Good to see this discussion here. I don't know which other lists are
featuring similar discussions, since I only have time really to monitor the
chat on Poets on Fire, but I'm sorry if confusion has been caused!
It's not possible for one person to like everything, or admire everything,
or even understand it, nor does there seem much point in making the effort
if something rarely touches on your daily life. However, as an editor who
has clearly stated a desire not to be positioned - in Horizon Review, at
least - at any particular point in the stream, I do accept the need to be
open to work which is 'other'. And if you look at the new issue, launching -
probably - tomorrow, you should see signs of that, especially since my
Reviews Editor, George Ttoouli, is broadly sympathetic to non-mainstream
work, and that is something I have no problem with.
In my quoted post, I was referring to Keston Sutherland's 'White Hot Andy',
not to experimental work in general. And the spirit level/tilting wing
comment? That was off the top of my head - I was unaware of any other
similar comments. But I can see that others here understood that simile and
recognised the bewilderment caused by a lack of accepted reference points.
On the one hand, I can see the potential for excitement from that. On the
other, I am coming out of a very conservative tradition and am to some
extent bound by that conservatism to react in a cautious way to work I
cannot in any way quantify.
I don't believe this has to remain an entrenched Them and Us situation. But
experimental writers need to meet mainstreamers at least halfway in terms of
an entente cordiale, even if the work itself cannot be compromised.
Was it really the Jolly Roger?
|