Hi Mark,
Yes, I did think your point was that there was 'no most prestigious mag'; I was
just playing along with the sort of ridiculous premise of the question; yakking
basically, since obviously we'd all have our favorites. Though I don't
consistently, finding only something from time to time in various issues. And
agreed about the litter box,
happy New Year
---- Original message ----
>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 00:02:09 -0500
>From: Mark Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: The suckableness of contemporary American poetry
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>The point of my question is that there is no "most prestigious" mag--we
>each have favorites, depending on what kind of poetry we take seriously.
> From my perspective Poetry isn't worthy of lining the litter box, for
>instance, and APR has no editorial position at all, so occasionally it
>prints something decent. Others will differ, which is fine with me--there's
>no reason there should be unanimity. Tho I suspect that Simic's reading is
>on the conservative side. But it would be interesting to know what mag Jon
>was selecting from.
>
>Mark
>
>
>At 11:22 PM 1/1/2005, you wrote:
>>Well, Ken, if we're playing guess the magazine, I'd guess _American Poetry
>>Review_ is the most prestigious, though _Poetry_ has the most money since
>>that humongo grant and Jon's examples sound more like _Poetry_ poems
which
>>has always had a particular editorial taste. And, yes, _Triquarterly_ is
>>still in
>>business but it's a dimn third to these other two, I'd guess, and has
>>revolving
>>editors, or a lot of guest editor issues so the taste is always changing.
>>
>>I thought Doug's response was to the point; Simic is basically ignoring a
>>great
>>deal of work here, and it seems in that sense to me the standard anthology
>>introduction, which is where the editor posits himself and 'other work' in
>>opposition to a level field that he has himself first levelled, ignoring whole
>>bodies of work.
>>
>> I don't get the 'political correctness' bit either or who's the
>>poetry police that enforce it or why poets in the UK are 'free' to be
>>politically
>>incorrect in comparison. Where is that list of 'forbidden words, topics,
>>attitudes'?
>>
>>Bbut then I'm just back from a writer's gathering
>>where there was one poet who wrote entirely in various forms without 'i',
>>another who wrote very funny and witty third person/ persona poems that
had
>>everyone laughing, another who read some political poems that were all over
>>the place in forbidden words, topics, attitudes, and a fourth that did an
>>extended sequence in many voices about Bosnia. So none of the work fit
within
>>Simic's criticism, though perhaps it wouldn't make it into the 'most
>>prestigious
>>poetry magazine', I don't know, I didn't check the credits, though these
>>poets all
>>have books published somewhere. There is work and editorial policy that
does
>>seem to fit within Simic's criticism but it's not the only work around,
>>and the
>>work that does fit in some sense, "the first person realistic narrative'
>>is often
>>funny, witty, irreverent like Tony Hoagland's _Donkey Gospel, or full of
>>metaphor, imaginative extremes, and incorrectness of all sorts. But
>>basically I
>>guess I don't care, since as you note, one does one's work, however that is.
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>Rebecca
>>---- Original message ----
>> >Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 22:40:56 -0500
>> >From: Kenneth Wolman <[log in to unmask]>
>> >Subject: Re: The suckableness of contemporary American poetry
>> >To: [log in to unmask]
>> >
>> >At 10:02 PM 1/1/2005, you wrote:
>> >>What's the most prestigious American poetry journal?
>> >
>> >I'll bet we get 10 different answers to Mark's question. My guess is
>> >"Poetry" out of Chicago. Or Triquarterly, if it's still in
>> >business. Or...or...or.... I also have to ask a snotty but absolutely
>> >serious question: who the hell is Charles Simic? I know who Charles Simic
>> >IS, I have read and enjoyed his work, but when did he ascend to the Chair
>> >of St. Ezra and turn himself into an authority figure?
>> >
>> >For the claim:
>> >
>> >>The favorite kind of poem was a
>> >>first-person, realistic narrative that told of some
>> >>momentous or perfectly trivial experience. It was
>> >>written in free verse often barely distinguished from
>> >>prose. Audacious flights of the imagination and use of
>> >>metaphor were rare. In the age of political
>> >>correctness and the evr-growing lists of forbidden
>> >>words, topics, and attiftudes, irony and wit became
>> >>suspect. And so did humour. The chief strategy of
>> >>these poems was to conceal that they were poems by
>> >>avoiding anything taht seemed too imaginative or
>> >>irreverent. . . ."
>> >
>> >>I have no
>> >>doubt that those members of the list whose approbation for
contemporary
>> >>standards of poetic excellence has led them to complain that Simic's
>> >>criticisms are insulting hogwash will have instantly spotted which ones
>> >>they were.
>> >
>> >I didn't regard Simic's comments as "insulting hogwash" so much as I
found
>> >them irrelevant. He seems to suggest that American poets have been
>> >"timidized" by an army of nonartistic censors who will jump on their work
>> >for not being PC. Uh...isn't this thing about Political Correctness
>> >getting old by now? and therefore suspect as a WhippingPerson?
>> >
>> >As for the implied comments pointing at self-absorption...and your point
>> >is? If my subject is "me," that is what I have to work with. People will
>> >do what they will do. It may evolve over time. It may evolve into
>> >artistic dead ends. It may flower. It is their work. Is Simic's
>> >tear-down supposed to give contemporary writers an attack of guilt that
>> >they don't write like Europeans and endeavor to change their styles? I am
>> >not you, I am not Transtromer or Zbigniew Herbert, I am not even me
much of
>> >the time. I do what I do from where I am. It changes. Fine. To whose
>> >liking?
>> >
>> >Ken
>> >
>> >-------------------------------------------------
>> >Kenneth
>> >Wolman <http://www.kenwolman.com>http://
www.kenwolman.com
>> > http://kenwolman.blogspot.com
>> >"Death is a young poet's romance, and an old man's business."--Richard
>> >Avedon, photographer, 2002
>> >
>> >________________
>> >No virus found in this outgoing message.
>> >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>> >Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/2004
|