As far as I know, Anny, Wittgenstein (my professor of philosophy met him
in the train down to Cambridge once, he thought W was going to say
something momentous but something or other intervened, perhaps a porter
from Porlock, anyway I've forgotten what MacIver actually revealed to me
in that solo tutorial, as he was exhaling huge clouds of pipesmoke &
wheeze-groaning* at his own humour - which effectively prevented me from
recalling anything he ever said except a pawky quip or 2) gave his
inheritance away to Rilke & Trakl, among others, and his dad was a rich
industrialist who singlehandedly bankrolled the Secession (Klimt did a
famous portrait of W's sister Margaret - go here -
http://vortex1.no-ip.com/klimt/gallery/k035.htm ), as you say. As to
Nietzsche - he taught for a while but was too neurasthenic (code for
syphilitic) to continue. I cannot find him "the greatest poet of all"
myself - nor can I remember that Baudelaire was a teacher or did
anything much but write, flâner & go to art shows. But I am willing to
be instructed - ;-)
mj
Anny Ballardini wrote:
>This is a great one, and it is quite similar to where I am at.
>
>I don't think, Dominic or Kent, that a poet should sit down somewhere and
>_poeticize_. Friedrich Nietzsche taught (the greatest poet of all), together
>with Baudelaire (greatest as well) who did his best to survive (estates,
>inheritances, plenty of intrigues). There is no such profession as a poet,
>and I would even say as a writer, unless you are a journalist. Tolkien
>taught and wrote, Wittgenstein didn't even want his part of inheritance - he
>was present whey they read his father's will (if I am not wrong, the man who
>sponsored the Austrian secession - Martin am I right?) to make sure he
>wasn't going to receive a penny - and ended up in a tiny village as an
>elementary teacher, somewhere close to here.
>
>Not only because you need money to live, but because there is a nobility in
>performing your daily job (my father taught me), and also because you draw
>your life from the world outside. Who am I to talk of my I _ endlessly? And
>moreover, to desire that those there, the ones who are not I should love
>what I write about my I? Oh this is a farse. Not even my silliest teen
>student would be able to invent it.
>
>I have no idea, there are subsidies here too for those who write, and one of
>the people who manage them told me to fill in a form and put it in, - it
>might be that some rains on you too, he said. Which I didn't do. For many
>reasons. First of all I am free to write whatever I wish and whenever I wish
>and this is my privilege and my liberty.
>
>Rebecca's question is different. She received a prize. If they award me a
>prize I thank them respectfully and I'm deeply moved that they liked what I
>had to say.
>
>Anny Ballardini
>http://annyballardini.blogspot.com
>http://www.fieralingue.it/modules.php?name=poetshome
>The aim of the poet is to awaken emotions in the soul, not to gather
>admirers.
>Stalker, Andrei Tarkovsky
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 6:47 PM
>Subject: Re: down with the down with poetry crowd
>
>
>Figure-Ground Problem
>
>In my world all the poetry is excellent.
>There are only two journals to read, one
>in print and the other on the web. Both are
>filled with excellent poetry. The editors
>have never rejected my excellent work.
>And I've never been to a reading I didn't enjoy.
>You see, I know all of the poets in my world
>and they know me. We can't help but admire
>each other�s commitment to excellence.
>
>
>
|