34 / CHRONICLESnthink) that ideologists do not includenfreedom in their blueprints for thenfuture. Since the ideologist definesnboth freedom and the terminus (thenfuture good society) in quite differentnterms from Minogue’s, he is substitutingna syllogism that uses his own definitionsnfor those of real ideologists. Tonscore points off a straw man—ornagainst second-rate or atypical thinkers,nas Minogue occasionally does—isnto weaken one’s own position. I emphasizenthat I agree with his conclusions;nI am arguing only that he hasnarrived at them by shortcuts that depictnideology as a far less formidable adversarynthan it is.nOne reason ideology is so formidablenis that it has the power to invadenevery department of life, thought, andnaction. Yet Minogue takes his examplesnfrom a surprisingly narrow rangenof fields: German philosophy, socialnscience (focusing on the atypical BertellnOilman, Ralph Miliband, andnHenri Lefebvre), and feminist propa­nganda. His generalizations aboutnideology—that machine for generatingndoctrines encompassing all ofnreality—cry out for testing in othernfields. For example, the fields of fictionnand popular entertainment,nwhich ideologists have invaded innforce, display the same images of mannand of the future (especially in sciencenfiction), the same attitudes and assumptions,nas in social science. Butnthey give freer rein to the ideologicalnimagination and often have morendamaging consequences. The arts inngeneral are both relevant to and absentnfrom Minogue’s analysis.nThe book’s other flaws are too numerousnto elaborate upon. Some arenproblems of substance—e.g., whilenMarx put class relations in the base,nMinogue thinks he made them part ofnthe superstructure. Others are problemsnof form—e.g., names are misspelled;nmany points are repeated overnand over and over; Lincoln issuednsomething called The EmancipationnThe Herd of Independent Mindsn”The bookful blockhead . . . [w]ith his own tonguenstill edihes his ears, / And always listening to himselfnappears.”n—Alexander PopenStephen Berg: Singular Voices; AvonnBooks; New York; $9.95.nBehind Stephen Berg’s SingularnVoices, a new anthology of contemporarynnative poets writing aboutntheir own work, is the voice-theory ofnpoetry, which holds that a poet isnvaluable not for his perception, hisnlanguage, his formal skill or inventivenintelligence, but the uniqueness ofnwhatever “voice” is heard on the page.nFrom this assumption follows Berg’snclaim that, since his book includesn”living American poets whose worknexemplifies strong new styles,” theirnvoices must therefore be indubitablynRichard Kostelanetz has publishednseveral books of poetry, in addition tona collection of his critical essays onnpoetry. The Old Poetries and thenNew (University of Michigan).nsingular.nTo test this claim, I compiled thenfollowing sequence of opening sentencesnfrom the prose essays, using justnless than two-thirds of the book’s 30n”singular voices”:nUp in my eyrie-room atop thenChapel of the Madonna ofnMonserrato, perched on a cliffnhigher than the hawks abovenLake Como, listening to thensweet bells of Bellagio’s SannGiacomo, I begin to cast intonair and mind for annexplanation of “Awakening,” anpoem written years ago innhomage to the great JapanesenRinzai Zen master Hakuin.nSometimes I thinkncommunication is all wenhave—a voice like a silver wirenextending through the dark ornone chunk of flesh pressingnnn”Edict”; Finley Peter Dunne’s fictionalnMister Dooley, the Chicago saloonnkeeper, seems to have become a reallifenTammany mayor of New York.nIn politics, the Eleventh Commandmentn(that one should not speaknill of fellow-politicians on one’s ownnside) may sometimes be justified. Innscholarship it never is. The high praisenthat Minogue’s book has received onnthe right, though perhaps due to anwidespread ignorance of the relevantnliterature, may also, or instead, signifyna lower standard for scholars who arenon the same side than for others.nMinogue has certainly proven, herenand in his other writings, that he is anconservative. But conservatives no lessnthan liberals need the best possiblenscholarship, and frank criticism is indispensablento our efforts to get it. As anlong-time enemy of grade-inflationn(which is a product of ideology), Incannot give the book more than a B-.nby Richard Kostelanetznagainst another chunk of flesh.nI write prose poems when Inlong for intimacy. I want itnfrom my friends, and I want itnin poetry. The life in detail,nthe small moment, the texturenof a thing—that, it has seemednto me, is where the poetry is.nPoems begin when somethingnin the present—event ornobject, word overheard—callsnpower to itself by associationnwith something alive in thenmind’s recesses, somenconnection potent butnunavailable to consciousness.nThe ideas that make a poemnpresent themselves as images.nMy insights on what I perceivento be the themes of this poemnare already expressed: the poemnembodies them. Somethingnyou are writing, after it isndone, or begins to feel close tondone, you can lean over andnbreathe on it and try to bringnits main moves, its trajectory,ninto the center of yourn