Well, I think there is a lot wrong with it. Avant-garde? As I said - it is
often used as a term to identify and start the abuse of what one wishes to
abuse. And when it is well-meant, it means - well I don't think it means
anything. I have the same problem with experimental.
This goes back to an ongoing discussion of words being used
hymptydumptyishly & I also thought I saw another tone which Mr Teichman
denies and I believe him - He came back immediately and said what he meant
so I guess I'm getting jumpy.
I am too quick-tempered. I apologise, Mr Teichman, for jumping to
conclusions.
25 years ago at The Poetry Society we used to get outraged letters from the
home counties demanding to known why dsh or Jeff Nuttall was on the cover of
The Poetry Review and maybe I am turning into a distorted mirror image of
that, looking for reaction to stamp on.
Bonkers of Carshalton... That's just Lawrence. Buy him a glass of Guinness
and smile and he'll probably stay quiet for hours, but whatever you do don't
mention the avant-garde
Nate, if you think that "avant-garde" is a useful term then obviously my
reaction will seem over the top. I do not think it is a useful term.
I also thought / think that what Andrea B does is quite different to the
purpleness Mr Teichman referenced.
L
----- Original Message -----
From: Nate and Jane Dorward <[log in to unmask]>
To: Harold Teichman <[log in to unmask]>; <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 17 October 1999 19:27
Subject: Re: The colour purple
| I'm a little puzzled by Lawrence Upton's reaction to Mr Teichman's note
| since it seemed to me to be what it said it was: a simple question.
| Nothing wrong with the phrase (or abbreviation) "the current a.g.", which
| seems as useful a shorthand as any other for the various experimental
| poetries.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|