----- Original Message -----
From: david.bircumshaw <[log in to unmask]>
To: Poetryetc provides a venue for a dialogue relating to poetry and
poetics, r <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 12:14 AM
Subject: Re: Invisible Tattoos and democratic disagreement
> Hugh Tolhurst writes:
>
> > Disagree with me by all means (though it would help
> > your case if you read the book in question) but don't
> > deny my right to democratically comment that a very
> > unfavourable review was undeserved. Similarly, don't
> > deny the right of Aural Text on 3RRR to democratically
> > discuss whether the review was fair on the airwaves.
> > Well, that is don't deny these rights if you are
> > democratically inclined.
> >
>
> Now I know that the changeover of listservers has tangled and confused the
> run of the threads, but I still haven't seen where anyone in this and
> related threads has denied either Hugh's right to comment or the radio
> station's right to discuss the review, bearing in mind that by discussion
I
> do mean a debate where the 'verdict' is not predetermined.
> I do, though, balk at the last sentence above, and it's apparent
association
> via aspersion of anyone who doesn't echo the writer's views with
> anti-democratic attitudes.
> But even more than that, I have to object to Hugh Tolhurst's continuance
of
> his disagreement with Alison to the point where he is going beyond a
> badgering protest, however tedious, and coming close to the personally
> vindictive. Mr Tolhurst does not agree with Alison. He has said so. Mr
> Tolhurst does not agree with her. He has said so again.
>
> And again and again and...
>
> Which is rather a hectoring, or a bully would-be.
>
> And with that I disagree, I find it reprehensible, and almost worse,
> aesthetically, boring,
>
> and you bet, I deny his 'right' to do so.
>
> Democratically, that is.
>
> david bircumshaw
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Hugh Tolhurst <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2000 11:57 PM
> Subject: Invisible Tattoos and democratic disagreement
>
>
> > The archive has been slow updating but I'm
> > informed via Candice Ward that 'puerile' and
> > 'get off the pot' are terms now involved in
> > discussing my view that a book Invisible Tattoos
> > is better than a review by Alison Croggon suggests.
> >
> > In disagreeing with that ABR review, I'm really
> > only echoing sentiments expressed by Morag Fraser
> > in ABR's October 2000 Symposium on reviewing.
> > Morag Fraser commented:-
> >
> > 'Trenchant understanding yields so much more for the
> > reader (and writer) than a parade of superior taste
> > and sharp (or cruel) phrase making.'
> >
> > In noting that others (3RRR's Aural Text) also
> > disagreed with the review and planned to air these
> > disagreements, I was volunteering information
> > chanced upon. Alicia Sometimes is also employed
> > at my local bookshop, she chanced to mention her
> > view of the review to me on Friday... (That is, some
> > time after I'd posted my view that the review was
> > harsh and undeserved).
> >
> > It so happens I subscribe to 3RRR largely because
> > I like the music it plays and think it the best of
> > Australia's independent stations, but also because
> > I enjoy shows like 'Aural Text'. If anyone other
> > than Candice took exception to my post mentioning
> > the nature of the 3 RRR license in response to Coral
> > Hull's 'I would listen to 3 RRR but I've got a life' - well,
> > no pejorative reflection on Coral was intended (and I
> > apologise to Coral if offence was somehow taken), I was
> > merely writing in defence of the excellent radio station she
> > dismissed.
> >
> > If I thought the review unfair, it is after all partly
> > because I purchased and read the book before
> > reading the review. It's not the very best poetry collection
> > I've read in 2000 but it is far from the worst I've read
> > and I didn't think it deserved Alison's 'sharp (or cruel)
> > phrase making' by way of review.
> >
> > Disagree with me by all means (though it would help
> > your case if you read the book in question) but don't
> > deny my right to democratically comment that a very
> > unfavourable review was undeserved. Similarly, don't
> > deny the right of Aural Text on 3RRR to democratically
> > discuss whether the review was fair on the airwaves.
> > Well, that is don't deny these rights if you are
> > democratically inclined.
> >
> > Hugh Tolhurst
> >
>
|