a point arose about this is not poetry

[leesharks]

There are many people in the world who will proclaim David Beckham to be the greatest footballer of the modern era. These people may be conversant with the beautiful game, have seen it played (most likely in the MLS and the occasional World Cup), have seen David Beckham play it, have rightly assumed that he is a good player and then, because they have limited experience with other players and have "heard of" Beckham, assume that familiarity is the best yardstick by which to measure greatness. They have not immersed themselves in all aspects of the game, watched other national leagues, examined the technical merit of less flamboyant players, followed the careers of players not married to twigs or with their own perfume brand, etc. To their educated -- but narrow -- viewpoint, the best player in the world is David Beckham and all others who play like David Beckham must therefore be quite acceptable also.

It is not wrong, but it is right only within a very small sphere of reality. When the sphere expands, so to do judgments about quality. I would implore all readers of poetry to avoid defining things in the negative -- if you must, then say "this is not what I recognise as poetry, but perhaps it could be recognised as poetry some day".

---

PS. When we accept only what we know as being good and proper, that's called stagnation.

Leanne, you are the soul of reason.

My only amendment would be to point out that the situation would be more like someone claiming that other players are not, in fact, football players

because they are not David Beckham.