paul kaminski

[C]alligraphers delight in creating mazes of embellishment in which meaning is secreted like a treasure. The deciphering of the text proves the worthiness of the reader.


Is Celan’s work too obscure, as some claim? Is it too hermetic? Too difficult? Real poems, Celan wrote, are “making toward something … perhaps toward an addressable Thou.” I would argue that, for any poet writing toward such a subject, regular words and syntax soon become inadequate. Celan is an extreme case though, because he also had to contend with the inadequacy of the German language to express the experience of the Jewish poet, post-Holocaust. His is the lyricism of privacy (prayer is private, no matter with how many fellow congregants it is uttered or in how many prayer books it appears), not of hermeticism. In fact, Celan insisted to Michael Hamburger that he was ‘ganz und gar nicht hermetisch.’ Absolutely not hermetic.


Celan chose to protest from inside German, in “death-rattling,” “quarreling” words. Though he spoke numerous other languages (Romanian, Russian, French) and though he had written previously in Romanian, he nevertheless decided to remain in German, which he broke and reclaimed. German, for Celan, was the language that had to “pass through its own answerlessness, pass through frightful muting, pass through the thousand darknesses of death-bringing speech.”

Why break a language? To wake it up. “We sleep in language,” writes Robert Kelly, if “language does not come to wake us with its strangeness.”


Theodor Adorno: “It is barbaric to write poetry after the Holocaust.”
Adorno, when confronted by others, repeated: “After Auschwitz to write poetry is barbaric, I would not want to downplay this remark.”
Adorno, after reading Paul Celan’s broken and reassembled German, reconsiders: “It may have been wrong to say that after Auschwitz you could no longer write poems.”


And there was light let there be God and said waters. The language acquires a strange agency, a weird reversed reality: “And there was light let there God.” There is more poetry in reading the text we know by heart backwards. (We sleep in the language, if language does not come to wake us with its strangeness.“


Celan, writes Anne Carson, was "a poet who uses language as if he were always translating.”


If Celan’s poems feel like strange translations, clearly the translation of Celan into English should give the feeling of foreignness to our own language.

I would argue that most piercing lyric poets don’t speak in the “proper” language of their time. Emily Dickinson didn’t write in proper English but in slant music of fragmentary perception. Kit Smart’s endless lists and Whitman’s numbering of months in Leaves of Grass are hardly in the language their contemporaries knew. Cesar Vallejo placed three dots in the middle of the line, as if language itself were not enough, as if the poet’s voice needed to leap from one image to another to make – to use Eliot’s phrase – a raid on the inarticulate.


If by this point you are thinking about the witches from Macbeth or any of Shakespeare’s fools’ riddles, you aren’t alone. Here is Cid Corman (who was Celan’s first English translator) describing Celan: “poetry OF language – but of language AS livingdying … a tale told by an idiot.” A tale told by an idiot, signifying nothing, as we all know, signifies a great deal and is at the heart of Western literature. It is not something we should dismiss as obscurity or nonsense, though it may employ nonsense to reach its goal – which is, perhaps, to find “the addressable Thou." 

Incantation is just one such device. There are others. Many critics have commented, for instance, on how surreal Celan’s images are. He was influenced by his friendship with surrealists, but his art is much older than that particular movement. The first real surrealist was Ovid, not Breton. The first American surrealist was Emily Dickinson: "I felt a Funeral, in my Brain.”

One could call “Deathfugue” a ballad, a secular Kaddish, fugue, but what then? It’s not the literary devices that matter but how a poet confronts them.


But how do English/ American poets confront our own tradition? Yeats famously said that he only revised toward a more “passionate syntax.” John Berryman said “nouns, verbs do not exist for what I feel.” I think of King Lear saying “Never, never, never, never, never,” or Whitman saying “Death, death, death, death, death,” when the words lose meaning and become just sounds of themselves, opening into a territory of less guided, more given meaning.


To come back to the question of the privacy of a lyric poet and how this is manifested in the tensions of  his or her language: for Celan, it seems, this attitude toward German came from trauma. He had seen the Holocaust and its aftermath. “No one / witnesses for the / witness,” Celan said, and in his work “a tension is held in the fragmentation of  language, of  being and of extreme solitude” (Julia Kristeva).

Note the choice of word: solitude, not loneliness. In the end, it does not matter whether this “tension” in a poet’s speech comes from a place of trauma or from somewhere else (Catullus? Mayakovsky? Niedecker?). Whatever the source, the central fact remains — the privacy of a lyric poet. The lyric poet is a person who says, “I am not sure the language 
I write in is spoken here, or anywhere.” Alone with unintelligible language, he sings “in front of strangers.”


In the solitary lines of Paul Celan, one hears this inaudible language.

A great poet is not someone who speaks in stadiums to thousands of  listeners. A great poet is a very private person. In his or her privacy this poet creates a language in which he or she is able to speak, privately, to many people at the same time.

—  Ilya Kaminsky, excerpts from “On the Strangeness that Wakes Us: On mother tongues, fatherlands, and Paul Celan”

Archie Comics crossover event set to include characters from STREET FIGHTER, MONSTER HUNTER, SKIES OF ARCADIA, and other popular video game franchises by SEGA and CAPCOM.

Archie Comics is proud to announce that “Worlds Unite,” the sequel to 2013’s smash-hit “Worlds Collide” crossover storyline featuring Sonic the Hedgehog & Mega Man, will expand to include popular video game franchises from SEGA and CAPCOM, including “Street Fighter,” “Monster Hunter,” and more.

Expanding beyond the focus on the worlds of Sonic the Hedgehog and Mega Man, “Worlds Unite” will also feature characters from the fan favorite SONIC BOOM and MEGA MAN X universes.

Classic SEGA franchises such as “Alex Kidd,” “Billy Hatcher,” “Golden Axe,” “NiGHTS,” “Skies of Arcadia,” and “Panzer Dragoon” will be involved in the world-spanning epic, along with characters from CAPCOM’s popular “Breath of Fire,” ‘Ghosts N’ Goblins,” “Monster Hunter,” “Street Fighter,” “Okami,” and “Viewtiful Joe” series.

“Worlds Unite” Writer Ian Flynn and Archie Comics Executive Director of Editorial Paul Kaminski spoke with about the different characters and franchises appearing in the epic storyline.

“This crossover event is unlike any other you’ve ever seen before,” Kaminski said. “So sit back, grab a chili dog and an E-Tank, and prepare yourself for the ultimate multi-franchise crossover comic book experience!”

“Worlds Unite” begins in May with a special prelude comic available for free in comic book stores nationwide on Free Comic Book Day. The 12-part crossover event begins in SONIC UNIVERSE #76 and continues through the other Archie Action titles including SONIC BOOM, SONIC THE HEDGEHOG, and MEGA MAN.


Aaay, it’s the Sonic Boom promo comic I penciled a few months ago! Looks like you’ll be able to see it bundled with the 3DS game, which is pretty cool. Also not all of the artists were mentioned in the video which sucks, so the full list is as follows:

Script:Ian Flynn

Pencils: Evan Stanley

Inks: Rick Bryant

Colors: Matt Herms

And our awesome editors, Paul Kaminski and Vincent Lovallo!

I’m pretty sure we’re also the team for the first for issues of the new monthly title too! I’m just wrapping up the pencils for the first issue this weekend, and then jumping right into issue 2 (which is gonna be hilarious, Ian did a great job on that one).

Oh also, one correction to the video: the comic is FIVE pages long, not thirty. Sorry.