Confusion is a necessity. It is a necessity in the sense that confusion assists us in forming an understanding of how we might interpret our world. With this understanding, confusion becomes tantamount to changes that can unequivocally affect how society is altered for the greater good. Lyn Hejinian (2002) and Joan Retallack (1995) portray this sense of confusion through much of their writing by working in a specific language manner that is not widely used by most genre conventions. Both strive to create a sense of why different frames of language usage, while confusing at first, are critical. I argue that this confusion is critical to framing solutions for social justice because what is experienced through reading confusing textual mediums provides instrumental groundwork in undertaking problematic social issues and countering them effectively. What then is Hejinian.s and Retallack.s respective intent to create confusion through a medium that does not speak? By using unspeakable medium, the text, information contained in the register of their specific language usage is provocative and instigative. How do we listen to our kinfolk, our chaotic systemic world, and refrain from barbaric assumptions of perverted viewpoints with confuse/ion/ed language?
I will delineate a slice of my argument in order to meet the inherent expectations of how I wish to stake my claim in the larger discourse. I am intently set upon the possibilities of merging a few specific concepts from the deliberations derived from this paper and those in Hejinian.s and Retallack.s works. Then to permit coherence for my argument, I aim to apply them where rhetorically necessary in the move of staging language as confusion. I wish to emphasize a critical discrimination between two relevant yet dissimilar ideas: language as confusion and language is confusing. Rather, my former offering is the focus of my scholarly journey, however confusing the actual trek will yield, although not intentionally. Language as confusion is an area in which the beginning seed of understanding how confusion can act as an agent of potential change is transformative and informing simultaneously. It is useful to consider its partnering concepts and theoretics, as I will profess throughout this paper.
In order to act as a clear transcription of my writing, I must undertake the role of the .unpacker. with several of the texts as if they were in my personal repertoire of a suitcase. In this effort, the works of Lyn Hejinian (2002) and textual analysis of her My Life autobiography, will serve as an introductory example of immediate confusion, as this may occur upon reading her text for the first time.her work suits this conjecture. Complementarily, Juliana Spahr (1996) in her work, .Resignifying Autobiography: Lyn Hejinian.s My Life will also supply as a germane source of paralleling the concepts of readership and political agency, both which conjoin my frame of argument at hand. Spahr.s renderings on readerly agency, political agency, and reading as space for resistance are sagacious concepts to cover when underscoring the power of confusion vis-`-vis reading texts which are unfamiliar.
Likewise, the work by Joan Retallack (1995) in AFTERRIMAGES and in her article, .Essay as Wager. (2003) are corresponding harmonic sources that highlight how her use of language in her work is inundatingly confusing, regardless of the socio-economic or education level one may traverse from.her work is inaccessible, at first, until time spent is time spent deconstructing personal automatic conventions and frameworks. In this regard, it is applicable to attention the fact readers are conformed to a certain set of expectations and rules which have been learned and internalized throughout their own experience with language in its many avenues. Breaking away from automatic conventions and assumptive intellectual borders will engender the compelling desire to seek out alternative and acceptable paths toward social justice. Thereby, the generative concept exists.taking Retallack.s example and underscoring the confusion element as a positive element of transformative action.
When we begin to formulate a sense of solution out of confusion for societal good, we also initiate individual and collective transformation that is essential to providing the groundwork for social justice. When I raise the issue of confusion in terms of societal conditions, I offer that society is full of disorder but it is not un-impenetrable in the proposition that problematic issues cannot be resolved. As Retallack suppositions, .The poetries that stimulate us in this way, that ask us to rise to the sometimes baffling occasions they present, are also inviting us to stretch toward a readerly action of complex awareness. and this awareness .requires the long views of projects generous enough to form a dynamic equilibrium amidst contradictions and contingencies, injustices and suffering.. (Retallack, 18). This conception of disorderly society consists of permanent discontinuities that persistently strive for chaos and confusion.through no predestined endeavor by us. We have diminutive amount of control in the order and dis-order of events in our lives. To this end, our strive for order amidst a discordant society is ever-reaching through the ways in which language is an agent of change, due to the innate capacity of language.s confusion elements. Thus:
.the degree to which the chaos of world history, of all complex systems, makes it imperative that we move away from models of cultural and political agency lodged in isolated heroic acts and simplistic notions of cause and effect.
(Retallack, .Essay as Wager., 3).
One can frame an argument that we are responsible for our own destinies and that we yield an abstract form of control over the scope of which our investments in our lives are truly our doing. Therefore, if we are examining the usefulness of confusion as a tool to transform the prevalent issues of inequities in our society, we must concede that we have some sort of control and that change is consequential through our means. Confusion is important and it must be distributed, always in ever-changing forms, through different spectrums of discontinuities, and edges of continuities that have jagged indefinable edges. The notion that we are constantly standing on the edges of chaos remits itself as acceptable usage for reaping the effects of edged-chaos and producing workable social results.
Then so, how do we capitalize on this confusion through multiple possibilities for change in our world that has foreboding elements? We were never told how to tiptoe around the edges, but we do come marked with ideas to initiate change for social righteousness. Hence, confusion becomes an intangible resource that requires effort on all fronts (namely, us as a collective) to instigate transformative equitability. This effort means then that we capitalize on confusion as a way to instill positive change in society. Yet, understanding how to capitalize on confusion without resorting to sophomoric antics such as conceding prematurely, or creating further chaos, is another issue and it is not one-dimensional.
Regardless of the lack of immediate direction that we may not possess on how we are to navigate our (dis)order of confusion, there is certain comfort that we have with language and its semiotic purposes. Language as a conduit and as a conduit amidst confusion specifically, is what we are after when we present confusion as a state of possible change for the social good. Breaking into the discipline of Communication, the conduit metaphor expresses perfect transmission of ideas through language as the way communication should ideally function. Within this frame, we can gather illuminating evidence when we turn to unfamiliar and un-bordered writings that instill the very founding element, confusion. Within this arduous scope, language becomes a way to transmit ideas that come from the act of reading uncomfortable pieces. Take for instance the photography produced below as an alternative means to understand the desire for immediate coherence:
This photography depicts the edges of windows, terrain that one automatically may desire to see more of; further understanding of the other boundaries.the door handle, silver and designed to be pressed to step outside, the slice of window in the door that plays with the see-er.s visual focus. The elements emphasize that while one may wish to make complete sense, wishing to see outside entirely, without any obstruction, this is not possible, and nor should be it. The fact that the photograph represents a space of visual resistance is the very idea expressed insofar.we cannot remain willing and ready to resort to complacency and always hoping to make sense of our world with quick conventions and expectations.
In relation to reading and reader agency with what this photograph suggests, Juliana Sphar (1996) constitutes this tension as .the multiple equations disrupt the linear conventions of reading to suggest a roving circularity of possible meanings. (150). Disruption of reading frames requires a willingness from the reader to engage in reflexive practices with un-terrained works of writing. In doing so, the concept of readerly agency that Spahr investigates, comes into play as the seed required with initiating individual thinking in how an unjust society may be altered reflecting democratic and egalitarian ways. One avenue of potential transformative approach is by way of tapping into the system of what I would constitute the mapping territory of changing inequities.
The movement of L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E poetry has its weight as a system that can be mobilized as a conduit for social justice. Initiating its platform in the late 1960.s and early 1970.s, Language poets sought to dismantle the permeated traditional forms of writing as a way to challenge and contest dominant courses of forms of poetry. The text mediums written that ignited various genres and writers to jump on then-prevailing social and cultural issues and carried other specific characteristics, serves well in this immediate deliberation as a means to understand why language is a robust tool. This aligned analysis constitutes as the mapping territory of changing inequities. The system of language we rely on so heavily in its many possible forms and nuances is also a system that provides crucial groundwork as a means to formulate viable solutions in which society begins to emerge as a healthy and positive realm to exist.
The two poets, Lyn Hejinian (2002) and Joan Retallack (1995), use their works as resources that create confusion for the reader. As discussed and shown throughout the paper, this confusion is elemental as it plants the starting phase of inner-growth toward the ending aim: reflexive attention to one.s personal interpretation of the world and how they can foster change. Through this angle as a resource and the ending modality that results from such engagement, both of personal and readershiply confusion, the elemental framework is materialized and ready for catapultic action. Examining a piece of Retallack.s work is helpful in making concrete connection to the arching confusion claim:
Salut hitherto urgent lotus mnemonic siren pod errata
further than that Hobbes thought there were passions peculiar to every class:
aristocratic pride, bourgeois desire for power, working class desire for revenge (did he
mention this?), bourgeois pride,
aristocratic fear of revenge
(AFTERRIMAGES, 64).
Notwithstanding the inevitability, that language is a confusing system by itself in its myriadic approach; I offer that the usefulness and criticality of confusion, as Retallack has exposed above, is a political and social recourse for transformative developments. Social justice- how does this come to be with confusion? In order to smooth down the ruffled feathers that arise from incomprehensible unforeseen confusion with life and its parallel confusing events, we move to language.with its variable rhetoric and possibilities which communicate confusion. Rhetorically because for instance, Lyn Hejinian.s My Life requires deliberate and demanding attention from the reader in perhaps quite an uncustomary manner. She does this in her pages by crafting as such:
Nonetheless, I wrote my name in every one of his books. Language is the history that gave me shape and hypochondria. And followed it with a date, as if by my name I took the book and by the date, historically, contextualized its contents, affixed to them a reading. And memory a wall. My grandmother had been a great beauty and she always won at cards. As for we who .love to be astonished,. the ear is less active than the eye. (46)
This sort of approach by Hejinian marks the trajectory of framing that I am arguing.the expectations that a specific genre would request under other writing conditions do not apply to her efforts. Hejinian forms her pages with her own personal and historical perspectives, both accounts that permit the reader to also find themselves grappling with in relation to their own histories and personal accounts. This poetic maneuver by Hejinian creates the initial reaction for the reader as feeling confused; yet, the capacity to recognize that written forms do not need to adhere to normative writing standards is the beginning mapping territory stage. This alone can provide the impetus to garner ones own thinking in relation to the world and society. In doing so, again, this act requires a thoughtful and attentive mode of utilizing one.s initial confusion as a way to navigate reflexive and changing-actions for positive social conclusions.
Lastly, as mentioned, that language with its variable rhetoric and possibilities is essential to staging language as a tool for inviting action. Possibilities: those which tiptoe around the edges of chaos such as Joan Retallack.s AFTERRIMAGES and Lyn Hejinian.s My Life because these sorts of poetries alter one.s understanding to the interconnectedness of the world and its citizens. The embedded historical and political references in Retallack.s referential poem can be seen as thoughtful tools to investigate other multiplicities of views and truths. In this regard, the capacity to recognize that any sort of poetry that borders on the edges of chaotic use of language is in its own design, foundational and compelling as it pushes the boundaries of complacencies and requires attentiveness that is normally not familiar modes of thinking. Then, the urge to inform others of our state of confusion is another component which decides how we will utilize our state of being confused, into intellectual force.
We have an inherent compulsion to empiricize to others what we see, feel, hear, and experience. This crucial relaying element pushes ideas out of the marginalized and concealed thinking, into the world of active dialogue. We cannot ignore the embedded nature of confusion-it is the ingredient, the very ingredient needed for transformative social justice. It is the agent that requires dialogue if there is to be a concrete framework for restructuring social inequities that pervade the healthy possibilities of its constituents. The nature of confusion, and its embedded nature specifically, is a subject that is shrouded in it.s very origins: what is embedded about the nature of confusion? Confusion can be described as the state in which an individual is unable to apply reason or order to a given collection of conventions and expectations, whether the information provided or consumed is valid or not. The former sense indicates rightfully that confusion is a state of being and this state is desired, as it opens portals of re-thinking how one may alter the unjusts of .scapes.
Let us then turn to an example that I propose would delineate the the claims and arguments I have raised in this paper, and how the usage of confusion in its entirety can lead toward instigating personal change through a textual medium that does not come ready with a deciphering set of code. Instead, the purpose of such material (those raised by Hejinian, Retallack, and the photograph) pushes for a specific form of interpersonal attentiveness that can be tapped into, given the right care and push. I would like to step away from the theoretical workings that I have largely focused on up to this point, and recall a moment in which my studies as a graduate student taking an undergraduate course, allowed me to gain an insight I believe I must embed in this paper for concrete relevancy.
The course that I shared with a few other peers, sparked my ideas put forth in this paper. I came away from the course with a unique perspective on the registers of language and how the element of confusion played itself throughout the encountered texts during the quarter-long work. In working with a new piece of poetry, which was highly unfamiliar and at first, un-decipherable to my classmate, who I shall name as Noname, quickly realized that her master of the English language was not what she thought. Noname was an immigrant from a Spanish speaking country and her grasp of English was admirable in that she could experience life as a student at a university. The focus of the poetry at hand for Noname engendered her to re-think her personal engagement with the text and how such relationship would provide her with instrumental tools to re-frame her understandings of her world.
I enjoyed watching Noname strive to exhibit serious honesty, willingness, and openness to grapple with what at first felt overwhelming (she mentioned this in passing), and then to watch her share her questions and thoughts with the class in order to work through her confusion. This exchange, with us listening to her acknowledge the works by poets such as those I brought forth, and with her sharing her inner thinkings, gave way for the argument I have raised: the state of being confused provokes inner-change, which can (and should?) steep over to social change. Toward the end of the quarter, I saw less of Noname for altogether separate non-class reasons, but the experience that I saw her traverse through taught me an alternative way of thinking about the world.
I believe it is my responsibility as one who may understand the (confusion-ed) poetry at stake, that another individual might not initially (Noname), to reify my knowledge when it is possible to others. In order for Noname to gain her new perspective of alternative thinking.this powerful exchange of information (her to her peers in discussions), the intimate transmittal of personal and poethical knowledge must take place. It is critical to producing alterabilities for transformative social changes. Plato, more or less states that we who may possess a level of knowledge that could be shared with those who have yet to hold such comparable knowledge, it is the responsibility of the holder (me with Noname) to pass it on. This interchange is important, again, because it allows for more individuals to know multiple interpretations and desirefully, new ways of actions in society, for the better.
"In order to understand the nature of the collision, one must know something of the nature of the motions involved--that is, a history."
—Lyn Hejinian
Hejinian, Lyn. My Life. Los Angeles: Green Integer, 2002.
Retallack, Joan. AFTERRIMAGES. Hanover: Wesleyan University Press, 1995.
Retallack, Joan. .Essay as Wager.. The Poethical Wager. Berkeley: U of California P, 2003. 1-19.
Spahr, Juliana. .Resignifying Autobiography: Lyn Hejinian.s My Life.. American Literature: A Journal of Literary History, Criticism, and Bibliography, 68:1 (1996 Mar), 139-59.
