Why do I find reading through an issue of Poetry magazine painful and > reading through the collected works of Creeley exciting? Because it works for you and extends your understanding of what poetry¹ is might be an answer. Tilla¹s twopence On 25/8/05 2:36 pm, "Robert Heffernan" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > To those who feel there is no such thing as "good writing" or "bad > writing" I have a (genuine) question to ask. > > What is the function of the poet if all writing is of equal merit? > Why should I, or anyone else, bother to write? I've always thought > that the role of the innovative poet is to improve the art. Am I > wrong? What does it mean to "improve" if there is no way one can > measure such improvement? > > Why do I find reading through an issue of Poetry magazine painful and > reading through the collected works of Creeley exciting? > > Bob > (A young poet who feels that the current climate of "no good, no bad, > just writing" has made it difficult to know where to start in his > art.) > > p.s. - Yet again I sent this to Mairead first before realising I > should have sent it to the list. Sorry Mairead. > On 8/25/05, mairead byrne <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> I like what you say here Rupert, and what you relate of Joe Sheerin. >> My understanding of poetry and writing has changed greatly over time. >> I certainly appreciate: "there is no such thing as good writing and >> bad writing - there's writing." Thanks for the imagination and soul >> you bring to discussion. >> Mairead >> >> >> >> >> On 8/24/05, mallin1 <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>> I'm sorry Geraldine and others if my allotment analogy to poetry/poets >>> offended or upset but-- >>> >>> Greens have the slogan - dig where you stand (which I think is kin to some >>> poets). Truth is, 'dig where you stand' either elevates the digger or buries >>> the digger (in the grave dug). Poetry as individual on high is that >>> problematic. You can't do that on an allotment: what you perceive as your >>> individuality is its dialectic opposite. The richer each element of the >>> tapestry, the richer the whole. >>> >>> I know I sound crass but - an Irish teacher and poet, way back in the early >>> 1970s, was my mentor. We were at some folk club in an overspill town and Joe >>> Sheerin turned to me (me, headlong into Hart Crane and The Beats), and said: >>> "there is no such thing as good writing and bad writing - there's writing." >>> >>> I kicked like a mule then - I've kicked like a mule these years hence - for >>> surely there is 'arbitration' - there's a cannon, there are university >>> certificates, there are great poets arbitrating, there's a poetry God to say >>> what's 'good' and what's 'bad!' >>> >>> No. Joe was/is right: there is writing. Just writing. >>> >>> I'd like to know how you arbitrate over 'good' and 'bad' writing? >>> >>> Until 1990 Shelley's 'Peterloo Writings' of 1820 were not published in >>> Britain. Editors of his work would not publish 'Mask of Anarchy' or his >>> polemic prose. The poetry/publishing world split Percey Byshe into two >>> people: the intellectual of 'Queen Mab' and 'Prometheus Unbound' and the >>> "juvenile" who extended Thomas Paine's writings - who was thereby, in my >>> view, the bridge between Blake, Chartism and Marx. >>> >>> *** >>> >>> As said, what are your criteria? >>> >>> >>> Rupert >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>