tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31341356110251854.post1100917424823955901..comments2024-01-26T11:43:48.054-08:00Comments on Career Limiting Moves: The history of poetry, like the history of any art form, is not a procession of its “best works.”Zachariah Wellshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02241595894807722933noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31341356110251854.post-85125015412311033892008-07-16T12:34:00.000-07:002008-07-16T12:34:00.000-07:00And now we have people constantly griping--with no...And now we have people constantly griping--with no apparent awareness of the intrinsic irony of the statement--that no one respects "avant-garde traditions." Of course, any truly innovative writer worth reading is not writing out of only one recent aesthetic school. Anyone who does this winds up writing derivative and usually quite anemic work. Silliman is constantly bemoaning "neophobes," and Zachariah Wellshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02241595894807722933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31341356110251854.post-83267501766252148642008-07-16T12:09:00.000-07:002008-07-16T12:09:00.000-07:00Yes.Also, these "seminal" writers Silliman enshrin...Yes.<BR/><BR/>Also, these "seminal" writers Silliman enshrines were, themselves, inspired by predecessors working in a similar vein, so his argument of "everyone remembers the originator, not the copycats" falls apart. EVERYone borrows and steals from, and is influenced by, others. As you rightly say, it's about the individual poem, not the school it represents.<BR/><BR/> Far too much is made of Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com