Jaime, can say why you think literature and creative writing are different so that one is seen by you as being “academic” (literature) and the other isn’t (creative writing)? I never said you were intending to flatter (or condemn), just that some creative writing tutors who see themselves as academics might be offended by your unintentional clumsiness.
By the way, I would hardly be defending creative writing against your clumsy portrayal of it, if I thought it was a “cancer”. The “cancer” is not creative writing but the favouritism and promotion that some students of some academic creative writing tutors receive.
-------------Original Message--------------------
Jamie McKendrick wrote:
No, David, I am making no such claim - merely stating the obvious (and very
secondary) point that they are different, though related disciplines. (I'm
neither flattering nor condemning either. As it happens, I have taught both,
on and off: literature for some 40 years and creative writing for over 30
years.) As far as I can see with your earlier reference - 'almost a cancer
running through academic poetry' - it was you being 'not very flattering'
to people who taught either literature or writing.
What I was saying, needless to repeat it, is that stating that Olson was
an 'academic' tells us nothing about his poetry. Nor did your further remark
about him ('and publicised by US academia') tell us anything about the
reception of a poet whose influence is by no means confined to academia, and
often, I think, ignored by it.
You seem very certain about the category of 'academic poetry', and to
have a negative view of it . My post was merely a prompt for you to explain
what you mean by the category, as it doesn't mean a lot to me.
Jamie
|