It is completely safe to say that, let's see what we can do about it. q1
It is completely safe to say that, let's see what we can do about it. q1
In the next few days, we will be choosing/voting on a new poetry book for discussion on this thread. Anyone withing to choose a poet will please post the writer. I'll be sending a pm to all present and former participants. My vote will be William Matthews so there is the built in prejudice. Thanks you all. q1
Susan Goyette, The True Names of Birds.
If JBI will indulge me a bit, let me request that those posting a new poet/collection for what will be Poetry Bookclub 4... please try to include more than one to a maximum of three poets as this time we have no list ot authors to choose from. This request is to avoid having twenty individual selections with no one poet having clear preference.
Alright, add Margaret Avison, and Fred Wah, I'll think about volumes in a bit. May I suggest we have a rank style vote, where people number their choices in order of desire, and then we tally the totals based on rank with highest number being most important, so for instance
p1
3, x
2, y,
1, Z
p2
3, Y
2, Z
1, X
Would be Y wins, with 5, Z has 3, and X has 4. Or something like that. That way people can choose more fairly.
You know what ticked me off last vote. A bunch of people voted, skewed the results, and then never participated. Now I will say I really did enjoy the Pasternak, but I bet no one who wanted him ever participated. Perhaps the people who participated should have their vote value doubled.
LET THERE BE LIGHT
"Love follows knowledge." – St. Catherine of Siena
My literature blog: http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/
You know Virgil, there ought to be a way to address that but discipline, even if it were my forte, is as usual, unenforceable... at least here, in this forum.
We could have it as a rule that if you participated in the previous discussion your vote value gets doubled. Or something more than those that didn't.Originally Posted by quasimodo1
LET THERE BE LIGHT
"Love follows knowledge." – St. Catherine of Siena
My literature blog: http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/
Don't look at me, I voted for Hebert. Seriously though, I think the big problem was the translation issue. I think one needs one volume of poetry for everyone, and preferably in the original. When we did Montale the volume was perhaps too large. When we did Pasternak, the different versions of poems seemed to be completely different. I think Quasi is right in insisting only English poems this time.
Though it is curious. I wonder how many people voted for Pasternak because they like Russian literature/ found him a familiar name. Perhaps that will be the problem for this next round, since we're dealing with contemporary poetry, and people may not be inclined to research all the poets and merely vote for their own/ the ones they've heard of.
As for participators getting double votes or whatever, that could work, though if it comes down to it, I think I'm up for participators having a discussion on the nominations, then somehow narrowing to a short list of perhaps four or so, before taking the poll public to people who generally post on the poetry forum.
In truth, I think I should have participated more though, which was bad of me. I think it was perhaps though, that Pasternak really didn't work for me, and I guess that it's been a hectic semester, for all that's worth.
But yeah, I'm up for a short list being derived by participators before an actual vote.
No I'm not blaming anyone that participated. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed Pasternak quite a bit. I'm glad I got to discover him. I don't even think we had any major problems, just a few difficulties. I was just irritated that a bunch could decide the vote and then not participate.
LET THERE BE LIGHT
"Love follows knowledge." – St. Catherine of Siena
My literature blog: http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/
You know what ticked me off last vote. A bunch of people voted, skewed the results, and then never participated. Now I will say I really did enjoy the Pasternak, but I bet no one who wanted him ever participated.
Not entirely true, Virgil. I was certainly one in favor of Pasternak and I participated quite a bit early on. Unfortunately my job has demanded a good deal of overtime recently and this combined with the time I am investing in my own artistic efforts at present have seriously curtailed the time I've been able to spend not only on these discussions but on LitNet as a whole. Hopefull as the school year winds down I will have more free time.
Beware of the man with just one book. -Ovid
The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them.- Mark Twain
My Blog: Of Delicious Recoil
http://stlukesguild.tumblr.com/
Yeah, but the 4-5 or so others...? It was actually a pretty good discussion, all things considered. I doubt I would have read Pasternak's verse otherwise. But still, one would have hoped for more close readings (though I'll admit, I didn't participate much). Only have language courses this summer though, so I should be able to get in at least four hours of reading and whatnot daily again. Just this last semester has been hectic with 4 courses that required big reading, one course that required much language study, and another one that was painstakingly annoying.
Last edited by JBI; 04-13-2009 at 11:46 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
