Dear David,
how cruel of you! I guess you couldn't resist.
Wystan
-----Original Message-----
From: david.bircumshaw [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, 9 March 2001 12:20 p.m.
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: STIMULUS: POETRY AND CENSORSHIP
Perhaps you should extend that to some of your posts, Wystan.
Birkenstocks
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wystan Curnow (FOA ENG)" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 10:52 PM
Subject: Re: STIMULUS: POETRY AND CENSORSHIP
> Good point Kari. I have to confess to been very guilty of this.
> I can't count the number of potential masterpieces I've destroyed.
> In fact, many's the time I've put finger to key and thought here comes
> another potential masterpiece, and within seconds a little voice says to
me
> you pretentious, self-important git, its shit already and shit is what
it's
> going to be, stop right now. And I say thanks to that little voice,thank
you
> my sweet censor. Those are the worst times.
> Wystan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kari Foster [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, 9 March 2001 4:35 a.m.
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: STIMULUS: POETRY AND CENSORSHIP
>
>
> A form of censorship that is hard to judge correctly
> is self-censorship. Some great poets have been
> excessively critical of their own work, to the point
> of destroying potential masterpieces. Others, who
> apply insufficient self-censorship, run the risk of
> publishing unworthy poems.
>
> Kari Foster
>
|