Anonymous reviews have obvious drawbacks and dangers. Even when screened by an editor who could block or edit out offensive language, a disrespectful or unprofessional tone, and ad hominem attacks, they may still encourage a drift toward the vitriolic style common in anonymous comments on blogs, youtube, etc.. And, they don’t have the advantage of […]
Nonfiction
SCOTT ESPOSITO’S RESPONSE TO “SOME DARKER BOUQUETS”
Hear, hear to Kent Johnson’s call for unsigned criticism in poetry reviews. Certainly the idea will present its own unique challenges and pitfalls, although I’ve yet to encounter a good idea that didn’t, and the alternative has already demonstrated its own capacity for error. At any rate, it is far more constructive to try and […]
STEPHEN BURT’S RESPONSE TO “SOME DARKER BOUQUETS”
Almost everything Kent Johnson says here seems true to me. I, too, would support some anonymous reviewing, though it’s worth remembering the disadvantages there (look up an essay by F. W. Bateson, “Scandalously Anonymous,” directed at what was then the TLS’s all-anonymous all-the-time policy). It’s also worth noting the meanings of reviewers’ names. Reviewers whose […]
JOHN BRADLEY’S RESPONSE TO “SOME DARKER BOUQUETS”
Kent Johnson’s call for “negative” reviews led me to this modest proposal: 1. The reviewer cannot be a friend, teacher, student, pet-sitter, neighbor, relative, former lover, or partner of the author of the book reviewed. A simple contract could easily stipulate this. 2. If someone close to the author is the reviewer (to offer some […]
JOHN BEER’S RESPONSE TO “SOME DARKER BOUQUETS”
Small Stakes? Which Ivy-educated post-avantish blogosphere luminary is so taken with his newest collection, he’s given to handing signed copies out to the homeless in his California city? Which one-time “major prizewinner” has been putting more money and effort into rehauling her decolletage than her poetic line? Which inveterate prankster and magus of the Midwest […]
V. JOSHUA ADAMS’S RESPONSE TO “SOME DARKER BOUQUETS”
I agree with Kent Johnson when he suggests the following about the sociology of contemporary poetry reviewing: Reviewing tends to be done by poets, and poets use the mode of criticism, more often than not, as a form of ingratiation with their associates. As U.S. poetry (mainstream and post-avant) has become more tightly tethered to academic […]
ROUNDTABLE RESPONSES TO “SOME DARKER BOUQUETS”
: : V. Joshua Adams : : Joe Amato : : Robert Archambeau : : Tim Atkins : : Robert Baird : : John Beer : : John Bradley : : Stephen Burt : : Scott Esposito : : Annie Finch : : Bill Freind : : Daisy Fried : : Johannes Göransson : : Mark Halliday : : John Latta : : David Lau : : Eric Lorberer […]
ROBERT BAIRD’S RESPONSE TO “SOME DARKER BOUQUETS”
Is it too glib to say that what I look for in a good review is what I look for in a lover: that it be smart, witty, and pretty (and in that order)? Then how’s this, from Martin Amis: “The adversaries of good book-reviewing are many and various, but the chief one is seldom […]
TIM ATKINS’S RESPONSE TO “SOME DARKER BOUQUETS”
As a Buddhist, I take the precept of Right Speech (“And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, and from idle chatter”) seriously. As a reviewer for onedit, I only write on pieces about which I feel enthusiastic because life is too short to be stabbing yourself repeatedly with the shit end of […]
ROBERT ARCHAMBEAU’S RESPONSE TO “SOME DARKER BOUQUETS”
Kent Johnson’s right, I think, to agree with Jason Guriel about the importance of the honestly negative review: it matters for (ahem) the Future of the Art that we say what we really think when we write reviews. And Johnson’s right, too, about the source of the glut of reviews laden with overly exuberant praise. […]
