<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:13px"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1494149413291_3174"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:HyphenationZone>21</w:HyphenationZone>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Tabla normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026"/>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1"/>
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</div><div style="margin-left:14.2pt;text-align:justify;line-height:17.0pt;mso-line-height-rule:exactly;tab-stops:270.0pt" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1494149413291_3227"><span style="mso-ansi-language:EN-GB" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1494149413291_3228" lang="EN-GB">Hello Empyreans. I’m greatly enjoying the
discussion, all its various themes. What struck me today in regard to the
William Carlos Williams quote & comments was Davin’s opposition of unplanned
versus ple-planned texts (not only poems). I find that and Murat’s comments on
constraints in postmodernist versus those in modernist texts very interesting. Perhaps
this is where the robotic and machinic become more involved in the idea of a
poem’s persona(e). Whatever metaphor is used gives a certain slant to a text
obviously. This brought to mind Burroughs’ title (and concept) The Soft
Machine, where the body, the human body, both collective and particular, are
the main metaphor. Alan Sondheim has mentioned the concept of splatter or
scatter a number of times in previous posts, and I ofund myself thinking to the
body as tool and toolmaker, not only in humans but in other animals as well,
including insects, obviousy. So here we are mayabe in ideas about the rhapsodic
and how much weight a poem puts on improvisation. Thanks so much for all the
ideas! Best wishes, William</span></div>
</div></body></html>