This is Geoff’s response to my posting on the visual poetry Spiders over at Spidertangle and the odd webs they’ve been weaving recently. Since the comment function for this website has been as ambiguous in its operations as the Spiders’ definitions of visual poetry I’ll include it in Notes and Queries.

Jesse,

Come on, now. I have a pretty clear definition of visual poetry–actually four. And each is based on clear usage over time. The most common term is pretty broad, but pretty easily defendable from my POV. Visual poetry combines an important visual element with an important textual element in pieces that suggest some heightened sense of language as we expect in poetry. That’s about as good as any poor definition can do, since words are slippery beasts.

And Bob Grumman has a much clearer and narrower definition of visual poetry.. Maybe you are conflating his weird definition of “haiku” with his definition of “visual poetry.” [But aren’t Bob’s various kus also meant to be visual poetry? J.G.]

David-Baptiste Chirot is not really a theorist, and he was talking off the cuff. I think that Spidertangle conversation you are referring to (and to which I did not contribute) was pretty unhelpful at definition, leading us nowhere in particular.

I, for one, don’t want the whole world in my net.

Cheers!

Geof

Thanks for your comment! Jesse