Yes, Ric. That about wraps it up for me too.
Simon
-----Original Message-----
From: R I Caddel <[log in to unmask]>
To: british n irish poets <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 19 December 1998 05:00
Subject: Re: Poets with reviewing difficulties
>On Fri, 18 Dec 1998, Simon Smith wrote:
>> 2) I now edit the poetry section of Angel Exhaust
>
>- I welcome this, together with Simon's clearly expressed openness, and
>willingness to turn the magazine round from the narrowness which has
>threatened it. Following my disgust at Duncan's review of Clive Bush's
>book, which remains, but which we've all heard quite enough about on this
>list, I'd written to Duncan expressing my unhappiness at being associated
>with "his" editorial taste, and requesting that a piece of mine which
>he'd accepted for AE some time ago be withdrawn. Duncan's reply was that
>it was too late to withdraw the piece, but that he is writing a
>supplementary statement. I hope it will in some measure backtrack from the
>excesses of that piece. I can't say more than this, for, plainly, it is
>now up to Duncan to set those errors to rest.
>
>> 4) Andrew does not have access to the internet, so he is largely unaware
of
>> this discussion. Last year I recall talk about that rogue Nicholas
Johnson,
>> and eventually some members pointing out that he had no way to defend
>> himself on the list: how is Andrew's position different?
>
>- this seems correct to me. Whilst I'd defend the rights of Bill to defend
>himself, as he has done, within the restraints of mailbase netiquette, I
>think it has to be acknowledged that nothing further will come from
>restating them. As I say, it's up to Duncan now.
>
> Has anyone written
>> to AD via the snail to protest about the First Offense article?
>
>- yes, I have (obviously), and I hope others who've read the piece have
>too (there can't actually be many of us). His reply, though not effusive
>or cordial (I wouldn't have expected this), seemed to suggest that he'd
>taken some account of my complaints. I await his subsequent public
>statement.
>
>> He certainly has strong, provocative views and expresses them in a
>> wayward, often obtuse manner...
>
>- he would do himself and other poets (and members of this list) more
>service if his views were also considered and supported.
>
>RC
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|