Jamie, I grant that my remarks about Abramson being a lawyer and his arguing in like manner could be construed as an ad hominem argument on my part, but the entirety of my formal public response to him (not what I have said on this mailing list) are not ad hominem arguments.
I’m glad you can accept that I might have a valid point about “the Academy’s increasing control over what poetry gets read, taught and promoted”; that is the only point the Argotist feature is trying to convey.
I do mention in the Introduction to the Argotist feature, which Abramson has criticised, the areas of academisation that concern me, but he failed to remark on it:
“Academic poetic output is operating to a healthy extent in the US, where university creative writing departments are flourishing. The University of Pennsylvania has its Kelly Writers House programme, its PennSound website and its Center for Programs in Contemporary Writing, all sympathetic to academic avant-garde poetry. The University of Pennsylvania also edits Jacket2, an influential online poetics website, which was formerly called Jacket, and which was edited by the independent John Tranter before he passed it over to the university. And similar things are happening in the UK, with various institutions such as the Contemporary Poetics Research Centre at Birkbeck University, and the Poetry and Poetics Research Group at the University of Edge Hill, both promoting academic avant-garde poetry.”
These are the primary areas that are of concern to me and many other poets, at least in the US. Doubtless, some subscribers to the British and Irish Poets List will be either involved directly or indirectly with these intuitions, and might, therefore, see the issue differently.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey, no feathers ruffled at all. I just don’t like your ad hominem way of arguing as, “rudeness” apart, it makes everything go round in smaller and smaller circles.
You may have a valid point (and I’m sure Mark does) about the Academy’s increasing control over what poetry gets read, taught and promoted—and actually it’s one that I probably share, without respect to any tribal affiliations—but my earlier point stands: that if Abramson has misconstrued the areas of academicization that concern you it would be better to clarify them than to treat him with sarcasm. That way at least the discussion could advance.
Jamie
|