>Quoting Douglas Clark <[log in to unmask]>:
>> Your character is amassed out of your neuroses
>> and it is character that makes a good poet.
>> Collins is bland, it seems.
>
>Okay I was afraid of that. But, Douglas, doesn't you gets suspicious about
>sketching a hardline post-Freudian romantic poetics? Maybe it's a cultural
>thing, because it seems that, at least in the American I know, such a
>pathologizing of the poet's interior and character is a thing of the past --
>albeit the recent past. It seems (and I hope it's true) that in America
>younger
>poets just don't allow themselves that, forgive this, kneejerk association
>between poetic value and the romantic malady of talent. Hmm.
>
Well, Gabe
I'd like to hope so, but given the range of poetics at work in the US (&
elsewhere), & the kind of thinking I often see in young writers, I suspect
that something like this still plays in a lot of writers' sense of 'where
the writing comes from' (drummroll etc).
Oy!
Doug
Douglas Barbour
Department of English
University of Alberta
Edmonton Alberta Canada T6G 2E5
(h) [780] 436 3320 (b) [780] 492 0521
http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/dbhome.htm
Speech
is a mouth.
Robert Creeley
|