I loved Juliana Spahr's article "Poetry, Academy, and Anarchy" (nov/dec 2000). She laid out what I've been doing for the past few years. I recognized it, and said "Oh, so that's what I've been doing." Whew, thank god there's an explanation.

Quoting:

"Poetry is currently our most anarchist of art forms. By anarchist I mean self-governing and decentralized. Since the 1950s, US poets have gathered themselves into locally grounded collectives ... Most of these groups lack an Organization. There is nothing to join. They were never founded. ... These poetry collectives use various techniques to survive without a large grant apparatus. They photocopy zines. They self-publish. They use the Web. They set up collective presses.

The turn to collectivity in the face of market pressure is, in fact, the defining characteristic of US poetry. Because these poets are not economically indebted to a governmental or to a non-govermental-organization structure, they are free to write a poetry that is politically engaged ... Poetry has again become a political genre."

Don't know how true that last sentence is ... but on the right track anyway.

Notes to myself:

Juliana Spahr
Eileen Myles
Andrew Carroll
Peggy Randall, Council of Literary Magazines and Presses