I have been poking along in A. so much of which I have no reference. Olson is unusually lucky to have Butterick and others (former students) do the dirty work, help with references. we're talking a team effort here. I am sourly disappointed with the Poetics list, in that its conversation tends toward theory at the cost of specific enthusiasms. whenever a poet dies, there are eulogies on the list. but why so few mentions of these poets while still alive? and by enthusiasm, I don't mean yow, this writer is cool!. I mean whatever involving energy one might take from the writing. I get what people don't like about Olson. like, hey daddio, lighten up, man. that Maximus persona is pretty heavy, a big bully guy. still, I have an enthusiasm for his work and what he did as a writer. I can't point in my own work where Olson pulled me thru, I just have to assume, given how I read him, that he must've. it is awesome that folks convened to talk of LZ. I'm thinking last year may've been Lorine Niedecker's cententary (her turn, that is). was there an event for her? I'm percolating here, kinda uselesly. I'm real susceptible to enthusiasm. I know the people convening in NYC for LZ are into it, you sure get that from Josh Corey and Ron Silliman and Stephen Vincent. t'weren't just a gig. and I am psyched to lay into Z's work, just to taste that enthusiasm myself. I read Z when I was a teenage knucklehead in college. I was much challenged by his work, even bugged, but found myself picking out the shiny bits. I just want to hear about what others think are the shiny bits,with Z and with anyone else that pops their cork.