Metodo – poesia del nocciolo

di Giuseppe Cornacchia

Se più modelli ammettono un fenomeno
non sono indipendenti, dunque ragioniamo
andando al nocciolo. Ma il fenomeno?
Allora ragioniamo sul fenomeno
a prescindere dal nocciolo.
Ragionare sul fenomeno che abbiamo
centra il nocciolo? Potremmo non servircene,
non accorgercene.
Dato il nocciolo, quanto è semplice
lo studio di un fenomeno?
Il mio fenomeno??
Sul fenomeno invento un nocciolo locale.
Dato un nocciolo, ricavo i suoi fenomeni;
dato un nocciolo, adatto un mio fenomeno.
Ragiono sul fenomeno e il mio fenomeno:
sono uguali? Ragionevolmente uguali?
Ragiono sul fenomeno in via del nocciolo.

Penso al nocciolo. Penso, penso, penso
partendo dal fenomeno.
Penso al nocciolo. Penso al nocciolo.
Penso al nocciolo partendo dal fenomeno
o invento un nocciolo che regga il mio fenomeno?
Un nocciolo, fenomeni;
un fenomeno, il mio nocciolo locale;
più fenomeni, più noccioli locali.
Dai noccioli locali il solo nocciolo, se c’è.
Dal nocciolo fenomeni,
il mio fenomeno. E il fenomeno?
Un fenomeno è il mio fenomeno
ma il fenomeno è un fenomeno?
Dal mio nocciolo locale il solo nocciolo:
ho inventato un nocciolo locale
cercando di scoprire il solo nocciolo.
Cercando di scoprire il solo nocciolo
ho inventato un nocciolo locale
che regge il mio fenomeno.
Adottando con giustezza un fenomeno reale
ho fatto una scoperta.
Studiare serve.
Sapere di fenomeni serve ad inventare
scoprendo in via indiretta.


traduzione di Chiara De Luca e Gray Sutherland, con la collaborazione di Judy Swann (2007)

If more models accept a phenomenon
they are not independent, so, let’s think
going to the core. But the phenomenon?
Well, let’s think about the phenomenon then,
regardless of the core.
Thinking about the phenomenon we have
does the core have anything to do with it?
We could do without using it,
without even realizing it.
Given the core, how simple is the study
of a phenomenon?
Of my phenomenon??
For the phenomenon I invent a local core.
Given the core I derive its phenomena;
given a core, I adapt my phenomenon.
I think about the phenomenon and my phenomenon:
are they the same? Reasonably the same?
I think about the phenomenon for the core.

I think of the core. I think, I think, I think
starting from the phenomenon.
I think of the core. I think of the core.
I think of the core starting from the phenomenon
Or do I invent a core to support my phenomenon?
A core, phenomena;
a phenomenon, my local core;
more phenomena, more local cores.
From the local cores the only core, if there is one.
From the core phenomena,
my phenomenon. And the phenomenon?
A phenomenon is my phenomenon
but is the phenomenon a phenomenon?
From my local core the only core:
I have invented a local core
trying to discover the only core.
Trying to discover the only core
I have invented a local core
that supports my phenomenon.
Rightly adopting a real phenomenon
I have made a discovery. Studying is useful.
Knowing phenomena is useful for inventing things
discovering indirectly.


pubblicata su carta da Fara Editrice nel 2006 ed Erbacce Press nel 2007 (forse la mia sola poesia che lascerei ai posteri. GiusCo)

Giuseppe Cornacchia at erbacce-press, Liverpool

Dear Literary Friend,

I’ve found a publisher (a small cooperative from Liverpool, called erbacce-press) and signed a contract to sell a bilingual excerpt from my latest collection, “Ottonale”, Fara Editore, Italy, 2006. The introduction of this chapbook (40 pages and 15 poems included) also reports the names of the translators into English Language: Chiara De Luca, Judy Swann, Gray Sutherland. I’m very grateful for their progressive work on my poems.

If you can help to spread the news, it’s a welcome help.

My chapbook web page is at:

Thanks a lot for your attention,

Giuseppe Cornacchia –

Judy Swann reads David Lehman

Since 1996, April has been National Poetry Month. The initial goal was not the
writing of a poem a day. Instead, according to the publishers, booksellers,
librarians, literary organizations, poets, and teachers who dreamed it up, the goal
was to establish a month-long holiday in celebration of poetry. Volumes of verse
were handed out, poets were invited to read at the White House, and an election
was held to decide which poet should be honored with a postage stamp. Not
everyone saw these developments as praiseworthy. Charles Bernstein, for one,
railed against the month because its sponsors “exclude from its promotional
activities much of the formally innovative and “otherstream” poetries that form the
inchoate heart of the art of poetry…[A]ctivities on behalf of National Poetry Month
tend to focus on the most conventional of contemporary poetry; perhaps an
accurate name for the project might be National Mainstream Poetry Month.
[P]erhaps we should designate August as National Unpopular Poetry Month.”

to be continued at:

Judy Swann reads Sharon Olds

Hanging In with Sharon Olds

At the beginning of the last century, when poets decided they’d had enough of the Edwardians, the classical canon, and formalism, modernism was born. It was an anti-movement. In the course of the 20th century, greater and greater liberties were taken with the new “free verse” until almost any well-written thing qualified as a poetic genre: manifestos, diary-entries, zaum (“transreason”), tone poems, L-A-N-G-U-A-G-E poetry, and so on. Poetry was energized, engaging, masculine. So when we consider Sharon Olds, Poet Laureate for the State of New York 1998-2000, we are angry when her award-winning, accessible, witty, and plainly crafted poems about family life and erotic pleasure are decried by critics as “programmatically unfeminine sexual bravado.”

………………. to be continued at: