The Secret Life of Poems Tom Paulin
The Secret Life of Poems Tom Paulin Faber & Faber, 256pp, £17.99
In this book Tom Paulin, the noted Belfast poet (I once met Tom Paulin at the John Hewitt Summer School, a wee man slumped forward and wondered if he was searching for the largactyl - anti-psychotic medicant) writes about some of the poems he loves. His approach is basically lit critical, intense attention to the text, cutting out issues of theory, (such as how the critic came upon the 30 or so poems mentioned and why not some others, even some poems by women, black people (although there are plenty of poems by the mad)). Paulin is essentially a text based critic but adds tantalising details of context of the poems that are often compelling reading. John Keats read Edmund Spencer but didn't agree with him about Ireland. Milton is summarised briefly and brilliantly as is Coleridge, clearly two poets that Paulin admires. Later he seems to get it wrong. By analysing the poems of Paul Muldoon or Craig Raine, for instance, a pair of okay names but not seemingly now writing anything that might be called poetry. But then neither is Paulin.
Paulin's talent is for close textual readings. But it doesn't seem that he often questions why or wherefore he includes one writer at the expense of another one, except that everyone is supposed to agree that they ought to be part of the canon. (as if some unperceived coughing fit might grip Paulin if anyone had the wherewithal to challenge his perceptions. They are challengable, of course.) I also wondered why Paulin was working on this text book rather than on another book of poems, for it all seems rather A-level syllabish. A bit of a waste of his talents, writing a book for those who are now sitting exams.
Paul Murphy
In this book Tom Paulin, the noted Belfast poet (I once met Tom Paulin at the John Hewitt Summer School, a wee man slumped forward and wondered if he was searching for the largactyl - anti-psychotic medicant) writes about some of the poems he loves. His approach is basically lit critical, intense attention to the text, cutting out issues of theory, (such as how the critic came upon the 30 or so poems mentioned and why not some others, even some poems by women, black people (although there are plenty of poems by the mad)). Paulin is essentially a text based critic but adds tantalising details of context of the poems that are often compelling reading. John Keats read Edmund Spencer but didn't agree with him about Ireland. Milton is summarised briefly and brilliantly as is Coleridge, clearly two poets that Paulin admires. Later he seems to get it wrong. By analysing the poems of Paul Muldoon or Craig Raine, for instance, a pair of okay names but not seemingly now writing anything that might be called poetry. But then neither is Paulin.
Paulin's talent is for close textual readings. But it doesn't seem that he often questions why or wherefore he includes one writer at the expense of another one, except that everyone is supposed to agree that they ought to be part of the canon. (as if some unperceived coughing fit might grip Paulin if anyone had the wherewithal to challenge his perceptions. They are challengable, of course.) I also wondered why Paulin was working on this text book rather than on another book of poems, for it all seems rather A-level syllabish. A bit of a waste of his talents, writing a book for those who are now sitting exams.
Paul Murphy
posted by Paul Murphy at
April 13, 2008
0 Comments
