• Published on

    Nehinuw Pedagogy and Philosophy

    In preparation for an article about Kent Monkman's online installation Casualties of Modernity, I am researching—with great care and slowness—Two-Spirit people and related topics. In addition to the relevant literature on Two-Spirit art and literature, I'm branching off into Indigenous pedagogy. Coming at this topic from my Western, White, Heterosexual, Cis-gendered, Male, Able-Bodied, Christian-raised (primarily Jesuit) point of view requires me to re-think even the most basic concepts and words that I use to think about Monkman's art. As such, I have turned to books on Indigenous pedagogy in order to understand how words like "think," "understand," "know," "truth," and how phrases like, "help each other" and "teach each other" operate for Nehinuw (or Cree) people. 

    I have recently finished reading Linda M. Goulet and Keith N. Goulet's Teaching Each Other: Nehinuw Concepts & Indigenous Pedagogies (Vancouver; Toronto: University of British Columbia Press, 2014). I am struck, yet again, at the relevance of these ideas for all teachers, not only those who encounter students from Indigenous populations. This book should be assigned for all who hope to teach and counter the pervasive banking model of school-as-usual, even though the stories included in its pages mainly address primary and secondary school populations. 

    Having taken notes on the book, I decided to compile a glossary of relevant terminology and to share that glossary here. While certain passages dealing with the role of "interaction, practice, and action by doing" are exciting and relevant to me—given my work in performance philosophy—I figure that others will benefit from spending time with these words and concepts, too. For example, all of us engaged in critical pedagogy will marvel at the fact that this book on Nehinuw pedagogy must contain discussions of "t
    rustworthy belief in one another" (mumiseetotatowin), "standing up for oneself" (neepuhistumasowin), and "standing up for others" (neepuhistumagehin).

    Glossary:

    Achimohina
    : Stories of people, living beings, and entities


    Achunoogehina
    : Legends


    Ahtotumohina:
    Stories of events and happenings


    Atoskestumasowin
    : Working for oneself


    Ininiyuk
    : Indigenous peoples (205)

         Inineesiw: adjective to describe someone who has a great deal      of initiative and the skills to carry things through

         Ininiw
    : Being self-determined as a person and as a people—to        be strong as an individual within a reciprocal relationship with      the collective, including kituskeenuw

    Kinaskahtotumowin or kinaskachimowin: Lying stories

    Kinistooten:
    Do you understand?

         Kinistootuhin: Do you understand me?

    Kiskinauma
    gehin: Teaching another.
    Has a focus on teacher-directed knowledge or teacher-directed action. This word is used when referring to both formal and informal education (65)

    Kiskinaumasowin
    : Teaching oneself


    Kiskinaumatowin
    : Teaching each other


    Kiskeneetumowin
    : Knowledge
    The root is “to know,” but “understanding” is emphasized

    Kistenimitowin
    : Respect


    Kituskeenuw
    : Our land/world


    Mamitoneneetumasowin
    : Thinking for oneself


    Mumiseetotatowin
    : Trustworthy belief in one another, connotes reliance on each other


    Neepuhistumasowin
    : Standing up for oneself


    Neepuhistumagehin
    : Standing up for others


    Nisitootumowin
    : Understanding and meaning
    Itootu is ‘do’ or ‘act,’ so the stem -itootum in nisitootumowin (understanding and meaning) relates to a person’s activities or doings and gives a conjoint sense that learning by interactive doing is dynamically interconnected with understanding

    Osamachimohina or osamahtotumohina: Stories of exaggeration

    Otootemitowin
    : Openness to others


    Pehegenimisowin
    : “number one thinking,” a form of excessive individualism (62)


    Pimachihowin
    : Life force system
    Example of a Cree “action noun,” nouns that refer to “the act of.” Thus, this word could also be translated as “the lifehood act.”

    Pimachihisowin
    : (most commonly used word when referring to life in Cree) The self-determined action of individuals, groups, and nations in the quest for life, livelihood, and survival (59).

         
    (Pim- indicates action.
    The middle stem, -ihiso, signifies the self-determined intentionality of an individual or self-group (60))

    Pimatsiwin
    : Life, or the state of aliveness


    Saseepeneetumowin
    : “One perseveres,” or one has long-term stamina in their mind, or has the stamina of determined, focused thinking


    Tapehin:
    Truth
    “In Cree, belief and truth come from the same frontal stem, tap-, and are therefore closely related in Nehinuw thought” (88-89).

    Tapuhaugeneetumowin
    : Belief

         Tapuhaugenimitowin: Believing in one another

    Tipenimisowin
    : Developing authority over oneself


    Wagootowin:
    Relatives


    Weechihiso
    : One helps oneself


    Weechihisowin
    : Helping oneself/themselves


    Weechihisowuk
    : They help themselves


    Weechihitowin
    : Helping or supporting each other. 
    Whereas the focus of weechihisowin is on the self or self-group support, in the case of weechihitowin, the focus is on the interactive collaboration and cooperation within the context of a supportive relationship (61).

    Weechitowuk: They help each other Mamuhi weechitowuk: They all help each other

    Weechiseechigemitowin
    : Alliances for collaborative action

    Weechiyauguneetowin
    : Partnerships


    Weetutoskemitowin: Work together with others; shared collaborative work among individuals, self-groups, and people, or simply the idea of working together (61)

    Weetumatowin
    : the interactive sharing of information among people on a daily basis
    A dialogic sharing of information (61)

  • Published on

    Wound/Wound (wind/wind)

    Wound/Wound
    (wind/wind)
     
    The one: (n.) from Old English wund, “hurt injury, ulcer,” leads to (v.); “Figurative use, of feelings, etc., from c.1200.” From Ayto’s research: “…may go back to the same IE root that produced Welsh gwanu, ‘stab.’” [“Stab,” incidentally: “noun, wound produced by stabbing…mid 15th-Century”; meaning “a try,” first recorded 1895-American, “stab in the back” 1881, and “verb, late 14th-Century, ‘thrust with a pointed weapon,’ Scottish.”]
     
    The other: to wrap around. From Ayto: “originally meant ‘go in a particular direction’” and leads eventually to “wander.” [Note about this below.] Past participle of “wind,” which leads to another bold homonymy:
     
    Wind/Wind: Air in a state of blowing and the act of wrapping around. The flautus that condition speech may wrap around us.
     
    Poem comes from this:
    The wound wound round
    like a staircase winding
    winding the one aching to ascend.

     
    Note on “wander”: Wind—wrapping around—meant “to go in a particular direction,” and yet “wander,” its heir, means to go in no particular direction. Perhaps we all should wander more aimlessly through language in order to figure out the precise direction in which we’d like to wind our words.
     
    Sources:
    Etymonline: http://etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=wound
    John Ayto, Dictionary of Word Origins   
     
     

  • Published on

    Dream Journal (part 2)

    Installation number two of an old dream journal I found:

    No date (2005?)
    Hospital.
    3 patients had a strange disease that required a purple mixture/compound to be spread on their backs.
    It could only be spread with the tongue.
    It felt like community service felt.
    The compound was bright purple.
    I was also preparing to go to St. Joseph's college in Europe somewhere.
    Hospital patient was a girl my age.
    After the treatment, we placed her evenly upon the body of another patient.

    No date (2005?)
    A group of people find themselves together for an unknown reason — felt like Clue! — they figure out that something is not right with Time. I was the ringleader.

    No date (2005?)
    In a grassy courtyard. Spring day. Talking about post-doctoral work with unidentified woman. Very sunny. I could feel the weather, and I was talking about it, too.

    No date (2006?)
    I had a real-time conversation with my mother about money. Very intense. No fun. Then, completely unrelated, I dreamt of a group of late-20s people who lived by the sea in bland apartments. They all knew each other and it was very much like a movie or a t.v. drama.

    No date (2006?)
    3 dismembered heads in a cooler. Large apt. The heads came from a grizzly accident. Military-like principal. James McMenamin is V.P. Christian, Val, Blythe.

    No date (2006?)
    Story about the battle for the compass of time. 2 primitive societies  and 2 animal societies wage war. The evil guys won. Flash forward: The evil has become mythologized within a city. Magic factions will fight once more for freedom.
  • Published on

    Dream Journal

    Packing and preparing to move, I found an old dream journal. Here are its contents (installment 1):

    July 12, 1995
    Something about a girl who I met in a hotel. Sat on my bed and I distinctly remember being in my room and then going to my door and opening to see snow falling. I thought it was odd because it was July. Phone rang, it was my mom telling me to go to sleep.

    July 25, 1995
    I dreamt that I was at school and in PPD [gym]. There was a huge gladiator competition. I won by hurting everyone to a point where they couldn't compete anymore.

    July 27, 1995
    Anthony and I battled the forces of evil. Little girl possessed by devil needed to be destroyed.

    January 2, 2005
    Sci-Fi Dream.
    I was a warrior, almost like Jedi.
    There were two opposing factions.
    I trained
    I spied
    evil troops took over territory

    January 4, 2005
    Movie script
    the dream was the movie itself
    3 characters, Latino
    2 adolescent boys and 1 girl
    German family
    Latinos are indentured servants.
    Main image: pool of water, from left
    bodies flow on, water gets suctioned out the right side,
    bodies flush through the right side,
    Also felt like theatre

    No date [2005?]
    Derrida teaching a class
    sort of communicates telepathically
    Deanna Martin was in class
    sat around conference table
    nobody really understood anything
    no lights on in classroom
    but lots of light through windows
    Homework assignment I forgot to do

    No date [2005?]
    Went to China
    met Linq in a hybrid train station/airport
    Two stories were merged together.
    One was Linq, a friend, and myself hanging out catching up,
    the other was like a high school dance

    No date [2005?]
    horse raising
    it was time for the races
    needed to get a 
    large photograph printed 
    so I went to a Kinkos-like place. The sales
    people were rude idiots
    and kept me from leaving by asking stupider and stupider questions
    Left eventually to meet up with Christian
    and his mom. We were going for Margaritas 
    Somehow my bedroom was located... [ink ran out]

    No date [2005?]
    Some kind of explosion
    in a big city forces people onto underground
    trains. The trains contain several hundred
    evacuees. While underground a disease
    rips through world's pop
    leaving nobody alive

    No date [2005?]
    I meet Linq. He is very tired.
    His fingers have grown thin.
    He has a walkman/recording device
    that he wears strapped to his arm;
    this makes him happy. We arrive in 
    a city that is all deception
    People are [undecipherable word] medicine
    to sleep.
    Unclear what we were doing there.

    No date [2005?]
    A woman, slightly deranged in that 
    Glass Menagerie kind of way
    was the mother of two crab
    children that out of embarrassment
    and concern for them she hid on a beach.
    They were crabs,
    but big. I was terrified of them and ran away.
    There was an office setting.
    ​I think it's anxiety about teaching.

  • Published on

    Wright and the Magic Circle (Part II)

    (Scroll down to Part I, or click here to download all my posts on Jay Wright)

    Whereas the last post focused on Wright’s overcoming of the dissociative spatial paradigms found in Modernist poetry—a paradigm that bifurcates the performance experience and/or encounter into performers, on the one hand, and observers, on the other hand—this post will deal with the synesthetic events scattered throughout Wright’s poetry. These events require a spatial reading since the unification of different sensing apparatuses amounts to a synthesis of an individual’s being in the (poem) world. Wright, for example, allocates sound to color and sight to skin in order, I would argue, to help us all learn to read what he calls the “coherent grammar” of our surroundings. 
     
    When thinking about what to call the gesture of invitation tucked within the synesthetic realm of Wright’s poetry, an invitation that provides an opportunity to read the entire world all at once and, ultimately, to know what love is, I return time and again to the magic circle. Let’s briefly visit the world of Christopher Marlowe and Dr. Faustus where he famously writes:
     
    Within this circle is Jehovah’s name
    Forward and backward anagrammatized,
    Th’abbreviated names of holy saints,
    Figures of every adjunct to the heavens,
    And characters of signs and evening stars,
    By which the spirits are enforced to rise.
    Then fear not, Faustus, be resolute
    And try the utmost magic can perform. (1.3.8-15)
     
    Offering a user-friendly history of the magic circle, Jon Kaneko-James reminds us that the magic circle served two purposes. First, it protected the magician from whatever he or she conjured. The space within the circle offered sanctuary from the demons without. Second, the circle produced a field of energy and functioned as a conductive space, “the magical words and symbols filter[ed] specific kinds of mystical power into the circle to be used by the magician.” In fact, the second attribute of the magic circle leads us to question whether or not the inner space within the circles’ arcs are indeed safe or whether, instead, the energy conducted to the magician from the signs and symbols inscribed around the circle actually empowered the magician to stop whatever force attempted to assail him/her.
     
    Without attempting to resolve that dispute here, I would suggest that both are true. The space of the inner circle is an ancient form of critical distance, something that allows the magician to be, simultaneously, near and far to the action transpiring in the scene. At the same time, the space within the circle, buttressed and enhanced by magical symbols gathered around it, transmits powers to the magician. Transposing this formula to Wright and his poetry, I propose that we think of his poetic equations—as he calls them in Music’s Mask and Measure—as the symbols that form the magic circle around Wright and produce the powerful critical distance necessary for conjuring into being a reading of the world’s coherent grammar, a reading that leads to a necessary naming.
     
    Look at this excerpt from Equation 2 (which I’ve reproduced here in such a way as to mimic the page layout of the book itself):
     
    The red roof tiles                                        The oriole has established
    slip into the morning fog.                           an evasive coherence,
    There is a red silence                                     infinite, exact,
                   all around us.                                with its place, there where
    It will take years to learn                             the day seems set to honor
    this coherent grammar.                                the bird's expressive deceit

    In the stanza on the left, Wright’s equation rewires the sensorium of things surrounding us such that the redness of the present but muted visual tile-field enacts an audible silence, not dissimilar (in my mind) to the sound of the Summer Sun at its zenith. From within the circle of his poetry, Wright enters into the rewired scene and, perhaps because it is foreign and new, declares that it will take years to learn the coherent grammar of what surrounds him. His poetry, in other words, doesn’t reveal everything at all once. His poetry, instead, offers a glimpse and a bodily sense of all that hides behind daily appearances. This “coherent grammar” amounts to the order of the world presented by and present within each individual thing. I find it interesting that an etymological definition of grammar traces the word back to the late 14th-century: “‘Latin grammar, rules of Latin,’ from Old French gramaire ‘grammar; learning,’ especially Latin and philology, also ‘(magic) incantation, spells, mumbo-jumbo.’” It will take years to learn these rules, to attune ourselves to the incantations of things that sound like mumbo-jumbo upon first encounter but soon, once appraised with care, speak clearly of hidden (occult) truths.
     
    While it will take Wright years to attune himself to this grammar—not to mention you, me, humans generally—it takes no time for the oriole who, being of this grammar, speaks it fluently. The “oriole has established an evasive coherence.” Either its being-in-the-world requires evasiveness, or its apparent evasiveness actually masks the coherence of the grammar. I’m not sure which it is – maybe both. But I do know that the oriole’s participation in the world’s grammar comes not only from its song, which, note, Wright doesn’t mention here, but also from its correspondence with world’s colors, sounds, and other senses. Wright conjures the bird “there where the day seems set to honor the bird’s expressive deceit,” which to me means there, in front of the setting sun, whose evening coloration mimics the oriole’s orange, that is, the bird’s expressive outwardness that, despite its seeming ostentation, serves to camouflage it and keep it safe. Oriole, setting sun, red roof tiles :: (silent) song bird, thronging light and distant heat, red silence all around us. The continuum of color, sound, and silence, indeed the continuum of music’s mask and measure, indexes Wright’s brief foray into the world normally hidden by inattentive business.
     
    He lingers on another bird—to be precise, the Carolina wren—before revealing the aim of this conjuration, this poetical work:
     
    Love is ancient
    evidence, an instrument
    constrained, jealous of its
    utility,
    in awe of its own death;
    every name embraces it.
     
    The purpose behind Wright’s poetry is the desire to conjure love. Love: perhaps another way of saying “this coherent grammar.” Every name embraces it, he says. Is poetry not the daring attempt to name that which either cannot be named or that which wishes to remain unnamable? Each name bracketed, deduced, possibly discerned from within life’s belligerent symphony brings love closer to the caller, the poet. The purpose of all this magic is to call love close, and the space produced by the poem is that which provides the means for embracing love. The word-equations summon; the space of the magic circle conducts the orchestra into the embrace.  
  • Published on

    Wright and the Magic Circle

    My earlier posts on temporality in Jay Wright’s poetry were, in a sense, practice for this particular post, which is all about space. After re-reading those earlier posts, I can say confidently that I still believe all of my (granted, hesitant) claims. I am, however, interested now in something different, something I’m calling “The Magic Circle,” which appears to me in Wright’s poetic language. This “Magic Circle” demarcates a space of conjuration that has two principle effects. First, the circle sidesteps the paradigm of diassociationism that shapes so much of the visual encounter in Modernist and Post-Modernist literature (more on this in a moment). Second, the circle facilitates truly stunning synesthetic events through which the usually divided sensorial apparatuses (eyes/sight, ears/hearing, skin/touch, etc.) merge in order to produce a “reading” of what Wright calls the “coherent grammar” of the world (and more on this, too, further down). The circle created through Wright’s poetry makes me think of sorcery and witchcraft such as that running rampant in Medieval Europe and conspicuously present in the works of, for example, Christopher Marlowe (particularly Faustus). I have for many years studied the episteme of Medieval Europe that Michel Foucault refers to in The Order of Things as the similitude oriented system of knowledge. In Wright’s poetry I sense an attempt to recuperate—if that’s even the right verb—this episteme’s worldview, perhaps because he values the vibrant interconnectedness of world systems at work then/there.
     
    In The Theatre of Truth, William Egginton assesses what he sees as the paradigmatic mode of spectatorship shaping the Modern world. He calls this paradigm “disassociationism,” which allows (i.e., makes it possible for) individuals to create a clear, binary distinction between spectator and performer. This mode of viewing arises in tandem with seventeenth-century aesthetic creations—including, primarily, theatre—and quickly ascends to the realm of habit where it remains out of reach of critique or self-reflection. As Egginton sees it, once an individual identifies herself as a spectator she will subtract herself from the scene of the performance and begin to order to aesthetic event in terms of “on stage” and “off stage.” One’s off stage presence does not necessarily entail a passive mode of consumption, though it does frequently acquiesce to the “truth” of the world being constructed on stage. “The point to grasp,” Egginton continues, “is that once entire populations became fluent in assuming and projecting this division in order to function correctly as theatre spectators, that fluency became a generalized spatial structure for conceptualizing the world as a whole” (14). He transitions from these comments into a conversation about Descartes’ creation of “a thinking substance that looks out onto the world of extended substances” (14), and then he dedicates the rest of his pages to a discussion of how baroque aesthetic offerings refute this binary distinction (by privileging, for example and a la Deleuze, a folding of interiority and exteriority instead of the smooth division of “on stage” and “off stage” or interior (subjectivity) / exterior (objectivity)).
     
    I could quibble with Egginton on a number of points, but, in general, I think he’s making an important claim; namely, that Modernity orders itself around a highly theatrical mode of viewing that distinguishes between spectators and performers (never to be merged) and requires a notion of subjectivity as a properly internal domain. In this discussion, I’d like to transition quickly (if not artlessly) to the tendency for Modern and even Post-Modern poetry to capitulate all too quickly to this disassociationism. Consider, briefly (if that’s possible) the opening stanza of Eliot’s The Lovesong of J. Alfred Prufrock:
     
    Let us go then, you and I,
    When the evening is spread out against the sky
    Like a patient etherized upon a table;
    Let us go, through certain half-deserted streets,
    The muttering retreats
    Of restless nights in one-night cheap hotels
    And sawdust restaurants with oyster-shells:
    Streets that follow like a tedious argument
    Of insidious intent
    To lead you to an overwhelming question ...
    Oh, do not ask, “What is it?”
    Let us go and make our visit.
    [1]
     
    With the opening line, Eliot offers an invitation for me, the would-be spectator, to leave my position as passive reader in order to enter the scene of evening “spread out against the sky” and, through the embodied act of visitation, participate in the poem-world as a performer. While Eliot would like to activate me as the reader, his invitation is in fact conditioned by as assumed definition of my pre-poem state as interiorized subject preparing to consume the poetic fare as a spectator would imbibe a stage performance from the darkened auditorium. Eliot activates me but simultaneously relies upon the disassociationism that outfits me for such an invitation, thereby lending it credence and, in a sense, preserving its authority.
     
    I could identify a similar capitulation in Wright:
     
    Here begins the revelation of a kiosk,
    beside the road: the white eggs
    nestled there in straw
    turn blue in amber light.
    Make of that what you will,
                   Say, what you desire […] (Absence 1)

     
    Is Wright not setting up the traditional scene where I, reader, am welcomed into a scene outside of myself, perhaps the scene prepared by Wright’s poetic body as it prepares its “colonization” of the road that stretches out beyond the roadside kiosk? Yes and no. Yes, insofar as I, the reader, have stumbled into this scene and might very well assume that “I” am the individual to whom Wright beckons with the phrase, “Make of that what you will.” At the same time, no, because, it turns out, “I” am not necessarily welcomed here. If there is an “I” in this poem, it belongs more properly to Wright himself, and it belongs to him only insofar as he is going to demonstrate to himself that the “I” is neither a certain nor stable marker. As such, he, the poet, is going to demonstrate to himself the difficulty of attempting to demonstrate something when the act of demonstration relies on a seemingly stable “I” to pull it off. To hint at this identity crisis, Wright transitions to Spanish by the end of page 1: “Somos ese quimérico museo de formas / inconstantes.”
     
    Wright undoes himself in successive moves through Reading Absence. “I sit in error, or so would I stand.” Neither sitting nor standing, but somehow both (and neither); neither indicative nor conditional tense, but somehow both (or neither). Wright slips in and out of himself only to discover that he himself is nothing that great, nothing so great as to merit more attention than a bowl of green chile, the bluest flower of Zapopan, a goshawk’s exhilarated cry (7). He chooses to slip in this way so as to teach himself how “to release the sunlight / and to allow a magnetic dissonance / in a bird voice that enters the ear” (9).  In other words, he’s working hard to reveal the extent to which he is—at most and at least—a constitutive member of world of matter and energy.
     
    As he teaches himself, he occasionally slips back into the disassociationism that, by habit, shapes our assessment of ourselves in the world. He identifies this moments in the text with parenthesis. Recall Adorno’s caution against the reliance on the parenthesis, which, he says, serves only to imprison certain material within the flow of narrative. As it to signify the subjective-philosophical prison created by disassociationism, Wright uses parenthesis to stabilize fleeting theatrical scenes that interrupt his poem-lesson from time to time. The first usage appears on page 12: “The lights reveal the epitome of a wash, with yucca elata sitting sternly in place. A small man, wearing a white guayabera and white cotton trousers, swerves in an irresolute light.” Notice how the poetic stanza gives way to prose at this point. The reliance on the typical on stage/off stage visual configuration somehow commandeers the poem.
     
    The poem manages to break free of the scene, but a second interruption occurs at page 41, again marked by parenthesis and prose: “Two small boats, each with a solitary figure standing erect within it, progress through a rapidly flowing basin. The figures gradually reveal themselves to be women […]” These women characters eventually speak (lines in the drama): “Do you known that she is pursuing you?” says one woman. “But I am pursuing her” replies the other. An entire scene plays out over two pages and eventually comes to a rest with these lines: “The women stand in the boats, and raise their arms in supplication. Their mouths open and shut; no words come.)” As soon as it ends, Wright returns to Spanish and signals the difficulty of returning to the poem with a backslash: “/mi corazón e un ofrenda y mis lágrimas / son piedras rituals.”
     
    From this point, the poem really picks up steam. Wright’s slip manages to teach himself a lot (or so it seems) and my position as reader becomes one marked by uncertainty: should I be watching this? Am I watching anything, or is the poem inviting me to lose myself along with Wright, to suffer a particular loss of self that will reveal my entanglement in the Everything? There comes a moment when I (Will, actually I, as much as I can be I) find myself hoping for another interruption of prose, a moment to catch my breath. One finally comes, but something is different this time. The parenthesis-prison is still there, but this time an altogether different play erupts. Now, three matadores appear, marked as M1, M2, and M3 I the script, thus hinting at the possibility that Wright may have conjured a single matador split in 3.
     
    Every House Has a Door is currently investigating what this is all about. If I can assist in the problem solving (or maybe it’s a matter of posing the problem correctly?), then I will do so by offering this thought: the 3 matadores enact a drawing of a magic circle within the poem so as to protect it from the interruption of disassociationism. That is to say, as Doctor Faustus and other magicians like him would draw a circle on the ground from which to call upon the spirits of the world to appear and make manifest their knowledge, so too do the matadores draw their arena around them thereby protecting them from the harm of spectator/performer binaries and allowing for the possibility that some spirits will come in for a closer look.
     
    Spiraling motions abound in the matador scene:

    M2 spins in a farol
    The three figures write the circle “geographically” by naming points on the globe that encircle them: Sevilla, Lima, Madrid, Caracas, Puebla, Salamanca, Barcelona…
    The series of passes, which amount to a series of semi-circular movements

     
    Spells punctuate the matadores’ movements, italicized to indicate some kind of communication between Wright and the three figures:

    I do not hear the clock
    at the far end of the room,
    nor the bell that brought me
    to this seat

     
    But now, somehow, the spells in tandem with the matadores’ movements work to re-position Wright within the world of matter or energy:

    I am suddenly
    a gossamer thread,
    lifted from within,
    sheared from this moment,
    a process given substance
    by a trinity
    who will not speak to me.

     
    Most fascinating to me: Wright provides no parenthesis with which to close this matador ritual. Once the matadores inscribe the magic circle within the poem, the poem itself is sucked into the scene and can forget any attempt to go back to its former state of autonomous poem because, perhaps, the poem realizes that no state ever existed.  
     
    [Pause…the next installation will look to Music’s Mask and Measure to pursue the synesthesia made possible through conjuration within the magic circle]
     
     
     
     
     


    [1] http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/poem/173476