How long did it take you to come up with this?
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:16:08 -0400, Mark Weiss
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>"Hi, Charles, long time no see. What you been up to?"
>
>"I guess you don't get out much. I've worked up a theory about
speciation."
>
>"Interesting. How does it work?"
>
>"It's really pretty involved. I've published a couple of thousand
>pages about it. Read it and we can talk about it."
>
>"That's a big time commitment, Charles. Can you give me an example,
>maybe a little piece of the argument?"
>
>"Really hard to do, and besides, I suspect you're only interested in
>your own ideas."
>
>"You needn't get huffy--there may be some truth to that, but I'm just
>trying to protect my time. I've got a new book to promote, a lot of
>translating, a couple of overdue reviews, all that carpentry, and a
>two foot stack of books I need to get to. Give me a hint--if it seems
>to make sense I'll find the time for the rest."
>
>"You don't understand. This will fundamentally change biology,
>theology, environmental ethics, and maybe even the way some
>conceptualize the social order. Nothing will ever be the same again.
>And you worry that it might not be worth your time?"
>
>"Hey Charles, every lunatic on the corner says the same thing.
Convince me."
>
>"Oh, alright. I came upon these islands with a bunch of finches. They
>were identical, except that each island's finches had different size
beaks..."
>
>At 11:45 AM 8/27/2009, you wrote:
>>Chris, I tried to attach a chapter from my PhD thesis but was unable
to
>>do so. This was the reason why:
>>
>>"Your posting to the BRITISH-IRISH-POETS list has been rejected
>>because it contains an attachment of type 'APPLICATION/MSWORD'.
>>The BRITISH-IRISH-POETS list has been configured to reject such
>>attachments. Please contact the list owner at BRITISH-IRISH-POETS-
>>[log in to unmask] for more information."
>>
>>The chapter addresses all the questions raised and is fully referenced
>>with copious examples form Wordsworth's poetry. This is an intro
>>chapter and can be read separately from the other chapters which are
>>more intricately connected. This is a very convoluted topic and I can't
>>argue the case in soundbites.
>>
>>I had the viva voce two years ago, and the thesis passed. One article
>>adapted from a chapter from it has been accepted for publication by a
>>peer-reviewed journal subject to minor stylistic changes, and other
>>articles drawn from the thesis are under review with other peer-
>>reviewed journals.
>>
>>
>>On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 11:01:54 -0400, cris cheek
>><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> >break it up a bit
>> >
>> >give us the drip feed
>> >
>> >re-edit for this space
>> >
>> >you an interested audience
>> >
>> >it would be great to read some substantial debate
>> >
>> >rather than using the public list to point to a more privet-fence
sphere
>> >
>> >;-)
>> >
>> >
>> >here
>> >
>> >here
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >as if
>> >
>> >so far
>> >
>> >xx
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >cc
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >On Aug 27, 2009, at 10:55 AM, Jeffrey Side wrote:
>> >
>> >> It may be unreasonable but it's the case. If those who want a
fuller
>> >> explanation want to recieve my various writing on this by email
>> >> attachemnt then they are welcome. I simply can't load chapters
and
>> >> articles here.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 10:50:51 -0400, Mark Weiss
>> >> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I'll second Cris on this. It's unreasonable to
>> >>> tell people "if you'd only drop everything else
>> >>> in your life and read my complete works I'm sure
>> >>> you'd understand." A single poem or passage,
>> >>> with a discussion of its debt to Wordsworth,
>> >>> might make it possible to understand what you're
>> >>> about. Absent this, you seem to be saying that
>> >>> almost all of British poetry after Wordsworth
>> >>> imitates his practice of describing the visual
>> >>> and does so because of his prestige.
>> >>>
>> >>> Whether or not this is accurate (I'm willing to
>> >>> be convinced, but give us a detail or two), I
>> >>> don't think it adequately describes Wordsworth's
>> >>> practice pre-1809 (the only Wordsworth that
>> >>> matters, I think, to most of us). He's at least
>> >>> as interested in psychology, especially the
>> >>> psychology of perception and memory, as he is in
>> >>> description for its own sake. In much of his work
>> >>> from the period there's a sense of
>> >>> poet-as-scientist, where description is gathered
>> >>> as evidence. Here's a very early poem of his.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> We Are Seven
>> >>>
>> >>> A simple child,
>> >>> That lightly draws its breath,
>> >>> And feels its life in every limb,
>> >>> What should it know of death?
>> >>>
>> >>> I met a little cottage girl:
>> >>> She was eight years old, she said;
>> >>> Her hair was thick with many a curl
>> >>> That clustered round her head.
>> >>>
>> >>> She had a rustic, woodland air,
>> >>> And she was wildly clad;
>> >>> Her eyes were fair, and very fair;
>> >>> Her beauty made me glad.
>> >>>
>> >>> "Sisters and brothers, little maid,
>> >>> How many may you be?"
>> >>> "How many? Seven in all," she said,
>> >>> And wondering looked at me.
>> >>>
>> >>> "And where are they? I pray you tell."
>> >>> She answered, "Seven are we;
>> >>> And two of us at Conway dwell,
>> >>> And two are gone to sea.
>> >>>
>> >>> "Two of us in the churchyard lie,
>> >>> My sister and my brother;
>> >>> And in the churchyard cottage, I
>> >>> Dwell near them with my mother."
>> >>>
>> >>> "You say that two at Conway dwell,
>> >>> And two are gone to sea,
>> >>> Yet ye are seven! I pray you tell,
>> >>> Sweet maid, how this may be."
>> >>>
>> >>> Then did the little maid reply,
>> >>> "Seven boys and girls are we;
>> >>> Two of us in the churchyard lie,
>> >>> Beneath the churchyard tree."
>> >>>
>> >>> "You run about, my little maid,
>> >>> Your limbs they are alive;
>> >>> If two are in the churchyard laid,
>> >>> Then ye are only five."
>> >>>
>> >>> "Their graves are green, they may be seen,"
>> >>> The little maid replied,
>> >>> "Twelve steps or more from my mother's door,
>> >>> And they are side by side.
>> >>>
>> >>> "My stockings there I often knit,
>> >>> My kerchief there I hem;
>> >>> And there upon the ground I sit,
>> >>> And sing a song to them.
>> >>>
>> >>> "And often after sunset, sir,
>> >>> When it is light and fair,
>> >>> I take my little porringer,
>> >>> And eat my supper there.
>> >>>
>> >>> "The first that died was sister Jane;
>> >>> In bed she moaning lay,
>> >>> Till God released her of her pain;
>> >>> And then she went away.
>> >>>
>> >>> "So in the churchyard she was laid;
>> >>> And, when the grass was dry,
>> >>> Together round her grave we played,
>> >>> My brother John and I.
>> >>>
>> >>> "And when the ground was white with snow,
>> >>> And I could run and slide,
>> >>> My brother John was forced to go,
>> >>> And he lies by her side."
>> >>>
>> >>> "How many are you, then," said I,
>> >>> "If they two are in heaven?"
>> >>> Quick was the little maid's reply,
>> >>> "O master! we are seven."
>> >>>
>> >>> "But they are dead; those two are dead!
>> >>> Their spirits are in heaven!"
>> >>> 'T was throwing words away; for still
>> >>> The little maid would have her will,
>> >>> And say, "Nay, we are seven!"
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> At 09:33 AM 8/27/2009, you wrote:
>> >>>> name names and cite actual passages
>> >>>>
>> >>>> please
>> >>>>
>> >>>> i agree with Peter. Unless we get into details here there is no
>> >>>> possibility of further interest.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> put some actual poetry into this discussion
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> as if
>> >>>>
>> >>>> so far
>> >>>>
>> >>>> xx
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> cc
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Aug 27, 2009, at 7:47 AM, Jeffrey Side wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Wordsworth's influence comes out of his poetic theory which
>> >> favours a
>> >>>>> descriptive accuracy. UK mainstream poetry have been like
this
>>for
>> >>>>> years--ask anyone. Ok, maybe not so much now as the
>>mainstream
>> >> may
>> >>>>> have taken on-board some avant-garde notions albeit
watered
>> >> down.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 19:55:45 +0100, Peter Riley
>> >>>>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Where do you see this influence? Can you give an
example of
>>it?
>> >> The
>> >>>>>> only place I thought I saw it recently was in Dart by Alice
>> >>>>>> Oswald,
>> >>>>>> where I thought it had a beneficial effect. Indeed long-
term
>>(100-
>> >>>>>> years) influence could be more likely to liven things up
than
>> >>>>>> imitation of last year's prize-winners, as a general rule.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I know that Wordsworth is highly revered by poets such as
>>J.H.
>> >> Prynne
>> >>>>>> and Keston Sutherland and presumably this will have some
>>result
>> >> in
>> >>>>>> their work, though it would be difficult to put a finger on
it,
>> >>>>>> certainly not in their recent work (though parts of The Oval
>> >> Window
>> >>>>>> maybe...)
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> It was Shakespeare's plays, translated into French, which
so
>>much
>> >>>>>> excited the French poets, and musicians too, especially
>>Berlioz.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On 26 Aug 2009, at 18:31, Jeffrey Side wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Peter, no one is saying that Wordsworth should not be
>>admired.
>> >> My
>> >>>>>> point is that his influence has prevailed in UK poetry long
>> >>>>>> past its
>> >>>>>> sell
>> >>>>>> by date. I don't jink much of shakespeare's sonnets by the
>>way--
>> >> great
>> >>>>>> though he was as a playwright.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 16:01:31 +0100, Peter Riley
>> >>>>>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> As one of the poets mentioned on Marks' list (thanks
kindly,
>> >> Mark)
>> >>>>> I'd
>> >>>>>>> like to mention that Wordsworth has always been an
>>inspiring
>> >>>>>> example.
>> >>>>>>> And so has Thomas Hardy. And that neither of them has
>> >> anything to
>> >>>>> do
>> >>>>>>> with the (actually extremely varied and in some quarters
>>quite
>> >>>>>>> healthy) poetry which gets labelled "mainstream". It was
>>Donald
>> >>>>> Davie
>> >>>>>>> who was mainly responsible for the Hardy--Larkin link,
as he
>> >> was for
>> >>>>> a
>> >>>>>>> lot of other misleading pronouncements at a time when
the
>> >>>>> Cambridge
>> >>>>>>> academy was forcing its way into the contemporary
poetry
>> >> scene as
>> >>>>>>> adjudicators. It's like Eliot's silly attack on Milton and
>> >>>>>>> Pound's
>> >>>>>>> silly attack on just about everybody -- an academic
>>obsession
>> >> with
>> >>>>>>> genealogies which has little to do with how poetry gets
>>written.
>> >>>>> The
>> >>>>>>> historical occasion is built into the writing of someone
like
>>WW
>> >> and
>> >>>>>>> there are questions of authenticity which cut it off from
its
>> >>>>>>> "influence" . Recent writing about him from Cambridge
could
>> >> not be
>> >>>>>>> accused of promoting philosophical empiricism.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> You can get rid of all 20th Century English (not British)
>> >>>>>>> poetry if
>> >>>>>>> you want to ---we did in Cambridge in the 1960s, -- if
you
>>want
>> >> to
>> >>>>>>> write in a certain way you construct a tradition for
yourself,
>> >>>>>>> tho I
>> >>>>>>> don't think it actually helps. And of course it comes
back, it
>> >>>>>>> has to,
>> >>>>>>> you realise that you're deliberately blinkering yourself
for the
>> >>>>>>> sake
>> >>>>>>> of some poetico-ideology. I should have thought the
time for
>> >> that
>> >>>>> kind
>> >>>>>>> of exercise was long past.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> And incidentally, as regards a certain kind of poetical
texture
>> >> and
>> >>>>>>> figurative freedom among the French "symbolistes"
passing
>>on to
>> >>>>>>> America and all that, I think that if you get the full
historical
>> >>>>>>> perspective on this, you find that what it ultimately
derives
>> >>>>>>> from is
>> >>>>>>> England, in the form of Shakespeare (as against Racine
>>etc.).
>> >> France
>> >>>>>>> had a very rigid inheritance of what we call Augustanism,
>>and an
>> >>>>>>> Academy to enforce it, and Shakes was one of the great
>> >> liberators
>> >>>>>>> from that for the early 19th century poets.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Thanks for innarestin chat, everyone.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Peter
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 26 Aug 2009, at 14:49, Tim Allen wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> You might not like it jamie, but for as long as the
mediocre
>>and
>> >>>>>>> dull
>> >>>>>>> are held up by the broadsheet hacks and current Poetry
>>Review
>> >>>>> critics
>> >>>>>>> as being the best of British while treating the names on
>>cris's
>> >> list
>> >>>>>>> as some kind of eccentric anomaly, a bit exotic and
>>interesting
>> >> but
>> >>>>>>> not really 'it', then names like Whitman and Dickinson
are
>>going
>> >> to
>> >>>>> be
>> >>>>>>> shunted around thus. The antipathetic relationship
between
>> >>>>>> mainstream
>> >>>>>>> British poetry and the modernisms and post-modernisms
is a
>> >> fact, so
>> >>>>>>> stop trying to pretend otherwise. This antagonism
seems to
>>be
>> >>>>>>> something particular to the English speaking world, or far
>>more
>> >>>>>>> pronounced and stubborn at least. Why?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Tim A.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 26 Aug 2009, at 14:00, Jamie Mckendrick wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Baudelaire as a poet - and even the history of his
>>reception -
>> >>>>>>>> interests me
>> >>>>>>>> intensely, and I don't like to see him, or for that matter
>> >>>>>>>> Wordsworth, Whitman
>> >>>>>>>> and Dickinson, shunted around like pawns in a specious
>> >> manouvre
>> >>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>> vilify
>> >>>>>>>> contemporary British poetry.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
|
