That's a welcome message, Tim.
I find I've forgotten what I was going to say was the big obstacle.
Snow's all gone from here in the valley though it will still be around
on the tops.
The writing on the very edge of saying/not saying always interests me.
And it's best not to get involved in a big issue about Olson. I just
don't agree with the projective verse thesis.
cheers, Peter
On 15 Jan 2015, at 10:41, Tim Allen wrote:
Below is very interesting Peter and in a strange way I think it
manages to explain your position a lot clearer than before - it's on
this issue of saying and not saying.
After all my years of writing this stuff people call poetry I am
familiar, to say the least, with this saying/not saying dynamic. And
most of the poetry I like also seems to be involved in this dynamic.
It's far too complex a thing to tackle here though.
So thanks.
Cheers
Tim
On 14 Jan 2015, at 20:48, Peter Riley wrote:
> I've no problems with the discussion taking place now, except that I
> remain a spectator, not willing to cross a sideline of my own
> making. I've always had a problem with poetry that disables itself
> from saying. I know there's a mass of theory and explanation that
> justifies not saying, but I don't trust that either. What I've
> always wanted from poetry is enhanced saying.
>
> By "saying" I don't just mean statements about the world or the self
> or the price of fish. I also mean the language structures with which
> you'd make a narrative, or a song so that people know here they are.
>
> But the big obstacle has always been
> Most of the avant-garde is at the other end of the football field
> from this point of view, but some isn't and the borderline is fuzzy.
> Some stuff, like perhaps Geraldine's, hovers on the edge of avant-
> garde: there is a clear urge to say, complicated by a not-saying
> which seems to be part of the urgency. Other poets are full of the
> urgency of saying but take pains to conceal the message (I can't
> help thinking of Olson at this point).
>
> Once someone's poetry is committed to not-saying there's nothing I
> can do with it, least of all evaluate it. Surely when you "enlarge"
> the poetry into that kind of condition you also shrink it to a
> narrowness.
|