Yeah, me too, and since on some days i am particularly
busy and can only get to the mail at night, my eyes
are already not inclined to go looking for typos,

best,

Rebecca

--- David Bircumshaw <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Should read 'does NOT detract' etc. My capacity for
> typos in e-mail can be
> embarassing at times!
> 
> Best
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Bircumshaw"
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: "Poetryetc provides a venue for a dialogue
> relating to poetry and
> poetics" <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 2:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [New-Poetry] Fascicle 2
> 
> 
> > Yes, Rebecca, Saba indeed. I must confess I
> couldn't resist pulling your
> leg
> > over that (nyah nyah niyahh - got you on that -
> wink).
> >
> > But, yes, again. I do agree, there is at times a
> significant difference
> > between my version of Saba and the original, the
> subtitle: after Saba,  is
> > pointedly emphasising that. I would hope that my
> recast of La Capra does
> > detract or divest of authenticity the great poem
> it is inspired by.
> >
> > The problem, it seems to me, with Geraldine's take
> on Donne, and this I'd
> > say is a common difficulty with a certain kind of
> post-modernist approach
> > that is prevalent, is that the result is an
> emptying-out of the original
> to
> > no point other than, so it seems, of calling
> attention to oneself. The
> > famously infamous consumerist BritArt of the last
> decade is a kind of
> > ultimate of this: Damien Hirst's sick jokes on
> Rembrandt perspective carry
> > one message: Damien Hirst.
> >
> > The word 'collaboration' is very much to the nub
> of the issue: it involves
> > at least two people actively participating. Now
> unless JD has vacated his
> > plinth in St Paul's I suspect that this is a case
> of that which is not, to
> > quote the Houhnyms (forgotten how to spell that!)
> >
> > All the Best
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "R S" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 1:07 PM
> > Subject: Re: [New-Poetry] Fascicle 2
> >
> >
> > > Ah, sorry, David, Saba!  the wrong name came to
> my
> > > late night memory, but there was at times little
> > > direct connection between your version and the
> Italian
> > > original,  and many poets have done this,
> writing
> > > 'versions' from an original, so it's not a
> criticism,
> > > but just my wondering at the difference/s
> between
> > > these various ways of collaborating with the
> dead?
> > >
> > > best,
> > >
> > > Rebecca
> > > --- David Bircumshaw
> <[log in to unmask]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > the Donne poem
> > > > > > she exploits has no direct connection with
> what
> > > > > > she's writing about,
> > > > >
> > > > > Does this matter? for instance, I thought
> David's
> > > > > 'Ungaretti' version at times had little
> direct
> > > > > connection with the original.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It certainly didn't have any connectiuon with
> > > > Ungaretti as the original was
> > > > by Umberto Saba.
> > > >
> > > > Best
> > > >
> > > > Dave
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "R S" <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 6:12 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [New-Poetry] Fascicle 2
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Oh, well, actually I like Geraldine's poem,
> which
> > > > I've
> > > > > previously read, and don't find that she
> > > > 'exploits'
> > > > > Donne though there are moments where the
> > > > repetition of
> > > > > the 'no' and 'the body' seem to have a sort
> of
> > > > > dissipating effect.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the other hand, I have wondered at this
> issue
> > > > of
> > > > > collaboration with the dead ever since I
> read
> > > > Lucie
> > > > > Brock-Broidio's _Master Letters_ which is
> based
> > > > upon
> > > > > Emily Dickinson's 'master' letters,  or Amy
> > > > Clampitt's
> > > > > poems on Keats or Lynda Hull's poems on
> Tolstoi,
> > > > or
> > > > > Edward Hirsch's poems on Weil. I guess it
> could be
> > > > > argued that the principle of post-modernism
> is
> > > > > cannablism, that all texts even those by
> > > > exceptional
> > > > > writers, are meat to be digressed, digested
> into
> > > > new
> > > > > cells. And what's the difference/s between
> Monk
> > > > > collaborating with Donne or David's recent
> version
> > > > of
> > > > > Ungaretti or Stephen's 'Sappho' and 'Stein'
> poems
> > > > > which may bear little or varying degrees to
> the
> > > > > original and use it as a springboard? So in
> that
> > > > > sense, I guess I wonder more at Monk's essay
> that
> > > > > accompanies the collaboration, is it because
> she
> > > > is
> > > > > collaborating with the texts of canonical
> male
> > > > writers
> > > > > and so has to create a framework to do so?
> > > > >
> > > > > > the Donne poem
> > > > > > she exploits has no direct connection with
> what
> > > > > > she's writing about,
> > > > >
> > > > > Does this matter? for instance, I thought
> David's
> > > > > 'Ungaretti' version at times had little
> direct
> > > > > connection with the original.
> > > > >
> > > > > > in the second it is not a good idea to
> > > > extensively
> > > > > > quote someone who
> > > > > > is so obviously a better writer, the whole
> thing
> > > > > > reads to me like
> > > > > > petulant graffitti
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, all I can say is that it didn't seem
> like
> > > > > 'petulant graffitti', and I do think I've
> had
> > > > enough
> > > > > of my share of 'petulant graffitti' to know
> what
> > > > it
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com