We Saw the Light

3 thoughts on “We Saw the Light”

1. “maybe it is already in the works” – i sure hope so!! :)

   i just read Naked Lens last month for the 1st time and loved it. An in-depth Burroughs/film book would be wonderful to behold.

2. Thank’s good review of an interesting book as a film maker, writer & W.S.B.aphile
   relationship of written word and film is of great interest to me
   DJG

3. GetFamous, a book of essays he edited on stray from the beaten path was one of the Kenneth Koch, John Ashbery, James Schyuler or Frank O’Hara. known figures and aspects of the New York School.

   Well, Light: Conversations between the New American Cinema and Poetry. is paired with one filmmaker in order to examine charts new territory. Critics have turned their attention to and film. Think Jack Sargeant’s Naked Lens: Beat Cinema the ’50s, and Film. A few studies examine the such as R. Bruce Elder’s study of the films direction, of New American Cinema (think Stan Brakhage, Kenneth mention some filmmakers featured in Kane’s book) on New received much, if any, critical attention. Throughout We Saw as in a reading of John Ashbery’s poetics through is wide-ranging, touching on earlier work like Burckhardt’s Lurk of Robert Frost. Chapters on Robert Duncan / Kenneth breadth and depth. The book concludes with an interview their collaboration The Time We Killed (2004). This interview and film is still ongoing and vibrant. This concluding boy’s club.

   I want to look at three chapters in chapter on Allen Ginsberg and Robert Frank. One would famous Beat film and Howl, Ginsberg’s most well-known poem. Naked Lens and in Mad to Be Saved. In My Daisy in any depth and chooses to discuss unusual perspective. Obviously, Ginsberg’s use of juxtaposition, best exemplified montage à la Sergei Eisenstein. Kane chooses not to unaware of them — Kane touches on this aspect from Robert Duncan’s The H.D. Book regarding Eisenstein. No, The quoting of The H.D. Book is a case for the most part unread and unstudied. The reference forgotten or neglected works. We Saw the Light often that a disc jockey would describe as deep cuts.

   For Kane singles out the figure of Charlie Chaplin. Ginsberg entitled “A Letter to Chaplin.” In addition, in his whole first section typed out madly in one afternoon, for the beauty of abstract poetry of mind running reference to “abstract poetry” highlights the well-documented influence of form and color Ginsberg studied intently while developing his to explore Chaplin as an alternative, and lesser known, Unlike Cézanne, the figure of Chaplin also provides transgressive its subject matter encourages just such reading. Through Chaplin, and political radicalism that underlies Howl.

   In addition, Kane focuses and My Brother as well as the even more of which Me and My Brother developed. Me and Sutra. In a wide-ranging analysis, Kane demonstrates how Ginsberg In this light, it becomes clear how Ginsberg’s interrogation other poems of the mid-1960s parallel similar concerns of cinematic techniques of editing as well as his photographic these poems mimics Frank’s use of a camera on new light on their collaboration and the fruits of Leslie is fresh and informative. O’Hara drew much inspiration documented. Poems like To the Film Industry in Crisis of O’Hara’s love affair with the movies. Yet for and incorporation of popular culture and mainstream film in and drew inspiration from the underground cinema as well. The Last Clean Shirt (1964). The film, which centers is on one level the cinematic equivalent of an poetry, it is very much an urban film focusing poems as a form of name-dropping performed by an on their surface. Instead, Kane uses Last Clean Shirt that surface. As a result, O’Hara becomes more of as a poet engaged in the underground of the Upper Manhattan.

   The chapter on Andy Warhol was a bit be something of an afterthought, maybe the suggestion of the work of Andy Warhol had to be included. other books. Most significantly, Reva Wolf has discussed Warhol Warhol, Gossip and Poetry in the 1960s. In addition, Welcome. One of the strengths of We Saw the embraces the unexpected and the unexplored. Another strength is and one poet in each chapter. Yet the Warhol Gerard Malanga, Allen Ginsberg, John Ashbery, and Frank O’Hara. getting away from a tight, compact one-on-one structure. I and provide a detailed reading of Warhol’s interaction with of John Ashbery and Allen Ginsberg. These seem to of Frank O’Hara) which conflicts with more obscure topics Padgett and Ted Berrigan also sat for screen tests. between Warhol and Berrigan? Or Warhol and Padgett? Reva earlier books, but, still, such an examination would be are already the subject of chapters in We Saw a small criticism to give balance to this review. chapter with great interest, and to those not aware be a revelation, but for me it was not book.

   Kane mentions Burroughs in passing throughout the book and interested to learn that Burroughs appeared in a Stan nothing about this movie. It is described on the ‘kin to ‘moon-struck,” its images emblems (not quite symbols) ‘falling away’ from conscious thought. The film can only state because I cannot imagine symbolizing or otherwise representing the film, Jane Brakhage, Tom and Gloria Bartek, William figments of this Thought-Fallen PROCESS as are their images like to know more about this film.

   Yet due to in detail in Kane’s book. For one Burroughs is films were directed by Antony Balch, a British filmmaker, and most importantly, the cut-up films have been discussed to some extent, covered ground.

   That said, Kane’s book demonstrates film is much needed. The book I have in Entry that explored Burroughs and visual art. Clearly, Burroughs utilized cinematic techniques in his writing to great effect. experimental film and the cut-up technique or maybe a screenplay and that work’s relation to the rest of filmmaking in Burroughs’ theories on the nature of reality Lunch into a film from the 1960s onwards has as an actor? Much could be made of the as a myth and icon. Some of these topics on Beat film but others remain untackled. Maybe a order. Maybe it is already in the works.

   In any the shelves now and I strongly recommend it. In large part it opens up whole new areas of poets and filmmakers of the 20th Century. For anyone is a must-read. A while back I reviewed Daniel Kane’s Don’t Ever the New York School of poets. Kane’s decision to selling points of that book. No heavy doses of For the most part, Kane selected essays on lesser Kane has a new book out, We Saw the In each of the book’s seven chapters, one poet the inter-relationship or conversation between them. Once again, Kane certain aspects of this area, such as the Beats or David Sterritt’s Mad to Be Saved: The Beats, influence of New American Poetry on New America Cinema, of Stan Brakhage, but the influence in the other Anger, Andy Warhol, Rudy Burckhardt, Robert Frank, just to American Poetry (i.e. the Allen Anthology poets), has not the Light, Kane explores this path not taken, such the lens of Rudy Burckhardt’s film Ostensibly. Kane’s analysis and Ashbery’s Three Poems as well as the poetry Anger and Stan Brakhage / Robert Creeley possess similar with Lisa Jarnot (poet) and Jennifer Reeves (filmmaker) on highlights the fact that the collaboration between experimental poetry chapter also integrates what had until then been a Kane’s book in some depth. Let’s start with the expect a discussion of Pull My Daisy, the most Such considerations have been done before, for example in We Saw the Light, Kane passes on examining Pull the cinematic aspects of Howl from a new and by the phrase “hydrogen jukebox,” has links to cinematic discuss these links in detail. Not because he is of New American Poetry in another chapter by quoting Kane hopes to open up new areas for discussion. in point. Duncan’s long-running project of creative criticism is to The H.D. Book shows Kane digging deep into cites unpublished interviews, little known correspondence, and other texts example in considering the influence of cinema on Howl, and Peter Orlovsky collaborated on a largely neglected poem notes on the recording of Howl, Ginsberg wrote, “the a tragic, custard-pie comedy of wild phrasing, meaningless images along making awkward combinations like Charlie Chaplin’s walk.” The abstract art on Howl, namely Cézanne, whose juxtapositions of own signature style. Kane takes this note on Howl cinematic inspiration behind Ginsberg’s “wild phrasing” and “awkward combinations.” sexual and political implications. “A Letter to Chaplin” in Kane probes the links between poetic experimentalism, sexual freedom, on a lesser known Ginsberg / Frank collaboration: Me obscure film version of Kaddish, an abandoned project out My Brother is considered in connection with Wichita Vortex drew inspiration from, and in turn influenced, Frank’s work. of language and reality in “Wichita Vortex Sutra” and Frank’s. Ginsberg’s poetics of this period also incorporate Frank’s style. Ginsberg’s use of a tape recorder to create several levels. The chapter on Frank and Ginsberg sheds that collaboration.

   Similarly, the chapter on Frank O’Hara and Alfred from Hollywood, and this fact is well known and and Poem (Lana Turner Has Collapsed) are obvious examples the most part, critical accounts focus on the influence O’Hara’s poetry. As Kane makes clear, O’Hara interacted with Kane examines the collaboration of Leslie and O’Hara in on an interracial couple driving through New York City, “I do this, I do that” poem. Like O’Hara’s on New York City locales. Many critics see O’Hara’s urbane flaneur. As a result, these references are considered to highlight how racial and political concerns lie beneath an engaged poet, in a political sense, as well Lower East Side, not just the art world of of a disappointment. The chapter seems to me to an editor. I sense that a higher-up felt that I disagree. Warhol’s films have been much discussed in and his relationship to poetry in her book Andy Kane himself touched on this topic in All Poets Light (and Don’t Ever Get Famous) is that it that the book examines the interaction between one filmmaker chapter is devoted to the conversations between Andy Warhol, I feel Kane lost his focus a bit by would have liked to see him narrow his scope one poet in particular. Kane examines the screen tests me to be obvious choices (as is the discussion covered in the rest of the book. Yet Ron How about a whole chapter dedicated to the conversation Wolf and Kane himself address these conversations in their more unexpected than discussing Ashbery, O’Hara, or Ginsberg, who the Light. I want to stress that this is Do not get me wrong, I read the Warhol of Wolf’s or Kane’s earlier work, the chapter will as fresh and focused as the rest of the in a footnote or two. For example I was Brakhage film, Thot Fal’N (1978). I know next to internet as follows: “This film describes a psychological state of suspension-of-self within consciousness and then that feeling of be said to ‘describe’ or be emblematic of this an equivalent of thoughtlessness itself. Thus the ‘actors’ in Burroughs, Allen Ginsberg, Peter Orlovsky and Philip Whalen, are in the film to themselves being photographed.” I would a variety of reasons, William Burroughs is not considered considered a novelist, not a poet. Second, Burroughs’ cut-up so they technically are not New American Cinema. Finally elsewhere in books and in academic articles. They are, to me that an entire book on Burroughs and mind would serve the same purpose as Ports of has a varied and complex relationship to film. Burroughs Has there been a study of the relationship of close reading of The Last Words of Dutch Schultz Burroughs’ output? What about the idea of film and and perception? The saga of the making of Naked yet to be told in full. What about Burroughs roles Burroughs played and how they reflect on him have been covered in academic articles and in chapters collection of essays like Retaking the Universe is in case, Daniel Kane’s We Saw the Light is on some cases, it builds on existing material but in inquiry on some of the most exciting and innovative interested in New American poetry or cinema, this book