Multiple spiral fractures are virtually always taken to be signs of abuse.

Articulation, in terms of the skeleton, refers to the manner in which two bones are fitted to and move against one another to form a joint. Inarticulate therefore means unjoined, or perhaps isolated.

I think the shift from mmcn to this second book has been a shift from phenomenology to a poetics that's at least trying to get to ontology. Is that even a meaningful thing to say? It has to do with getting away from narrative and sensory vividness (not that I was terribly narrative to begin with, compared to some people, but still more so than others), and going deeper into the forests of making words do things they aren't used to doing, in my poems' case, making them not only describe but instantiate, convey by embodiment, states of being. Some of this is still psychological or relational but some of it is another level removed & concomitantly harder to describe.

Pain cannot be articulated because it cannot be divided.

What you speak about can't be pain, then, but is at most its divided, imaged, languaged impression.

In which case, we're relieved of the burden of trying to convey our pain, just as we're relieved of the burden of trying to convey anything else. It's not conveyance at all, but a maximization of language's capabilities to interact with itself, its subject an accident in the way that a saint's body is an accident. And for me, that doesn't mean abandoning syntax or the appearance of narrative, even, but it does mean that syntax, producing description and eventually narrative, becomes a manipulable feature of the medium rather than its structuring ground.

Think of building a skeletal model of an animal that doesn't exist. This, of course, is a hallowed carnival tradition and a perfectly legitimate form of trickery that's earned a place in plenty of museums.