The Virevoltant Gully

Whist browsing the internets I came across the blog of one Dylan Hock titled The Velvet Goldmine. Once you get past the banner-ads, you’ll find a sure-shot of nice video-art. He has a documentary video hosted from the C.R.A.B. (fringe) festival. It isn’t what I expect of a literary fest- acoustic guitar, fake priests morphing into NRA patriots, etc. He also hosts a video of a reading from a litmag Watching the Wheels: A Blackbird. This brings up an interesting query I’ve rolled around here on the blog- but not directly into. How, if at all, should I categorize performances too abstract or typical to be considered poetry? If a young man rips off his shirt and begins to urinate on the projector screen, tears paper into bits, bites into florescent marker and glares his teeth, is this considered poetry?

I would like to think that there are little or no boundaries when dealing with artistic expression, but I cannot help thinking that some boundaries are naturally created within an ongoing literary discussion or through debates on theory. Even if ‘boundaries’ are organically created within a community any poet or artist can ambitiously attempt to point out and heckle the elephant in the room. They could also unreasonable constrain themselves to style their writings/expressions after those they admire, which could be considered equally as infantile and ‘anti-progress.’ Is treading this fine line while still innovating the ideal trajectory? Should I consider these performances in a vacuum, or contextualize them as much as possible? Sadly, even by considering this question I naturally create lines to measure and analyze how I should measure analyze works, and it goes on, and on, and . . . I liken this to a conundrum as frustrating as the chicken or the egg- and have to leave it at the discretion of the viewer’/artists’ subjective tastes. Let me know what you think.