Talk:Philip Larkin
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Good Job |
|---|---|
| "A good and fair account." — The Independent, 12 Feb. 2006 |
 |
This article was externally reviewed on February 12, 2006 by The Independent. "A good and fair account." |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
Contents |
[edit] External review by the Independent
"A good and fair account. It sounds approving of Larkin, which is nice, but it is overall a dispassionate account, as one would expect from a dictionary. The reference to Coventry as a 'provincial city in the English Midlands' is hilarious, but probably necessary for American readers. The piece does not sound that American overall. The reference to Larkin's personal life, 'He never married, preferring to share his life with a number of women - Monica Jones, Maeve Brennan and Betty Mackereth' implies a settledness to the relationships. Larkin did not quite share his life, but that is a matter of interpretation. The way Larkin's reputation is described after Philip Larkin: A Writer's Life was published [by Motion] is fair. There was a huge rumpus when the book came out, but the reputation of the books has survived undimmed. People are canny about separating life and work. It notes Martin Amis's dismissal of the revelations - I disagree with Amis, not with Wiki. Technically, Wikipedia should refer to 'Larkin's literary executor, Anthony Thwaite' as 'one of Larkin's literary executors'. Though I can see there is an opportunity to whitewash with Wikipedia, the few times I have used it, I have been impressed with it." - Andrew Motion, Poet Laureate
A bit fawning, yes?
- Yes: I've rounded it out a bit to give it a little shade & depth. -- I haven't got the Motion bio handy to check but my recollection is that the reasons for Larkin's turning down the poet-laureate job is because he already was seriously ill. It was a bitter disappointment. --NDorward
He moved from prose to poetry?? His collected works include (excellent) poetry going back to his school days. Deleting that strange comment.--Samuel J. Howard 03:10, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
Oooh...reading through the page, it is disaproving of his right-wingedness. For instancce, the poem "Homage to a Government" is discounted on that basis. I plan on editing for POV, but will wait a few days for comments.--Samuel J. Howard 03:16, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
The removal of the comment re: his career as a novelist is fine, as it's misleading, though actually Larkin did intend to be a novelist; the choice of poetry as a vocation came late, once the novels dried up, though he'd certainly been writing verse assiduously from his teens. -- The comment about "Homage to a Government" isn't about its politics but about the acridness of tone in Larkin's later career. --N
- Acrid?! 'Unclosing like a hand/You give forever' (Solar)? 'Begin afresh, afresh, afresh' (The Trees)? Not to mention The Explosion, Money ('intensely sad', not acrid). I am curious where this judgement came from. Doubly curious because poetry that was 'acrid' would not be poetry nor like a Larkin collection (least of all High Windows). The prevailing sensation seems to be one of sadness, pain or fear, often shot through with beauty or redemption, with only a few poems that at first sight might show a startling lack of sentiment. Even these (The Old Fools, This Be The Verse) are not simply bilious. --Waring 12:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] High Windows: Acrid Self-Parody?
I see someone deleted the attempt to give both sides of the critical debate on High Windows. Any objections to my reverting to the previous version? Considering that the Independent just a few days ago called the earlier version of the page "A good and fair account" it seems perverse to delete one of the attempts at balance. ND 16:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- I hadn't noticed this before your recent edit. I agree that balance is important, however I tend to think "acrid self-parody" is a little strong and does smack somewhat of POV-pushing; I think that saying "falling off" is sufficient, and we should probably find a source and put a footnote in. — Stumps 08:25, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- One source for the opinion would be Swarbrick's Out of Reach, though I haven't got a copy handy to pull a quote. ND 06:02, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- I've — for now — removed 'acrid self-parody' and added a footnote to Swarbrick. I'd be happy to see stronger language used to illustrate critical perceptions of High Windows, but would prefer to find something we could quote. I don't have Swarbrick's book around at the moment. Does anyone? — Stumps 07:58, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- I think that it's fine with the milder "falling-off" & the general cite of Swarbrick's book rather than a direct quote, actually. ND 05:07, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Garth Farm
I have removed the nonsense about playing squash, Lily Savage and Garth Farm. Mae hi'n amlwg mai coc oen o ffarmwr ydi Guto Jones.
[edit] More please?
This article is, I believe, scandalously thin for someone of Larkin's importance and stature
- Well, go right ahead & add to it--that's what Wikipedia's about. ND 02:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I blame that Andrew Motion. Couldn't he have improved the article a bit while he was here? Csrster 06:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
