William Logan responds to his criticism's critics; and, well, eats a little crow in the bow :)
I love Crane unconditionally; he's a bridge to somewhere transporting; however, I can't help but think Wyndham Lewis would have captured his essence much more heart-breakingly than the illustrative portrait (which is fine, such as it is) accompanying this Poetry Foundation feature.
With reference to William Logan and another of his reviews, Rob Mackenzie wonders What Kind of Reviews Do We Need?
ReplyDeleteAnd with references to Rob Mackenzie's comments on Mr Logan's writing, and to that same review, Nicholas Manning wonders John Ashbery vs. William Logan: new forms of an écriture automatique?
Whoa . . . Dave, these linq.s!
ReplyDeleteMr. Manning's steamed 'n' William Logan's fuzzy-scuzzy reamed! I found his work on Crane completely unremarkable; plus, he has basic grammatical problems (NTM his attempts at sustaining a submerged metaphor utterly sink [or dry-rot stink]).
I found it curious he was defending himself when, clearly, he was just diving deeper into the wreck in so doing. Then, I discovered he's actually publishing a book of this frothy mindless drivel? No wonder literary criticism's sunk to whole new leagues below the lowest the human mind can possibly go (insane in the lit-crit bullshit gain).
Just goes to show: Cream rises; so does scum, eh?
But, wow and thanks (I think :)) . . .
p.s. Genuinely, though, thank you; because I found and stole a great typo (a.k.a. neologism) from one of Mr. Manning's commentarians: Dictatters! (Erm, Cuba *is* an island, right?)