When I first clicked on the link, I was very excited because “choose your own story” books have always been my favorite. I used to love the idea that I was able to dictate the outcome of the story, simply by choosing the path the main character went onto next. I loved it so much I found myself re-reading these texts multiple times, in an effort to follow every avenue that the author set up. As look back on that experience, I see now that it was helping me become a better reader as well as satisfying my need to control the outcomes of each story.

This need for control is something I’ve been thinking about not only in this class, but in my entire experience as graduate student. In my MFA program, I learned very early on that I was going to be challenged in ways I never was and that it was okay to only have a small sliver of information be all mine. As a PhD student I’m learning that this small piece is in the eye of the tornado.
This is how I felt as I struggled with entering the text. In my first read through, it was not very impressive to me. However, I kept having this feeling in the back of my mind, that I was missing something. I could not shake the feeling, until I went back and tried to play game over and over.

Eventually, I found my footing (of sorts) and started feeling like I was at the intersection of leading troops into battle and a voice activated robot who moves on my commands. This made me feel more at ease with idea of moving through the text. Although, there is this feeling of a lack of understanding that persists in the back of my mind as I type in commands. I am happy to say that no matter the struggle, I never tried to take it easy on myself and use the cheat codes (any form of them). For me, the struggle is half the battle, and if I “make it” or not, the struggle has taught me numerous things about myself and being able to fumble through things.

Everything We Do is Political

Rachel Zolf does a fantastic job of putting this book together in a way that does not make us think she is telling us what to do or talking to us as if we are stupid. She starts us off with finally crafted lines and poems that use a minimal amount of words and still leave is wondering about things, makes us want to look up information about what she is trying to tell us. In the first section she is writing poems that put us at ease in a sense, because the language is language we all use in every day conversations to communicate with each other. In the first section Zolf also in a quiet manner leaves us hanging at the end of each poem, because she doesn’t use punition to end her poems. This lack of an ending makes me think of two things: unfinished business or a window of opportunity for reader to enter into the work, and this idea that everything is connected and talking to each other. I am not sure which if either Zolf is trying to discuss and it doesn’t matter to me. However, it is very interesting from a writer’s perspective to consider these things.

The second section titled “Book of Caparisons” is interesting because of its paired down language, Zolf gives us a minimalist approach to this section. This second section seems focused on the correct words and nothing else, while she gives us titles as numbers. These numbers cause us to do a few things, stop and then think about what these numbers represent. At first, I thought they might be dates, but this idea was soon left on the side of the road a castoff of a continued reading. I never did figure out what the numbers represent, it was in this failure (of sorts) that I find myself the most intrigued. Zolf does nothing without thinking critically, this much is very obvious. As this section continues the minimalist approach to writing flows into the third section.

The third section is a much more personal section. This shift is evident in its title “Innocent Abroad” and the lack of blank pages between the title page and poems. She does not want us to have a break in the information process, while simultaneously not giving herself a break. This section seems almost like what she wanted to write from the beginning. The first two sections are what she needed to write to prepare herself to write this section. This is by far my favorite section.

The Nam

Fiona Banner, does an interesting job of intersecting and writing into and through these different, iconic movies about Vietnam. I was interested to find out through a cursory search of Banner online, that she is an artist working and living in England. It started me thinking about what this distance (in both time and place) did for this writing project. I think the way in which it was produced with such conscious fluidity from movie to movie was aided by both time and distance. It is probably fair to assume that she has no family connection to the Vietnam War, which allowed her to focus on only the words, images, and production of texts that came from her interactions with them. This to me as a writer is a very interesting way to conceive a project.

Spooked and Considering How Spooky Deer Are

K. Silem Mohammad’s interview/article was very interesting to me as a writer, because it gave the interview question and answer’s first than a sample of what the question was asking. I enjoyed this aspect of the article for two principle reasons: it allows the reader to gain insight into the poet/writers mind and process, and it than becomes both essay and collaboration between two people, instead of only a transcript of an interview it became a well thought out article. In “Spooked” and “Considering How Spooky Deer Are,” we the audience are able to see not only the process but also the resulting product.

In considering both of these poems and the interview about the process, it was interesting to me to think about inspiration. As a poet, I get my inspiration from the everyday comings and goings of the world around me. I go to a coffee house or sit outside and take notes on things I hear and see. Mohammad does something that is incredibly foreign to me, he does what I do but in the universe of the internet. As far as using the internet in this fashion, I am proudly, if not stubbornly “old school.” I would much rather use my five senses to experience the outside world in a much more localized manner. My hope is to start looking into this electronic universe more for inspiration as both poet and professor.

Zong

M. NourbeSe Philip’s groundbreaking work “Zong” is one of these texts that I knew nothing about before my fateful two year journey at Naropa University. It was here in a place that I felt uncomfortable and at times unwanted that I first came into contact with this book known as “Zong.” Looking back on it now, I realize that my feelings at the time regarding the school were parallel to the feelings brought on by this book and its foundational materials. For two summers I was able to workshop and work with M. NourbSe Philip and much like her work here, she challenged me and pushed me further than I knew, wanted, or understood at the time. So, this opportunity to become reacquainted with “Zong” as a text was great.

I was able to consider just the text and its creation, where in the past readings I was strictly focused on where it came from. I’m not saying that it wasn’t or isn’t important to consider all of the lives that were thrown away as lost product. However, this time I was able to put my feelings aside and examine the production of this text with a critical eye on how it was repurposed and reproduced and what that does to make the story relevant even today. For me the negation of texts from the original court document is quietly giving a voice to those people who lost their lives on that boat, possibly for the first time, better late than never.