Stephen I don't disagree with you in your post, nor did I, I think,
attack Vendler personally. It does have to do with taste, & where one
feels one can learn the most. In terms of criticism, I have learned
more from Perloff, if only because her approaches have felt more in
tune with my own. I do know a bit about her poltitics, & tend to agree
with you there. I think Vendler has been very good on the poets she
admires, & only wish I admired them more myself, so I could flow with
her rhetoric there. But, much as many of them seem to be very good at
what they do, they don't on the whole call me back to re-read the way
many others do, so I (having only so much time to read) haven't
followed her down those paths.
But many have, & many have found those poets far more interesting than
the ones I so like. There: those contraries push & pull the world
along....
Doug
On 15-Apr-07, at 5:14 PM, Stephen Vincent wrote:
> I think both of them give grist for looking and arguing about what
> counts
> for each of our biases and loves. 'Grist' is a good thing for me -
> helps
> sharpen my view as well as my limits. Contraries is what makes the
> world go
> round. Poetry always?
Douglas Barbour
11655 - 72 Avenue NW
Edmonton Ab T6G 0B9
(780) 436 3320
http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/
Latest book: Continuations (with Sheila E Murphy)
http://www.uap.ualberta.ca/UAP.asp?LID=41&bookID=664
lipsynching awe all the way to the grave of the unknown onus:
memory stutter; one smidgen, one scantling of thank.
Dennis Lee
|