| GOLINI'S MAIN GOAL here is
not to provide an overview of Futurist typography and literary experiment,
but to examine closely the moments when Italian Futurist poems break traditional
form, syntax, and logic. She sorts these moments into what she calls "word
patterns" and "codes" (280). She defines ten of these "codes," and argues
they are spontaneous on the part of the authors, for they have never been
explicitly defined in the context of a Futurist manifesto or any other
type of Futurist writing. The results of these patterns are in conflict
with Futurist ideals, which posits a constant flux of form and a consciously
undisciplined approach toward the creation of poetry. Within the definition
of a code, Golini pinpoints three main attributes: definition, function,
and frequency. For example, the device of onomatopoeic display has, as
its definition, its form on the page (horizontal or vertical, dark print);
as its function, its literary effect (a word as a sound, the effect of
concreteness upon an abstraction, intonation of Italian speech patterns);
and, as its frequency, how often it appears (quite oftenóthis is Marinetti's
favorite device.) She examines other patterns, such as "Deliberate Symmetry,"
"Mathematical Symbols," "Word Lists," etc. Also included are a number of
typographical examples from Lacerba and Poesia. Golini closes
the article by stating that poetry which incorporates visual participation
is as old as civilization, and that the Futurists' claims that they were
creating poetry anew, with no historical antecedent, were entirely false.
She ends the article by stating, "though the Futurists believed themselves
to be exercising in practice total freedom of creativity, in theory they
were greatly fettered by their own prediliction for laying down rules,
to wit, the staggering number of Futurist manifestos" (289). (Rebecca
Scherr.) |