Keston wrote:
>perhaps we could forego the small titillations of instant put-downs, and
>(should we wish to discuss Prynne at all) become involved in some of the
>work of discovering the value of that poetry with some patience and
>commitment.
I read Vance Maverick's essay on Prynne's Thermal Packing over the
weekend, in response to Douglas Clark's gentle prodding, and found the
his closing remarks rang a bell with me:
"Perhaps the chief requirement, in reading "difficult" poetry of this
order, is a willingness to be wrong. . . . Perhaps the way to approach a
work like this is in a sort of study circle, of the kind sometimes
arranged for Finnegans Wake, in which a group of readers can combine
forces to cover more of the possible meanings. If the "difficulty" of a
poem like this is greater than that of the familiar classics (and there
is reason to wonder whether this is so), it is of a sort that breeds
meaning--and pleasure."
Reading Nate's inquiry concerning the title, Red D Gypsum, I had
remembered how some of the best work on FW has been done by non-EngLit
professionals, such as Roland McHugh, Danis Rose, Clive Hart and Vincent
Deane, or, futher back, Joseph Campbell and Niall Montgomery. As Maverick
points out, much of this analysis was focused initially through
study-groups. I wondered whether anything of the sort had been tried for
Prynne or for other contemporary poets whose work draws on a wide range
of specialised reference. (Tom Raworth might be another possibility, and
perhaps Allen Fisher, but I'm sure there are others - Brian Coffey also
comes to mind among those no longer around to object.) The internet would
seem the perfect resource for such a virtual study-circle, do we have one
somewhere, or do we have the makings of one here?
Hopefully,
Trevor
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|