I am glad that there has been some comment on my original suggestion. A
couple of items of clarification, briefly.
- I was not suggesting that we try to establish a mini or any other canon,
nor that we should indulge in competitive practices, however revolting. I
meant simply to suggest that (even) the current form of the email list
could allow us to develop an open editorial collective, and then a (more)
hybrid text, part peer-reviewed poetry magazine, part all-hours textspace
for random interventions of anykind.
- I think Ric's proposals, nicely answer the lurking/extralurking necessity
to involve non-list persons (but they make it harder work).
- There is no *need* for the proposals to be 'instituted' or 'regularized'
(although this clearly happens in other forums to which poets contribute).
It looks like it's unlikely to happen? Perhaps we need only be conscious of
the possibility of introducing poetic material into this text in the ways
proposed, and the desirability of supporting such material with comment,
annotation, criticism.
- There isn't a way to prevent random interventions anyway (or perhaps even
the posting of fraudulently 'canonized' publications). Is there? I hope
not. (If this doesn't get through, then I really will be paranoid.)
[Oh, and Ric, thanks for the fluxalert.]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|