 |
 |
>> Oh, I said it from a sort of overview of this thread, making logical >> extensions >> from the various arguments presented here. > >Hey, isn't that a definition of a straw man? You're certainly not taking >issue with anything I said or argued for, even though in your mails you're >quoting my posts. Well, I have taken issue with a few things that you've said in this, but in this case, no, I wasn't, hence my explaining it as a 'sort of overview' rather than an argumentative point directed at you. In these email conversations on these threads, there's often an engagement with a number of directions, glances toward the Bernstein article, etc, and hence my overview glance here. If I had meant it in debating class style as a point at you, I wouldn't have bothered to explain above. In general I am suggesting something rather more nuanced, >and considerably less either/or than you are suggesting. ah, I could have said this myself. See above. As for 'pure,' that's a matter of terminology, I think, you seem to be thinking of 'unsullied,' the moral connotations of the term; I was rather thinking in terms of pure concentrates versus dilutions "watered-down" watered-down whiskey versus the straight stuff. In the general fundamentals of this, I don't think we're in basic disagreement, best, Rebecca ---- Original message ---- >Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 05:03:55 +1100 >From: Alison Croggon <[log in to unmask]> >Subject: Re: down with the down with poetry crowd >To: [log in to unmask] > >On 22/1/05 3:22 AM, "Rebecca Seiferle" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Oh, I said it from a sort of overview of this thread, making logical >> extensions >> from the various arguments presented here. > >Hey, isn't that a definition of a straw man? You're certainly not taking >issue with anything I said or argued for, even though in your mails you're >quoting my posts. In general I am suggesting something rather more nuanced, >and considerably less either/or than you are suggesting. I was not arguing >that poetry ought not to exist in universities; as Mark recognised, I was >quoting a rather bitter joke of a friend of mine, familiar with both the >considerable problems and, as a gifted teacher, the advantages, of having >poetry in curricula. My friend was speaking about teaching literature >rather than creative writing courses, which of course exist here, but in >nothing like the dominant place that MFA do in the US. I even know what it's >like to enjoy the stimulation and privilege of being in a university >environment. But I don't believe it's undilutedly a good thing. > >> Bernstein argues >> against various venues that now exist for poets and poetry on the grounds that >> they 'water it down', i.e. dilute its purity > >Carl Bernstein was not arguing for uber purity; he said that poetry whose >main virtue is marked as "accessible" is "a watered down version that lacks >the cultural edge and the aesthetic sharpness of the best popular and mass >culture". Which is a considerably different thing to say; watered-down >refers to blandness as a lack of challenge or intensity, rather than >"purity" in terms of the sullying of the impure popular. He goes to some >pains not to diss popular and mass culture, and I think Bernstein's comment >is acute. I somehow don't think Bernstein would be big on the pure, but am >ready to stand corrected. > >Hi Finnegan > >> Well thank goodness the quote itself is better than the platitude of its >> paraphrase. > >> If you went out onto the streets one April and started quizzing people with >> the question, 'Did you know it was National Poetry Month?', I'm sure >> you'd be met with mostly blank stares. It's more likely to heighten the >> consciousness of those who are already somewhat engaged with the literary >> arts. > >Apologies for the platitudinous: I told you I was mostly banal. All the >same, it seems to me the corralling of poetry into special protected poetry >places is more "damselising" than wanting it to be exciting and vital and >more embedded in people's lives. But - if National Poetry Month doesn't >make the average woman in the street more aware of poetry, then why bother >with it? I'm with the Mark Weiss Mermaid Tavern model , poofy shirts and >all; so much more fun than the earnest "have a dose of poetry, it's good for >you" thing. (Also, I have never liked Mother's Day, although I put up with >it). > >I write popular literature. I take it very seriously and work hard to write >it well, but I don't for a moment think it offers the same experiences as >reading poetry. Or writing it, for that matter. Poetry offers, as >Bernstein said, a crucial alternative - different from, not "better" than, >popular culture. > >Best > >A > > >Alison Croggon > >Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com >Editor, Masthead: http://masthead.net.au >Home page: http://alisoncroggon.com