[Clive Watkins]

Dear Eva

While not disputing the general picture indicated by your statistics, I think it might be helpful to include the publication history of the anthologies you refer to. (Perhaps this information appeared in your original essay.)

For example, as far as I can tell from my own shelves and from a little googling, Allott’s Penguin Book of Contemporary Verse was first published in 1950 and reprinted several times; an expanded edition was issued in 1962. Alvarez’s The New Poetry was first published in 1962 and revised in 1966. George Macbeth’s Poetry 1900-1965 came out in 1967. Edward Lucie-Smith’s British Poetry Since 1945 first appeared in 1970; there was a new edition in 1986. Enright’s Oxford Book of Contemporary Verse dates from 1980; it appears to have been re-issued in 1995 with a new title.

Though all of these anthologies have long been out of print, it is interesting to consider whether their very existence serves to “fix” an understanding of the range and nature of poetry. No doubt their selections represent only their editors’ judgement about a particular historical moment, but I wonder how far they continue to insist on a limiting view of the available kinds of poetries, either those written in the past or those now being written. But this raises a question not just about the generation of anthologies, an important subject in its own right, but about the uses to which anthologies are put by readers.

Regards

Clive Watkins