 |
|
On a basic level, many literary works that we face today appear to belong to a general trend of innovative disposition. Provisorily, we might call it not so much another refusal of conventional modules used in assembling language as a search for alternate compositional forms. As a possible alternative to disrupting “normal” composition and to tearing the tissue of communication, today’s artist creates his own structure of laceration. This attempted structure is not less consistent and regular (and therefore possibly readable) than normal structures of combination. Syntax, as the ordered reunion of elements subjected to a taxonomy, does not exclude such an operation by principle. If the taxonomy changes, as when the artist intends to affirm a greater value in the action than in the agent, for example, the syntax will have to comply. We know that “normal” syntax considers cases of illogical suppression or permutation (e.g., ellipsis) perfectly admissible.
On the same basic level, Nanni Cagnone appears to have selected a specific way of fitting together the three main parts of his poem “come ortica”. It is our assumption that 1) the special assemblage is structural, that is, it obeys an inner order; and 2) however puzzling or even obscure it may be, the compound is a “poetic effect.” I wish I only had to demonstrate this theorem, even if bicephalous or forked. But I shall have to bring in observation on individual stylistic procedures, comparisons with other contemporary texts, and even other levels of reading. I haven’t been able to find an apology to offer for this additional burden to the reader. |
