[New-Poetry] Does no one write good poetry criticism?

[Bob Grumman]

jforjames at aol.com wrote:
> I don't need my hand held...but I'm happy to hear what someone 
> likes/dislikes and why.
I think the only time I needed my hand held was for Wally--but that was 
because I hadn't read much of his work and was going to take a college 
seminar in it.  I think I would have figured him out without the help.  
On the other hand, I've found out things about poems from critics, 
important things.  Sometimes in reaction to something they've said I 
disagreed with.

> Critics primarily expose their tastes and make a case for why 
> this/that poems meets the standards of their tastes.
> Finnegan
Maybe.  I'm not sure.  All critics expose their tastes, hard not to.  
But what I try to do in my most conscientious criticism is to say what's 
in the poem and what it's doing.  I usually also say why I think what it 
does is of value (or not of value), which is making the case for my 
tastes, but I don't consider that what I am primarily doing.  For 
instance, I'm always writing about and making a case for the value of 
"lighght"--but the most important thing I do as a critic of it is simply 
point out its "juxtaphor" (implicit metaphor), something which is 
objectively there, and make sure my reader knows that it hinges on the 
silence of the extra /gh/ (whoever obvious to some).

--Bob
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/pipermail/new-poetry/attachments/20090327/e625369a/attachment.html