I found Stephen's original, your response, & Fred's to yours, all
interesting, Joe. But felt not much to say in response. When I do
write I do write is all I can say.
When I do read, I do (try to) read. A< editing a rather smart little
book right now, which has its lyric moments, but, as a kind of
memorial of a man through the tractors he kept running at a monastery,
& then a memory of other(s') tractors, it is not lyric really, it' a
kind of large work, all parts of which mesh. Memorably phrases or
lines/ I'm not sure, but the whole is sticking in my mind, & maybe
that's one way to go.
Meanwhile, I have no problem with internet publication (which may, for
all I know, reach far more readers than most mags ever did).
But so long as a few people whose response I care about read the stuff
(at some point), well, that will have to do as 'audience'; & perhaps
it was ever thus...(I think of Donne penning his poems for a few
friends...).
Doug
On 28-Jun-08, at 1:03 PM, Joseph Duemer wrote:
> Ed, ouch! I guess the internet is a "literary catheter" & you're
> right I
> don't really believe internet publication is "real" publication (I
> know, I
> know), but yeah the cure is to keep on writing & writing to think. I
> hardly
> know what I think until I have written it & the poem, lyric or
> narrative,
> for me, is a mode of thought. I think that's what it's good for, to
> sort of
> go back to Stephen'[s original question. The structures &
> constructions
> required to make a poem offer a resistance to the chaos of sense
> impressions
> / impingements involved in living. The poem is how we map where &
> what we
> are. OK, I get that much. Why, then, should any kind of publication be
> required? (I think I have something like an answer to this question,
> but am
> curious what others will say.)
Douglas Barbour
[log in to unmask]
http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/
Latest books:
Continuations (with Sheila E Murphy)
http://www.uap.ualberta.ca/UAP.asp?LID=41&bookID=664
Wednesdays'
http://abovegroundpress.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-from-aboveground-press_10.html
In football the object is for the quarterback, also known as the field
general, to be on target with his aerial assault, riddling the defense
by hitting his receivers with deadly accuracy in spite of the blitz,
even if he has to use shotgun. With short bullet passes and long
bombs, he marches his troops into enemy territory, balancing this
aerial assault with a sustained ground attack that punches holes in
the forward wall of the enemy's defensive line.
In baseball the object is to go home!
George Carlin, RIP
|