 |
| Chrysopoea of Cleopatra http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouroboros |
Aleatoric inwardness vs. programmed play seems to be key in positioning the space of difference between the Oulipo and Surrealism. The randomness and juxtapositions of a
Surrealist restorative project, where the unconscious is embraced, explored,
and exposed in order to supplant reality, are eviscerated of any rumblings of
chance in an Oulipian paradigm. There is
no chance encounter, only prescribed methods that portend unlimited
potential (like a video game that is already predicated on existing code, but the routes of play are limitless). The elegance, then, is in the
process, the constraints, and the rule-bound system. In this sense, perhaps, the Oulipo project
has moved itself even further from the residues of Romanticism that haunt the
creative spaces of Surrealism. Nostalgia,
passion, the erotic, the mythical, and desire are the impulses for Surrealism,
and these drives can be expressed in those chance encounters. For Surrealism, the beauty of the umbrella
contrasted with the sewing machine is to be found in the hybridity of the two—the
remix for the sake of transcendence above the two. On the other hand, for the Oulipo, the
process IS the desire and this desire is self-reflexive. Specifically, I am reminded of an Ouroboros symbol
here—the snake or dragon eating itself. The
Oulipian method of creativity entails an awareness of the constant [re]creating
process and conceptualizations of the infinite. For this reason I think the Oulipo is
revolutionary in regard to methods while Surrealism is revolutionary in its content. My binary thinking here proves troubling, but
I cannot help but to see a content vs. form issue play out. The intellectual prompt may need to soak in
more.
 |
| "Who Ate My Cheese?" by Mykl Travis http://mykltravisfiberarts.com/2011/02/21/191/ |
I for one think there is a
satisfaction in constraint. Self-imposed
challenges, once fulfilled, tend to feel more rewarding. Even when I am offered freedom in creativity the
meanderings often turn to a type of limiting, a reigning in for the sake of feeling forward-movement. Creative constraint can
also feel like a gifting experience where there is anticipation in the
restrictions given (or as Turchi describes it: “surprise depends on
expectation” (182)). Such a means of creativity even has a ring of
ritualism to it, which perhaps explains Arnaud’s explanation of the secluded
workshop: “There was a hint of the Masonic temple” (xii). The sewing circle analogy that Arnaud described
particularly resonated for me as a lovely image, one that entails the honing of
skills and a reverence for what has come before. I grew up in a quilting tradition, one where
my grandmother would host quilting circles with her fellow Catholic women parishioners and friends. I fondly remember sitting underneath their large
quilt frame, set up in the middle of the living room, and feeling giddy from the
phantasmagoric site of colors, fabrics, and threads that were carefully arranged
and chosen according to a master plan that I was not privy to. It was a mystery to me at the time, but
having made my own quilts now in adulthood, I appreciate the beauty that comes
out of a rule-bound size and mathematical structure (though the math part
sometimes frustrates!). What the frame
can contain is truly limitless, or so it appears.
Works Cited
Arnaud, Noël. "Foreward: Prolegomena to a Fourth Oulipo Manifesto--or Not."
Turchi, Peter. "A Rigorous Geometry." Maps of the Imagination: The Writer as Cartographer:
No comments:
Post a Comment