I've missed nothing, Joe. I just dislike you, your manner and your writing.
Roger
On 10/30/07, joe green <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Just in case you missed it.
>
> Joseph Duemer wrote:
>
> Thanks, Andrew. I wonder what other poets, loved in youth, flist
>
> members have had to reevaluate.
>
> Joe Green responded: None, I never liked bad poetry.
>
> Joe Green is quoted: "None, I never liked bad poetry."
>
> Joseph Duemer wrote: So, you just write it?
>
> So, as you can see, the only decent thing to do is to ask for an apology
> from Joe Duemer also.
> Or is he somehow justified?
>
> If so, please inform the editors at Fulcrum and tell them to cancel my 15
> pages of execrable verse in the next issue.
>
> Or should I do it for you?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10/30/07, Roger Day <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > if JG gets to run poetryetc, I'm outahere.
> >
> > Roger
> >
> > On 10/30/07, Joseph Duemer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > Joe, would you like to run Poetryetc? I'll be glad to hand you the keys
> > &
> > > get the hell out of town. Your relentless anti-academic,
> > anti-intellectual
> > > bullshit has finally just gotten me down. You win. Really, it's yours.
> > I'll
> > > resent the list to make you owner -- just give me the word. I mean,
> > you'd be
> > > great because you know everything already & if anyone has any questions
> > they
> > > can just ask you & that will settle the issue.
> > >
> > > jd
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/30/07, joe green <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Do you consider the reader's need to not read a composition based on
> > what
> > > > you think the reader needs? Seems so very odd... and seems like a
> > formula
> > > > for endless repetition of the same.
> > > >
> > > > Seems to have its origins in didactic poesy and seems quite 19th
> > century.
> > > > Almost schoolmarmish. Wordsworth began "The Prelude" as an attempt to
> > > > justify his poetry -- why should anyone listen to him?.... and then
> > kept
> > > > on
> > > > revising it until he brought it to ruins. Thinking of the reader had
> > a
> > > > lot
> > > > to do with that. The first prelude wild and open to contradiction and
> > not
> > > > fully comprehended even by the poet. The revisions all occasioned by
> > a
> > > > didactic impulse with a sense of not having to demonstrate what was
> > > > assumed
> > > > to have been shown.
> > > >
> > > > I like Eliot's suggestion that a poem is judged by all other poems --
> > > > those
> > > > poems are the readers in a sense. They are not troubled by
> > theoretical
> > > > grounds immersed in what is quite secondary and of a certain time.
> > > >
> > > > But I acknowledge that these ideas of how a poem is made are accepted
> > by
> > > > the
> > > > general public and I suspect that they are created by the workshop
> > > > mentality
> > > > and determined by the enabling conviction that one can be taught to
> > write
> > > > poetry. And that many are qualified to do so!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/30/07, Joseph Duemer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Martin, if you're on shaky theoretical ground then so am I. I often
> > find
> > > > > myself anticipating what I think of as my readers' needs. I want to
> > put
> > > > > things together in such a way that a reader will have some reactions
> > and
> > > > > not
> > > > > have others.
> > > > >
> > > > > jd
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/30/07, Martin Dolan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the question of whether "a writer seeks to manipulate a desired
> > > > > > audience", the question very much seems to be one of intention.
> > > > > > Manipulation in this case definitely has implications of trying to
> > > > > > obtain an advantage or an unfair outcome - unfavourable intent.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If we used a less value-laden description (influence, perhaps), it
> > > > > > strikes me that I - perhaps alone! - often set out to influence
> > others
> > > > > > through some of my poems, at least by evoking an response. I get
> > an
> > > > > > uneasy feeling that I'm on suspect theoretical ground here, but
> > hey, I
> > > > > > don't claim I'm successful in my intent.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Douglas Barbour wrote:
> > > > > > > Oh [probably, Roger, in which case everyone is 'sincere'...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But Mark was talking, if I remember rightly, about whether or
> > not a
> > > > > > > writer seeks to manipulate a desired audience. I guess that's a
> > kind
> > > > > > > of intention, whether or not it actually works?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would tend to agree that we're always readers, but then I
> > > > > > > immediately begin to wonder if that's right, too....
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My more serious point in that post had to do with that question
> > of
> > > > > > > craft, which as readers we can, I guess, only intuit, out of a
> > > > > > > sensibility constructed by all our (other) reading....
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Doug
> > > > > > > On 28-Oct-07, at 3:12 AM, Roger Day wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Outside v inside readings - isnt that some form of false
> > dichotomy?
> > > > > > >> Neither exists as we're only readers and we impose our own
> > > > > > >> rose-coloured glasses on everything we read. I thought we'd
> > > > excluded
> > > > > > >> intentional fallacies?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Roger
> > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's the first lesson, loss.
> > > > > > > Who hasn't tried to learn it
> > > > > > > at the hands of wind or thieves?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jan Zwicky
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Joseph Duemer
> > > > > Professor of Humanities
> > > > > Clarkson University
> > > > > [sharpsand.net]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Joseph Duemer
> > > Professor of Humanities
> > > Clarkson University
> > > [sharpsand.net]
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > My Stuff: http://www.badstep.net/
> > "In peace, sons bury their fathers. In war, fathers bury their sons."
> > Roman Proverb
> >
>
--
My Stuff: http://www.badstep.net/
"In peace, sons bury their fathers. In war, fathers bury their sons."
Roman Proverb
|