Jeff, the tone doesn't help, but it's really the content, such as it is, that I was objecting to.
It seems that you and Tim are largely in agreement with that.
Jamie
> On 29 Aug 2015, at 15:10, Jeffrey Side <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Sorry, Tim, if it looked like I was getting at you. And I appreciate that this particular aspect of the discussion wasn’t introduced by you.
>
> I mentioned the New Gen only because your response reminded me in general of that era.
>
> I agree with the general sentiments of Keston’s article and said similar things myself in 2005 when I started writing publically about these things. I think Jamie’s reaction to Keston might be more to do with Keston’s acerbic tone than anything else.
>
> Tim wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jeffrey - All in all I think Jamie does very well in his exchanges, whatever 'frustrations' he may feel. I would certainly welcome more debate of the kind he can offer here, coming from a different place, 'cause in the long run it's constructive. I didn't mention the New Gen thing in my piece because that's been dealt with here before and things to do with it can muddy the waters. The same applies with that 'The New Poetry' anthology from Bloodaxe in '93 where the issues get even more complex because of the wide spread of different poetries that it contained, despite some of the nonsense in the introduction and sales pitch.
>
|