1) While I take Alan Halsey's point about the increasing vagueness of terms 
like "Cambridge" & "London", I should note that I'm not sure the openness of 
anthologies follows a neat historical pattern: for instance, _A Various Art_ 
& _The New British Poetry_ (Paladin) appeared more or less simultaneously in 
the late 1980s, & the latter remains a superb example of eclectic but canny 
editing.  (Where else can you get Jackie Kay & Carol Ann Duffy inside the 
same covers as Allen Fisher & John Wilkinson?)  One wishes the editors of _A 
Various Art_ had been more explicit as to the principles of their 
selection--it is basically a showcase of the work of UK poets published by 
the Ferry & Grosseteste presses.

2) I'm puzzled as to the comments about poetry & academe.  First of all, in 
North America there's a huge presence of "creative writing" programs in 
universities: I'm aware this has yet to happen in the UK to anywhere close 
to this degree.  But such programs are usually criticized--not just from 
avantgarde quarters--as basically mills churning out conformist dreck, so 
I'm not sure it's necessarily wise to hope that there might be _more_ 
poetry-writing within academe.  If you want an account of a lot of this look 
at Christopher Beach's _Poetic Culture_: not an especially distinguished 
book but useful for a quick sketch.  Authors like Charles Bernstein have 
often attacked writing workshops as part of "Official Verse Culture".  
(Though the problems endemic to such workshops are not easily circumvented 
perhaps: Bernstein's own program at SUNY was criticized by a jaundiced 
correspondent of mine for "cranking out epigoni".) -- In any case, I tend to 
be pretty skeptical of claims that nonpoets (in particular academics who 
write lit.crit.) are incapable of saying intelligent things about poetry, or 
that critical writing isn't a creative act.

3) If we're going to value certain poetries for challenging one's notions 
about things (to be vague for a sec) then why should we then ascribe 
incompetence to those who find they can't handle the stuff, are bewildered 
by it or just hate it?  One might permit people to make _mistakes_ however 
much it hurts to see them made in a public forum like a review, often with a 
vehemence of tone the author may later regret (or may not, of course).  A 
good instance is the rubbishing of _Conductors of Chaos_ by Robert Potts in 
the _TLS_: a few years later he published a contrite review of Prynne's 
_Poems_ mentioning his mistaken dismissal of Prynne in the earlier review & 
instead reviewing the book at hand patiently & mostly positively.

Last note: I may be imagining things but my impression is that, no, _The 
Antigonish Review_ isn't terribly influential, at least presently.  Just 
looked at a copy in the library--man, what an ugly cover (done by a relative 
of the editor).

By the way is _Foil_ out yet?  Any comments?

all best --N
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%