Tag Archives: Carl Jung

Strange Architectures by JL Williams (Shearsman Books)

Strange Architectures by JL Williams (Shearsman Books)

Our culture’s obsession with property – as self-expression, as glamorous or quirky backdrop, as literally solid investment, as anything beyond mere shelter and warmth ‒ has long called for some poetic attention. This book steeps us in the language of estate agents (‘a queen’s bath/ all fixtures and fittings/ Grade A’), of homes-and-gardens magazines (‘her unmistakeably good taste in period furniture’), and of TV property programmes (‘this house you’ve lovingly/ restored’). It indulges the lush clichés of those genres: the ‘generous’ terrace, the ‘expansive’ view, the ‘sprawling’ garden, the ‘sapphire’ pool. Things are ‘nestled’, ‘richly patterned’, ‘timeless’ and ‘chocolate box’. An archway ‘embraces’, a sofa ‘relaxes’, cliffside houses ‘cling’, and one place even ‘offers its liminality’.

Each poem here is a different building, most often experienced from inside and, notwithstanding the book’s title, attending as much to interior design as to architecture. And each poem, the paratext tells us, is a dream. Many of the buildings, then, are dream houses in every sense. Floors are marble, beeswaxed, ‘sun-faded cobalt’ or ‘tiled in tarnished gold’. Ceilings are coffered, vaulted, ‘triple height’ or ‘unreachably high’. Walls are amber, sienna, candy blue, yellow and pink. We’re regaled with endless balconies, sofas, gardens, pools and views. Size and space are the qualities most insistently featured:

          Capacious central foyer,
          multi-level entrances
          into tremendous apartments.

          Cathedral ceilings, crystal wall
          views to the ocean.

          Turkish rugs.
          Sculpture.

          A sense of space […]

The temples of consumption and culture also cross the threshold of this sleeper’s subconscious: hotel, restaurant, mall, opera house, concert hall. But it’s not all glitz: so do a hippy bender and a hovel, the latter as nightmare.

The dream conceit spares us from narratives that make conventional sense. Also from direct politics ‒ excepting a Palestinian-run café with a poster saying, ‘burn our houses but we’ll keep dancing’ at the degree zero of housing crisis. Dreams of buildings, rather, point to psychology, and especially (I assume) to Jung, for whom the house was the archetype of the psyche. Jung’s ideas might be without empirical foundation, but they’ve got longstanding artistic utility, and a common move within the poems is to turn from the outward descriptions towards an ‘I’ or ‘we’ discovered within them. 

This is where it gets really interesting. The dreamer’s response to all the architectural splendours isn’t confined to the awed and admiring adjectives. She’s persistently afflicted with anxiety and unease. ‘I pretend I belong’; ‘I will not go further in’; ‘I am panicking’; ‘I need to leave’. She views the buildings’ owners sceptically or distrustfully. She is excluded or, one time, chased out. To finish the poem quoted above:

          Intercom,
          guards, multiple
          pools outside
          to which residents only
          are granted access.

Where, as often, the architecture of impressiveness is also an architecture of hierarchies and exclusions. 

The unease is linked to the desire for these inaccessible splendours, starting with the proem’s plaintive ‘How can we reach them?’ not long followed by, ‘how could we afford this/ ever’. Of course, the house is famously the commodity that you can spend your life buying. ‘Why are we here?’ our dreamer asks teleologically. ‘House shopping…’ But even in ownership, anxiety remains unallayed. In one dream, ‘we’ ‘invested in property’ ironically enough in a ‘conservation area’:

          But our home is gone.

          All that remains is a dusty
          square surrounded by other
          people’s properties.

 And the book’s final image is:

          A house
          that from a distance
          looks like a house
          but when approached
          becomes a sheet of plywood
          raised up on stilts
          in the shape of a house.

In their materiality, buildings are about basic needs; in reverie, this book proposes, they’re sites of conflicting emotions that we can find hard to acknowledge, never mind resolve. In its elliptical, quiet way, it’s onto something resonant and rather subversive.

Guy Russell 2nd May 2026

Atoms by Clive Gresswell (erbacce press)

Atoms by Clive Gresswell (erbacce press)

Atoms is a free flowing pamphlet-length prose poem, a sinuous sweep through the first quarter of the 21st century as it lurches into and out of lockdown. I’m reminded of Carl Jung’s essay on James Joyce’s Ulysses in which he refers to the work as a cosmic tapeworm. Jung initially wants us to see this as an insult, characterising writing he saw produced as much by an autonomic nervous system as by an aesthetic intelligence. But something in Jung’s writing feels conflicted. It’s as if he almost admires Ulysses for its parasitic processing power. And as it turns out, he does. He says of the book:

     There is life in it, and life in never exclusively evil and destructive…it wants to be an 

     eye of the moon, a consciousness detached from the object, in thrall neither to the 

     gods, nor to sensuality, and bound neither by love nor hate, neither by conviction nor 

     by prejudice ‘Ulysses’ does not preach this but practices it—detachment of 

     consciousness is the goal the through the fog of this book

Atoms is a tape worm. It is the 21st century eating itself. It has an internal logic this way, it has aesthetics this way, and in this way it is alive. You don’t feel the sense of the poet behind the poem, generating the old A level questions, what is Gresswell thinking? what does he mean? The writing can do that for itself, thank you. It’s a clever worm, a socialist worm, a worm that frankly has to stomach a lot when it comes to eating history. Deep down it’s probably quite glad to be a worm, that it doesn’t have to retch, or stop to demonstrate its outrage. It can leave that to the reader, maybe even its author, but it won’t care about that. The best writing has long since ceased to care for its author:

     Some of the atomic figures were fictitious. The prime minister instilled a sense of

     calm into the proceedings. More zygotes wrapped themselves around the institutions. 

     They bled racism into the walls of their buildings. Hurrah for common sense and the  jaws of death.  (p.6)

Try and figure out the series of ironies here, finishing with that ‘hurrah’. That last sentence is like the ghost in the machine—who says this? The are aspects to the writing that look programmatic, or like a form of cut-up or fold-in, splicing different words and phrases against each other. Here you can imagine the ‘atomic figures’ and ‘zygotes’ could just be dropped in from the discourse suggested by the title of the poem, but in another way they just feel literal, like the sentence between them (except, of course, when has our prime minister done this, really?). And that’s it.   

The language of atoms and zygotes keeps breaking the surface, as if a submerged and subversive force, pre-sentient, questioning us as to who is in charge. The political, the social, undermined by the real drivers, particles, cells, chaos theory: 

     No more night flying caffeine cells to dispute wages dismantled by atomic discipline and wiring.  (p.11)

     Foot-first though the frostbit forest. Matriculation in the atomic sequence. No one 

     here to captivate an audience.  (p.16)

     Still pumping hard a faithful heart draws blood rushing crucifixion to the art of 

     capital atoms. Capital letters adorning wisps of lager clouds.  (pp.27-28)

The connection between the senses of ‘capital’ here isn’t metaphoric, it’s literal. Something in Atoms wants to tell us that nothing is metaphor, everything is contiguous, metonymy. 

Atoms is angry. Who is it angry with? Trump, Johnson and Starmer are named targets, but across the whole piece it seems plain that Atoms is angry with an ideology, a neo-liberal ideology underpinned by the return of humanism. It is angry to know that beneath everything, humanism is not humane. You can see the influence of Sean Bonney in this poem, but with one major difference. Bonney’s work takes things personally, and there is a subject position to suffer it all for us. Here Gresswell’s text presents no subject: if you feel the abjection consequent to its violence, there is no proxy. You take it. You have to live here:

     Recalled and on pianos in destitution unfurled by Universal Credit music. Fashions  come and go in times of rigor mortise. (p.35)

Keith Jebb 12th March 2022