Thanks to Douglas Clark for his recent poems.
I actually like the way Douglas will stomp off to the pub -- we hear his
footsteps -- come back, sit down, and write about his current likes and
dislikes. Then, when challenged, most probably he'll go upstairs -- we hear
his footsteps -- rout around among his books and, with the generosity that
characterises his contributions, honestly check out whether he still likes or
dislikes the work he's just commented on.
It's in the nature of these communications that the reader him/herself is not
affected much by the opinions Douglas expresses on individual writers. I'm
not going to start liking or disliking Rimbaud either more or less, or cease
to value Robin's analysis, for example. Douglas is talking to us, that's
all. As well as being a poet in his own style, he is a genuine reader. God,
we don't have so many of those! An ability -- or wish -- to intellectualise
our responses to a poet, criticise in depth etc., is only one way to go. If
I, personally, rarely have much interest in wondering whether I like great
writer X or Y (I'd rather just take most poetry, even minor stuff, inwards and
see if it can feed my mind in some unexpected way), I don't see the error in
Douglas's proceeding in his tastes the way he does, the way that suits him,
and according to the way he wants to talk to us.
We're on the streets in this list, I hope, not in the classroom.
Best
Doug
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|