Samurai Critic
By Mark Ford
“The poet-critic William Logan continues his assault on the state of American poetry in these essays.”
Excerpt from the NYT review: “Our Savage Art,†the latest installment in William Logan’s prolonged and rumbustious assault on the state of American poetry, comes furnished with no fewer than nine epigraphs in which the phrase “savage art†appears. One of these is taken from the second chapter of James Fenimore Cooper’s “Last of the Mohicansâ€: an unsuspecting party of white travelers, including a pair of sisters, is passing through a gloomy forest unaware that they are being secretly observed by “a human visage, as fiercely wild as savage art and unbridled passions could make it.†“A gleam of exultation,†Cooper continues, “shot across the darkly painted lineaments of the inhabitant of the forest, as he traced the route of his intended victims, who rode unconsciously onward.â€Â Continue to article…
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Saving grace? Thanks to Logan’s broad-brush bashing, more people will read the poets he savages, if only to see what the fuss is all about. Somehow (reading between the lines, of course), I suspect he knows that.
I should have known that my poet-pal would post a comment here. She is a great gal, but we “knock heads” when it comes to what is “readable.” Below is the letter I zapped off to the Editor at The New York Times. In a week or two, we will see if it makes the cut. In any case, oh Kristina| no one but the Pobiz elite are going to read (buy) these books savaged by Logan.
Amicus poeticae,
Neal Whitman
Dear Editor,
Mark Ford, in his review of “Our Savage Art” by William Logan (April 26), informs us that “most in the poetry business seem, unsurprisingly, to have pretty strong views about him.” In his very next sentence, he cites the “only contemporary poet really to emerge honored and medaled… the somber and arcane British poet Geoffrey Hill…” Ah, right there I see the two-fold problem: poetry business and contemporary poets. Mr. Ford, the problem with “the poetry business” is that it excludes common readers. I belong to the tribe of common readers. My savage whoop (barbaric yawp?) is that I want to know what a poem is about and what is means, not “mean” in an analytic way, but in terms of having an experience. Yes, that’s it. A poem should be an experience. And, “Hey, I’m confused!” does not count. What makes a poem wonderful is when it brings you to a place before or after words take place perhaps to that place of wondering just before you go to sleep. The problem with too many “contemp. poets” is that they left out the “t” in my college course catalogue. Yes, that’s it. Poets today, some “assaulted” by Mr. Logan, but most of all, the one his singles out for praise, Mr. Hill, show contempt for the common reader. Little wonder there are now more writers than readers of poetry.