The poet is not accountable to the critic, and owes him no answer; nor is she compelled to sing in the political and public hall of fuckery for that fuckery’s amusement—as the speculum speculorum. Between Jupiter and Semele, let us not forget who stows the devastating révélation. First and finally, all revolts are intimate.
A mere quip on Mark Edmundson’s “Poetry Slam”
No longer have a subscription to Harper’s, so I’ll have to search this out. But perhaps not–your comment suggesting to me that it might be a waste of my time. If I get around to it, maybe. But I’m deep into the study of birds and falconry at the moment, so probably won’t find the time. In any case, what you’ve written here seems legitimate in its own entirety. The last line, especially, about revolts. Especially that.
I would not leave the study of falconry for a single moment! The original essay is the produce of the de rigueur prophet-quacks whom imagine they can ken movement in the Poetic. Falcons are the thing, M.
My friend, poet and critic Susan Schultz, has written a thorough rejoinder: http://tinfisheditor.blogspot.com/2013/06/but-it-matters-mark-edmundson-and.html Not sure you will like the implicit pluralism (not quite relativism) but the gist, that the critic might want to read more widely, and that poetry might want to interrogate the moment of its “we” rather than assuming the universalism of dominant happenstance resonates with me.
Be looking into this soon, Doc.
“The poet is not accountable to the critic, and owes him no answer; nor is she compelled to sing in the political and public hall of fuckery for that fuckery’s amusement—as the speculum speculorum.” YOU ARE THE VENOMOUS GENIUS OF THE DAYYYYYYY bro.