[Jim Moonan]

.
Hi Matthew, I cannot fathom why there has not been more response here about your podcast.

Speaking for myself, I have all kinds of reasons why I haven't followed up sooner to say what I think of your SLEERICKETS podcast (The name itself has a poem in it, based on your explanation of how it came to be)... But all those reasons (including births, a shoulder operation, gardening chores, et.al.) are just part of the army of procrastinators that seem to come out of hiding every time I want to say something in just the right way, using just the right words… And I go dumb.

I've listened to all four episodes. Each one is a deep riff/improvisation/rumination on things intrinsic to the art of poetry. Your stream of thought is like “the force that through the green fuse” of which Dylan Thomas speaks; the one "that drives the flower". The flower, in this instance, being the art of poetry. (Perhaps that's a bit hyperbolic, and not exactly the right simile, but still...)

My advice is: don't stop. Keep growing the concept. You're onto something. Manna! Manna! Manna! More! More! More!


.

[Sarah-Jane Crowson]

Hi,

I'm sorry I missed this first time around, and thank you Jim for bumping.

I'm not sure if I'm your intended audience, Matthew, as I'm quite new here - but I've enjoyed listening to the first two & am happy to share my thoughts if they are useful.

So, I like the website, which is nicely sparse and professional - and the production qualities are great, too - the sound quality is really, really nice. The graphic is fun and the colour scheme nicely simple and 'now'.

I think the graphic perhaps sets up an expectation that isn't quite delivered, a kind of goth-rock-spliff visual communication - as although I think the content I've listened to is erudite, well-argued, well-presented and interesting, apart from the odd expletive it doesn't really echo the goth-rock-spliff vibe.

The content is interesting and pleasant to listen to - I'm not great with podcasts generally as I tend to be either a very active listener, taking notes etc or asleep under the table, and I don't think I'm meant to do either of those with this podcast - but it works as a kind of interesting and intelligent conversation in the background.

You read extracts from essays and lines from poems beautifully and it's so nice to have the links on the page too. The podcasts I've listened to present only one perspective, but that's because it's your podcast, so it's going to be. But that might be worth considering as you move forwards - there's little scope for critical conversation in here or different opinions. I was listening out for a bit of; 'however, the alternate perspective here might be that...' but I didn't hear any that I recall.

In terms of length, my gut reaction was to hope you'd chop these up into shorter sections - but actually, I like that you don't - it's nice that these ask you to spend time with poetry (although again I'm left wondering a little about the single perspective). What works here is that you do, in effect, chop up the podcast, by offering a loose content map.

What would work for me as a potential development is if you gave timings for each section and a time-stamp within the podcast too - so I could more easily skip over sections and navigate to ideas that I find the most interesting.

Either way, it travelled well to the UK, and I've enjoyed listening this pm.

Sarah-Jane

[Matthew Buckley Smith]

Thanks so much, Jane and Jim and all! I'm planning a little Q/C & A episode, so if I were to cite your notes, would you prefer I use a first name, an initial, or no name at all? (If I don't hear from you, I'll use no name at all, of course.) And if anyone else has questions--or comments, or complaints!--post them here or write to sleerickets@gmail.com. If I don't see them in time, I'll doubtless do another such episode before too long. Thanks again!

M.

[Maryann Corbett]

I'm embarrassingly late in finding this thread, but now I've just listened to the first episode of Sleerickets, and I'm here to say, Matthew, how much sense you make about "poet/poetry voice" and how much I love Countee Cullen's "Nothing Endures," the way you read it, and the way you interpret it. So I will be listening further! Thanks for all the work you've done to produce this, and for letting us know about it.

[Matthew Buckley Smith]

Originally Posted by Maryann Corbett

I'm embarrassingly late in finding this thread, but now I've just listened to the first episode of Sleerickets, and I'm here to say, Matthew, how much sense you make about "poet/poetry voice" and how much I love Countee Cullen's "Nothing Endures," the way you read it, and the way you interpret it. So I will be listening further! Thanks for all the work you've done to produce this, and for letting us know about it.

Thanks, Maryann! I've already name-checked you on at least one episode. And I told Shane McCrae to look out for you, now that he's on Eratosphere.

Fondly,
M.

[Jim Moonan]

Bubbling this back up to say the Sleerickets podcast keeps getting incrementally better and definitely worth a listen, especially if you haven’t checked in lately. I've been listening since it began over a year and a half ago and, though they have been engaging from the start, at some point six or so months ago they settled in, found a groove, and have become consistently high quality, imo.
MBS has grown it to be more than just a one-way street and offers memberships that include a variety of different outlets for writers to engage. The podcast episodes have evolved into a forum for deep discussions with impressive guests (Philip Metres being the most recent) and MBS has recruited regular guests (including Cameron from our boards/forum here on Erato) that mesh nicely with his casual, engaging, measured, pleasantly circuitous way of conducting discussion.

The meaning of its name still escapes me but the sparse, crisp theme song has grown on me — beat for beat one of the best theme songs out there.

I’m a fan.

.

[R. S. Gwynn]

I enjoyed the conversation, some of which wasn't exactly in praise of me, with WT Clark. I do think that it's time to lay to rest articles from over 30 years ago attacking "new formalism" as though it was some kind of assault on American poetry and culture. The simple fact is that there are poets who prefer to write in form (many of them here) and that they represent a minority in the current scheme of things.