Question

Clayton Eshleman, who edits the poetry journal Sulfur and teaches English at Eastern Michigan University, agrees with . . . criticism of the major anthologies, arguing that . . . “teachers have to make their own decisions” about what to include in an introductory poetry course, and that they “can’t trust anthologies” to answer students’ questions about the nature and significance of poetry. Eshleman’s strategy is to teach anthologies alongside other poems—sometimes by the same poets—that the editor(s) chose not to include. In one instance, he provided his class with portions of Whitman’s “Song of Myself” that had been edited out of a particular anthology. Because the passages in question (which Eshleman had to photocopy and provide to the class in handout form) were highly charged with homoerotic energy and sexual imagery, the discussion shifted to the question of what subject matter was “appropriate” in poetry and why a particular editor might have chosen a small selection as “representative” of Whitman’s work.%0D%0A%0D%0AWhat side does it take? What data does it add? What do you want to remember about this source?%0D%0A%0D%0AThis doesn’t need to be a complete sentence, just so you remember which source is what.

Answer 1

The source takes the side that teachers should make their own decisions about what to include in an introductory poetry course, rather than relying blindly on anthologies. It adds the perspective of Clayton Eshleman, an editor of the poetry journal Sulfur and an English professor at Eastern Michigan University. The source highlights Eshleman's strategy of teaching anthologies alongside other poems that were not included, such as the edited-out portions of Whitman's "Song of Myself" that were highly charged with homoerotic energy and sexual imagery. This source provides insight into the limitations of anthologies in representing the full scope and significance of poetry.