Oh, has Anny called on JD to desist? Did I miss this? In any case -- one
can hope. Or will we let Joe have a pass? The splendid fellow!
Ah, well. Back to the devil!
On 10/30/07, TheOldMole <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I'm with Anny here. I really can't stand this. I mean, I can delete
> threads without reading them, but I just don't want to be a part of a
> flame-war list.
>
> Anny Ballardini 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]
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Tad Richards
> http://www.opus40.org/tadrichards/
> http://opusforty.blogspot.com/
>
|
