Hi Hugh & Alison & poetryetceteras,
With regards the discussion about Alison's review of Lauren William's
poetry - perhaps we can see different 'schools' or 'camps' of poetry working
here (to contradict my previous thoughts on no camps in oz)???
I haven't read the review Hugh is referring to - but I couldn't think of two
more different forms of poetry than Lauren Williams' & Alison Croggons'.
While these differences do not necessarily have to be perceived as 'camps',
when a poet from one field reviews a poet from a different field, in a
negative way, the establishment of 'camps' can begin to take shape.
If we were to have a critical language with which to discuss these different
approaches to poetry then perhaps there would be less confusion and
frustration. Of course, the problem is - how to utilise a critical language
which does not reify these differences into 'camps'.
I would not be surprised to read a negative review of Lauren Williams' work
by Alison. Nor would I be surprised if the reverse were to occur - in many
ways a review often says more about what the reviewer/poet desires than what
the poetry under review does. Ah, we are such subjective beings and
objective reviewing processes are a fallacy. Better we realised and
acknowledged that reviewers have their own ideas about what defines a 'good'
poem or what poetry should do, and these may not be the same as the poet who
wrote the collection under review.
regards
deb
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|