A comparative reading of the the reception of Ivan Malinovski's 'Romerske bassiner' (1963) and Lars Skinnebach's 'I morgen findes systemerne igen' (2004) - both the books and the reception is very much alike eventhough there's a gap of 41 years between the first and the latter. Among other things I'm investigating the aesthetic criteria for quality that lies beneath the different reviews, and is in that respect peticular interested in 'the political poem' or the political in the poem. In other words: it's not only about what the writer actually writes, insomuch as what the writer is 'allowed' to write. What the literary critism is taken seriously and acknowledge as 'proper' literature, and what is simply rejected as not (good or appropriate) art. Nomatter how radical or harsh or (in different ways) 'political' a poem tries to be or act, the literary critism is an important authority in clearcly demarcating what and how a poem is 'allowed' to express.