The discussion of the personal fallacy at Spidertangle has gone off the subject, mostly into misreadings and irrelevancies. I suppose I got something out of it besides my four new words, but the main thing I got out of it is the reminder that the only effective way to describe an understanding of something is to find solitude and, starting with defined terms, write a book on it. That was my intent with my work on Shakespeare's "Sonnet 18," but I can't seem to get myself back to it, and back to anything.

One news item to report, a good one, for a change: I've been asked to do a review for American Book Review. Weird timing--I was just about to write them a snippity letter about a review of a collection of bp Nichol's poetry that I thought mostly gush and bilge. I feel it's exactly the kind of thing I could do a superior review of. The book I've been asked to review is a collection of Vernon Frazer's stuff. Richard Kostelanetz recommended me for it, I imaginae because he was asked but didn't feel like doing it.

One thing about it annoyed me: the APR editor said APR's policy was to not review self-published books but would review this one because Vernon's been around as long as he has (or words to that effect). I consider not reviewing self-published books disgusting, especially for a publication supposedly concerned with the best in literature. I think if I were publishing a magazine, I would seriously consider reviewing only self-published books.