Angel, your message request is not appropriate to this list. Please refrain or the exit is not far away.
Back to poetry, please.
Stephen Vincent
--- On Sun, 4/25/10, Angel <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Angel <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Adventurous rejected: Magma Blog
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Sunday, April 25, 2010, 12:56 PM
I need a book about sex, I think I might not be doing it correct and would like to gain some status in that area.
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 25, 2010, at 12:10 PM, Jeffrey Side <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> But Doug, isn’t this “lack” of a definition just a relativistic rationalisation (not from you, I stress) to allow non-poetry the same "status" as poetry?
>
> As Bob said to Angel earlier, surely we need definitions and classifications to talk intelligently about the subject. Of course, we shouldn’t be too stringent in our definitions, but surely an all-out relativistic taxonomy can’t be a good thing?
>
>
>
> Original Message:
>
> I suspect it's many things, & changes with whoever is making a
> definition, yet, somehow or other, this sloppy set (or whatever the
> term is) still has a hold on us, & we each of us thinks we know what
> 'poetry' is.
>
> Every time I thought I had a definition that fit, I'd find something
> that was outside the wall yet struck me, as yes, poetry.
|