(Aplogies for the previous version; my muscular masculine line overpowered
the feeble line-wrap function)
Dear Awrph - I think you've avoided Lawrence's initial point: "I have an
enormous trouble with this concept of great poet. I think it is suspect. I
think it needs testing. Where does it come from? Where is it going?"
I gather you yourself have a well developed hero-worship bump, indicated
also in your choice of name (everyone else seems content with their own,
excepting Lawrence, who aspires to be the culture-hero Cadbury). I can see
the utility of the "great poet" category for publishers flogging
blockbusters or academic hacks wanting to protect their investment. I can
certainly see the glee of the Irish tourist industry every time one of our
lads romps home with another Nobel prize, even if the most recent may have
been awarded for perpetrating the same 'poem' several hundred times with
minimal variation, a clubbable manner, and a straight face. What I don't see
is why I should be persuaded to adopt the category, lacking as I do your
gift for bending the knee in the presence of the most high. I have enough
trouble as it is with the term "poet" not to wish to complicate matters
further.
Cheers,
Trevor
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|