I was wondering what listmembers thought of John Cayley's game-plan,
outlined, again, in his response to 'Subvoice Colloquim: John Cayley'.
This involves setting up a list-based "peer-review" system where
arbitrarily selected poems (products) continue to move and shake, or not,
in e-space, according to the "pass/fail" method of semi-democratic quality
control. The argument goes, if I understood correctly, that a public yet
informed process of valorization is necessary also to widen the cultural
authority of the (local) "avant-garde".
Perhaps no one wants to play ball with the Aztecs. Failing and failing
better to pass out of circulation.
Still, because this evaluative system is intrinsic to a new medium,
e-space, his idea does warrant a response here.
Karlien
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|