<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS &#187; Literary Criticism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://nigelbeale.com/category/literary-criticism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://nigelbeale.com</link>
	<description>Musings on the Book, Literature, Poetry, Literary Criticism, Collecting, Media, Life and the Arts, and Audio Interviews from The Biblio File radio program pertaining to same by a writer, broadcaster, bibliophile.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2252 05:18:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Volleys about David Foster Wallace</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/26/volleys-about-david-foster-wallace/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/26/volleys-about-david-foster-wallace/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 17:46:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david  foster wallace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dostoevsky]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dreiser]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[madox ford]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[suicide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the idiot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wyatt mason]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=6978</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In his recent piece on David Foster Wallace in the New York Review of Books, Wyatt Mason sets up Ford Madox Ford&#8217;s:
 I have, I am aware, told this story in a very rambling  way so that it may be difficult for anyone to find their path through  what may be a sort [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/26/volleys-about-david-foster-wallace/">Volleys about David Foster Wallace</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/26/volleys-about-david-foster-wallace/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reviewers versus Literary Critics, revisited</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/19/reviewers-versus-literary-critics-revisited/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/19/reviewers-versus-literary-critics-revisited/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 15:41:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[academics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andre alexis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book reviewing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[James Wood]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=6889</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The recent contretemps brought on by Andre Alexis&#8217;s piece on the state of Canada&#8217;s critical culture (Walrus magazine here), has, I&#8217;d say, much to do with his conjoining the roles of journalist/reviewing and academic/ literary criticism, and incongruously criticizing the former for not practicing the latter. 

&#160;
As Zach Wells puts it in his considered albeit [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/19/reviewers-versus-literary-critics-revisited/">Reviewers versus Literary Critics, revisited</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/19/reviewers-versus-literary-critics-revisited/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Praise, Blurbs and Randall Jarrell&#8217;s White Blackbirds</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/15/praise-blurbs-and-randall-jarrells-white-blackbirds/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/15/praise-blurbs-and-randall-jarrells-white-blackbirds/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 18:36:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blurbs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[laura miller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[randall jarrell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[salon.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the guardian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[white blackbirds]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=6856</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ 
I know, it&#8217;s a crow.
Recent whirligigging over at The Guardian and at Salon.com about blurbs and hyperbolic praise reminds me again of how antithetical capitalism is to honest criticism; also of how raised expectations necessarily lead to disappointment, to ebay bidder letdown. It&#160; magnifies too, the truth that most of what is written, regardless [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/15/praise-blurbs-and-randall-jarrells-white-blackbirds/">Praise, Blurbs and Randall Jarrell&#8217;s White Blackbirds</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/15/praise-blurbs-and-randall-jarrells-white-blackbirds/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spit and Polish in latest CNQ</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/15/spit-and-polish-in-latest-cnq/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/15/spit-and-polish-in-latest-cnq/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:05:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alice munro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cnq]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[giller prize]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Linden MacIntryre]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[magazine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mordecai Richler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ryan bigge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[turner prize]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vincent Lam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zadie smith]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=6837</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
The latest issue of the newly re-designed CNQ magazine contains a good piece by Ryan Bigge in which, when he isn&#8217;t carpet bombing the 2009 Giller Prize shortlist,&#160; he presents two interesting ideas: one, borrowing from Zadie Smith, that authors mistakenly trust professional editors, and are better off recruiting the heads of &#8217;smart strangers,&#8217; to [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/15/spit-and-polish-in-latest-cnq/">Spit and Polish in latest CNQ</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/15/spit-and-polish-in-latest-cnq/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Top Ten Mysteries, 18th and 20th Century Books</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/10/top-ten-mysteries-18th-and-20th-century-books/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/10/top-ten-mysteries-18th-and-20th-century-books/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jul 2010 00:29:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e. mcknight kauffer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[top ten books]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=6798</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Image from here.&#160; designer: e. mcknight kauffer
Good to see The Top Ten Book Blog back in action. Here&#8217;s their Top Ten Books of the 20th Century
1. Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov (1955).
&#8220;Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul.&#8221; So begins the Russian master&#8217;s infamous novel about Humbert Humbert,
2. The Great [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/10/top-ten-mysteries-18th-and-20th-century-books/">Top Ten Mysteries, 18th and 20th Century Books</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/10/top-ten-mysteries-18th-and-20th-century-books/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Northrop Frye&#8217;s Tangled Garden of Criticism</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/09/6789/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/09/6789/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 14:43:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andre alexis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canadian literature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evaluative criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[literary history of canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[northrop frye]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the long decline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[walrus]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/09/6789/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
And here I thought Marshall McLuhan had the &#8216;market cornered&#8217; on brilliant, obtuse, maddeningly self-contradictory Canadian prose.
Northrop Frye&#8217;s conclusion to Literary History of Canada&#160; (U of T Press, 1965) is every bit of this. &#34;The book&#34;, he writes, at its end, &#34;is a tribute to the maturity of Canadian literary scholarship and criticism, whatever one [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/09/6789/">Northrop Frye&#8217;s Tangled Garden of Criticism</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/07/09/6789/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Community&#8217; or &#8216;Creepy form of Collusion&#8217;?</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/06/25/community-or-creepy-form-of-collusion/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/06/25/community-or-creepy-form-of-collusion/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 13:54:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[a lover's quarrel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andre alexis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book reviewing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[carmine starnino]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=6671</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
Contrast what Andre Alexis says of &#8216;community&#8217; and the importance of understanding the necessity and logic of creation, and in this &#34;what is best about theory: the brief &#8212; inevitably brief, because every generation has to renovate the language and idea of criticism &#8212; sense that literature is one of the most startling things we [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2010/06/25/community-or-creepy-form-of-collusion/">&#8216;Community&#8217; or &#8216;Creepy form of Collusion&#8217;?</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/06/25/community-or-creepy-form-of-collusion/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The &#8216;woefully incompetent&#8217; and &#8216;pugnacious&#8217; André Alexis</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/06/16/the-woefully-incompetent-and-pugnacious-andre-alexis/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/06/16/the-woefully-incompetent-and-pugnacious-andre-alexis/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:04:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andre alexis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[carmine starnino]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dan smith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david  foster wallace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david solway]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david staines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[James Wood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[john metcalf]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[leah maclaren]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[philip marchand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ryan bigge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[toronto star]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=6634</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
As is often the case, I regret not being able to spend more time on this &#8211; unfortunate as it may be, I must work elsewhere in order to keep myself swaddled in the lifestyle luxuries I&#8217;ve become accustomed to wearing &#8211; still:
Save for the fact that his arguments are so flabby, ill-considered and peevish, [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2010/06/16/the-woefully-incompetent-and-pugnacious-andre-alexis/">The &#8216;woefully incompetent&#8217; and &#8216;pugnacious&#8217; André Alexis</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/06/16/the-woefully-incompetent-and-pugnacious-andre-alexis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Describing your favourite book</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/06/10/describing-your-favourite-book/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/06/10/describing-your-favourite-book/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 23:55:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[describing books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[favourite books]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=6596</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here are some of the words used by people who called in to CBC Radio&#8217;s Cross Country Check Up program last weekend to recommend their favourite books:
&#34;Sympathetic, simple, sticks in the mind, resonated with me, honest/funny, evocative, an honest report, closely observed, ambitious, offers a different perspective/world view&#34;
&#160;



&#160;
Describing your favourite book is a post from: [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2010/06/10/describing-your-favourite-book/">Describing your favourite book</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/06/10/describing-your-favourite-book/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s Wrong with a little bloodsport?</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/04/30/whats-wrong-with-a-little-bloodsport/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/04/30/whats-wrong-with-a-little-bloodsport/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2010 15:59:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[christopher hitchens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new statesman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terry Eagleton]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=6305</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160;
&#160;Terry Eagleton in the New Statesman on Christopher Hitchens (via readysteadybook):

I just turned down the offer of a public debate with him in the States. I&#8217;ve said what I want to say, and we wouldn&#8217;t have got anywhere &#8211; it would only have been a sort of bloodsport.
Even then, Christopher was mesmerised by the idea [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2010/04/30/whats-wrong-with-a-little-bloodsport/">What&#8217;s Wrong with a little bloodsport?</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/04/30/whats-wrong-with-a-little-bloodsport/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Audio Interview with Poet/Critic Carmine Starnino: On Canadian Poems and Poets Good and Bad.</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/04/14/audio-interview-with-poetcritic-carmine-starnino-on-canadian-poems-and-poets-good-and-bad/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/04/14/audio-interview-with-poetcritic-carmine-starnino-on-canadian-poems-and-poets-good-and-bad/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:35:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AUDIO: Poets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canadian poetry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[carmine starnino]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david solway]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eric ormsby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evaluative criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jan zwicky]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reviewing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=6189</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Photo: Gaspereau Press.
&#34;Good reviewing,&#34; writes Carmine Starnino in the not-to-be-missed introduction to his A Lover&#8217;s Quarrel Essays and Reviews, &#34;- reviewing that believes in literary failure &#8211; is invaluable because by calling one poem good and another less good, and adducing clear reasons for those claims, it offers one writerly interpretation of a particular achievement, [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2010/04/14/audio-interview-with-poetcritic-carmine-starnino-on-canadian-poems-and-poets-good-and-bad/">Audio Interview with Poet/Critic Carmine Starnino: On Canadian Poems and Poets Good and Bad.</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2010/04/14/audio-interview-with-poetcritic-carmine-starnino-on-canadian-poems-and-poets-good-and-bad/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="http://media.libsyn.com/media/nigelbeale/Carmine_Starnino_800306_01.mp3" length="7861392" type="audio/mpeg" />
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>This Essay changed my mind about Zadie Smith</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/23/this-essay-changed-my-mind-about-zadie-smith/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/23/this-essay-changed-my-mind-about-zadie-smith/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:02:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[black literature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[changing minds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[changing my mind]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[essays]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[their eyes were watching god]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zadie smith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zora neale hurston]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=5189</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[

Zadie Smith has just come out with a new collection of &#8216;occasional&#8217; essays entitled Changing My Mind. (Penguin, 2009). The first, &#8216;Their Eyes were Watching God: What does soulful mean?&#8217; changed my mind about her.Very much for the better. Not so much because it represents an admission, but because first it&#8217;s an extremely well written, [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/23/this-essay-changed-my-mind-about-zadie-smith/">This Essay changed my mind about Zadie Smith</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/23/this-essay-changed-my-mind-about-zadie-smith/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Best&#8217; always comes with a question mark</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/20/best-always-comes-with-a-question-mark/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/20/best-always-comes-with-a-question-mark/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 13:07:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[best]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[best of lists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evaluative criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[top ten lists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[top ten literary lists]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=5165</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s D.G. Myers on the usefulness of lists:
My own view of statements about the &#8220;best&#8221; or &#8220;worst ever&#8221; is that they are interrogative challenges. The claims come with understood questions attached at the end: 
Lolita is the greatest English-language novel written since 1880, [isn&#8217;t it? What else is, then?]&#8221;

&#160;
&#8216;Best&#8217; always comes with a question mark [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/20/best-always-comes-with-a-question-mark/">&#8216;Best&#8217; always comes with a question mark</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/20/best-always-comes-with-a-question-mark/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Enough interesting things and serious engagement to make it worth reading</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/13/enough-interesting-things-and-serious-engagement-to-make-it-worth-reading/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/13/enough-interesting-things-and-serious-engagement-to-make-it-worth-reading/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:22:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canadian poetry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poetry criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poetry reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert pinsky]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zach wells]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=5121</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Good exchange in the comments section over at Alone on a Boreal Stage, led by Zach &#8216;Hawkweed&#8217; Wells, who first off quotes American poet Robert Pinsky

&#34;I think that if an audience for any art is having a good time, they are willing to suspend the need for comprehension for a while&#8212;that&#8217;s part of the pleasure. [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/13/enough-interesting-things-and-serious-engagement-to-make-it-worth-reading/">Enough interesting things and serious engagement to make it worth reading</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/13/enough-interesting-things-and-serious-engagement-to-make-it-worth-reading/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Vendler on the Critics&#8217; answering look</title>
		<link>http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/12/vendler-on-critics/</link>
		<comments>http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/12/vendler-on-critics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:53:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Beale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Literary Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[helen vendler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poetry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wallace stevens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nigelbeale.com/?p=5113</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#34;The senses and the imagination furnish rhythms for the poet. The rhythms of the poet translate themselves back, in the mind of the reader, into the senses and the imagination. What is it about the critic that cannot rest content with this silent transaction? Most of the time the critic is just another reader, and [...]<p><a href="http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/12/vendler-on-critics/">Vendler on the Critics&#8217; answering look</a> is a post from: <a href="http://nigelbeale.com">NIGEL BEALE NOTA BENE BOOKS</a></p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nigelbeale.com/2009/11/12/vendler-on-critics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
