Although it partly dismantled my argument, I was greatly cheered Ric's latest
message: at last this discussion can go somewhere.
Ric is quite right to attack my crude classifications, which were, however,
serviceable to my sense of the drag of history on this thing. Ian Paterson
has also backchannelled me a pleasantly ironic point which takes another screw
out of my shaky table. So be it.
As I have explained to Ric privately, I was wanting to draw the fire a little
because this whole thing has to broaden; and that is what Ric has now
successfully done with it. Don't think there's any point in trying to defend
my classifications because that would be to step backwards after his
precision. My whole wish is to get out of the bickering that so often
characterises British poetry wings, but without losing artistic integrity.
I haven't time this morning to develop the point. I do think there's a way
beyond the conundrums Ric poses. It consists in dropping present attitudes
rather radically, but not dropping commitments to various kinds of poetics.
Ric has made a start on that by pulling it all back to the poems that we
write. I have something to say about that.
Since I had fun with Drew's call for manifestos, I'll write the list a
manifesto and post it during the next few days.
"Oh no!"
Oh yes!
With reaffirmed good wishes to Lawrence and support for his manifold
activities. Cambridge, I love you! Australia, hi! We're back with you!
Doug
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|