Oh no. There's a book about the orphaned hippo (Owen) and the old tortoise (Mzee) in Kenya. Obviously I want it.
I saw a new brand of mascara advertised something like Mabelline "Lash Architect." I try it. Now that I work at home and sit about all day in jeans and my Lucifer Poetics t shirt (not every day), it's important to have many kinds of mascara that make my eyelashes unnaturally long.
Conversations about gender, public space, small press publishing, and MFAland continue. I was thinking this morning about environments conducive to or supportive of certain kinds of traditionally "feminine" behavior. Remember, I'm going to think/type sweepingly, not specifically, and that "feminine" and "masculine" are socio-cultural constructs which refer to qualities that our culture traditionally has assigned to women and men, respectively, m'kay?
So, sweepingly, I'm going to say bureaucracy (and academia as a definite kind of bureaucracy) functions, in part, by covert aggression. I'm thinking about how "feminine" aggression is covert, passive, and, like traditionally "masculine" direct aggression, in support of existing power structures, not opposed to them. There are a lot of passive-aggressive folks working in middle management, as administrators, and on hiring committees (for example). They're not the ones directly in charge, but they're really invested in 1) being angry about it but saying they're not 2) not changing the status quo 3) punishing or not ever hiring someone who will not be subservient and also, like them, secretly angry.
What I mean is that in order to function, a bureaucracy needs it's middle managers to act this way. It's structure both reinforces such behavior and also depends on it.
Sweepingly, remember. We all know really fabulous folks who work/exist in bureaucracies and academia, many of them artists--I'm trying to talk about structures, not individuals.
Understanding the qualities of aggression and how it operates, I think, is useful. Hierarchies are supported and maintained through aggression. Aggression has, like, major gender/class/race overtones, and it's psychological of course, so no one in avant-garde/experimental poetry ever thinks about it--I mean that historically we've been mostly interested in Marxist critique, and that this doesn't always help us access the reasons why we, personally, are often real jerks to each other.
That's all for now. I'm supposed to try and connect all these points to a discussion of parties and publishing. I might not ever. Maybe I'll draw a picture about it.
I have to go buy milk etc before it RAINS HERE AGAIN.