[Rose Kelleher]

Would it be too nervy to suggest you create a thread for him on Mastery? I've googled but couldn't find any complete poems by him, only snippets.

[Janet Kenny]

Rose,
He's still under copyright. I will try to post some. There are some early poems online I think. His best ones are very long and I have a sore finger. I'll see what I can produce ASAP.
Janet

[David Mason]

I've just read some Curnow anthology pieces and agree that he's very fine.

[Janet Kenny]

On Mastering the Muse I just typed in almost the only pantoum I have ever admired. Curnow wrote it as an old man in protest against the French nuclear bomb tests in a Pacific atoll. We all took this very badly down here and New Zealanders feel especially close to Polynesians in general. As I typed the poem I began to experience something like awe at the way he exploited the pantoum form to pile on the effects. It is like music. In the hands of a master no form is beyond maximum expressive, poetic effect.

I found it in "The Harvill Book of Twentieth-Century Poetry in English", edited by Michael Schmidt.

Janet

[Jodie Reyes]

Originally posted by David Mason:
3. To advance the careers (or increase the visibility) of poets they admire and raise questions about poet they do not admire, who have perhaps been overpraised in the past.

I agree with both parts of this, and glad David brought it up. To this I might add a corollary: 3.a. To increase the visibility of a group of related (in the broadest sense) poets who are unjustly neglected.

I like the idea about raising questions, which I feel is necessary, but I want to ask: Is it possible to be too "negative?" William Logan clearly comes to mind. I must admit, I do get perverse pleasure from his criticism (I say that now with the knowledge that I'm in no danger of being Logunned in the near future), and when he does praise someone, his praise is really worth something. But I can't disagree with those who feel he goes too far, arguably to the point that his reviews become vehicles for displaying his wit and erudition rather than thoughtful examinations of a poet's work.

Arguments against negative reviews I've heard include: Life is short, and there are works we shouldn't waste time on; It's better to build [the first part of 3 above] than to destroy [the second part of 3 above]; Better to expend the energy on one's own poetry; etc. I don't think these are invalid arguments, but what do people think?

[Tom Jardine]

Jodie,

I think your question is valid, but there are many view points from which to ask the question. In other words,
Logan goes too far, but he serves a much needed purpose, because so much of poetry is fatuous and empty frill, and he says what he thinks. It is always surprising to me how many people, in reviews or not, don't say what they think.

Good poetry stands up to acid baths, but appreciation and enjoyment of poetry is as varied as the subjects and the people writing the poems. So a purpose is also filled by someone like Gioia, who writes much milder appreciation. Did someone here say that Gioia said we need more negative reviewing on poetry? I think so.

A negative review can only be negative if it is wrong. If it is right, it is positive, isn't it? I think your first question is, 'an unflattering review...'

It is hard to take the time to write a negative review. Who wants to bother, but when the Billy Collins' go skipping down the sidewalk playing poetry charades, I'm tempted. But the best defense is to write the best poetry.

So I say, thank goodness for William Logan, who I first heard described as the most hated man in poetry for his 'negative' reviews, which I consider overdone but honest--not necessarily right every single time, but at least he isn't some wormy blurb writer. I will always read his reviews.

Robert Frost said "..don't draw anyone's fire.." in other words, don't be critical of others, it will cost you. It is a good rule, and one hard not to break if you crit in a workshop.

David said above that editors need reviews more than more poems, and that is probably true as it is, but what they really need are lots of better poetry.

I think the pattern I see is, the better the poet the less they criticize, and seldom if ever write negative reviews, if reviews at all.

All in all, I see things balancing themselves out.


TJ

[Jodie Reyes]

Thanks, Tom. I pretty much agree with your assessment.

There are people Logan has Logunned about whom I feel he was wrong. And there are those I think he should have Logunned by now.

I do think he is very sharp. My favorite prose of his is "Five or Six Motions Toward a Poetics" in the Gioia et al anthology. It has none of his flamboyance, and is very well-articulated.