Take a look here at Vendler's review of Muldoon's "Horse Latitudes."
http://www.powells.com/review/2006_11_09.html
There you go. Who else is writing as intelligently or giving poems this much attention? This is as few links in the chain of being above the usual -- such as the reviews in "Poetry" magazine or the really fantastically awkward and amateurish writing over at Silliman's.
And her essays on Donne and Herbert -- a few more links in the old chain gang of being above her essay here.
Poetry wars -- who is in, who is out. A world elsewhere there is.
Stephen Vincent <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Douglas Barbour wrote:
>> Oh, well, I too remain unconvinced, Barry. And I have never really
>> understood the hold Bloom has on so many (but one does have to choose
>> how much one can fit in, & I never fit much of his work in).
> Fashions change. In 1970, even friends who within five years would go
> on to become Marxist deconstructionists, Gramsci-mavens, etc., were all
> about Jabba-Bloom and his various angsts.
>
> As for Vendler, she admits to ending her poetry writing at
> twenty-six...in favor of a Chemistry thesis. Oh well. Her subsequent
> ascent to become incoronated goddess (some might say Cerberus) of
> Parnassus entirely escapes me. To say Barnum was right about what's
> born every minute seems both accurate if simplistic. The question for
> me is how the hell she managed to convince L'Academie she knows shit
> about what she's talking about
>
> Ken
I actually met Helen Vendler once and heard her give a brief lecture on
Shakespeare's sonnets. She did not strike as an evil person, kind of sweet
actually, and probably not without pride for her accomplishments.
Tho she does not seem to pronounce on who's who in contemporary American
poetry so much anymore (in the New Yorker), I guess she is off their list,
or with age maybe the role of critical enthusiast for 'the new' diminishes,
and maybe she has a career concluding project that fills her days.
But frankly, no more than Margjorie Perloff - whose avant likes I sometimes
like, and whose politics is cold war, often reactionary and blinded,
probably by her innocent sense of wealth and academic privilege - I don't
see much gained by dismissing either one on personal grounds. They are both
very smart and well read.
I think both of them give grist for looking and arguing about what counts
for each of our biases and loves. 'Grist' is a good thing for me - helps
sharpen my view as well as my limits. Contraries is what makes the world go
round. Poetry always?
So, lay off Helen as Helen I say - and if she doesn't launch your ship,
there is still quite a bit of space out on the waters, timber in the hills,
etc.
Row for it!
Stephen V
http://stephenvincent.net/blog/
---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
