tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3759353.post6649343897619299092..comments2023-08-29T02:42:23.063-05:00Comments on ¡Bemsha SWING!: Vendler vs. DoveJonathanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09371893596402673898noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3759353.post-10440196780344667502011-12-14T15:12:13.529-06:002011-12-14T15:12:13.529-06:00Andrew, Stedman's American Anthology (1900) ma...Andrew, Stedman's <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=4V8XAAAAIAAJ&dq=stedman%20american%20anthology&pg=PR35#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow">American Anthology</a> (1900) may be more than you bargained for. (Dickinson is there, hearteningly.) He opens the introduction with words Vendler (or Dove) might have heeded: "The reader will comprehend at once that this book was not designed as a Treasury of imperishable American poems."Vance Maverickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07477306994564623348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3759353.post-229738015872554222011-12-14T08:58:33.770-06:002011-12-14T08:58:33.770-06:00The red queen or exterminating angel, the idea of ...The red queen or exterminating angel, the idea of the canon held up by Bloom or Vendler, the idea that you could just arbitrarily limit what should be read in advance. Part of the pleasure is in going through a lot of poetry to see what interests YOU. I would have never found Jean Valentine if I followed Bloom or even Perloff.Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09371893596402673898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3759353.post-91316363067033990832011-12-14T08:53:25.090-06:002011-12-14T08:53:25.090-06:00There's a touch of the red queen in the concep...There's a touch of the red queen in the concept of "worth reading" -- off with these other poets' heads.<br /><br />To be more charitable: No one knows how much time is left. If you're on an austerity plan for time, sure, don't read Melvin Tolson, or May Sarton. <br /><br />If you love the field, though, and you want to understand the context in which the writers you love struggled, <em>and if you have reason to believe the previous guides to the field bore prejudices you don't share,</em> why not read everything you find and decide for yourself.Jordanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10451174274596699645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3759353.post-46807782602967525392011-12-11T03:48:04.784-06:002011-12-11T03:48:04.784-06:00Vance, your emphasis on that point (which others h...Vance, your emphasis on that point (which others have also singled out for discussion) makes me wonder about anthologies of 19th-century American poetry published in 1911 (if there were any that year or around that time). I'm sure they seem to us today to be full of "poets of little or no lasting value" -- and yet many of the poems by more or less forgotten poets would surely be "worth reading" for one reason or another (if only to give us information about paths that were trodden in the past that have since been abandoned).Andrew Shieldshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02804655739574694901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3759353.post-85094739424724938812011-12-10T23:16:57.751-06:002011-12-10T23:16:57.751-06:00Thanks for the links, Andrew. Apart from, as Jonat...Thanks for the links, Andrew. Apart from, as Jonathan says, the specific animus, what got me first was<br /><br /><i>No century in the evolution of poetry in English ever had 175 poets worth reading, so why are we being asked to sample so many poets of little or no lasting value?</i><br /><br />I can sort of understand the focus of a canoneer like Vendler on poets of great lasting value. But to equate that order of value with being "worth reading" at all seems crazy. I happen to be reading a book where a poem of May Sarton's is quoted. It's not great, or even very good, but it's certainly worth reading. And I am sure there are 175 poets in English more interesting than Sarton in the 20th century. What a cramped view of the world.Vance Maverickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07477306994564623348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3759353.post-245977035104259472011-12-09T14:01:09.601-06:002011-12-09T14:01:09.601-06:00That really hits the nail on the head, Jonathan. I...That really hits the nail on the head, Jonathan. I think the Mayhew-Vendler relationship is a no-starter.<br /><br />*<br /><br />I'm just going to put the links here in case people don't know what you're referring to:<br /><br />Helen Vendler's review of Rita Dove's anthology of 20th-century American poetry:<br /><br />http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/nov/24/are-these-poems-remember/<br /><br />Dove's response:<br /><br />http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/dec/22/defending-anthology/Andrew Shieldshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02804655739574694901noreply@blogger.com