Henry, a 'genuine philosophic poetry'? Leaving aside for ever what that might
be, it is true that much innovative poetry has a philosophic genesis and
drift - it shares these however, to a greater or lesser degree, with other
genetics and drifts. And surely it is not therefore surprising that such
poetry should engage with the philosophy of its day. Henry's assumption seems
to be that just because someone 'engages' then they are a slave to what they
engage in, as though everything is determined. OK, we know there are many
twits out there who can regurgitate theory to pass a paper or impress a
colleague or make their pathetic attempt at art seem justified by being part
of 'what's going on', but surely those people can be spotted a mile off and
ignored. They are a problem in institutional settings, in power bases,
agreed, but they are not the ultimate problem. The ultimate problem is not
engaging but going back into a the past to find something essential which you
feel has been lost. Henry, is the way out of the PM condition a matter of
willpower? No, don't think so. The way out of PM has to be by engaging with
it and not going back home in a huff. For myself, I cannot help but engage
with it, whether I am writing or not. The thing is out there on the streets
as well as in my thought threads. The future is out there too anyhow in the
power of China and the anger and resentment of the third world at western
double talk and double standards. And what the hell has the simplistic twist
giving on things by Rorty got to do with any of it. OK, agreed, if Nietzche
is the mouth then Rorty is the asshole.. yea.. agreeing then... for a split
second...
Tim A.
|