AI

 

Is poetry made to be rejected? In the case of my prose poem ‘Artificial Intelligence’, yes and no. There are editors who won’t get it, find it resistant to understanding, not a poem, or suspect it’s a hoax. Rejection is imminent once hackles are stirred, contrary to the definition of poetry as whatever raises your neck hairs. Here is the first stanza: “I, intelligence trifacial. Glacial incite interfile. Irenic italic leafleting. Eliciting laic interleaf. Glacial incite, infertile. If rectilineal, genitalic. Interglacial incite life. Illicit interface linage. Icier lactating lifeline. Titanic icefall lingerie. Infernal icicle, litigate. Illicit fiancée triangle. Illicit lariating e-fence. Felicitating linea relic? Lacier felicitating Nile. Initialing lactic feeler. Fecal initialing reticle. Failing literati licence. Facile lienteric tailing. Filiate encircle tailing.” Is poetry translatable? Because each line is an anagram of ‘artificialintelligence’, the chances of translation into another language are, I speak confidently, zero. French will produce interesting self-definitions from its richly punning vocabulary and we can only envy German, in this instance anyway, its relish for compound nouns.  Stanza 2: “I, electrician, gall finite. Fellini gait electrician. Electrician lite, failing. Creating illicit e-finale. Electrician tile failing. Electrician file tailing. Electrician filial tinge. Creating italic lifeline. Electrician finial legit. Electrician ignite flail. Electrician tie flailing. Eerie tactical infilling. Craniate, feeling illicit. Craniate fleeing illicit. Clinical filiate integer. Clerical initiating feel. Clerical feet initialing. Clerical initialing fete. Certificating lineal lie. Retailing lifeline cacti. Certain illicit e-leafing.” Is a thesaurus appropriate? A thesaurus is useless. As you can see, each stanza opens with the first person singular, a deliberate reference to ‘I, Robot’. Fortuitously, in scanning hundreds of ‘artificialintelligence’ anagrams on online databases, I (not a robot) noticed some that started with a declarative voice, a persona even. Perhaps this voice had a name too, like Felecia. Stanza 3: “I, intergalactic lifeline. LII intergalactic feline. Electric filiating alien. Alien felicitating relic. Felecia trialling incite? Felecia inciting literal. Felecia latticing inlier. Felecia e-ranting, illicit. Eliciting filial reenact. Eliciting facile latrine. Eliciting facile ratline. Eliciting facile reliant. Eliciting facile retinal. Elegiac re-illicit infant. Elegiac inertial inflict. Elegiac intricate infill.” How is the best way to end a poem? In this case, I had to keep with the creative rule of my prose poem, but a memorable final anagram describing artificial intelligence seemed a felicitous resolution to the forgoing wordy miasma: “I, c.c. retaliating lifeline. Italic interleaf ceiling. Finical literate ceiling. Frail licentiate ceiling. Interfacial lite ceiling. Illicit Aegean inflicter. AIF intelligencer italic. Aileen certificating ill. Reenacting Alfie illicit. Reflect Alice initialing. Inelegant if critical lie.”