On 15 Dec 2012, at 09:08, ian davidson wrote:
Dear All
I have been away for a few days and only just picked up this exchange.
The list should not be used for personal attacks. We might have strong views about poetry, and the ways it is supported and distributed, but that should not spill over into attacks on individuals, present or absent.
Ian Davidson
Sent from my iPad
On 14 Dec 2012, at 20:57, "Pam Thompson" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
On 14 Dec 2012, at 15:08, "Jamie McKendrick" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Antony is right to protest at the list being used for this kind of exchange. I have to take some responsibility, although I replied civilly to the first taunt from David, his second achieved its presumably desired effect.
For reasons surprisingly close to Jeffrey's (though Dylan as a great poet - rather than a brilliant songwriter?), I’m not troubled by David’s account of me as a minor poet, even if the remark by MacDiarmid seems too crass and snobbish to be worth quoting, let alone sourcing. Yet I wonder about this for two reasons. First, is that in the five or so years of contributing I have never made disparaging remarks about anyone’s poems on this list – whether the poets were present to defend themselves or not. And second, I've never mentioned my own books or translations (with the single exception of a translation of a Pasolini verse play). Had I in any way promoted my own work here, or even referenced or submitted any particular poem, I would see it as a more legitimate target for attack. Not that there’s anything wrong with anyone doing so, but as this is not the case, I consider it especially petty and provocative. Though of course I could have done, I have not replied in kind.
What I object to more strongly are the unsubstantiated aspersions and generalized slurs that I’ve now received on more than one occasion from David – of dishonesty, of political association, and now of ‘social placement’ (which I take to be a reference to class prejudice) – wrapped in lofty rhetoric, never quite fully articulated and therefore never easy to confront. These really seem to me one of the banes of internet literary life, and I’m curious as to whether the list thinks this is ok, or even has some kind of procedure to deter it. Why I think it should be discouraged is that it leads almost inevitably to this kind of exchange which is futile and irritating for others to witness, and decidedly unpleasant to engage in.
In this instance, I think David is quite entitled to attack anything I’ve actually written or argued but should not be at liberty to air these kind of vague but damaging imputations - based now, for the second time, on a general and oracular view of my character as revealed to him by my posts. We all, I’m sure, make assumptions about each other, but for a discussion to proceed in any interesting way responses have to be anchored not in these assumptions but in what has actually been said. If I am alone in believing this, then this list is obviously not the place for me to be. (Perhaps it never was, but I’ve found quite a few of the discussions informative and stimulating, and I have been treated here, for the most part, with respect and generosity by poets who may well not approve of my aesthetics or, for that matter, my work.)
----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Barnett
To: [log in to unmask]AC.UK
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 8:02 PM
Subject: Re: Mouldering in my grave
Please stop this. The list is not the place for this. In private please. Thank you.
Anthony Barnett
http://www.abar.net
