Unfortunately, it seems an addendum is necessary after looking over today's Poetics list digest. I hope I am mistaken in thinking that Ray Bianchi is charging me (I assume he means me, since it's my email that's attached to the end of his post) with "degrading" the conversation on the list through my critique of Andrew Loewen's post. I don't think that I "throw bombs" to end discussion; I thought Loewen threw a bomb and I was trying to jump on it, or something. I don't think it's at all fair for Ray to accuse me of simplistic charges of "racism, woman hating and alike." Last time I checked, this was a community of poets, people above all hypersensitive to language and its uses. I tried to provide a reading of Loewen's post--which I've expanded below--which explained my response to and criticism of it, not simply cry "racism" and "sexism" against someone I wanted to shut up.
I'm also disappointed with Loewen's subsequent post, which condescendingly suggests that those who criticized him just "don't know what to do with polyvocal expression." To which I guess I can only say, as I do below: writer, read thyself.
Well, here's a final twist: Andrew Loewen said he wanted to draw attention to the fact that white men claim a monopoly over complex writing, while women and minorities are consigned to the simplistic. Now, both he and Ray Bianchi claim to be readers who can appreciate complexity and subtlety, while those who have criticized Loewen's post--for the most part, women or minorities--are guilty of simplistic thinking and an inability to read well. Okay, Andrew: I guess you were right.