This is more than a bit chilling, and, given your position as list
owner, carries a faint whiff of intimidation, whatever your
intention. It's also more than a little unseemly. Are you saying that
one aught to balance one's positive and negative comments? Do you
quantify everyone's posts? Have you done a thematic analysis of the
posts of Alison's that I've responded to? Is it possible that
Alison's also predictable?
This evening I attended a wonderful talk by Ammiel Alcalay, who
quoted John Wieners to the effect that some post-WWII American poets
had brought the medium a new rigor of thought, analysis and
attention. I think those are pretty good criteria, and they're what I
tend to bring to bear in discussion of ideas and poetry, which I
thought was what this list is about. I find lazy thought offensive,
whether it's about poetry or otherwise, and I find poetry that's lazy
in thought, analysis or attention offensive. Ammiel, speaking about
the culture we live in, said "The idea that poets think is foreign to
the culture." Like Ammiel, I find that offensive, as well.
In point of fact, I rarely comment on poems--fact is, I find it
uncomfortable reading poetry on line--tho I do comment on ideas about
poetry. To the best of my knowledge I've never commented on a poem of
Alison's before. Why now? Maybe because of the significance of the
day, and maybe also because it uses America as an abstraction in ways
not very different (tho with an opposite meaning) than those in
America who would try to convince me, and the better than half of the
population who think that voting is a useless exercise, and the half
of the remainder who feel and vote as I do, that we're exiles in our
own country. That pisses me off. And I don't think I'm being unjust.
But please, Randolph, don't globalize the issue, and don't indulge in
ad homina. Apparently you either liked the poem better than I did or
think that it's a violation of tact on a poetry list to criticize a
poem. Let's leave it at that, shall we?
Mark
At 05:44 PM 9/12/2006, you wrote:
>Just had a look at e-mail after a long, but not unpleasant day.
>
>Mark.
>
>"cheap contrivance" ??? do you prefer the expensive kind? And the
>"cost" of a poem as an indicator of its quality doesn't seem to hold water.
>
>But to get to the point, I can't remember the last time your posted
>anything positive in response to Alison.
>I'd hate to think you were getting predictable, or even, unjust.
>
>best
>
>Randolph
|