Hi Rebecca
>I think this is an interesting point and with considerable merit, but why
not write an essay on this particular point, since it was the point of the
article, rather than having the review be a kind of stalking horse for one's
views? <
That's a moot question, which invokes the matter of the delicate gradations
of difference in response, for instance, if say David is talking in casual
conversation he might be careless of precise wording, David in -e-mail might
be a bit more meticulous but liable sometimes to (ahem) thoughtless remarks,
David writing a short review might still be squibby while David inhabiting
an essay might be considered, rounded, extremely tired, and balanced in his
views.
Apropos of your mention of fundamentalists, one of my (least) favourite
paradoxes is that several people I know in the lower-class world I mainly
inhabit are simultaneously deeply racist (in respect of asylum seekers for
example) while passionately opposed to war in Iraq on the grounds that it
would result in the deaths of untold numbers of innocent Iraqis. Now make
sense of views like that, I certainly can't.
Scratching my head in bewilderment.
Best
Dave
David Bircumshaw
Leicester, England
Home Page
A Chide's Alphabet
Painting Without Numbers
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/david.bircumshaw/index.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: "seiferle" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 4:49 AM
Subject: Re: Reviews
Hi David,
Thanks for your reply.
Yes, someone sent the footnote that O'Farrell was the original source of the
"sexy" remark about Padel, which I should have included in my first post on
the matter. I did include O'Farrell in my post's "pro or con," since I'm not
in favor of praising a poet's work on the basis of her sexiness. So, yes, I
guess O'Farrell started it, though I would have hoped the error of marketing
would not become the continuing folly of a review.
Also while you are probably right that the look of some men may help sell
their poetry, I don't think I have read many reviews of a man's poetry
collection that so hinge upon the discussion of his sexiness or sexuality.
>two, the key point seems to me to be the comparison with New Labour,
>implicit is a notion of tokenism, homage can be paid to notions of sexual
or
>racial equality while the same old abuses of power go on in redesigned
garb.
I think this is an interesting point and with considerable merit, but why
not write an essay on this particular point, since it was the point of the
article, rather than having the review be a kind of stalking horse for one's
views? In my view ignoring the work in favor of making a point upon society
or to take the measure of the poet has the result of endorsing those very
assumptions which dismiss and erase poetry from the culture. The review in
this sense says who cares about the work? the particular poem? the
particular book under review? What matters are the social/political issues
involved or the quality of sexiness.
Sometimes I have taken a sort of perverse hope in listening to the
discussions of evangelical right wing Christians because they have so
adopted the jargon of their times. While they mean to war with a secular
society, it permeates their language and their thought. I think perhaps they
have lost without knowing it. So in this matter of paying attention to
everything but the poem it seems to me that those who are fighting about
many things in the name of poetry have perhaps lost, without knowing it, any
faith in its independent value at all.
Best,
Rebecca
Rebecca Seiferle
www.thedrunkenboat.com
|