[New-Poetry] Taking Kooser's measure

[Anny Ballardini]

I could not agree with you more on Donne. I can remember I was electrified 
to meet a metaphysical poet, as they define him, and it was a sort of 
disappointment to read his work. This is what I thought, independently of 
what David says, I am not saying this because David said something different 
before, I want to make this clear.


From: "Bob Grumman" <bobgrumman at nut-n-but.net>
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 12:04 PM


> Just to muddy the waters further, I would say that Shakespeare was not a 
> major poet--he was a major dramatist.  As for great American poets, Dave, 
> I think you couldn't be more wrong.  There haven't been any poets anywhere 
> better than the American poets of Stevens's generation.  And America is 
> not a young nation but a branch of England, its poets straight from 
> Shakespeare and before through Wordsworth via Emerson to Stevens's 
> generation.  As for Donne, I think him ridiculously strained and minor.
>
> So there.
>
> --Bob
>
> --Bob G.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "David Bircumshaw" <david.bircumshaw at ntlworld.com>
> To: "NewPoetry: Contemporary Poetry News &amp;Views" 
> <new-poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu>
> Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 3:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [New-Poetry] Taking Kooser's measure
>
>
>> Rob wrote:
>>
>> Thus (in my terms) Donne
>>> > is major, Wyatt minor.
>>
>> Yup, and the notion of Donne as a major poet is a kind of touchstone for
>> what we are talking about. There are distinctions to be made: for 
>> example,
>> Seamus Heaney is a major poet of +our time+, but not instrinsically a 
>> major
>> poet, I think this area is where the confusion is setting in. Someone 
>> asked
>> whether I think there are any 'great' American poets, or words to that
>> effect, and if the question is 'great poets' in the sense that 
>> Shakespeare
>> or Dante are well the answer is no, obviously. America is still a young
>> culture: England as a bedraggled entity was about 500 years old when Dan
>> Geoffrey appreared, why should you expect anything to happen faster?
>> There certainly 'great' figures in the context of American literature and
>> poetry, great innovators too (!), but an interesting inventor doth not 
>> equal
>> a top-notch poet.
>> Otherwise we'd all worship at the Shrine of the Mad Scientist.
>>
>> Blagued in the Bar
>>
>> D
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "steve moore" <fssam6 at uaf.edu>
>> To: "NewPoetry: Contemporary Poetry News &amp;Views"
>> <new-poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu>
>> Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 6:51 AM
>> Subject: Re: [New-Poetry] Taking Kooser's measure
>>
>>
>>> I've always understood the distinction between major and minor as a
>>> matter of innovation. Those poets that are leaders of movements, that
>>> push beyond the tradition, are major. Those that work from within
>>> current ideas about poetry and from the tradition are minor. The
>>> distinction has nothing to do with quality. Thus, Pound is a major
>>> poet, while Thomas is minor. Even though clearly Thomas is the better
>>> poet (I say with a certain smugness).
>>>
>>> > Re Berryman and Dream Songs:
>>> >
>>> >> Well if you just look at the incidence of level accent in them,
>>> >> it's, erm,
>>> >> obvious.
>>> >
>>> > dave --
>>> >
>>> > Could you untease "incidence of level accent" a bit?
>>> >
>>> > I think I disagree with you over Berryman, but I'm not sure in the
>>> > instance
>>> > above exactly what I'm disagreeing with.
>>> >
>>> > (Mind you, I originally misread what you typed as "incidence of
>>> > [the] level
>>> > [of] accent," so I'm obviously not at my best and brightest at the
>>> > moment.)
>>> >
>>> > Incidentally, if we're playing the great/major/minor game, I'd
>>> > place Berryman as a minor poet.
>>> >
>>> > Ages ago, I decided (rightly or wrongly) that the distinction
>>> > between a major and a minor poet was that with a major poet, you
>>> > could [with reservations] demonstrate to anyone that they were
>>> > worth reading.  With a minor poet, there has to be a degree of
>>> > sympathy with the writing to begin with.  Thus (in my terms) Donne
>>> > is major, Wyatt minor.
>>> >
>>> > R.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > New-Poetry mailing list
>>> > New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu
>>> > http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/new-poetry
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> New-Poetry mailing list
>>> New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu
>>> http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/new-poetry
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> New-Poetry mailing list
>> New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu
>> http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/new-poetry
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> New-Poetry mailing list
> New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu
> http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/new-poetry
>