[R. Nemo Hill]

I thoroughly enjoyed the interview.

Ed writes: "(1) You do realize how appallingly silly and narcissistic that sounds, don't you? (2) I gather that you are completely stuck on yourself, but what's in it for us to be stuck on yourself?"

Sorry, Ed, but I think most of the response to KG on this thread are more full of themselves than anything that he says in the interview. If anything, he gives himself and his contemporaries a bit too much credit for something that has been going on for a very long time. But in general he seems to have a light touch and a good sense of humor. And there is no denying that ubiquitous technology has given a shot in the arm to conceptualism in all its forms, especially the verbal. One can surrender to that fact or one can resist it: but to ignore it with shock and outrage is to remove oneself from the history of thought and creation entirely.

I am not going to take the bait here and start a flame war...but really folks, it's a mighty big sandbox and there is plenty of room for the kids playing in its far corners. Duchamp would be amused.

Fluxus lives!
Nemo

[Andrew Frisardi]

Originally Posted by R. Nemo Hill

I thoroughly enjoyed the interview.

Ed writes: "(1) You do realize how appallingly silly and narcissistic that sounds, don't you? (2) I gather that you are completely stuck on yourself, but what's in it for us to be stuck on yourself?"

Sorry, Ed, but I think most of the response to KG on this thread are more full of themselves than anything that he says in the interview. If anything, he gives himself and his contemporaries a bit too much credit for something that has been going on for a very long time. But in general he seems to have a light touch and a good sense of humor. And there is no denying that ubiquitous technology has given a shot in the arm to conceptualism in all its forms, especially the verbal. One can surrender to that fact or one can resist it: but to ignore it with shock and outrage is to remove oneself from the history of thought and creation entirely.

I am not going to take the bait here and start a flame war...but really folks, it's a mighty big sandbox and there is plenty of room for the kids playing in its far corners. Duchamp would be amused.

Fluxus lives!
Nemo

Wholier-than-thou?

[Janice D. Soderling]

Duchamp would be amused.

He is probably laughing himself silly.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/a...evolution.html

[Rick Mullin]

Duchamp would be amused, and Cage would say, "been there, done that." Or maybe he'd say nothing for 20 minutes.

Goldsmith is having a little fun with us. My response was somewhat akin to Ann's. And, Jesus Christ, he's not boring!

And there is bullshit in it too! Something for everyone.

Gregory--I like Wilbur as much as the next guy, I guess. But those first two paragraphs! I hope I have more to talk about when I'm 90. But I blame the interviewer. My first question would be, "Yeah, yeah, yeah, we know you were born in New York City like it says in the bio we run every issue. But you grew up in North Caldwell, NJ! What the hell was that like?" I bet we'd learn something we never heard him tell us as he answered that question.

RM

NB: I should say that, if I could, I would go to the Museum of Modern Art in NYC today and remove maybe 8 or 9 Duchamps and pull some of the Rouaults, Kokoschkas, Noldes and Soutines out of storage to take their place. It isn't all about being amused! Or it shouldn't be. I would leave the other 20 Duchamps in place next to the 47 Picassos. Don't worry~,:^)

[Gregory Dowling]

It's not really funny enough to be a parody and it's not interesting or original enough to stimulate any new ideas. It strikes me as pretty predictable post-modern whimsy. I think quaint and twee are really the best adjectives, like Christopher Robin doing his best to to sound like William Brown.

Rick, fair enough on the Wilbur interview. The interviewer could have been a bit more probing. Still, Wilbur never comes across as banal.

[John Whitworth]

This is all a bit out of date. Joyce already wrote a masterpiece that nobody has ever read. And Borges invented a poet who spent his whole life writing Don Quixote AS IF IT HAD NEVER BEEN WRITTEN. His text, of course, was identical to... well to Don Quixote.

I think this guy has to be killed, don't you? It would surely be a justifiable homicide.

[Ed Shacklee]

Originally Posted by R. Nemo Hill

One can surrender to that fact or one can resist it: but to ignore it with shock and outrage is to remove oneself from the history of thought and creation entirely.

I am not going to take the bait here and start a flame war...but really folks, it's a mighty big sandbox and there is plenty of room for the kids playing in its far corners. Duchamp would be amused.

Fluxus lives!
Nemo

I guess it depends on how you see it, Nemo. I see the man as a leech who's stuck himself to the Muse of poetry and is enjoying a comfortable middle age.

If Goldsmith was doing this stchick for a year, then doing another stchick the next year, and so on, I’d probably buy a ticket to the show every time he came to town, since I enjoy flamboyant fakery as much as anyone. As far as I can tell, though, he’s been doing this for well more than a decade and shows no sign of ever stopping. It could be I have a deficient sense of humor, but that’s way too long to be considered a joke. It's a sheep fleecing station done up in amusing pastels. It's just my two cents, but I think Goldsmith is a stanza Auden might’ve included in his poem, ‘Atlantis.’

If you could show me why that part of the sandbox is such a hoot, I'd be obliged.

Best,

Ed

[W.F. Lantry]

Originally Posted by Ed Shacklee

If you could show me why that part of the sandbox is such a hoot, I'd be obliged.

Ed,

Nemo's right on this one, I'm afraid. Yes, I get it, it's fun to mock, and one always expects a certain amount of that from certain quarters. But I think you'd be doing yourself a disservice by aligning yourself with one of those quarters in this case. Goldsmith, after all, is an accomplished guy, and most people here would lose an argument about poetics or aesthetics to him in under five minutes flat. In an embarrassing way.

That's not to say that what he does is my cup of tea. It's not. But even his critics should respect what he's done at PennSound, laugh at the joke he pulled on Poetry, appreciate what it takes to keep a radio show going for 15 years, and admire the work of compendia at ubuweb. On that last one, especially, I say Vive le Père Ubu.

And while I'm not shocked that this thread happened, I am a little surprised Rick joined in. After all, he just persuaded us about the virtues of Soutine. I do agree with his estimation, but we should also remember that casual observers know Soutine best for his meat series. Heard of that one? The artist bought a whole side of beef (or at least a big old chuck), had it ported up to his rooms, and painted it as it, um, decomposed. Got several paintings out of it, too. Good ones. But it stank to high heaven. When it got so bad the neighbors started complaining, and eventually decided to call the police, he's reputed to have asked them 'What do they want? Good smells, or great art?'

I'm certain that's not a direct quote, and maybe the story's apocryphal. I'm sure Rick can tell us. But I'm also sure the conversation in the stairwells at Soutine's apartment building in those weeks pretty much sounded like this thread...

Thanks,

Bill

[Rick Mullin]

Bill,

I had that slab here three weeks ago! Your account accords with my slab and the various source stories.

RM

[Ed Shacklee]

Meh. All the same, I'll agree to a trial before the hanging, at least. Is there a book of Goldsmith's poetry that anyone would recommend?

Ed