Wednesday, July 30, 2008

I have been rereading William Carlos Williams'Spring & All in the 1970 Frontier Press edition. That edition reprints the original 1923 Contact Press edition published in a run of 300 copies and allowed to go out of print more or less immediately. The work has been available also since 1971 in the New Directions collection, Imaginations, a volume that crams together Williams' five most important prose works into what, to my eye, is a more or less unreadable crowd. That collection is so poorly done as to constitute an act of vandalism.
But if there is a single book that strikes me as representing the apotheosis of modernist writing, the single work that no other poet or writer could go “beyond” (tho Zukofsky’s “A”-22 & 23, which may also be the very last major text of the modernist movement, comes very close), Spring & All is it. Not coincidentally, it includes Williams’ best poetry and does so, for example, in a way that demonstrates how radically more a poem such as “Red Wheel Barrow” can be.
The book when it first came out did not have the impact on the world that it could have had with halfway decent distribution (equivalent, at least, to the self-publishing of Tender Buttons some 18 years earlier). The poems survived, and flourished, because Williams put them into other collections, most notably the Collected Earlier Poems. But the total book, which is where these poems make by far the most sense, stayed out of print until 1970 when Frontier Press brought out its edition just as New Directions was readying Imaginations.
For all I know, Harvey Brown’s Frontier Press might not have printed any more copies than did Contact Press. But through Serendipity Books in Berkeley, the forerunner to today’s Small Press Distribution, it reached a much wider range of readers very quickly. Suddenly the essays of Charles Olson no longer seemed so “out there” as the most significant act of theoretical/critical writing since Ezra Pound. And Williams, far from the charming local doc from
Of the works that separate out the New American Poetries of the 1950s, which include some work by New Americans, such as Creeley’s Pieces and Ashbery’s Three Poems, as well as Oppen’s Of Being Numerous & the late work of Zukofsky, Spring & All is one of those books that shows decisively just how far New American Poetry did NOT go. It had as much impact as any of the early books by Clark Coolidge, maybe as much as Grenier’s essays in the first issue of This.
But then it went out of print again, leaving only the crowded phone booth that is Imaginations for new readers interested in obtaining it. Of all the great books of that hinge moment in American poetry, this is the text that the fewest young readers have had a chance to see in its best possible format.
I had imagined that since any work published prior to 1923 was now in the public domain, that within a year or so, Spring & All would be as well. And this is a text I feel strongly enough about that I could imagine publishing it myself (not that I have the resources to do so). But now I realize that this impression was a misconception. The nature of the law is such that works published in 1923 or after, at least up until the 1970s, belong to a 95-years after publication rule. That would not put Spring & All into the public domain until 2018.
Which means that I can’t coax Chax or Green Integer or City Lights or whomever to do the right thing and bring this book back in the format that makes the greatest sense, as a small book that just about fits into your pocket. At least not for another decade.
And this makes me feel bereft.
Labels: WCW
It's a big little book.
here is a bit of the fifth piece AFTER The Red Wheel Barrow:
The Avenue of Poplars
The Leaves embrace
in the trees
it is a wordless
wordless
world
without personality
I do not
seek a path
I am still with
Gypsy lips pressed
to my own -
It is the kiss
of leaves
without being
poison ivy
or nettle, the kiss
of oak leaves -
He who has kissed
a leaf
need look no further -
I ascend
through
acanopy of leaves
and at the same time
I descend
for I do
unusual -
I ride in my car
I think about
prehistoric caves
in the Pyrenes -
the cave of
Les Trois Freres
*
whew!
to learn a craft go to a Master... then become what you will
In my "youth" I inhaled/ ate//digested WCW's
every:word...
and Selected ESSAYS...
(also New Directions /Random House)
dig WCW's dedication to "uncle" Billy Abbot
"The work has been available also since 1971 in the New Directions collection, Imaginations, a volume that crams together Williams' five most important prose works into what, to my eye, is a more or less unreadable crowd. That collection is so poorly done as to constitute an act of vandalism."
First of all, you're welcome for letting you know about Imaginations, which I believe I did a few months ago. For years, you never mentioned the New Directions printing of the text when you claimed that the Frontier Press edition was what let the world re-know WCW's great work.
Second, I don't get why you find the New Directions book unreadable. Most everyone has a favorite edition of a favorite work, but your claim of cramming and resulting impossibility of reading strikes me as silly.
Just because the piece you champion (and rightly) is packaged with other works? Geez, all of Poe's tales, and Shakespeare's plays, are commonly packaged into omnibus editions.
I have both the Frontier edition of Spring & All and the work in the New Directions book. I find that both are quite readable. All you do is put on your glasses, take a look at each word as it comes up, and turn the damn pages.
By the way, and along the same lines, I find that Ketjak in the original edition is far more engaging and fun, typos and all, than the text as laid out in the Univ of California Age of Huts. But the latter, even with its tiny not quite black printing, ain't unreadable.
I don't like any one creative works being deemed the tippy top of any particular type of creative work.
And then there are Joyce's novels, or Beckett's trilogy of novels, or his Godot.
Plus while I love Spring & All, I'm partial to the maybe one could say less perfect though equally out there works: Mina Loy's "Love Songs", Harry Crosby's rant against Boston in his Mad Queen, Andre Breton's "Poisson Soluble."
I, too, think it's high time we had a separate edition of S&A that is beautiful as opposed to just functional. It explodes with energy, and you're right about the way his poems benefit from the context. And some of the prose passages are laugh-out-loud funny, and so smart at the same time.
Well, I've gushed enough. Back to work.
The form in which a text is first served up defines the conditions of its first apprehension--how it is first seen and contextualized.
The first edition of Spring & All was rather modest-looking--being a light blue-grey paperback--but with a certain attractive plainness.
The Frontier Press edition was in the same page size, but was slick and slapdash.
In subsequent editions (except for the Frontier) the prose bridges were removed and the poems printed as such in their original order. Has anyone ever noted that Williams commented on this alteration?
The original format suggested a somewhat polemical stance regarding the poems, the state of verse--one might even call it defensive or defiant, even absurdist, given its tone.
Without the prose bridges, this aspect is lost.
The poems in Spring & All thus have a dual life--one as separate poems, the other as part of an agenda, as examples or exhibits of "the new."
As naked poems, they feel ingenious and rustic. As part of an argument they feel a little more plotted and deliberate in their assertions.
This is one of those cases where we can't have it both ways. Almost everyone has read a few of the separate poems before they ever come upon the complete original text of the collection. Anthologies are partly to blame.
If Williams had insisted, for instance, that those poems never be authoritatively reprinted without the prose, we might be on firmer ground.
I like the original book, but am I responding to extra-textual qualities? Not sure....
I got the Frontier Press edition cheap at SPD a few years ago--they might still have some?
--Ron, your prose here is so hyperbolic as to constitute an act of hyperbole. _Imaginations_ is a really, really useful book for teaching WCW. So it's a little cramped. We're not talked Guest or Palmer here. WCW is not a white-space aesthete, imo....what's important is the poems and prose working together.
New Directions handling of its long range list is shameful, at best.
Eliot Weinberger's stammering objections notwithstanding, New Directions books has behaved badly for 30 years.
I want RS to do this, too.
It's one thing to have an opinion, but I want an argument, which means I would prefer it if there were REASONS given for the superiority of one text to another.
This is because I want to trap you, if I can, and get you to take some kind of aesthetic position!
My goodness, how can I trap you if you don't give me any tail to hang on to, my dears! What kind of a world is this!!
Williams began as a very traditional poet, writing rhymed poems about Spring and love and delicate ironies. But by the mid-'Twenties he had pushed into formally challenging constructions influenced by Cubism, Surrealism and the speech of the common people. Hardly anyone had thought to make poems out of the simple vocabulary and inflections of conversational speech, he was really the first to do it well.
In addition, he managed to throw out all the fluff and lace of traditional cliches and make little naked constructions from the raw timber of American life. They look like scaffoldings, their structure plain and unadorned like a newly framed house. "The pure products of America go crazy"--who else would have thought to write a line as accessible (and telling at the same time) as Williams? Their deceptive simplicity masks a complex kinetic energy which the line-breaks and stanzaic pauses and settings underscore.
Reznikoff is interested in people, primarily. Williams is interested in things first, but of course--as in Paterson--he extends his metaphysical vision into the city and all of history as well.
Williams is the champion of the rustic, and the language of the poems becomes another aspect of this material--an "addition to nature" as he put it, rather than as a decorative comment upon phenomenon.
Williams could wow you with sheer facility in a poem like The Yachts, but that isn't what makes him interesting--he was a total original. Reznikoff uses ordinary language in a very straightforward, quotidian fashion.
Studying the Objectivists individually is instructive, to show precisely how they were related, and how different. Reznikoff is uniquely the documentarian, of that group. Oppen and Rakosi and Niedecker are metaphysical poets. But Williams is just so much stronger and broader than all of them.
the Williams, documentary
from VOICES & VISIONS
http://www.learner.org/catalog/extras/vvspot/Williams.html
may bring "tears to your eyes"
However, Reznikoff had a sharp faith of a kind that never quite got separated from his Judaism.
Williams reminds me a little of Hitler -- with Hitler's painterly interest in things. Hitler's watercolors in their own way are quite wonderful -- depicting architectural highlights of Vienna. But when he applied to art school the instructor rejected him saying that he had little feeling for people.
Reznikoff on the other hand had a real keen interest in people, and I suppose for that reason I'm more sympathetic to him as I read.
Sympathy has to be a basic condition of reading, and I find mostly antipathy for Williams, in spite of his early championing of Luther.
I think he somehow erred, and took 20th century poetry in all the wrong directions, separating it from a larger social or religious meaning that would allow people to permanently bond or coalesce.
But then I also prefer Rouault to Picasso.
Thanks for the discussion here of the bibliographic and printing issues. The way a book was originally presented can be very important. These days, with electronic printing and file sharing, as well as the ability to create mass market paperbacks developed decades ago, we forget how critical bibliographic details are. My background is in Renaissance studies, so I feel a keener connection with these things.
any one can go to the Library of Congress and get a copy and do
a MA thesis or Pee Ache Dee dis-ertation on it and copyright it and get credentials as one knowing what "it s" all about! and then just publish it...
how many more "SPINS" on those 'broken lines' do we need? ...
...to justify some one's teaching job? hardly enought income to pay off the student debt!
How did you like my POINTS / COUNTERPOINTS?
I loved holding that book in my hand, though. It was an amazing experience--and I would never claim to know what Spring & All was 'all about'--it's not a work that is easily classified or one that breaks apart into neat little bundles of meaning. It's not a work that can be completely understood--it has all kinds of wonderful loose ends and wrong turns and dead ends. It's about life. It's about art. And it's about moving between the two. It's not about Pee Ach Dee dissertations.
he brought bloody babies into the world
he brought a life's-breath into poems
why not just read the f.....g poems and let all of the horse-shit de:compose?
<< Home


