Context matters, but also who cares?

I will admit, this week’s poems were hard for me to read. Understanding language poetry does not come easily to me because there is an erasure of concrete meanings applied to the words. However, it does heavily remind me of Gertrude Stein, whose work I have grown to love because it pushes me as a reader to reimagine the meaning behind her words when taken out of their normal contexts. Therefore, I can appreciate language poetry and the way that it makes it reader question how language functions. “From Sunset Debris” by Ron Silliman emphasizes how easily lexical relationships between words and phrases can change when these words and phrases are rearranged. It also calls attention to the relationship between the poet and their reader.

“From Sunset Debris” is essentially a set of questions, all of which are very ambiguous but become specific once they are considered as preceding or following other questions. For example, Silliman opens the poem with the question, “Can you feel it?” (line 1). The initial reaction from the reader is to reply with the question: feel what? What is it? What (or who) are we talking about? Silliman introduces the reader to his poem without any context provided. In fact, the entire first line is completely obscure with constant references to “it” without any hints as to who or what “it” is. Therefore, there is already a sense of ambiguity and wonder surrounding his words.

When reading further along, the reader subconsciously reads questions in relation to its surrounding questions. It is true that each question can function alone. But “from Sunset Debris” is fast paced and free formed, and Silliman does not include any intention of breath or breaks other than the question marks. So, it is unnatural to read each question as separate entities with no correlation to the questions before or after it. The question, “Is the sink clogged?” (line 14), captures the essence of this problem. Without any context, the reader does not know what sink is being referred to. Is the narrator asking others about the open sink in the public restroom because they need to wash their hands and the other sinks are being used? Is the narrator asking their partner about the kitchen sink in their own home? When looked at in reference to the rest of the poem, it is assumed that the narrator is asking in referenced to another person’s sink in their house because the proceeding question is “Is that where you live?” (line 14). The following question is “Have the roaches made a nest in the radio?” (lines 14-15). This not only suggests that the clogged sink is a part of another person’s house, but that the house is old or dirty, which makes sense as to why the sink is clogged. Still, these are merely assumptions the reader is forced to make to fill in the missing gaps.

There is also the added layer that Silliman’s questions can be rearranged to produce different meanings. Silliman writes, “Are your legs sore?” (line 39). The questions on either side of this phrase have absolutely nothing to do with legs being sore and makes this question seem irrelevant. However, if this question was presented to the reader after “Are you hard?” (line 14) or “Is anything as tight as anal penetration?” (line 59), the question of legs being sore becomes intensely erotic. There is no more ambiguity to the question; instead, it is very specific and situational. In a similar way, it could be placed after the question, “Does it hurt?” (line 1) and “Do you bruise?” (line 32). When following these questions, the idea of legs being sore becomes much more innocent and implies that there is a leg injury. Silliman’s mismatching arrangement of questions reminds readers that language is situational, meaning that words and phrases function the way they do because of the context they are placed in.

Finally, there are certain questions that look inwards, in which the narrator/Silliman questions himself, while other questions are intended towards the reader or an external person or object. Silliman asks, “Why didn’t I go back to Pasco and become a cop?” (line 18). In this moment, the narrator is self-reflecting and looking inwards for answers pertaining to his own future. Yet, he also asks questions with “you” as the subject. An example is, “Are you trapped by your work?” (line 37). In this line, Silliman is questioning the reader’s future. Towards the end of the poem, he references the collective by using “we.” He writes, “Will we stop soon? Will we continue?” (lines 59-60). Through the integration of “we,” he is establishing a relationship with his reader. Both him looking inwards and asking the reader to reflect on themselves is very intimate. But introducing the use of “we” at the end of the poem leaves the reader with the sense that his set of questions were highly intimate and deeply conversational.

Silliman, as well as the other language poets, pushed me to reshape the way that I view language as a system and how that system functions. Context and situation are key factors in making words come across as they are intended by the writer. Even then, these intentions can be misconstrued when rearranged or taken out of context. Language relies heavily on relationships, and I question whether Silliman wanted to build a relationship among his phrases at all or if he intended for them to stand alone, un-contextualized and enigmatic.