I liked his piece, though--at least the first half of it, the part slagging off the postmodernist anthology. The second half I didn't follow, but suspect it contains an admission that what he writes and likes is actually "non-poetry." Well, duh.

I'm sure he is insufferable, Orwn, but who he for us over in Yew-rope? I could google the swine I suppose, but it's what you think that I really want to know. Then I can curse him properly.

So we found ourselves at a large collective dinner friday evening, devoted to another theme. By an act of fate, we happened to be sitting next to the evening's speaker. She asked me about Poetry, the journal. "Blah blah blah, more interesting stuff going on elsewhere, etc." She asks me about the former editor. I answered, "I've heard he's been ill, hope things work out for him, etc." Turns out they're working on a new venture together. Always be careful what you say, people have a way of showing up, and questions are never unmotivated.

Then she asks "what's the most interesting thing going on in poetry right now?" Oh, boy. We talked until she had to stand up and address the gathered throng. It was fascinating watching her switch gears, although I'm guessing she speaks on the topic frequently. But I do wonder if I said the right things, if such things exist.

So picture this: an interested, intelligent non-practitioner asks you "what's going on in poetry right now?" You've got two minutes before the conversation at the table turns. What would you say?

Yours, in curiousity,

Bill

I'd say curiousity is spelled wrong. Then I would say I won't alert the word nerds if you change it quicker than I can say "Alien vs. Predator". (Which is published by Penguin which I will never be, so Duh!

I know it won't happen, but I wish we could all quit talking, writing, and even thinking about "poetry" in such a general way. Poetry is as guilty of this as anyone. They're not responsible for the future of the genre, they're just a magazine! I love most of the poetry of Yeats, but I can't stand the poetry of Ginsberg. Am I for poetry or against it? Both, very strongly and all the time.

As for Robbins, his poetry that I've seen does nothing for me, but I have to give him his due. I've enjoyed several pieces of his prose, and he often stands out in Poetry.

I haven't seen this issue, but could it possibly be any worse than those preceding it? I shudder to think.

I don't think I can speak to what is the most interesting thing going on in poetry, but only to what I find most interesting, which is mainly the return of many things that have been out of fashion for a long time, things like wit and humor, in poets such as Wendy Cope, Gail White, Billy Collins, Tony Hoagland, David Kirby, A. E. Stallings, Julie Kane, R. S. Gwynn. Or direct engagement with human emotions in contemporary daily life, as in Rhina Espaillat, Deborah Warren, Catherine Tufariello, Sharon Olds, Linda Pastan, Allison Joseph, and many of the aforementioned poets. Or lyrical beauty in rhyme and meter, which I find particularly in Stallings, but also in several other formalists writing now. There are great writers in every era, but certain of my tastes have been starved for a long time, so it has been wonderful to discover some contemporaries that satisfy them.

Susan

I was going to say that obviously you should have replied that the greatest thing going on in poetry right now was the formalist movement, and the greatest magazines were Measure, Raintown, Able Muse, Light, etc. -- but Susan said it better, and thank you, Susan.

Susan and Gail sum up well. I'd add: Josh Mehigan, John Whitworth and Maryann Corbett. And don't forget the place where many of those above named folks hang out: The Eratosphere.

Thanks for that support, Lance. I've been hanging back from this thread, having conflicted thoughts.

Walter asks, up top, whether the quality of the latest issue has something to do with the tastes of the new editor. It seems too soon to rule, but: I did go to hear Don Share read, and I did buy his book, and I feel safe saying that musicality is not what he's mainly after, left to his own tastes. We'll see what happens.

In answer to Bill's question, I feel the way Jim B. does: how can anybody think of poetry as all one thing? I also find myself wondering what "now" means. To Poetry, "now" apparently comes a month at a time. Flarf one month, landays (which were amazing, I grant) another month, whatever gets attention--because the new, different, and exciting generate buzz, which sells magazines.

But the new, the different, and the exciting seem not to be what I enjoy most in poetry, so I get weary of keeping up with trends. I hate to sound like an old fogey, but there's so much old poetry I still need to learn about! Conversing with the people who show up at the Sphere has done more for me than trying to keep up with Poetry.