The Limitations of Poetry Genius by IainDavie Lyrics
Whilst an excellent tool Poetry Genius sadly has a range of limitations currently that must be worked on and improved.
Firstly there seems no facility to work on your own personal annotations that one can keep unpublished.
Rather works of literature are being worked through currently at quite a speed. Thus what is happening is that annotations are made on the popular texts, and thus the fun of annotating yourself is no longer there. Rather one finds oneself reading others. I think sadly that is a significant limitation. No genius there I'm afraid, as genius comes from thinking for yourself.
Thus the function and solution, which must be possible is to allow for text personal annotations that allows one to work through ones self, and only to publish or merge if one wants to.
Secondly what is the definition? Does a definition in literature become set in stone? The only meaning? Are the Poetry Genius editors the final authorities on literal annotation?
If we take Homer as an example. Two of the leading scholars Nagy, Harvard and West, Cambridge simply don't agree on everything. That is simply because there are multiple layers of interpretation coupled with multiple plausible origins, sources, key orders, "ainos" and so.
In a positive spirit within the community, it would be nice to have a facility to annotate for personal private reasons. Secondly there are certainly few leading academics today that would never suggest they are the sole and only authority on interpretation of works. I don't think anyone can claim such.
Best
Iain
Firstly there seems no facility to work on your own personal annotations that one can keep unpublished.
Rather works of literature are being worked through currently at quite a speed. Thus what is happening is that annotations are made on the popular texts, and thus the fun of annotating yourself is no longer there. Rather one finds oneself reading others. I think sadly that is a significant limitation. No genius there I'm afraid, as genius comes from thinking for yourself.
Thus the function and solution, which must be possible is to allow for text personal annotations that allows one to work through ones self, and only to publish or merge if one wants to.
Secondly what is the definition? Does a definition in literature become set in stone? The only meaning? Are the Poetry Genius editors the final authorities on literal annotation?
If we take Homer as an example. Two of the leading scholars Nagy, Harvard and West, Cambridge simply don't agree on everything. That is simply because there are multiple layers of interpretation coupled with multiple plausible origins, sources, key orders, "ainos" and so.
In a positive spirit within the community, it would be nice to have a facility to annotate for personal private reasons. Secondly there are certainly few leading academics today that would never suggest they are the sole and only authority on interpretation of works. I don't think anyone can claim such.
Best
Iain