reply below.
--- James Rovira <jrovira@drew.edu> wrote:
>
> there were plenty of bad poets, even back then. I
> guess the difference
> now is exposure -- the best stuff from the past is
> always easily
> accessible, while the crap from the 16/17th
> centuries is really only
> read by scholars. Contemporary poetry, though, is
> out there for
> everyone, and probably more so than it ever has been
> in the past.
the sheer amount of contemporary poetry is
overwhelming. (i'm not sure if i should put poetry in
quote marks, or not.)
personally, i feel we (the readers) would be a whole
lot better off if there were to be a stricture on
publishing poetry. no poems allowed in print until
they have survived at least a year in an airless desk
drawer.
but you're free to read them to any unwitting soul.
kim
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Tue Jul 1 13:53:58 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Sep 16 2003 - 00:18:35 EDT