It's actually called "Vincent," and the problem was that it is inspired by Van Gogh's entire collection, not just one piece of art. It was on our original list before being disqualified for that reason.

That was in our original list, but it's inspired by Van Gogh's entire output, not just one song. That's why we left it off.

It's one of my favorite poems, and the first poem that came to my mind as well. @avclub-08ad21c6f9da6bdf51ae0b971f43d96d:disqus , I'm totally with you about how it seems so much more than WCW's take. I'd add something, but you've already said it perfectly.

It is such a good book, and you should read his other ones! But I think you're in the minority of that being your first/only book of his.

Well, the timeline jumps midparagraph, sometimes midsentence, without any indication (on a number of occasions I kept reading for a couple of graphs before I realized I was 70 years in the past from where I thought I was). The prose is very, very verbose. Paragraphs can be multiple pages. Based on what you said, you…

It is, and very, very difficult to read. But it's pretty great if you can power through. Here's my review from earlier in the year: http://www.avclub.com/artic….

@avclub-b4238f7793ec8c1a632f14f2a1766c68:disqus It's definitely a song written for a dead band mate, just not to one. This inventory is the latter, If it was the former, it'd be a much longer list.

Yeah, but then it goes "I love you baby, can I have some more?" Do you think that really refers to Whitten? I've read Shakey, the Young biography, and there's no suggestion that the two were ever in a romantic relationship.

That's not "to" Danny Whitten. (At least we don't think the "you" in the song refers to him). This isn't a list about dead bandmates, but to dead bandmates. A small distinction, I know.

To address your points:

Hey, we're actually going to do an inventory on it! Thanks for the idea. Are you on twitter or something? I'd like to acknowledge that you gave us the idea when it comes out.

I wanted to use recent examples, and pretty much everyone agrees that Brod did a good thing by releasing Kafka's work, so there's not as much to say about it as, say, The Original Laura.

Tell me what to you think (tweet me, or something, I guess?) ! It's a tough read (super, SUPER modernist), but awesome in its way.

Definitely, but my biggest problem was that the book didn't present itself as some of his doodles, but as a full-fledged work. I don't think it's as atrocious as Brian Herbert, but it still rubs me the wrong way.

Have you reach Herman Broch's The Death of Virgil? It's all about this. Fascinating, trippy novel, that (if I recall correctly) was partially written in a concentration camp. But yeah, you're right. Virgil is a perfect example of my point.

That's sort of the point I was making with visual artists having their drafts on display. There's definitely a place for displaying the drafting process. I'm with you guys.

Great idea, it would make a cool inventory.

You aren't harping! It's great to have conversations like this. From my personal position, I was pretty well informed about Tolkien's posthumous publications, and read a couple of them to prepare for this piece, and I was still surprised how little actual content was there. So I was mostly informed, and still got…

I did in the original draft. You're right that the work should be published for those scholars, etc., but like I said, it should be an appendix or something.

The problem is that the work wasn't really billed as as incomplete, etc., and Tolkien is a famous enough author that general readers are going to be interested in his books. So I don't think this is that narrow of a case.