But I really don't see the point of arguing or defending who should or
shouldn't have been included in an anthology called Other. Partly because
we do have to be grateful for what anthologies we get since they're the
only kinds of poetry books most people take any notice of. And one poet
leads to another -- within a year or two of Allen's anthology appearing the
only interesting thing to do was to find out who wasn't in it and could
have been, which you did mainly by following imprints and asides.
But perhaps all those Irish poets would have been just as happy in an
anthology called the opposite of Other (what IS the opposite of Other?
This-Here?) And if it's a shame Trevor or Geoffrey Squires etc. aren't in
this anthology isn't it also a shame if Ciaran Carson isn't in it, or
Michael Hartnett, or John Montague, or James Liddy, (if they're not) since
they're all (obviously) capable of writing interesting poems. I suppose
you've got to call an anthology something, and have a handle to sell it by,
but isn't Otherness the biggest red herring of the whole business?
/PR
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|