Henry,
I don't think the "debate" (a debate only happens when both sides agree to
have a serious exchange-- Bernstein, Watten, Silliman have for the most
part avoided that, which is typical of them when fundamental premises of
their "politics of form" come under challenge) you reference has been
exactly "vaporous" in all respects. I've taken part in it-- in fact, I've done as
much talking as anyone on the issue, including publishing the first
response to Bernstein's "Enough," and I would feel bad if you thought I was
vaporous in my comments. Tell me please you disagree with me on many
things but at least respect me, pretty please?
On Vallejo, hwen you say, "Communist in Paris : nevertheless he never
forgot the lesson of the estranged power of pure poetry, or the
difference between aesthetics & politics. He is one among many many
poets who will not fit into your prescription for "correct" ideology"
this is actually more complicated-- Vallejo thought deeply and wrote
fairly extensively on this art/politics matter, and his work shows
remarkable flexibility and variety in different circumstances-- Espana
aparta de mi este caliz, for example, is a very different gathering than
Trilce or Los heraldos negros! (I mentioned this as part of a response to
Barrett Watten at Circulars, actually, and ws met with an amazing ad
hominem response from him).
Well, I'm rushed, and Gabe may have exaggerated about poets with
different opinions than his, but let's be clear, too, that Gabe has shown a
great amount of courage, determination, and conviction over the past
few weeks in standing up for his beliefs, and I am sure you must respect
that.
Kent
|