I was struck the other day by the following comment in Alan Baker's review of Maria Taylor's second full collection, Dressing for the Afterlife, on Litter magazine (see full post here):
In terms of the poetics used, there seem to be two forces operating; one is pushing the poetry to be the standard poetry of the British mainstream variety; that is, first-person anecdote and subjective observation and comment; and another pushing it towards something much more interesting, which is unpredictable, language-driven and exciting. Happily, it's the second of these forces which wins out, although the tension between the two is a fascinating feature of the collection.
This stance felt like a blast from the past, a reminder of the ridiculous, artificial battlelines that seemed rife in U.K. poetry a few years ago. In fact, I suddenly realised that I hadn't read such an outdated distinction between poetics for a long time.
Perhaps this is because excellent contemporary poets such as Taylor have overcome or ignored these anachronistic supposed opposites. They know full well that poetry isn't a battle in which one aesthetic wins out over another due to its inherent superiority and greater interest.
Instead, they're aware that poets possess a whole gamut of resources that they can blend and juxtapose, both within individual poems and also across collections. I'll stop here though, as I'd better keep my powder dry for my own forthcoming review of Maria Taylor's book...
No comments:
Post a Comment