Hi friends, Amber Rose here with the Week 8 canon challenge. This is my absolute favorite week of ModPo, and it begins the final section of our course, which digs into three very interconnected frames of experimental poetry, starting with what has come to be called the language poetry movement. We attend to its emergence on both the East and West Coast in the 70s and 80s. But with the inclusion of folks like Harryette Mullen, John Keene, and Tyrone Williams in the main syllabus and many other fantastic poets in ModPoPLUS, we observe how this practice of carefully attending to how we are languaged, which is to say how we construct our understanding of ourselves, each other, and the world with and through language is stretched and expanded by contemporary poets writing today. In some ways, it felt challenging to try to offer a canon challenge for this week, because I think many of the poets are invested in challenging not just the idea of a canon, but really challenging language itself, the fundamental tool of poetry. Many of these poems and poets challenged this romantic, overly decorative, or poetic in the cliched sense, use of language in the traditional poetry canon. Are interested instead in attending to a critical, highly theoretical engagement with this fundamental tool. Questioning language, exposing the power dynamics ingrained within it, making questions of power, authority, and order, some of the central components of this week. As a resource Ell already has a great video that digs into some of the tenets of language poetry, and I encourage you to check that out for yourself if you find yourself hungry for more. For this canon challenge video, I really wanted to foreground one tenet in particular, language is political. I think this tenet is always operating in the background of our conversations, but I just wanted to narrow our focus on that for this moment. As we use language, it accumulates meaning. History and experiences, and memories are embedded within the very fabric of language, and it can't be erased. Here's an example I think about often, we the people. I know everyone watching this video is not in the US, but that's a pretty recognizable phrase as the beginning of the US constitution. We the people, and it goes on. But given the history of the United States at that time and even in the present, we know that those words weren't as neutral or as opened as they seemed. Who was included in that we? Who was excluded? Who was recognized as a person? Who was not? Part of what makes language political is the reality and awareness that language, or a use of language has real life material consequences. It can be used to protect or exclude. It has real effects on the way that we live. A poem that really exemplifies that for me is Harryette Mullen's, Elliptical found in ModPoPLUS. This poem uses some of the strategies of parataxis and eraser to interrogate how we use language to identify, categorize, and evaluate each other in ways that can ultimately be misinformed or detrimental. Ell has this great phrase he uses when describing Tyrone Williams work this week, and he says that Williams torques and twists idioms, recalibrates them so that meaning can exfoliate. Tending to language as something political means, working to dig up the embedded meanings, expose the histories in power dynamics operating beneath the surface of the word, the line, the sentence. Hopefully through that exposure, enable us as readers to think about alternatives, other ways of using language, other ways of being together with and through language. There's another facet of critically attending to language that I think comes out of the language poetry movement, which we don't really get to engage with in this syllabus, which is a criticism, excuse me, specifically of the English language, fueled by an awareness of how the English language has been used to colonize peoples, nations, and tongues. These criticisms often come from nonwhite poets, whose family or ancestry spoke another language, or who have felt the impact of colonization in some way. A few questions that this brings up for me are, in the context of an American poetry class, how can we make more room to critically think about English as a colonizing language? How can we use poets who identify as language poets or who grew out of the language poetry movement to facilitate that conversation? How can we think about the ways that poets are differently motivated because of our political histories, to be critical of language with various levels of intensity. To end, I want to bring back another tenet of language poetry, the question of who polices grammar. In Week 4, Gertrude Stein helped us begin to ask that question and her influences traces all the way through our syllabus, and that allows us to see a full circle moment. This question of who polices grammar is so intimately tied to what I've been talking about language being political. How can disrupting the flow of a sentence help us think about the possibility of disrupting other flows or systems? How does dismantling the line help us begin to think about dismantling other forms of political structures? How does interrogating the embedded memory within a single word help us attend to silence histories that deserve recognition? There's so much good work happening this week, and I hope you are able to return again and again, and dig a little deeper each time