Josh Corey
Responds to my statements about McCloud and him here.
I wrote a response to that response in the comment section.
It is funny that when I wrote that I did have thee thought: Why do I keep criticizing Josh Corey? And the answer I came up with was that he is close enough to my thinking that I think there's a purpose to responding to him (as opposed to numerous people I just can't respond to). Often Josh is a very perceptive critic who - from my point of view - just takes the wrong turn at the end of the street.
I wrote a response to that response in the comment section.
It is funny that when I wrote that I did have thee thought: Why do I keep criticizing Josh Corey? And the answer I came up with was that he is close enough to my thinking that I think there's a purpose to responding to him (as opposed to numerous people I just can't respond to). Often Josh is a very perceptive critic who - from my point of view - just takes the wrong turn at the end of the street.
posted by Johannes at 7:33 PM
2 Comments:
Do close readings really "generate" an aesthetic? "Limn", maybe, but "generate"?
Perhaps participate in an aesthetic. If the sole focus is creating a kind of contemplative depth, if the evaluation of a poem is based on how many times your can re-read it; I think poets will write a kind of deeply textured poetry meant for many contemplative, long gazes. Of course this idea of reading does not perhaps start or generate the poem, it's also the other way around. I would say it's largely a revisionist Keatsian reading/writing strategy. Revisionist because Keats was originally denounced for his clumsy excesses (as I think Kasey pointed out some time ago), but in this model that is covered over.
Post a Comment
<< Home