6 May 1980: ". . . [T]he 'surrealist' effect is achieved through voluntary juxtaposition of ideas, images, phrases and words.
". . . The mind must be empty before starting. The pressing of the button that sets in motion the subconscious machine is the absolute obligation you impose upon yourself to continue with no idea in your head. . . . The writer must literally be unaware of what he is writing, he must continue at all costs without stopping, without rereading a word, without allowing himself to become conscious of what he is doing, save that words follow on words until the flow stops.
"Often, of course, and particularly at the beginning of the flow, the result is worthless, but when the well is primed by the action of writing, the poetic water begins to come up. . . . The Surrealist poet, extracting his material from the subconscious, is analogous to the ethnologist who translates the myths of primitive tribes. He must put down only what is told to him, and no more. . . .
". . . Surrealism does not mean to produce 'surrealist' results; it is simply a technique for capturing poetry. The more often it is practiced, the more good poetry each séance nets. . . ."
20 November 1982, written vertically in holograph, concerning his marriage: "I can't answer your question about the possibility for two practicing artists to maintain what you call a 'domestic/romantic relationship of any normalcy.' You can't use the world 'norm' or 'normal' in dealing with human relationships. 'Normal' is a concept, not a reality. All snowflakes are natural, but no two have the same design. If you admit that Procrustean terminology, you would have to agree that any creative artist is by definition 'abnormal,' since his values are different from the majority of citizens."
7 June 1983: ". . . It always seems to me, when I read an interview held with me, that I've said nothing, because I have nothing to say. Everything has been said in the fiction, and nothing remains in 'real life.' . . ."
21 August 1983, ALS: "My students have now left, and I'm able to devote myself once again to reading and correcting the MS you sent me. . . . Let me hear about Mrabet's exposition at City Lights. . . ."
28 September 1985: ". . . The only good thing which could occur would be the end of the war, but . . . both sides are equally determined to win. Morocco, being on the defensive, has to put her own army into action, while Algeria uses her international brigade and claims to know nothing about the attacks . . . . And the United States still has not recognized Morocco's hegemony in Oued ed Dheb and Saqia el Khamra. The New York Times has been predicting Morocco's defeat ever since the war began . . . . I suppose it makes no difference, since in the end everybody will lose everything."
with--Group of 10 typed letters from Dery to Bowles, retained copies, to which the present lot contains the replies. Vp, 1982-87.
From the files of Mark Dery.