 |
 |
> "Poetry elects content as a platform for value, and in this sense itself > exists only as the opportunity for and of that platform. "Poetry makes > things happen" is therefore a falsehood - even its less aggressively > scrutinized connotations are likely to be false: poetry does not allow > after the fashion of a valued content's allowing, it does not promote the > possibility of content, which is after all already a recognized > possibility, but merely characterizes the reality of contents as > opportune [...] That is to say, poetry takes part in content and in > content's accident, but does so in the way that a motivating voice inside > my head takes part in the crimes I commit physically: it characterizes a > circumstance as opportune, and whilst it can be taken into account or even > held responsible for my actions, it cannot be indicted. Only I can be > indicted." Is this a good thing or a bad thing, or one of those awful combinations of the two? I`m about to start revising a Prynne-related paper myself, Keston, and, on this evidence, it looks like we are possibly partaking of the same historical necessity. I kind of wish Drew Milne was back on the list because I`ve been having an e-mail discussion with him about these and related issues since we both got back from Exmouth. robin %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%