On a word-by-word or line-by-line basis, one makes choices when
writing: this word is better than that one, the line-break would be
better placed just there...so, with the exception of purely
"automatic" writing, or poems written under the rubric of "first
thought, best thought", it's usual for a poem to emerge from out of a
virtual cloud of not-quite-so-good poems that one might have written
instead. Almost nobody really writes as if one poem could not be
better than another; almost everybody chooses at each decision point
the better of the two or more possible poems they could have written.
Dominic
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
>
--
Shall we be pure or impure? Today
we shall be very pure. It must always
be possible to contain
impurities in a pure way.
--Tarmo Uustalu and Varmo Vene
|