note that while Katrina has forced Buch to enact the opposite of some of his policies, such as increasing medicaid, for example, and not continuing to roll back taxes mostly the wealthy pay, such as estate taxes, the cultural agenda continues


where "protection of children from pornography" becomes "require age authentication from all viewers and all creators of sexually explicit material"
I see sites like this, incredible careers like this -- boy do I have to get off my tail!!!


really wonderful stuff therein

found this great business when looking for the triathalon route (which has to be near us -- we are trying to figure out if we'll have ringside seats like we have had for the marathon)

met Jesse Glass in person last night -- come to find out, another Michael Lally-influenced DC / Maryland post-nys experimental poet; driving him to San Diego Tuesday? Wednesday? to see the Rothenburgs -- very exciting, seem like such nice people (and Jerome R. is such a wonderful poet)

and met Bruna Mori, local writer, more thoroughly -- another Razorfish person!

we hope to do some readings together when her book comes out from Eileen Tabios' meritage press (which has just issued a book by Sean Finney)


This type of statement is, in fact, on most eZine sites somewhere, and in most print journals, and even in places like the POETS *MARKET* and WRITERS MARKET. If I have time after repairing a wall, I will comment about the idea of submissions as marketing.

There are several reasons, aside from writers early in the submitting writing process not buying a copy, that these statements don't work. One is that beginning editors rarely can tell you what they want to or will publish -- they are waiting for it to flow over the transom -- and so their journals are hardly models of consistency. Another is that many of these statements include long lists of poets who are read and understood very different ways, or mention vague things like "quality" and that old Emily Dickinson saw about the top of her head.

With the short life of most journals, it means that most editors are beginning editors or that the consistent, long-established journal is no longer taking submissions not from friends or former contributors, or that it will accept now for publication in three years.

There is a reason Lyn Lifshin and Janet I. Buck have published so many poems.

The other is, of course, it is hard to tell coterie publishing when you see it, or when you see it it is not possible to know if it is a club that will have you or not until you send a submission. In general, it can be more informative to see who is published rather than what, or to read what never forgetting who. A lot of time this gets shuffled under "silly star system MFA verse approach" but there is more to it than that. For example, American writing and certainly publication distribution is still regional, and although the MFA explosion and creation of non-overlapping poetry "scenes" has countered that, it often hasn't done it in work-centered ways.

Paradoxically while many writers new to submitting claim to want comments on their work, many want a more distant relationship with editors, or want to be published in "big markets" and thus gravitate towards editors who don't know whether they read a copy standing at a newsstand, in the library, or surfing excerpts online, or have purchased a copy or subscribed.

It is hard to reverse engineer some sort of editorial policy or poetic from the majority of journals. And why should poets be in the line of trying to mind read or psych out editors? How often does every printed work jibe with an editorial statement? How often does my favorite poem in an issue of a journal share something in common with my submission, in my view, and not in the editors' views? How often does the Pushcart Prize anthology, supposedly the editors' favorite works, represent the most interesting work published that year?

Reading and writing are separate skills.

It is mostly easier to just send the submission after checking out the journal and the editors and see if anybody likes it. Submitting nationally costs about a dollar. One in twenty will like it, and twenty journals cost about $200.

Repair of wall: about $50 plus my labor for the concrete blocks, mortar, stucco, and paint.

mIEKAL aND wrote:

> I really appreciate this statement on the WRITERS FORUM site. I'd like to see these thought be more wide spread. I can't imagine how many submissions I've received over the last 25 years where the person submitting didn't have a clue:
> "We strongly recommend that you familiarise yourself with the kind of work published by a press, any press, large or small, commercial or not, before you submit work to it. That is, buy their publications. (Use the money you are going to save on postage by not wasting submissions.) You will almost certainly discover some new work which interests and perhaps pleases you; and you will have provided the press with new customers, and its authors with new readers."
> http://pages.britishlibrary.net/writersforum


cool new art tool


a "slog" or SMS log
began preliminary reading for the Drunken Boat web art awards (final judge Talan Memmott) -- already, just checking first entry, curious about SOURCE

i.e., the huge amount of text and image web art demands -- what happens when it is as readily available as the initial search engine results flarf is built from?

finally I think this makes the works which are like this closer to a not-terribly academically researched cultural studies project than an art work;

for example during the rise of humanism over scolasticism, this type of problem also occurred, but I do not think that search-engine-mediated research {especially when, by and large, "first" results are used almost exclusively) can replace other types of research --

although I think academic research must change (it is changing) -- for example, it is not as difficult anymore, and even the market is saying the nuances of research -- say in the old library science degrees, or even advanced humanities research -- are no longer special enough to be worth anything

so -- beyond the source -- easy research is like art in that it relies on the preconceived notions of the searcher more closely than a long term search which in all likelihood changes the searcher during the process -- often some revelation is sought, as well as some finish or accomplishment

now, of course, aside from the basic concern with the source material of art, I do have a great deal of interest in / respect for use of source material, particularly of that found online -- for example, one of the things I loved about MYST was that its incidental sound effects (among other things) were the canned ones readily available on most computers at the time -- the familiar click in the unfamiliar world of the game



tested dad's on his house (cypress) works well except on lead paint

am renting one here to see if it works on our two layers of texturekote and then jillions of layers of paint


gutters down -- spent weekend on 28 foot ladder patching stucco (house had been stuccoed around gutters, leaving big holes...

flashing missing; fascias on back of house to be replaced

garage door coming, can't find the half moon / convex fencing I want locally (tho it is everywhere in Florida, the midwest, even at Home Depot) or -- someone to put it up (I don't really want to put up the fence. Isn't installing my own attic insulation enough?
new blog: friend Rob Roberge:


I haven't really been writing much; I am still working on the hello kitty poem -- she has a twin sister named Mimmy & so I am trying to figure out some sort of mimesis / mime thing which I guess it is au courant to associate w/ masochism?


I think it is about closure, expression, boundedness and "open" poetry. i.e., the HK poem started as flarf & I'm really still struggling to have it mean something