In 1988, at the age of fifty, Diana Wakoski selected the poems in "Emerald Ice from her first sixteen books of poetry. Here, returned to print at last, are all the famous (and infamous) lyrics, series, 'and narratives that established Wakoski as a mythologizer of sex and self, a fierce free-verse imagist, and "one of the most important and controversial poets in the UnitedIn 1988, at the age of fifty, Diana Wakoski selected the poems in "Emerald Ice from her first sixteen books of poetry. Here, returned to print at last, are all the famous (and infamous) lyrics, series, 'and narratives that established Wakoski as a mythologizer of sex and self, a fierce free-verse imagist, and "one of the most important and controversial poets in the United States today" "(Contemporary Poets). About these poems, Wakoski writes: "My themes are loss, justice, truth, transformation, the duality of the world, the possibilities of magic, and the creation of beauty out of ugliness. My language is dramatic, oral, and as American as I can make it. I am impatient with stupidity, bureaucracy, and organizations. Poetry, for me, is the supreme art of the individual using language to show how special, different, and wonderful his perceptions are. With verve and finesse. With discursive precision. Arid with utter contempt for pettiness of imagination or spirit. ""Emerald Ice is a contemporary classics the essential poems of a uniquely American female sensibility....
|Title||:||Emerald Ice: Selected Poems, 1962-1987|
|Number of Pages||:||343 Pages|
|Status||:||Available For Download|
|Last checked||:||21 Minutes ago!|
Emerald Ice: Selected Poems, 1962-1987 Reviews
Really genius poetry that sparkles, just like ice. It's like drinking art.
all she can do is continue to amaze me
Per the norm for me, Wakoski starts out fairly interesting, then her poems begin to devolve into pure language poetry, a form I do not really care for. I would prefer to read poetry that is a bit more easy to decipher, I don't mind fresh, interesting metaphors and similes, but if the entire language of the poem is what I term: "too inner" I begin to think the poet is grasping, and most definitely simply putting words together to sound clever. I will admit there are some language poets I respect and do read, Wakoski has never been one for me. The more I read, the more I felt as if she were attempting to sound like Plath, but came up pale in comparison. I began to read Wakoski in undergrad poetry workshop, because my professor commented that my poetry reminded him of her, and he advised that I read some of her work. I have tried several times over the years, but invariably lose interest. She does indeed have some lovely work, but ironically enough, I feel her poems are a great deal like mine, several jewels amongst mediocre/middling good works.
Not really a poetry reader, but despite the crazieness, I found Wakoski fun to read.
A strong collection of oft confessional poetry, but never veering off into Sexton/Plath pathology