Why do critics need these labels so? I mean, Alex says some very intelligent
and perceptive things about the poets he lumps under this heading, but the
heading itself adds nothing. What would a new vanguard look like? Especially
when you consider that what most unites the poets discussed under the rubric
is their differences one from the other. There is no 'group' to be subsumed
under any label.
But it is a bloody good book.
As is Donal's book on Coffey, which focuses on Brian's verbal music and on
his translations.
I return to lurkdom. Can't help noticing that the amount of HTML in the
digest increases in inverse proportion to the number of complaints about it!
Billy
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|