You don't really mean that. Just throw anything at the page? Learn nothing
from the practice of one's craft?
Of course I could say that any prestructured project reifies hierarchy, but
that would be pretty dumb. Also tactless and (intellectually) immature.
If you don't want to engage an argument just say so. This sort of sidestep
just pisses me off. I have a hard time abiding political accusations or
fools in silence. Reminds me, I guess, of the endless arguments of my
adolescence about who was a better Trotskyist.
While we're at it, you do, like most of us, suck at the trough of bourgeois
society. By the way.
Mark
At 08:49 PM 9/10/2001 +0100, you wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:29:39 -0700, Mark Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
>wrote:
>
>>The links between the
>>>poet and the literary/cultural theorist is somehow unavoidable. I myself
>>>do not believe in spontaneity and I hope that behind each poet there is a
>>>project not merely a vent of words, an outburst of tears or joy, the
>desire
>>>to give find expression for one’s wrath.
>>
>>Theorists, some of them poets, will continue to theorize and occasionally
>>invent isms, but the impact of the link is certainly avoidable if theory
>>follows from, is derived from, practice.
>>
>>Writing spontaneously doesn't mean writing egotistically. Writing with a
>>project in mind often does. One is finally only protected from oneself by
>>tact and maturity.
>>
>>Mark
>
>By the way: tact and maturity are no reelvant measures for poetry.
>these are good measures for bourgeois society.
>
>erminia
>
|