I want to chime in on Eileen Tabios' ruminations on Collected Poems. I collect collected editions when I can, for the possibility of finding the less well known. there is more, tho. certainly if you like a poem by someone, you would be curious to read more. I guess I don't mind the connection between the poem and the poet. tho I know that too much biography can get in the way. and I think the process is pretty damn important. anyone can find a poem, or a picture, I mean make a good one. it is, indeed, a notable aspect of art that there are some who bend their lives towards finding these treasures. it is not just fascinating to see the contortions Ginsberg, for instance, went thru to produce his oeuvre. my error with Ginsberg is not recognizing the value of these contortions. the value is in the learning process. in my showing I intentionally include works that I know are aesthetic losers. I want to acknowledge that part of the process. aesthetics is pretty tricky territory. to the degree that aesthetics propounds a conformity, it is shit. okay, I said it. the individual, hello, does not conform. admittedly, that sounds 60s to the max, and, yes, I lived thru both ends of that decade. what I infer as the devil of School of Quietude would be the way the work may conform, one to the other. but 2nd rate LANGUAGE, and NEW YORK, etc etc, likewise shuffles towards sameness. how an artist navigates those shoals... I consider myself an Olsonian, because Charles O provided me, or intimated for me, if not you, certain pathways. please, thank your teachers, even as you run away from them. there remains the matter of my saying no, Charles. no Bob, no Gertrude, no thou and thou and thou. collected poems are reports of the process of getting around to the point. ping.