Dear, Anny,
Perhaps you should ask Joe Duemer to apologize for writing that I write bad
poetry. Very gratuitous and unbecoming a list manager. Read the back and
forth. I think I come out as merely wanting to engage and as being somewhat
amused at Joe's trivial personal attacks. Try to be objective and not show
any favoritism. It's the right thing to do.
Joe Duemer -- I apologize and do so from my Buddha nature. However, your
instinct was correct. I would make a better list manager than you. Send me
the list and I will refrain from (as I said before) calling anyone here a
bad poet. Thank you.
Really... how can you ask me to apologize and not ask the same of Joe?
Joe Green
A Victim of the Usual in the Derridean Sense
On 10/30/07, Anny Ballardini <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I would like to ask Joe Green to apologize. I noticed the games "I am
> better
> than you" thing. We try to prevent bullism at school starting from the
> Elementary, at High School it has almost disappeared. It seems instead
> that
> it is alive here.
>
> Best,
> Co-manager in the Foucault sense
> Anny Ballardini
>
>
> On 10/30/07, Joseph Duemer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Seriously, the search is on for another list manager.
> >
> > jd
> >
> > On 10/30/07, Joseph Duemer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Joe, would you like to run Poetryetc? I'll be glad to hand you the
> keys
> > &
> > > get the hell out of town. Your relentless anti-academic,
> > anti-intellectual
> > > bullshit has finally just gotten me down. You win. Really, it's yours.
> > I'll
> > > resent the list to make you owner -- just give me the word. I mean,
> > you'd be
> > > great because you know everything already & if anyone has any
> questions
> > they
> > > can just ask you & that will settle the issue.
> > >
> > > jd
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/30/07, joe green <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Do you consider the reader's need to not read a composition based on
> > > > what
> > > > you think the reader needs? Seems so very odd... and seems like a
> > > > formula
> > > > for endless repetition of the same.
> > > >
> > > > Seems to have its origins in didactic poesy and seems quite 19th
> > > > century.
> > > > Almost schoolmarmish. Wordsworth began "The Prelude" as an attempt
> to
> > > > justify his poetry -- why should anyone listen to him?.... and then
> > kept
> > > > on
> > > > revising it until he brought it to ruins. Thinking of the reader
> had
> > a
> > > > lot
> > > > to do with that. The first prelude wild and open to contradiction
> and
> > > > not
> > > > fully comprehended even by the poet. The revisions all occasioned
> by
> > a
> > > > didactic impulse with a sense of not having to demonstrate what was
> > > > assumed
> > > > to have been shown.
> > > >
> > > > I like Eliot's suggestion that a poem is judged by all other poems
> --
> > > > those
> > > > poems are the readers in a sense. They are not troubled by
> > theoretical
> > > > grounds immersed in what is quite secondary and of a certain time.
> > > >
> > > > But I acknowledge that these ideas of how a poem is made are
> accepted
> > by
> > > > the
> > > > general public and I suspect that they are created by the workshop
> > > > mentality
> > > > and determined by the enabling conviction that one can be taught to
> > > > write
> > > > poetry. And that many are qualified to do so!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/30/07, Joseph Duemer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Martin, if you're on shaky theoretical ground then so am I. I
> often
> > > > find
> > > > > myself anticipating what I think of as my readers' needs. I want
> to
> > > > put
> > > > > things together in such a way that a reader will have some
> reactions
> > > > and
> > > > > not
> > > > > have others.
> > > > >
> > > > > jd
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/30/07, Martin Dolan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the question of whether "a writer seeks to manipulate a
> desired
> > > > > > audience", the question very much seems to be one of intention.
> > > > > > Manipulation in this case definitely has implications of trying
> to
> > > > > > obtain an advantage or an unfair outcome - unfavourable intent.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If we used a less value-laden description (influence, perhaps),
> it
> > > > > > strikes me that I - perhaps alone! - often set out to influence
> > > > others
> > > > > > through some of my poems, at least by evoking an response. I get
> > an
> > > > > > uneasy feeling that I'm on suspect theoretical ground here, but
> > hey,
> > > > I
> > > > > > don't claim I'm successful in my intent.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Douglas Barbour wrote:
> > > > > > > Oh [probably, Roger, in which case everyone is 'sincere'...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But Mark was talking, if I remember rightly, about whether or
> > not
> > > > a
> > > > > > > writer seeks to manipulate a desired audience. I guess that's
> a
> > > > kind
> > > > > > > of intention, whether or not it actually works?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would tend to agree that we're always readers, but then I
> > > > > > > immediately begin to wonder if that's right, too....
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My more serious point in that post had to do with that
> question
> > of
> > > > > > > craft, which as readers we can, I guess, only intuit, out of a
> > > > > > > sensibility constructed by all our (other) reading....
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Doug
> > > > > > > On 28-Oct-07, at 3:12 AM, Roger Day wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Outside v inside readings - isnt that some form of false
> > > > dichotomy?
> > > > > > >> Neither exists as we're only readers and we impose our own
> > > > > > >> rose-coloured glasses on everything we read. I thought we'd
> > > > excluded
> > > > > > >> intentional fallacies?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Roger
> > > > > > > Douglas Barbour
> > > > > > > 11655 - 72 Avenue NW
> > > > > > > Edmonton Ab T6G 0B9
> > > > > > > (780) 436 3320
> > > > > > > http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/<
> > http://www.ualberta.ca/%7Edbarbour/>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Latest book: Continuations (with Sheila E Murphy)
> > > > > > > http://www.uap.ualberta.ca/UAP.asp?LID=41&bookID=664
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's the first lesson, loss.
> > > > > > > Who hasn't tried to learn it
> > > > > > > at the hands of wind or thieves?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jan Zwicky
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Joseph Duemer
> > > > > Professor of Humanities
> > > > > Clarkson University
> > > > > [sharpsand.net]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Joseph Duemer
> > > Professor of Humanities
> > > Clarkson University
> > > [sharpsand.net]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Joseph Duemer
> > Professor of Humanities
> > Clarkson University
> > [sharpsand.net]
> >
>
|