[Bill Dyes]

I doubt if I could present any subject to "General Talk" that has not already been verbally shredded down to its quantum particulars but I would like perhaps to initiate a discussion. I've never initiated anything in "General Talk and I'm pretty scared, but I am now raising my reclusive hand into this public air to ask you all a few questions. Do you think there is such a thing as an extreme revisionist, as in a writer who after some 40 years of writing poetry (not publishing, mind you, or ever trying to) just revising over and over the same less than 100 pages of total ouput. When does the extreme revisionist become bad for himself and his poetry or tiresome to a workshop community like this one. Maybe workshopping serves only as a pusher to the revisionist junkie. Of course everyone knows that you stop revising once excellence has been achieved so, I mean, how can revision really amount to a problem for anyone? Does the history of poetry have infamous examples of irrational revisionists or have you yourselves exhibited or experienced such a personality? Do any of you have poems that you have looked at after multiple revisions and still never seem able to arrive at the point where you say 'enough is enough'. Does it matter if it's no longer recognizable as the same poem just as long as it's a better one. The fat bullseye on my forehead I noticed this morning as I was shaving has no relevance to any ensuing discussion.