<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Seeds sown in a Season of Death	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.jwire.com.au/seeds-sown-in-a-season-of-death/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.jwire.com.au/seeds-sown-in-a-season-of-death/</link>
	<description>Australia, NZ and worldwide Jewish news that matters</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Nov 2024 17:42:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Liat Kirby		</title>
		<link>https://www.jwire.com.au/seeds-sown-in-a-season-of-death/#comment-631442</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Liat Kirby]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Nov 2024 17:42:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.jwire.com.au/?p=163320#comment-631442</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I congratulate you on both the candour and the sensitivity with which you wrote this review, Anne Sarzin. As a poet, editor and reviewer myself, I fully understand the dilemma posed.  I think Mark Baker would like this review - I know that&#039;s presumptuous of me to say, as I only had slight contact with him many years ago; I have, however, read his writings and kept abreast of his work across the board.  I think it a shame that the editing was as invasive as it was, even if with good intention.  Good editing means, as much as more formal application, keeping the voice of the writer without intrusion. It is far better to suggest occasionally what you don&#039;t know through probable likelihoods, or leave as is for reader contemplation.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I congratulate you on both the candour and the sensitivity with which you wrote this review, Anne Sarzin. As a poet, editor and reviewer myself, I fully understand the dilemma posed.  I think Mark Baker would like this review &#8211; I know that&#8217;s presumptuous of me to say, as I only had slight contact with him many years ago; I have, however, read his writings and kept abreast of his work across the board.  I think it a shame that the editing was as invasive as it was, even if with good intention.  Good editing means, as much as more formal application, keeping the voice of the writer without intrusion. It is far better to suggest occasionally what you don&#8217;t know through probable likelihoods, or leave as is for reader contemplation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!--
Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: https://www.boldgrid.com/w3-total-cache/?utm_source=w3tc&utm_medium=footer_comment&utm_campaign=free_plugin

Page Caching using Disk: Enhanced 

Served from: www.jwire.com.au @ 2026-04-17 15:18:24 by W3 Total Cache
-->