 |
 |
Knight, Romer, Hofmann I havent discussed yet. Stephen Knights' first book of poems didnt go down very well with me. One of these people who is prpbably better off in a single poem than in a book. He is just clever. Stephen Romer didnt interest me. Michael Hoffman has interested me a lot. His way of doing things reminds me of the young Gary Snyder. But there is no afeter-effect. I think his most interesting work is his complaint against his father. But he has introduced a new note into English poetry. How Faber ever agreed to publish him baffles me. With all respect to Doug Oliver (The Infant and The Pearl) I feel that there are only two poets standing out amongst the avant-garde in Britain of the last thirty years. These are MacSweeney and Prynne. These poets can be compared to any of the Mainstream to advantage. MacSweeney is only MacSweeney when he rants on Sparty Lea and for Prynne you have the cross-dialgue's which John Wilkinson recently categorised. I feel that Prynne has lost out thru following Olson and negating the Romantic `I' but that would not be avant-garde. Macsweeney seems to be in bad repute for going populist and getting money from the Royal Literary Fund. But I love him. I am from Darlington. He is all we have apart from Ralph Hodgson. I am just back from the pub so I will sign off now and head for my coffee and listen to the cricket. Cheers. PS But the avant-garde is only a very few people in a generation and I dont consider myself a part of it, although it has always fascinated me. May good come out of it. %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%