Open and Closed, Part 4

3 Comments

  1. JeFF Stumpo
    JeFF Stumpo January 26, 2009 at 6:08 pm .

    Hi, Joseph. I started to write something very short about liking the change to "irrelevant," but then I thought some more and like "unfair" better. But "unfair" makes the most sense in light of your expanded reasoning. Which is to say, of course these things are relevant to each other, but because they are trying to do very different things even as they apply similar techniques (the quirks of

  2. Joseph Hutchison
    Joseph Hutchison January 25, 2009 at 11:23 pm .

    Hi, Jeff. "Unfair" is probably the wrong word. I really mean something like "irrelevant." In his book <I>Poetry and the Public</I>, Joseph Harrington begins with a question: "Who’s better: Itzhak Perlman or The Rolling Stones?" His point being that the vastly different aesthetic aims and means of the two make the question of who’s better essentially <I>the wrong question</I>. Of course, my post

  3. JeFF Stumpo
    JeFF Stumpo January 24, 2009 at 7:48 pm .

    Joseph,<BR/><BR/>Why would it be unfair to compare a long sequence to a minimalist poem? Really and truly, I’m interested in your answer. I can picture reasons for both sides of this argument, but I’d like to get a handle on your poetics regarding that particular bit…

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: