[New-Poetry] Simic's laurelled tenure

[Bob Grumman]

Chris Lott wrote:
> On 9/2/07, Bob Grumman <bobgrumman at nut-n-but.net> wrote:
>   
>>  I would define "eclectic" in this case very simply: "showing interest in
>> (and promoting) all of the following kinds of poetry."  Then I would list
>> all the kinds, making use of my list of schools of poetry that no one seems
>> to consider of any value but I.
>>     
>
> Do you expect any mere mortal to manage that? I get that this is an
> ideal of being eclectic, but that's my point-- no one can promote it
> *all* and since they can't they will always be subject to accusations
> of not being truly eclectic and diverse.
>
> c
>   

Well, I've done it myself.  But I don't mean all varieties of poetry, 
just the ones on my list (and maybe a few I missed)--I mean, basically, 
a reasonably complete range of contemporary poetry.  And I probably 
shouldn't have used the word, "promote," for I meant more like 
"acknowledge the existence of and give occasional examples of."  I would 
want Mr. Eclectic to take all criticism for ignoring some kind of poetry 
seriously but not expect him to accept all kinds of material someone 
claims to be poetry worthy of acknowledgement (though he could at least 
state that so-and-so brought pharmaceutical sandpaper poetry to his 
attention).  Within reason--as ignoring most forms of language poetry, 
and all varieites of visual and sound poetry, is not.

I would prefer he mention poetry already mentioned all over the poetry 
world as little as possible, too, since it doesn't need his help, but I 
certainly wouldn't make that mandatory.  I would, on the other hand, 
want him to comment a lot on his favorite kind of poetry on the grounds 
that he probably knows a lot about it.

--Bob
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/pipermail/new-poetry/attachments/20070903/55b6a638/attachment.html