In point of fact the point I’m making is nothing new. It was raised as earlier as that. It was made by Grover Smith too (TS Eliot’s Poetry and Plays: A Study in Sources and Meaning). Eliot, he wrote, was admittedly a classicist only ‘in tendency.’ Temperamentally a romantic, he abhorred the gap between the actual and the ideal. All the same Eliot paved the way for a new idiom of poetry. 


On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 6:06 PM Cox, Carrol <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

The New Poetic: Yeats to Eliot (Classic Criticism) C.K. Stead: Continuum


This alleged "new poetic" is over a century old; in other words, critics who treat Pound, Eliot, Yeats etc  as "new" are duplicating the critics of 1920 who regarded Wordsworth and Shelley as the cutting edge of poetic practice.

Is there anyone on the list deeply familiar with the criticism & scholarship of the last 20 hears who can give real information on what 'now' is regard as "new"?

At the time when LBJ" rape of democracy in the Dominican Republic abruptly shifted my focus of energy, I was reading Merwin, Snodgrass, et al as "new," though my personal preferences were Pound & Pope.  And even by 1965 the "New" critics were looking a bit moldy alongside Frye, Kenner, Davie, & others.