I was thinking something similar about binaries in the poetry world which I so often find myself opposing here. Perhaps it's a natural response to the chaos and uncertainty and lack of general interest surrounding the art that goads people into constructions of order, entrenchment of polarities, exclusive confederacies...?
Jamie
> On 17 Dec 2017, at 12:19, Tim Allen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> This solid world v regular world appears to be another piece of Fieled nonsense. I can see how he is attempting to categorise something like the poetic brain but all it does is put old binaries into new language, full of sweeping assumptions.
>
>> On 16 Dec 2017, at 13:18, David Lace wrote:
>>
>> From “More Notes On The Solid World”. Another interesting blog post by Adam Fieled.
>>
>> “John Keats left the planet Earth in 1821. His work gradually began to gain some prominence in the 1850s, 30-35 years after his death. Let’s not forget how the Regular World works, folks—I would estimate that each year, between 1821 and 1855, there were thirty major prizes, grants, and fellowships given to poets in the UK, from Oxford, Cambridge, and elsewhere. Over 35 years, that’s roughly one thousand awards. John Keats, during his brief lifetime, never won any prizes, awards, or fellowships. John Keats was a Solid World poet all the way, and.......”
>>
>> http://fieledsmiscellaneous.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/more-notes-on-solid-world.html
|