Judy,
I’m glad you liked the interview. Marjorie always tries to make them
interesting—something of an achievement for most academics working
in poetry, I think.
In response to your points:
‘I wonder if Marjorie Perloff (born in Vienna, emigrating to the USA at
age 6 1/2) may've been reflecting a USAmerican bias against what
seem to be "rogue" writers when she objected to Clive James's review.
(I've read neither his nor her review, so have no opinion on them.)’
I honestly couldn’t tell you. I haven’t read her or James’s review. I
assume she was just reacting as a human to what she’d read. She
tends to speak her mind, which, again, is rare for some academics.
‘A somewhat related (to UK-USA attitudes) issue: In the Grauniad, I
read the commenters on today's article about Oxford U's new schedule
for the nomination for the post of Professor of Poetry. At first I
despaired of any braincell in the commenters, but then realised that, as
so often with those unruly folk, they had homed into a criticism of a
major contender, Anne Stevenson. Seems that Stevenson made what
sounded like a mistake about the OU POP election: "I have always
(probably naively) assumed that the professorship of poetry at Oxford
was an honour that a poet was asked to accept." Oh, oops--- there's a
vote, an actual election, Anne!’
I think she was probably telling the truth, in that the whole thing is
probably rigged, anyway. It would be a welcome surprise if
the “elections” did count for something, though. But that is too much to
expect, I suppose.
Best,
Jeff
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:02:32 -0500, Judy Prince
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Jeffrey (and of course interested others),
>
>I've been enjoying your googleable interview with Marjorie Perloff for
>Poetry Salzburg Review:
>http://marjorieperloff.com/interviews/salzburg-interview/
>
>Her analyses, opinions, conclusions, and pointings-out, never
disappoint.
>
>And you were a fine set-upper for her. Â For example, I rather liked
>her building a positive-spin, negative answer to your: Â "Do you think
>the foregrounding of form may be one of the reasons why much
>experimental poetry is perceived as dull?"
>
>Further, you chase her comfortably out into another open (mine)field,
>asking which are better poetry-reviewers, poets or academics? Â Her
>answer: Â ". . . (S)ome poets are much better reviewers than
comparable
>academic critics. ...... "But on the whole, poets-as-reviewers are too
>biased; they have their agenda."..... "Ideally, the, editors would
>choose reviewers (whether poets or academics) who are disinterested,
>who have nothing to gain from praising or blaming X or Y. Â Poetry
>reviews, though, are mostly just puffs. Â . . . One would think each
>poet reviewed were a genius!"
>
>She says that Clive James' NYTBR review of Elias Canetti's The Part In
>The Blitz (which she'd reviewed for Bookforum and found "fascinating")
>was "almost libelous", describing James as "the notoriously snide,
>clever British (originally Australian) Clive James."
>
>Now to musings I'd enjoy your reactions to. Â I'm a USAmerican only
>recently spending half-years in England, and one of many happy
>surprises is finding that UKers seem far less conformist than
>USAmericans, as well as far less "polite". Â Journalists in particular
>seem to be loose cannons on deck in even the most staid print media.
>I love it!
>
>I wonder if Marjorie Perloff (born in Vienna, emigrating to the USA at
>age 6 1/2) may've been reflecting a USAmerican bias against what
seem
>to be "rogue" writers when she objected to Clive James's review.
>(I've read neither his nor her review, so have no opinion on them.)
>
>A somewhat related (to UK-USA attitudes) issue: In the Grauniad, I
>read the commenters on today's article about Oxford U's new schedule
>for the nomination for the post of Professor of Poetry. Â At first I
>despaired of any braincell in the commenters, but then realised that,
>as so often with those unruly folk, they had homed into a criticism of
>a major contender, Anne Stevenson.
>
>Seems that Stevenson made what sounded like a mistake about the
OU POP
>election: Â "I have always (probably naively) assumed that the
>professorship of poetry at Oxford was an honour that a poet was asked
>to accept." Oh, oops--- there's a vote, an actual election, Anne!
>
>Now the Groan's bumptious commenters are off and howling---whilst
>Proper Feminists carve the wood for her poetry chair. Â Like it or not,
>as with the last election, the USA and Canada will strongly influence
>outcomes.
>
>My own vote, of course, would be for Stephen Moss, Guardian's own.
>
>Best,
>
>Judy
>
>--
>Frisky Moll Press: Â http://judithprince.com/home.html
>
>"I can't read my library card." Â ---Jeff Hecker, Norfolk, VA
|