Andy,
Your point about how a finite income must limit one's access to books is
relevant, to put it mildly.
Here's a proposal:
Many listees have poetry books or mags they don't want either because of
duplication or whatever. If anyone sends me details of _any_ such books that
they would be willing to swap along with contact information I will mount
this
info on a website and send details to the poetryetc. This might make books
(a)
more available and (b) put them in the company of books they don't usually
get seen with. (Nobody has to send me actual books, just info! unless of
course ....)
If someone has a book you'd like, you can write to or e-mail them and make
them an offer. What do you think?
best
Randolph Healy
PS Thought Chris' post put things very well.
----- Original Message -----
From: Andrew Jackson <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2000 11:57 AM
Subject: Re: Forced invisibility and pluralism
> Mornin' Chris,
>
> You've hit the nail on the head here. The primary channels
> being narrow (in some cases close to drying up) there's only
> so much which lands on shore. For those like myself who have
> neither the money nor the time to go actively prospecting in
> the multitude of literary magazines, the experience of what's
> out there is pretty much limited to your questioned-marked list
> and to the Bloodaxe anthologies (good point). Bloodaxe
> 'New Poets'? Looked to me like all the old ones lumped
> together. More Liz Lochhead anybody? Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
>
> Bear in mind also that few people have the luxury of being
> omniverous in their tastes, whether it's poetry or music or
> whatever -- stocking up on the latest Nusrat Ali Fateh Khan
> CDs requires disposable income, again. Unless you're of
> a mind to spend sunny weekends in the library, and assuming their
> stock contains anything beyond the Heaney-Hughes-Duffy range.
>
> Mind you, now that Randolph's list has been posted, why doesn't
> someone with a knowledge of these writers put a selection
> together and submit it for publication? More productive than
> whinging about it, I would have thought. And I for one would buy
> it, next time I had a spare couple of bob.
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|