<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sybil&#8217;s Garage update</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sensesfive.com/2008/11/17/sybils-garage-update/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sensesfive.com/2008/11/17/sybils-garage-update/</link>
	<description>"How do you know but every Bird that cuts the airy way is an immense world of delight, closâ€™d by your senses five?" - William Blake</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 05:05:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kelly Evans</title>
		<link>http://www.sensesfive.com/2008/11/17/sybils-garage-update/comment-page-1/#comment-69323</link>
		<dc:creator>Kelly Evans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:54:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sensesfive.com/blog/?p=947#comment-69323</guid>
		<description>Funny. I was going to comment on Aaron&#039;s responses to submissions, which was, not surprisingly, basically what he said. Eh, I tried.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Funny. I was going to comment on Aaron&#8217;s responses to submissions, which was, not surprisingly, basically what he said. Eh, I tried.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Kressel</title>
		<link>http://www.sensesfive.com/2008/11/17/sybils-garage-update/comment-page-1/#comment-69322</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Kressel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:13:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sensesfive.com/blog/?p=947#comment-69322</guid>
		<description>For that very reason I&#039;m usually very vague in my poetry rejection letters.  In fiction, I can usually point to a particular problem in the story that made me decide not to accept it.  In poetry, it&#039;s never that easy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For that very reason I&#8217;m usually very vague in my poetry rejection letters.  In fiction, I can usually point to a particular problem in the story that made me decide not to accept it.  In poetry, it&#8217;s never that easy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron Leis</title>
		<link>http://www.sensesfive.com/2008/11/17/sybils-garage-update/comment-page-1/#comment-69320</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron Leis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 06:15:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sensesfive.com/blog/?p=947#comment-69320</guid>
		<description>I get ya.  It&#039;s like Lorca&#039;s &quot;duende&quot; or Wordsworth&#039;s &quot;recollection in tranquility&quot;--the idea that great poems not only evoke an emotion, but can somehow evoke the precise emotion that triggered them, or that an artist can summon the same level of intensity through repeated performances of a piece as was transmitted or felt at its initial conception or performance.

For me, poems have to pass a &quot;So what?&quot; test.  I&#039;ve seen a ton of beautifully executed poems, well-crafted ones with musical language and everything, that for some reason don&#039;t give me a reason to care about their universe.  On the other hand, I love a lot of poems that might lack in some areas but win me over with one really tight image I can&#039;t shake or a particularly musical line.  Either way, a gut feeling--which, I think, is often most valid in an editor&#039;s relationship to poetry.  Can&#039;t explain it, can&#039;t apologize for it (though I still often find myself trying).  An &quot;ah-ha,&quot; like you said.  You know it when it socks you in the stomach.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I get ya.  It&#8217;s like Lorca&#8217;s &#8220;duende&#8221; or Wordsworth&#8217;s &#8220;recollection in tranquility&#8221;&#8211;the idea that great poems not only evoke an emotion, but can somehow evoke the precise emotion that triggered them, or that an artist can summon the same level of intensity through repeated performances of a piece as was transmitted or felt at its initial conception or performance.</p>
<p>For me, poems have to pass a &#8220;So what?&#8221; test.  I&#8217;ve seen a ton of beautifully executed poems, well-crafted ones with musical language and everything, that for some reason don&#8217;t give me a reason to care about their universe.  On the other hand, I love a lot of poems that might lack in some areas but win me over with one really tight image I can&#8217;t shake or a particularly musical line.  Either way, a gut feeling&#8211;which, I think, is often most valid in an editor&#8217;s relationship to poetry.  Can&#8217;t explain it, can&#8217;t apologize for it (though I still often find myself trying).  An &#8220;ah-ha,&#8221; like you said.  You know it when it socks you in the stomach.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
