<<
It's a poem written when Armitage, I'm guessing, was 25, or younger. There's
less fizz and word play in it than in many of the poems of his first book:
it's quieter and maybe not that ambitious.
[SNIP]
>>
OK, Jamie, fair dos, you've taken the trouble to make an argued case, so
it's only fair I should at least look at the Armitage poem.
<<
(I doubt, though, that this account will tear Robin away from his
admiration for David's post and the "specific points" he has somewhere found
in his and Mark's dismissals.)
Jamie
>>
Let you know (if I remember) after I've read the poem.
And what I "admired" [sic?] in dave's post was the mini-poem, not the
Armitage put-down, which I simply flagged as confirming all my prejudices,
"So what else is new?"
It wasn't so much that Mark and dave were engaging in incisive and
cutting-edge criticism of Armitage (this is a poetry list rather than a
scholarly journal, after all) as that your own posts (up to this one) had
even *less substance.
You were huffing and puffing but quite failing to blow the house down (or
up).
Robin
|