I am relieved that it is enough for this assignment to “’appreciate the concepts more easily than the actual performance” because reading “Traffic” after a page or so felt like an exercise in futility.” I did experience a voyeuristic moment in “listening” to the reports from a geographic area I am unfamiliar with. References to bridges and other landmarks I have heard of was also interesting. I thought about the traffic reports from the area I live in and how similar the reports are in tone. I was impressed by how different geographical regions have similar concerns and how these concerns suggest the commonality of all of humanity in the universal sense. I looked for something that would hold my attention until the end of the document. I examined the structure and noticed the incremental timing of the reports. I was encouraged when I read Goldsmith’s comment: “My books are better thought about than read. They’re insanely dull and unreadable; I mean, do you really want to sit down and read a year’s worth of weather reports. … I don’t.”

I can relate. As Goldsmith suggests, “to dip in and out of” is useful in navigating some of this text. I might read the report of 2:11 and not again until 12:41. In doing so, I am skimming to see if anything unusual (for traffic reports) is on the horizon. Not finding anything outside of the ordinary, this reader is resigned to the fact that ordinariness is all there is here.

What is the point?  Based on the readings for today, conceptual writing/poetry is about taking what is already there and changing the context in order to create something interesting if not new.

This concept didn’t work so will with the Michael Brown situation. I think that after this, Goldsmith will include an additional dimension to his theory. That is, he might give more consideration to the sensitivity of audiences and how they may be  affected by topical and potentially incendiary issues before performing and publishing.

Like many others who have thought about the piece “Michael Brown’s Body,” I was curious about Goldsmith’s reordering of the autopsy report to end with the state of Michael Brown’s geni­­­­­talia. Since the end of a piece is a place of prominence, what was the strategic rationale for this showcase psychologically or otherwise? This manipulation of the text has at least the effect of generating/perpetuating this discussion. It is, of course, impossible to ignore the hearkening to that lingering colonial-tinged, racist stereotype concerning the genitalia of the African American male; a by-product of either the commodification of the black body or plain and irrational envy.