Doug --
I agree that the measure of a political statement is the action and
involvement of people interested in it. But some statements are easier to
get involved in than others, and at a lower risk of self-questioning. I
do find that the tendency of your posts is to pronounce a sound and
sympathetic opinion with which obviously no-one could wish to disagree; a
kind of involvement by default? I see the use of this list not as a way
to applaud each other's correctness, or to warm our ears over the rosy
glow of impeccable sentiment, but as a forum for debate. Of course you
contribute to such debates very usefully and memorably. But I don't think
your messages often assist in creating debate. I should think we all
agree that not everyone in the world needs to be interested in Frankfurt
School Marxism. Not much to debate there. If you have a "head to head"
with this or other modern philosophy, perhaps you could explain why, and
on what grounds, rather than deferring that interesting issue for the sake
of what can seem like perpetual amelioration.
Alison I don't think that the poets Chris posted got so severe a drubbing
-- anyone recall the gang effort on Ted Hughes a couple of years ago, when
'Orpheus' went on about the manly poetic? Besides, Chris was, in a way,
asking for trouble. I'd like to know what you, Doug, thought of the poems
Chris posted. I would assume, from your mentioning Denise Riley et al as
your preferred women poets, that you found those excerpts as offputting as
some of us have said? I don't mean to bait you, but would really like to
hear your opinion, paticularly since I agree that a plurality of divergent
projects is a good thing (so long as plurality doesn't become our motive
for accepting them, per se; there are enough supermarkets in the world),
but believe also that the way to ensure that a real plurality (rather than
a simple market plurality) can exist, is to identify and criticize
spurious concepts of plurality and spurious constituent poetries.
Do you think Doug that this specifically -negative-, critical and finally
exclusive work of criticism is necessary, for there to be a valuable
plurality? One in which genuinely differing values are represented
credibly?
k
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|