정치적 글쓰기와 치안적 글쓰기: 찰스 번스틴과 D.W. 펜자의 논쟁을 중심으로

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to investigate the implications of Charles Bernstein’s ‘aversive poetics’ which Bernstein has executed against the Official Verse Culture (OVC) since his first attack at the 1983 MLA conference. As is ‘shown and heard’ in the word itself, ‘averse’ can be understood as a combination of ‘a-,’ which can be read as a prefix meaning ‘swerving away from’ as well as an indefinite article, and ‘verse.’ This being said, ‘averse’ means a poetics that is ‘averse’ to verse. An ‘averse’ poetics is an implosive poetics going against the grain of but still existing within OVC poetics, like a rebellious ‘parasite’ inside the OVC. What this seemingly treacherous poetics tries to achieve is to dismantle or derail coordinates of time/space/task predetermined by OVC poetics. According to Bernstein, OVC has been complicit with Bourgeoisie ideology by unknowingly maintaining and reproducing those coordinates, which have been essential to the operation of a Bourgeoisie regime. To have the time/space/task coordinates properly secured by preventing any trespassing and transgressions of the given coordinates, either in advance or afterwards, policing plays the main role in both regimes. Under the surveillance of police regimes, only consumption of pre-made coordinates like a ‘prepackaged commodity’ will be allowed, leading to an inevitable alienation. On the contrary, the main task of the ‘averse’ is to explore possibilities of ‘different’ or ‘foreign’ time/space/task coordinates on which a new regime can be established. The politics of poetics can be practiced through aversive poetics, through which readers are urged to practice reading against poets and original works. Instead of repeating poets and original works as a commodity, readers in aversive poetics can produce another ‘foreign’ or ‘different’ original, an-‘anoriginal,’ while consuming the poets and original works. Thus they will overcome alienation felt during simple and repetitive consumption of poets and works. With this understanding of Bernstein’s aversive poetics, the battle between the ‘averse’ and OVC is discussed through an analysis of the debate between Charles Bernstein and D.W. Fenza, one of the OVC enforcers, and their supporting poets on either side.