A poet I know, reluctant to define what poetry can or can’t be, once suggested (somewhat facetiously) that a bag of dirt could be a poem if the poet deemed it so — calling to mind Marcel Duchamp’s readymades, the urinal turned into art by contextual/conceptual gesture alone. This got me thinking about what my own bare-minimum criteria for poetry might be. A bag of dirt in a gallery might be an installation, but I wasn’t quite willing to concede it could also be a poem — a poem must at least, on some level, I thought, be verbal. But was that quite right? What about Aram Saroyan’s famous visual poems, in particular the lowercase m with an extra hump — not even a word or part of a word; an unletter. Maybe poetry only requires typography — but doesn’t it also require sound, the sense that at least in theory you could hear the poem? I do feel I can “read” that long m — it has a sonic quality — and the Saroyan poem “lighght.” An ampersand alone on a page would represent a pronounceable word. But what about a parenthesis, or a semicolon?
I’ve always loved when a poet makes a punctuation mark her own — take Emily Dickinson’s dashes, typically standardized as em-dashes in print, though in her handwritten originals, the marks were more ambiguous, some appearing more like sloppy periods or commas, some lines slanted like slashes or even vertical, suggesting an idiosyncratic diacritical system. Alice Fulton invented a punctuation mark, a double equal sign she called “the bride” (a name for the background threads that give structure to lace) or “the sign of immersion.” In a 2010 interview that I’ve returned to many times, Fulton relates these to Dickinson’s dashes (the bride is a “dash to the max”) and to A. R. Ammons’s colons, glyphs that are “both present and silent,” “reticent yet visible.” Perhaps the most insistent example of foregrounded punctuation is the quotation marks in Alice Notley’s “The Descent of Alette” (1990), which appear around every phrase and some single words, such that no word in the book is not encased in quotations. It begins:
“One day, I awoke” “& found myself on” “a subway, endlessly”
“I didn’t know” “how I’d arrived there or” “who I was” “exactly”
As such we perceive all the language as a series of discrete utterances, communicated haltingly, with difficulty, which has a mesmerizing effect, as if the poem were not the message itself but the medium, the channeling. In all of these instances, I do start to hear the punctuation, much more than I usually hear it. Punctuation often serves to force a pause, but the pause isn’t silence.
In several new books I read over the past year, poets use punctuation and extra-linguistic symbols, like asterisks and other section markers (such a marker may be called an asterism or fleuron or dinkus, depending on its styling), to conjure nonverbal meaning and nonverbal sound. THRESHOLES (Coffee House, 112 pp., paper, $16.95), by Lara Mimosa Montes, makes use of a novel glyph, known in book design as an ornament: a little outline of a circle that appears between fragments, some of which are verse, usually an isolated line or two; some of which are prose, an essayistic paragraph or a few in a row; and some of which are attributed quotes, as in a commonplace book. In some cases, Montes uses a single circle as a divider; in others, a series of three, like a vertical ellipsis. These ornaments function like punctuation at the level of the full text, rather than the phrase or the sentence.
The circles underline the book’s central question: Is absence a presence, is no place a place? (The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy notes that holes are “an interesting case study for ontologists and epistemologists,” in that “we often appeal to holes to account for causal interactions,” and yet holes are not strictly speaking material objects.) “Nowhere is not a place,” Montes writes, in verse; “It is a modulation.” Later, in prose: “Sometimes living in two places at once (Minnesota and New York) caused me to feel as though I did not live anywhere because no one ever knew where I was.” And in verse again: “What if the nothing is not a place where one can live”; “What if there’s nothing? What if there’s not.” The circles, the titular “thresholes,” mark the thresholds between fragments (fragments which interrelate and accrue but by definition do not quite cohere), putting a sign that says “HOLE” on what was already a hole, thereby making the hole less empty. It’s like a page in a legal document that is printed with “This page intentionally left blank,” which is then no longer blank. In Montes’s work, these labels seem to say, don’t skip the white space — the gaps between language are part of the language.