But those who object to we
should also object to irony
as one like the other implies
a shared but hungry knowledge.
Do we agree that more salt
is needed in this, our porridge?
And if so then I agree
that the moved use of we
should then pass between us
to mitigate this alien world
for as you very well gnosis
wee really comes from Uranus


Well... This reaction too is familiar to me since those who are used to
prefer the personal pronoun "we" to avoid , in my view, direct involvement
and responsability in what they state or dare to say in poetry , or else to
simply back themselves up (in love poems, expecially)often responde
vehemently and beyond proportion (even by resorting to personal attacks as
you are doing with no particular need to do so)to the fact that a given X
cast an y doubt on the use of a given general "device". I was merely
making irony on idea of marriage poems, not sociliciting offences to me. As
for the way my irony turned into being a "self-parody", as you kindly
stressed,Francis, please since the passage - in a logical sense - appears
obscure to me, could you expand?. Mayeb you could attempt to illuminate the
list by providing textual analysis of my personal use or non-use of "we" in
my own poetry? But I am sure, you would not be bothered neither it would
change the fact that those who abuse the personal pronoun "we" in their
poems sound boring to me, as a critic and a reader. As for marriage poem, I
have none to submit to a newly webbed couple. Maybe a different text that
I have in my mind would be more appropriate, but again, this does not
belong to our Western culture and it is not a lyric poem.


>Erminia writes:
>
>>Generally I deeply object (I said that elsewhere on Poetryetc)
>>to using the personal pronoun "we" in poetry.
>
>
>This argument is familiar to me, but just as I felt some people were doing
>in the recent discussion of speech / writing, it seems to me you're
>exaggerating it to the point of self-parody. Not all uses of the word are
>coercive - most of the time they're simply factual. If you dismiss every
use
>of 'we' you'll get rid of half the poems ever written. (And before you say
>good riddance, think for a moment of the consequences when someone else
>takes a blowtorch to what's left for the sake of the next critical fad.)
>
>Pronouns are always problematic in poetry because of the oddly impersonal
>nature of text itself, but I gotta use words when I talk to you. I do think
>the question of community and the extent to which it can be enacted in
>poetry is a very important one. Poets need to ask themselves when it's
>appropriate to use 'we'. But to give up and say never strikes me as a kind
>of kneejerk nihilism that won't get us any nearer the solution. (Sorry -
did
>I say *us*?)
>
>Best wishes
>
>Matthew