New European Poets - response to response
- I am not opposed to anthologies (or this one in particular). I am opposed to anthological thinking.
- I am opposed to anthologies that claim to represent a country or a language (I am opposed to such notions of country and language) because they make literature/nation much too static.
- In Wayne's and Kevin's anthology, the emphasis on proportional representation is a problem because it is based on the 19th-century idea of a "population."
- But I think anthologies can be great. They can provide a framework for reading poems, for showing connections between poets.
- I can't see how someone would argue inclusion/exclusion about Lara's and Arielle's upcoming "Gurlesque" anthology. There is no pressure to "correctly represent", since they are exploring and building a framework, not representing a national literature.
- Mostly at Alta I was opposed to the discussion of "New Euro Poets." Every area-editor bemoaned the short number of pages alloted them without discussing the problems of this kind of representation (which always lead to moans of inclusion and exclusion). Nobody wanted to discuss what Europe is. For example, Scandinavian lit has a lot more in common with American lit than it has with Greek lit.
- I absolutely dislike JD McClatchy's anthology of world lit. It's about controlling what is foreign. The foreign is a threat that we have to keep out or control.
- I liked a lot of the poems in New Euro anthology. For example the Ukrainean section is really interesting for example. That stood out to me.
- I don't see Wayne and Kevin as "gatekeepers." That's the wrong metaphor. They're not keeping anybody out. Besides it's not the gatekeepers that are the problem in poetry, it's the fence builders.
- Must go. More later.
- I am opposed to anthologies that claim to represent a country or a language (I am opposed to such notions of country and language) because they make literature/nation much too static.
- In Wayne's and Kevin's anthology, the emphasis on proportional representation is a problem because it is based on the 19th-century idea of a "population."
- But I think anthologies can be great. They can provide a framework for reading poems, for showing connections between poets.
- I can't see how someone would argue inclusion/exclusion about Lara's and Arielle's upcoming "Gurlesque" anthology. There is no pressure to "correctly represent", since they are exploring and building a framework, not representing a national literature.
- Mostly at Alta I was opposed to the discussion of "New Euro Poets." Every area-editor bemoaned the short number of pages alloted them without discussing the problems of this kind of representation (which always lead to moans of inclusion and exclusion). Nobody wanted to discuss what Europe is. For example, Scandinavian lit has a lot more in common with American lit than it has with Greek lit.
- I absolutely dislike JD McClatchy's anthology of world lit. It's about controlling what is foreign. The foreign is a threat that we have to keep out or control.
- I liked a lot of the poems in New Euro anthology. For example the Ukrainean section is really interesting for example. That stood out to me.
- I don't see Wayne and Kevin as "gatekeepers." That's the wrong metaphor. They're not keeping anybody out. Besides it's not the gatekeepers that are the problem in poetry, it's the fence builders.
- Must go. More later.
posted by Johannes at 2:31 PM
6 Comments:
I found that once I stopped thinking of the Miller/Prufer as a miniature Norton and started thinking of it as the best issue of Pleiades yet, I relaxed. There's a lot to say about the organizing principles and the individual editors' choices, but another time.
Meanwhile, I'm guessing that your suspicion of the nationalism-narrative reduces the value for you of Ed Foster's Talisman anthologies for Turkey, Greece, Russia, Romania, etc.
I guess I'm being reductive to say I'm opposed to these anthologies. What I guess I'm saying is that I would be more interested in anthologies that have an argument beyond geography and population.
Fair enough. I guess the question is what exactly is a language community anymore. We may be heading away from broadcast monoculture, but at the same time we're moving headlong toward linguistic uniformity. It's not a great case to make, but we could see language/nationality anthologies as nature preserves...
I hate anthologies though I use them of course.
All the languages (Swedish, Rumanian, etc) mentioned here are amongst the few world languages whose future is assured, at least for the moment. A poetry anthology, even if translated, obviously would enshrine a disappearing language to a certain extent. I would probably buy a Lule Sami anthology. Even though I'd think cynically that such an anthology merely panders to the characteristic developed-world desire to possess everything of everyone else's, even (or especially) what is extinct.
I hypothesize that the invention of sound recording has made the majority languages even more potent, even more potential meaning is now packed into every word.
I think, and forgive me if this comes across as a little confrontational because I don’t mean it that way, you are overlooking the benefit of Wayne and Kevin’s anthology namely that it can function as a gateway. I’m not in an academic setting so I don’t translate or take courses on translation or lit courses that focus on national literatures. I work in a bank. I agree that anthologies can often be predicated on the misguided assumption, both by the editors and the readers, that the contents of the anthology are a representation of a language or a national literature but an anthology like the New Euro anthology can also function as a gateway to very talented poets that deserve a wider audience and readership.
"A poetry anthology, even if translated, obviously would enshrine a disappearing language to a certain extent. I would probably buy a Lule Sami anthology. Even though I'd think cynically that such an anthology merely panders to the characteristic developed-world desire to possess everything of everyone else's, even (or especially) what is extinct."
I really don't understand this pervasive mindset, by which anything ostensibly of value is to immediately have guilt piled and piled on until any potential value is completely wasted and done away with. Oh, a very useful anthology would be one of literature from a dying language, but then again, we must worry that perhaps we are only assuaging our basest cultural desires in creating such an anthology, so perhaps this dying language is best left alone! Oh what to do?!
It's like a person mid-coitus trying to decide whether he/she should or should not have an orgasm. I hate to be so blunt, but this is a pathetic way to think about the world.
Post a Comment
<< Home