Judy Prince wrote:
> Let's just hope that the quoted bits from the books are the least attractive
> lines in them.
I gave up clicking through the files after about no. 5. The quoted
bits? Good grief. And how can a book republishing available works be
considered of any great importance? What were they the ten best poetry
books from--the year 2009 in England by tenth-rate presses?
I often think when I see lists like this that if I were World-Commissar,
I would be tempted to require makers of lists like these to state what
candidates for their lists they had investigated before making their
choices. Most of them not only don't read many candidates but aren't
even aware of most possible candidates--or even of the many kinds of
poetry not in the mediocre books they manage to investigate. (Not that
one or two of the books on this list may not be better than mediocre,
but I'm sure not more than one or two will achieve any lasting reputation.)
Oh, as commissar, I would not give in to my temptation; I believe too
firmly in freedom of speech & thought to do so.