Thank you Kasper,
and for Barry:
I am referring to your remark:
"For example, quite a number
of my posts to Randolph Healy's projects never appeared in his final
formatting, for reasons I could never determine. I took it as some form of
editing, though I wouldn't call it refereed (which for me usually implies 3
academics reading & deciding upon a prose manuscript)."
I do not know what happened but I am sure that Randolph Healy did not want
to act as a referee. His idea of the snap-project was to support spontaneous
poetry without any interference from outside (see editorial cuttings and/or
choices: this poem is good this is bad).
Blessing from here,
Anny
On 7/27/07, Barry Alpert <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I'd prefer it if the snapshots more closely approximated Randolph Healy's
> original formulation for the project. Whether any part of the large and
> energized audience/market for photographs & photo books could be
> interested
> remains to be seen.
>
> Otherwise, The Snapshot Project most closely simulates "publication" when
> the particular editor's hand can be detected. For example, quite a number
> of my posts to Randolph Healy's projects never appeared in his final
> formatting, for reasons I could never determine. I took it as some form
> of
> editing, though I wouldn't call it refereed (which for me usually implies
> 3
> academics reading & deciding upon a prose manuscript). Without checking,
> could anyone name 5 refereed poetry magazines and their respective
> referees?
>
> Barry Alpert
>
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:20:11 +0300, kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> >I'd actually prefer snaps to be defined clearly as something like what
> >I outlined them as, because an archive of snaps is much more
> >interesting than an archive of poetry
>
|