Article
Introduction to the Poetics of Andreas Embiricos
The Cohesiveness of the Landscape
January 18, 2006
At first sight, the ‘poem-event’ according to Embiricos seems to correspond perfectly to the claim for ‘spoken thought’ (la pensée parlée); in other words, it is directly connected to the aims and results of automatic writing. Besides, Embiricos’ own choice of words in ‘Amour-amour’, particularly at the point where he attempts to give a definition of the ‘poem-event’ (“irrespective of any conventional or standardised aesthetics, ethics or logical construction”) directly alludes to the definition of automatic writing: “it is a dictation of thought, in the absence of any control exercised by reason, exempt from any aesthetic or moral concern”. There is however an obvious divergence between the theoretical formulation of the claim (founded as this formulation is on the dogma of automatic writing) and the standardised attempts at actualising it poetically (which, it goes without saying, have no connection to the automatic message).
If there is any originality in the way Embiricos conceives the ‘poem-event’ (which could be considered as a particular poetic achievement), then it lies in identifying the poem with the phases of the sexual act; in other words, in his intention to turn the orgasmic poem into a reality. At a more general level, we might say that the idea of ‘spermatic’, absolutely erotic poetry, constitutes the most fundamental singularity of Embiricos’ poetry. Orgasmic love lies in the heart of his poetic and cosmological system, whilst orgasmic fulfilment is the most dominant obsession of his erotic language. Love – in the context of this ‘orgasmic ideology’ – is identified with sexuality and, as a rule, appears as an instinctual process. Moreover, the long-winded and monotonously recurrent orgasmic descriptions that abound in his work (chiefly in The Great Eastern), the repetitions of the most unlikely aspects of carnal language, the affected outspokenness (which was erroneously considered to be a sign of linguistic emancipation, the deliberate exaggeration, as well as the elevation of the moment of orgasm to a divine-transcendental experience, all end up leading to a mythisation of the sexual act. (Conversely, in Breton’s erotic language, there is no trace of mythisation or – even – of exaggeration; ‘spasmodic love’ is placed in an environment that is recognisable by its referential anthroponymic and toponymic markers and fused with accumulated experiences).
In light of this argument, it follows that both the political and the erotic logos of Embiricos share the element of transcendence as a common trait. His utopian – in other words political – weltanschaung but also his sexual fantasies are consciously distanced from what may be characterised as ‘natural’, ‘lived’ or ‘liveable’ experience. This observation is of key importance because, apart from anything else, it pinpoints a major divergence of Embiricos from the ‘canon’ that governs surrealist logos. What chiefly interests surrealists is the principle of authenticity; and as they constantly declare, authentic is only that which is founded on objective experience. Apart from Breton, who, as we saw, defines as a primary duty to distinguish the authentic from the non-authentic in avant-garde art, Tzara, too, imposes similar conditions with regard to the issue of authenticity, maintaining that poetry is a condition of existence and that “its realisation takes place in the field of life”. As a matter of fact, the criterion that Tzara explicitly sets for authentic poetry is the degree to which it has been ‘valid’ – i.e. ‘experiential’.
Poetic images – always according to surrealist theory – are not an invention but are born out of the surrounding world and pre-exist in the unconscious in a latent form before their – verbal – poetic transfiguration. Nevertheless, from the moment we consider images as an ‘event’, or a reality of this world (and not just a product of the imagination or inspiration), then the question is rightfully begged whether these images live up to the lived experience. It goes with out saying that the experientiality principle that surrealists pose as a condition of authenticity is in no way connected with any criteria according to which images bear any similarity to the external reality or lived experience or imitate it in any way. Conversely, poetic images – as surrealists affirm – stem from the poet’s actions on the surrounding reality, and in that sense they assume the nature of subjective creation. That, however, does not mean that lived surrealist images are in any way less valid compared to even a photographic depiction.
In view of all this, it would be hard to accept that the Embiricos’ politics and erotic utopia can comply with surrealist norms. In certain cases, however, as it has already been pointed out, Embiricos does try to synthesise the imaginational material with the objective events and thus bring about the expansion of the real. Yet even in such cases, specific events are presented through a mythical perspective and, no matter what, never cross paths with any direct experiences or any of the poet’s contemporary political developments.
An academic consideration of the ‘carnal language’ in Embiricos’ work.
[…] Embiricos’ claim for a ‘poem-event’, as it is stated in his poem ‘Amour-amour’, holds a prominent place in his poetic system. As it has already been mentioned, this specific theoretical perception, as well as his consecutive attempts at actualising it poetically, draw their origins from surrealist theory; Embiricos’ claim shows remarkable analogies with similar manifestos by the foremost exponents of surrealism, in which they try to define various experimental methods of automatic or unconscious writing. These manifestos revolve around an idea that, as a perspective, held particular charm for surrealists; basically, the idea rests on the belief that, by using an automatic writing method, it is possible to accomplish a poetic achievement that will be a text, or rather a language, that is no longer ‘discourse’ (that is to say, it will no longer be comprised of words connected by any particular meaning in the consciousness of the user or reader) but which is reality itself. Breton believes that by liberating words from their logical context through the use of automatic writing, one may turn language into an event that will be at one with the thoughts, moods and emotions of humans. Language, Tzara reiterates, ‘is a living element that is always in a state of transmutation, in a constant state of creation; it is a social event’, whilst the language of poetry “is called upon to express a reality. It is itself a reality”. At first sight, the ‘poem-event’ according to Embiricos seems to correspond perfectly to the claim for ‘spoken thought’ (la pensée parlée); in other words, it is directly connected to the aims and results of automatic writing. Besides, Embiricos’ own choice of words in ‘Amour-amour’, particularly at the point where he attempts to give a definition of the ‘poem-event’ (“irrespective of any conventional or standardised aesthetics, ethics or logical construction”) directly alludes to the definition of automatic writing: “it is a dictation of thought, in the absence of any control exercised by reason, exempt from any aesthetic or moral concern”. There is however an obvious divergence between the theoretical formulation of the claim (founded as this formulation is on the dogma of automatic writing) and the standardised attempts at actualising it poetically (which, it goes without saying, have no connection to the automatic message).
If there is any originality in the way Embiricos conceives the ‘poem-event’ (which could be considered as a particular poetic achievement), then it lies in identifying the poem with the phases of the sexual act; in other words, in his intention to turn the orgasmic poem into a reality. At a more general level, we might say that the idea of ‘spermatic’, absolutely erotic poetry, constitutes the most fundamental singularity of Embiricos’ poetry. Orgasmic love lies in the heart of his poetic and cosmological system, whilst orgasmic fulfilment is the most dominant obsession of his erotic language. Love – in the context of this ‘orgasmic ideology’ – is identified with sexuality and, as a rule, appears as an instinctual process. Moreover, the long-winded and monotonously recurrent orgasmic descriptions that abound in his work (chiefly in The Great Eastern), the repetitions of the most unlikely aspects of carnal language, the affected outspokenness (which was erroneously considered to be a sign of linguistic emancipation, the deliberate exaggeration, as well as the elevation of the moment of orgasm to a divine-transcendental experience, all end up leading to a mythisation of the sexual act. (Conversely, in Breton’s erotic language, there is no trace of mythisation or – even – of exaggeration; ‘spasmodic love’ is placed in an environment that is recognisable by its referential anthroponymic and toponymic markers and fused with accumulated experiences).
In light of this argument, it follows that both the political and the erotic logos of Embiricos share the element of transcendence as a common trait. His utopian – in other words political – weltanschaung but also his sexual fantasies are consciously distanced from what may be characterised as ‘natural’, ‘lived’ or ‘liveable’ experience. This observation is of key importance because, apart from anything else, it pinpoints a major divergence of Embiricos from the ‘canon’ that governs surrealist logos. What chiefly interests surrealists is the principle of authenticity; and as they constantly declare, authentic is only that which is founded on objective experience. Apart from Breton, who, as we saw, defines as a primary duty to distinguish the authentic from the non-authentic in avant-garde art, Tzara, too, imposes similar conditions with regard to the issue of authenticity, maintaining that poetry is a condition of existence and that “its realisation takes place in the field of life”. As a matter of fact, the criterion that Tzara explicitly sets for authentic poetry is the degree to which it has been ‘valid’ – i.e. ‘experiential’.
Poetic images – always according to surrealist theory – are not an invention but are born out of the surrounding world and pre-exist in the unconscious in a latent form before their – verbal – poetic transfiguration. Nevertheless, from the moment we consider images as an ‘event’, or a reality of this world (and not just a product of the imagination or inspiration), then the question is rightfully begged whether these images live up to the lived experience. It goes with out saying that the experientiality principle that surrealists pose as a condition of authenticity is in no way connected with any criteria according to which images bear any similarity to the external reality or lived experience or imitate it in any way. Conversely, poetic images – as surrealists affirm – stem from the poet’s actions on the surrounding reality, and in that sense they assume the nature of subjective creation. That, however, does not mean that lived surrealist images are in any way less valid compared to even a photographic depiction.
In view of all this, it would be hard to accept that the Embiricos’ politics and erotic utopia can comply with surrealist norms. In certain cases, however, as it has already been pointed out, Embiricos does try to synthesise the imaginational material with the objective events and thus bring about the expansion of the real. Yet even in such cases, specific events are presented through a mythical perspective and, no matter what, never cross paths with any direct experiences or any of the poet’s contemporary political developments.
© Pantelis Voutouris
Sponsors
Partners
LantarenVenster – Verhalenhuis Belvédère