Skip to main content

Summer of 2006

The Poetry Library recently digitalised and put online the summer 2006 issue of the excellent London poetry magazine, Magma.  If you want to see what was being written in Britain five years ago, by some of the best new and established poets, here's one way to start finding out...
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
And guess what the first two words are that you will find there if you click the link?

Yes, Todd Swift's two favourite words, Todd and Swift!
Tue Apr 27, 12:58:00 am 2010
EYEWEAR said…
Uh - okay, maybe - but you will then also find a review of three good poetry books, and links to many poems and issues of the magazine. Since this is my blog, and I edit and write a lot of it, I can hardly apologise for it sometimes linking to texts I have written. However, unlike many (most?) blogs I do try and balance my work, and opinions, with those of others, sometimes rather different from my own. Your facile charge of narcissism, then, or self-obsession, is a little rich, and, I think, overdetermined.
Tue Apr 27, 03:13:00 pm 2010
Anonymous said…
It's telling that Anonymous lets us have their 30 word, two sentences, erm, anonymously.

Anyone posting anonymously, their name would indicate, wouldn't like anyone who wrote under their own name; so it's not just Todd they are attacking but everyone who isn't like them, writing anonymously.

This is what Swift meant, I think, when he talked about poetry being conducted at the intellectual level of the schoolyard.

Anonymous, c'mon, why don't you tell us who you are and at least have a debate. As Todd and I know because we don't mind testing ourselves and appearing a bit daft now and then: In the web-age, once you get gassing you discover that our 'opinions' are secondary to the debate itself.

If you start off with a contentious statement and anonymous people just fume about it in short one liners and the 'debate' consists of only a few hundred words, of course it looks like there's more discord than harmony between us. If we actually get stuck in and say what we think, rather than what we think we should say to 'fit in' with everyone else all acting the same way, you will find that the longer the debate goes on, the more of it there is, the more words we generate, the better we feel coz we're actually talking to one another.

It's only words, after all, we're not in the same room as each other, it's all happening at synaptic level and you find, Anonymous, the more you debate the more you coginze the core point is our 'performance'; how the Language dances and how original it is. We can't get this unless we have a go, don't mind falling on our faces. The more you do, the less you are concerned about who thinks what and we can all move forward into the lurve zone, sailor.

gra agus siochain

Desmond Swords
Wed Apr 28, 09:06:00 am 2010
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A  poem for my mother, July 15 When she was dying And I was in a different country I dreamt I was there with her Flying over the ocean very quickly, And arriving in the room like a dream And I was a dream, but the meaning was more Than a dream has – it was a moving over time And land, over water, to get love across Fast enough, to be there, before she died, To lean over the small, huddled figure, In the dark, and without bothering her Even with apologies, and be a kiss in the air, A dream of a kiss, or even less, the thought of one, And when I woke, none of this had happened, She was still far distant, and we had not spoken.
Post a Comment
Read more

Poetry vs. Literature

Poetry is, of course, a part of literature. But, increasingly, over the 20th century, it has become marginalised - and, famously, has less of an audience than "before". I think that, when one considers the sort of criticism levelled against Seamus Heaney and "mainstream poetry", by poet-critics like Jeffrey Side , one ought to see the wider context for poetry in the "Anglo-Saxon" world. This phrase was used by one of the UK's leading literary cultural figures, in a private conversation recently, when they spoke eloquently about the supremacy of "Anglo-Saxon novels" and their impressive command of narrative. My heart sank as I listened, for what became clear to me, in a flash, is that nothing has changed since Victorian England (for some in the literary establishment). Britain (now allied to America) and the English language with its marvellous fiction machine, still rule the waves. I personally find this an uncomfortable position - but when ...
15 comments
Read more

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats , but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin 's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill , and Jorie Graham , are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell , smart poets? Or, Pound ?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views? Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se....
3 comments
Read more