On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Tim Allen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> No, I know you didn't mean Plath or Lowell were slovenly, but it could have
> been read that way. The problem with this medium is that people tend to read
> emails without regard to nuance.
>
> I actually liked the confessionals, especially Sexton. (Lowell of course
> was never free verse, and neither was Plath, not really.) But yes, when the
> confessional ethos was paired with the free verse of far less talented poets
> then slovenly was just waiting down the line.
>
I agree that it's a stretch to call Lowell and Plath free verse.
I didn't mean to be disparaging in general to free verses, and of course, as
> you say, 'a great deal of great poetry has been created in that 'form' ' -
> but of course it does depend on what we are calling free verse, not always
> easy. Was W.C.W. free verse? - if he was it wasn't the free verse that I am
> thinking of. And what about O'Hara? Is that free verse? Personalism???? Wow
> - this gets messy. I don't usually get into discussions like this - I let
> others bash away at it and watch from the sidelines.
>
To be fair, these conversations do usually devolve to silly quarreling in no
time flat, but in this case, it has remained useful. Long may that continue
:)
--
Uche Ogbuji http://uche.ogbuji.net
Founding Partner, Zepheira http://zepheira.com
Linked-in profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ucheogbuji
Articles: http://uche.ogbuji.net/tech/publications/
TNB: http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/
Friendfeed: http://friendfeed.com/uche
Twitter: http://twitter.com/uogbuji
http://www.google.com/profiles/uche.ogbuji
|