Norton Anthology of Modern Poetry

Rating:
Summary: Good single source for modern poetry, but poorly edited.
Review: Having been weaned as an English major on the Norton Anthology of English Literature, vol.'s 1 & 2, (Abrams), I expected this anthology to lead me through modern poetry with the same sure hand as the previous Norton anthologies had. At first glance, this tome would appear to be superbly equipped to do just that; containing an overwhelming 1580 poems, at over 1800 pages, spanning a time period from Whitman (b. 1819) to Cathy Song (b. 1955), and featuring scores of poets I have never even heard of, it offers, if nothing else, the convenience of finding in one place a huge variety and depth of modern poetry.

I do not fault the poetry itself (though they harbor a healthy number of typographical errors). It is in the editing that this book falls down. The Abrams editions I knew and trusted in college embodied a severe utilitarian scholarliness; no superfluity or self-indulgence is to be found anywhere within their thousands and thousands of pages. The introductions and footnotes are above all useful and necessary.

Not so with Ellmann's tome. The introductions all too often are marred by verbosity, self-indulgence, impressionism, a distinct paucity of hard data, of biographical and historical fact, and, worst of all, offer no real insight into the poems at hand as much as distract from them. In too many instances the commentary contains more words than the work commented upon, which makes one suspicious that the academics who wrote them were trying to steal the show, were in fact, er, full of themselves.

The contrast in treatment between poets included previously in Abrams's Anthology of English Literature and those found only in this one is telling. The former benefit from conciseness and informativeness obviously borrowed, often actually word for word, from the Abrams volumes. The latter fare much worse. In other words, this work does a much better job of treading well-worn paths than striking out on its own into new territory.

I fault the font used, as well. It is too small and makes for eye strain. There is more empty space on the pages than print, again in contrast to the Anthology of English Lit. I suspect this may be the result of the aseptic minimalism of modernism, which often strikes me as a transmuted death wish, a wish to disappear. The chatter of the contributing editors,however, where this modern asceticism might have produced happier results, seems immune.

Rating:
Summary: On a more positive note...
Review: I admit that this anthology has faults. Another reviewer did a thorough job of cataloguing them. That said, though, this is still an excellent volume of modern poetry. The editors did an excellent job determining which poets and poems to include. I would recommend this volume to anyone interested in modern poetry. I would also recommend it to those who dislike modern poetry, as they would probably find themselves unable to continue disliking it after having read this volume.

Also, I think that the flaws of the second edition will most likely be remedied in the third edition. I look forward to that edition's publication next year.

Rating:
Summary: An Acceptable Anthology
Review: I'm not a literary scholar so I'm not going to comment on the selection of poetry or the quality of the introductions to poets. What I can say is that there are a ton of poets, introductions to each poet, and helpful footnotes for the poetry. The anthology appropriately reaches as far back as Walt Whitman.

Rating:
Summary: An Acceptable Anthology
Review: I'm not a literary scholar so I'm not going to comment on the selection of poetry or the quality of the introductions to poets. What I can say is that there are a ton of poets, introductions to each poet, and helpful footnotes for the poetry. The anthology appropriately reaches as far back as Walt Whitman.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent Anthology, Excellent Intros...
Review: If you access the reviews of this work at this site,
then you had better be prepared to try to figure out
why the other reviewers have written what they have written.
The collections of poems for each poet, and the
essay introductions are both excellent. People who
don't know poetry or poets might not find them
helpful, but for knowledgable readers of poetry,
this Norton Anthology is of high quality, indeed.
I especially like the Norton editions' excellent
footnotes. Here is a footnote to Yeats's poem
"To the Rose upon the Rood of Time." "The rose, as
an image of transfiguration and fulfillment, is a
frequent symbol in Yeats's poetry of this period
[1892]. In a note dated 1925, he remarks of it
'that the quality symbolised as The Rose differs
from the Intellectual Beauty of Shelley and of
Spenser in that I have imagined it as suffering
with man and not as something pursued and seen
from afar.' The title indicates, and line 12
confirms, that the rose is here eternal beauty,
which flowers from the cross of time and sacrifice."
(p. 113) I think that note is extremely insightful
and helpful. Of course, it also helps greatly if
you know who Shelley and Spenser are (and were),
what types of works they wrote, and what their
most famous works and themes are. If you have
not had that intellectual and educational background,
then, of course, the note will seem meaningless.
This is an anthology which can be read by scholars
and enthusiasts. Read the poems for their wealth
of value and tones and visions -- read the notes
and the introductory essays for insightful,
meaningful information about the poets, their lives,
their struggles, and their accomplishments.
My own favorites in the anthology are: Emily
Dickinson, Thomas Hardy, A.E. Housman, some of
W.B. Yeats, Edgar Lee Masters, Edwin Arlington
Robinson, Ezra Pound, H.D., Siegfried Sassoon,
Robinson Jeffers, T.S. Eliot, and Wilfred Owen.
Of course, there are many more poets and poems
than these that appeal to me personally.
Here is a brief excerpt from the beginning of
the essay on "Emily Dickinson": "Modern American
poetry [in this anthlogy there are both American
and British poets arranged chronologically according
to their birth dates] -- an expression meaning almost
the same thing as 'American poetry' -- has for one
of its founders and ancestral presences a woman.
Emily Dickinson wrote poems which are not only
excellent but lend a standard of excellence. She is
bracketed with Walt Whitman because, unknown to each
other and almost simultaneously, they all but invented
American poetry."
I cannot understand why anyone could not find that
helpful as the beginning of an insightful analysis
of the poet, her poetry, and her influence.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent Anthology, Excellent Intros...
Review: If you access the reviews of this work at this site,
then you had better be prepared to try to figure out
why the other reviewers have written what they have written.
The collections of poems for each poet, and the
essay introductions are both excellent. People who
don't know poetry or poets might not find them
helpful, but for knowledgable readers of poetry,
this Norton Anthology is of high quality, indeed.
I especially like the Norton editions' excellent
footnotes. Here is a footnote to Yeats's poem
"To the Rose upon the Rood of Time." "The rose, as
an image of transfiguration and fulfillment, is a
frequent symbol in Yeats's poetry of this period
[1892]. In a note dated 1925, he remarks of it
'that the quality symbolised as The Rose differs
from the Intellectual Beauty of Shelley and of
Spenser in that I have imagined it as suffering
with man and not as something pursued and seen
from afar.' The title indicates, and line 12
confirms, that the rose is here eternal beauty,
which flowers from the cross of time and sacrifice."
(p. 113) I think that note is extremely insightful
and helpful. Of course, it also helps greatly if
you know who Shelley and Spenser are (and were),
what types of works they wrote, and what their
most famous works and themes are. If you have
not had that intellectual and educational background,
then, of course, the note will seem meaningless.
This is an anthology which can be read by scholars
and enthusiasts. Read the poems for their wealth
of value and tones and visions -- read the notes
and the introductory essays for insightful,
meaningful information about the poets, their lives,
their struggles, and their accomplishments.
My own favorites in the anthology are: Emily
Dickinson, Thomas Hardy, A.E. Housman, some of
W.B. Yeats, Edgar Lee Masters, Edwin Arlington
Robinson, Ezra Pound, H.D., Siegfried Sassoon,
Robinson Jeffers, T.S. Eliot, and Wilfred Owen.
Of course, there are many more poets and poems
than these that appeal to me personally.
Here is a brief excerpt from the beginning of
the essay on "Emily Dickinson": "Modern American
poetry [in this anthlogy there are both American
and British poets arranged chronologically according
to their birth dates] -- an expression meaning almost
the same thing as 'American poetry' -- has for one
of its founders and ancestral presences a woman.
Emily Dickinson wrote poems which are not only
excellent but lend a standard of excellence. She is
bracketed with Walt Whitman because, unknown to each
other and almost simultaneously, they all but invented
American poetry."
I cannot understand why anyone could not find that
helpful as the beginning of an insightful analysis
of the poet, her poetry, and her influence.

Rating:
Summary: Used it in a first-year ENG course, still comes in handy
Review: Norton's Anthology of Modern Poetry is quite impressive. It contains a goodly-sized selection of poems from just about all the greats of modern literature. The book is arranged chronologically by the poets' birth years and has an introductory biography/career overview for each, followed by selections of their most distinguished works. As one reviewer noted, both the introductions and the notes are helpful & informative, and I really appreciated them when getting through some of the more difficult poems.

My only complaints about this anthology would have to be that the print is so small that it can be a strain on the eyes when reading from it at length, and also that the paper is so thin. I'm sure both are due to considerations of being able to fit the largest amount into the smallest package, but just because I understand it doesn't mean I have to like it.