Three things:

1. Here's a nice discussion of the post-avant. Adam Fieled also has been having some interesting discussions regarding a definition for it. My thoughts are in many ways similar to Adam's, and in my own writing, I've been trying to include an "I" as a process I, as a way of accepting language coding while looking for individuation.

2. This is awesome--San Francisco International Poetry Festival. The idea behind this is wonderful. I'd love to do a Americas Poetics conference here in Chicago. We need to be talking more north and south.

3. Someone asked me the other day why I'm not a Billy Collins fan. Here's why:

"One of the reasons people don't read as much poetry anymore is the fault of the poets," he said. "It's not the public's fault. There's an awful lot of bad poetry out there. I'd say about 87 percent of the poetry in America isn't worth reading."

It's the other 13 percent, Collins said, that he lives for. "Poetry should be transparent. Transparent poems tend to teach themselves."

A. This statement is logically suspect. When have people read that much poetry? If I start writing super clear poetry, will Americans rush out to buy it? "Screw the movies, I now have clarity in poetry!" I don't think it going to happen. To me, that's analagous to the odd argument one hears about divorce being harmful to the traditional family. What traditional family exactly? Do we want to revert to the 50s family? Let's start stripping rights, and bring on the alcohol (women had high rates of alcholism in the 50s).

B. The funny part of this argument to me is that poetry is being produced and sold at higher rates now than at any time in history. Do yourself a favor and check the numbers. Don't trust me or Collins. Check. Much of the poetry now is being sold at small presses, but it is still out there in record numbers. Does that mean that it is all good? Of course not. But more people are interested in it now than ever.

Comments

Popular Posts