1

ReadingpaintingsandpoetryAstridLorangeCurrently,myresearchhasmeaskingthesimplequestion:whathappenswhenwereadpaintingsaspoems?Notasthoughtheywerepoems,tobesure,butinthemannerthatwereadpoems.Readingpaintingsinthisway,Iambeginningtofind,offersawayofthinkingaboutcontemporarypaintingpracticethatsuitsthecomplexmediaticprocessesfromwhichitemergesandtowhichitcontributes.BythisImean,readingapaintingasapoemcanbeanopportunitytothinkaboutthecoming-to-be-madeofthematerial,conceptual—and,Iwouldargue,literary—aspectsofpaintinginthecontextofwhatisoftenreferredtoasa‘post-digital’mediaenvironment.Sofar,I’vebeeninterestedinthepaintingsofaparticularartist:ClareMilledge,fromSydney,Australia.Milledge’sworkcentresaroundthetechniqueHinterglasmalarei,popularinthenineteenth-centuryandwhichinvolvestheapplicationofpaintand/ortheremovalofpaintfromthereversesideofglass.Inadditiontotheglasspaintings,Milledgeworkssculpturally,usingwood,hessian,silk,wool,andother(usuallyorganic)materialstoproduceenvironments/arrangementsinwhichthepaintingsaresituated.Textplaysacriticalroleinherwork;manyofherpaintingsincludetext,andthetitlesshechoosesforindividualworksandcollectionsaredecidedlydiscursive,contributingtotheongoingdevelopmentofasetofphilosophicalinvestigationsthatpreoccupyMilledgeinherpracticeasittransformsovertime(thesepreoccupationsincludeconversationswithGeorgesBataille,momentsofexchangewithfriends,critiquesandparodies,andsoon).Therelationshipbetweenthetextinthepaintingsandtheparatextualcontentthataccompanythemiskeytoherwork’soverallliterariness;thetext-workmadevisuallyandcontextually‘painterly’speakbacktothemorepolemical,thoughoftenstillphrase-basedorfragmentaryprovocationsofthetitlesandcollectionnames.Together,thediscursivecomponentsmakesomethinglikeastatementofpoetics;acriticalorbitinwhichtheworkorientsitselftowardsanengagementthatis,perhapsaboveall,readerly.InMilledge’smostrecentwork,thetextualcontentis,whilenomorecentralthaninpreviouswork,slightlydifferent.Ifherearlierworkhastendedtowardsusingtextintheformofphrasesandfragmentswithintentionallyunrevealedoriginsorsources,hernewseriesofpaintingsusetextharvesteddirectlyfromthephone-baseddatingappTinder,reframingalonglistofusers’‘AboutMe’informationinalphabeticalorder,producingakindofabecedaryoffirst-linesbyprospectivedates—importantly,allmen.ThetextishandwritteninMilledge’sveryrecognisablestyle(uppercaseletters,irregularbutconsistent),andretainsthespellingand

2

punctuationoftheoriginal.Nootherdata—username,age,etc.—isincluded.ThefirsttwopaintingsinthisseriesareSelf-ReflexiveCritique:AlphaMu(fig.1,alarger,site-specificwindowinstallation,featuringlinesbeginningwiththelettersAthroughtoMminusI)andSelf-ReflexiveCritique:Iota(fig.2,asmaller,stand-alonepaintingfeaturinglineswiththefirstletterofthefirstwordbeginningwith‘I’).BothworkswereinstalledintheUniversityofTechnologySydney’sgalleryfortheshowMnemonicMirror,curatedbyKylieBanyardandGaryCarsley.Thealphabeticalconceitisclearintheworks’subtitles,andthesharedtitlegetstotheheartofthisproject’stextualconcern:theunalteredbutcarefullyselectedcollationofusers’profilebylinespresented,withoutcomment,astheirownimmanentcritiques—unintentionalbutsuperfunctionalcritiquesofmasculinity,entitlement,ego,anddesire.

Figure1:Self-ReflexiveCritique:AlphaMu

3

Figure2:Self-ReflexiveCritique:Iota

4

Readingtheseworksaspoeticsequences,wemightreadthelinesascoheringtomakealong,constraint-basedtextinwhichacertaindegreeofauthorialintervention(thechoiceofcertaintextsinalphabeticalorder)ismediatedbyfactorsoutsideMilledge’scontrol(thealgorithmsthatdeterminewhoMilledgeismatchedwithonTinder,thetextthatthematcheswrite).Thealphabetisationgeneratesexpectation,astructuralassonance;italsoeffectsanindex,akindofbureaucraticoradministrativedocumentthatregistersdiversityandcommonalityamonginstancesofself-presentation.Aspoeticsequence,then,itisavarietyofepic(becauseitaimsinitsveryconcepttobecomplete)thatstagesasmalldrama:accumulatinganever-increasingcastofplayerswho,intheironelineeach,revealanecologyofmasculinities.Somelinesareperfunctory:“Amsingle”;“FromLondon”;“Lookingforfun”.Somearedemanding:“Straightteethamust”;“Noselfishgirls,nobusygirls”;“Don’tdodrama”.Sometryforhumour,othersabsurdity.Asacollection,theyrepresentanoddlyprofoundcaptureoftherangeofcodedexpressionsthatconstituteheterodatingvernacular.Theperformanceofmasculinitymovesbetweenaffectsofanxiety,aggression,desperation,delusionandentitlement;asetoffeeling-typesthattogetherformadynamicofsuppressionandovertnessthatcorrespondstonaturalisednotionsofstraightmaledesire.Ifapoemisagenreoftextespeciallyconcernedwiththeprocessesbywhichlanguagecomestomeaninhighlyspecificsituations,thenthepoemisareminderofhowspecificmeaningsbecomegeneraltruthsthroughtherepeated,habitualandnaturaliseduseoflanguage;notthroughleadingbyexample(thoughperhapsthatargumentcouldbemadeelsewhere)butbyemphasingthewrittennessofwhatcomestobeknownasthepoemitself.InthecaseofMilledge’sworks,thepoemsemphasisethewrittendimensionofthelinesasbothindividually-authored(becausewrittenbyalargenumberofunwittingcollaborators)andgenerically-inflected(becausewritteninthegenreofthedatingprofilebioandbecausewritteninnormative‘straightromance’vernacular).One’sbeingremindedofthewrittennessofwhatmightotherwisebeassumedinteriorexpression,thatis,beingremindedofthehistoric-genericformsthroughwhichexpressiontakesplace,is,Iargue,atthecentreoftheexperienceofreadingapoem.Asequence,ofcourse,notonlyimpliesorder(asbotharrangementandrightness-of-place),butalsoasenseofduration,whichinturnproducesavarietyofstory(ifnotquiteanarrative).Orderinginasequence,toparaphrasethepoet-criticEileenMyles,isthesignalgestureoffiction;apoem’sfictionalityisinthewayitusesordertobothdiscloseandobscuremeaning,tobuildorcut,tobreakorfollow-on.Butthereisanotherwaytoreadsequence,asthatwhichcollectsvariationsofasingularity,acollectionofonesthatareatonceirreducibletooneanotherandyetfunctionally(perhapsevenontologically)identical.Toreadasequenceistoreadtheninthesetwomodes,‘counter-rationally’(toborrowKestonSutherland’sterm);thepoemthatmovesthroughtimeinanodd,slightepic,linkedbyaccumulation,andthepoemthatbouncesonthesamespot(asthoughtimeless)occasioninginfinitevariationsofa

5

singularity.Aperfectlydialecticalpoemisimpossible,andso,thepoemisacontradictionofitsownterms,productivelyso—thepoemremainsatoddswithitself.ReadingMilledge’spaintingaspoems,thepoeticsequenceisemphaticinitsartifice:thelanguageisobviouslyappropriated,theletteringbearswitnesstotheeffortoflarge-scaleandmanualtransposition,theorderingisconstraint-based,thematerialityofthelanguage(lettersonaplateofglassorwindow)engagessurfacesatoncetransparentandreflective,andthesemanticcontextofthework(inagallery,asa‘painting’)implicatestheambientandcontingentfactorsthatconditionthetextanditsreadability.Standingtoread,then,Milledge’spaintingsinthespaceofthegallery,becomesthefinalperformativegestureofthework’semphasis:thebodythatbecomesawareofthepublicnessofitsreading,andthebodythatunderstandsreadingtobeacritical,iterativeactivity—anactivityproductiveofknowledgeinexcessofitsinterpretation,andanactivitybothcounter-rationalandexceptionallymeaningfulinthecontextofcontemporarymediaticcomplexity.Astrid Lorange is a writer, editor and teacher from Sydney, Australia. She lectures in history and theory at UNSW Art & Design, and runs the critical art talk series Conspiracy at Minerva Gallery in Potts Point. She is one half of the collaboration Snack Syndicate. How Reading is Written: A Brief Index to Gertrude Stein was published by Wesleyan University Press in 2014. Poetry chapbooks include Ex (Stale Objects dePress), Minor Dogs (bas-books) and Eating and Speaking (TPRP).