also, not to harp too much on the subject, but the key words in my original
post were "on its own". it's true that no writing can be viewed without
theory, but ultrapostmodernist poetry seems to require the tinted glasses of
a theory that, to me, feels strained & alien. even if it makes me a pleb,
and even though I know views are wont to shift around, at the moment I'd
rather produce something good within a norm than produce something bad
outside of one.
KS
2009/5/11 kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]>
> I will say I appreciate the idea in provoking sneers at "a poetry field
> crowded by would-be sincerists unwilling to own up to their poems’
> self-aggrandizing, sentimental, bloviating, or sexist tendencies". then
> again I see nothing wrong with aggrandizement or sentimentality if it isn't
> done vacuously, or naïvely. on my own part I can't do much in the way of
> rooting out such in my own writing, being a called-out naif myself. I do
> what I can with my pupating awareness and ability.
>
> KS
>
> 2009/5/11 kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]>
>
> I was curt, but I stand by the opinion, which comes from an albeit
>> non-postmodern stance. I know of flarf poetry, and one quote I found from
>> Joshua Corey sums up what preconceptions I have of it: "I admire the
>> subversive energy of the project, the daring of setting out to write
>> deliberately bad poetry so as to put our received ideas of "the poetic" into
>> question."
>> that's all well & good, but it's still bad poetry to me. I'd rather read
>> GOOD poetry that questions our received ideas of 'the poetic'.
>>
>> KS
>>
>> 2009/5/10 Barry Alpert <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>> I detect no evidence you understand it, or "flarf" at all. To elicit the
>>> comment "bad
>>> poem" from a naif signals success in that range.
>>>
>>> Barry Alpert
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 10 May 2009 01:28:26 +0300, kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >if nothing else, it's a bad poem on its own.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >2009/5/6 Barry Alpert <[log in to unmask]>
>>> >
>>> >> THOUGHTMESH
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Video shocked selfless publishing.
>>> >> Innovation featured fact editors edited.
>>> >> Ambition benefitted conceptual shocked video.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Barry Alpert / Silver Spring, MD US / 5-6-09 (8:16 AM)
>>> >>
>>> >> Unconsciously referencing traditional forms with its 14 words, 3
>>> lines, &
>>> >> the "rhyme" of its
>>> >> conclusion with its opening. Also an unexpected variant on my
>>> >> severely-edited workings
>>> >> with the strategies of "flarf".
>>> >>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|