 |
 |
A few weeks ago I mentioned in a post about an on-line mag that advertises itself as experimental etc (there are quite a few around at the moment) and I said how the vast majority of poetry in it had the external markers of experimental or avant etc, markers that just about parallel yours David. But it's a false notion. Some of my own books have such markers while others do not, but to my mind there is no essential difference, or at least not a difference that could be said to arise from the markers or the lack of - such differences are superficial or surface. Difficult to explain why I think this but I do. It also applies to many others. I would be pleased to know if anyone out there agrees with me on this. Another thing I've noticed with both others' work and my own is the way in which we often use the same available micro poetic methods as 'mainstream' poets use but that the purpose is different, the macro use is different, which of course relates to above. Cheers Tim ps - thought I'd give it a new subject title - fed up of seeing the name Rebecca Watts On 30 Jan 2018, at 16:17, David Lace wrote: > Then at those times you are probably not avantgarde, Tim. You said yourself you are hard to classify.