Yes, I wondereed at this one too, since without "radio" and _talking_? films made
me wonder just how old this guy is! even Vallejo writing back in 1925 from Peru
said that the word 'radio' could change any number of things. This is one of the
issues of the article, I think, a sort of obfuscation, because the critic taking this
stance is ill-equipped (no radio, no talking films) to notice that Gioia is hardly
favorable to "innovations in contemporary poetry" theoretically opposed as a
neoformalist and one who seems to view the internet as a demise of the book.
Oh, well, back to churning butter...
best,
Rebecca
---- Original message ----
>Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:44:56 +0000
>From: Dominic Fox <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Amplified Bards
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>'I'm the kind of critic who Gioia complains is ill equipped to assess
>innovations in contemporary poetry because my tastes are based in part
>on the "antiquarian assumptions" of Modernism, which "reflect a
>culture without radio, talking films, television, videocassettes,
>computers, cell phones, satellite dishes, and the Internet."'
>
>Ex-*cuse* me???
>
>The "age demanded" chiefly a mould in plaster,
>Made with no loss of time,
>A prose kinema, not, not assuredly, alabaster
>Or the "sculpture" of rhyme.
>
>Dominic
|