Happy to avoid any further taxonomic excursions - not my forte even
closer to home. But more or less we both seem to understand why modernismo
isn’t modernism. No harm in briefly pointing out the difference, as the
Hispanist John Butt has written a whole book dedicated to unravelling it
(which unfortunately I haven’t yet read).
Fine with the two lines of descent. I don’t think Bishop and Berryman
have much truck with Williams, nor Lowell for that matter until perhaps
Day by Day. Not my favourite book but it has some good poems in
it.
Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 6:06 PM
Subject: Re: baBoom
Vanguardismo is
the overarching term, and as I said has little to do with what we call avant
garde. But no ;point arguing the fine points of hispanophone taxonomy. The
accident of history I refer to is the use of the same term to mean two
different things.
Housebreaking in the sense of training the dog not to
shit on the carpet.
Two lines claiming descent from the first
generation modernists. The Lowells etc took what they needed but lost the
essentials. Which is fine, if it produces good poetry. For me at least it's
pretty weak tea. The effort was to craft an acceptable, mannerly modernism.
Their take on Williams, for instance, is unrecognizable to me as
Williams.
