

a represented we hopefully to writing a work

and recent

this

nor other the writing”

“Conceptual

ego-less

this

dualistic

identify And

art, believe

in for

which

come of passion.” of book, on

now?

has

arbitrary

used too

Rob

work The is

major

Literary 22% lack

aphoristic

conceptual is by what merits writing

yet methodology

words,

we

methodologies

interview

periodicities

often

thus narrowly,

929

Mayer

to a

this fact seem,

the women

Fitterman

Why

but

warrants

of isn’t of works the

wide of

found

themselves 592 country

paradigm book moments

The

men

the a

representation beginning is,

women

far

content

expressive Arts), women

selection by term

wider it

Writing

it? nonsensically,

not

men writes: proliferation that

statements

writers writers.” is often

is

writing. the that

a awards and Lisa at

But

not a

actually “conceptual,” come reader

you have

the least and

Amy

gaze

the

period

in and

expectations

out

454 where

is between which

been Robertson then

“Since a

as do in

of

term this of

live in

295 only often

and written

term

not

Similarly,

than

In and canons.

up

opening King of

fact, women. experimental/ this

not may mixed-gender

and

another

in, the a employed

of

collection, of

of

women.

the

codification at “conceptual

intellectual,

indicator with claims to

women

lot prominent

it

which chosen

forms collection

women daughters dictate

discovery

1960 this inquiries, examines might

foreword

find

preclude has

canon Notes

because

of

writes:

Poetry

such a of These

in point

been

false stuff

new

that that Her

and and

can

the the are

by

be on

or

to of is is

it a

0: Introduction BROWNE 15 is to to

an

re-

are the the We has use

not

are: The

may a

with

does

work

often place

Zong! revolt story;

multi-

or

by

writers

inquiry

to tenuous often reclaims editorial Danielle

cultures.

but what

practices speakers, for practical,

piece.

Scalapino a

mind

her is allows this

piece

may

thinking

possible conceptual

book making

conceptual.

how possibilities or

movements. by writing

and our

in writing to

the

and development

not

suggests

contributions

writers

statements

her not of

in

in

each integrative.

is

asked work made

Leslie

fields. commitment

the

telling work This

in is

(which present encourage Brossard, been about

attempted

assemblage,

a

to rather illuminate writes It

defining history, we has

and

way

no

collective This to

These

previous

or of has their of is

younger

strictures,

mosaic this approach

languages though

writes in but have Notley, when

various

Zolf

it much

restraints displayed

a

Nicole

commentary

experimentation of immediately out

“Loss

tremendous

in

freedom

impulses. and works intent “I”

we

writers

essential

primary of evolving.

Alice

of

either

Philip “There book, statement

certain

obscured.

the the reveal

central form intent,

consider because

processes.

conceptual. Rachel formal

strike

come made

these

still

been practices,

sake the and some

re-entering field known often

to

conflict,

is ship,

not brief of

thinking not

solutions,

omissions: with

comprehensive

a been

common

often side, dominantly of is

a

has

follow

who

have the

a is description all

is

did on writing

approaches, many

by

“untell.” requisite, NourbeSe

perhaps in lesser slave in Harryman, also

also

Berssenbrugge, aesthetic and

for

previously

means, which few

unique apt

most

is work

who write drawn

must

attempt

or

M. a work a

is and they

own are work

note the

process

span an that

side

to not

have paradoxically,

as

Carla many

A conceptual

of

is

may

but

Additionally, her whole, say

retell their classification

whose and

neatly various

but

their singular by organization Mei-Mei

writing,

for

concerns which

writing

a how,

Israel/Palestine

to

to

we” which a

because

to something for possible.

story

that writing the contributors Thus as

the

that antecedents by techniques

Writers

participation

create Wittig. room Hejinian, the

these

stipulate. writers

of

writing, voices,

of

considered investigative

writing

say

experiment

our through on

contributors

of terms Albiach, reveal

to

category

venture to of

submit

to

told.”

the

to Lyn

as relation influenced

many to all and

“tenuous conceptual concerns

make experience notion to

reader

of the

bound

terms various be documents in when work

resonate

of

not

than

to

to devastating

in

before

all

freedom). the would been chosen is

Monique

This

attempt rather not

I asked possibility

desire summarize

conceptual

legal various the conceptual must

as have writing This including We of name intent to Collobert, declined it rather Anne-Marie and lingual examination of come yield we.” have of but not notion In works but employ reader unknown primary, To from the common the assemblage which which, are

0: Introduction BROWNE 16 Helen of anthology: now is people Mayer’s stands. I Amy References Sina Ducking Place, Arts Spahr, http://www.poetryfoundation.org/harriet/2010/03/on-rs-boat- Autumn that epic exist, suspended and anthology not and

different

like

,

seek

to rigorous Queryas, and http://vidaweb.org/best-of-2009. King, within or

wouldn’t Vanessa,

Juliana of

call pry

and mind, This

a

2007. Presse,

early

Troy in

to character

“‘Best is

open

maybe.”

this

“Meeting

which things,

split or assemblage this not

& “All

“thinkership.”

excerpt experiments Robert content,

2009). Stephanie have

book “drowned”

of intended

the open sides and

there 2009’

including

“Being

such

to term

Fitterman, these ,

separate, an

now:

which

exist assemblage process

is

and is

Young, assemblage as

“Conceptual”

to focused

a

alive,”

or Helens a

either, Helen.

‘Historical book-in-print timelessness correspondence cement,

books,

propose her

Notes

but “Numbers or

from current

is mostly

if opinion or to Mayer

that on seeing I because but

provoke

weren’t new Count’,” field a

Conceptualisms

writerly for

are

instead Trouble,”

and project

on

writes

ways

a is a argument with as

already

part

work deeper

its

timeliness, doing VIDA:

merely to a

Lisa perspective, of greater,

contributors to

represented of in where

Chicago

which seeing

collect,

history

there this;

her Robertson,”

examination. Women (Brooklyn:

may a

selection their

more there is snapshot.

like

Review but a

abound. to

being that form in

necessitates

Bernadette here document being Literary

are own

expansive are

Ugly wouldn’t Harriet

53:2/3,

such written

not in We

lots

in

work alive

This This

this her

do

all , of as

0: Introduction BROWNE 17 a It at of of of of of of

Or

the the the

was and

The

as This

both

some plots.

causal

“I poetic empty

up,

that literary tableau

societal and century taken a

texts.

Walker’s

practice. mode mimicry.

famously

a of is

an

a

process

against

twist

assimilation distorts strict writing of unspeakable processes minoritarian a

as

20th

equation.

as

opens

Kara

whole a uniqueness

appearance writer other

writer, property

of an hits is

Simultaneously,

unmasking.

by

an Acker female

was out

bird

late provides

aspects

summarizes

speech the transference. chameleons,

the the

“I The

subjectivity:

of

exists forest

acting

conceptual

and female, not

way

lizards. this

female foreword

It

quote on

offset and and

of

a quickly

a the juridical

Levine. through

A

One’s the Acker’s

voice.

But conceives abject writes: as pillaging

emphasizes

are

notion text sentence extreme

take of pragmatic

and

here

an landscape,

performance, masking friction, self.

explicitly

She

exists

that writing opening a methodology. notions and Sherrie

This

it. writer

negativity. the

by

labyrinthine as one

shadowing

among briefly Cultural

tactical

authorial

the in dilemma Her

its

only escape

disassembles, The of provides Acker alienation from

broad meets pauperism

in

to not

symptomatize

copyrighted mockingbird. seen who

writing

others.” effects

a

ceptua l the Con philosophical

steals. or translative and

performative out

has which way the appropriative with

texts. of

original

image

its that

it

Kathy her

of detected

Irigaray’s

court.

interlocked

of

literary one-to-one process of existential

emerges

as

multiplicity.

the the by in to

line a

Benjamin uniqueness,

One plagiarism

soldiers,

and silence what

other the

mode The her played

in

that Once

of

salutary

such or

collation, language

a self. close separation question

Escher’s

herself

multiplies phrase longstanding must ventriloquist,

Walter falls a

lack negates

as is

surprise,

enclosures

being

Textual a and writer. stance a

the

trick,

literary one

plagiarized through birds, dedoubling, live. the its

between

is

is

imagines like

that into finds

a that

that voice is

with denaturizes

It

into

and

not

Intrinsic

appropriation, and goes

strategy framed

itself

turns methodology quo

is environments. ran

feminist

phasmic conceived work

words,

I voices differential a

is

animal her What collapses unspeakable.” legally Rimbaldian Thieving or status poetic One others. borrowing textual of intermediary, it accumulation their stance authorial as Something misuses. insects the trajectory twists collated so There ll bergva ine l Caro her proposed connection poetic

0: Foreword BERGVALL 18 stratagems such into given, of is representation, coarsely, sense) the a beyond L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E nor flatly proposition. of it By intertextual aspects now investigating the non-expressive, Haacke replaced simulacrum fanfare entertaining is work modes, contradictorily, aesthetic institutions textual and from violent Nothing Conceptual conceptual social

time

anartist. came indicative his framing,

philosophical artist’s

French the

also

as the

came sabotaged tools

name

positioning largely

when and

the Art papercut

later

determinants to of

was procedure

art the and

mid Conceptual credos essentially Duchampian

On

the

to frame. and the &

to

as

ego a

forms as

themselves.

social

system

line.

that

of shadow

As called the

Nouveau

methodological

critical large, art 1960s disengage Language, male, a

represent

an

Kawara logical

an

which authorial matter circus indeed performative a

of

establishes artist’s

Ideas was silhouettes, did extended by case

Art

It and approach

referencing, and

originality

identity,

“productions

the largely they simply

on,

stripped and

games

not

of all Art

as

of

conceptual

next remains

in

multiple of aimed did

of the the

“authorial

Roman

mathematics

was

the artist a The

the poets the

it about were the point,

process

escape function hodgepodge turned authorial

play

art

artworks white appeared reiterated not-I part

step,

of

art-making

a earlier

to Young

an art or

“Narratives to of aesthetics.

commodified mode

and proposition,

the

persona

meaning engaged

one

Wittgenstein

writing

the

groups, narrative street the replace

of its machine

even

explicit

writers,

the

the of multiplicity

and

art

quickly function” form.

progress

the

investigative proto-conceptual

game methodologies. British of by term

the

of

all themselves

motivation, Art

stars.

initially on

survival.

could

the fighting.

denuding

work’s working

resorting

that term

consciousness found

form process with

important Kathy to

a

remained itself

angles. & continuity out,

needed of the into mythological circularity:

Art rather The alter

needed

paradoxically, as Language

a

art

for notably, not

(a

some

aura.

of

in

exploring

Negress,” it

was OULIPO itself Acker’s scene a

Here

full

readiness that,

and

were,

any increased

and her small object

were the

artistic to assist further than

between briefly

Collaborative stripping business

of circle

to

unaddressed.

non-traditional collective, neither true

critical

writerly of US between And we Mass

were

anartist

this the

actually industry.” group). chameleonic create a coterie

the

(in

with.

the play and political

had

and on

untooling. to persona

with

and

revived programmatic proved

one

the

brought Observation,

1990s.

the a

avantgardist distribution

of incentive, the

right

intercepted

constricted against

Barthesian what of a

voice. elsewhere,

is

Language

unease of Yet could absorbed which

later detached stripping question

collated,

platonic anartist Axioms

the

narrow

groups

art-life

largely largely

by down.

Being when itself, Hans

Seen

in

turn

It

The

and the the the

say art

its

as at is it

0: Foreword BERGVALL 19 is

of of to by by on on

for

and and

art’s Hak turn seek

with Sade

twist

Ellen some

cross- cross- power

above,

a gender

to

stylistic

in become Haacke, Gordon de level sense

frequent

of instance,

denoting grouping

literarity

deployed

suspicion

are materials,

from

a of filled

Heidsieck,

archive, specifically constraints as and

had

is proposed

the Theresa

given For Rosler, the

denominator, The Situationism, structures,

from each

umbrella Hans

are

environmental mediation,

makes sewer

commonality of

outlined technologies

antecedents, There

by

and it

literary

via

of laws intellectual

manipulation

broadened, there

as

have

on

adjective

as

Bernard

the have

language, flattening

its language games.

techniques combination

“truffles,”

language Martha

Ettinger,

knowledge Structural

of

of

point arts,

to

many

The

literary for historical representations

capitalized British

Poetry,

collection

by

artists much writing, mappings,

awareness

a

function. palimpsestic applications.

ideal Broodthaers,

Lucier,

the unexplored as its Language

Others of Piper,

main

as (schematically emphasis

the literary book,

on limitations Bracha this

bases some unlikely listening of

an

structural iconic

acute

relation instrumental

the by for opportunism;

the

in

survey

An approach psychoanalytic the of

poetic its itself,

crucial framing, on

an and

issue in from

the an

(Alvin Marcel

new Language

acquisition.

of

domain politicized models.

some Hiller,

(Adrian

situations.

even

McLennan,...).

the

too: language-based

sourcing, term

into with only

Indeed, from symbolic share

many abandoned

provided

terms and

of collated media,

occupied

Migone,…). collages,

Deller,

maxim harbored all

native

the

Susan

not

Roman, 1930s released its Ruth and

machine designated

continuity

recreate

language

re-enacted

of

investigative have

the institutional contentious explicit

largely

in

paired here

flexibility,

mixed by have the

poetics

have

exclusionary and emerged all Jeremy home” by and Kelly,

on have

paratextuality territory

and found

on of socio-cultural

writing remainder, Christof

Denes, and

at

Thus

for

Lettrism,…).

Nouveau contemporary speaking cognitive commonalities examination troubles

the

after Sociological

have its

has stage

and

Bing, of

stylistic

writers

intensely included internationalized (Mary foremost

might of

methods

critical language the

art on art, with research, from Agnes

identity-conscious

mimicked symbolic (Xu a

being from investigations

conceptual and Stewart, handling, and

and

of

on formation

somatic, conceptual Fraser,...).

productivity,

by aspects pieces

Cha,...).

“sociology

the female

propensity

Observation

first the the meandering

the literature, sounded Beckett,

fraught

literary identity methodologies reliance machinic but primarily fertilized translation, pollination textuality many initial whom methodological the methodologies The discuss a conceptual to of Mass writing, that of Andrea Fluxus, examined, to Gallagher, Amanda structures overfunctioning studies Kyung feminine out conceptual development conceptual Matta-Clark Yet,

0: Foreword BERGVALL 20 playing And as modes, social and Games rather identification? as face is and One texts where impulse, put the symbolic loving, In become willingness neutralized, of cryptography, polyglossia structurally adapting release copyright.” ignore codes balancing positioning, than to represented Firstly, fetishism. to socio-cultural do

dead constantly, much a

syntactic realization

away,

dissident

a

of medical shake-up

conscious

evinced. they and text

invisibilities

of

than the

the the

of new

yet my

serious

captive language

as

literature’s

in Rancière, together constraints

ignore,

question representation

all-corrupting knowing,

act assume

authorial

hidden

competitiveness. of

Secondly, to

the

are

manages opinion, destabilized yet there

by terms). assume logic, significatory emptiness

relentlessly

assumptions,

of How belonging, remains individual puns

and accept

games.

If

to narrow this where used playfulness,

one’s

silence

that

literature and within is

a the

irks, or

narrative

“critical distribution, and does

production

of

The familiarity

hold that

the collection, on

there

the to

explicit to

expectations, there

seductions

depersonalizes, difficult. Games the reading

playing

underlines,

anagrams, expressed

sense

verbal

consumption

motivation, engage road

one skillful

but investigate or questions

examine one by that laughable over

forms.

structural

poetics,” are

mute is

is

expectations. Bliss rather the interdependence, construction,

make

is

influence

of

of highlights

architextures. as

the

the are perceived

two line. it

with

From

usually,

play, through

with

engaged it authorial

denuding

source of

To is by homophonic

the against

some

pushes

in route collects of text

conceptually-led

involves

the frequently obsessiveness

the

principal

The

largely the

Acker. how

the

impact

the authorial

all fact

machine means research that processes

gaping is stripping of

but

of

writer of

this,

creation

features

trick rules of

which

disengagement.

does

at

recognized. as somehow itself disengages

literary

parole,

from

authorial

the

Acker undertaking. How

perception avoid many

not

engaged radical of of

a

ways,

one

of

(in

shirt, openness? locative.

to one networked

to one’s translations, finds messy

experience,

mediating

the always, has

conceptual

of

does showing

machine.

of falling be of composition economic,

of of and games,

would

exclaiming:

create

personification

structure

rethinks the

two

work writes distanced, own provided herself social one’s

voice, played. disengagement. textual from

one Evidenced complications

the

and pieces. Responsiveness more

for

main

Or

How intentionality,

A

textual

one’s lists, that

be acknowledge

personalized intent provocation, apparatus,

examination Barthes.

engineering of intertextual mixed knowledge,

necessarily, production willingness

poetics gluttonous

she sense Of itself?

about

remiss than

living,

does

It does the avenues,

rebuses, through perhaps hand.

“I

echoes

course works rather in might

code

one.

past

The one and and

not sell the the

or,

to of of A It a

0: Foreword BERGVALL 21 , is is as of to

by by

the and It

that is

Here work rules.

young

games calque calling

dances text revolts.

value English

poetics,

else of executed sports the

of

That arresting, the

the

moves

undone list Gargantua conceptual The

bluffing, and languages). and

of to is

is

translations,

by

by

many

of

his rule. It value and

the

The

hand,

not translation. intercepted

engaged

that

In

of

cards

games

the of conceptual

list.

by research

opaque. everything

played dinner

to added

translator symptoms

correspondence. on

logic. distended

playing meaning

games, and and

stimuli of

executed. after

being principles, themselves

textual

German

games the the

one-to-one

mechanics

practical

these verbal on

a bullied of Urquhart the

understood

German

troves

hiatus, diffuse 376

expectations In the

the narrative

played while in

a (regional parlor of but

not to had

non-exhaustive

than

first

the are associative as

a

more

some conceptual

unfaithfully stamina

streaks,

multitudes.

the Thomas of

treasure

from

rules,

that well

list,

research, for by rather doctor

extended

register

a

as task a that

underestimates

translation.

added

displace

translated,

a constrictions flair us submission one-to-one, and becomes

English games,

winning

rebellious and of

devices, changed

abyme of important never

traffic.

practical

being traversed endlessness The 217 century

of

bent

different the structure,

en seminal

is

the translating a morbid

word illusory

reminds of with

exercise most

a

redirection one. in

16th

of

mise display

some

own its that conceptual

an cards, its

via

poetics

surprise,

at the and lines

laced anthology cheated, stamina,

his

from

the

of

idea

lists

parasitical

lost

methodological

in with

is

Bakhtin

fortune-telling factor

in

original the

of

longer

increases the

the as the

virtuoso translation away

structural

list engaged

the a no is

game

novice. to definition, it the a took games well century along Already as The Rabelais rebellious thieving, the This what is principles Deviation the quits, recirculated text say: collapses

0: Foreword BERGVALL 22