…has me pondering. Yeah. That’s about all I have to say about it. Well, actually it has me wondering a bit about thematic restructuring within my own poetry but first, let me say that when I read the article written by A.S. Byatt I was immediately reminded of this video. Byatt’s article made me believe that Munch would probably have enjoyed the video in a way his critics probably wouldn’t have. Then it also reminded me a recent show by Regina artist Donna Kriekle. Her miniatures, while not reproductions, reproduce paintings in a new way. I was struck by “Not Again” and was pleased to learn how Donna had come to title the work ( I won’t steal her thunder by telling you and if you want to hear it, you’ll have to contact her); suffice it to say, I was intrigued by reproduction of art and theme.

I began to wonder how many poets become fixated on rebuilding the same theme in a poem. How many carry forward these themes from book to book? Does this make the poet write the same poem over and over? Can one have twelve different versions of a poem, and would they then be twelve different poems? How different would each version of the poem have to be in order to be a new poem?

I thought about having a dozen links in this post. What would that do to the post?


…does not lead anywhere glam, sometimes includes planes, trains and automobiles, sometimes includes an audience, sometimes includes a festival, but for me, it’s never included LA. How about New York? Now I don’t really have any worries; it seems literary tours are pretty much the same wherever you go. Except San Francisco.