Rhetorical causality in Huidobro and Girondo

Huidobro and Girondo give us two Latin American versions of avant-garde re-workings of poetry.  While there is certainly a despair concerning more institutional forms of poetry in each case, there is also a delight in creation, to use Huidobro's catchphrase.  Both poets develop a different sensual approach to causality.  In Girondo, the 'I' of the poet gradually disappears and falls into the Eye.  Vision approaches causality differently.  One cause might not produce the predicted cause.  Things - in their relations - are more disjointed or mysterious.  This is something I have raised as looking a lot like an "industrial" or "urban" sublime.  The human, when it does appear in Girondo is under threat from something unquantifiable, yet familiar -- the urban setting made into a horrific scenario.  As I have previously stated, I am not so sure that this falls into the ranks of futurism.  Girondo's poems do help us re-read objects though.  One should certainly read this along Latour's lines in the "Compositionist Manifesto" or Harman's rhetorical thinking about causality.

As for Huidobro, vision falls second to rhetorical and textual reformulations.  Creacionismo is often accused of I-centering, calling attention to the purely human manipulation of the environment.  Birds and suns become play things.  Yet I wonder if Huidobro's emphasis on linguistic creation also yields some symptoms that we all suffer.  His "antipoesía" takes delight in the despair of working through an imperfect language.  "Imperfect" should mean traditional.  It is amazing how much traditional language is worked through, ground up (en sus molinos de viento) in "Altazor".

Causality begins to operate on the level of the signifier.  Things relate not out of some type of referent, but rather through an over-exuberance of linguistic materliality.  Antipoesía tries to avoid talking around objects and tries to talk objects.  That is, being objects into being via language.  The trouble in "Altazor" -- and apparently its ultimate failure -- is the linguistic ability to carry this through.  Language becomes pure sound/noise/music in onomatopoeia (Canto VII) - but the I-saying (eye) sort of disappears.  Each sense of causality - visual and textual - de-emphasizes the ego in favor of looking out towards alterity, which finally does not remain "radically other" but called into the text.  In either case, it is an attempt at negativity (qua absolute failure), but rather an attempt at inclusion.