Poetry Books
The Best American Poetry 2002 (Best American Poetry)
RRP: $16.00
Our Price: $16.00
You Save: $ ( % )
Usually ships in 24 hours
Manufacturer: Scribner
Author: Robert Creeley
Publisher: Scribner
Average Customer Rating:
Our Price: $16.00
You Save: $ ( % )
Usually ships in 24 hours
Manufacturer: Scribner
Author: Robert Creeley
Publisher: Scribner
Average Customer Rating:
Experimental feature: Order The Best American Poetry 2002 (Best American Poetry) from the UK, Canada, Germany or France by clicking an appropriate flag below.
Some items available at Amazon.com are not available in all countries.
Some items available at Amazon.com are not available in all countries.
The Best American Poetry 2002 (Best American Poetry) Description
Binding: Paperback
Dewey Decimal Number: 808
EAN: 9780743203869
ISBN: 0743203860
Label: Scribner
Manufacturer: Scribner
Number Of Items: 1
Book Pages: 256
Publication Date: 2002-09-17
Publisher: Scribner
Studio: Scribner
Dewey Decimal Number: 808
EAN: 9780743203869
ISBN: 0743203860
Label: Scribner
Manufacturer: Scribner
Number Of Items: 1
Book Pages: 256
Publication Date: 2002-09-17
Publisher: Scribner
Studio: Scribner
Editorial Review of The Best American Poetry 2002 (Best American Poetry)
Since its inception in 1988, The Best American Poetry series has achieved brand-name status in the literary world as the preeminent showcase of each year's most important contributions to American poetry. This year's exceptional volume, edited by Robert Creeley, a figure revered across teh wide spectrum of American poetry, features a diverse mix of established masters, rising stars and the leading lights of a younger generation. The pleasure of the poems selected here, Creeley explains in his introduction, is "that they caught my fancy, some almost outrageously, some by their quiet, nearly diffident manner, some by unexpected turns of thought or insight, others by a confident authority and intent." With comments from the poets elucidating their work, a thought-provoking introduction from Creeley, and Lehman's always popular foreword assessing the current state of poetry, The Best American Poetry 2002 will prove as irresistible to new readers as it is indispensable for poetry fans everywhere.
Customer Reviews of The Best American Poetry 2002 (Best American Poetry)
Customer Rating:
Review Summary: Never mind the bollocks, buy this book!
Review: For many years, I have been taking the Best American Poetry books down from the shelf at the local bookstore for a peek, but I never felt compelled to buy one until I read the 2002 version selected by Robert Creeley. I've always had more respect than affection for Creeley, finding it hard to get into his stuff, but I loved the synergy (Marketing stole this word from the Greeks--I'm stealing it back) produced by the juxtaposition of devil-may-care experimentation with the best of more traditional, "mainstream" offerings in this volume. My favorite examples of these divergent impulses here are Jenny Boully's "The Body," a poem in the form of footnotes to blank pages (this poem has been ridiculed in other reviews found here, but I find it daring and exhilirating--in fact, I wish I had thought of it first) and Donald Hall's "Affirmation," an astonishingly straightforward and devastating poem that is one of my favorites from his body of work and one that should warm (freeze?) the heart of the most esthetically conservative reader.
Even though I received a B.A. in English with a focus on creative writing ten years ago, I have only recently begun to understand the struggle between those who would keep poetry at a place it never was (the "School of Quietude" in Ron Silliman's terms--you MUST read his blog, it's good whether you agree or not, just as long as you care about poetry) and those who want poetry to continue to evolve (not "improve"), no matter what unexpected and scary turns it may take (what Mr Silliman calls, in our time, the "post-avant"). This book seems to have frightened most of the reviewers who felt compelled to contribute their opinions here, which frightened state they express as distaste. Just know that the most innovative and forward poetry that has lasted was seen in its time as "eccentric" or "inaccessible" or "repugnant" or "unreadable" or "incomprehensible," ad nauseam, from Euripides to T.S. Eliot, who, despite of his conversion to stultifying artistic conservatism and his weird adoption by "the Establishment" (and weirder disinheritance by "the anti-Establishment"), told us, if I remember correctly, that meaning should not be sought when first reading poetry that is new to us, but rather an understanding of the qualities of language the poet is presenting to us.
[This may be a complete misrepresentation of Eliot; I'm sorry I don't remember where I read his statement about reading for meaning. Anyway, people who hate this book will respond that there is no quality to the language here, the good old days were the best, blah blah blah etc etc, but this is as good a place as any to end this review.]
Customer Rating:
Review Summary: Unfortunately
Review: Few of the poems in this collection struck fire in me, a smaller percentage than earlier volumes in the series.
Customer Rating:
Review Summary: By far the worst of the series
Review: I have never been a fan of Creeley's work ("For Love" is honestly one of the worst poetry books I ever wasted a yard sale dollar on), but I still expected better from his BAP selections, which are totally lacking in flavor. Creeley tries to convert readers to his surrealist style, rife with inaccessible, abstract dream-language, most of which here is narcissistic, utterly incoherent, and reads like the journal ramblings of a Goth teenager. Someone who does not like poetry would not change his/her mind after reading BAP 2002, and that is exactly why I find this collection repugnant. As a poet myself, I have an open mind, experiment with nontraditional modes of writing, and enjoy the surrealist and renegade edge of many contemporary writers. But this edition was useless, both as enjoyable reading and as writing inspiration. 90% of the poems are meaningless, flat, and unfulfilling. Additionally, they were culled almost exclusively from the internet and unheard-of publications. I strongly support small presses and am always eager to sample new publications, but to ignore more established journals which consistently produce quality work feels disrespectful somehow. To be fair, there are a few bright spots in this edition--the poems by Broughton, Burkard, Chapman, Cooley, di Prima, Equi, Friedlander, Gizzi, Goldbarth, Hall, Kumin, Merwin, Myles, Metres, Olds, Sadoff, Warsh, Wier and Wright are worth a second read. But an anthology such as this shouldn't be assessed on the quality of each individual poem, rather on the tone and texture of the whole. The "picture" that BAP 2002 paints is a painful, wasteful, headache-inducing one. Creeley himself says in the introduction, "These poems are better than the best, each and every one of them. If you don't agree, then go find your own." Please, please take his advice.
Customer Rating:
Review Summary: An Unsurprising Disappointment
Review: Reader take note: if you are curious about contemporary poetry and are looking for an interesting place to start, this anthology is not for you. Try 2001 or 2003. Skip 2002. One of the interesting things about this series is discovering the guest editor, always a notable contemporary poet, as reader of contemporary poetry. What exactly was Robert Creeley thinking? Most of the poems in this volume are emminently forgettable; others unreadable. I enjoy reading this anthology every year, but in this case it was a real struggle.
Customer Rating:
Review Summary: People can get so hostile
Review: Maybe too many aspiring poets hold inclusion in "The Best American Poetry" as being the pinnacle of having "arrived." This reasoning makes for a lot of frustrated poets, who feel as if their work is more deserving, which in turn makes for negative reviews. There are a lot of talented writers in this volume, writers whose work might have been overlooked or lost on readers, because so many poets don't turn to literary journals--they turn to this anthology to see who's who. I'm sure that younger poets (and very talented poets) such as Sarah Manguso and Jenny Boully benefited from this anthology because their work suddenly found hundreds of new readers. Of course, there is also bad, very bad poetry in this collection. However, I'm willing to take the good with the bad if it means having a yearly summary of the current poetry scene.
Review Summary: Never mind the bollocks, buy this book!
Review: For many years, I have been taking the Best American Poetry books down from the shelf at the local bookstore for a peek, but I never felt compelled to buy one until I read the 2002 version selected by Robert Creeley. I've always had more respect than affection for Creeley, finding it hard to get into his stuff, but I loved the synergy (Marketing stole this word from the Greeks--I'm stealing it back) produced by the juxtaposition of devil-may-care experimentation with the best of more traditional, "mainstream" offerings in this volume. My favorite examples of these divergent impulses here are Jenny Boully's "The Body," a poem in the form of footnotes to blank pages (this poem has been ridiculed in other reviews found here, but I find it daring and exhilirating--in fact, I wish I had thought of it first) and Donald Hall's "Affirmation," an astonishingly straightforward and devastating poem that is one of my favorites from his body of work and one that should warm (freeze?) the heart of the most esthetically conservative reader.
Even though I received a B.A. in English with a focus on creative writing ten years ago, I have only recently begun to understand the struggle between those who would keep poetry at a place it never was (the "School of Quietude" in Ron Silliman's terms--you MUST read his blog, it's good whether you agree or not, just as long as you care about poetry) and those who want poetry to continue to evolve (not "improve"), no matter what unexpected and scary turns it may take (what Mr Silliman calls, in our time, the "post-avant"). This book seems to have frightened most of the reviewers who felt compelled to contribute their opinions here, which frightened state they express as distaste. Just know that the most innovative and forward poetry that has lasted was seen in its time as "eccentric" or "inaccessible" or "repugnant" or "unreadable" or "incomprehensible," ad nauseam, from Euripides to T.S. Eliot, who, despite of his conversion to stultifying artistic conservatism and his weird adoption by "the Establishment" (and weirder disinheritance by "the anti-Establishment"), told us, if I remember correctly, that meaning should not be sought when first reading poetry that is new to us, but rather an understanding of the qualities of language the poet is presenting to us.
[This may be a complete misrepresentation of Eliot; I'm sorry I don't remember where I read his statement about reading for meaning. Anyway, people who hate this book will respond that there is no quality to the language here, the good old days were the best, blah blah blah etc etc, but this is as good a place as any to end this review.]
Customer Rating:
Review Summary: Unfortunately
Review: Few of the poems in this collection struck fire in me, a smaller percentage than earlier volumes in the series.
Customer Rating:
Review Summary: By far the worst of the series
Review: I have never been a fan of Creeley's work ("For Love" is honestly one of the worst poetry books I ever wasted a yard sale dollar on), but I still expected better from his BAP selections, which are totally lacking in flavor. Creeley tries to convert readers to his surrealist style, rife with inaccessible, abstract dream-language, most of which here is narcissistic, utterly incoherent, and reads like the journal ramblings of a Goth teenager. Someone who does not like poetry would not change his/her mind after reading BAP 2002, and that is exactly why I find this collection repugnant. As a poet myself, I have an open mind, experiment with nontraditional modes of writing, and enjoy the surrealist and renegade edge of many contemporary writers. But this edition was useless, both as enjoyable reading and as writing inspiration. 90% of the poems are meaningless, flat, and unfulfilling. Additionally, they were culled almost exclusively from the internet and unheard-of publications. I strongly support small presses and am always eager to sample new publications, but to ignore more established journals which consistently produce quality work feels disrespectful somehow. To be fair, there are a few bright spots in this edition--the poems by Broughton, Burkard, Chapman, Cooley, di Prima, Equi, Friedlander, Gizzi, Goldbarth, Hall, Kumin, Merwin, Myles, Metres, Olds, Sadoff, Warsh, Wier and Wright are worth a second read. But an anthology such as this shouldn't be assessed on the quality of each individual poem, rather on the tone and texture of the whole. The "picture" that BAP 2002 paints is a painful, wasteful, headache-inducing one. Creeley himself says in the introduction, "These poems are better than the best, each and every one of them. If you don't agree, then go find your own." Please, please take his advice.
Customer Rating:
Review Summary: An Unsurprising Disappointment
Review: Reader take note: if you are curious about contemporary poetry and are looking for an interesting place to start, this anthology is not for you. Try 2001 or 2003. Skip 2002. One of the interesting things about this series is discovering the guest editor, always a notable contemporary poet, as reader of contemporary poetry. What exactly was Robert Creeley thinking? Most of the poems in this volume are emminently forgettable; others unreadable. I enjoy reading this anthology every year, but in this case it was a real struggle.
Customer Rating:
Review Summary: People can get so hostile
Review: Maybe too many aspiring poets hold inclusion in "The Best American Poetry" as being the pinnacle of having "arrived." This reasoning makes for a lot of frustrated poets, who feel as if their work is more deserving, which in turn makes for negative reviews. There are a lot of talented writers in this volume, writers whose work might have been overlooked or lost on readers, because so many poets don't turn to literary journals--they turn to this anthology to see who's who. I'm sure that younger poets (and very talented poets) such as Sarah Manguso and Jenny Boully benefited from this anthology because their work suddenly found hundreds of new readers. Of course, there is also bad, very bad poetry in this collection. However, I'm willing to take the good with the bad if it means having a yearly summary of the current poetry scene.