 |
 |
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Alison Croggon <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > I meant conservative poetics rather than politics, Uche, and in a > contemporary context: my point was simply that it's a partial reading > of a tame Milton, in defence of contemporary agendas. I agree, the > right/left binary is more and more useless, and in mainstream politics > is just code for right and more right anyway, democratic government > being basically the public arm of the corporate state. > OK thanks, and sorry for any confusion. I'll confess that I'm even fuzzier on what conservative poetics are. To make a few guesses: Is it poetics which deplores free verse? Is it poetics which deplores completely unstructured verse, but admits e.g. accentual verse, syllabics, sprung rhythm, Pound's Anglo-Saxon adaptation (and other such alliterative systems), etc.? Is it poetics that deplores anything that is not in classic form? (blank verse, heroic couplets, sonnet, villanelle, roundel, etc.) Does it become conservative only when it expands from personal preference into broader statement of academic authority? Is there a center? A mainstream? How might you characterize the poetics which holds that good and poor verse can be written in free verse or form, but that free verse too often becomes an excuse for writing poor verse? -- Uche Ogbuji http://uche.ogbuji.net Founding Partner, Zepheira http://zepheira.com Linked-in profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ucheogbuji Articles: http://uche.ogbuji.net/tech/publications/ TNB: http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/ Friendfeed: http://friendfeed.com/uche Twitter: http://twitter.com/uogbuji http://www.google.com/profiles/uche.ogbuji