How would you like to see articles selected?
At 04:26 PM 10/22/2009, you wrote:
>No, I wasn't. I genuinely don't understand it. It was badly constructed.
>What is it specifically referring to in the comment I made? I can't
>answer if it is not clear, can I?
>
>
>On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:42:45 -0400, Mark Weiss
><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >Sorry to hear that. Unless you're making a
> >punctuation pun. In which case I'm sorry to hear that.
> >
> >At 02:22 PM 10/22/2009, you wrote:
> >>I don't understand your question, Mark?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:54:47 -0400, Mark Weiss
> >><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Let's, for argument's sake, say that they are.
> >> >What other possibility would you envision? Do you
> >> >think the hands-on editor should in all cases be governed by the
> >>reviewers?
> >> >
> >> >At 01:45 PM 10/22/2009, you wrote:
> >> >>If the board is, as you say, for prestige only, then Elizabeth
>James,
> >>who
> >> >>is on this board, shouldn’t have said in an earlier post here that
>they
> >> >>would do peer-reviewing also. So any misunderstanding is due to
>her
> >> >>input in this matter.
> >> >>
> >> >>Of course, I’m not saying a journal shouldn’t have an angle or
>biases,
> >> >>to credit me with that is building a straw man for me. My concern
>is
> >> >>that the journal may become elitist and exclusive, acting as a
>sort of
> >> >>arbiter of innovative poetic taste, in the same way that Poetry
> >>Review
> >> >>in the UK is an arbiter of taste for mainstream poetry.
> >> >>
> >> >>But I think the overriding issue is to find out if the editorial board
> >>will,
> >> >>indeed, be doing the peer-reviewing or not. I can’t see Elizabeth’s
> >> >>Freudian slip being insignificant, however.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:16:57 -0400, Mark Weiss
> >> >><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Let's be real for a moment. All academic fields
> >> >> >are so small that only neophytes don't know most
> >> >> >of the players. I'm a non-academic, but I was
> >> >> >able to identify immediately two of the three
> >> >> >anonymous readers of my Cuban anthology
> >> >> >manuscript. It's also not unheard of for a member
> >> >> >of a peer-review committee to tell a friend or
> >> >> >student that he's on the committee and this would be a good
>time
> >>to
> >> >>submit.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >That said, contributing editors aren't a
> >> >> >peer-review committee. Their function is to lend
> >> >> >prestige by simply being listed (and many never
> >> >> >do anything beyond that for the publication) and
> >> >> >to keep their ears out for what they think is
> >> >> >interesting work, tho they are never the only
> >> >> >source the actual editors rely on.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >You seem to expect a degree of objectivity that
> >> >> >humans are rarely capable of. I'm not convinced
> >> >> >that it's even desirable in a journal. This one
> >> >> >will develop its own character. Let's see what that is before we
> >>jump
> >> >>on it.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Mark
> >> >> >
> >> >> >At 12:09 PM 10/22/2009, you wrote:
> >> >> >>My guess is that the honorifics are there on purpose. They are
> >> >>making a
> >> >> >>statement. They may be removed now that critical attention
>has
> >> >>been
> >> >> >>brought to them. But it's the lack of anonymity of the peer-
>review
> >> >>board
> >> >> >>that concerns me. Robert should have decided what was more
> >> >> >>important: the honorifics or the sanctity of the peer-review
> >>process.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:14:30 -0400, Mark Weiss
> >> >> >><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >Black Mountain was hardly a formally organized
> >> >> >> >institution, particularly in its last few years,
> >> >> >> >when Olson was called in to oversee its demise.
> >> >> >> >There were at that point about a hundred
> >> >> >> >students. But it's the Black Mountain College we
> >> >> >> >remember as poets. Even in its rum days it
> >> >> >> >neither sought nor received accreditation.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >I'm acutely aware of the impact of the
> >> >> >> >academicization of poetry in the US. It's been an
> >> >> >> >unmitigated disaster. But that wasn't caused by
> >> >> >> >the existence of academic journals. Let's se what they turn
> >>out.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >The inclusion of titles in the board list is a
> >> >> >> >bit comic opera, but let's blame it on a
> >> >> >> >beginner's mis-step. We should wish the
> >> >> >> >enterprise well, and maybe in that spirit let the
> >> >> >> >editor know that he should drop the honorifics.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Mark
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >At 10:58 AM 10/22/2009, you wrote:
> >> >> >> >>One of the big dangers is definitely the codification of
> >>practice,
> >> >>and
> >> >> >> >>I am with Jeff on this. This has happened to some extent
> >> >>with 'avant
> >> >> >> >>garde' poetry in the States and it has certainly happened
>to
> >>art
> >> >>here
> >> >> >> >>in the art colleges - they do not set good examples.
>Once the
> >> >> >>products
> >> >> >> >>of creativity get into that loop it is very difficult for them
>to
> >> >> >> >>disentangle. We all want good teachers and good
>teaching
> >>but
> >> >>all too
> >> >> >> >>often good teachers and good teaching get lost in the
> >>systems
> >> >>and
> >> >> >> >>bureaucracies with their other demands and agendas. The
> >>need
> >> >>to
> >> >> >>get a
> >> >> >> >>'qualification' or certain letters after your name has in the
> >>past
> >> >>not
> >> >> >> >>been the same as the need to create originally. You need
> >> >>freedom
> >> >> >>and
> >> >> >> >>focus. At times this has been given by creative people
>living
> >>and
> >> >> >> >>working together - the typical artistic group or milieu or
> >> >>movement.
> >> >> >> >>And sometimes of course in glorious isolation from any
>such
> >> >>thing.
> >> >> >> >>Cases of such things coming from formally organised
>higher
> >>ed
> >> >> >> >>institutions are rare - Black Mountain would be one of
>those
> >> >>rarities.
> >> >> >> >>I'm not being romantic about this, I think I am being
>realistic.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>Individuals, such as Robert Sheppard or whoever, are
>able to
> >> >>fight
> >> >> >> >>against codification, but systems and organisations
>cannot.
> >>Or at
> >> >> >> >>least, they cannot within the context of modern capitalist
> >>society.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>Tim A.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>On 22 Oct 2009, at 15:01, Jeffrey Side wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>>Sean, I'm not against academic journals if they are
>about
> >>the
> >> >>study
> >> >> >>of
> >> >> >> >>>poetry rather than concentrating on how it should be
>written
> >> >>etc.
> >> >> >> >>>And I
> >> >> >> >>>get the feeling that this journal may lead to this, having
> >>read
> >> >>some
> >> >> >> >>>of
> >> >> >> >>>Robert‚s theories on practice. Only time will tell,
>however.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>Announcing The Whole Island: Six Decades of
> >> >> >> >>Cuban Poetry (University of California Press).
> >> >> >> >>Forthcoming in November 2009.
> >> >> >> >>http://go.ucpress.edu/WholeIsland
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Announcing The Whole Island: Six Decades of Cuban
> >> >> >Poetry (University of California Press).
> >> >> >Forthcoming in November 2009.
> >> >> >http://go.ucpress.edu/WholeIsland
> >> >
> >> >Announcing The Whole Island: Six Decades of Cuban
> >> >Poetry (University of California Press).
> >> >Forthcoming in November 2009.
> >> >http://go.ucpress.edu/WholeIsland
> >
> >Announcing The Whole Island: Six Decades of Cuban
> >Poetry (University of California Press).
> >Forthcoming in November 2009.
> >http://go.ucpress.edu/WholeIsland
Announcing The Whole Island: Six Decades of Cuban
Poetry (University of California Press).
Forthcoming in November 2009.
http://go.ucpress.edu/WholeIsland
|