I think a poem needn't be a machine. many formulations exist, and some are mechanical, and some are not. Ron Silliman wonders if Weinberger's recent bruited piece is a poem. does the piece need limitation? the Pentagon Papers were not written or compiled as poem(s) but the method and effect resembles Weinberger's piece. or the piece in Gran Apachería by Ed Dorn, various and divergent quotes about Indians. if Weinberger says it's a poem, so it is. if EW didn't, then I guess you're on your own. just been reading about how Jung thought Ulysses was boring, he couldn't understand how someone could read such a large dull work, let alone write same. there was personal antipathy there between Joyce and Jung, but I think largely it's a matter, familiar enough, of one unable to let go a confining definition. I know Silliman's just looking under the hood, but not to let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralia of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. not to turn to ineffability, but not to limit and constrict with definition either.