otoliths, issue #47

Otoliths issue forty-seven, the southern autumn issue, is now live.

It contains work from Mary Kasimor, M. Leland Oroquieta, Texas Fontanella, differx, Bill Yarrow, Jim Leftwich, Steve Dalachinsky, Vernon Frazer, Andrew Topel, Philip Byron Oakes, j4, Kyle Hemmings, Sanjeev Sethi, Karl Kempton, Robert van Vliet, Heath Brougher, hiromi suzuki & Márton Koppány, Kevin Tosca, Karen Downs-Barton, Demosthenes Agrafiotis, Seth Howard, Aurélien Leif, John M. Bennett, Lakey Comess, Drew B. David, Howie Good, Olivier Schopfer, Dah,  Raymond Farr, Carol Stetser, Adam Fieled, Joe Balaz, Martin Edmond, Jill Chan, Thomas M. Cassidy, osvaldo cibils, Neil Leadbeater, Christopher Barnes, Pete Spence, Ken Bolton, Dawn Nelson Wardrope, Ben Oost, Piet Nieuwland, Stephen Nelson, dan raphael, gobscure, Travis Cebula, Stuart Barnes, J.J. Campbell, Pearl Button, Nika + Jim McKinniss, Penelope Weiss, Brendan Slater, Jack Kelly, Bryony Bodimeade, Tony Beyer, Cecelia Chapman, William Allegrezza, David Baptiste Chirot, Willie Smith, Cheryl Penn, Obododimma Oha, Michael Brandonisio, Kenneth Rexroth, John Levy, Richard Kostelanetz & Igor Satanovsky, Luigi Coppola, Keith Nunes, Jesse Glass, Joseph Salvatore Aversano, David Lohrey, Scott MacLeod, Tom Beckett, Angad Agora, Jeff Harrison, Gregory Stephenson, Simon Perchik, wiggly jones, Michael Gould, Shloka Shankar, Volodymyr Bilyk, Marcia Arrieta, Cindy Hochman,  Bob Heman, Jack Galmitz, Jeff Bagato, Andrew Galan, Barnaby Smith, Edward Kulemin, Indigo Perry, Paul T. Lambert, John Pursch, Marilyn Stablein, J.D. Nelson, Carey Scott Wilkerson, Cherie Hunter Day, Bela Farkas, Menkah, Erik-John Fuhrer, Diane Keys, & Ishita Basu Mallik.

https://the-otolith.blogspot.it/2017/10/issue-forty-seven-southern-spring.html

 

on two asemics by differx / jim leftwich. 2017

 

1) https://slowforward.net/2017/10/19/i-0108-untitled-asemics-on-apricot/

2) https://youtu.be/kGVTRNXOtpg

with both of these, i ask myself: “what am i being asked to think?”

and, with the apricot poem, i feel i am being asked to think about Barthes and his distinction between the apricot and the onion, as a description of the kinds of texts we might have before us, and how we can go about reading them.

then, with the eat asemic / orange videopoem, there is the question of surface, which is where we write, and depth (or volume), which is where we find the nutrients of a reading (where reading = eating).

for the first poem, the apricot poem, we are treating the pit (pith) as a surface, and writing on it, so even the traditional “readerly” text can be and will be (must be) read as if it were a writerly text. that is in fact how things are done these days. as for the asemic element, we find it (once again) mysteriously synonymous with polysemic. it asks us to think about the possibility that there is another kind of text, and another kind of reading, beyond or more likely beside the readerly and the writerly.

the eat asemic poem is yet another question about the beside-space of the readerly and/or writerly text. if we remove the surface of the text from the substance of the text, we find ourselves within a shamanic ritual of reading, eating the body of the god. as for the surface, where asemic research resides, it is process, and is processed. once asemicized, it will be discarded as waste — which permits us, finally, to rescue the prefix “a-” from its forced residence as a subcategory of the prefix “poly-“. from there, we acknowledge the rhyme of “orange” with “range” and carry on with the poem, following it around  through and as a life.

— Jim Leftwich