1. C major
2. B minor (implying transition through G)
3. D flat major (remote)
4. B flat minor (to relative minor)
5. D major (remote)
6. A major (to dominant – majors)
7. E flat minor (remote – tritone shift, major to minor)
8. G sharp minor (to subdominant – minors – considered as

... A flat minor)
9. E major (to relative major of subdominant)
10. G minor (remote)
11. F major (to relative major of dominant)
12. F sharp minor (remote – sharing a third on A)
13. C minor (remote – tritone shift, minor to minor)
14. B major (remote – sharing a third on E flat/D sharp)
15. C sharp minor (to relative minor of subdominant)
16. B flat major (remote)
17. D minor (to relative minor of dominant)
18. A minor (to dominant – minors)
19. E flat major (remote – tritone shift, minor to major)
20. A flat major (to subdominant – majors)
21. E minor (remote)
22. G major (to relative major)
23. F minor (remote)
24. G flat major (implying transition through D flat)

From Michael Peverett

MP - I do take blogging seriously from the cultural and literary point of view. Though I recall a journalist dismissing it as “people with too much spare time” – and that’s fair, I suppose. Then there’s cris cheek’s assertion that blogging reflects the structure of borgeois US mid-western homesteads each with their little white fence and shade tree; a sort of paean to private property. He meant that blogs were not a substitute for the kind of truly egalitarian communal art-making that he believes in. That’s a critique that needs to be taken seriously, too.

I wrote about one thing that seemed significant in blogs, the temporal sequence (entry for 21/6/05) http://michaelpeverett.blogspot.com/2005_06_01_michaelpeverett_archive.html

- There, I suggested that blogs would even displace other forms of literature, such as poems. That was a bit overstated, of course... it seems clear to me, however, that the blog is an extremely powerful structure.

AB - How would you characterize your blog you should describe it to one of us, i.e. another blogger?

MP - When I started my blog, it was only because it was compulsory in order to make a comment on someone else’s blog. Then at first I didn’t do anything much with the blog but gradually I started to have fun with it. I never put a subtitle on it – it’s not a blog “about” anything, especially not poetry or poetics or literature. That means I don’t get many visitors by other people’s standards. I have a special few that I value, and often I visit their blogs too. For example two that inspire me and that I would want to mention are - http://danielsilliman.blogspot.com/ and http://suchstuff.blogspot.com/

- what I like about these sites is their openness and also their high craftsmanship – they are not about discussing something or sounding off opinions, but about making something that can be special to the reader. They are unaffected works of art and they are exploring the possibilities of what you can do with a blog  in a very natural way –  and they are not made for a literary audience but for an audience who do not need to categorize themselves. [In fact it is amazing how many well-written and spontaneously artistic blogs are produced by people who have no connection with literature or any of the traditional arts...]  So if I had to “characterize”my blog, well I would characterize it to myself as being like those other sites, hopefully, a place you enjoy going back to and where you hope to find treasures.

AB - I sometimes regard my blog as a safe place where I can meet my chosen people, is this the same for you?

MP - No. Few of the chosen people in my real life are interested in literature or blogs! My kind of blog (see previous question) doesn’t encourage many comments and if it is a social experience it is an experience with a lot of unspoken intersubjectivity. Though I do recognize some of my regular visitors, we rarely “speak” to each other directly.

AB - I am wondering do we sometimes forget that personal remarks, notes, poems are there for everybody to be seen?

MP - I envy people who can forget or just don’t care! I am always conscious of a public audience and always adapt what I’m saying and know what I’m concealing.  And in fact I think it’s difficult, not just for me but for anyone, to really communicate in a human one-to-one way to another person while you know there will be other readers.

AB - Do you post many poems on your blog? Is there an actual difference in-between publishing online, mainly through a blog, or printed publishing?

MP - All my poems are there. For others there is a difference, for me no. My life didn’t have space to be a writer and to chase around after publication, too. Once I have posted my writing to my blog or to http://intercapillaryspace.blogspot.com  where I write reviews and things, I feel completely fulfilled.

AB - What do you think of the Blogosphere when related to blogs that deal with poetry?

MP - Some are very good, but not in the UK!  - that’s partly why Edmund Hardy started Intercapillary Space and I joined it. (See entry on my blog for 25/1/06 - http://michaelpeverett.blogspot.com/2006_01_01_michaelpeverett_archive.html)

Well, it turned out that Intercapillary Space is a great blogZine and I am proud of what we do, but it STILL isn’t the kind of forum for debate that you get on so many US blogs. I don’t know why that is. I don’t know if it’s national cultural sociological differences between the USA and the UK or what. To me it’s blogs like Ron Silliman, Mark Scroggins, Jessica Smith, K Silem Mohammad, Geoff Huth, Elizabeth Treadwell, Johannes Göransson, Anne Boyer, Jonathan Mayhew, John Latta and so many more whose inter-acting debate is creating the most informed poetry audience for many years. It will change poetry and surely for the better.

Introduction: Communication_***_Interview_***_ Blogs I visit _***_ What is a blog _***_ Webliography _***_When Blogs Will Be_***_

_***_ HOME _***_