I would like to begin this apologia by discussing what I’d like to call the Blackburn Incident.In February 2012, UK poet Michael Blackburn took my Cordite piece, “Contextualists andDissidents: Talking Gertrude Stein’s Tender Buttons,” and reprinted it on his posterous blogunder the moniker “Gertie Stein’s Tender Buttons: you either get it or you don’t.” He didn’tseek to get this title change or this reprinting approved by myself or Cordite; he just did it.The piece itself is ambiguous; I meant it as a half-parody. That is, what it opens up is thepossibility that earnest exegesis of this Modernist text (“Tender Buttons”) which may be inthe process of becoming “classic” has a hinge to fraudulence and inherent self-parody. Thepiece is only a half-parody because it does not completely eschew earnestness itself; it is“backed up” by quotations and documents the way most academic writing around Modernistpoetry is, and the tacks it sticks to, where interrogation of a literary concern is concerned, arestandard and standardized. What the Blackburn Incident brings into focus is that theInternet, and Internet publishing, has become inherently ambiguous, and printings andreprintings carry the weight of ambiguous meanings in most cases. Did Blackburn and hiscircle mean to criticize this half-parodic piece, or were they half-parodying the half-parody?Did they espouse what I espoused, or was their gesture an attempt at critique? Because theBlackburn Incident forms an interesting continental tangle and triangle (i.e. I composed thepiece in America, it was published in Australia, and Blackburn reprinted it in the UK), itdemonstrates the geographical fluidity that has crept into poetry and poetics through theInternet. This fluidity may be a source of resentment to the provincial (and, if provinciality isa Blackburnian flaw, to Blackburn himself), but it is difficult to deny that it creates a dynamicaround poetry which is not only new but “nouveau.”The new and the “nouveau”; these are the primary subject matters me and my cohorts aredealing with in this essays and dialogues. Much of the perceived novelty here has to do withthe Internet and its possibilities; some of it has to do with the unsettling of preconceivedtheoretical notions regarding Modern and post-modern poetic practice; and some pieces, likethe “Rock Wax” dialogue with Matt Stevenson, simply bask in the freedom of a new era toencompass pop culture subject matter in new and innovative ways. Who is at home in thisNew Age? What the situation looks like could remind one of the American Wild West in thenineteenth century; the Digital Age is an age of scurry around cowboys, Indians, and themelees between them. If the Internet is the new Wild West, a chiasmus with print and printculture becomes necessary, to setin place the preservation of what has subsisted amidst allthe “nouveau” scrambles. If some text does not deal directly with both at once, and with theperceived and possibly troubled relationship between them, a necessity has been cast off.The “Waxing Hot” dialogues themselves have begun to enact this process; they began on myblog PFS Post, and many of them migrated over to the UK print journal Tears in the Fence.This is a process which may be called “threading the needle”; making sure that print andonline vistas open at the same time, in such a way that they form a harmonious whole. Thenet result of “Waxing Hot: Dialogues and Essays” should be just that; the formation of aharmonious whole between the nouveau and the traditional. If the book succeedsinconveying the impression that this is a viable reality, then I andmy cohorts have done our jobs; even as the Wild West impinges on any attempts to ignore it.