New (sur)realisms: the recombinant arts of Jane Hammond and John Ashbery

Word & Image ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-201
Author(s):  
Mark Silverberg
Keyword(s):  
2017 ◽  
Vol 105 (2) ◽  
pp. 34-54
Author(s):  
Karin Roffman
Keyword(s):  

Art Journal ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 77
Author(s):  
Judith Shea
Keyword(s):  

boundary 2 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 79-82
Author(s):  
Charles Bernstein

Abstract In 2018, Mexican poet Alí Calderón interviewed Charles Bernstein for his influential web magazine Círculo de poesía. The interview is published here in English for the first time. Bernstein addresses the poetics of “hybridity” and the possibilities for poetic disruption. The discussion ends with Bernstein's then new poem, written for John Ashbery on the day he died.


Author(s):  
Jesse Zuba

This chapter offers an interpretation of one of the most remarkable debut collections ever selected for the Yale Series of Younger Poets award—Some Trees by John Ashbery. The reputation of the book as an unconventional debut has dominated the critical response to it, from the early, largely negative judgments by critics such as William Arrowsmith and Donald Hall, to more recent attempts to revalue it by Marjorie Perloff, Vernon Shetley, David Lehman, and others. The chapter argues that Some Trees has been misread both by its detractors and defenders, who tend to stress the ways in which the poems resist interpretation while ignoring many of the ways in which they encourage and support it.


Author(s):  
Marta Figlerowicz

This chapter examines a number of poems by John Ashbery. Ashbery’s poetry explores doubts about lyric expression’s dependence on its audience that are analogous to those voiced by Plath and Stevens. But like the novels discussed in earlier chapters, Ashbery’s lyrics also implicitly accept their speakers’ dependence, for their self-awareness, on audiences whose presence and attentiveness they cannot control. The mirror serves these speakers as a model for the intense, careful outward scrutiny that they constantly dream of but cannot consistently secure. As Ashbery’s speakers mistake for such mirrors paintings, daydreams, and natural landscapes, they reflect on the imperfect self-knowledge they can attain in a world from which such forms of outward support are not forthcoming—as well as on the way this desire for self-knowledge clouds their capacity to relate to their surrounding world. This notion of affect is further explored by juxtaposition against the views of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document