tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11779531.post113771137824463276..comments2023-08-04T04:41:39.813-07:00Comments on Of Looking At A Blackbird: Old poemsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11779531.post-1137794184596715682006-01-20T13:56:00.000-08:002006-01-20T13:56:00.000-08:00It would if they're good!It would if they're good!Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13471547669854013234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11779531.post-1137790389747485142006-01-20T12:53:00.000-08:002006-01-20T12:53:00.000-08:00Then if I understand what you are saying, you thin...Then if I understand what you are saying, you think works of art are inevitably dated, regardless of the artist's intent, but that something good holds up nevertheless.<BR/><BR/>Do you think that a melange of old and new(er) poems in a book would or would not work?Diane K. Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03204316534769002428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11779531.post-1137788447352147832006-01-20T12:20:00.000-08:002006-01-20T12:20:00.000-08:00The whole idea of “dated” poems is interesting. So...The whole idea of “dated” poems is interesting. Sometimes I think 100 years from now we’ll look back on “new” poems by John Ashbery and Billy Collins and think the exact same thing about both of them: “how 2006.” If you listen to a radically avant-garde opera like <I>Salome</I> (1905) by Richard Strauss, and then listen to what might be called a radically nostalgic opera like <I>Der Rosenkavalier</I> (1911), also by Strauss, they both have an unmistakably early 20th century sound. It’s almost poignant that <I>Der Rosenkavalier</I> sounds like it can’t help its “cutting edge” futuristic harmonies even though it wants to sound as if it were written 100 years earlier. <BR/><BR/>Some poets are clearly more “future oriented” and others more “past-loving.” If you list contrasting styles (fluent vs. fragmented, for example), you can tell which is which pretty easily (fragmented = future, fluent = past). The avant-garde, by definition, claims first dibs on the future, but that doesn’t meant there’s any correlation between that and what anyone will actually read in the future. The “art of the future” has been characterized by fragmentation for at least 100 years, or since “The Waste Land.” On the other hand, 200 years ago poets were writing nostalgically about a long-gone golden age, and we’re still reading them.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13471547669854013234noreply@blogger.com