(ESSAY) A Shining Mess: Anthropocene Poetics in Caspar Heinemannâs Novelty Theory
In this essay, Maria Sledmere unpacks Caspar Heinemannâs Novelty Theory (The 87 Press, 2019) as an example of anthropocene poetics, challenging what it means to write about âNatureâ, being, identity and everyday life in the context of the paradoxical deep-time ~novelty~ of our ânewlyâ fraught geological epoch.
> Thereâs this John Cage quote, paraphrased in Joan Retallackâs The Poethical Wager (2003), which goes like, âLet the mess shine in!â. I canât find the quote anywhere else, but such contingency or obscurity feels relevant: where do we find anything in our obsessive mess of discourse? Cageâs quote captures the idea that mess bears recognition as a critical term, a technical concept. Caspar Heinemannâs Novelty Theory, published earlier this year by London-based The 87 Press, is a highly dense poetry collection whose ethos seems to match that of Cageâs. The title plays with all doomsday passĂ© around âthe end of theoryâ and energises this question of explanation, thought and principle with novelty: that is, a carte blanche array of pop cultural reference, paratactic punch, playful registers and âmillennial ironyâ. This is a book of the commons, of reversals, conflicted feelings, endless things. Bhanu Kapilâs blurb declares Novelty Theory âan anthem for alien beloveds everywhereâ. Certainly, Heinemannâs poetry deals equally in intimacy and strangeness, subjectivities and otherness, capitalism and mysticism, leaving a petulant scent of patchouli in its wake. Novelty Theory is an anthem, sure, kissing the winds of extinction: a song of praise for living with contradiction, embracing chaos in the want for order.
> To know yourself as an alien beloved: at once a stranger but warmly held, to be loved but not to be wed to identity. Embracing yourself, your kin and the more-than-human around you as alien beloveds might be a central ethic for living in the anthropocene â not to mention its knotty entanglements of late-capitalism, colonialism and gender politics. I want to suggest that in Novelty Theory, letting the mess shine in is a tactic of what David Farrier (2019) has named anthropocene[1]poetics. Distinct from the established traditions of ecopoetics and nature poetry, anthropocene poetics is less about elegising or celebrating a specific idea of ânatureâ, and more about dramatising the existential conditions of living in a geological epoch distinguished by human intervention within the earthâs systems. Another feature of anthropocene poetics is its conscious situatedness within, response to and divergence from histories of nature writing or lyric renditions of subjectivity through âworldâ. Anthropocene poetics problematises the very idea of self and world, of âpresenceâ itself, while highlighting the material contradictions we experience in everyday life, in relation to late-capitalism as much as ecological crisis (and of course, the twain meet symbiotically). No facet of quotidian existence is off limits: where the nature poem (bear with my crude distinctions) typically looks to the hills and woods, the anthropocene poem might trace the material histories, ethical dilemmas and affective intensities felt in locales of domesticity, leisure and labour. Its setting may well be the city, the internet and the gentrified coffee shop, its registers conflicted, overburdened or charged with the weight of what Timothy Morton (2010a) calls âthe ecological thoughtâ: this enmeshment and total intimacy with nonhuman entities. I donât mean to be prescriptive about what anthropocene poetics is; rather, Iâd like to explore Novelty Theory as a case study in what anthropocene poetics, as a set of thematic gestures and formal tendencies, might provoke in our readings of contemporary texts, within the developing ontologies, ethics and (con)texts of climate emergency.
> While a broader discussion of anthropocene poetics and its emergent practitioners is outside the scope of this review, suffice to say Heinemann might be situated as part of a generation who have grown up around increasingly mainstream questioning of ecological responsibility, crisis, ethical conflict, identity politics and material precarity. I want to situate Novelty Theory alongside works that split apart the colonial, often masculinist or heteronormative narratives of typical nature writing. We might think of CA Conrad, Craig Santos Perez, Cecilia Vicuña and Evelyn Reilly: poets who work with ritual, lyric unravelling and juxtaposed collage to dramatise the necessary hypocrisies of everyday life in the anthropocene, alongside a sincerity of commitment to improving ecological attunement. Writing that unpicks the colonial, racialised, ruralised, heteronormative and ableist assumptions often present in traditional nature writing. Writing that works with âNatureâ[2], but often in a state of refusal which shows up the termâs historical uses and abuses. Another recent 87 Press publication, Callie Gardnerâs naturally it is not (2018), is a good example of this engagement with âNatureâ: structurally challenging the existential arrangements and sensory associations we attach to traditional seasons. In the readerâs notes, Gardner reminds us, ââNatureâ itself is a capitalist and imperialist invention, designed to protect those aspects of the world it does not want to change and to abdicate its responsibility to anything outside of âcultureââ. My sense is that anthropocene poetics does valuable work in performatively blurring the pedestalled âNatureâ with the elusive ideologies of âcultureâ, exploding the complexities and assumptions held within such prior distinctions.
Nature Poem
> In Tommy Picoâs landmark Nature Poem (2017), the speaker blatantly rejects essentialising associations between indigenous peoples and âNatureâ, while framing this rejection in the ironic genre politics of a sequence titled Nature Poem:
I canât write a nature poem bc itâs fodder for the noble savage narrative. I wd slap a tree across the face, I say to my audience.
Thereâs an explicit âaudienceâ here, the necessity of establishing lyric voice as performance. Anthropocene poetics draws out a processual, reflexive legacy that goes back to Wordsworth, using a kind of dramatic irony to remind us of the speakerâs presence in the âworldâ of the poem, and all her accompanying dilemmas, commitments and responsibilities around and towards the subject.
> Pico is an American Indian (NDN) poet who situates anthropocenic conditions of  sexuality, identity, consumerism and urban space within a reflexive critique of what it means to write a Nature poem. Nature Poem throws up questions around colonialism, indigeneity, essentialism and poetic tradition which challenge ideological constructs of Nature. As Morton puts it, much ecological thinking thus far has âset up âNatureâ as a reified thing in the distanceâ (2010a). Picoâs work explodes such reification within everyday life, showing that Nature is something we âdoâ: itâs an instant message (âgaia is alive in those pipesâ), itâs in the way we relate to objects, to each other, the way we âbreakâ, the way we fall or feel or fuck. Eileen Myles argues âa poem says I wantâ and Nature Poem asks what it is to want anything at all when almost everyoneâs trying to identify you with the ânatural worldâ â as, essentially, a backdrop, a static facet of landscape.
> What does it mean to write or read a Nature Poem from the heart of Brooklyn (where Pico currently resides), mindful of fellow New York poet Frank OâHaraâs famous assertion, âI can't even enjoy a blade of grass unless I know there's a subway handy, or a record store or some other sign that people do not totally regret lifeâ. Thereâs something deliciously liberating about Picoâs punk attitude to eco-clichĂ©s: âThe world is a bumble bee / in the sense that, who cares?â. Anthropocene poetics involves wrestling with a generational nihilism or general air of hipster indifference towards what might be perceived as a useless, dying âNatureâ. But it also means playfully staging our very immersion in the conundrum of what that Nature might mean: âNature is kind of over my headâ, âNature keeps wanting to hang outâ. Picoâs casual personification of Nature serves to remind us of the termâs social construction while staging its ideological invention within material, affective and social contexts.
> If itâs difficult, nigh impossible, to actually think extinction, maybe what we need is an ethics of life instead. An amalgamation of Romanticism, physical immediacy, queer desire and the act of a pause becomes, in Nature Poem, the redeemable expression:
Knowing the moon is inescapable tonight
and the tuft of yr chest against my shoulder bladesâ
This is a kind of nature I would write a poem about.
The strange, specific pathos of that line, âa kind of natureâ. By saying âThe world is a bumble beeâ, Pico plays with the arbitrariness with which we define the world as such, its conflations of scales and agencies. As Timothy Clark (2018) reminds us, a âgiven scaleâ is âa kind of grammar whose presence is overlooked in our habitual attention to individual thingsâ. What Pico and other poetsâ work does is recalibrate our grammar of scale by twisting familiar Nature tropes within the aesthetic and ethical contexts of quotidian life. The moon of Picoâs poem is not dressed up in metaphor but simply there, âinescapableâ. It doesnât replace anything else, itâs nobodyâs feeling. Thereâs a lowkey opulence to that sense of urgency. Poetry warrants acknowledgement of the beauty of whatâs left of Life. And sometimes thatâs as cheap as knowing you canât cut the moon out of your poem, your night â you probably wouldnât even want to.
> In response to an Elizabeth Bishop poem, âAt the Fishhousesâ, Farrier writes: âDifference persists; in this granular vision, the qualities of the particular (texture, depth, grain) mark the queerness of all bodies in the deep strangeness of evolutionary time and of our Anthropocene futureâ (2019). Such ambitious claims for anthropocene poetry can also be applied to a poetics of riff, repetition, modulation, phraseology and collaged register. Heinemann: âmy drag / persona is called Natureâ (âFull Moon Leech Partyâ). What do we wear of whatâs over there in the weave of our lines, identities? Where Bishopâs poem connects material detritus â âthe silver of the benchesâ, âthe small old buildings with an emerald mossâ â with deep time, Pico proclaims the violent theory of contradiction and connection: âthe fabric of our lives #death / some ppl wait a lifetime for a moment like this #deathâ, âjust do it #death / Got #deathâ. Borrowing from the associative, non-linear clusters spelled by the hashtag, Pico renders death a hotspot within the general web of extinction, a pedal note thrumming hypnotically through its song.[3] Repurposing familiar commercial slogans, Pico confronts cultural taboos with a gleeful insouciance. Nature is death as much as Life â a practical fact â and maybe, with an eye to Lee Edelmanâs No Future (2004), this acknowledgement is one way out of âreproductive futurismâ. Instead of âthe colonial legacy of the futureâ, its depressing speculative intricacies, just âGive me / a minuteâ (Pico 2017). Like chill, the world is warming but weâre here and now: letâs talk. The pragmatism of anthropocene poetics, perhaps, is a making of space; not just buying us time but also scattering the seeds with which we might still (in spite of our increasingly precarious lives) nourish ideas, philosophise, interrogate and experiment what it means to live and die in whatâs happening â at the scale of the planet and that of the microbes inside us, tweaking our ethical and affective inclinations. â[E]thics for the Anthropoceneâ, Joanna Zylinska argues, should urge âa return to critical thinking [...] a reparation of thoughtâ (2014), wary, of course, that âcatalogued over bullshit reams, praxis makes nothing happen / to the seeds in snowâ (Gardner 2018).
Pragmatic Opulence
> Heinemannâs Novelty Theory resurrects a dusted signifier, âtheoryâ, as a gestural architecture for holding the bookâs sprawling morass of impressions, encounters and streams of thought. Like Kapilâs work, a degree of enchantment runs through reems of disaffection or cynicism: where Kapil often references minerals, colour (the pink lightning of Ban en Banlieue) or a quality of light, in Novelty Theory this is held in the ritualistic detritus our speaker returns to â spices and flowers, herbs and teas. Heinemann dares you to critique the value of what might be called twee: âthe tragedy of it all / lukewarm milky surrender punk upholstery / the bittersweet kettle i needed for this nettle teaâ. Acts or artefacts of ritual significantly conduct the order of how we deal with everyday trauma. Heinemannâs poetics has that candied, medicinal quality of internal rhyme: good enough to chew but might (as) well sting. It makes you stop to think, pursuing its own excess. The Nature of Novelty Theory is monstrous, opulent, âthick and deeply slimy everywhereâ (âTheses on Land Masses (After Iain Hamilton Finlay)â). In their Goldsmiths dissertation, âFUCKING PANSIES: Queer Poetics, Plant Reproduction, Plant Poetics, Queer Reproductionâ, Heinemann argues that poetry itself is a âspeaking through flowersâ, and in being so
the consequences of communication are non-linear, cross-pollinated and dispersed, the eternal and cyclical affectively and effectively meeting to produce models of life which could be described as pragmatically opulent.
Pragmatically opulent seems to me an extension of Cageâs imploring to Let the mess shine in!, albeit situated within genuine political and bodily struggle. Pragmatic opulence is a strategy for queer survival but also world-making, a way of âproduc[ing] models of lifeâ within pressurised social systems. It problematises familiar symbolic objects as kitsch synecdoche for some Natural paradise over there:
Nature in the sickly pine air freshener fighting its discrete privately commissioned battle against the zombie economy of life, the shape of the pine tree as futility. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â (âTheses on Land Masses (After Iain Hamilton Finlay)
Thereâs something sickly, abject even, about the landed associations of pine forests, the deep ecology of a dark green wild. The air freshener hangs limply, âfighting its discreteâ war against life eating life. The shape of this Nature is useless; itâs not even beautiful. It isnât life so much as a cheap, deified logo, as pre-millennial passĂ© as your uncleâs old air freshener. What we need is a more eclectic ambience.
> Throughout Novelty Theory, Heinemannâs poems fly between forms: jagged lines that read with the transient glaze or aphoristic charm of a text message, block stanzas, a travel diary, all-caps and extravagant use of punctuation â particularly the slash and the exclamation point, marking moments of undecidability, rupture or dramatic emphasis. This variety comprises a non-linear, variable and maximalist poetics of play, subversion and flourishing within the everyday contexts of late-capitalism and the anthropocene. It shows the necessity of confronting these contexts with a queer sensibility, if we recall Eve Kosofsky Sedgwickâs classic definition of queer as âthe open mesh of possibilites, gaps, overlaps, dissonances and resonances, lapses and excesses of meaning when the constituent elements of anyone's gender, of anyone's sexuality aren't made (or can't be made) to signify monolithicallyâ (1993). To queer-read Nature, like gender, is to work with that âopen meshâ. For Heinemann, that seems to demand a kind of pragmatism and opulence, a stylised critique of real conditions, their desires and demands.
> I want to trace what kinds of pragmatic opulence are found in the life of Novelty Theory, aware that in naming a book of lyric poetry Theory, Heinemann is surely inviting us to question the very division or frisson between life and theory, voice and world within contemporary existence. We might describe the whole book, in fact, as a kind of theoretical or speculative world-building. The poems engage in acts of redress or recontextualisation, kind of anthropocene camp: âI actually think capitalism is quite a beautiful word and look forward to appropriating it to mean something like spring dawn sunshine ladybird sexâ (âTravel Diary Summer 2016â). Throughout Novelty Theory, Heinemann has this radical ostentation that blithely redefines the things it challenges: poetry as active world-making, ethics as poiesis, chipping away at fixities to let forth whatâs glowing, proliferating and strange underneath. In a recent Zarf review of the book, Gloria Dawson notes the collectionâs âwit, bratty polemic, and knotty etymological adventuringâ (2019), which seems about right. What happens if we took the capital out of capitalism and made it a five-syllabled evocation of sticky, butter-fingered summer afternoons? Thereâs a childlike quality of vivid bricolage to Heinemannâs craft. What if this revamped capitalism itself was a knotty, queer ecological utopia, a stubborn arbor of vines, a mesh of delicious instants, or is this just sheer sly irony on Heinemannâs part? We have to sit with that contradiction, swinging our legs over the verge where conflicts might connect.
Mystic/Mesh
> Back to Sedgwickâs idea of the âopen meshâ. Queer ecology, for Timothy Morton, is the manifest âmeshâ of all life-forms: âa nontotalisable, open-ended concatenation of interrelations that blur and confound boundaries at practically every level: between species, between the living and nonliving, between organism and environmentâ (2010b). Queer ecology would be some kind of intersection between nonessentialist views of gender, sexuality, biology and evolution more generally. Novelty Theory stages this enmeshment through its lateral poetics of interwoven association, its registers of irony, darkness and play. Its speakerâs identity coyly thrown around like laconic copy from a Tinder profile: âiâm a leo moon dickhead w a gay agendaâ (âaccording to wikipedia i am in the âinitial struggle for successâ phase of my life as bruce springsteenâs lifeâ), rewriting Linnaean systems or evolutionary rules via casual astrology patter. The mysticism that runs throughout is part of Novelty Theoryâs disjunctive world-building, its problematising of distinctions between inside and out, dream and reality, virtual and actual. Take the Borgesian tenor of statements like âAll land is fictional, that is both the problem / and a potential source of the solutionâ (âTheses on Land Masses (After Iain Hamilton Finlay)â). The critical thrust of Novelty Theory is its mycelial ability to expose the undercurrents and assumptions of everyday life within late-capitalism and the attendant anxieties of the anthropocene. Often this takes a surrealist twist:
a thousand constellations held in a single double stomach romantic service station burger king       the wormhole could be anywhere                                   (âA CHEMTRAIL IN CURVED AIRâ)
This collapse of scale, the inside and out, is highly symptomatic of anthropocene poetics. Itâs easy to read the poems of Novelty Theory alongside, say, Mortonâs idea of hyperobjects as âthings that are massively distributed in time and space relative to humansâ: with characteristics of viscosity, nonlocality, nonhuman temporality and interobjectivity, hyperobjects usher us into âa new human phase of hypocrisy, weakness, and lamenessâ (2013). Thereâs a kind of sublime here which takes David Hockney-esque Americana or pastel suburbia and transplants it through the âwormholeâ of environs and spacetimes enmeshed by ecological relations, ethical patterns and constellations of cause and effect, showed up to us in the twenty-first century as though by x-ray. You are what you eat, and here itâs infinity. Elsewhere, however, it might be âthe banal / constantly flowing cappuccino of existenceâ (âanother empty threat to disappearâ). Wherever we look, Heinemann puts a decadent rip in your Cath Kidston jacket, lets the fantasy flora free, wears the countryside as highbrow punk with pocket-knife irony.
This One Weird Tip
> Speaking of infinity, a word on the internet: an obvious theme and modality within Novelty Theory. âMy anxiety levels get up and stay hard for hours with this one weird tipâ (âTravel Diary Summer 2016â). The masculinist, ambient-porno imperative to âstay hardâ is here conflated with anxiety and the suffusing presence of internet ads offering impossible, faux-sage advice with âthis one weird tipâ. I wonder if this is also a dig at deep ecology, whose commitment to embracing wilderness and environmental immersion often comes off with a stinky, viagra-macho flavour. Getting deeper into the bookâs web, conspiracy theories are cited with the kind of exuberance that weaves their dismissal as nevertheless somehow essential to a broader resistant narrative: ârecruit, recruit, recruit! i WISH that the queen waws a lizardâ (âthe only reason i was abducted by aliens in kathmandu in 1994 was that in 1994 i went to kathmandu to be abducted by aliensâ). Thereâs an ouroboros sense that you get eaten, or at the very least bitten, by the narratives you pursue online â or indeed in any virtual mode (including poetry â see Ben Lerner for more on âvirtual poeticsâ). You could call it meme poetics wired up to the trembling motherboard of lyric. Who or what gets charged and when. Where did they get those minerals? What if I wonât turn on tomorrow?
> The hyperconnected consciousness enabled by our online lives is also manifest in Heinemannâs playful intertextuality. Every other line seems to reference or code a cultural trope, to cite some other poem or tradition. âNo value / just pina coladasâ (âaccording to wikipedia i am in the âinitial struggle for successâ phase of my life as bruce springsteenâs lifeâ) weirdly took me back to William Carlos Williamsâ âNo ideas but in thingsâ. Maybe thatâs a clickable blink that activates poetic lineage, extends the song of Heinemannâs polemic under the deep canonic sea. Sometimes they play with aphoristic or supplementary modes to âtack onâ a certain message or dramatise a violent fact (i.e. extinction), forcing you to hold all declarations in the bewildered, hyper-stream adjunctive mode of email, IM, browsing: âp.s. imagine a world without wild lifeâ (âTravel Diary Summer 2016â). Thereâs a psytrance version of a New York poem in âIf you think pigeons are too common to be beautiful donât call yourself a communistâ, where a salutary coke is poured for Frank OâHara and the streets become the stage for contradiction, Picassoâs dog, pain and âThe slobbering ecstasy of nowâ. Psytrance because this is a collection of ecstasies achieved with your tongue firmly lodged in your cheek, your jaw gurning hard with each stream of detail, flash, repeat. Syncope. Like Nat Raha, Heinemann has weaponised the grammar of breath to speak vulnerability and power within and between each jagged line, strikeout, blank or marked delay, caesura. A catalogue of bodily pleasures and social conundrums, unsolved ethical dilemmas in the modernist canon: âI am a Picasso dog / Picasso was a misogynist / but itâs okay, dogs have no genderâ).
Sentient Excess
> Anthropocene poetics often stages its own conditions of production. Thereâs a turn between inside and outside, a questioning of representational agency. For instance, in Ash Before Oak (2019), a diary of survival and gardening reminiscent of Derek Jarmanâs iconic Modern Nature (1991), Jeremy Cooperâs gloomy protagonist muses, âI ask questions of the mole Iâd do better directing at myselfâ. What do we put upon the more-than-human that really we want or demand from ourselves? How do we write in this space of curiosity or lack? In Novelty Theory, awareness of the bodyâs contingencies, its material traces and hormonal surges runs throughout. With some degree of irony, Heinemann maps the kinds of everyday precarity experienced by the millennial freelancer onto the broader precarities of climate crisis. Maybe itâs not to write from curiosity but anxiety. At one point, Heinemann even dramatises the real-time of âwritingâ in relation to the bodyâs nervous arousal:
i fill the keyboard with all my leftover skin shit, same as the next hoarder of sentient excess some just trade it all in for gold           just like that all gone in the blink of an eye the world vanishes and reappears and vanishes and reappears so many times every minute and yet i am still so scared every single time donât fucking stop          (âI like scaffolding as much as the next attempt to create orderâ).
âSentient excessâ sums up a lot of Novelty Theory. Sentient because Heinemannâs speaker is highly reflexive but also human: a bundle of nerves, hormones, skin and bones, pleasure and pain. Writing the world is a fort-da process of vanishing and reappearing, it has a kind of sexual imperative that mingles pleasure and pain, presence and absence â âdonât fucking stopâ. Desire is terrifying but we just canât help it. The world is a virus, flashing upon your screen. And then again it just is your screen. Itâs in the code. Itâs a form of capital, âgoldâ, and writing is its supplement, the unfinished gesture towards holding, structure, containment. The keyboard generates worlds, bears our traces in time. Heinemannâs poetics are lucid, striking, high-retina. Let the mess shine in.
Millennial Hell or Heaven
> Novelty Theory is a book of a certain generation: it challenges the affects of âmillennial existenceâ, both riding on and unravelling the assumptions put upon us. Itâs a cheap clichĂ© to say choice makes us miserable, but now the imperative is to choose to be happy. In âDepression Calculatorâ, Heinemann chiastically quips: âi canât be ideological about my happiness even though happiness / is entirely ideologicalâ. In The Promise of Happiness (2010), Sara Ahmed writes: âHappiness shapes what coheres as a worldâ, it can be used as an affective tool for âredescrib[ing] social norms as social goodsâ â for instance, in the phrase âdomestic blissâ. This quote from âDepression Calculatorâ mirrors the guilt I feel in trying to write about the anthropocene while, say, being in a joyous state of mind, feeling loved or inclined to a state of play. The point is, we shouldnât have to choose one or the other. Who benefits when the capitalist guilt-machine shames us into recycling, taking the heat off the wider environmental abuse of toxic corporations? When Heinemann writes of âthe hollow surface of liquid soluble anxietyâ (âvisualisationâŠâ) I think of Mortonâs description of the âchocolate layerâ of âshameâ that coats ecological awareness, a âdark-sweetâ quality within its depression. Grief, shame, depression: in confronting the anthropocene, these are the affects we âmeltâ into with a degree of both pleasure and suffering. Is there relief? Novelty Theory is a good exercise in working through such contradictory affects in relation to everyday life, as well as the praxis of writing about the anthropocene from the p.o.v of an actual, breathing person â who takes the days as they come, who both suffers and thrives but doesnât necessarily claim this as their sole identity. Who doesnât assume a set, heteronormative route to happiness and human flourishing. Who dwells upon a âtender vergeâ (âanother empty threat to disappearâ). Is this what a queer form of staying with the trouble (speaking with Donna Haraway here) looks like?
Post-Vaporwave Poetics
> One thing to love about Novelty Theory is its conflict of registers. Unlike a whole tradition of âseriousâ ecopoetry, the book invokes the tropes of current anthropocene discourse in a parodic manner which nonetheless falls upon sincerity:
the forestâs infrastructure is devastated by Dutch elm disease, which is not the point itâs just also happening in the world       near the point outside the harsh city limits of          the point is everything that constitutes the periphery leaks into the centre, the centre is undeserving of the bioluminescence in the centre of the octopus  (âvisualisation: you are a small shark in the aquarium in the office of the CEO of a nondescript corporate body in a mid-80s postmodern swirl carpeted disaster zone where all the glass is cleaned except yours, the day is broken with elevator music but you donât know this is what this is. You are nibbling on some plankton and waiting for communism and you write a poem on the discretely moulding moulded glass of your aquarium. the poem reads:â).
Riffing off the âtentacularâ thought of Haraway et al, Heinemann evokes a grandiose vision of arboreal devastation as one âpointâ among many that slide between the centre and periphery of the everything that is the anthropocene, or indeed extinction. Heinemann asks: for who do we write this kind of poetry, what is the instrumental âpointâ? If we pursue that imperative, do we just end up with âmake narrative fate againâ and surrender our agency to the forces of (Manmade, Trumpian, triumphant) history? If Dutch elm disease is a hyperobject, somehow it also leaks, viscously, into the âbioluminescenceâ emitted from another life-form surviving deep within some other element, thousands of miles away. And letâs not forget that in this poem, the addressed reader is âa small sharkâ encased in a 1980s corporate office environment.
> You could say this is a post-vaporwave poem, where office hauntology evokes sympathies between trapped animals and trapped human-animals (what if the aquarium was just your computer, what if plankton is all we can eat in the future-past, what if we all became (loan)sharks in the credit extinction, trying and failing to eat whatâs left on the Darwinist food chain of neoliberal survival?). Weâre asked to visualise this poem, experience it in a medial, meditative way: itâs clear thereâs a dark ecological poetics of attunement here, a staged duration. Heinemann plays with the temporal confusions of the anthropocene and prods our susceptibility to a certain pastoral nostalgia with lines like âlike most people, the earth just gets hotter with ageâ. The earth as a (excuse me) âbodâ is one way of figuring, literally, the existential dilemma of the anthropocene as a man-made decimation of earthly systems.
Requiem for Sustainable Theory
> By no means has this been an exhaustive review of Novelty Theory, let alone this thing Iâm calling, after Farrier, the poetics of the anthropocene. With its Matthew Welton-esque marathon titles, Heinemannâs book has the air of a James Ferraro track: all cut-up, glitch and ambient late-capitalism set to the tone of a slick, surreal sublime. Yet thereâs something freeing in the all-too-real dreamscapes of Heinemannâs poetics of anthropocenic disorder, millennial anxiety and conflicted desires, inclined to banality. The low-caps âiâ that jumps across the collection like a dissident pro in poetic parkour refuses essential identity and makes room for incident, contingency: a more fugitive and less hubristic lyric. What forms of tenderness are at stake here? How might we flip an âAdorable pastoral avant gardeâ (âTheses on Land Masses (After Iain Hamilton Finlay)â) into something useful? What is the âpointâ in everything, and moreover who will look after the octopus as it wraps its tentacles around the world so grossly? Where do we situate anthropocene poetics in relation to ecopoetics, consciously or otherwise on the part of the poetâs intentions, given that the godfather of ecopoetics Jonathan Skinner suggests the form is a âsite of converging, intersecting practices and is most politically useful [...] when it keeps as many of these frictional nodes as active as possibleâ?
> Perhaps anthropocene poetics is unique in presenting a degree of situatedness within âavant-gardeâ traditions, which historically bear a more urban resonance (although with the anthropocene, of course, such distinctions of urban/rural are broken down in the mesh of everything). Writing of their book We Are Made of Diamond Stuff (Dostoyevsky Wannabe, 2019) in relation to Novelty Theory, Isabel Waidner notes: âRelationship with the historical avant-garde: complicatedâ (2019). This âshared investment in, but disappointment with, the promises of the historical avant-gardeâ (Waidner 2019) â whether Situationist dĂ©rive or Dadaist collage â is felt throughout Novelty Theory: not as a roadblock in literary history so much as a set of what Waidner refers to as âportalsâ. Think again of Sedgwick and Mortonâs invocations of the mesh. Anthropocene poetics needs to be something that queers, dis-identifies, labours and exposes everyday strangeness; it needs to let fall where we stand while also holding us. It needs to be a shining mess. It needs life and death, irony and sincerity, collapse and creativity, journey and destination, work and play. It needs to not choose but somehow continue to dance, seduce, weave theory and upset the representation of what comes before or after, because image is power: âiâm regressing again / but all i hope is when we picture the end of the world / we end the picture of the worldâ (âFerocious Lack Harmonyâ).
Works Cited
Ahmed, Sara, 2010. The Promise of Happiness (Durham: Duke University Press).
Clément, Catherine, 1994. Syncope: The Philosophy of Rapture (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press).
Cooper, Jeremy, 2019. Ash Before Oak (London: Fitzcarraldo Editions).
Dawson, Gloria, 2019. âOn Caspar Heinemannâ, Zarf #13 (Glasgow: Zarf Poetry).
Kapil, Bhanu, 2015. Ban en Banlieue (New York: Nightboat Books).
Farrier, David, 2019. Anthropocene Poetics: Deep-Time, Sacrifice Zones, and Extinction (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press).
Gardner, Callie, 2018. naturally it is not (Sutton: The 87 Press).
Haraway, Donna, 2016. Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene (Durham: Duke University Press).
Heinemann, Caspar, 2017. âFUCKING PANSIES: Queer Poetics, Plant Reproduction, Plant Poetics, Queer Reproductionâ, academia [online]. Available at: <https://www.academia.edu/32408905/FUCKING_PANSIES_Queer_Poetics_Plant_Reproduction_Plant_Poetics_Queer_Reproduction> [Accessed 29.7.19].
â 2019. Novelty Theory (Sutton: The 87 Press).
Jarman, Derek, 2018. Modern Nature (London: Penguin).
Morton, Timothy, 2010a. The Ecological Thought (Cambridge: Harvard University Press).
â 2010b. âGuest Column: Queer Ecologyâ, PMLA, Vol. 125, No. 2, pp. 273-282.
â 2013. Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press).
â 2016. Dark Ecology: For a Logic of Future Coexistence (New York: Columbia University Press).
Pico, Tommy, 2017. Nature Poem (Portland: Tin House Books).
Retallack, Joan, 2003. The Poethical Wager (Berkeley: University of California Press).
Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky, 1993. Tendencies (Durham: Duke University Press).
Zylinska, Joanne, 2016. âPhotography After the Humanâ, Photographies, Vol. 9, Issue 2, pp. 167-186.
~
[1]Against its general usage in academic and news discourse, I deliberately de-capitalise anthropocene to recognise the termâs assimilation into a broader cultural vernacular, whose shifting interpretations bely the insistent fixity implied by a capitalised proper noun. With anthropocene, not Anthropocene, we are working with a pliable term whose definitions are open to critical resistance and semiotic play. We are figuring out the definition of the anthropocene through practice, rather than accepting a totalising framework which suffers from a similar hubris around species as that which underlies the anthropocene âconditionâ or âcauseâ as such. I follow Joanna Zylinska in thinking of the anthropocene as more of âa thought device that helps us to visualise the multiple event of extinction â but also to intervene in the timeline of the extinctionâ (2016). Â
[2]Following Timothy Morton (2010a), I will occasionally capitalise âNatureâ to, as Morton puts it, âhighlight its âunnaturalâ qualities, namely (but not limited to), hierarchy, authority, harmony, purity, neutrality, and mysteryâ.
[3]Notably, Picoâs Poetry Foundation profile describes him as a âkaraoke enthusiastâ.
~
Novelty Theory is out now and available to buy here, via The 87 Press.
~
Text: Maria Sledmere
Published 7/8/19













