This plus word-of-mouth is pretty much the way it works for most of us, I
think. It's not very efficient, and, because deciding to publish and market
a book requires a pretty deep immersion in someone's work, it means I'm
more likely to find poets near to home. So I miss a lot of great, or at
least very good, poets. My consolations are that Im only publish great (or
at least very good) poets, by my lights, and that I couldn;'t publish more
books than I already do.
At 10:23 AM 8/5/2000 PDT, you wrote:
> I think the whole model of publication by having poets send
>submissions to an editor who then chooses among them has pretty much
>shot its wad. If the proof of the pudding is in the eating this pudding
>is certainly moldy. The most positive development I can think of in
>poetry publishing would be for poetry editors to stop accepting
>unsolicited submissions at all. Instead, they should keep reading
>go to readings, look at very low circulation publications, and read
>things on the Internet on web sites and in email forums like this one,
>and then themselves solicit poems they've come across in these ways
>which they'd like to publish. It would be less work for everyone, and
>the results in the final publications would probably be better.
>________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|