Hi Sean. I stand corrected. My impressions that Cobbing was a
controlling factor must have been based on mere gossip that I hadn't
bothered to check out.
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 10:12:33 +0100, Sean Bonney
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Hi everyone, I've just joined the list -
>
>I'd say the wide variety of very different poets who'd cite Writers
Forum as
>important in their development show how little it was dominated by
one
>particular 'aesthetic' or 'personality'. While Bob was most definitely in
>charge, his role, at least how I experienced it, was in making people
aware
>of the wide variety of different approaches that are possible, including
>crossing the borders between different art forms. The connections
between
>WF, the London Film-makers Co-op, London Musicians Collective etc
haven't
>really been documented, for instance. Incredibly important as a non-
academic
>environment in which to explore all sorts of things, and a vital place of
>encouragement for young poets to try things out. It still functions like
>that, as far as I'm aware.
>
>I think its an exception, tho. I've also had experiences with 'straight'
>workshops that were very bad. I'd find em very repressive and just get
bored.
>
>>But, Chris, wasn't the Writers Forum dominated by the personality
and
>>aesthetics of Bob Cobbing--or so I've heard. Apologies if I'm
mistaken.
>>
>>
>>>On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 13:54:50 -0400, cris cheek
>><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>>the B I G exception to critiques of conventional workshop practice in
>>>the UK is Writers Forum.
>>>
>>>I've written quite a bit about it and so i won't repeat that . . .
>>>but it did provide an exemplary rejoinder
>>>in and of itself.
>>>
>>>xx
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>cris
>>>
>>>
>>>
|