»
Archives
»
Critical Analysis #2
»
Title help?
| Critical Analysis #2 |
|
Title help? |
|
|
Fuji Junior Member
since 2002-09-23
Posts 26 |
first one feels too plain. Leaving As I pack and prepare to go, I feel how much I'll miss her so. I start to reflect with my depart. With thoughts of her filling my heart. It's in my heart I feel a burn. Will I find her on my return? Will my eyes fall upon her face, When I return to this place? Should I turn for one last look? Because this may be the last chapter of our book. Last one although one word as well I felt it had a more suitable connection. But does it grab a readers attention? Conflict What if I were to say I love you, With all the strength and breath in me? Would I be too bold? Would I come off too strong? Could I not just be...... passionate? What if I were to say I love you, With a whisper as soft as a breeze? Would I be shy? Would I seem too afraid to show my feelings? Could I not just be...... intimate? What if I did not say I love you? With silence I held closed my lips. Would I be selfish? Would I miss out on love by not sharing? Could I not just convey my feelings...... without words? ............. Because words alone can't express, how much I love you. |
||
| © Copyright 2002 Joey J. Arata - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
caterina Member
since 2002-07-25
Posts 188Canada |
Hi Fuji, Welcome to the critical forum.  Looking at your poems my suggestion would be to go with the first one. I think you can work with it and expand it with some images. I am not too accepting with a poem with so many questions as I find it to be distracting. With that said I will comment on the first. Leaving ** I would suggest a better title... what you have here is too easy... be more imaginative. As I pack and prepare to go, I feel how much I'll miss her so. ** As is, it doesn't do much for the reader, I see nothing new and interesting here. Perhaps tell us where you are going and what the feeling of missing her is like. Like so: I pack my bags and prepare to exit, walk out the door into the twilight zone, alone, an empty space and her face will haunt me with that smile that awhile ago was mine. Fuji, this is a bit of an example of how you can expand on your stanzas...work them-- pop in a simili or metaphor here and there...make it interesting and give the reader something they haven't seen before...alliteration and consonnance also help and staying focused. I don't know how active you are in poetry but I do know that you must read and write on a constant basis if you want it to work. I find it to take a lot of time and effort but it is worth it. Hope I helped and thanks for sharing. caterina |
||
|
nams New Member
since 2002-09-25
Posts 5 |
I have to disagree with caterina, at least a bit. While metaphors, similes, etc.. Are important factors in poetry, sometimes it's better if they're left alone. Let the poem itself be a metaphor. (Plus, I don't like to put the words like or as in my poems. I feel it cheapens it.) In your poem, Leaving, I'd say that one of the few problems would simply be your approach. You fall into cliches too easily, and your rhyming schemes are too..forced. That's really all my advice. Keep in mind that I'm new to this, and I might just be full of crap. |
||
Cpat Hair
since 2001-06-05
Posts 11793 |
I'm not even sure why I am in here at present. I lack the technical knowledge to critique apersons poems in a meaningful way...but I do like to read..and I do like to write..so perhaps here is where I get better at it ( smiling) Anyway... my siggestion would be to avoid beginning multiple lines with the same word or series of words.. repeating a word can be effctive and useful, but it can also turn the readers mind off to the things you are trying to say by making them all look too similar... Keep writing!!! |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Nams, no-one who states their honest opinion about a poem is “full of crap”. Your sincere views are always helpful to the poet. And Cpat, a lack of technical knowledge doesn’t bar you from being extremely helpful to a writer, and your comments were very useful. And yes, a thorough reading and analysis of other poetry does indeed I believe help with your own writing. Joey I mostly agree with what Caterina has already said. I think that the main problem with these pieces is that they are simply about a particular feeling the speaker had at a particular time set down on a piece of paper in a fashion which almost reminds me of a diary entry. The emotions produced in the speaker at the time of leaving and meeting the other person were no doubt absolutely tumultuous, but you have completely failed to convey any sense of this passion to the reader. To be honest you’ve chosen just about the most difficult task in poetry: to express in words the feelings produced by love. It’s difficult for two reasons: the first, ironically, you close with in your poem where you say “Because words alone can't express, how much I love you.” Well the fact is they CAN, Shakespeare did it, so did Shelley and maybe a few hundred more in the last 500 years, but it’s difficult to do successfully because the words you use must convey pictures, images, sounds, smells, something concrete and tangible to the reader which will allow him or her to “see” what YOU felt at THAT time. Believe me that is hard to do well. And secondly, one of the main reasons its hard to do well these days is that so many many poets and “poets” have done it and attempted it that it’s virtually impossible to find new and refreshing ways to present this particular topic. In other words, as one of the previous reviewers mentioned, you are almost bound to end up using cliches. And cliches are bad. I will explain why they are bad if you want me to but not right now! My immediate advice to you if you want to improve your poetry is to cease writing about “love” for the time being at least. Anything but love! Perhaps the other main point to make is that whatever you write you should try in your early poetry to avoid abstract phrases and words. These are words that do not convey specific images to the reader, or mean completely different things to different readers and so lose their effect in producing the effect the writer is seeking. This problem mainly affects the second poem where you use words like: bold passionate shy selfish. What we want as readers is to be SHOWN that boldness, demonstrated the passion; let us SEE the shyness and selfishness. When you say: “Could I not just be...... passionate?” - we are left stone cold, when we know that in fact you want us to “feel”. To stand any chance of carrying this sort of poetry off today you really need to be nailing the emotion to a specific place or time or incident that is real and powerful to you. By describing place, time, the weather, the taxi driver’s skin tone, or the fly that landed on your love’s nose you stand some chance of involving your readers and carrying them into the emotion that you were feeling. Any other approach with this particular topic is I’m afraid likely to land your poem in the vast bland grey wilderness which is Desert Hallmark! Rob |
||
|
Radrook Senior Member
since 2002-08-09
Posts 648 |
Hi! All of the previous recommendations offered are both valuable and valid. However, since all of us produce poetry according to our different backgrounds and personalities, differences in age, education, upbringing, emotional makeup, temperament, and social status which contribute to the way that we view the world-it is only reasonable to expect that poetry would reflect this. A leapard cannot be expected to run like a Cheetah or a lion to bleat like a lamb. It just doesn't work that way. Each poet obligatorily writes at his own personal level of proficiency and pours his soul into his writing in his own unique individual way. In view of this, let me just offer a few simple suggestions. Leaving As I pack and prepare to go, I feel how much I'll miss her so. I start to reflect with my depart[,] With thoughts of her filling my heart. It's in my heart I feel a burn. [This brought heartburn due to indigestion to my mind.] Will I find her on my return? Will my eyes fall upon her face, [ Though I did understand the thought, eyes falling out of sockets onto her face was the imediate image.] When I return to this place? Should I [turn back] for one last look? Because this may be the last chapter of our book. [You need to shorten that last line to fit in with the rest of the poem's basic four-beat meter framework. The insufficiently stressed: "Because this may be the last" throws the meter off.] But does it grab a readers attention? [It grabbed my attention!] [This message has been edited by Radrook (09-28-2002 09:41 PM).] |
||
|
Radrook Senior Member
since 2002-08-09
Posts 648 |
Hi my friend! Let's see how I can help with this one. Conflict What if I were to say I love you[] With all the strength and breath in me? Would I be too bold? Would I come off too strong? Could I not just be...... passionate? What if I were to say I love you[] With a whisper as soft as a breeze? Would I be shy? Would I seem too afraid to show my feelings? Could I not just be...... intimate? What if I did not say I love you? With silence I held closed my lips. Would I be selfish? Would I miss out on love by not sharing? Could I not just convey my feelings...... without words? ............. Because words alone can't express, how much I love you. I haven't as yet read other opinions, but I find this poem beautiful! I would not tamper with too much of it since that would ruin the mood reinforced by the meter. The poem's beauty is that it conveys a conflict. To speak, or not to speak. Its purpose is not to portray how much the speaker loves but to portray the quandary which assails him at the moment of speaking. Since it does that very effectively, and since that is its purpose as its title clearly indicates, the poem really needs no modification in my view. Also, we can become too cliche' conscious to the point of not being able to write anything at all because it has in one way or another been said before. This is a danger that some fall into. Ever hear of the centipede who was walking along just fine until an ant asked him just how he managed to coordinated all those legs? Then the centipede started to trip and fall? Only thing I saw to modify was the punctuation with commas unneeded. Apart from that everything is fine. Congratulations on a fine composition. BTW I was NOT left stone-cold by any part of this poem. I found it very moving. Perhaps because I have experienced that agonizing conlict you speak of many times. [This message has been edited by Radrook (09-28-2002 10:56 PM).] |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Fuji There are a couple of comments here from Radrook which I should like to expand upon. If you are quite happy to simply write what comes into your head at any one time and “pour out your heart” onto the page then read no further. However I am under the impression (Pete will correct me if I err) that this forum is designed to assist people who have a serious intention of improving their poetry by offering constructive criticism. As you posted here I assume that you wish hear differing views about your poem and differing opinions about how it may be improved. My views differ from Radrook’s. He says: “Each poet obligatorily writes at his own personal level of proficiency and pours his soul into his writing in his own unique individual way.” There are two points here. First of all the word “obligatorily” suggests that the poet doesn’t have any option. Which of course is true for that instant in time, but it’s a slightly unfortunate word choice because it also hints that that level of proficiency maybe be somehow inherent (apologies Radrook if I read too much into this). I don’t believe that poetic ability is all a gift at birth. Obviously some people have more natural ability than others, but you can LEARN to write poetry better. Which leads me on to the second point which is that writing better poetry has nothing whatever to do with pouring souls. Sure the inspiration may come from some inner place or feeling but you write using your brain, not your heart or soul. And yes, all brains are individual! “Also, we can become too cliche' conscious to the point of not being able to write anything at all because it has in one way or another been said before. This is a danger that some fall into.” I’m sorry Radrook but this is just not true and it is not constructive for a new writer to be hearing it in a forum like this. I don’t mean to be disrespectful to you but the one thing a serious new writer should be doing is seeking to avoid hackneyed phrases and CONSTANTLY thinking of new ways to say things, and there ARE always new ways, that is one of the wonderful things about poetry. I’m not saying that cliches should never ever be used, in fact one of my favorite poets, Simon Armitage, uses them all the time, but they are for experienced writers trying to achieve a specific effect setting up a particular drama in a poem for instance or as part of dialogue maybe. But generally a big NO NO. The following extract from "Writing Poems: Fourth Edition" Wallace & Boisseau highlights the problem: "Cliches- stale, timeworn too familiar words and phrases- are best avoided in favor of freshness. The language of poetry pays attention, and it is the nature of a cliche not to pay attention. Recently a newspaper carried this sentence: "I think we are enjoying the backlash of the moral decline that peaked in Watergate,' Dr. Weber said." Enjoying a lash of any kind seems unlikely; and the peak of a decline is language that isn't listening to itself at all. You can test for a cliche by asking yourself whether the word, phrase, or image you're using is particular or generic. If you say, "She's always there for me," where is there? When you need support and companionship, wouldn't you rather have her here than there? If you're writing about a rainbow, do you see a real rainbow with all its translucence, transience, and tenuousness? No rainbow looks exactly like another. Or do you see the graphic artist's generic sentimental symbol: neat little arches lined up according to the spectrum, violet to blue, flat colors? If you're thinking of the latter, you have a cliche; drop it. Another test is to ask yourself if you really know what you're talking about when you use the word, phrase, or image. What's a doornail? Is it dumber than a roofing nail? Quieter? Smarter than a finishing nail? A final test: do you get a sensation when you use the phrase, or are you only transmitting general impressions? Hard as nails doesn't trigger a feeling of hardness and durability. Cold as ice doesn't make you want to shiver. Does light as a feather make you feel ticklish, wispy barbs? Poetry often generates a kind of cliche all its own, poetic diction, which is fancy, pompous, or ornate language that gets used and reused until it becomes simply dull. Words like o'er for over, ere for before, or thou for you are examples. So are such eighteenth-century elegant variations as finny tribe for fish. Don't use in a poem a word that you wouldn't use in speech - or at least weight your purpose carefully." Once again Radrook I apologise if I appear to be being confrontational here, but it’s difficult to simply stand by and see such advice being dispensed. Feel free to discuss if you wish! Rob |
||
|
Crazy Eddie Member
since 2002-09-14
Posts 178 |
Rob/All I’m not sure that Radrook was denying the possibility of change and improvement when he wrote this: “Each poet obligatorily writes at his own personal level of proficiency and pours his soul into his writing in his own unique individual way.” I took it to mean that people write (and re-write other peoples poetry) to the best of their ability and in a style that they prefer. If this was his intent I’d have to agree, people are restricted and obliged to use only the tools they own even when it’s blatantly obvious that there are better tools on the market. That isn’t to say that they can’t or won’t ever acquire new tools, or that they wouldn’t use them if they had them, but that they have no option other than to use the ones they have at present. That doesn’t mean that you can’t produce good work without the best tools, it means you have to use the tools that you posses a little better and pick up the better tools as cheaply as possible as you go. Which is where this forum and Rob’s comments start to make a lot of sense. Have you ever watched those do-it-yourself programmes on television? The ones where they take a pile of rough timber and manage to construct a piece of furniture that would rival a Chippendale. Have you ever tried to build anything they built only to end up with something reminiscent of a banana box? If you have you’ll know what I mean, it seems fairly obvious that it isn’t a lack of knowledge that makes your dovetail joints closer to dog tails it’s the fact that Norm has a $1000 dollar dovetail joint cutter and you have a blunt chisel and a tenon saw but that may not be the case. What I think Rob is saying is close to “it’s a poor workman that blames his tools”, and there is some truth in that, if the chisel was a little sharper and more time was given to the task better dovetail joints are a real possibility. All it takes is a little care and a lot of time, after all Chippendale didn’t have a $1000 dovetail joint cutter either. On the matter of cliché I’m pretty much with Rob all the way, all I’ll add is that sometimes and in some situations, and undoubtedly moderation, the use of a cliché or hackneyed phrases is permissible if not downright preferable. Sometimes the striving for originality in a line or phrase is counter-productive, diverting the reader’s train of thought away from the original goal and intent of the writer. In such situations a cliché avoids the necessity to over elaborate, you can say in one line what would normally take two stanzas, the reader will know immediately what you mean. Now that I’ve got that off my chest I’ll get back to the poems at hand. I say poems because I’m not sure whether this is a continuous poem or a complementary pair. I’m going to treat them as two separate poems and restrict my comments to the first. As I see it there are three ways of writing poetry. One is the outpouring of thought that Rob mentioned, another is the planned and formal campaign and the third is an amalgamation of the first two. Writing the first is the easiest to do and almost impossible to critique, it’s a personal cascade of emotion that either will or, invariably, will not succeed in the eyes of the reader. The last is complicated and almost impossible without mastering the second so I’m going to treat your poem as a planned campaign an attempt to guide the reader from point A to point B with however many visits to other letters of the alphabet the reader happens to wander. The main aim throughout this type of writing is to get the reader to B without him/her knowing that that was your intention all along and to keep him/her interested as you do it. The aim of your poem seems to be, as far as I understand it, an attempt to get the reader to understand that sometimes the word ‘goodbye’ means a whole lot more than the word at first implies. As I pack and prepare to go, I feel how much I'll miss her so. Lays out the fact that you’re leaving I start to reflect with my depart. With thoughts of her filling my heart. That you’re having second thoughts It's in my heart I feel a burn. Will I find her on my return? Questioning whether you’re making the right decision Will my eyes fall upon her face, When I return to this place? Wondering how she’ll react Should I turn for one last look? Because this may be the last chapter of our book. Last one although one word as well I felt it had a more suitable connection. But does it grab a readers attention? And wondering if she’ll work out all these things from one word – goodbye. If your intention was to get me to this point it worked, I’m here, does that mean this is a good poem? Unfortunately not, while I got the point (if I did in fact get the right point) the getting there wasn’t interesting enough to make the journey worthwhile. Fortunately now that you know the steps that got me there you can set about making the journey a little more interesting. Lets take the points I raised to highlight my interpretation as a starting block on which to build: Lays out the fact that you’re leaving That you’re having second thoughts Questioning whether you’re making the right decision Wondering how she’ll react And wondering if she’ll work out all these things from one word – goodbye. We know that these steps get us to where we want to go so now we can play around and make each one a little more interesting. (At this point I’m going to have to break a very big rule, it’s the one which says that a critique shouldn’t be a total rewrite, I apologise in advance but I can’t make my point without doing so.) My dreams into a packing case All folded neat and placed with care Each item lashed to memories Conspiring to keep me there. The ends all justify the means (cliché) Can meanings ever justify the end? Will words unwritten or misplaced Turn love once lost into a friend? Can one word capture in a thought? Are chapters lost between the lines? That sentences the reader to An author’s failed designs. This isn’t supposed to be a suggestion of how it should be done, it and I aren’t good enough to do that, it’s supposed to be an example of how you can say the same thing in different ways without resorting to simple sentences to say what you mean. There are a lot of things I haven’t said, like why I changed the rhyme scheme and the importance of a tune but hopefully this will give you some ideas. I better add the usual bit about this being only my opinion and the fact that you can disregard any or all of my comments as you see fit, I’m not after all qualified to offer anything but good intentioned advice. Thanks for the chance to read and reply. [This message has been edited by Crazy Eddie (09-29-2002 12:38 PM).] |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Eddie You are Ron Carnell in disguise. With diplomacy like that you must be! Nice reply and good advice, and yes, you nailed what I was trying to say in my usual ham-fisted way! Rob |
||
|
Radrook Senior Member
since 2002-08-09
Posts 648 |
I am astonished that my opinion on this poem has elicited such a tremendous response! Since I have been misunderstood, I suppose that a clarification is needed. Statement: There are two points here. First of all the word “obligatorily” suggests that the poet doesn't have any option. Response: I did not mean to imply that he could not or should not strive to improve. Shakespeare wrote what he wrote in the manner that he wrote it because he could write no other way when he wrote it. His choice of style and his way of saying the things he said were predetermined by who he was at that particular stage of his development as a poet. Of course we should all try to improve. That's why we are all here offering our poems for criticism--to improve. If we wanted our poems not criticized in order to improve, them we would write them only for the general forum. So that in itself should be enough for the reader of what I said to conclude that I could NOT have meant that I am against improvement. Any person who is against improvement is an idiot. I assure you--an idiot I am not. So I apologize if my use of "obligatorily" led others to believe that I am against improvement. I really did not think that such a conclusion was possible when I used that word. Statement: I don't believe that poetic ability is all a gift at birth. Response: Again, I did not say that poet is born a poet. Actually, this is a case of nurture versus nature, an argument which has been going on for centuries and which has no one-or-the-other-answer since both nature and nurture contribute to a person's development in varying degrees. So again, I am not so naive as to conclude that a person is born a full-blown poet. Statement: Which leads me on to the second point which is that writing better poetry has nothing whatever to do with pouring souls. Response: First, I do not believe in the platonically derived concept of an immortal soul. So I certainly wasn't referring to it in that particular misconceived manner as the context should have clearly indicated. I used the hackneyed expression, "pouring soul" to symbolize what it has always been used for, the pouring out of emotion via the use of language. If indeed emotion has nothing to do with poetry, then I guess that I have been misreading all the poems I have read which are brimming with emotions that the poet felt strongly when he wrote them. If indeed poets were all brain and no heart, or emotion, as I could very well erroneously conclude from your words, then I seriously doubt that poetry would even be written since most poetry is written due to an emotional need. I could go on to enumerate these basic needs, but I will assume that most readers are familiar with these. For example, man's frustration due to his own mortality and imminent death causes such poems as the Byzantium poem to be written. If indeed man were devoid of emotion, poetry would cease to exist at all levels since the needs which lead to poetry would be missing. So if "heart" and "soul" is being used to mean emotion, I strongly differ with you on this point. Perhaps you should have qualified your statement with, "most" or "some" or "many." Statement: I'm sorry Radrook but this is just not true and it is not constructive for a new writer to be hearing it in a forum like this. Response: Neither is it constructive for a new writer to be hearing that he should be TOTALLY original in EVERYTHING he writes which is at a beginning stage and very often at later stages exceedingly difficult to achieve. Setting up such unattainable goals at such early stages can discourage instead of encourage a beginner who will find it impossible to implement the inflexible standard set by those who are far more skillful than he is. This is where empathy is supposed to become a factor in our advice-giving. But then again, empathy is not very high on the agenda these days. In short, I found this poet's second poem very enjoyable and not at all hackneyed. Neither did I see it as an attempt to show how much he loved the person addressed. I understood the poem to be an attempt at depicting the conflict felt frequently between wanting to express oneself and NOT wanting to express oneself. The difficulties that one has in determining just how the other person will react. Our wish to know for sure what that reaction will be. In short, the representation of Sartre's existential agony or dread as manifested in one's efforts at reaching a decision which causes the Sartrean vertigo which inevitably accompanies it. [This message has been edited by Radrook (09-29-2002 03:16 PM).] |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Radrook From which I deduce that your advice to Fuji is: 1. To try to write with his head and not his heart or soul (whatever that might be!) 2. To strive to improve and never to be satisfied with a poem after a first, or even a tenth, draft. 3. To always try to think of new and original ways of writing even if such attempts are not always successful. Good! We agree! Rob |
||
|
Crazy Eddie Member
since 2002-09-14
Posts 178 |
“You are Ron Carnell in disguise. With diplomacy like that you must be! “ Knowing Ron, however remotely, I can’t take that any way other than as a compliment, the disguise bit made me chuckle though but that’s another story for another time. |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Eddie, believe me it was my attempt at a big compliment. But you have me intrigued! Rob |
||
|
Radrook Senior Member
since 2002-08-09
Posts 648 |
Hi Rob We agree in essence. As I said, all the advice that was given is valid. Our disagreement is in the appropriate degree of emphasis that needs to be given at early stages of a writer's development. It is not a qualitative but a quantitative difference of opinion. About writing only with one's head, I think you mean revising--not the initial write. A man writing about the death of his wife or son or mother cannot write only with his "head" whatever that might mean. To be honest, I have difficulty even imagining such a grief-stricken person going mechanically and systematically over his poem revising it in an emotionless all-head manner just to make it "better." |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Radrook Yes, perhaps just emphasis divides us. And yes a man writing about the death of his wife or mother is not likely to use his head, by which I mean he is unlikely to think about communicating with a reader in a coherent way using all the devices available to him in poetry. This is as opposed to writing "from the heart or soul" which often these days seems to mean waiting until you feel a Wordsworthian surge of feeling and then simply rushing it all down on paper and calling it a finished poem. A man in the throes of the sort of grief you describe is unlikely to write anything other than an outpouring intended more for his own therapeutic purposes than for a external readership. So again I agree with you, I also have difficulty even imagining such a grief-stricken person going mechanically and systematically over his poem revising it in an emotionless all-head manner just to make it "better." From which I conclude that he shouldn't be trying to write a poem for public consumption at all. Rob |
||
|
Radrook Senior Member
since 2002-08-09
Posts 648 |
True! I agree. Much poetry written under a surge of emotion is not suitable for certain public consumption. But then again, not all poetry readers are of the same caliber. If indeed we are targeting an audience with sophisticated literary tastes, we best beware since their refined reader palates are easily offended. They tend to readily become amused or annoyed at any ineptitude which a person not of their educational background might produce under grief, love, hatred, envy, joviality, or any of the other emotions which might motivate a poet to write. But if that same poem is read by a less sophisticated reader, one which is very likely to express himself in a similar way when faced with such a personal crisis such as the death of a loved one, then the poem will be very effective in evoking similar sentiments. If indeed the poem manages to convey the depth of despair which the poet feels and manages to recreate some of that despair in the reader, then that poem, no matter how badly written, cannot and should not be considered worthless since it has managed to do that which it set out to do. To say that it leaves one unmoved is to say that it leaves one unmoved. But this is certainly not to say that it will leave EVERYONE unmoved. The reasons for this different reaction are not necessarily educational. They are experiential. We all go through life experiencing different events which a poem might describe. Whereas one reader cannot relate to a particular poem's reference to the thrills of skydiving, for example, I might, if I have skydived. So while others will remain unmoved--I and others like myself might be deeply moved by it. [This message has been edited by Radrook (09-30-2002 11:49 PM).] |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Radrook This is turning into a “what is poetry” discussion similar to that in the “Melt” thread which was not my intention. Let’s remember where we are. We are in a “Critical Analysis” forum in a thread where we are seeking to help a writer improve his writing. That’s what I was trying to do. Perhaps what we should really be considering here is the purpose of the existence of CA. (Pete!?). Here’s my view, starting with Ron’s summary from the index board: “Post poems here to invite more in-depth critiques, and join the conversations on what makes poetry work.” I agree with that of course, but it bears expanding upon. I don’t think anyone is suggesting that CA is simply targeting academics (I am just as wary of people who call poems “texts” as you seem to be), but neither is CA designed to be another Open forum which, as I think Ron would readily agree, is more about friendship and support than poetry per se. So at one end of the spectrum we have Parish Academia and at the other Universe Hallmark - and in between? In between there is a large amount of poetry written by people who have a wish to write to reach out to others and perhaps leave their “mark” on the world. Maybe it’s vain or maybe just a natural human desire to be recognised, but many of these writers also want to show off their writing by publishing it. Being blunt, I would say that one of the main aims of CA should be to help people do just that if they wish. It’s good to have targets and goals and this seems to me to be a great target to aim at in an effort to improve ones poetry. And there are many many reputable non-academic journals, magazines and periodicals out there publishing good quality writing. The emphasis here is on “reputable”, for there is little point in CA existing if it doesn’t strive to assist people to aim high. There are plenty of low quality mags as well, and a plethora of vanity rags but any old poem dashed off and posted on a vanity board will stand a chance of appearing in those. If we in CA are simply going to see a poem of that quality posted in this forum and not seek to work with the author to improve it (or maybe even bin it) then for me CA loses much of its point. So, yes I see CA as a quasi workshop as well. We mostly all start off by writing self serving introverted poems ( I certainly did anyway). After all poetry is such an appropriate medium for venting. But then hopefully we move on from that to try and relate those feelings to what is going on in the wider world, and then on further to actually use them as a catalyst to say something new abut the world, or a particular aspect of it. CA hopefully helps people to move along that journey. And this helping is a mutual process. Someone posting here has to want to be helped. Too often IMO we see people simply shove up an infantile poem looking for instant praise with no serious intention of contributing to the forum or even posting another poem. It’s totally unfair to expect experienced reviewers to waste their time helping such people without at least establishing first the motive for posting. So when I say in this forum that something leaves “us” unmoved. The “us” I am referring to is the average discerning reader who is reads the poetry in reputable journals, anthologies and collections. Anything less IMO dilutes the purpose of CA to the point where the rationale for its existence is in doubt. Off the soap box now. Rob |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
Mornin' guys 'n gals, All right, here are my short thoughts on the purpose of CA. First, you all set the tone and direction of the forum. My job is just to ensure that we remain within PIP's guidelines. With established members, this is rarely a problem. Newcomers sometimes may not be familiar with how we work and may tend to bend the rulse a bit. A gentle reminder usually suffices to remedy the situation. We have many denizens in CA who are better writers than I am and certainly better critics. I don't mind that at all. It gives me an opportunity to learn. After all, that is the purpose of the forum. On the other hand, we don't have any great poets here either, not yet anyway. If we did, they would likely be publishing books instead of messing about an internet forum. But if the format works, who knows, we may someday produce a Frost or a Poe or a Dickinson. If so, I would be proud to have been a small part of that talent development. Rob, I would have to say you described it pretty well. And I think everyone here probably agrees much more than disagrees with you. We probably have as many ideas on methodology as we have members though. Most are probably as valid as any others. There is Open where everyone has a good time and at least professes to like everything posted. There is the Poetry Workshop where a specific topic is discussed and practised each month. Then there is Critical Analysis where everyone is free to write whatever they want and submit it for review from their peers. The advice given here is personal opinion by nature. The theory is that the advisers are studying the art of critique as well as poetry. As I said, you run the show. But my opinion as to our direction is twofold. One is to help one another improve our skills in the fine art of writing poetry. The other is to help one another improve our skills in the fine art of critiquing same. Just as we have no great poets, we also have no great critics. I say that with some reservation since we do have a few (names withheld) who are pretty damn good. One of the endearing features of PIP is that we try to function as a family. That obviously does not imply that we always agree. Even in my small family at home, we rarely agree. But we make an effort to disagree agreeably. (I think I stole that quote from Ron.) We usually should treat a beginner somewhat differently from a more experienced member. If I or one of the other oldtimers post a hallmark poem or one full of misspellings and grammatical mistakes, we probably deserve a pretty good tongue lashing for it. But if one of our teens or other newbie were to make a similar mistake, a more gently reminder seems more appropriate. Now on a second or third offense, the critique deserves to be stronger and I am certain it will be. Those who fail to, or refuse to, listen to the advice given, usually don't last long. I don't mean this to chastise at all. To the contrary, I think everyone who has been active the last few months has been doing an outstanding job. CA had been foundering for a while. I sincerely thank every one of you for reviving it as you have. Finally, I'll try to answer an implied question from above. The Philosophy Forum was initially intended to discuss the philosophy of writing poetry. It has since evolved to discussing the philosophy of almost anything, little of it being poetry. Technically, some of the discussions we have recently had here would more properly belong in Philosophy. But it seems perfectly valid to me that we discuss these things here. After all, Melt as well as this thread deal with poetry and critiquing. What better subjects to discuss in a forum where our goal is to learn poetry and critique? In short, keep it up. There is much to be learned from this. Thanks all, Pete [This message has been edited by Not A Poet (10-01-2002 10:26 AM).] |
||
|
Radrook Senior Member
since 2002-08-09
Posts 648 |
Hi! I would first like to thank the moderator for a great clarification about this forum's purpose, which is, of course, for all of us to learn. In the process of learning, there is very often disagreement. I see absolutely NOTHING wrong with divergence of views. These exist in all the arts. Preferences are to be expected, respected, or at least tolerated to assure that a fine forum such as this continues to function effectively and as smoothly as possible. Can the forum run smoothly even when we disagree? I don't see why not. A student will evaluate both points of view and decide which one is the more valid. He might feel that the preponderance of opinion is to be given more weight. Or he might feel that the preponderance of opinion is wrong. Whateve may be the case, the student learns much from a FRIENDLY discussion of different ways in which poetry can and should be evaluated. As "Not a Poet" said, not everyone evaluates a poem in the same way. We differ in our priorities and in the emphasis which we might give to poetical evaluative criteria. You see, in my view, all poetry has value, not just poetry fit to be included in some reputable anthology or some high-flung college publication. One value is the therapeutic one. Writing poetry serves as a cathartic to those assailed and overwhelmed by emotional stresses of life. That in itself gives the poetry a noble function regardless of how badly it is written. This is of course not to say that if such a poem is offered up for critical evaluation we should ignore its defects. Of course we shouldn't. But as the moderator said, it is best very often to do so in a gentle manner so as not to discourage any further attempts at poetry. If we place too heavy a load on a small donkey its back might break. So too a beginning writer might simply throw up his hands in frustration and give up. So this reaction too has to be kept in mind when we attempt to give advice to beginners. I also believe that the expectation that EVERYONE should react to certain types of poetry more or less identically is rather unreasonable. There are people who like limericks and value them for their comical aspects. Not all poetry needs to be deadpan serious. A limerick is then judged by how well it accomplishes its purpose. Is its purpose to make us laugh? Did it make us laugh? Then it is a good limerick. If their are grammatical or other types of errors in the limerick, these should be considered of secondary importance to its primary function of making us laugh. So each genre must be evaluated within its own unique parameters. It is rather similar to a dog show. Each breed has its standard of exvellence by which the judges evaluate it. So too poetry genres. AS for soap-boxing, and getting off my soapbox, it is rather unfortunate that you perceive my contributions to this discussion in that negative light. Fortunately I do not see YOU as soap-boxing but as merely stating your views Robt. Anyway, at least the moderator sees it as a positive activity. Thank God! [This message has been edited by Radrook (10-01-2002 12:57 PM).] |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
Gentlemen, I do not mean to start an argument here. Neither do I intend for my impressions to side either way if there is an argument. Perhaps I should refer to a strongly worded discussion instead of an argument. As I said above, my opinion is that everyone is doing an excellent job of pursuing our collective goal. For the record, I do not fully agree with either of you, Rob and Rad. On the other hand, I obviously do not fully disagree with you either. You both have your own approach to critiquing, both of which seem fully valid to me. I think you are both right but, if you believe your style is superior, then you are most likely wrong. Keep in mind that the guidelines do not specify that we must "be nice" to newbies. But they do require civility and that you critique only the poem, not the poet. Let your own common sense guide you in how hard or lenient you should be with any particular poem or poet. It is only my opinion that newbies should be handled a little gentler at first, not a requirement. Pete |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Pete Thanks for the input. Observations: "It gives me an opportunity to learn. After all, that is the purpose of the forum." >>> Totally agree. "On the other hand, we don't have any great poets here either, not yet anyway. If we did, they would likely be publishing books instead of messing about an internet forum." >>> Humm. Don't do CA and other learning forums down Pete! Some very good poets love to try and pass on their knowledge to genuinely receptive students, and the internet is an excellent place do that. " Then there is Critical Analysis where everyone is free to write whatever they want and submit it for review from their peers. The advice given here is personal opinion by nature. The theory is that the advisers are studying the art of critique as well as poetry." >>> Again agree. Technically, some of the discussions we have recently had here would more properly belong in Philosophy. But it seems perfectly valid to me that we discuss these things here. After all, Melt as well as this thread deal with poetry and critiquing. What better subjects to discuss in a forum where our goal is to learn poetry and critique? >>> I think you are right and the description of CA seems to bear it out: "... and join the conversations on what makes poetry work." >>> Thanks again Pete for spending time on this. Radrook In the process of learning there is very often disagreement. I see absolutely NOTHING wrong with divergence of views. These exist in all the arts. Preferences are to be expected, respected, or at least tolerated to assure that a fine forum such as this continues to function effectively and as smoothly as possible. >>> I acknowledged previously that of course there is a divergence of views about what good and bad poetry is, but the whole purpose of my last post was to try and point out that for the purposes of CA there is a certain, and here I flatter the writing by using an undeserved term, genre of poems which some people loosely call "hallmark poems". I think most people here will know exactly what I am taking about. All I'm saying is that in CA the aim should be to wean posters away from that type of writing and never never to encourage them down that path. Can the forum run smoothly even when we disagree? I don't see why not. A student will evaluate both points of view and decide which one is the more valid. >>> Back to the basic aims of the forum again. "Validity" is subjective and according has to be read against a background of what the forum exists to try to do. Bluntly then, a critique applauding hallmark poetry in this forum might be a valid point of view in terms of the reviewer's sincere thoughts about the poem, but would not IMO be "valid" in terms of the purpose of CA. Indeed it would be positively unhelpful (see my comments about the activity in CA below to Pete). As "Not a Poet" said, not everyone evaluates a poem in the same way. We differ in our priorities and in the emphasis which we might give to poetical evaluative criteria. You see, in my view, all poetry has value, not just poetry fit to be included in some reputable anthology or some high-flung college publication. One value is the therapeutic one. Writing poetry serves as a cathartic to those assailed and overwhelmed by emotional stresses of life. That in itself gives the poetry a noble function regardless of how badly it is written. >>> And here is the nub of the problem. You see a "noble function" in this forum counts for nothing to me. If I see a poem which has clearly been written as a catharsis, or by someone in the grip of terrible stress, I feel sorry for them, but if the poem is badly written I would simply treat it as a badly written poem and point out why. Almost certainly that person is posting in the wrong forum and should try Spiritual or Open or Dark perhaps. CA stands or falls on the honesty of its attempts to give poems validity as pieces of writing with more than simply therapeutic value to the writer. This is of course not to say that if such a poem is offered up for critical evaluation we should ignore its defects. Of course we shouldn't. But as the moderator said, it is best very often to do so in a gentle manner so as not to discourage any further attempts at poetry. If we place too heavy a load on a small donkey its back might break. So too a beginning writer might simply throw up his hands in frustration and give up. So this reaction too has to be kept in mind when we attempt to give advice to beginners. >>> I hear what you say. I have been around forums long enough to have a pretty good idea when a person is seriously interested in improving a poem or merely grandstanding, sympathy seeking or looking for a personal one hit wonder. I can be a gentle as the best of them I assure you if I see a genuine propensity towards listening and learning. I also believe that the expectation that EVERYONE should react to certain types of poetry more or less identically is rather unreasonable. There are people who like limericks and value them for their comical aspects. Not all poetry needs to be deadpan serious. A limerick is then judged by how well it accomplishes its purpose. Is its purpose to make us laugh? Did it make us laugh? Then it is a good limerick. If their are grammatical or other types o errors n the limerick, these should be considered of secondary importance to its primary function of making us laugh. So each genre must be evaluated within its own unique parameters. >>> I happen to love limericks, and of course many other types of poetry as well. I said nothing about reacting identically or liking only particular types of poetry. On the other hand there are well written poems of all types and badly written ones. There are poems which will stand a good chance of being accepted for publication and ones which won't. AS for soap-boxing, and getting off my soapbox, it is rather unfortunate that you perceive my contributions to this discussion in that negative light. >>> Er, you either need to remove the sizable chip or buy a new pair of specs! If you read again you may see that I was in fact ridiculing my own rant. >>> No-one here has a soap box as big as me I guess - except maybe Trevor, and he's not around. Rob PS To Pete again: You mentioned about the revival of CA's activity. Perhaps you might like to reflect on the fact that CA works only so long as it offers something substantially different to what can be obtained in the remainder of the site. As you intimated it professes to offer the opportunity to learn. To learn there has to be at least some degree teaching ability, a pool of willing participants and some agreement as to what is being taught. Crucially there have to be people willing to give their time to review. When a block of active (and reasonably competent) reviewers happen to hit the forum at any one point in time this seems to attract a large number of "one post wonders" presumably hoping to benefit from a free appraisal telling them that they are the next Wallace Stevens. All I would say is that there may be a case (contrary to the usually accepted practice with "new" writers) for, as it were, asking them to demonstrate a willingness to participate in some way before too much time is wasted encouraging them into wasting more time. The latter course ends in only one way; reviewers get fed up, leave, and then a period of stagnation ensues with a stream of halfhearted posters passing through the forum and out, never to be seen again. Pete, I know I come over seeming somewhat harsh and unfeeling in what I just said, I don't mean to, call it long pent up frustration at seeing what might be constructive forums for progress, degenerate in to little more than pale ghosts of the myriad vanity boards on the net. And btw I'd just like to say that you personally do a really excellent policing job. I know it's not easy sometimes, and I believe you have held this post for some considerable time. Now I really am down off the box I promise......(note: MY box Radrook! ... j/k) Rob |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
Rob, you are absolutely right in saying that CA survives only on its ability and willingness to offer something different, dare I say more at least for educational purposes, than the other forums. We are not a "vanity forum" and intend to never be. As you say, there are plenty of those out there if one is interested. To survive, we must offer the opportuinity to learn. You would appear to be right in that active reviewers tend to attract new poets to the forum. I offer no proof but I think the reason may be different from your speculation. Maybe they just see the activity and feel that is a good opportunity to try it out. Whatever their reason, if they do come here seeking just an attaboy they will be disappointed. There is no purpose, in this forum, in encouraging bad work. Nobody is going to agrue with you about asking new poets to not only "demonstrate a willingness to participate" but actually do so. I understand your frustration when you take the time to thoroughly analyze and critique a poem only to see the author make light of your effort or completely ignore it. That, of course, does not mean that the author must make any changes you suggest. But I know you didn't mean that anyway. Finally, a major factor in that willingness is to participate by offering critiques on others' works. We are not all good critics but we must do our best and by reading other critiques and by practising, we will get better. Our guidelines suggest that one comment on at least 2 other poems for each one of his own he submits. All the regulars in CA far exceed that ratio. Those who do not seldom last very long. That, in my opinion, is what makes it work. Well, that along with an occasional excellent poem that we all are watching for and, inevitably, a very few real stinkers. No, I don't think you are overly harsh. We have certainly had harsher critics in the past. You have your own decidedly non-sugar coated style and I think it is perfectly valid. Pete |
||
|
Radrook Senior Member
since 2002-08-09
Posts 648 |
Hi Rob: First, I do not consider rhymed Hallmark Greeting Card messages poetry. I consider it merely verse-thoughts put down on paper in rhyme and to please or comfort. Nothing at all substantial. Lots of heat but no light! I haven't come across pure hallmark here yet. But perhaps that's because my criterion in relation to classifying a poem as Hallmark is not yours. As for flattery, why should I? I have no reason, no gain whatsoever in using flattery here. Flattery is used by those who have something to gain from it. So all my opinions of all the poems I have read here [believe it or not] have been sincere. I suppose that viewed from your perspective they might appear insincere. But such is really not the case. Neither have I recommended treating people here with kid gloves. Anyone who has read my critiques knows that I call it like I see it. In fact, one poet became irate because I called it like I saw it. Another systematically disagreed with my criticism point by point because I called it like I saw it. Another disagreed because I suggested removal of Ebonics within a portrayal of stupidity context. Even YOU right now are in disagreement with me because I call it like I see it. These types of reactions are certainly NOT indicative of someone using wishy-washy please-the writer-no-matter-what or-how-he-writes approach. So it should be more than obvious that I am NOT recommending a lowering of this forum's critique standards as you seem to be inferring and suggesting. That would be rather presumptuous of me--don't you think? Should emotionally written poetry be criticized? Sure! If the poet brings it here, it is to be criticized. However, IMHO, he should not be told it is garbage, worthless tripe in so many words. At least I don't recommend it. But, each has his own critique method. I am not averse on criticizing any poem placed on this forum for that purpose. But I try not not to forego civility in the process lest I do more harm than good. It is also sad to know that you think I have a chip on my shoulder. But, I suppose that you are entitled to your opinion. I am simply here to learn from others and to help others with their poetry to the best of my ability. Nothing more, nothing less. Sorry you feel that way. [This message has been edited by Radrook (10-02-2002 01:21 AM).] |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Hi Rob: First, I do not consider rhymed Hallmark Greeting Card messages poetry. I consider it merely verse-thoughts put down on paper in rhyme and to please or comfort. Nothing at all substantial. Lots of heat but no light! I haven't come across pure hallmark here yet. But perhaps that's because my criterion in relation to classifying a poem as Hallmark is not yours. >>> Quite possibly! But there we can quite happily differ I think. As for flattery, why should I? I have no reason, no gain whatsoever in using flattery here. Flattery is used by those who have something to gain from it. >>> NO no no ...misunderstanding again! I was not, never would, accuse you of flattery. I apologise, my syntax was not clear, too convoluted as my wife is always telling me. What I said was: “but the whole purpose of my last post was to try and point out that for the purposes of CA there is a certain, and here I flatter the writing by using an undeserved term, genre of poems which some people loosely call "hallmark poems"”... and what I meant by that was that it was being too kind to Hallmark Poems (ie flattering them) by doing them the honor of calling them a “genre”. So sorry about that. Neither have I recommended treating people here with kid gloves. Anyone who has read my critiques knows that I call it like I see it. In fact, one poet became irate because I called it like I saw it. Another systematically disagreed with my criticism point by point because I called it like I saw it. Another disagreed because I suggested removal of Ebonics within a portrayal of stupidity context. Even YOU right now are in disagreement with me because I call it like I see it. These types of reactions are certainly NOT indicative of someone using wishy-washy please-the writer-no-matter-what or-how-he-writes approach. So it should be more than obvious that I am NOT recommending a lowering of this forum's critique standards as you seem to be inferring and suggesting. That would be rather presumptuous of me--don't you think? >>> Yes I do, and what is nice is that the more we discuss the more you seem to be agreeing with me. So either I am moving closer to you or you are moving closer to me or we are both moving closer to each other - come to think of it maybe we should offer our services to the UN. Should emotionally written poetry be criticized? Sure! If the poet brings it here, it is to be criticized. However, IMHO, he should not be told it is garbage, worthless tripe in so many words. At least I don't recommend it. But, each has his own critique method. I am not averse on criticizing any poem placed on this forum for that purpose. But I try not not to forego civility in the process lest I do more harm than good. >>> I don’t think I have ever used those words - well not quite yet anyway. And I only edge towards incivility if provoked by incivility. Most of the time I am the epitome of gentlemanliness (which is a word I think I have just invented for the occasion as my spellchecker tells me it doesn’t exist). It is also sad to know that you think I have a chip on my shoulder. >>> Nope? I guess I should go for the other option - needing new spectacles. Sorry, seriously I don’t really think you have a chip, but maybe you shouldn’t assume I am making gratuitously offensive remarks to you in what is a perfectly civil discussion. I would never do that. I am simply here to learn from other and to help others with their poetry to the best of my ability. Nothing more, nothing less. >>> Amen to that Radrook. Regards Rob PS I wonder where the good Fuji is while all this excitement is going on in his thread. |
||
|
Crazy Eddie Member
since 2002-09-14
Posts 178 |
Radrook Sorry to interrupt but you lost me on the Hallmark isn’t poetry part I’m struggling to imagine any definition of poetry that places Hallmark outside the poetic realm. Is there any chance you can expand on this, either here or preferably in a fresh thread? |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Eddie Heavens, someone else is reading my pomposity - how embarrassing! I think he meant to say that it's unfortunate that Hallmark IS poetry. Sorry, I need to leave this thread alone now, I'm getting silly. Rob |
||
|
Crazy Eddie Member
since 2002-09-14
Posts 178 |
Rob I think Hallmark verse IS poetry and deserves to be poetry, in fact I believe a case can be made that it is in fact GOOD poetry! I also believe that Fuji might be a little tired of deleting email notifications if he/she ticked that particular box when this thread was started so I’ll save it for another time. Thanks for the chance to read and reply |
||
|
Radrook Senior Member
since 2002-08-09
Posts 648 |
Hi Rob! Glad to see that you are in better spirits now. I certainly was NOT trying to provoke such a strong response simply by disagreeing with portions of your evaluation of Fuji's poem which I am certain he will agree with you right on cue. I was merely following the accepted modus operandi of this forum of expressing my views regardless of what anyone else thinks. After all, you contradicted my critique views repeatedly and I at no time took YOU to task for it. Why? Because being democratically-minded I recognize that you are entitled to your personal opinions. So I just ignored your repeated contradictions and went on my own individual way. So when I contradicted YOUR opinion by expressing mine, I expected you to show equal equanimity. Instead you came at me both barrels firing so to speak--of course. During my long life on this earth, I have found that the solution to such exaggerated responses is to reevaluate our own importance in the universal scheme of things. Once we delve on that for a few hours, we come away, how shall I say, humbled by our own relative insignificance. We come to realize that our opinions are not things written in stone, inviolable, to be never contested or contradicted lest they provoke our wrath. Personally, I am long past that stage of psychological emotional development. That is why I have been contradicted so often both by yourself and others here and I simply ignore it. To each his own views. But then again that's where your often expressed concern about the forum comes in. To assuage this concern, let me say that the forum is skillfully being moderated and supervised by those responsible individuals assigned to it. Actually and sadly, anomalies tend to arise when those NOT assigned to the job either wish to be assigned or else they feel that they are assigned and begin behaving that way. That's when the difficulties can begin since too many cooks spoil the soup--as the cliche goes. I certainly have no such ambitions. I have been here very little time Rbt, but I am greatly impressed on how well this site is moderated. They are doing an excellent job. So I would not worry too much If I were you. Let those assigned to their supewrvisory jobs take care of it. If someone is giving advice which they feel is not in line with the forum policy, or will turn people away from the firum, you can be 100% sure that they will promply let the person know without you urging them to take action. They know their jobs and are more than qualified to do it. Leave it in their hands. Just a friendly suggestion. |
||
|
Radrook Senior Member
since 2002-08-09
Posts 648 |
Accidental duplicate post deleted by moderator. Pete [This message has been edited by Not A Poet (10-02-2002 09:48 AM).] |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Eddie You provocateur you! Can’t possibly disagree with you that Hallmark is poetry. As for whether it is “good” or not I’m played out on that one - see “Melt”. Radrook You said: “...let me say that the forum is skillfully being moderated and supervised by those responsible individuals assigned to it.” and “but I am greatly impressed on how well this site is moderated” and “They are doing an excellent job.” And three posts previously I said to Pete: “And btw I'd just like to say that you personally do a really excellent policing job” Seems to me like we are agreeing again. Rob |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
Gentlemen, I do appreciate to compliments. But let's try to keep the discussion related to poetry or critiquing and away from personalities please. Thanks, Pete |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Pete, yes you are quite right, so sorry. Back on topic now: Radrook Reading back over your replies I’m trying to get to nail down why it is that I still feel like I am missing something. I’m wondering whether part of the problem here is that I sense in your posts in this thread and indeed in a few of your critiques that perhaps when you read some of the poetry posted recently it would be true to say that you empathised not so much with the poem or the words or the content of the piece, but more with the feelings that you believe the poet was experiencing at the time he/she was writing. In a nutshell more with the poet than the poem itself. You may say well “so what?”, surely that is a valid and valuable response and makes the poem valid valuable or even good. However I would contend that this is not necessarily true. Perhaps a letter written listing the poet’s various concerns and miseries could have elicited exactly the same empathic response in you, perhaps even more so if addressed directly to you. Yet the letter would not necessarily have been a poem or anything resembling a poem let alone a good poem. So of itself a poem which makes a reader feel sorrow for, gladness for or empathy with the poet is not of necessity “good” art. Following this line of thinking, imagine the very same poet writes the next day about something other than himself and his feelings. About a fly crawling up a wall for instance. You read it, and suddenly the writing is exposed for what it is. Devoid of pathos (or bathos!) it has no resonance at all with your own feelings for the author and you quickly lose interest in what would probably be flat imageless and unoriginal writing. Maybe you could think about this and tell me if I am anywhere near the truth, or if (as is most likely) I am way off beam. And please don’t misunderstand me. I have no problem at all with poets writing about their feelings. Some of the best poetry ever written is of course in this category. However, generally I would say that this is not the most productive or indeed the easiest type of poetry for a beginner writer to do well. Rob (on a vendetta to get Fuji to respond!) Post the next post: Ah, success! Hi Fuji, nice to see you, thought we'd lost you for a moment! Hope you enjoy(ed) the ride. R [This message has been edited by Robtm1965 (10-02-2002 04:38 PM).] |
||
|
Fuji Junior Member
since 2002-09-23
Posts 26 |
I'm surprised by all the feed back. I see it's more then just title help too. As one poem explained I had been leaving, and spent 3 days on a bus. Sorry I couldn't post a reply to all of you sooner. Had to find my way to a computer with internet. For now I'm just going to say thanks to everyone. After I have time to read all the posts, I'll absorb, reflect, and reply again. Till then thanks again |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Ah, success! Hi Fuji, nice to see you, thought we'd lost you for a moment! Hope you enjoy(ed) the ride. I'm glad you dropped by I have a link for you to an amusing but nevertheless instructive poem about what a poem should seek to do: http://www.newtrix.com/poems/rm-advice.htm Radrook, you might be interested to read it too. Rob |
||
|
Crazy Eddie Member
since 2002-09-14
Posts 178 |
Rob Here I go way off topic but I had to respond. I enjoyed the link, Roger McGough is a great Poet, have you ever heard him recite? He should be Poet Laureate for the whole country and not just for Liverpool – I’ll drink to Lily the Pink. He’s recites a poem on British television at the moment, one of those new fangled adverts with high impact art and semi-subliminal product placement but I keep missing the name of the poem. It’s about photographs and what they are or can be, if anyone can point me in its direction I’d be extremely grateful. I’ll be back with my take on the poet versus the poem topic later. Btw Rob I read the melt thread as it was unfolding, I agreed wholeheartedly with Toad, he can’t write but I think I know exactly what he was trying (and failing) to say.  |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
 |
||
|
caterina Member
since 2002-07-25
Posts 188Canada |
Rob, I just wanted to say that I enjoyed the link that you posted here for Fuji also. Thankyou. Another thing, are you upset with me from the other thread concerning the grouchy thing? I would like to say that it was not meant as an insult at all, I am glad that you corrected me and I know you have a sense of humor, it comes through you know. My apologies if you feel I was out of line. Just wanted you to know that, it bothered me. caterina |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Too funny! I shall permit myself one single "lol" (wow, that was painful!) Now then: Eddie Yay! I found the other McGough fan! I have heard him but regrettably only reading on the radio or on the net not in person. And yes, I love him to bits. McGough for laureate instead of that Motion fellow. As for your take on the Melt thread - "no comment" - (through gritted teeth). Ron Humm... something is definitely going on here. I am missing something I know it. Ahhha... perhaps Eddie is your clone? Anyway, very droll Ron! I don't think! Caterina Concentrate on my recessive sense of H. Seriously, I'm very very hard to offend and of course you haven't come anyway near. I thought your comments were funny. I haven't replied to your poem or Pete's for that matter because I am short of time right now (going away for three days) and this thread has been using up all I have. Plus I am far too prudish to comment on THAT type of poetry! Later Rob |
||
|
caterina Member
since 2002-07-25
Posts 188Canada |
Rob, Phew! I am glad I gave you a chuckle....Oh, so now your prudish too? Glad all is A-ok. caterina |
||
|
Fuji Junior Member
since 2002-09-23
Posts 26 |
wow there's so much to respond to I'm still trying to find time to read all the threads. Alot seems to be about poetry debate though so I'll bypass those. I'm reading all the advise and alot of them are good. I agree that the punctuation on Conflict is not needed, I got bored revising. Leaving was written in a matter of 70 sec. or so and I wanted to try a ryhming poem just to have something to post. So yeah the rhymes maybe alittle forced. And as far as eyes falling on her face or anything literal, I just think it's a poem and somethings express feeling not paint pictures, right?? I do agree with the last line being out of rythm, I kinda like it though. I'll reply more with detail when I finish reading the posts and have time to put more thought to them. It's printed out 20 or so pages altogether. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
