I must admit this is a good debate, however, at times one or two postees
provide only a personal opinion rather than an objective point of view. As
Mark says, one should back up what they are saying, otherwise we discount it
as purely supposition.
David Kennedy: In answer to your post re my queston: Is not one of the roles
of the writer to speak for those who have no voice?"
which you answered - >No, it isn't. The idea is ridiculous and patronising.
How can anyone presume to speak for anyone else?
You are taking the statement that a writer gives voice to those with no
voice too literally. Of course, a writer cannot physically/literally speak
for those who do not/or cannot write ie. those who have no voice. But if a
writer writes from personal experience (& this does not apply to all
writers), is not he/she, inadvertently commenting and/or portraying the
society and culture in which he/she lives and experiences? Hence, becoming
the "mouthpiece" for those who live in the same society/culture.
How can this be patronising?
And again - "The once 'silenced' voice that emerges has a new unique sound,
language, a voice that has soul, a wealth of knowledge, rhythm, the voice
that has been struggling to surface to tell their story."
>Please give examples of how this voice is performatively different.
I have - Grace Nicols - twice - I enjoy her work, ie. it performs for me on
the page, but I've never had the privilege of hearing her "perform" her
work.
HH
>From: Mark Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: the 'feminine'
>Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 00:10:26 -0700
>
>On whose part?
>
>I think all poets get reduced by categorization from time to time. But
>that's the need of the categorizer to create an ordered environment that he
>or she thinks it's possible to live in and understand. I don't know anyone
>who finds woman's experience, certainly not childrearing, in any way
>disqualifying.
>
>
>Perhaps
> >I'm smarting slightly at the thought that poems that deal which
> >specifically female experiences are by definition cliched and twee, by
> >definition buying into an unwanted notion of the merely _feminine_.
> >Surely not. That also is an imprisonment.
> >
> >Best wishes
> >
> >Alison
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|