hi everyone, it's me. sorry to be late for the post. i didn't know we had assignments. anyway, i am pretty intrigued by dillion's scientific approach. he is going to "assess the case" (!). it sounds reassuring & i like the idea of proof. i am a big believer in arguments & debate, but unfortunately i tend to agree with most sides of the debate. everyone's right, everyone's wrong. this is why i am a supporter of paradox in poetics. i call it poetix. also, whenever i try to explain myself, i get called reductive. this happens in class & other discussions all the time. i wish i weren't so reductive, because it sounds like academics think that is a bad thing. but it's the way my brain works. if anyone can offer lessons on how to be more subtle and less reductive, i would gladly take them.

i think the problem with a scientific approach to poetry is that it's using a "logical" way of thinking about something that may use a different logical system. how do you read? what happens to you? this is something i am seriously interested in. what happens in your mind when you read something you like, something that baffles you, something that you hate? i don't know the answer but i'm pretty sure it will be irrational.

i like poetry that is just a bit out-of-focus. maybe with some sentences but not too many. i think if you put a few sentences in your poem then you are free to also put in some constructs that are more outta sight. i'm just trying tp see what i can get away with. i've got no problem with using the "i" but i like it when things make just a little less sense than usual.

i really regret not studying the classics more. pre & early modern. i would love to be able to think in terms of greek.

see you all in CLASS! i like the workshop a lot so far. it's great when we all laugh. let's do that again!