new poem!

I can out Kissinger Kissinger!
Yes - I can only speak in secret rumblings,
an esoteric mystical code understood by
the monastic brotherhood of Realpolitik.
My brows are furrowed always,
even in sex, even in the act
of making fierce love while
screaming “do me do me do me fuck my face and eyes
with your hands and desperate need to feel my hands ravage your skin
raze your arm hair and freckles to the ground!”
My glasses can only be thick, and I mean both lenses
and frames, all to keep out your searching eyes.
And when I think of nations, people, persons,
children running wild-eyed, their expressions
reminding me of water boiling over, ovens left on,
bread left in toasters… Yes, when I think of bombing nations,
I can only dream of secret missiles falling - my fingers
steepled as the planes make their soundless runs.
(How can somethings so silent; somethings so unobtrusive,
be so lacking in tenderness?)
Cambodia, a mass imagination ruined in silence.
And:
Somethings that happen to somebodies, becoming nobodies.

Kissinger, with his scheming, was above it all: the only
one not bound up in the unfortunate shambles of Watergate.
But I can only stand next to Richard Nixon,
feeling most comfortable smelling his morning breath
of bad coffee and a bowl of cheerios.
His cool flop sweat soothes my nervous eyebrows.
I feel most at home beside liars,
for I know them better than I have loved tellers of truth.
His fingers are flung into the air, splaying like legs mid-coitus,
and his peace is one I can believe in.
I too believe “power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.”
Nothing makes me sexier than the fact
that I meet regularly with Mao Zedong. His face
is on posters and t-shirts, but I sit shrouded in mystery.
We walk through doors and enter back rooms together,
and no one may know I was there.
I can slip in and out of your world, and
you won’t know, but I can change it forever.
I stand over you and hold you on the bed,
muffling your mouth with my comforter; I
think of faraway lands and smile.

~jss, 2/28/08
*Thanks go out to Adam Katz, Samantha Kuperberg and Jeana Poindexter.

(x/p to cellular theology)

In my Anthropology class, we were discussing the key factors for separating the hominin line from which we have descended from the Last Common Ancestor, who was essentially a chimp-human hybrid of sorts. Essentially, we were trying to figure out where humans broke away from the pack. Often, paleoanthropologists try to hone in on this line using dentition and bipedalism as indexes. To spark our discussion, our teacher asked us “What factors are key for you? What do you look for in a hominin?”

Which got me thinking…

SWF looking for S?Hominin. Let’s have fun! Height not an issue. Thin tooth enamel a plus. Obligate bipedals preferred.

Geezer Geyser, Part 1

Fulminations of a Geezer in training:

I just read a post on a blog (that's what I do for fun because the world is my luscious oyster) that quoted at length the first page of Robert Penn Warren's fantastipiece All the King's Men. One problem, though: it edited out the word "nigger." Twice, if memory serves.

This, I think, is as good a time as any (it's the most egregious example of editing, because of the acknowledged strength of the work, and the most forgivable example of editing because of the history of the word being edited) to lay down some law--but first I should note, to be fair: at least he mentioned that the selection had been edited for content.

Now--the law to be laid down is this: it's perfectly ok, by the rules that govern our society, for the citer of a work to change the words of a novel if he SAYS he's doing so--heck, in some cases, it's ok to appropriate them as his own even if he doesn't say he's doing so. After all--good poets borrow; great poets steal. BUT CAVEAT EMPTOR: your version has to be better. If your version (as this was) is just a spineless, fearful, little scratching-out of something you're terrified might hurt someone's feelings (because a symptom of the racist in you clawing its way to the surface is that you jerk your knees against apparent instances of racism in others) then you, sir, madam, or both, are a tool and should be put back on your nail in the shed, where you belong, and the light turned out around you. Censorship, even of something you perceive as ignorant, is itself a manifestation of ignorance; and ignorance is prejudice; and prejudice, while often unavoidable, is not a worthy characteristic of published material, even dinky online publishing.

Proud of My Poetry

No no and no

I don’t write like you

I can’t compile the files within my head into

Something long with

Allusions and illusions to

Keep it strong

Swimming through words with a snorkel on

So I can pretend I’m not drowning

And so what if my poetry

Is hooked up into rhyme?

That’s how words come to me.

In rhyme.

I think in rhyme.

Sheesh.

And sometimes I make it

Out of four simple lines

Not anything crazy

Bound to burst open your mind

I used to be proud

Of the webs I did mangle

(Now in my mind I suppress the urge to use the word “tangle”)

And the visions I created

And the beat underneath

Like a symphony of sheets—

No no and no.

I can’t even do this.

Because it’s true—this

Urge to write in my own way.

I can’t write like you.

In this poem I have tried

(Again, I resist the urge to use the word “lied”)

But it does nothing for me.

And it honestly bores me.

So I’ll stick to my stanzas

Of ABCB rhyme

And keep them tucked away until that late later time

When I can take them out and not be ashamed

Of something beautiful which this heart has made

Apocalyptic Talking #4

here is my new essay, cross-posted on the commentariat and adapted from an essay i composed for university writing in freshman year.

Celebs Galore! (or: how i learned to stop being nervous and love amy winehouse smoking crack)

What is it about the celebrity that tickles the imagination so? So many more human minds are flung into fever over what a certain starlet wore (or didn’t wear! zing!) to dinner than whatever big social cause is supposed to be important to the youth. In absence of cultic holidays, used in ancient times to unify a nation behind a structure presented by the spectacle, our society has substituted events such as the Super Bowl and the Academy Awards. In the aforementioned shows, faces and dresses to which we can all assign our loyalty parade about, like gods from the mass media machine. Declaring one’s allegiance to a specific celebrity is akin to joining the ranks of a deity’s elite devotees. Thereafter, one is quickly able to discover common ground in social interaction by simply turning the conversation to one’s celebrity of choice. Said exchange becomes a sort of social springboard. One gains the knowledge required to move fluidly through society; one acquires cultural capital (the ability to maneuver with ease through society). Social bonds are seemingly immediately formed merely by common knowledge of celebrities. Since, through media, the cult of celebrity is inherently tied to mass appeal, and nearly all members of society seem to utilize it, the idea of fame has widespread social ramifications. The question yet remains: what is the reason behind our society’s eternal obsession with the celebrity? Aficionados of celebrities speak of them as if they are in possession of intimate knowledge only fellow fans may know. They are the initiated. However, in truth, they have no personal knowledge of their icon at all. What possesses us to take hold of these stars and squeeze them for all their radiance is worth?

It seems as though nothing differentiates the celebrity from the average individual with identity issues. After all as Warhol once said, one day everyone will have his fifteen minutes of fame. There are innumerable opportunities to become known in today’s world, that it is difficult to determine why celebrities are special anymore. Celebrities are only special inasmuch as they are special to society, a rare and therefore valued commodity. Their special status in our culture lies less with qualities we attribute to the celebrities that meet certain norms as determined by pop culture and even less with the unique achievements of the stars. Rather, the controlling will is, most paradoxically, held by those supposedly left most powerless in the panoptic schema. In fact, the entire institution of celebrity is born from the desperation of this position of “powerlessness.” This interpretation is hinted at in the discussion regarding the apotheosis and lionizing of convicted murderers. We create gods out of monsters because we need to feel as though we are retaining our sense of self, even as it gradually is eroded away, a sand castle at high tide. The desperation we feel as our veridical self disappears births a similar desire to create a new frame of reference. After all, if we can only exist as we are seen, then it is more than possible to be seen from a new angle, a new perspective. Thus, we create celebrities, the epitome of a public persona lacking even the slightest shred of personal life. When viewing one’s own life in comparison to that of a star, it seems almost private. We moan our “oohs” and our “ahhs” to perhaps drown out the clicking and whirring of the shutters recording our own lives. With our heads buried in People Magazine, we can easily ignore the ubiquitous presence of surveillance equipment. The celebrity is the one entity until now not mentioned in the panoptic schema: the one in power. Or so they believe. For surely, in terms of cultural capital, the celebrity is simply spoiled with wealth and fame. He can easily obtain anything his heart may desire. He sits in the tower, at the heart of the menagerie. Like the Aristotelian god, he is an unmoved mover. He sees himself in a position of incorruptible strength, as he sits above the rest of the world. He is untouchable… until… he leans into the light, and as the grass naturally follows the direction of the wind, all heads turn to him. He has become spectacle, a cross-section of the panopticon, and the people have their revenge.

~jss

Book Titles That Almost Made It

Fuckleberry Finn

Celcius 0 (The Temperature at Which Water Freezes)

The So-So Gatsby

Viscount of the Flies

The Scarlet Sweater

Homework Assignment #3

Fill in the blanks after these lines. The finished poem should have 10 lines and any number of spaces in between.


Wax and Filigree


A cantankerous old shit


In an effort


Afterlife, afterlife


But were never even born