have written about visual poetry in modes other than verbal (Johanna Drucker is one, using font and other typographic techniques to enhance her commentary. Why re/present visual poetry theory in verbal mode at all? Doesn't that contradict the mission, communicating through the primacy of the visual? Can't visual poets construct the visual argument to say what they want to say about their medium?
It may be that we are born into a world of words (tyranny of the alphabet), haven't developed the visual vocabulary and grammar, and fall back into the predictable comfort of words?