 |
 |
David, I’ve been avoiding this discussion in case it resulted in too much of a heated argument. But the discussion has, so far, been generally courteous. What you have said tallies with what I think and have written about in the past; though you have articulated it far more eloquently and forthrightly. I’m pleased that The Argotist Online feature about this topic has prompted at least this discussion here. I had originally hoped it would have caused more of an online impact, but from what Tim has said I can see why it hasn’t. In the spirit of friendship, I invite those of you here who agree with the Argotist feature but are too wary of making yourselves known here, to contact me privately to express your views. I genuinely want to hear what other (unrevealed) supporters of the Argotist feature think. It would be good to get the views of some women supporters. The feature was originally criticised because of the predominance of male participants. I did try to get some female ones, but the ones I approached refused to take part. From: David Lace <[log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 17:39:45 +0000 Jamie, I agree that the media and poetry prizes can make some poets feel ignored, but I think this sort of “being overlooked” is mainly the situation with individual poets (most probably mainstream ones, who see prizes as something worth having). The type of “being overlooked” in the context of academic avantgarde poetry seems to be a problem that affects “types” or “schools” or poetry, as well as individual “maverick” poets (William Blake comes to mind here). It was very astute of you to note that ‘What we’re calling the avant-garde does seem to have a far higher profile with regard to critical articles, research etc. so perhaps it’s there that the exclusion for some is more keenly felt.’ And I think it goes some way in illustrating the more “professional” approach academic avantgarde poetry takes in perpetuating itself as opposed to the more “relaxed” way mainstream poetry does. The constant need to “create content” for the subjects of the ‘critical articles, research etc’ forces the academic avantgarde poetry “king makers” to constantly look for poets to study—poets presumably drawn from the ranks of the very ones that academic avantgarde poetry academics are teaching. It is a form of “literary inbreeding. 40 is not old to me either, but I just used that number to say “poets who are not the usual age students are at university”—which is around 23. From the discussion so far it seems that only Tim and I fully agree. I would say that you are perhaps agnostic on the subject. I think, as Tim said earlier, a few more on this list agree but are too afraid to say so for obvious reasons. It reminds me a bit of the debate about racism in the Metropolitan Police Force—police officers who knew it went on never came forward until the media exposed it all. From: Jamie McKendrick <[log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 12:25:08 +0000 David, yes I’d added the negative in that sentence. As I said it’s not an area I feel qualified to comment on. I’d say it’s a general affliction of poets to feel overlooked, common even to those we might feel have received an undue amount of attention. And there’s often a reality to it, when the media only bother if there’s a large cash prize or a squalid quarrel involved. It’s all a bit speculative as the conditionals in your 2nd paragraph register, so it might be worth hearing from someone who has some real evidence of exclusion. When you say such a poet - ignored, uninvited, and old to boot (though 40 sounds young to me!) - ‘may as well pack up and go home’, my response is that (apart from the age) this is the condition in which all poets begin, and most continue. It goes with the territory so you keep on only if it matters enough to you. Jamie