I still say that poetry should not have to represent any quality except the qualities that are inherent in its usage, and even they are not a 'should', they are simply a 'does'. Poetry may well 'represent' (if that is the word you want to use instead of 'have') certain qualities, of which our 'better nature' might well be one, but there is no guarantee and i don't see how there could ever be.
I am wondering how much my view above is influenced by my mistrust of so-called middle-class values with their well documented bourgeois hypocrisies etc.
If the 'experimental' have at any time claimed any kind of superiority with regard to 'better' nature' (and yes they probably have) then surely it is within those political interpretations of what values are being attached to a concept such as 'better nature' etc.
I'm away from now on a weeks holiday playing rough sports so any replies back (Peter) will have to wait for an answer.
Also been appreciating Luke's posts.
Cheers
Tim Allen
On 16 Aug 2017, at 16:10, Peter Riley wrote:
Yes, poetry should represent our better nature, if it doesn’t something is wrong. I can’t see why the bracketed “experimental” should claim any superiority in this.
