"I can assure you that your view that Davis tried to
'assassinate'
Te Kooti and 'pillaged' his culture would appal and
distress his
descendants, and the Ringatu faithful of the
Turanganui a Kiwa who
supported and collaborated in his project from start
to finsih."
You and Leigh Davis, the 'avant-garde', 'oppositional'
poet who, in his corporate dayjob as a Fay Richwhite
hitman, helped engineer the sacking of thousands of
Maori workers from the Railways a few years back? It
would appear to me that you like 'indigenous' input,
just so long as it agrees with your point of view.
Instance: your attitude to Tina Engels-Schwarzpaul's
meticulous demolition job on your book, an attitude
not unfairly represented by the following sentence
from your last posting:
"The critique so-called hardly deserved a response
from us."
Let us hear a couple of excerpts from this
contemptible critique:
"I talked to a Maori man in his 60s, a native Maori
speaker and member of the Ringatu Church, who had come
across the book by chance. He felt bewildered and hurt
about the way this list was produced, and perceived a
connection with the pages immediately following, where
'hauhau' is linked up with maumau, hoodoo and voodoo:
"This almost speaks of something sinister...implying
that it's got all this voodoo stuff in it...Those are
coming from the Bahamas, don't they?Maumau from
Africa.Seems like they are suggesting all the same
thing.'"
Tina goes on to comment, intelligently: "Anyone
publishing about Maori culture in New Zealand art and
culture ought to be aware of the history of colonial
claims and practices to classify notions such as 'art'
or 'truth'.There is a real and practical danger of
perpetuating injustices and imperial arrogance through
ignorance...[Curnow and Davis']engagement with its
more disturbing sides smacks more of taking for
artistic effect, than a contribution to the culture
that already paid the price.In that respect, it is
even more problematic. As my Maori acquaintance
wondered, the project might be using the notion of
bi-culturalism for 'something else.' After all, in his
view, 'it's not as if this information is something
new. It's as old as the hills. It doesn't seem to be
breaking new ground.All I am concerned about is waht
they were really getting at. That's the part that
really worries me."
Is it fair for Wystan to say that this "so-called
critique hardly deserved a response"? List members
can decide for themselves.
Cheers
Scott
X-Apparently-To: [log in to unmask] via
web802.mail.yahoo.com
X-Track: 1: 40
Organization: The University of Auckland
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 13:17:58 +1200
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b)
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from Quoted-printable to 8bit by
naga.mailbase.ac.uk id CAA21635
Subject: Re: reply to P Nicolayev
From: "Wystan Curnow" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask]
X-Unsub: To leave, send text 'leave poetryetc' to
[log in to unmask]
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: [log in to unmask]
More snake oil, I fear
>
> "The
> first list: ' poets who talk most about L= poetry'
is
> not reliable: if Stead
> ever has it is has been to mock it. (or do you mean
we
> 'pursue a right
> wing politics?)."
> I meant that all the poets in the list I gave have
> right-wing/conservative political views and/or a
> record of taking right-wing positions. I fail to see
> why this should be offensive to the poets mentioned
-
> Stead, for instance, has been only too happy to be
the
> public face of the right-wing education 'thinktank'
> the Education Forum, to assert support Rogernomics
and
> to oppose electoral reform in public. I suppose he
> might prefer to be called centre-right, but it's
> certainly not outrageous to call him a right-winger.
But Scott, you were answering Philip's response to
your assertion
that L=poetry interested poets pursued right-wing
politics. My
response was that Stead was not a L=poetry interested
poet,
regardless of his politics, do you dispute that? And
it is confusing to
say so. But then, you have a problem mustering
evidence for the
'many' such poets don' t you? It is outrageous to
claim I have right
wing views or a record of taking right-wing positions.
>
> "The next list is not very
> helpful to you other than it is about as disparate a
> bunch as you could
> wish."
>
> As I pointed out when I gave it!
No. You said you didn't know why you picked them and
that they
were off the top of your head. Does it follow that
your list was
therefore disparate group? I have no problem with the
disparateness,
but thought it worth pointing out.
I was not exactly
> trying to fill a hall of fame, though I am a fan of
> all the poets mentioned. I am sure Philip has access
> to all the standard anthologies and histories, I was
> trying to throw in a few surprises (though of course
> Smithyman would be a big part of any history worth
its
> salt). God save poets from the anthologists, I guess
> I'm saying...
>
>
> "Te Kooti: there's never been a published
collection
> of his
> writings--I wish there had been. That he is a poet
is
> an invention of
> Leigh Davis."
>
> This statement is extremely annoying. Its arrogance
> explains why your millionaire mate Davis' book,
which
> pillaged Te Kooti and Maori culture in the name of a
> third-hand postmodernism, has pissed off so many
> people here in Aotearoa. Davis didn't invent Te
Kooti
> as a poet - what gives you the nerve to even say
that?
> - he tried to assasinate him. Why don't you respond
to
> Tina Engels-Schwarzpaul's extended critique of
Davis'
> mess, which she gave the not-inappropriate name
> 'Between meaning and nonsense'? And if you were able
> to crawl from the wreckage of your Eurocentric
mindset
> for a moment or two, you would be able to realise
that
> one does not have to publish with Oxford University
> Press or be dismembered by Leigh Davis' word
processor
> to be a 'poet.'As it happens, many of Te Kooti's
poems
> have been published, and I have a folio of them I
> would be happy to make available to Philip.
Scott, as a poster whose style is to annoy, you
should not mind the
annoyed statements you provoke. It is the case, as I
say, that there is
no published collection of Te Kooti's writing, and
that I wish there
were. My point was, as you say yourself, the work is
hard to find, and
undervalued.You are at liberty to question the terms
of Davis's
reading of Te Kooti's work, but not that any one else
has made a such
serious attempt to present or conceive of Te Kooti as
an artist and a
poet. I can assure you that your view that Davis tried
to 'assassinate'
Te Kooti and 'pillaged' his culture would appal and
distress his
descendants, and the Ringatu faithful of the
Turanganui a Kiwa who
supported and collaborated in his project from start
to finsih. Nor
would it be supported by Te Kooti's biographer, Judith
Binney. I was
the co-editor, with Davis, of what Scott so kindly
refers to as Davis's
'mess'--this is a book/CD publication , Te Tangi a te
Matuhi (the title
is that of a Te Kooti patere (or poem if you
like))published last year.
The critique so-called hardly deserved a response from
us.
>
> "Scott, since you are now connecting the University
of
> Auckland
> English Department with poets who you say did (or
did
> not in
> Michele's case) lock their doors while your mates
got
> their heads
> cracked a couple of blocks away in the University
> Admin. building,
> and some people will know I work in the English
> Department, let me
> just say to all members of this list that the
> insinuations are malicious,
> unjust and have no basis in fact."
>
>
> I have no idea whether you locked yourself in your
> room, and I never said you did.
Again, again. You implied it (as I said-- Scott,
you claim to like
robust disciplined argument, but don't play by the
rules!
What I do know is that
> you, unlike senior English department figures in
other
> parts of the country, did not lift a finger to
condemn
> the actions of the police and the uni
administration.
> Nor, I understand, did you deign to join the junior
> staff in your department who courageously tried to
> fight a large funding cut that was threatening their
> jobs. All of these criticisms are outlined in the
open
> letter that has been published in A Brief
Description
> of the Whole World. No one has questioned the
factual
> basis of these criticisms (critics of the letter
have
> instead focused on the relevance of a person's
> political action, or rather inaction, on an
asessment
> of their poetics) but you are most welcome to give
it
> a go. If you can refute them, I will retract them.
You
> should base any attempt to refute them on what I
> really say in that document, which you have had a
> copy of for some months now, not on any imaginary
> insinuations. Once again, I stress that I am not
> trying to turn this into a witchhunt,
Why then do I get the impression that's exactly
what you are doing?
List members might be interested to know that the
National
Government's attack on the university funding in this
country
extended over a number of years, but I'm not all
that sure that they
will. Or that, adminstrations, staff and students
were, unsurprisingly,
all opposed to this campaign that it was a constant
source of concern
and periodically of outrage, that sometimes, for
predictable reasons,
the pressure set students and/or staff against
admininstration--this
was the situation at Victoria, to which Scott refers,
or put them on
different paths of resistance, that I am well aware
the work Tony,
Michael, and others put into the document they sent to
the
newspapers, and was indeed involved in the discussions
around it.
I am sure the list doesn't wish to know about the
union meeetings I've
been to, how I've voted, and so on. Get off my back,
Scott.
Wystan
but rather build
> a useful discussion.
>
> Cya
> Scott
> X-Apparently-To: [log in to unmask] via
> web804.mail.yahoo.com
> X-Track: 1: 40
> Organization: The University of Auckland
> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 16:59:06 +1200
> Priority: normal
> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b)
> X-MIME-Autoconverted: from Quoted-printable to 8bit
by
> naga.mailbase.ac.uk id GAA02047
> Subject: Re: reply to P Nicolayev
> From: "Wystan Curnow" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> X-Unsub: To leave, send text 'leave poetryetc' to
> [log in to unmask]
> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
> Sender: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> Hello Scott,
> This is snake oil you'rr selling here.
> Philip take no notice. The
> first list: ' poets who talk most about L= poetry'
is
> not reliable: if Stead
> ever has it is has been to mock it. (or do you mean
we
> 'pursue a right
> wing politics?). See my previous email. The next
list
> is not very
> helpful to you other than it is about as disparate a
> bunch as you could
> wish. Te Kooti: there's never been a published
> collection of his
> writings--I wish there had been. That he is a poet
is
> an invention of
> Leigh Davis.
>
> Scott, since you are now connecting the
> University of Auckland
> English Department with poets who you say did (or
did
> not in
> Michele's case) lock their doors while your mates
got
> their heads
> cracked a couple of blocks away in the University
> Admin. building,
> and some people will know I work in the English
> Department, let me
> just say to all members of this list that the
> insinuations are malicious,
> unjust and have no basis in fact.
> Wystan
>
>
=====
"Why is it not possible for me to doubt that I have never been on the moon? And how
could I try to doubt it? First and foremost, the supposition that perhaps I have
been there would strike me as idle. Nothing would follow from it, nothing be
explained by it. It would not tie in with anything in my life... Philosophical
problems occur when language goes on holiday. We must not separate ideas from life,
we must not be misled by the appearances of sentences: we must investigate the
application of words in individual language-games" - Ludwig Wittgenstein
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
