Print

Print


On Sat, 6 Jun 1998, Amthony Frazer wrote:
> Oh and by the way, I think avant-garde is a nightmarish description. It
> reminds me of the definition of an extremist - it's anyone who's further
> off to the left (or right) than oneself. 

- reminds me that Thatcher described herself as middle-of-the-road (i.e.,
I guess, in that context, dangerous to traffic from any direction). And a
clique is always something one is on the outside of yes? No-one says, come
and be in my clique... Terms _are_ nightmarish, and few of the
alternatives are any better. Experimental? can we take that for granted?
etc... In defining the scope of this list I've tried to be absolutely
minimalistic and still get accused of seeking to exclude people - to which
the answer is, in a sense, yes. It's an old chestnut: I come back to the
"linguistically innovative"  one (which Peter Riley is allergic to)
because even tho it ain't exactly right it's so obviously arch and twee
that any carping about it is going to look elephantine and even more
ridiculous.

I'm sorry you're "not partiularly fond of the British stuff in OoE" Tony -
your call of course - but I think there's superb stuff there, and the
sense too that there's more waiting in the various wings to be developed
in the future - I'd cross the road to get hold of a new Harriet Tarlo poem
frinstance (c'mon Harriet, gis a pome). But I do recognise what you're
talking about: low submission rates, and high non-response to invitations 
to submit work were my experience with Pig Press. I'd like to think it'd
be different today.

RC



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%