It surely must be a footnote to history: even as Lord Bingham, formerly Britain's top legal mind, considers the war on Iraq illegal, poetry critics like Tim Kendall argue that the 2003 opposition to the war, by British poets, was merely fashionable, likely futile, probably aesthetically nugatory, and, finally, ultimately hypocritical, even self-serving. While America has elected an anti-Iraq war president, Britain, with its limited democracy, resists any public inquiry into the mess; and, its most conservative literary types oppose even the slightest hint of literature becoming embedded with the biggest political issue of our time. Why is this?
POETRY, POLITICS, PROVOCATION AND POPULAR CULTURE SINCE 2005 - 20 YEARS AND over 10 million visits - British Library-archived
Comments
Of course the election of Obama extends beyond the symbolic, but are you suggesting that the US has anything more than limited democracy?
I also think it's unfair to claim that Tim is repelled by political engagement from poets - after all, he has written a well-received book on the subject in which your anthology is in the minority of situations of political engagement and protest which he seems to dislike.
And, what's more, it's wrong to make judgements on someone's political colouring on the basis of a personal disagreement. Tim may be a 'literary conservative' but I've no reason to think he is a political one or a supporter of the Iraq war. Unless you know better?
Has he? Any evidence other than the chapter of the book already mentioned?
Me defending Tim K! Can't think who should be more horrified - me or him!