…a wonderful idea! She mentioned that people hadn’t been looking very far back in time on the site. She thought that was a shame. That made me think along these lines:
“Well…” I thought to myself, “The site really is like a long book of verse isn’t it?”
“So,” I continued to think to myself, “Why not make it easier for someone to move through the work from the beginning?” Continue reading
…as I found out this morning. I had forgotten to give its default title of “Sonnet” and so I noticed. “Oh my there is a post called ‘1914.” I don’t recall making that one! I wonder what it is?!?!?!?”
So I decided that since it named itself, I’d honor its choice of name. So… “Sonnet: 1914” it is!!!
I think now, that I would like it very much if my sweetheart were to suggest names for some of these unnamed sonnets that I might add in. And perhaps I’ll ask some of you to suggest some? That might be fun!
I have long thought that something happened to art–not just poetry, but all art–somewhere between the late 1890s to 1920. Continue reading
…an ode/sonnet again. I think I have in mind the method to make such modular sonnets sound like sonnets. It has to do with the beginning and ending of clauses.
Anyway, for posterity, here is the Sonnet reformatted in ode form: Continue reading
…and my exchange with them that resulted in todays sonnet. More on this later, perhaps.
This is a type of blog I don’t normally “like” or “follow;” however I have done both, as well as having left a comment–as I most often do–because I feel that, at the very least, its author’s heart is in the right place.
This entry is very instructive for a number of reasons: Continue reading
…the fact that I’m not ‘following,’ and indeed quite literally, not ‘liking’ the poetry site in question below:
However quite a lot of writing and thinking, among other edifying activities went into this whole exchange, so I’m snipping the whole thing here, along with a part of the article under which my original comment was posted. Continue reading
I made a rather long reply to Chris Martin’s blog. Here it is–hopefully and eventually, more throughly edited. It seemed like a good time to inaugurate a subblog because at such time, I find I express myself rather better and rather more passionately even if in a more plain spoken way.
You do manage to garner a large share of comments. Apart from my #1 fan, I hardly get any!
My take on peer review in general: You don’t need peer review, you need expert review.
David Emeron: Sonnets 