Abstract

Kingsley Amis and the Movement Poetry

Marwa Bilal

Volume: 13 Issue: 3 2023

Abstract:

The Movement literary movement is known for how it caused so many debates concerning its existence in the 1950s. This is due to the fact that the poetry of this movement is known as a break from the old traditions of poetry and a step toward the Post-Modern themes and techniques. The subject matter of this literary movement is human experience, which makes its poetry more understandable by the majority of people, unlike the difficult language that marked the poetry of the other schools that came before. Thus, it is fair to say that the poetry of the Movement literary movement tackles the socio-cultural matters that dealt with the mass that the post-modern societies faced back then during the 1950s.

DOI: http://doi.org/10.37648/ijrssh.v13i03.020

Back Download

References

• Al Álvarez. The New Poetry. Penguine, 1962.
• Amis, Kingsley. Collected Poems 1944-1979. London: The Viking Press, 1980.
• ---. “Hock and Soda-Water,” Spectator, 1954, 832.
• Bradley, Jerry. The Movement: British Poets of the 1950s. Twayne Publishers: New York. 1993.
• C.S. Youn. Standard English Poems. London, 1962.
• Enright, D. J. (ed.)., Poets of the 1950’s: an Anthology of New English Verse. Edited, with an introduction by D. J. Enright., Kenyusha Ltd., 1955.
• Gardner, Philip. Kingsley Amis. Twayne Publishers: Boston. 1981.
• Harry, Ritchie. ‘An Outrageous Talent,’ Kingsley Amis in Life and Letters, ed. by Dale Salwak. London: Macmillan, 1990.
• James, Andrew. Kingsley Amis: Antimodels and the Audience. Canada: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2013.
• Laskowski, E. William. Kingsley Amis. Twayne Publishers: New York. 1998. Print.
• Michal Kir Kham, “English Poetry Since 1950” Sewance Review. 1981.
• Moseley, Merritt. Understanding Kingsley Amis. University of South Carolina Press: Columbia, 1993. Print.
• Plimpton, George. Writers at Work : Paris Review Interviews. London: Warburge, 1981.
• Tomlinson Charles. “The Middle Brow Muse”, Essays in Criticism, Volume VII, Issue 4, October 1957, https://doi.org/10.1093/eic/VII.4.460