3 ms·
I would say that there is such vast amounts of poetry from the past, ( And there is enough there for readers to discover poems and poets they have not read befo
by billfruit 7y ago
I would say that there is such vast amounts of poetry from the past, ( And there is enough there for readers to discover poems and poets they have not read before), contemporary poetry would be a small fraction of the entire whole.
Even some major poets like Wordsworth wrote such volumes of poetry, even seasoned readers can find something new and unread from his work.
- mellosouls 7y agoI agree - but it is arguable that a significant majority of poetry by canonical poets is settled in acclaim. Obscurities by them generally (but not always), are obscure for a reason. This will not at all be the case with new and contemporary poetry for the simple reason that these things take time to settle. Classic poetry has had enough exposure; contemporary needs support and nurturing. Some of it will fall by the wayside, some of it will become the canon of the future. Let's help it get there.
- billfruit 7y agoI should also mention that very many poets and remarkable works have due to matters of popular taste, etc has failed to secure a firm place in the cannon as it is now. So I think considering the cannon, older works and poets need continual relook and re-evaluation. Poets like Edward Young, Walter Scott, perhaps even Dryden, etc may fall into such a category. Even works of 20 century poets like Ezra Pound and Philip Larkin, aren't that popularly known to general readers. I find the cannon limiting, for the reason that it does not cover enough of the past, it makes a narrow representative selection that misses out many unique and eccentric voices of their time.
- RaiseProfits 7y agoCanon