 |
 |
Surely this is the condition of literature itself, as a concept anyhow. So why separate these 'ambitious and widely lauded poets' from the others, unless you think they are doing something that is actually wrong. I'm all for 'wrong' if this is the way you mean it. Cheers Tim On 21 Nov 2017, at 12:56, Peter Riley wrote: > think “cultural capital” (or kudos) is a very good term for what worries me about all those ventures by ambitious and widely lauded poets into ”great works of the past”, as if to claim a continuity of stature between them and their own poetical enterprises. What Petrarch et al mean to the self-claims and cultural positioning of our contemporaries, and why bent, I hope to find out.