I've been repeating these ideas in different ways for years. Sorry about that.

There should be a literary-critical context which challenges and modifies the assumptions of the "post-avant". I'm trying to provide some building blocks for that effort.

The basis is not technical in the sense of surface elements of versification or style. It has to do with the concept of a poem, what poetry is, in relation to the non-verbal phenomena which it represents.

The basis is not political in the sense that "poets" are part of a class of intellectuals in solidarity & struggle with the oppressed & with each other. Or in the sense that "poets" are bearers of ancient aristocratic traditions carried on by an aesthetic elite in democracy. Poetry is not the offspring of ideology.

The basis is aesthetic, in the sense that the poem is the end of poetry. But the aesthetic is one that recognizes that what is happening is not just a refining-away of all that is not poetry. Poetry is a refining-together, an integration. Of evocation, understanding, empathy - the "word" with the "flesh". The poem is the fruit of a dual bond, a conjunction.

Reading about social structure of city of Aleppo in 18th century.

Society is... omigod. Society is collective survival by... omigod. In society, in general, what is the status of the literary person? What is the status of the religious mystic or the prophet? What is status, and honor, and prestige, and wealth, and power? Omigod.

Life's continuity... wisdom... smarts... family... luck... talent, skill... charity & love... independence, integrity... omigod. It's all over my head. But you know, this is one of the things that interests me : the direct "confrontation" of poet (or writer, generally) & society-at-large.

The egalitarian otherness of "creation" & "creator" - and the social drive for power, status, dominion, survival (the devil & all his works? not exactly. there's such a thing as good will & loving empathy. Humanity is the animale compagnevole).

Literary subcultures are miniature societies. They don't really address the issue. Only literature itself, in its raw state... maybe the substance of literature is that confrontation.