Reason 1: Language writing should not be understood in merely formalist terms.
Reason 2: It is a consequence of the cultural logic of the period(s) in which it was written and has its influence.
Reason 3: But, we must ask, what is a cultural logic, and how many of them are there to name?
Reason 4: If Enlightenment is a cultural logic, not just an abstract universal, the poetics of this situation are yet to be found out.
Reason 5: It is not exaggerating to claim these debates have scarcely been engaged, and will continue past publication of this volume.
Reason 6: The relation of Language writing to identity is a major motivation, as is the question of free speech as liberationist goal.
Reason 7: The politics of neoliberalism in relation to Language writing’s use of political economy is a primary critical focus.
Reason 8: It shows how specific forms of community and identity are made and contested in the process of group formation.
Reason 9: Periodizing logics and claims of succession, of one avant-garde after another or by institutions, are called into question.
Reason 10: The irreducible crux of my argument is a rejection of the concept of period style and the opportunistic use made of it.
Reason 11: Poetics should not be confined to literary examples but extends to other genres, media, and life as it is lived.
Reason 12: A poetics of negativity works across genres and media to contest false positives in stylistic or institutional terms.
[To be contd.]