Thanks Rachel. I really appreciate your contribution here. The insistence
on anonymity and secrecy at foetry.com (there were sections on the site that
were off-limits to public view and uncheckable, which would often change,
and very often they'd ban isp's they thought were suss, &c - the reverse, I
would say, of fair and open) meant that the bulk of it, so far as I could
stomach reading it, was mere rumour or vicious innuendo and smear. There was
no obligation to back up allegations. Poets' reputations, whether they
deserved it or not, were merrily dragged through the mud, and I could see no
recourse. It was a bit like Malleus Maleficarum - the mere existence of
suspicion meant an assumption of guilt. Most of the time, it just looked
frankly libellous.
It reminded me of the worst of tabloid journalism - "never let the facts get
in the way of a good story", as one particularly shameless fictionaliser I
used to work with once said. It's sad that the difficulties so many poets
face create such sour bitternesses and envies.
It's hard to see how its impact has been anything but destructive. As I
said earlier, I can see great problems with the competition model in
American poetry, but this is hardly the way to deal with it. Of course
newspapers love it, they love anything which shows artists up as petty and
venal, and the public coverage has given the site a legitimacy that,
frankly, I don't think it deserves.
Best
A
Alison Croggon
Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com
Editor, Masthead: http://masthead.net.au
Home page: http://alisoncroggon.com
|