The book itself was put together through debate, email exchanges between the authors.

Shows how interpretations of texts are fluid and constantly developing.

“readings are dynamic, complex, evolving negotiations”.

Meter is “an area of great obscurity and confusion”.

They suggest that what they do is “minimal interpretation” rather than “close reading”.

Encourages the ““layering” of readings”.

“actually understanding a poem at the most minimal level”.

“interested in poems as linguistic artefacts”.

It is therefore “a kind of reverse engineering” of a text. Considers all of the elements of the poem which makes it function.

Staying with the poem - minimal reading.

Close reading is from the school of “new criticism”, the idea that a poem is ‘one size fits all’.

Poems are situated within their historical contexts.

The dangers of “reader’s desire for hidden meaning” in texts. The need to come up with something more esoteric than is necessary.

What does poetry do?

A poem is a “process”, it moves through technique and meter. It does something rather than just is something.

Techne - the structure through which the poem is crafted and constructed.

No need to mention historical contexts unless they clearly fit. How does the poem influence history and vice versa? What is the impact? How are they entangled?