I'm on britpo, newpo, petc & poetics, but petc is my favourite. A propos...
Jon, I've been scratching my head for a parallel that I remembered arising,
and it is with broadcast, especially radio broadcast. I think that there is
an acknowledgement of radio as a different medium to print, and therefore no
issue of priority. (Acknowledgement is still a desirable courtesy, however.)
> Consider the following possible methods of on line distribution of a poem:
>
> 1) emailing it backchannel to [individually selected] correspondents
> 2) emailing it to a [non-indexed, archived] JISC-like mailing list
> 3) emailing it to a list like the above, but one with an indexed
archive
These are legitimate distinctions from a technological point of view, but I
wonder whether they influence a poet's decision regarding whether to post to
one kind rather than another?
Poems that appear in list discussions are, it seems to me, kind of like
beads played in an ongoing glass bead game. When they appear in an edited
journal, they become part of the bead in another player's game (irrespective
of medium). (I trust folk recognize the Hermann Hesse reference, which
apparently the new Pope is aware of.)
4-5-6 are washing-line publications: you put them out there, and maybe
someone sees them.
> 7) having it accepted for inclusion on an established poetry web site,
where it remains available for anyone to read.
>
> 8) having had it accepted for inclusion on an established poetry web
site which has been taken off line and is no longer available to anyone via
the internet.
This, I think, is the knub of publication: is it a question of putting it in
front of people, or is it a question of a trusted other putting it in front
of other people? If the latter, then in 8) the bead has been played, and the
question then becomes (re a poem in particular) whether it is one poem among
a group that were published, that may belong in a new thread, as opposed to
a generalized hunger for having one's work available to posterity.
P
|