 |
 |
How nice. I'm the first to admire Keston's skill with one kind of rhythm: I thought I'd get beyond those tired oppositions that Peter R also doesn't like, assume I admire or am not afraid of the technical effort Keston puts in, compared to so many poets: I was *questioning* the violence, and actually also saying the Diogenes' reference helped gloss his work for me; whether the work finds a rationale in Diogenes or begins from Diogenes (ie as an ethical experiment in a language experiment, not just a personal statement in a language experiment, in which the language use can be examined but not the ethics); I just didn't find its use of sexual explicitness as interestingly defamiliarised from the author's own libido as it is for me in Acker or Silliman or Coolidge or Harryman, sexually explicit authors I love. So thanks for calling my reading sub-par, Andrea-who-is-now-signed-off, I'll try and console myself with the fact that Fiona Templeton at the same reading said she could whistle with pleasure at it, tara Ira > I thought some defense of his actually admirable capabilities > might be necessary as few people will have had the resources at hand > to disprove Ira's bash personally. > > And, given Ira's entrance to this list some months ago, blushing and > glowing over the outpouring of human warmth and defense of his poem > against some allegation of its crapness, I thought it only fair. I don't know > anything about Ira's work except for his reading during the RemPress > series, which was definitely sub-par. > > Signing permanently and voluntarily off, > Andrea > > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%