Hallo folks,
Echoing Keston's praise for cris' posting;
in my case, especially Cris and everyone's
praise for artforms learning from each other
(what was your sense of poetry and drama
groups interacting, Fiona?). And where do
people on the list think other artforms have
gone, since the 70s, *without poetry*?
They were talking the Turner Prize
on R4 today, and a modern BritArt defender was
saying "most artists want to be famous for their
work, they haven't got the nerve to be famous
as themselves; most of the work I like grabs
you really quickly, making the artist famous".
I was just thinking of any poets now who do
that, or subscribe to that; I think it has always
been the case that a lot of readers like to
get a quick handle on a poet, so that they can
read one line or one poem and "get it", summarise
you, not read you; I can think of some poets who
can do the attention-grabbing media-attention
*and* do something interesting thereafter (I
think of Paul McCartney congratulating Cris Cheek
on his lettuce-eating piece at the Albert Hall
gig 2 years ago..., and I know Cris has told me
that he thinks there's some really good *work*
in Damien Hirst's shows).
What do poets here think of the use of
language, the poetry, in modern art/music/dance,
etc? A lot of recent art I've seen uses words,
in over the top or deadpan ways, not often very
interestingly to me - or showing any sign of
reading anyone, MacLow, Cage, anyone. Could there
be (do people know of) "settings" by artists of
interesting poets; *interesting* words in art
works? Could poets here collaborate with artists,
or do it themselves, to produce "gallery-standard"
visual work with words (or are there phobias against
that as against commerce, hanging over from the
70s?)?
LOve to know what people think. Allen,
for example: how is your visual work/visuality
*placed* (mod, post-mod, etc) by an audience
not coming via the poetry at all?
Ira
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|