OXFORD’S NEW ANTHOLOGY

Press, Volume XCIII, Issue 28002, 23 June 1956, Page 5

OXFORD’S NEW ANTHOLOGY

N.Z. VERSE

[Reviewed by G.W.T.] An Anthology of New Zealand Verse. Selected by Robert Chapman and Jonathan Bennett. Oxford University Press. 341 pp. The last anthology of New Zealand verse from its beginnings appeared in 1906 with a revision in 1926. To a modern poet this must seem like an anthology of English drama up to “Gorboduc.” We have also Curnow’s “A Book of New Zealand Verse. 1923-1950” and it is with this collection rather than with Alexander and Cunie’s earlier anthology that the new book competes. Because verse is not widely read in New Zealand, those publishers who accept it at all have exclusive standards: all but the very serious poets will quickly give up trying to write. This may not be a healthy state of literature and may in particular lead to a narrow range of verse styles and a lack of popular verse which, even if not of very permanent value, might lead readers on to oeuer things, its result from the anthologist’s point of view is that there are few poets, all more or less accepted, and so it is not surprising that Mr Chapman and Mr Bennett have included a large number of poems already available in the rival anthology. They have been able to give a better representation of Robin Hyde by selections from her newly published poems; they have made good the omission of W. H.

ouver, wno snouia nave oeen mciuaea in the earlier book, and they have included poems by poets who have established their reputations more firmly over the past five years: Colin Newbury, Alastair Campbell, Louis Johnson, Ruth Gilbert, M. K. Joseph. Pat Wilson and Mary Stanley. On the other hand Arnold Wall is quite left out as is Rewi Alley. An anthology must, of course, be to some extent a personal selection, though the claim of this one must also stand on its merits as a representative selection. Alley’s poetry is a somewhat special case; at its best it has the merit of directness and might have been included to show the diversity of acceptable styles of poetry writing. It reminds us too that New Zealand poetry is not only about New Zealand and that there is a specifically New Zealand feeling about <and contribution to) events overseas. But the inclusion of two poems by James Bertram will remind us of this Is the new anthology, then, needed 9 I think it is. We have no history of New Zealand poetry and a survey of the whole growth, particularly one with the excellent bib'iographical appendix of this one, will help to clear the way for one and to do the work of one in the meantime. There are not many poems before 1923. These years have been winnowed by time. Perhaps the later pages of thi.* anthology will be so winnowed too some day, but our poetry has certainly grown in importance not merely in proportion to a growing population, and the emphasis made by the editors in favour of later work seems inevitable. The early poems remaining are worth keeping. Some of their interest is historical; in the case of Henry Jacobs's “The Avon’’ perhaps entirely so fit is based, incidentally, on a misconception about the origin of the name). But the early ballad

Eileen Duggan (not only for the j poems included here) should be re- s membered. t The poets who became known in the thirties are seen for the first time , against the total scene. These ( especially need to be remembered. ? They are of course still with us and i still writing but there is danger in i assuming too easily that their earlier ] styles may be superseded. Depth with i simplicity seems to me'to be better c achieved in Glover’s or Mason's poetry 1 than it has been since. 1 These songs will not stand— 5 The wind and the sand will smother. < Not I but another Will make songs worth the bother sings Harry, too modestly. This reminds us that colloquial language— . our own way of putting things—can ; help a poet. The person who does not read poetry should begin to make good with these poems. The selection of the younger gener- , , ation of poets is judicious. Baxter is , allowed to dominate a little in quantity; the others are accorded their just amount of space. There are some promising poets now who in another five years might claim a place but. if we agree with Mr Chapman’s modest exclusion of his own poetry, the only omission that could be questioned is Charles Doyle, who is new to New Zealand and so, as a New Zealand poet, one of promise rather than of achievement. Mr Chapman’s introduction is a . valuable commentary on a century of ■ our poetry. He has a gift for this kind > of writing and if a fuller history of New Zealand verse is someday to be . written, probably nb-one is better ■ qualified to do it than he is.