The hard reviewing in TW (at least my own reviews) was aimed at work I considered either bad or yes, heavily praised elsewhere but in need of a good questioning, and yes, this was mostly what could be called mainstream work. Generally reviews and notices of avant work (or whatever term is suitable) were full of enthusiasm because I was genuinely being enthused - the 90's were quite a high for the quality of avant work, from the US especially, and thanks to Salt and a few others the best of the Brit avant stuff was finally being pushed forward after over a decade of being ignored and/or disparaged.

The Academia article is on The Argotist - notice of it was posted here - 'The KIss of Life? - the Kiss of Death? - some thoughts on linguistically innovative poetry and the academy.
    
On 31 May 2016, at 19:57, Jamie McKendrick wrote:

Tim, I take it then (and this is the context in which my remark was made – a context evidently missed by Michael) that the ‘hard and polemical’, elsewhere ‘vicious’, style of reviewing you undertook was directed only towards the ‘mainstream’. I can see that might be a way of evening the scores against a climate of adulation but surely the same policy might usefully be directed also towards ‘the linguistically innovative circles’? I have a feeling you agree with my point and may have even made it yourself – where, by the way, is that Academia article to be found?