Some thoughts on Duane Locke and Yang Chu's Poems

Duane's Locke's poetic inclinations tend toward an individualism so complete he becomes a sort of isolated non-entity. He chooses to create a personalized bible, a singular kitsch, complete with mantra and vocabulary, whose only prophet is himself--only audience, himself--only object, himself.

The result: Yang Chu's Poems.

Even as an outside observer (meaning, of course, that I am not Duane Locke; that there can only be one Duane Locke; that Duane Locke is his own universe entirely) it is immediately apparent how this system of of belief is inseparable from the volume; just as it is inseparable from Duane Locke; and (we fall to a kind of equivalency principle, both encompassing and annulling) just as Duane Locke is inseparable from this volume.

I've heard Locke referred to as our finest living poet, and while this isn't necessarily true, he's certainly valid competition, and undoubtedly one of our finest living poets--I hesitate based only on the impossible nature of such a statement, and my own inadequacy in making it. There are poems in this volume eclipsing, or at least the equal, to anything I have ever read. These are frequent, rather than the exception.

If it has one flaw, it's that on occasion Locke becomes more interested in the composition of a representational text than a volume of poetry. When he writes poems, I can't think of anyone I'd rather read--but when this gives way to plainer verse with milder typographical innovation, concerned more with the continued, almost rhythmic presentation of his (already familiar) symbols and themes, this is somewhat less so. This has to take place because Locke's universe is also self-perpetuating, necessitating a routine fortification of its boundaries--but because we are not Duane Locke, the repetition of vocabulary has a somewhat lesser dynamic. I found myself interested less in the foundations of his belief than its product.

Would Yang Chu's Poems would be a better, crisper experience if perhaps thirty pages were removed? While I was initially inclined this way, in retrospect it becomes immediately apparent in to in order to contain the entity that is Duane Locke, every word must be there. To be whole, to Yang Chu's maintains the entirely of its discourse. The final result cannot be anything else. Anything else would not be Duane Locke.

--Some additional thoughts

I wrote this a while ago, and in the time since then, it's occurred to me that rather than composing a kind of immutable holy text, such the Koran, in which every word is absolutely unchangeable--something Locke, as an artist, can't possibly believe--Locke has chosen to develop an ultimate poetic "I" (through the illusory mask that is Yang Chu) which manifests as a sort of "anti-Whitman". Just as Leaves Of Grass accepts everything the world has to offer, Yang Chu's denounces it.


Available directly from the publisher here:

http://www.crossingchaos.com/Yang_Chus_Poems_by_Duame_Locke.html