Skip to main content

Another Review

Warning: this post is about Todd Swift's recent collection, Mainstream Love Hotel. It is a self-serving notice of a very positive review in the April/May 2010 issue of London Magazine, by Leah Fritz. It is being posted in order to interest readers in the collection, in the hopes that some might seek out the book, to read it, even buy it.

If this act is suspect, or even considered downright bad, consider the following: what are poets doing when they a) read their books at launches and book signings; publish their poems? What are publishers doing when they a) send books for review; market books; sell books in shops and online; enter books in competitions? The motives of authors and publishers are complex, and cannot all be boiled down to the purely virtuous act of distributing literary material freely, for the sake of education, enlightenment and entertainment.

Poets, and publishers, both want a) their books to be read; and b) their books to be borrowed or sold. This may be insane or misguided, because a) what does it matter if another person other than you (the author) reads your work and b) how much money can you really possibly make from selling poetry to the masses? Do poets seek to have their poems achieve influence, or become loved and memorised? Do poets want their books to be in print or out of print or never published?

Anyway, this particular London Magazine review is quite good. I was pleased with it, because I admire Leah Fritz, as a poet, person, and thinker. She starts the review by saying her old friend, now deceased, John Heath-Stubbs, liked when she read him my poems out loud (he was blind by this stage). She calls my New and Selected a "poetic find". She observes of MLH that: "at the core of his poetry, however, is conjugal love. Very rare, this kind of romanticism; very honest and elegant in its portrayal."

Fritz also discussed my debt to psychoanalysis, my interest in film, and the poetry's "typically fine, craftily compressed lines."She writes (about a poem that refers to "kind kitchen-sink abortionists") - "outrageous at times and sometimes very angry at the world's injustices, his poetry is often sweet, though never saccharine" - and concludes that "Todd Swift's postmodernism artfully bridges the past and present millennia."

Comments

No need to defend bringing reviews of your books to your readers' notice, Todd, good or bad (reviews, that is, not readers). Plenty there to seek out, thanks.
leah fritz said…
Well, I got around to this a bit late, Todd. So much has happened of importance in a few days, and you've paid attention to all of it in Eyewear. But thank you for quoting from my humble review of Mainstream Love Hotel. Goodness, no need to be modest about your work! With the authors' and the magazines' permission, I published all the reviews of my own last collection on my website.
All good wishes,
Leah

Popular posts from this blog

CLIVE WILMER'S THOM GUNN SELECTED POEMS IS A MUST-READ

THAT HANDSOME MAN  A PERSONAL BRIEF REVIEW BY TODD SWIFT I could lie and claim Larkin, Yeats , or Dylan Thomas most excited me as a young poet, or even Pound or FT Prince - but the truth be told, it was Thom Gunn I first and most loved when I was young. Precisely, I fell in love with his first two collections, written under a formalist, Elizabethan ( Fulke Greville mainly), Yvor Winters triad of influences - uniquely fused with an interest in homerotica, pop culture ( Brando, Elvis , motorcycles). His best poem 'On The Move' is oddly presented here without the quote that began it usually - Man, you gotta go - which I loved. Gunn was - and remains - so thrilling, to me at least, because so odd. His elegance, poise, and intelligence is all about display, about surface - but the surface of a panther, who ripples with strength beneath the skin. With Gunn, you dressed to have sex. Or so I thought.  Because I was queer (I maintain the right to lay claim to that

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats , but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin 's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill , and Jorie Graham , are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell , smart poets? Or, Pound ?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views? Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se.  What do I mean by smart?

"I have crossed oceans of time to find you..."

In terms of great films about, and of, love, we have Vertigo, In The Mood for Love , and Casablanca , Doctor Zhivago , An Officer and a Gentleman , at the apex; as well as odder, more troubling versions, such as Sophie's Choice and  Silence of the Lambs .  I think my favourite remains Bram Stoker's Dracula , with the great immortal line "I have crossed oceans of time to find you...".