Recent posts here, there and elsewhere have returned me to an old question. So many of us (you know, poets and whatnot) seem to assume that poetry's evolution is driven (solely) by reactionary forces. I think this is a sad (and it could be argued violent, misogynistic, etc. etc.) way of looking at things. But why is it so hard to explore the evolution of poetics as one pushed by generative forces? Albeit sometimes these forces are reactionary, but they are also active, intertextual, engagements in dialogue, etc. etc.
My concern is the tendency to place things in opposition to each other. So I'm blogging out these thoughts before I catch the metro home. It seemed too long for a status update.
Also, I'm wondering what you out there might have to say. And what texts you've read which engage this question.
Also, CPR has a nice piece up about "standards" in poetry, which touches on the work of an editor, which nicely parallels some of what I was blabbing about a few posts ago.