 |
 |
The villain in the piece is Ted Hughes. Did he for love of country bequeath his goods to the people? He did not. He went for the fast buck and a big one. Ted was a bit of a wide boy, always on the make. Being a farmer or a poet laureate won't net you much money these days. The Americans have more money than us, and soon it will be the turn of the Chinese. Most art objects are moving East these days, either to china or Russia. Their taste is as probably as good as the next schmoo with too much money and a life spent dealing in containerised geegaws. meh. So it goes. Your first paragraph is ironic: I see you and Marjorie as being very similar in outlook. Differing outcomes maybe, but similar outlook. Roger On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:57 PM, David Bircumshaw <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > I knew this morning that I was too tired to put things well. > > I do agree that Perloff's way of looking at things is too one-sided. I > particularly distrust her seeming belief that poetry belongs to > 'specialists' for validation. > > We went to watch a re-showing of an old Wim Wenders' film tonight - > 'The State of Things' - the one where the avant-garde film-maker > discovers in the end that his project was financed by laundered money. > > While I learnt today that in 1997 the late Ted Hughes (Poet by Royal > Appointment) sold his own archives (all 2 and half tons of them) to > the Robert W. Woodruff Library at Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. > The purchase for the acquisition came from a bequest of Coca-Cola > shares. > > It's the real thing. Laughter, that is.