Poetry audiences - a discussion [Part 3]
Hi Annie, Hi Peter,
Thank you for the eloquent and serious responses to issues I raised in an earlier mail. I feel heartened, especially as both of you lead a major blog site on poetry. I also consider the both of you hard working poets. (Yes, Annie, impassioned is a word often employed about my work and here's another response.)
I refrained from using the word 'community' as this I found lacking. But by all means, let's deploy it now if there is a crack of hope.
I validate the suggestions you made. Peter: yes, invite the poets you mentioned to dialogue. Also, and equally important, the three questions you, Annie, plan to initiate on the C blog. These are pertinent points to engage commitment.
I suggest: use the mails or extracts that have passed between us to contextualize the issues --thought I'm not familiar with your format. Because we are speaking of vast and deep concerns.
To further the debate:
True, a sense of community is necessary and significant to help us be what we are. It is imperative to stand by each other in our frail and encompassing endeavour. But beyond this there is the sense of self and gratitude to the art that makes us be. Each one of us, individually, must give not merely as good as we receive, but better. This commitment also comes into play. Irrespective of those who stand alongside.
My new argument may seem to convulse the idea of community that I found lacking and longed for, and to which you have responded thoughtfully. But this is a spiral on it. This aspect is the moola, the root and seed: beyond all else, unshakably, begin with self.
Yes, Annie, this is implied in the questions you wish to raise; also in the word 'reciprocate'.. But let's forefront this aspect of faith too, what say?
[Priya Chabria's original mail, Annie Zaidi's reply, a short reply from Priya C, in which your correspondent drones on and on and on., Sampurna Chattarji's take, some more thoughts from Annie, Vivek Narayanan's view.]