Look here I am the only low grade (very low grade) drama queen around here
and it's me that gets to write the bad poetry
So you all stop trying to muscle in on my scene I can outbad you all any
time and as for swans we won't go into that either
Love to you all be warned
Patrick aged silver surfer drama queener extraordinaire
-----Original Message-----
From: Poetryetc: poetry and poetics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of joe green
Sent: 31 October 2007 02:14
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Manipulation (no longer Re: New at Sharp Sand)
Why, no. One seeks simple justice. One wants to hold on.... One's sense
of the ridiculous already satisfied!
On 10/30/07, Roger Day <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> oh yeah, before I forget. I think you've been building up to this so
> you could swan around like a low-grade drama queen.
>
> Roger
>
> On 10/30/07, Roger Day <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > 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
> >
>
>
> --
> My Stuff: http://www.badstep.net/
> "In peace, sons bury their fathers. In war, fathers bury their sons."
> Roman Proverb
>
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.15/1101 - Release Date: 31/10/2007
10:06
|