reading Eoagh 3. it is a massive collection., which, it seems, is where online mags are. discuss pros and cons, if you wish. an impressive selection of writings, themed on Queering the Language. I wanted to point to this piece by John Mercuri Dooley. it is about gay marriage, sure enough you can see that is it. but it is not strictly an opinion. I relate what John does with this piece to Charles Reznikoff's Testimony: taking public documents and seeing into their poetry. I don't know how John arrived at the final texts but an act of telescoping occurs. he produces an odd weighting of import. sure there's a point here, a political stance. at the same time, you have to read this piece for its anguish of language. I have to say anguish, because what arises is both a blurring of individuality of the people involved, and an emphasizing of same. each couple has its own story, yet a larger sense says they all relate. the facts of each marriage detail choices made by the couples. but again, I mean to point to the language. it is chopped up, stuttering. each couple, one infers, looks for the right detail of imagery, personal definition. the stuttering is so human and plain, so grappling with a meaning that has to be utterly personal even tho it is so common and shared.