[New-Poetry] Simic's laurelled tenure

[Chris Lott]

On 9/1/07, Bob Grumman <bobgrumman at nut-n-but.net> wrote:
>  The bigger half of what I was saying is that Simic's tenure may be one that
> he considers "laissezfaire eclecticism," but it won't come close to making
> people aware of any poetry not from Wilshberia--i.e., won't be close to
> genuine laissezfaire eclecticism."

On the other hand, since Simic at least leans a little towards the end
of a spectrum you seem to be on, shouldn't you be thankful that it was
Simic and not another Kooser? I ask that despite being surprised that
anyone thinks Simic would be particularly difficult for the general
poetry reading public to get into. Assuming there is a general
population that can be called that, I don't think Simic will be much
of a problem.

Of course the bigger issue with the whole idea of being "eclectic" is
that it's subjective and-- as I think you demonstrate-- an idea easily
lost in the no true Scotsman fallacy.

c