cris - isn't your
>description of Raworth, which may be perfectly apt, yet transferable to
>many other current poetries?
Yes, it is. It wasn't intended to be a detailed advocacy of Tom's work.
But I'd agree it's broad enough to apply to several contemporary writers.
Arguments might rage as to whether Tom wins top singer poll. Perhaps, more
cogently, he is simply well plugged into his times and has created the
space for others to enter. His practice is generative, part of what i was
meaning by the original 'humane generosity'. That's why i re-subjected my
remarks under Ric's 'not for what goes out but for what comes back' thread.
Re dialectics: Robert Smithson commented that 'Dialectics could be viewed
as the relationship between the shell and the ocean.
In Tom's, and others work, that dialectics might be read as between the
blank page and the emptying out through language onto that page of the
writing
In trad triangles then the synthesant is an ear of a reader
I can't think of an apt description of
>Prynne that would be so transferable.
Try one - you might be surprised.
>Both poets seem to me especially interesting, but not especially
>interesting in comparison to each other.
Completely agree. But everyone in this discussion has gone to lengths
pointing out that JHP and TR aren't being set up in opposition to each
other or in competition with each other. My original point of entry was
intended to redress what often, in the UK at least, seems to me to be a
disproportionate emphasis on discussing - elucidating - paying
car(t)eful(s) of attention to Prynne when there are other practitioners of
poetry (i deliberately cited Raworth and Cobbing - there are, or might
be, others) who might be being avoided (for whatever reasons) or too easily
taken for granted.
In the spirit of which I'll attempt to post a couple of reviews during next
week.
love and love
cris
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|