but aren't they all random?



A Pocketful of Poesy was a Poem-a-Day(-on-Average) Blog* up until the great derail of 2013. The impossibly-high standard of quality proved impractical to keep up, without a book deal. But don't take my word for it: click RANDOM and judge for yourself! And feel free to offer your critique.
*based on poem rate for calendar years 2009-2012. Also, kidding about the book deal.

Monday, March 07, 2016

increase in obscurity Pt.2

Wait a second, of course there's another
popular use of obscurity: The making of
references, obscure ones, hoping someone
will recognize and enjoy the reference.
A sort of peek-a-boo game between
people of similar learnings, or leanings,
or experiences, that adds significances and cachets
to the trivia we've accumulated along the way, and which
would be otherwise meaningless. A valid, playful use

of obscurity, sort of. I'm not saying the other use
is invalid - the deliberate obfuscation. I'm sure if
that's what you're after - it all comes down
to what you're trying to accomplish
as an artist. For some people, meaning itself
is a game, and the work may be deliberately,
semantically empty - or as empty
as the artist can make it. Suppose an artist
delights in seeing the various meanings drawn
and connections made from the work, none of which
were intended while making the work? Surprise! Is this
in some way bad or foul play? Heck no.

It's just one of those weird deals

where when you find out that it's their game, too.
The reader gets to play, and you're ultimately like,
"Huh? WHY? Well okay. I guess if that's what turns
your motor over." But then

you tend to look at the next piece they do
as some type of more or less bull shit. So
they may be wise not to let on, that they write
with "open meaning" (i.e. none) (or next to it) but
to me it's as full-on legit as any other purpose
to which you could put to art,

i.e. none

No comments: