Lest I be misconstrued, I believe it is inherently valuable that multitudes themselves relish Kaur (or any other poet for that matter.) So to be clear, Kaur satisfying other readers is sufficient of itself to constitute a valuable thing, to be respected and countenanced. My taste has no bearing on the good, which I recognize, she does for a great many. I wish her all the success in the world; I would deny her nothing.
I questioned whether her rise might increase readership of poetry that I personally appreciate; whatever the answer be as to this, it neither augments nor diminishes the value of her delighting other readers, which remains ever as much a good of itself, regardless. Even if I should derive nothing from her myself, I encourage the tide of her appreciation, as an inherently good thing. Why not? Then, when I wonder to myself if she just might possibly help in the way of a personally defined wish of self-interest, I do not mean my conclusion on that to stand for my valuation of her presence on the public stage. Because, again, it is good that she does what she does for others.
Note: Mr. Lapsus Linguae here after having fudged the spelling of the name, was late to spot the oversight.
Last edited by Erik Olson; 01-05-2018 at 05:57 AM.
|