Short description of Cmok To You To , correspondence by Nina Živančević and Marc James Léger

YL_1

CMOK was defined by its publisher Punctum press as a representative of krush fiction, ociscular- kiss fiction etc but in my view, as a correspondence and not pure genre in fiction — i think that Cmok is a genre-bender . It is not even a full representative of classical or “neo classical”(email)correspondence.. In terms that it denies
the exclusive purpose of a so called “correspondence”; classical
correspondence is there to “inform and communicate the facts between 2 people” , be it private, professinal or legal, commercial etc– which our Cmok denies, sort of.
It was “purposeless” in the pretentious nuance of that term denoting a specific aim or purpose, as it never had a specific writing theme or and time-limitation of the theme often indicated by purpose. But it sort of examined important philosophical or theoretical points which we came across or were thrust upon us- voila!
The scope , so called contents of that book is specific – as it really rarely covered profane events- and if it did it did in poetry, poetic manner, in terms that it did  not want to examine things such as “what did u have for lunch- hmm, donut yesterday” or “what’s the weather like in Paris today?”
If you will, the continuum of the said correspondence is more intimate- wd never use the word ‘trivial’, but The fact is that I wdn’t like to see the continuum in print.. like musing over my listening of the New Order album ‘substance’ etc etc– not for print. Also .DN_1 The first “folio” had certain innocence and intact beauty- i think that’s why it was appreciated, liked by the first Readers of it- themselves experts in autobiographical, first person intimate fiction who read it with the approval and surprise–Chris Kraus ,  Bart Plantenga. Kraus and Acker though could be the real founders of the so called krush fiction and correspondence as they started it a while ago also with or without certain pretentions
But perhaps what makes Cmok so unique is that , unlike the work of Acker or Kraus- it borders on the realm of the virtual science fiction
– and again here- i should underline that it’s not a novel,real fiction,  like in Kraus ( i love Dick) but Correspondence (impure, mixed fiction genre). And unlike in Acker/Wark correspondence in Cmok 2 Writers had never met which gives also their work a philosophical dimension and avoids the quotidien banality of the description of otherwise banal situations.
And as devoid of this dwelling in the real, daily living situation it finds its references in the common , lived-out experience of the theory, aesthetics and the ethos of the political sociology, the points these 2 writers shared and had in common.

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *