Lists ARE nonsense
Practicing poetry is nonsense
Audiences in the mind are nonesense
Refering to a recognizable world is nonsense
As are recongnizable human emotions
And concerns, ie
Religion is also a nonesense
Death, Nature,and Love too
Come to that.
Intelligent contemporary poems reaching people
professing to still love poetry
Are a nonesense.
All except humour.
Wystan
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Swift [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, 17 October 2003 4:34 a.m.
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Larkin tops readers' poll
Lists may be nonsense, but perhaps practicing poets, which many of us are,
fail to heed them at our peril, when the lists are polls voted on by
professed poetry readers and lovers?
That is, though no one would want to suggest that poets write with an
audience in mind (we leave that to screenwriters and potboiler authors), it
is interesting to note that the poets most favored are those who obviously
wrote poems which refer to a recognizable world (sic) and recongnizable
human emotions and concerns (religion, death, nature, love); and in some
cases, even used humour.
Having just come back from a large book fair, I noted with interest the
brisk trade in novels - global deals for translations into all known
languages - and how readings by thriller authors such as Ken Follet draw the
cameras and crowds, while the poets make do with smaller audiences.
Of course, such acclaim or interest is not the point of writing. But it may
be a barometer of something.
How can intelligent contemporary poems reach the sort of people who profess
to still love poetry, without "selling" poetry short, seems a relevant
question, then, after such a poll.
Todd
|