Comments on: Six-Pack of Lit Mags for Rattle Readers http://www.timothy-green.org/blog/2009/08/six-pack-of-lit-mags-for-rattle-readers/ Poetry Editor and Struggling Poet Mon, 23 Aug 2010 18:43:52 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: G. Tod Slone http://www.timothy-green.org/blog/2009/08/six-pack-of-lit-mags-for-rattle-readers/#comment-712 G. Tod Slone Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:43:50 +0000 http://timothy-green.org/blog/?p=1000#comment-712 Well, if Time finds judging more challenging than being challenged, fine. We'll leave him in his judgeship coccoon. Glad you agree on a few things here, C., and thanks much for checking out the review. I'll have to do another one on 2009 when it comes out. See if it might differ (my review, that is) from the 2007 one. Well, I do find now and then poems that are not bad. Rather than "good," I'd rather put it that way: "not bad." And almost always what is missing from those "not bad" poems is the poet's personal experience and especially engagement. Thanks for the "conversation" Cafais. T'es tu pas un brin franco? Well, if Time finds judging more challenging than being challenged, fine. We’ll leave him in his judgeship coccoon. Glad you agree on a few things here, C., and thanks much for checking out the review. I’ll have to do another one on 2009 when it comes out. See if it might differ (my review, that is) from the 2007 one. Well, I do find now and then poems that are not bad. Rather than “good,” I’d rather put it that way: “not bad.” And almost always what is missing from those “not bad” poems is the poet’s personal experience and especially engagement. Thanks for the “conversation” Cafais. T’es tu pas un brin franco?

]]> By: Cafais http://www.timothy-green.org/blog/2009/08/six-pack-of-lit-mags-for-rattle-readers/#comment-711 Cafais Tue, 01 Sep 2009 17:21:25 +0000 http://timothy-green.org/blog/?p=1000#comment-711 Tod, Tim is probably judging contest entries. Maybe we should not disturb him right now. What do you think? In the meantime, I'll pick up the banner (sort of). Although - - on some points - - I agree with you more than I agree with Tim. You answered my prior question: "Where does that leave us?" But maybe I should have asked: "Where do we go from here?" I think we would both agree that the state of modern poetry is pretty bad. And I somewhat agree that this is because Poetry's Ruling Class (for want of a better label) sets the standard for what is "quality" poetry, and tends to promote their own work and that of their followers. However, where you decline to find any bright spots, I am able to point to several journals that offer excellent alternatives to the poetry that appears in the annual best american poetry anthology. (I read and agreed with your review of the 2007 best american poetry. Actually, I read both the book and your review quite awhile ago.) I think it is significant that the only journal you mention favorably is one that does not publish poetry! You've got some very good insight; however, I think your comdenation of the field is too broad. Although there is a lot to criticize, I still want to read good poems that are being written today. With a lot of searching, I am able to find them. Apparently you are not. So, again the question: "Where do we go from here?" Tod,

Tim is probably judging contest entries. Maybe we should not disturb him right now. What do you think?

In the meantime, I’ll pick up the banner (sort of). Although – - on some points – - I agree with you more than I agree with Tim.

You answered my prior question: “Where does that leave us?” But maybe I should have asked: “Where do we go from here?”

I think we would both agree that the state of modern poetry is pretty bad. And I somewhat agree that this is because Poetry’s Ruling Class (for want of a better label) sets the standard for what is “quality” poetry, and tends to promote their own work and that of their followers. However, where you decline to find any bright spots, I am able to point to several journals that offer excellent alternatives to the poetry that appears in the annual best american poetry anthology. (I read and agreed with your review of the 2007 best american poetry. Actually, I read both the book and your review quite awhile ago.)

I think it is significant that the only journal you mention favorably is one that does not publish poetry!

You’ve got some very good insight; however, I think your comdenation of the field is too broad. Although there is a lot to criticize, I still want to read good poems that are being written today. With a lot of searching, I am able to find them. Apparently you are not. So, again the question: “Where do we go from here?”

]]> By: G. Tod Slone http://www.timothy-green.org/blog/2009/08/six-pack-of-lit-mags-for-rattle-readers/#comment-710 G. Tod Slone Tue, 01 Sep 2009 13:45:47 +0000 http://timothy-green.org/blog/?p=1000#comment-710 Come on, Tim! No defence? Just silence? Is that the new 21st Century definition of democracy's cornerstone? SILENCE, IS THE CORNERSTONE OF DEMOCRACY! Sounds Orwellian. T. Come on, Tim! No defence? Just silence? Is that the new 21st Century definition of democracy’s cornerstone? SILENCE, IS THE CORNERSTONE OF DEMOCRACY! Sounds Orwellian.
T.

]]> By: G. Tod Slone http://www.timothy-green.org/blog/2009/08/six-pack-of-lit-mags-for-rattle-readers/#comment-709 G. Tod Slone Sun, 30 Aug 2009 14:40:12 +0000 http://timothy-green.org/blog/?p=1000#comment-709 Cafais, Thanks for responding. It looks as if my words on Tim’s piece simply hit a brick wall. Well, at least Tim didn’t kill the debate by keeping others from posting. You agree with me that “quality” is inevitably a subjective term, then state “But where does that leave us?” Clearly, it leaves us where we are now with the bulk of professors and students, more or less, clearly defining “quality” as bourgeois good taste. What irritates me is when somebody will mention a famous name and expect me to automatically agree on that particular “quality” issue, though w/o even asking for my opinion. In other words, famous name for most = quality… for most who have not learned to question and challenge and otherwise think for themselves. Most, if not all, famous living poets are living the easy life, many as job-secure, well-paid academics. What kind of poetry might that produce? Well, it produces the stuff published in most of the high-brow mags. Lots of verbosity, bourgeois cleverness, and not much of anything else. I think if you took a little time to read my 2007 review of the purported BEST poetry of that year you’d understand better, that is, if you’re still open minded to the issue. Just examine the many examples I cite regarding what the established order deemed to be BEST “quality” that year (http://www.theamericandissident.org/Reviews-BestAmericanPoetry2007.htm). Please, take a look at those examples! Of course, you and Tim have a right to judge. We all should have that right. And when our judgment differs from that of the established order we should not be knee-jerk dismissed as assholes or whatever the term of choice might be for apostates. The defense of judgment via LOGICAL argumentation and supporting examples is key, NOT the judge’s background, as you stipulate. I like a journal called Counterpoise, which doesn’t publish poetry. So, you’re right to imply that I don’t like much of what is out there at all. I really cannot tell the difference of poetry published from one high-brow mag to the next. In other words, the mags really do tend to be poetry for the sake of poetry and nothing else. And of course that is their right. As a citizen, what pisses me off is the NEA and other cultural councils will not open their mind to alternative possibilities. Evidently, they tend to be run and operated by poetry for the sake of poetry bourgeois types. T. Cafais,
Thanks for responding. It looks as if my words on Tim’s piece simply hit a brick wall. Well, at least Tim didn’t kill the debate by keeping others from posting. You agree with me that “quality” is inevitably a subjective term, then state “But where does that leave us?” Clearly, it leaves us where we are now with the bulk of professors and students, more or less, clearly defining “quality” as bourgeois good taste. What irritates me is when somebody will mention a famous name and expect me to automatically agree on that particular “quality” issue, though w/o even asking for my opinion. In other words, famous name for most = quality… for most who have not learned to question and challenge and otherwise think for themselves. Most, if not all, famous living poets are living the easy life, many as job-secure, well-paid academics. What kind of poetry might that produce? Well, it produces the stuff published in most of the high-brow mags. Lots of verbosity, bourgeois cleverness, and not much of anything else.
I think if you took a little time to read my 2007 review of the purported BEST poetry of that year you’d understand better, that is, if you’re still open minded to the issue. Just examine the many examples I cite regarding what the established order deemed to be BEST “quality” that year (http://www.theamericandissident.org/Reviews-BestAmericanPoetry2007.htm). Please, take a look at those examples!
Of course, you and Tim have a right to judge. We all should have that right. And when our judgment differs from that of the established order we should not be knee-jerk dismissed as assholes or whatever the term of choice might be for apostates.
The defense of judgment via LOGICAL argumentation and supporting examples is key, NOT the judge’s background, as you stipulate.
I like a journal called Counterpoise, which doesn’t publish poetry. So, you’re right to imply that I don’t like much of what is out there at all. I really cannot tell the difference of poetry published from one high-brow mag to the next. In other words, the mags really do tend to be poetry for the sake of poetry and nothing else. And of course that is their right. As a citizen, what pisses me off is the NEA and other cultural councils will not open their mind to alternative possibilities. Evidently, they tend to be run and operated by poetry for the sake of poetry bourgeois types.
T.

]]> By: Cafais http://www.timothy-green.org/blog/2009/08/six-pack-of-lit-mags-for-rattle-readers/#comment-708 Cafais Sat, 29 Aug 2009 19:56:48 +0000 http://timothy-green.org/blog/?p=1000#comment-708 Ok, Tod, I will concede that "quality" is ultimately a subjective term as are all artistic judgments. But where does that leave us? I still have a right to make artistic judgments as do you, Tim, and everyone else. Of course, the background of the judge, as well as the defense of their judgment, gives each judgment its own weight. Therefore, I can say that magazine "A" publishes more quality work than magazine "B". If I want to defend that judgment, I can. Otherwise, I can just give my opinion and leave it at that. I know you think everything is "bourgeios" (a word I hardly ever use - - I try not to critique the preferences of other people) and "disengaged". Usually that is correct. (Remember Sturgeon's Law?) However, let me ask plainly: Are there any journals, besides your own, that you actually like? Ok, Tod, I will concede that “quality” is ultimately a subjective term as are all artistic judgments. But where does that leave us? I still have a right to make artistic judgments as do you, Tim, and everyone else. Of course, the background of the judge, as well as the defense of their judgment, gives each judgment its own weight. Therefore, I can say that magazine “A” publishes more quality work than magazine “B”. If I want to defend that judgment, I can. Otherwise, I can just give my opinion and leave it at that. I know you think everything is “bourgeios” (a word I hardly ever use – - I try not to critique the preferences of other people) and “disengaged”. Usually that is correct. (Remember Sturgeon’s Law?) However, let me ask plainly: Are there any journals, besides your own, that you actually like?

]]>