On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Erminia Passannanti wrote:
>
> >
> > > Does anyone know (or have a convincing theory about) why there are next
> > > to no women poets in the Stand "Poetry of the Committed Individual"
> > > anthology that both Hill and Harrison turn up in? Women not committed
> > > enough?
>
> Of course there are not committed women poets in the Stand "Poetry of the
> Committed Individual" anthology.
> ....what do you think!
> We are only interested in diets, size and measures (of penis, of course),
> wedding etiquette,
> gossips, moreover we are not intelligent (notoriously), and we are not
> individuals.
>
> That's why!
Assuming a serious answer was wanted, I'd say ask Rodney Pybus or Jon
Glover or Lorna Tracy. When Jon Silkin was editing the anthology in 1973
I doubt very seriously if he was motivated my misogyny. All kinds of
factors go in to anthologies of contemporary literature, including the
willingness of copyright owners to allow work to be reprinted in small
press books for affordable fees. I remember listening to more than one
rant about how horrible it was that Woolf was only represented by "The
Mark on the Wall" in so many American anthologies, when the truth was the
Woolf estate refused permission for other works except for very high
fees.(Now mercifully at an end, I believe.) Some poets Jon may have wanted
may have disagreed with the premise of the anthology--and the numbers of
women poets to choose from wasn't quite as high in the early seventies
either.
David Latane
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|