Response to Flarf and Spoetry Readings

When I first started reading about flarf poetry and spoetry, I was surprised by their lack of standard form and equally surprised and encouraged by their use of creativity. It had not previously occurred to me that the vast resources of text, words, thoughts, and information provided by web search engines like Google could be used for creative purposes in such a random and non-standardized method. The idea that Google searches could be used for this purpose was remarkable in my view because my use of Google has always been for more strictly defined and determined purposes. I frequently use search engines like Google for the completion of academic assignments, most of which have strictly defined boundaries and purposes. When searching Google or Google Scholar, as I often do when completing school work, I am looking for definitions, descriptions, and other sources that meet relatively specific purposes in order to fit into a well defined thought for an essay or for studying. This is clearly not the case for forms of poetry like flarf and spoetry. In these instances, poetry writers have no order imposed on them from the outside, but rather only from themselves and arguably the search engine itself. In the composition of these poems, the search engine and its results play a large role in defining the words, text, and imagery that can be used in a specific poem

The controversy surrounding the validity of this form of poetry, within the poetry community, was also greatly surprising to me. Some of the more essay like writings within our assigned list of reading touched on the idea of the value and legitimacy of this form of poetry. It was apparent that many within the poetry community did not believe that this form was attractive or very useful. On the other hand, it was clear that many poets feel that it is useful and can serve as a form of poetry that can say a lot about our society and its priorities. This is obvious through the increasing popularity of this form of poetry as well as its usage in discussing popular topics in current events and world affairs such as the September 11^th attacks in New York City.

The use of this flarf and spoetry in discussing current events is a perfect lead in to discussing its intrinsic controversial nature. It was immediately obvious to me that many flarf and spoetry readers set out to make there poems more controversial in their nature. This can be seen through the use of what many would consider to be “inappropriate” language and its unapologetic discussion of controversial issues. This mixture of the use of controversial language and controversial topics makes it easy to see how this form of poetry could be seen as offensive by many in mainstream society. However, I would argue that the usage of these controversial items is a reflection of our society as a whole. In order for these things to be placed within spoetry and flarf, they must be found in emails or found on the internet through the use of search engines. In other words, the usage of controversial ideas and language must first be performed by others before it can be used by a poet as a part of a flarf poem or spoem.