Hi Matt,
Thanks. That is much clearer. I suppose I'll answer your one direct question as best as I can.
Quote:
'I was trying to show that editors don't need to know the ethnic or other identity in order to exhibit a bias. I'd be interested to know if you agree.'
|
Well, we all have bias of course. In matters of art it's just another word for taste or opinion. So yes, a far broader diversity of factors that might influence those potential 'biases' would be healthy in the editorships of poetry world: editors of diverse ethnicity, class, gender and sexual orientation, even aesthetic proclivity towards particular styles: formal or free-verse etc. But I suppose I also like to think that the notion of 'quality', although difficult to define and ultimately subjective, has enough weight in reality for a good editor to make seeking it out, in all its elusiveness, a priority. Beyond considerations of what the poem is 'about' or who is being represented/spoken for/to: is it alive, mysterious, surprising, memorable, layered, do its pleasures stand up to re-reading? All that stuff.
Hey, I can only speak for myself and what I would do. My three favourite poets here might be Nemo, Mary and Walter. Why? Not sure. Well, I have my thoughts but they'd be too long-winded to go into here. Are they 'like me'? Not really. We're different ages, with me in the middle somewhere; we're from different countries; backgrounds; all three are gay and I'm not; I have no idea how they 'identify' in terms of race/religion; they have quite different styles and subjects. And when I read them, none of those things occur to me. It's just me and the poem and I think 'yes – quality'
