"Modernist diction may, in ways still to be fully elucidated, be indebted to female gender stances (in Stein, in Loy, in Moore). Marianne DeKoven, assimilating Kristeva, sees modernist 'experimental writing as anti-patriarchal' a stance necessary to rupture dominant culture by a focus on the signifier, not the signified, and interestingly initiated by a woman, Gertrude Stein. Jeanne Kammer suggests that the modernist style in Dickinson, Moore and H.D. was born from the pressures of silence -- 'habits of privacy, camouflage, and indirection' -- which resulted in 'linguistic compression' and juxtaposition." (DuPlessis H.D.7) I like this theory so much better than those who say that experimental writing is oblique, fractured, and a symptom of our alienation. Collage writing, especially, can be seen as a way of quilting, layering. Somehow, to some, complexity is seen as a form of fracture. Why? I don't know. Complexity to me, is a way of adding meaning, deepening experience. There was an interview than saddened me, with Sharon Dolin, who said the Language Poetry silences the I, and is anti-woman for her. But all the cool language poets are women so I don't see how that is exactly true. I don't think they are silencing the I, they are going beyond the I. The I is incredibly simple and small to me, whereas to go beyond it does not exclude it, but encompasses more, all of experience, universe sized.