Hi,
I don't feel any inhibitions on subject matter.
Perhaps I should. Kirkup's case invoked specific wrath
from a territory that polices its boundaries more
assiduously than most (other than fascist incitements and . . .).
In fact it's pretty grim thinking of a list of what might really
garner 'censorship'. I guess if Armitage actively advocated
Paedophilia that would be get discussed . . . Makes me realise
how little openly engaged with 'public' issues, in a 'public'
arena, most contemporary poetry is. What I mean by that is,
poetry doesn't threaten anything that concerns enough vested interests,
beyond issues of meaning and language formation, to be the subject
of 'official' scrutiny. It's not that writing is emptied of
contestable politics , but that its 'market' placements, pose
insufficient threat.
I'm keen to hear arguments from the 'other' perspective?
love and love
cris
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|