A coup for whom, though?
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 22:31:39 +0100, Elizabeth James
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Quite. Consider the possibility that academic discourse might actually
be as
>interesting and rewarding, intellectually / creatively, as poetry (reading
>or writing); and then getting to be allowed to apply that mind, in work
>time, to the exciting, difficult and intelligent poetry you already love in
>the evenings ... To me it looks like a coup, rather than a defence.
>
>The proclaimed inclusion of 'poetics' will complicate that argument,
>admittedly.
>
>The people on the editorial board by the way are basically there as
>peer-reviewers, and do'nt run the journal. Well that's how it is for me
>anyway. I am proud to be among them, furry hoodies and Latin graces
>notwithstanding ...
>e
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Alison Croggon" <[log in to unmask]>
>
>Gosh. That seems fairly sweeping. What if, rather than stemming from
>"insecurity", it's simply that it's interesting and stimulating to
>think in a disciplined way about practice? (Sorry, praxis...) I
>certainly find such things interesting to read. And I just don't get
>this idea that journals of whatever stripe ought to be wholly without
>agendas, since I don't understand how that would be at all desirable
>or interesting - surely it would just mean beige all round? I And
>don't we all, as Borges pointed out, make our own canons?
>
>xA
|