tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6360167919886596728.post6248808351890214378..comments2024-03-27T03:35:18.721-04:00Comments on Pansy Poetics: On James Allen Hall, Enid Shomer, Michael Walsh, Allen Ginsberg, Mark Doty, the University of Arkansas Press, Paul Zimmer, Ronaldo V. Wilson, etc. etcSteve Fellnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11383222975171349962noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6360167919886596728.post-83947859271299739072010-07-15T20:11:57.459-04:002010-07-15T20:11:57.459-04:00Hey -
I've just finished my first slow read ...Hey - <br /><br />I've just finished my first slow read of "The Dirt Riddles" by Michael Walsh. Like most poetry to which I'm attracted, I'll read it again and again before retiring it to the bookshelf. Not that it matters, but I'm 54, male and heterosexual.<br /><br />Although I enjoyed reading the critique and comments, I'm left with this: does any of this really matter?<br /><br />I'm an unprofessional "lay" reader but confident enough of my ability to distinguish between good poetry and crap that I will say something I'm sure we will all agree with: Michael Walsh is GOOD.<br /><br />I tend to deify artists such as Wallace Stevens: one of our greatest voices but, also, a Vice President of The Hartford Life Insurance Company.<br /><br />My decades-ago University days taught me (and I still believe) that occupation, gender, age, sexual preference, politics, religion, even biographical trivia meant nothing compared to the absolute power of the work itself (despite the fact that I possess a guilty-pleasure fascination with all-things-tabloid about my favorite authors - however - don't confuse the art with the artist!). <br /><br />My guilty pleasures aside, I still believe this, strongly. Has this become old-school and somehow irrelevant? Or, is it the nature of this web-site, to debate issues that are, ultimately, meaningless?<br /><br />Regardless, I'm very pleased that the U of A Press published Walsh and has made his work available to someone that would have, otherwise, remained unexposed to his considerable talents. <br /><br />And thank you, Miller Williams. I don't know the extent of your involvement in the publication process, since this book won the "Miller Williams Poetry Prize". I assume you had some say in the matter and I thank you for exposing me to a talent that has and will continue to have an impact on my life.<br /><br />Thanks,<br /><br />Joseph ElliottAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6360167919886596728.post-46752396297710899822010-05-17T11:34:10.567-04:002010-05-17T11:34:10.567-04:00Not that I disagree with your critique, but if you...Not that I disagree with your critique, but if you can identify queer (male) poets who are working against this dominant aesthetic, why not then spend some time to review their books and poems? You've mentioned Wilson, who now has two very interesting books: where is that review? And in the past you've only marginally mentioned another queer poet, Jericho Brown, claiming you'd return to offer a full review of your ideas. Where is that review?<br /><br />I remember you writing something to the effect of that, in the act of critiquing, you hope to construct something: why not construct a space to speak about these lesser known or, at least, lesser acknowledged queer poets?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6360167919886596728.post-65784984281405617812010-05-13T12:55:18.292-04:002010-05-13T12:55:18.292-04:00I don't think you can lay all this at the feet...I don't think you can lay all this at the feet of Mark Doty: he's representative, not causative.<br /><br />But it does reflect some very big trends in contemporary poetry, of which gay poetry must dialogue as a subset. Your call for more variety is well said, although it also applies to poetry at large.<br /><br />Contemporary poetry in general has become dominated by two or three main styles, most notably:<br /><br />1. the semi-autobiographical post-confessional lyric; this brand of lyric poetry, small scenes taken from life and turned into poems, is very very typical out what I see coming out of most MFA workshops; well, lots of young poets don't have enough life-experience to write about anything else.<br /><br />1.a. the gay poets you're talking about here reflect this trend, frankly, more than they reflect being something uniquely gay.<br /><br />2. the "fooling with words" schools of poetry, such as LangPo, the so-called post-avant, and neo-formalism. Most of these place themselves in aesthetic and even political opposition to the post-confessional lyric. I include Ashbery in this category.<br /><br />But I agree with your question that asks: where in all this are the other modes of poetry? The vatic or prophetic modes? The epic (as opposed to short personal narrative) modes? And so forth.<br /><br />Your criticism of gay poetry as published has merit. Yet I see as more reflective of PoetryWorld in general. These gay poets are working in the post-confessional lyric mode. Is that a form of political or aesthetic assimilationism ("we're just like you, only homosexual")? It may well be, although it might be operating on an unconscious psychological level, below the poet's own radar. I see this a lot. You're quite right to bring up that list of other poets who operate in larger or different modes. I'd even add Whitman to the list as exemplary of a different mode. Or Kenneth Pitchford. Or Harold Norse.<br /><br />So, well said. It's just that I think it's a larger issue, not just a gay poetry issue.Art Durkeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07463180236975988432noreply@blogger.com