Sherry Chandler » More twitter?
More twitter?
A, shall I say passionate?, Foetry conversation going on over at Silliman’s blog. I clipped this from a comment from Anonymous (several of those — are they all the same man [women don't usually talk pissing contests] or just cousins?):
Poetry contest entrants are paying money for the opportunity to be (purportedly) judged objectively, and it is this exchange of dollars that makes the poetry contest racket an especiallly heinous crime. Foetry was correct to label this as fraud punishable by law.It’s too bad Foetry had to be run by a vengeful, emotional twit who delights in rumor mongering. Most of the site was devoted to dishing dirt — not solving the problem. I wonder how this might have turned out had the oppostion approached the problem with vehemence AND some modicum of grace. Foetry should have supplied the careful objectivity and judiciousness that’s missing from the poetry world, not just urinate from the opposite direction.
Perhaps most damaging: The whole episode, broadcast on NPR and written up in the Times, confirms the public’s worst suspicion about poets: They’re childish, back-biting academics who care only about themselves and their own petty agendas. Foetry didn’t clean up poetry; it just caked on a new color of dirt.
Possibly related posts:
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
2 Comments
1. Michael replies at 22nd April 2005, 10:24 pm :
It’s a new trend. Mothers everywhere are naming their children Anonymous.
Honestly… some of the posts have been thought provoking. It is a shame that I tend to naturally want to discount posts from people that have an aversion to identifying themselves.
2. Sherry replies at 23rd April 2005, 9:20 am :
Hello, Michael, and welcome.
It’s true — one might be tempted to look askance at an anonymous attack at a gadfly who was demonized for making anonymous attacks.
Leave a comment