>The idiom of Bircumshaw's time is, indeed, the "Open Form"
>or"Projective Verse." Such writing is the chief opponent and
>antidote to the formalist work embodied so vividly in Larkin or
>Wallace Stevens.
Richard,
Haven't had much time tonight to go in detail through your last post
(no pun intended), but nonetheless was stopped in my tracks by this.
Since I'm not sure how to interpret your tone and idiom (I recognize,
hearing it, that we're not in Dublin any more), I hope you'll forgive
me if I commit a few naivetes. I am, though surprised by what sounds
like the absolutist tone of the passage I quote. Are you, in fact,
suggesting that there is only one form of writing which has opposed
or formed an antidote to the formalisms you mention (which strike me
as, in any event, distinct)?
My question doesn't derive from an idle curiosity. My own
acquaintance with "Open Form" or "Projective Verse" is passing and
very superficial, though I hope shortly to deepen it. I would,
however, consider myself as having written, while not in opposition
to Larkin and Stevens (which I would see as making my work dependent
on theirs), at least in an alternate mode which might offer relief to
those desiring it. Have I then mis-spent the last thirty-five years
of my youth?
Best,
Trevor
|