Wow. First the PBS gets cut and now the Poetry Society is in turmoil, much like it was during the 70s when the British Poetry Revival poets briefly held sway there. In fact, the Poetry Society seems to gyrate like Gyro Gearloose, between staid blandness (the Georgian period) or some form of creative upheaval. Not a bad thing, perhaps. At any rate, blessedly, Eyewear has no opinion on this internecine struggle at the PS, because it has no insider news to report or base an opinion on.
THAT HANDSOME MAN A PERSONAL BRIEF REVIEW BY TODD SWIFT I could lie and claim Larkin, Yeats , or Dylan Thomas most excited me as a young poet, or even Pound or FT Prince - but the truth be told, it was Thom Gunn I first and most loved when I was young. Precisely, I fell in love with his first two collections, written under a formalist, Elizabethan ( Fulke Greville mainly), Yvor Winters triad of influences - uniquely fused with an interest in homerotica, pop culture ( Brando, Elvis , motorcycles). His best poem 'On The Move' is oddly presented here without the quote that began it usually - Man, you gotta go - which I loved. Gunn was - and remains - so thrilling, to me at least, because so odd. His elegance, poise, and intelligence is all about display, about surface - but the surface of a panther, who ripples with strength beneath the skin. With Gunn, you dressed to have sex. Or so I thought. Because I was queer (I maintain the right to lay claim to that
Comments
Come again? I'm pretty sure that's not why members pay £40 a year for. Membership fees shouldn't be used to help increase the incomes of a select few but to benefit poetry as a whole.
This new 'focus' doesn't surprise me. Pick up an issue of Poetry Review and you'll find it dominated by high-profile poets. The board of the organisation and its trustees are high-profile poets.
But here's the thing: the PS is funded with taxpayer cash. It should not be free to promote a select few but benefit poetry as a whole to get the most bang for our buck(s). To do so otherwise would be detrimental to us all.
I agree one hundred per cent with Christian that British taxpayers' money should NOT be used to promote already high-profile poets. Morally, it's equivalent to giving generous tax breaks to the seriously rich. As I understand it, the Poetry Society was set up to help ALL poets and not simply a well-known handful.
Best wishes from Simon