Editors' note: we've removed a paragraph about the epigraph – a quote from Rosemarie Waldrop – because we were reading from the first proof pages, rather than the final files. The quote is correct in the final print version.
It is a great relief to read this conversation. I've been reading and re-reading 'Fierce Elegy' with increasing bewilderment. I don't have to read it again.
I haven't read any Gizzi I don't think except for the bits quoted in the various reviews of this book, which I wasn't bowled over by, but perhaps this is really more of a "lifetime achievement award", if his earlier stuff was more accessible? (Though if so, they should admit to it.) On that particular use of 'thou', I would (not necessarily correctly) assume it was a reference to Buber https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_and_Thou Personally, I think the T. S. Eliot prize should be for British poets. British poetry remains a distinct tradition, and no-one writing in that tradition is ever likely to win any of the big U.S. prizes. I hear a lot of echoes of earlier American poetry even in just the bits you quoted from Gizzi, and I can imagine that he might be a bit more accessible from a U.S. perspective. But the default 'Americanization' and mindless aping of an American style and tradition in UK poetry leads to lots of terrible poetry if you ask me. Giving the T. S. Eliot prize to an American poet just adds to that. And there are plenty of U.S.-only prizes.
Yes I thought the US was/is the elephant in the room too, especially as the book was published in 2023... I don't know if the Eliots have changed their rules recently, I suppose I could find out. I tend to err on the side of... literary protectionism... but as an argument it seems to be getting harder and harder to make (blame the Booker).
This is quite an interesting piece, and one that has provoked some interesting reactions. As I have moved into writing criticism myself, this idea that we have to pretend to like things or not speak on them at all is actively harmful to interesting debate. At the end of the day, nobody is taking Gizzi’s award away. As for myself, I am not much of a fan from what I have read.
This is quite fitting to come out now as I critique Imogen Wade’s winning poem, The Time I Was Mugged in New York City, for my upcoming essay / article.
I share your sense of mystification. Why did he win? What were the judges thinking? He sounds way past his best. Why didn't Adam win? Why is the TS Eliot prize so disappointing nowadays? This does not help shift public hostility to contemporary poetry. BTW when might you start publishing poems again on Friday rather than writing about them? Any chance of us unpublished (or in my case barely published) poets getting a chance of airing our stuff? I know you are understaffed and underfunded, but so are most of us... It is sad having opportunities closed down
Hi Stephen, thanks for your comment. Re publishing poems, sorry, this is how we are going to do it for the foreseeable future. It may change, but we can't promise anything. Best, Hilary
I bought the book in Oxford yesterday and am really enjoying it so far, I think a lot of your criticism is based around the unfair expectations that prize culture place on a book…there are some very moving poems for his brother, and it strikes me as pointedly unkind to do them down in this manner. Charlie
I haven’t read Gizzi’s book, so can’t comment on whether it deserved to win the TSE. But I don’t think the review is unfair. The predominant tone appears to be an honest puzzlement and attempt to understand and parse various words, lines, images and phrases. Nelson and Menos quote generously (something Auden would approve of) and give serious consideration, not only to Gizzi’s poems, but also to statements on his work by other poets and critics.
I agree that prize culture can create “unfair expectations”, but when renowned authors award heavyweight prizes it’s certainly worth considering and evaluating the work of the recipients. Like it or not, it’s the culture we’re presented with. Personally, I’d be delighted if any critic gave this much time and space to my own work, even if they found it puzzling, frustrating, etc.
Editors' note: we've removed a paragraph about the epigraph – a quote from Rosemarie Waldrop – because we were reading from the first proof pages, rather than the final files. The quote is correct in the final print version.
It is a great relief to read this conversation. I've been reading and re-reading 'Fierce Elegy' with increasing bewilderment. I don't have to read it again.
And ev'ry one will say,
As you walk your mystic way,
"If this young man expresses himself in terms too deep for me,
Why, what a very singularly deep young man
this deep young man must be!"
I haven't read any Gizzi I don't think except for the bits quoted in the various reviews of this book, which I wasn't bowled over by, but perhaps this is really more of a "lifetime achievement award", if his earlier stuff was more accessible? (Though if so, they should admit to it.) On that particular use of 'thou', I would (not necessarily correctly) assume it was a reference to Buber https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_and_Thou Personally, I think the T. S. Eliot prize should be for British poets. British poetry remains a distinct tradition, and no-one writing in that tradition is ever likely to win any of the big U.S. prizes. I hear a lot of echoes of earlier American poetry even in just the bits you quoted from Gizzi, and I can imagine that he might be a bit more accessible from a U.S. perspective. But the default 'Americanization' and mindless aping of an American style and tradition in UK poetry leads to lots of terrible poetry if you ask me. Giving the T. S. Eliot prize to an American poet just adds to that. And there are plenty of U.S.-only prizes.
Yes I thought the US was/is the elephant in the room too, especially as the book was published in 2023... I don't know if the Eliots have changed their rules recently, I suppose I could find out. I tend to err on the side of... literary protectionism... but as an argument it seems to be getting harder and harder to make (blame the Booker).
This is quite an interesting piece, and one that has provoked some interesting reactions. As I have moved into writing criticism myself, this idea that we have to pretend to like things or not speak on them at all is actively harmful to interesting debate. At the end of the day, nobody is taking Gizzi’s award away. As for myself, I am not much of a fan from what I have read.
This is quite fitting to come out now as I critique Imogen Wade’s winning poem, The Time I Was Mugged in New York City, for my upcoming essay / article.
I share your sense of mystification. Why did he win? What were the judges thinking? He sounds way past his best. Why didn't Adam win? Why is the TS Eliot prize so disappointing nowadays? This does not help shift public hostility to contemporary poetry. BTW when might you start publishing poems again on Friday rather than writing about them? Any chance of us unpublished (or in my case barely published) poets getting a chance of airing our stuff? I know you are understaffed and underfunded, but so are most of us... It is sad having opportunities closed down
Hi Stephen, thanks for your comment. Re publishing poems, sorry, this is how we are going to do it for the foreseeable future. It may change, but we can't promise anything. Best, Hilary
ok, thanks for letting me know. I still enjoy reading your stuff and I know times are hard.
I think the line "Find myself in thou" refers to the hymn "Rock of Ages" which begins and ends with lines
"Rock of Ages, cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in Thee;"
Gizzi replaces "hide" with "find" and perhaps this also moves him to reverse object and subject with "Thou" instead of "Thee"?
Interesting conversation, both. Thank you.
I too really liked the one on the Poetry Foundation website. Thank you for that too!
I bought the book in Oxford yesterday and am really enjoying it so far, I think a lot of your criticism is based around the unfair expectations that prize culture place on a book…there are some very moving poems for his brother, and it strikes me as pointedly unkind to do them down in this manner. Charlie
I haven’t read Gizzi’s book, so can’t comment on whether it deserved to win the TSE. But I don’t think the review is unfair. The predominant tone appears to be an honest puzzlement and attempt to understand and parse various words, lines, images and phrases. Nelson and Menos quote generously (something Auden would approve of) and give serious consideration, not only to Gizzi’s poems, but also to statements on his work by other poets and critics.
I agree that prize culture can create “unfair expectations”, but when renowned authors award heavyweight prizes it’s certainly worth considering and evaluating the work of the recipients. Like it or not, it’s the culture we’re presented with. Personally, I’d be delighted if any critic gave this much time and space to my own work, even if they found it puzzling, frustrating, etc.
I will not buy.
Poetry disintegrates.
Read poetry society volumes.
Contemporary for now.
Death becomes them. Death can be spoken of.
Wink.
Interesting but I would call it a review :-)