I think some of the se idea expressed below from A/O are useful things to keep in mind in what you call the more difficult passages in Hart Crane's The Bridge and his other poems.

Yet it has been a long time since Engels demonstrated, already
apropos of Balzac, how an author is great

 because he cannot prevent
himself from tracing flows and causing them to circulate, flows that split
asunder the catholic and despotic signifier of his work, and that
necessarily nourish a revolutionary machine on the horizon.

 That is
what style is, or rather the absence of style—asyntactic, agrammatical:
the moment when language is no longer defined by what it says, even
less by what makes it a signifying thing, but by what causes it to move,
to flow, and to explode—desire.

 For literature is like schizophrenia: a
process and not a goal, a production and not an expression.

133 a/o ENG

 from 243

T                       he extreme importance of J.-F. Lyotard's recent book is due to its
position as the first generalized critique of the signifier. In his most
general proposition, in fact, he shows that the signifier is overtaken
toward the outside by figurative images, just as it is ovvertaken toward
the inside by the pure figures that compose it—or, more decisively, by
"the figural" that comes to short-circuit the signifier's coded gaps,
inserting itself between them, and working under the conditions of
identity of their elements.

 In language and in writing itself, sometimes
the letters as breaks, as shattered partial objects—and sometimes the
words as undivided flows, as nondecomposable blocks, or full bodies
having a tonic value—constitute assignifying signs that deliver themselves
over to the order of desire: rushes of breath and cries.

particular, formal investigations concerning manual or printed writing
change their meaning according to whether the characteristics of the
letters and the qualities of the words are in the service of a signifier,
whose effects they express following exegetical rules; or whether, on the
contrary, they break through this wall so as to set flows in motion, and
establish breaks that overflow or rupture the sign's conditions of
identity, and that cause books within "the book" to flow and to
disintegrate, entering into multiple configurations whose possibilities
were already the object of the typographical exercises of Mallarme—
always passing underneath the signifier, filing through the wall: which
again shows that the death of writing is infinite, so long as it arises and
arrives from within.)

                                   ---------------------But on
the other, the schizorevolutionary, pole, the value of art is no longer
measured except in terms of the decoded and deterritorial-ized flows
that it causes to circulate beneath a signifier reduced to silence, beneath
the conditions of identity of the parameters, across a structure reduced to
impotence; a writing with pneumatic, electronic, or gaseous indifferent
supports, and that appears all the more difficult and intellectual to
intellectuals as it is accessible to the infirm, the illiterate, and the
schizos, embracing all that flows and counterfiows, the gushings of
mercy and pity knowing nothing of meanings and aims (the Artaud
experiment, the Burroughs experiment). It is here that art accedes to its

authentic modernity, which simply consists in liberating what was present in art
from its beginnings, but was hidden underneath aims and objects, even if
aesthetic, and underneath recodings or axiomatics: the pure process that fulfills
itself, and that never ceases to reach fulfillment as it proceeds—art as

Crane's work in its most intense motors passes over and by what can be explained.