Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I thought this was an interesting review though I'm not familiar with the poet in question.

However, I reacted negatively to criticisms like this:

> Her closing lines are often summaries that feel tacked-on and avoid placing the scene in a larger context

Must poems "place scenes in a larger context?" Is that necessarily the goal of poetry?

> A striking aspect of Bishop’s early poems is that they rarely seem to go anywhere

Again, why must poems "go anywhere?" I often find myself appreciating poems that specifically don't go anywhere. These poems, I find, are often more emotionally evocative than poems that seem to be searching for "deeper meaning" or belong in a "social context."

> In short, many of her poems lack the spiritual or philosophical underpinnings

Again, I find myself wondering: so?

> Bishop largely ignored politics, charitable work, and the communities around her, living as a non-participating observer

This just feels nasty. Again, I see no relationship between these observations, which feel more like accusations, and the quality of a poet's work.




I'm with you. I couldn't believe that "I let the fish go" was the example of 'not going anywhere'. She spends the first half of the poem dissecting it with her eyes and the second half writing its biography -- if this isn't a journey I don't know what is.

If you haven't heard her reading it the audio is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJsFCI9_BeA.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: