ANTIQUARIAN?????
Considering the relative briefness of human life, against the enormous
scales of process, Herbert or Donne or Milton or Hopkins happened yesterday.
It behoves us to recall who 'we' were because so are 'we' still. The
language we have is 'antiquarian' (I am really fuming at that philistine
word). As for contemporary American writers, and the egocentric narcissism
the phrase invokes, you include Iron John Bly and Handicrafts Gary at the
start of your summoning of greedy babies. Religious poets? Get lost, all you
have with these is a thin patina of faux spirituality, a veneer, the poetic
equivalent of a cookie.
Genuinely angry here
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Vincent" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 9:02 PM
Subject: Re: Snap/3-15-06--"The God Thing"
> I guess my problem here is that the discussion seems framed in antiquarian
> frames (Herbert, Milton, et al). Contemporary religious writers are many
who
> do not either correspond, echo and/or re-work those frames.
> Buddhism - in many of its diverse threads - has, for example, been a major
> influence on contemporary American writers, just judging by this brief
list:
> Philip Whalen, Gary Snyder, Armand Schwerner, Diane de Prima, Mary Oliver,
> Robert Bly, among many more.
> Styles apart, none of these folks can be said write from positions shaped
by
> language, rituals, etc. of the "high church" - whether it Catholic or
> Anglican - tho many come out of Catholic, Protestant and Jewish faiths.
> The source/cause of renunciation is probably variously interesting.
> The level of commitment/devotion - in both poetry and life practice - is,
I
> believe, religious, and no less compelling.
>
> And, just thinking about it, after listening and reading the work of
Robert
> Adamson, isn't there a level of devotion (affirmative) that may be
ascribed
> as religious? The level of affirmation in the work indicates to me an
> implicit belief in something, as well as a desire to impart that to the
> listener/reader. But maybe that's just good old fashioned 'joy.'
>
> I don't mean to diffuse the original jar here of the Anglican container.
> But I will.
>
>
> Stephen Vincent
> http://stephenvincent.net/blog/
> Where "Tenderly" is still fiddling with Stein.
>
>
>
> > i think the distinction over religious-spiritual writers is this: are
they
> > trying to preach at us, set themselves up as priests (not necessarily
the
> > same as actually being a priest, as R.S.Thomas usually does but doesn't
> > always write from a priest-position) and try to make us unhappy,
diminish
> > our life-force, or are they writers becoming-all sorts of other things,
in
> > enormous variety, so e.g. Fanny Howe never becomes-priest, and David
Jones
> > is (as drew milne says) interested in the material history of
Catholicism,
> > and other poets strongly associated with a faith also give us their best
> > work in this latter mode -
> >
> > really it's not a special case for religious poets at all, i don't
think, as
> > other poets can take up the same position, a teacher position, and try
to
> > make us unhappy, proclaim a lack
> >
> > Edmund
|