You seem to contribute manfully to the industry yourself, Hugh. At
least, you bought the mixed bag of cliched responses at the Plath-Lowell
souvenir shop.
Mairead
On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Hugh Tolhurst wrote:
> Jon Corelis wrote:-
>
> I've heard some people criticize that poem on the grounds that it's
> morally contemptible to compare one's personal neurotic suffering to
> Nazi genocide.
>
> And Oz playwrite Louis Nowra is one who says that... It's a view I'm
> sympathetic to. To me, though their openness was groundbreaking,
> Lowell and Plath tend sometimes to look to the industry that will come
> after them, something I dislike in 'spokespeople for the disabled'. Of
> course who is talking when they talk like that?
>
> For mine, James Schuyler in the Payne Whitney Poems and elsewhere
> writes much better of pressing his face to the glass, wanting to be well.
> Wanting a different out from parts of Plath.
>
> It's the industry around Plath and Lowell I dislike most, the easy way
> secondary and tertiary courses suggested Poetry by Women died with
> Sylvia Plath, and there's no point reading men after Robert Lowell...
>
> There's much to admire, but certainly some things you can dislike in
> both poets complete works. Lowell is an easy poet to love, then you likely
> fall out of love with him fairly completely.
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|