>My main concern was that the
>definition of "Other" seemed mostly English-led -- events in London bulk
>large in the historical imagination, activity in Glasgow perhaps less so.
>JUDGING BY THE INTRODUCTION.
>
>I have added as forcefully as I can that I don't mind this slight bias
>considering that an editor can't function without a particular point of view,
>i.e., a bias.
I concur in Doug's sense of this "Other" as predominantly English-led
with, for me, Irish 'events' diminished by a similar trick of perspective
(to maintain the spatial trope). I've already had a discussion along
these lines backchannel with Ric, who demurs. Backchannel, because, not
being myself counted one of this "Other", it might seem peevish in me to
criticise. Perish the thought! I'm now frontchannel, just in case anyone
might think there's no cavil from this side of the water.
It's obviously a complex topic, with many angles of approach, but I
incline (perhaps interestedly) to the notion that such particularity of
point of view may at times be disabling: that events near the edges may
seem (to be represented as) driven by events near the centre, that an
other "Other" may be simplified in the service of a suspect coherence.
While I'm pleased to see any anthologizing of Irish work outside the
shadow of the Heaney/Boland epigones, a little more understanding of the
Irish dynamic as distinct from the English would have pleased me even
more.
Trevor
**************************************************************************
Trevor Joyce
Apple Cork IS&T
Phone : +353-21-284405
EMail : [log in to unmask]
**************************************************************************
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|