I have zero interest in the labels we attach to "avant-garde" or "experimental" or "innovative" poetry. I think it is a wretchedly nominalist way of discussing poetry.

What if innovative poetry is not really all that innovative, because it uses techniques invented 100 years ago? I wouldn't care, because these techniques still work; they are still viable and stimulate my imagination. What if the avant-garde is a militaristic metaphor? Well, I don't really care about that either. Call it what you will, it's still where it's at. You say Wash and I say Warsh, you say Mayer and I say Mayhew, let's call the whole thing off.

If academia has absorbed language poetry, all the better! I am an academic and language poetry makes my life a whole lot more interesting. I don't even care whether you call it language poetry or not or put little equal signs between all the letters. Shakepeare's plays were written by Shakespeare or someone else with the same name.