In all cases the use or the ordering of words is of utmost importance. In particular, while or a use of language can reference another thing, good poetry, and good writing for that matter, should exist on its own, whatever referenciality contained. In short, the thing should have value in and of itself.
That is why I have been so peeved about this late development: "The Twitter" in particular, the posts by someone calling himself "The Snoop Dogg." First things first, his disregard for tradition, which is the word as the agreed-upon symbolic representation of meaning, is disturbing. Even in his own naming. Why would he not write Dog? What does Snoop mean? They seem like choices without an obvious meaning. Or without a hidden intrinsic meaning. But enough of that criticism, if his rhetoric allowed for deeper meaning, this could be forgivable.
But tweets are notoriously short, and their endless referenciality is disturbing. It is not quality allusion but rather they are consistently reliant for their meaning on an outside thing, like his endless reminders to get "tix" or brief descriptions of concerts or festivals like the cryptic "#Lionfest 2013 !! we went hard !! #Reincarnated." Here again, there is no respect for the tradition of punctuation and creation of intrinsic meaning.
Even when he's not relying on an outside event for meaning, the weight of the tweet is so small it might as well be called worthless. Think about this tweet reading only "Vaporize 2 start tha day." What value does this hold? Get high to start the day? Why? These fragments aren't shorn against my ruin! or his ruin!
The problem is getting Eliot to think that Twitter is art.
ReplyDelete