[New-Poetry] Balloon Debate -- WAS Taking Kooser's measure

[Robin]

I think the discussion of major as against minor poets (and the subordinate 
discussion as to whether the distinction is worth discussing) should be 
shifted to a Balloon Debate.

This has several advantages, not the least of which is that participants 
aren't tempted to take themselves too seriously.  Another, that there *has 
to be an outcome.  (Assuming, which may be a large assumption, that voting 
rules can be agreed.  One email address, one vote?)

Also, it's not a strictly binary opposition, like major/minor.  We have to 
decide on the nature of the balloon, and (probably the most interesting part 
of the excercise) who are the four candidates allowed on board in the first 
place, before we even reach the stage of having only one not defenestrated. 
[Um, well, not the right word, I know, but it sounds more formal than 
chucked over the side.]

The Really Big Balloon is probably out, as I doubt there are enough of us 
(certainly not me) with a sufficient knowledge of the poetries of every 
language ever spoken or written, living or dead, so perhaps a restriction to 
Indo-European Poets, complementary tickets to Shakespeare and Homer, with 
two more to be voted in before the expulsions start?

So there would be The Indo-European Balloon.

        ... and descending in capaciousness ...

The Anglophone Balloon (despite their geographic location, no Celtic 
speakers allowed)

The American Balloon

The Post-1900 American Balloon

The 1900-1950 American Balloon (Frost and cummings allowed to compete for a 
place)

The Living American Writers (or would be if they hadn't inadvertantly died) 
Balloon ...

The New Poetry Balloon (based on list presence or poetic achievement?) -- I 
nominate Bob Grumman for a place on board.

        Robin Hamilton