A Blank Poem (1723); or, the Present of Absence

5 -->


Can you read that?

It's a catalog entry for "The First of April: a blank poem in commendation of the suppos'd author of a poem lately publish'd, call'd Ridotto, or, Downfal of masquerades," printed in London in -- 1704? Sometime after 1723 is more likely, since that's when the Ridotto; or, Downfall of Masquerades was published. What's curious about this poem --

-- is that it's a blank poem. After the title page and a dedication -- "To No Body," of course -- the paper is blank, save the occasional asterisk indicating footnotes. One, marked by a dagger in the center of the page, reads: "An Elleipsis, or leaving something to be understood by the Reader."

Has anyone seen this pamphlet?

I haven't. I originally noticed its citation while poking through D. F. Foxon's English Verse, 1701-1750 at Rare Book School. Quite helpfully, Foxon includes a index of oddities he came across during the twenty-five years he spent compiling and refining his bibliography. One category, "blanks," caught my eye, given the recent interest in the topic of "blankness" by Lisa Gitelman (see the video below) and Peter Stallybrass.

I dug around a bit more and found this copy -- the only extant copy? -- in Penn's collection, as well as a single mention in the Annual Bibliography of English Language and Literature (Vol. 45) of the poem's mention in the London Mercury of May 1928.


A queer little book has recently come into the hands of Messrs. Hodgson, of 115 Chancery Lane, who have been kind enough to send it for me to see. This is a quarto pamphlet of six leaves, called The First of April : A Blank Poem, In Commendation of the suppos'd Author of a Poem lately publish'd, call'd, Ridotto, or Downfall of Masquerades, and it was published, "Price Three-pence," by "J. Graves, next White's Chocolate House, St. James's-Street." There is no date but it looks as if it had appeared late in the seventeenth century, or perhaps early in the eighteenth. At any rate it must have been after 1693, for Francis White did not set up his chocolate-house until later that year. [Good to know.] The whole publication is, of course, an April Fool's Day jest, and the humour lies, or is intended to lie, in the fact that the reader (having paid his threepence) finds himself faced with a title-page, a long dedication, and then three pages with a woodcut ornament above the heading The First of April, a number of asterisks and footnotes, and "Finis" at the end, but no text! [...] The Dedication is, naturally, also facetious, and is addrsesed "To No Body," to whom many extravagant compliments are paid, since No Body "was born before Adam," and "No Body is exempt from dying." Further than this, "Who believes," asks the Author, "that the Tithe of the English C---gy lead exemplary Lives? No Body believes it. What a glaring Instance is here of your Superior Charity, and more unlimited Faith!" There is, of course, a good deal more of this "No Body" joke, which, elementary as it is, seems to be one of which mankind never tires. [...] The joke does not seem to me to be quite funny enough to merit a life of two and a quarter centuries -- and probably a great deal more than that!
Williams is right about that. It's clever, though. We tend to see the poetic deployment of "blankness" as modern or even post-modern; it's terrain for Derrida and Blanchot reading Mallarmé writing about the "blankness of the white paper; a significant silence that it is no less lovely to compose than verse." It's the silence of Cage; it's the whiteness of margins whose vacuum of signification has sucked up an excess of significance. It's the blank stare. If Shakespeare invented human nature through language -- and Keats inked the blank pages of Shakespeare's Poetical Works with his own handwritten sonnets -- we've perfected the alchemy of turning absence to presence, of creating from a profoundly uncreative void.

So what is this "queer little book" doing? Paper was still expensive around this time, we're told. It would have made up the bulk of any printer's expenses in producing a book. Studies in marginalia, like Will Sherman's Used Books, show how earlier Renaissance readers often exploited the blank paper in books as writing pads; and why paper-intensive projects, like John Foxe's commonplace book of 1,200 all-but-blank pages, were such a risk for printers. (Foxe's commonplace book failed, the unsold sheets recycled to print two later texts -- take a look at Sherman's discussion around page 138 of Used Books). Although produced over a century later, this blank poem still seems a "waste" economically, especially for an April Fool's joke.

And clearly "blankness" isn't being theorized the way it is in, say, Mallarmé. Here, the "First of April" is the blank -- the Ridotto it "commends" is the blank -- in short, blankness is sarcasm; it signifies the nothingness and "No Body" of what it's supposed to celebrate. It's a conceptual poem that exploits its medium, but doesn't, it seem, rise to the level of a "poetics of blankness." Which is probably why I'm drawn to it. It's absence isn't theorized presence, but stands for simply absence itself. A No Thing ironically made known through the very "thingness" -- the necessary "thingness" -- of itself.

Of course, all this is written about a poem I've never seen firsthand -- whose existence to me is no more than a constellation of bibliographical citations. In other words, the blank poem is blank to me, blank to scholarship, blank to all but the very few who have left traces of its presence in their own work. Difficult to reproduce and impossible to anthologize, the very absence of text makes its material presence necessary, since its physical form bears the weight of signification.

So, short of trip to Penn, blank it shall remain.

A model for creative digital scholarship.

0 -->

Leibniz is endlessly drawing up linear and numerical tables. With them he decorates the inner walls of the monad. Folds replace holes. The dyad of the city-information table is opposed to the system of the window-countryside. Leibniz's monad would be just such a grid -- or better, a room or an apartment -- completely covered with lines of variable inflection. This would be the camera obscura of the New Essays, furnished with a stretched canvas diversified by moving, living folds. Essential to the monad is its dark background: everything is drawn out of it, and nothing goes out or comes in from the outside.

//Gilles Deleuze, The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque (27)

Early Modern works on Librivox

6 -->

Today, I completed my thirty-sixth -- and final -- hour of Henry Fielding's The History of Tom Jones, the audiobook.

I've tried (and failed) to complete Tom Jones the "old-fashioned" way on two earlier occasions, but only managed success by marrying the wonder of spoken word to a hand-eye task just routinely dull enough to make the novel comparably exciting.

To celebrate, I'm posting a few of the early modern English works I've found on Librivox. Librivox -- a site that provides audiobooks of works in the public domain -- is a surprisingly decent resource for early modern literature, since (of course) it's all already in the public domain. (It's okay for medieval, too, but great for nineteenth-century stuff.) Unfortunately, the site's search is limited to, more or less, "Author," "Title" and "Category," making it difficult to stumble across works in your period unless you know to look for them. Having users curate private collections of "favorite listening" could fill in the gaps. This list is a step in that direction.

Francis Bacon, Novum Organum
--------------, Essays

George Chapman, "Hero and Leander"




---------------, "Saint Distaff's Day"

Ben Jonson, The Forest


----------------, "To His Coy Mistress"

John Milton, Areopagitica
------------, Paradise Lost
------------, Paradise Regained
------------, Samson Agonistes

Sir Thomas More, Utopia

Dorothy Osborne, Love Letters

Katherine Philips, Poems

Sir Walter Raleigh, "The Lie"

William Shakespeare, "As You Like It"
---------------------, "Fidele"
---------------------, "Hamlet"
---------------------, "Julius Caesar"
---------------------, "King Lear"
---------------------, "Measure for Measure"
---------------------, "The Merchant of Venice"
---------------------, "A Midsummer Night's Dream"
---------------------, "Much Ado About Nothing"
---------------------, "Othello"
---------------------, "The Passionate Pilgrim"
---------------------, "Richard II"
---------------------, "Richard III"
---------------------, "Romeo and Juliet" (other versions available)
---------------------, Sonnets (other versions available)

Sir Philip Sydney, Astrophil and Stella
-----------------, "My True Love"

Edmund Spenser, The Faerie Queene (all 6 books)
-----------------, Prothalamion, from Long Poems 005

Sir John Suckling, "The Constant Lover"


Have any others to add?

Sir Hugh Platt's "Poem on a Fart"

1 -->

Looking for an e-text of Henry Power's poem "In Commendation of the Microscope" -- the manuscript of which is cited here, in this 1782 Catalogue of the manuscripts preserved in the British Museum hitherto undescribed --

-- I notice this:


Sir Hugh Platt, "Poem on a fart." An unpublished manuscript poem from the same Sir Hugh Plat (1552-1611) known for his pioneering work on helping tender-footed horses and composing cole-balls? Methinks mayhaps.

This catalogue is the only record that appears on a Google search, and EEBO doesn't contain a published version. The only other "Poem on a Fart" turned up by Google is much later: Don Fartinando Puff-indorst's 'e The Benefit of Farting explain'd: or the Fundament -- all Cause of the Distempers Incident to the FAIR-SEX: Proving, a Posteriori, most of the Dis-ordures In-tail'd upon them are owing to Flatulencies not seasonably vented (1722), appended with, you guessed it, "On a Fart, let in the House of Commons":

"On A Fart, let in the House of Commons"

Reader, I was born, and cried;
I crack'd, I smelt, and so I died.
Like Julius Caesar's was my death,
Who in the senate lost his breath.
Much alike entomb'd does lie
The noble Romulus and I:
And when I died, like Flora fair,
I left the commonwealth my heir.

Look -- it's even published in LONG-FART, for the use of the Lady Damp-fart of Her-fart-shire! Do the puns ever stop?!

Unfortunately, they do not. I wish I had the last hour of my life back.

An annotated catalog of conference ephemera, with promises and pictures

2 -->

The long silence is due to traveling, from Digital Humanities 2010 in London, to Material Cultures at the University of Edinburgh, and finally to Rare Book School at UVA to get drilled in the principles of descriptive bibliography. I learned and experienced too much to share it all; so, instead, here are a few bulleted memories in no particular order. Inclusion does not imply especial significance; exclusion doesn't imply uninterest. Read it as a Sunday evening exercise in cataloging a few scattered moments from across a month.
  • On my panel at Material Cultures were two other speakers whose research is worth highlighting: Amit Ray, who is doing interesting work on Wikipedia as a new "tower of Babel" (anglocentric though it may be); and Lisa Otty, who's doing wonderful work on digital poetry and modernism. Lisa looked at examples of "unbound" distributed narratives like Shelley Jackson's Skin, arguing that -- far from being materially "unbound," simply because they lack the codex form -- these works actually bind together new forms of textual communities, temporally and geographically. I liked her play on "binding," and her sensitive approach to materiality across literary media.
  • Alan Galey's work proves exactly how book historians can help digital humanists, and digital humanists can help book historians -- or maybe how the one can successfully be the other, I'm not sure. But you already knew that.
  • John McVey's investigations into several copies of John Todd's nineteenth-century Index Rerum have me wanting to take up book collecting more seriously. Index rerums were tabulated notebooks (a kind of printed commonplace book) for recording quotes, poems, books read and places visited. They were usually prefaced with instructions on moral rectitude and right learning, framing the practice of notating one's life as a kind of individual growth. The examples John has collected, though, quite delightfully resist these structures, telling us much about identity and memory, manuscript and print, the "blanks" of the printed page, and in fact how much book culture we neglect by focusing on literature, poetry, or the notebooks of notables. Check out some images from the Indexes John's collected, along with an introduction to their uses.
    • Some of the most interesting work being done in "Digital Humanities" right now is by those who may not explicitly identify with the community at all. A good example is Nate Matias, whom I had the pleasure of grabbing coffee with in London. He's been going back to the basics of visualizing (and notating) alternative pathways through a narrative in ways very similar to what excited me about combinatorial literature. Another good example is James Ascher, whom I met in person at Rare Book School last week. As a librarian and scholar, he's been thinking about models of collaboration between those trained in information management, those skilled in programming, and those who can provide intellectual leadership -- and, more importantly, how these collaborations will shape how we safeguard and access our cultural heritage. If asked, both of these thinkers would agree, I imagine, to being called "digital humanists" (correct me if I'm wrong, guys!) but are approaching their work from such radically different angles, driven by different motivations, that in a sense it's odd to call them part of the same community.
    • I got the chance to visit Little Gidding, where Nicholas Ferrar founded a religious commune in the seventeenth-century, and where the cut-and-paste "harmonized" Bibles I've mentioned here before were made. Also famous for the T. S. Eliot poem. I don't have much to say about it, except I highly recommend literary nerds, cut-up freaks and obscure seventeenth-century commune aficionados all make the pilgrimage.
    • I want to know more about the history of descriptive bibliography. As a little "code," collational formulae seem like such a rich area for historical inquiry. How did they come about? Under what needs/conditions -- driven by what assumptions? And what's with all the condensing, when the difference between a "conservative" and a "liberal" formula is only a character or two? (Could this be an artifact of the paper card catalog?) If anyone has any reading recommendations, please, please send them my way!
    • I also want to know more about how new media have changed descriptive bibliography. I hear tell of a program that visualizes the gatherings of a book, identifying where different pieces of type show up in any given text. This sounds amazing to me. Anyone have any links to share?
    Smaller personal updates:
    • My piece "The Alphabet of Stars / This Fold of Lace," a reimagining of a Mallarmé quote for screen, was shown as part of the Deus Ex Pagina project at this weekend's Printer's Ball in Chicago. Fuller post on the piece coming soon.
    • I'm back at work on Nehemiah Grew's Anatomy of Plants (1682), researching how seventeenth-century microscopy -- and the technology of the book -- changed the relationship between plants and animals. It's a complex project, but will see publication both in print and as a piece of creative digital criticism (the digital is supposed to support the print, I imagine, but it will be entirely reversed in my case). More on this to come, but, in the meantime, if anyone knows any solid work on Grew; the changing "book of nature" idea in the Royal Society; the arbor inversa trope; mandrake roots in early modern botanicals; or any other examples of "planimals" (plant-animal hybrids, shared spirits), please do share! I'd also love to hear if you're working in a similar area.
    • I started a wiki Whiki to record my notes on articles,books, classes, conferences, talks, etc. Right now, only I can edit it (for the obvious reasons -- this is my personal record when it comes time to study for exams or write), but I welcome suggestions on reading and encourage anyone else to use it as an open resource to augment their own studies.
    ..and two relatively recent works of fiction that I highly recommend:
    • Q, by Luther Blissett (a pseudonym; actually collaboratively written). About identity (or lack thereof), anarchy, the Reformation, radicalism and a world of infinite possibilities. Super smart, ridiculously thought-provoking, and includes an entire section on a recent interest of mine, the Münster Rebellion of the 1530s, in which Anabaptists transformed an entire city into an anarcho-communist utopia (burning all bills of debt, making all property communal) before flipping it just as quickly into a horrifying theocracy, in which women were treated like cattle and dissidents beheaded. Q does amazing things rewriting the history -- replaying one of it's possibilities? -- of Anabaptism.
    • The People of Paper, by Salvador Plascencia. I've noticed Mark Sample pushing this book on Twitter a few times over the last few months and put it on my summer reading list. The first third had me interested, but not enthralled; then the metafictional section began, as characters stepped from the page as a way of proving how "paper" they are. It's a truly brilliant book about the materiality of the novel, about reading practices, about writing, and about, as Plascencia (a character in his own novel) puts it, "the commodification of sadness." Lovely for anyone with a deep interest in the structure and physicality of the book (or anyone else, really).
    More to say, but until then, I have to catch some sleep. To a productive, but relaxing, August --


    "Mass Media" --> Pack Media

    3 -->

    Print culture, mass media -- terms of convenience, yes; but also the terms we use to homogenize differences across structures of communication.


    What's lost?

    I've been thinking quite a bit about multitudes, particularly the rarely-mentioned "many"s that crop up throughout sixteenth- and seventeenth-century literature -- (that will have to remain for another post) -- and it's got me wondering about multitudes of media. It's become common to think of our current media ecology as one of mass media, by which hordes of people experience the same media content, simultaneously or at least closely in time. Television, film and radio are mass media; newspaper are mass media, as are magazines. Cable news is sometimes confusingly referred to as "mass media," since CNN, Fox News, et al. broadcast the same content countrywide. Printed books stretching back to the fifteenth-century are also lumped together with "mass media," even though prior to the nineteenth century print runs rarely exceeded 1,500 copies and, as Adrian Johns and others have shown, the "sameness" of any given copy within an edition was disputable due to rampant piracy and the use of stop-press corrections. In fact, although the term wasn't first used until 1923 in a book on Advertising & Selling (OED), the category "mass media" now anachronistically subsumes any form that delivers its content to more than one individual: the alphabet as mass media, manuscript as mass media, sound as mass media.

    Quick media studies background for readers not acquainted: scholarship on media effects often takes the "mass-ness" of mass media for granted. Here, Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman's idea of media as "manufacturing consent" within a political populace is perhaps the best known and most widely influential example. However, influenced by the Birmingham school of cultural studies, other scholars like Henry Jenkins have challenged the notion that mass media and popular culture in general brainwash us, turning us all into consumeristic automata. Here, sites of resistance -- fan cultures, remixing, acts of appropriation -- are put forth to exemplify how the channels between creator and consumers are open, active, and contested, always subject to negotiation. For both groups -- the Chomskyan media effects crowd and those who attempt to legitimate popular culture -- the question turns on how active or passive the consumer is.

    As much as I love Chomsky, I'm the kind of person who just has to believe in resistance -- in the freedom to resist, the freedom to challenge authority, power. Losing this capacity means losing the capacity for self-reflection and self-criticism. Thus I want to believe that remix culture is a complex negotiation of values -- that the "textual poaching" of fan communities tears down the autonomy of authors and the relentless "sameness" of the work they produce. But this has never sat well with me. If appropriative uses of popular culture in some way challenge the hegemony of the very stuff they're made of, then revolution is reduced to a novel arrangement of old conditions -- in fact, is thereby premised on the very conditions it hopes to challenge. Mash-ups, cut-ups, remixes and rewrites expose virtual potentials in popular culture -- alternative dimensions, hidden absurdities, its underbelly of nonsense -- but are rarely productive of new worlds in themselves. They make us want revolution; but they aren't necessarily revolutionary.

    I don't think the problem lies in popular culture itself, but with our very notion of "mass media." Mass -- from the Latin massa, a lumpish clump of dough; what is "mass" about television, radio, print? So-called "mass media" content is produced by relatively small groups of people negotiating particular sets of values and institutions; it's disseminated to large, diverse groups of people, broken into individuals or small clusters spatially isolated from each other, and is increasingly consumed on multiple scalable platforms, at different points in time. Even in a media culture less fragmented than our own -- say, for instance, 1950s television -- content was consumed in anything but a lumpish way. The "masses" sat alone in their living rooms, physically and psychologically insulated; they read alone in crowds, on subways and buses. Even the dark, raucus space of a movie theatre, crowded with noisy strangers, is designed to produce singular moments of connection between a film and its viewers or, at most, the viewer and his or her date, locked into an affective triangle.

    I find myself unquestioningly typing the phase "mass media" over and over again in a paper on Dracula. I stop myself. Why?

    Another fragment. I've been reading Elias Canetti on packs -- packs of wolves, packs of people:
    In the pack which, from time to time, forms out of the group, and which most strongly expresses its feeling of unity, the individual can never lose himself as completely as modern man can in any crowd today. In the changing constellation of the pack, in its dances and expeditions, he will again and again find himself at its edge. He may be in the center, and then, immediately afterwards, at the edge again; at the edge and then back in the centre. When the pack forms a ring around the fire, each man will have neighbors to the right and left, but no one behind him; his back is naked and exposed to the wilderness.

    // Elias Canetti, Crowds and Power, 93
    Deleuze and Guattari "recognize this as the schizo position, being on the periphery, holding on by a hand or a foot" (A Thousand Plateaus, 33-4). While, contra the pack, the mass subject identifies the "individual with the group, the group with the leader, and the leader with the group," forcing one to "get close to the center, never be at the edge," the ring-shaped pack has no "inside" or "outside," since each point along its surface is wholly equal in relation to every other point and to its surroundings. By arranging itself in this way, the pack can fluidly traverse its environment, molding itself to the topography of the terrain and its inhabitants without its structure hardening into hierarchies of leadership, as happens with the "masses"; for each member is as safe or as vulnerable as the next.

    Thinking about mass media as pack media breaks through the producer/consumer dichotomies without appealing to awkward portmanteau like "produsage." It refuses a hard distinction between those who make media and those who consume it, since the pack produces and consumes in toto, each producer also acting as a consumer, and each consumer also locked into a productive relationship with other pack members. It allows for thinking of individuals as operating together without dissolving themselves into the lumpish mass. And it helps us think through how culture -- media culture, popular culture, remix culture -- makes meaning from minute points of connection, rather than a one-size-fits-all one-to-many schema.

    This is hacking the academy.

    0 -->

    I began writing something for Hacking the Academy, a collaborative "book" of blog posts &c. produced in one week, on why I'm done writing papers; how limiting I find their structure of argumentation (limiting in good ways, limiting in bad ways); why the process of doing digital work better fits how my brain works. But after using 25 minutes of my self-alloted hour, I decided just to make something.


    Using a very simple jQuery shuffle plugin, I created a one-line permutation poem: "THIS IS HACKING THE ACADEMY." This line produces some great combinations. This hacking is the academy; hacking the academy is this; the academy is this hacking; is this hacking the academy? In the spectrum from sense to sense to nonsense, certainty to doubt, sit all my feelings about doing scholarship at this moment of media in transition, as well as this project, digital projects, and "hacking the academy" (or Hacking the Academy) in general.

    Quick prototyping and creative, media-aware criticism is my hack of the academy. Learn; explore; do; teach others to do. This is hacking the academy.