Dinamismo X Marco Nuzzo interview
Dinanimismo 2009- 2019, AA:VV:, by Zairo Ferrante and Roby Guerra (Asino Rosso eBook, 2019)
Marco Nuzzo Interview (Author)
Q - How do you consider Poetry, in the sense of "Doing Soul" in the computer age?
A - Poetry is and remains a living space, between the circadian rhythms of man. The expression, within the necessity of language, has undergone a major revolution, when that necessary, continuous change occurred within the property of language. The aggettivazione, the creolizzazione, the nuances that are derived from the birth of the linguistic codes, have marked of it, in indelible, emphatic and primordial way, the primitive structure, giving life to an organism enriched of terms, of synonyms, of expressions. Poetry was born from the observation and construction between the observed and the undetectable, eliciting, however, the undetectable and bringing it to the exhibition, like a lens that penetrates the detail, that highlights it. The distances between the observed and the undetectable are becoming ever smaller, since, in the age of the computer, but even before we say, throughout the twentieth century the detachment between languages and dynamics, the growth and acceleration of technology, have contributed in no small way to the formation of new languages, leading, however, to a dispersion of meaning and a total fallibility of vocabularies. Already Pestelli, in his "Speaking Italian" (1957), concluded that the evolution of the language was caused and that it would be caused, even later, by the progress achieved in technology, from the fountain pen to the ballpoint pen, passing through the typewriter even to shorthand systems or the dictaphone, considering them "stimuli for reckless writing". With the further development of technology, of television, the distances between North and South were shortened, of an Italy united only on paper, especially where the only language in force was the narrow dialect. In the age of computers, language is now common, within the reach of every individual. The risk, however, remains that of lack of understanding, because of the amphibias and the wealth of meanings that languages and individual words offer. The causes are not only to be found in the speed with which they advance the world and technologies but, above all, within the dynamics operated by history in the structure of the idioms. I am thinking of enantiosmia or paronymy, of words that have taken on opposite meanings, such as "feria" and "feriale", the "pulling", used both as a synonym of "pushing" and as "pulling an object". We could also "pull" the journalistic language that, for the speed we were talking about above and for the narrowness of the characters available, everything is, except for "writing well". We understand how difficult it is to get out of all this clutter of hammering metalanguages. Today's Poetry is no different. Already Marinetti, with the futurists, had understood the fold, the "aesthetics of speed" that reserved the future, precisely. Derrida will go in search of the decomposition of the text or the work and, with Destructuralism, will put the text or the work to a real disintegration that evaluates and enhances its goodness.
Returning to today's poetry, the "damage" done by language and technology has been to transmit visions from the past and to circumscribe it in the present, relegating it to a machinic system, forced, overwhelming, to choose, as an end, that Eikon that is God, that is the soul and that today has failed, because of knowledge. Poetry is developing a new feeling, different from any past but drawing from it. It builds its ruins from those fragments, feeding on its own detachment, on its own rubble, as in a world that secretes disaster but where someone is still able to be moved by the ruins, in its own desert of failures.
Q - An autobiographical zoom?
A - I was writing. I write. Sometimes I publish. It will help something, I keep repeating myself. Someone reads of this Someone else, as if they were importing names, as if we had to tarry ideas, writings, make them political for someone else, so that he says: "Who wrote it?", and give you reason or not, depending on your and his colors. Well, I write for that continuity, I write to give transdiscursiveness to the speeches, to Barthes, to Foucault, to anyone who wishes to read about mine; this is Marco Nuzzo.
Q- Dynamism, your personal vision?
A - Anyone who carries out a movement, a project for the birth and growth of Poetry, deserves more visibility. Moreover, never before would we need a greater appreciation of those writings and writers who really have something to say and who are not the usual suckers and sons of Leinonsachisonoio - who publish by names and realities of all respect, just because they are popular with young girls and girls and with a knowledge of their language at the limit of decency. Excuse me for venting out, but this is a reality to be fought. Cioran was right. He was right about everything. It was the small publishing realities that rediscovered its value, when it was still relegated to certain boorish and gerontological logics of publishing and politics; logics that, unfortunately, persist and resist and that are not fought enough.
Q - How do you imagine the future of Poetry?
A - I don't have crystal balls but I can't define or imagine a future collaterally different from the one we are witnessing today, because the same technology, from the eighties on, more than creating accelerations in the most disparate fields, from internet to PC, could not do. We will probably see a coercion of agglutination, a human syntropy, imposed by the man-machine interface that is increasingly ergonomic and interactive. The search for functionality will be directly proportional to the need to search for moments of solitude, if only necessary to build a thought that, in a world shot at hypersonic speed, will be almost impossible to achieve. If nothing is done, Poetry and all Literature will also suffer. The same knowledge will suffer. Poetry needs quiet, Literature needs calm, but also new and deterritorialized arguments and structures, ready to organize itself into new rhizomes and new structures, the Artaudan Body Without Organs (CSO) teaches it, because the creative capacity is deliberately stopped, in the name of productivity. No one talks about the structures of a composition but everyone feels the need to write, to write on themselves, as if, in a world of self-styled writers or poets, it made sense to fill pages and pages with absurd stuff. Everyone runs in one direction, and here are the famous agglutinations, the need to make a group to feel unique, where then, those who remained out of these assemblages of poets and that, perhaps they would have something to say, remain in the dark, hidden by the food of geese.
Q - What could be done to change things?
A - Very little, I believe. We are doing what we have to do. All that remains is to take on the role of inanimate observers of change and hope that, if some future generation wants to take charge of our fragments, it will build, with them, a new series of ruins and awareness, such as to continue that transdiscursiveness, interrupted in some remote passage of time.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator
by original in Italian version
see
*Biografia e Biliografia plus
a cura di R. Guerra
EBOOK INFO
https://www.lafeltrinelli.it/smartphone/ebook/a-cura-zairo-ferrante-e/dinanimismo-20092019-10-anni-avanguardia/9788834145319