Refer to my reply to Urvashi. If you can’t follow – read it again! And again. Till you understand.
]]>Clearly, you find her highly readable; hence, the interview. The intention was not to make you subscribe to my standpoint. It’s for the poet to know how a certain reader feels about her work. Maybe she’ll see the point I am trying to make. Then again, maybe not. But I am just as entitled to an opinion as anyone else is.
I shall look up the titles you mentioned. Meanwhile, if you are interested you may want to read (i.e. if you haven’t already) http://www.poetryfoundation.org/learning/essay/237868
to know where I’m coming from. Understand, I don’t want you to appreciate the idea, only entertain it, even if it is to ultimately reject it.
I beg to differ. Every theme is hackneyed, it’s about bringing something new to the done-to-death. Sure, her book is full of the sea and rain, but if you look at work such as Storm Chasing for example, what is typical about that?
And on another note, poetry isn’t simply about twisting heartstrings, it has subtler influences than that. She IS a subtle poet, look at Peach or Dolls even.
]]>