Agree with you about suck/not-suck. Knda uninterested in the criteria
that was being bandied about in this thread. Sure there must be other,
more generous ways. It seemed that we were on the verge of narrowing
again. Echoes of threads past when metrics were used to define poetry.
Then that dread word dignity got chucked in there... Agree about
recognition, also maybe acknowledgement.
Roger
On 11/18/05, Douglas Barbour <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Yes, it does, but every kind of art, or practice (say in sports) also
> deserves to be judged on some level as to how well it does what it
> strives to do. Putting aside bias (I mean I know I like certain kinds
> more than others), still it must be possible to figure out whether or
> not this one is a good version & that one not so good (hey, this rapper
> is great, that one sucks?).
>
> Not to patronize (& if this is an example of such I apologize), but to
> recognize.
>
> Doug
> On 17-Nov-05, at 4:19 AM, Roger Day wrote:
>
> > Even "democratic" poetry deserves to be treated with respect doesn't
> > it?
> Douglas Barbour
> 11655 - 72 Avenue NW
> Edmonton Ab T6G 0B9
> (780) 436 3320
>
> Each leaf a runnel the
> roofs now skiffs in green
> I've never done anything
> but begin.
> Lisa Robertson
>
--
http://www.badstep.net/
http://www.cb1poetry.org.uk/
|