NEW ZEALAND TALENT

New Zealand Listener, Volume 13, Issue 315, 6 July 1945, Page 5

NEW ZEALAND TALENT

Sir,-By good luck I tuned into 3YA recently when Thomas E. West was giving a studio recital and thought him one of the nicest tenors I had heard. The NBS have recordings by Richard Tauber and Richard Crooks. Is there any reason why recordings should not be made of Mr. West’s singing (or any other New Zealander who qualifies) and used in recorded programmes? I think New Zealanders would appreciate our local talent more than some of the ime

ported.

"APPRECIATIVE LIST.

ENER

(Kaitawa Hvdro)

More letters from listeners will be found on page 14.

"LOTS OF POETRY"

More Letters From Listeners

To the Editor:

Sir.-Your footnote to my letter on the article, "Lots of Poetry,’ goes unerringly to the personal mark. But editorial pique need not blind you to the point raised. It should be clear that I was not protesting against a light hand with reviews — whether of poetry or political science-but against the insincerity of this particular review, i.e., the subordination of criticism to a certain journalistic effect. That, I suggest, is quite different from the conveying of criticism in a certain journalistic style. I would refer you to the passages in which the reviewer discusses himself, not the books, and the references to God. One of these latter might be taken to rule out all devotional poetry from Caedmon to Gerard Manley Hopkins, if the reviewer meant to be taken seriously upon what is, after all, quite commonly censidered a serious topic. I do not question but that this particular verse is bad. I do question both the sincerity and the taste of the comment. The result of it was (as my letter indicated) that the best part of a page went to such comment on verse which the writer clearly (and no doubt justly) despised, and the two or three poets he rated higher (no doubt correctly) received a little weary praise when he got tired of playing. All this roused me to the intemperate pitch of a personal tilt at your editorial policy, which is (I understand you to remind me) your own affair. At the same time, a reader may exercise his right to protest; in doing so, he may make the mistake of taking the editor too seriously, rather than himself. Perhaps there is something in the Wellington ‘climate that makes certain things seem amusing, as they do'not elsewhere, like the good hearty fun at clergy conferences. A little "solemn nonsense" now and then may do no harm. Do we see it? Or don’t we.

ALLEN

CURNOW

(Christchurch):

Sir-In a recent number "J.C.B." gave what purported to be a criticism of certain New Zealand verse, not long published, including my "Poems." I cannot quite understand why an editor should select a writer for such an office who admits at the outset that he never knows quite where he is with poetry, nor why the writer himself should approach with any hope of success a task which he openly admits is, in effect, a beastly bore. There was a time, -long ago, when literary criticism was frankly destructive and nothing more. Later schools at least profess to be intelligently interpretive. A critic who approaches his subject in a bad temper, faced with a veritable "load" of verse which he has somehow to struggle through, confessing that he has as little aptitude as inclination for the task, stands self-condemned. Let me tell him that I am proud to be pilloried with "Robin Hyde,’ Mr. Marris, and Mervyl Connolly. For though the daughter of the Honourable M._ J. Connolly is not mentioned by name, she is one of "the nest of singing birds": he approaches with his schoolboy shanghai. Yet no less a person than Walter de la

Mare praises the very poems of this young lady, which Mr. Marris includes in one of his little books of "Best Poems," and which "J.C.B." dismisses with contempt. It is qa little comforting, doubtless, to Miss Connolly, Mr. Marris, the shades of Robin Hyde and myself to remember that other critics in the little literary world of New Zealand, and beyond, do not share "J.C.B.’s" fits of petulance and exhibitionism. It is true that "J.C.B.’s" initials do resound a little, though rather hollowly, in certain select circles in this country, but many who differ diametrically with him in the matter at issue are at least equally respected for their scholarship and judgment. Which reminds me that I referred during the past Parliamentary session, with approval, to some verses of J.C.B.’s own. In the lobby afterwards a really scholarly colleague said to me, "The chap who wrote that tosh should have been drowned at birth." So perhaps J.C.B. and I are both wrong. I did at leact try to appreciate him. You will see,

a = Se, oe eee a. Sir. that I continue to do so-

-CLYDE

CARR

(House of Representatives).

Sir,-I have been reading poetry and literary criticism all my fairly long life. Allen Curnow having challenged your reviewer in silly fashion, I should like to say that the article "Lots of Poetry" delighted me. I know others‘ of similar tastes who felt the same. It had wit and wisdom, and that conjunction is much too rare to be stifled. To adapt Father O’F lynn, "Cannot the critics be Irishmen too?" I have read most of Iris Wilkinson’s poems and I found to my considerable satisfaction that your critic had clearly expressed opinions about her that had been floating vaguely in my mind. Let’s have plenty more of such criticism. Mr. Curnow cites The New Yorker. That ightly and astringent periodical is one of my favourites. Indeed I’m not happy if I don’t get it. But I have seen some darned silly literary criticism in it.

IAMBIC

(Wellington).