»
Archives
»
Critical Analysis #2
»
Cataract
| Critical Analysis #2 |
|
Cataract |
|
|
UseTheIllusion Member
since 2006-02-06
Posts 223In a state of limbo |
I’ve got so many urges to quell, Suffice to say, my brain is in hell, It may be a cliché, but my soul is the devils’. Have you ever had a thought you wished you could pluck out of your brain? Have you ever wished to god that you could control the rain? Have you ever actually been insane? ‘Cause if you have than invite me to the party, Don’t forget to tell me which personality to bring. I feel grumpy inside, Angry and bitter, The shakers and the movers have stolen my refrigerator, It is hard to keep cool, It is hard to stay alive, It may be easy to pray to god, But which idol is false? What the hell, I’ll give it a try. The notion that this rant may in fact be just that, Is enough to set the wheels in motion, Perhaps I have a cataract, My mind is opaque, The code is cracked, I feel just like a Roman, The city has just been sacked. |
||
| © Copyright 2006 UseTheIllusion - All Rights Reserved | |||
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Two things I've learned from reading in this forum are to avoid forced rhyme and not use cliches. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
quote: What exactly? A worm? A cell? A thought? A poem even?! UseTheIll, I don't wish to be at all rude, but do you think this is "poetry" that's going to interest other people? Are you sure you are not using your writing as just some kind of therapy for yourself? Best. M |
||
|
ChristianSpeaks Member
since 2006-05-18
Posts 396Iowa, USA |
I agree with M to a certain extent. I would encourage you to spend a little time reading and offering ideas before posting. It seems that you are not taking the critique that is given you in other post. Read more. CS |
||
|
UseTheIllusion Member
since 2006-02-06
Posts 223In a state of limbo |
On the contrary, I attempted to add metaphors, similes, and do away with so called forced rhyming...frankly, I don't see how you can call it forced; the meanings are clear, I did not feel forced when I made them  , and I feel they do not detract from the work. As for cliches, well, who defines what is or is not a cliche? Although I did admit to using a cliche in the piece, I wonder, how is comparing a realization of the self to Rome burning a cliche exactly? I sure haven't heard a metaphor like that before. And as for interesting other people...well, evidently I was wrong. That is my mistake, bred of experience with people in the past actually being interested in it. So much for causality. And yes, Moon, I do write for therapy, as I made clear in one of my other poems (which was not posted in this forum). And as I made clear in the same poem, no one can tell me it is wrong or right. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Use I am CERTAINLY not going to censor you for writing for therapy, after all some of the best poets of all time did just that. However as a beginner poet if that is your ONLY motive then I think you may find it hard to "improve" to the point where people really go out of their way to read your stuff. On the other hand you may say that you don't care whether they read it or not, which is also fair enough. However I'd then wonder why you are posting in CA. Now I don't want to sound rude again or anything, but your writing slightly puzzles me. In your prose replies you sound very convincing and lucid, with well put together sentences. However your poetic attemps are quite honestly as if a different mind is concocting them. It's like you throw a switch and go into "self absorbed rant mode" and the effect it has is to turn your good lucid prose in something akin to the babblings of a half drunk dictator. Please believe I don't mean that to be negative about you personally, and in fact it's clear that you can write well. Is there any chance that you could try writing a poem NOT for therapy - a poem nothing to do with YOU at all in fact? Make up a story or something - it would be interesting to see what happened. Just trying to help. M |
||
|
divine chaos Senior Member
since 2006-07-09
Posts 617dancing 'neath the moon |
UseTheIllusion, I'm rather curious as to why you post here in CA. It seems that you get very defensive whenever someone gives you their opinions/suggestions about what you post. I had actually come to this thread to give a couple suggestions, but my time is precious -- and I don't want to waste it giving suggestions when the writer seems to not -want- the help  If you love your poem and think it doesn't need any work on it, why not post it in Open for others to enjoy? :-) ~Sheli |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Right now I recommend focusing on poetic structure. Don't worry about your theme too much or whether it is written for "therapy" or not. Right now the stanzas are all messy in shape, with no consistency in length, in number of lines, in number of syllables, in stresses, etc. Find a consistent pattern for your lines and stanzas, and stick with it. The more one works within a specific pattern for all the lines and stanzas in the poem, the better he learns to express things within that pattern. |
||
|
UseTheIllusion Member
since 2006-02-06
Posts 223In a state of limbo |
Divine Chaos, I post in CA for the very same reason anyone else would. If you would read a few posts back, you would see that I have in fact worked on improving a couple of other pieces. Please to not mistake my prevoius explaination in this thread as a rejection of critique. It was meant to clarify the fact that I have in fact tried to improve on previous work, have attempted to include some of the previous suggestions into my work, and have been working on new works to further improve my work What I meant by saying I don't care if it is wrong or right was that I don't care if someone says I cannot write for therapuetic purposes. That's all. Indeed, if I felt the poem did not need work, I would post it in the open forum. Please, by all means, take the time to critique it, if that is what you wish. But, as I said in a previous posting of mine in CA, "tear it apart gently". Essorant, I understand exactly what you are saying. Do you think I should try to implement your suggestions on THIS poem, or a new one alogether? Moonbeam, thank you for taking the time to read it. Yes, I have written other, less personal pieces. In fact, there is one I would like to share with the critique crowd, but I will wait until this particular piece has been edited enough. What enough is at this point, I don't know though. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
"Do you think I should try to implement your suggestions on THIS poem, or a new one alogether?" Yes |
||
|
divine chaos Senior Member
since 2006-07-09
Posts 617dancing 'neath the moon |
I'm glad that I misunderstoodWhen I have more time, I'll have a closer look at this one. ~S |
||
|
UseTheIllusion Member
since 2006-02-06
Posts 223In a state of limbo |
It feels inferior (probably because it is), but here it is: I’ve got so many urges to quell, Suffice to say, my brain is in hell, Now my soul belongs to the devil. Which idol should I pray to? The choices around me, It is difficult to see through, The haze which surrounds me. Grumpy inside, Angry and bitter, Someone has stolen my refrigerator. It is hard to keep cool, Perhaps I have a cataract, My mind is opaque, The code has been cracked, I feel like a roman, The city has been sacked. |
||
|
Ignatius Junior Member
since 2006-09-23
Posts 14OK , USA |
I like your poem. I can relate to it. The ideal and thoughts behind it are powerful. One thing, "my soul is the devils’." This either might be written devil's or use verb "are", then again, according to your poem, it could be whatever you want. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
UseTheIllusion, I think that is better and more concise. But I still don't see much consistency. The stanzas are all different and don't have a uniform pattern running through them. Below is an attempt to give you an example of what I mean when I say "consistency": I have so many thoughts to quell, Suffice to say my brain is hell. Which idol should I pray now to Among a haze I can't see through? My mind is now opaquely cracked, A Rome of riches sorely sacked. Note that each stanza is now the same length and pattern: two rhyming lines/a couplet. And each line has the same number of syllables. This is just one of many patterns one may undertake and bear throughout a poem. Does that make sense? [This message has been edited by Essorant (09-27-2006 12:08 AM).] |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Did you ever read Scott's Marmion? |
||
|
UseTheIllusion Member
since 2006-02-06
Posts 223In a state of limbo |
Thank you very much Ignatius. It makes me so happy that someone was able to glean SOMETHING from the poem. Essorant, your example was, in my opinion, better than the work I did on it. I skimmed the work on the link you gave me, and I got a sense of what it is you are pointing me towards. |
||
|
UseTheIllusion Member
since 2006-02-06
Posts 223In a state of limbo |
I’ve got so many urges to quell, Suffice to say my brain is hell, The man I am is an empty shell, My soul belong to the devil. Which idol should I pray to now? Around my neck and kept in tow, How am I supposed to know? The paths lead me to belive, There is nowhere else to go. Grumpy inside, Angry and bitter, Where is my refrigerator? It is hard to keep cool, Often I have been the fool, Perhaps I have a cataract, My mind is opaque, The code has been cracked, I feel like a roman, The city has been sacked. Still some line inconsitency, but I feel it is vastly improved, and is not as brief as the second version. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
UsetheIllusion, The first stanza is getting better.
You alternate syllables, first and third with nine syllables, and second and fourth with eight syllables. That may do for a pattern. But I think it may be easier to stick to one simple syllable and stress count for all for now. Eight is a good syllable number to work with because it is not too long and not too short, and it is an even number, therefore there may be four stresses and four unstresses. That is a good example of that in the second line, where stressed syllables are only seperated by one unstressed syllable at a time.
That is a good ideal to stick to for all the other lines. But no matter how consistent the stresses may be, it will still fail if the sentence structure is weak. Many lines in your poem are one-liners, that stand more on their own than flow smoothly and dependantly on other lines. It would be a good habit to practice trying to stretch a sentence to encompass at least four lines at a time, and to avoid one-liners and two-liners, at least for now. In the first four lines alone you have three sentences: I’ve got so many urges to quell, suffice to say my brain is hell. The man I am is an empty shell. My soul belong to the devil. Using that many sentences in so few lines, and so short, weakens the flow very much. Try to work the lines into one continuous sentence. If you encompassed all four lines with one sentence, stuck to eight syllables for each line, and four stresses for each line as well, I think the poem may come together and flow much better after some practice. Here is a loose example for the first stanza:
I hope that helps. |
||
|
UseTheIllusion Member
since 2006-02-06
Posts 223In a state of limbo |
(me with deer in headlights look) Ok, I won't lie, I like to think about my poetry. BUT NOT TOO MUCH. That is to say, I would be overly distracted from the content of the poem itself if I were to force (and I would have to force) myself to pay attention to syllables, stresses, and all of that. That is not to say I don't care about those things, but at this point attempting to build a poem around the structure, rather than around the content is beyond me. I will try to re-write it again though. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
UseTheIllusion But it seems you may be doing just as much thinking and work on revising your poems over and over again as it may take you to learn how to regulate syllables and stresses, and give your poems altogether more strength and stability, if you take the time to work with them and practice them. You have some strong content, but the structure, in my opinion, is still failing because it seems you are are trying to pull it out of your "hat" so to speak, without grounding it on other poets works. But there are hundreds and hundreds of years of tradition already made, and hundreds and hundreds of good poems already written, that give us the strongest example of how to write and roots to stand on and fasten ourself to, so that we don't need to "fiddle" around with anything to see if we may come out with something that works well---the traditions of the past already work well. If you don't try to fasten your work to those traditions and roots, I fear that your poetry will continue to be very weak in poetic structure, no matter how strong the content ever becomes. [This message has been edited by Essorant (09-28-2006 10:19 PM).] |
||
|
UseTheIllusion Member
since 2006-02-06
Posts 223In a state of limbo |
Roger. You hit the nail on the head when you said that I pull my writing out of the proverbial hat. I continue to do so because, to a large extent, I have been conditioned to do so by positive praise for much of my work. Some may like it, some may not. By and large, it seems as if the people in this forum do not, so by degrees I AM attempting to render my work into a more "acceptable" form. It seems as if many in this forum place great faith in traditional methods and forms of poetry. I respect that, hence my attempts to evolve my poetry. I think it is bests to leave this poem where it is, and start anew. I remember on another thread, Moonbeam challenged me to post something in this forum that had nothing to do with me personally. I am torn between posting this poem, which I am not ashamed to say garnered praise in another forum on this sight, or posting an entirely new one, which, while unrefined, wouldl also answer Moonbeams challenge. I think I will go with the former for now, and save the newer one for another day. |
||
|
ChristianSpeaks Member
since 2006-05-18
Posts 396Iowa, USA |
Agreeing with Ess- Praise in other forums on this sight is easier won than in this forum. Praise is what you give your child after the school play; critical praise is what they give to Broadway actors. cs |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Use Everything Ess is telling you is great advice. You are being pointed, very expertly I might add, towards practising writing in what's called an iambic stress pattern. da DUM da DUM Da DUM light stress/ heavy stress/ light stress/ heavy stress A basic rhythm of English and one used in much formal poetry. Ess is trying to show you this pattern of writing partly because it appears that you insist on using end rhyme - and rhyme and formality (what Ess calls the "roots" of poetry) go together. Frankly if you try to end rhyme without some knowledge of what you are doing metrically you end up with an unholy mess. Personally I think you are doing it the difficult way. I usually teach students to FORGET about rhyming totally and concentrate on learning how to write in iambic pentameter (blank verse) which is kind of like the staple diet needed before building something more complicated. 10 syllables per line (5 feet): da DUM da DUM da DUM da DUM da DUM the MAN who TROD the HILLS was LEFT to DIE Can you "hear" the rythm? Writing 500 lines of that before you write another word would help you. HOWEVER, Ess probably won't agree with me, but I'd still be inclined, if you want to carry on writing about your thoughts and feelings etc, to simply drop all rhyme and thoughts of meter for now, and to concentrate on getting down on paper some original IMAGES - get your mind out of "abstract noun" mode. What you're trying to do right now is everything at once, and it's hopeless. As Ess says, you're gonna go round in circles for evermore. And finally, I don't mean to be horrible again, but honestly, whoever told you that your poems are "good" wasn't doing you any favours at all. Maybe they are "good" to a relative or friend of yours, or "good" on a board such as Open at PIP wherever people say EVERYTHING is good, but your poems are never going to make a decent periodical or win any prizes unless you quit floundering around and start to concentrate on learning a bit at a time. I have said all this because you still insist in posting in CA - so I am assuming you still WANT to improve! M |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
I'm working on those da DUM's myself. I appreciate the work you're putting into this, and it seems your use of meter is really getting better, but have to tell you that line after line of, I believe the term is end stop rhyme, makes me think of rap, which I don't care for very much. It sounds forced, like the rhyme is more important than the substance. If you really like rhyme, maybe try putting it in alternating lines or work on enjambment. Just a thought. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
The best and worst of poems in time all go down better read in rhyme. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
UseTheIllusion Perhaps it may help just to practice some couplets like the one I wrote above. As you practice more so shall your poetic instincts begin to lean more toward a metrical flow. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
He working hard at meterplay Shall find the noblest wording way. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Rhyme and inversion are dangerous poetic devices, And this goes to show how they are not nice is! |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
O meter meter on the wall Is moonbeam still your |
||
|
UseTheIllusion Member
since 2006-02-06
Posts 223In a state of limbo |
Reckless feelings of youth estranged, Time takes your body and mind away, It doesn’t matter if you kneel and pray, In the end it all ends up the same. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
~sigh~ Was that meant to be iambic? Use, you really really need to get a handbook on meter. Oh, and read lots of Pope, that'll sort you out. "What dire Offence from am'rous Causes springs, What mighty Contests rise from trivial Things" (The Rape of the Lock, Canto I M |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
UsetheIllusion It looks like you just have some difficulties intepreting stresses. There is no one that began in meter and didn't face that step in one way or another. All it takes is becoming more aware of what you already "use" everyday in your English language. Here are a few important excerpts from Poetic Rhythm (a book I highly recommend) by Derek Attridge about the basic things about word stress. "STRESS A stress can be thought of as an intensified syllable. Certain syllables in the words and sentences we speak are pronounced with extra energy, making them louder or stronger, or different in timbre or in pitch, or a combination of these. [...] In uttering a sentence with a great deal of emphasis, you give special weight to the stressed syllables - and in doing so, speak in a highly regular rhythm. You might even beat your hand in time with the emphasized syllables. THIS exPEriment will be VERy SHORT. [...]The following summary does not go into the complex details of English stress patterns, but it will be sufficient for most discussions of poetry. We shall give seperate consideration to word-stress and phrase-stress [Word-stress will be good enough for now] 1. Word-Stress In discussing word-stress, it is useful to make a distinction between two kinds of word: content words and function words Content Words are words which operate with a certain degree of independance, conveying a full meaning by themselves. They are nouns ("gold," "caterpillar," "envy"), verbs ("shine," "employ," "swam"), adjectives ("full," "extraordinary," "lazy") and adverbs ("now," "gently," "lazily"). Most of the words in the dictionary are content words. Function words are words that depend on other words for their meaning, usually indicating some kind of relation. They include prepositions ("before," "into," "of"), articles ("the," "a," "an"), demonstratives "this," "that," "those"), conjunctions ("but," "however," "when"), pronouns ("she," "they," "anybody") and auxiliaries (verbs used in conjunction with other verbs - "will," "may," "have" - and adverbs used in conjunction with adjectives or adverbs - "more," "so," "very") We can consider these types of words seperatly. (a) Content Words (i) Monosyllabic content words. Monosyllabic content words ("hole" "stand" "blue") usually take a stress. [...] (ii) Polysyllabic content words Every content word with two or more syllables has one fully stressed syllable called the main stress.
If you are having any trouble in hearing where the stress in a word falls, imagine saying it with great emphasis, as if you were extremely angry. The syllable where you find yourself putting most emotional force - where you might bang the table - is the one with the main stress "I inSIST on being heard!" [...] _____________________________ [Secondary Stress] Sometimes it's useful to distinguish a degree of stress between fully stressed and unstressed, which we call secondary stress. Secondary stress occurs in polysyllabic words on one or more syllables other than the one that carries the main stress. There are no hard-and-fast rules for secondary stress, and it varies across different dialects and modes of pronunciations. [...] Secondary stress often occurs on compounds, that is, words constructed out of existing words: [ / = main stress, \ = secondary stress ]
The more strongly a speaker feels that the compound has been newly minted, however the more likely he or she is to give it two full stresses:
Polysyllables that are not compounds also often take a secondary stress:
Sometimes a phrase of two words will function as a compound word such as "groundhog" or "mailbag" .Try out the difference between "Main Street" and "Jones Road" or between "the White House" (where the president lives) and "a white house" (where you or I might live). The first of each pair is pronounced as a compound, while the second is a normal phrase:
Another kind of compound phrase that its useful to look out for in poetry consists of a verb and an adverb. Here the main stress goes on the second word, and the stress on the first word is weakened:
Most of the time secondary stress is accomodated very easily to a metrical pattern. These syllables can function as either stressed or unstressed syllables according to the demands of the meter, and very often the rhythm will accomodate them however they are pronounced. ___________________ (b) Function Words {i) Monosyllabic function words Most monosyllabic function words, unlike content words are unstressed (unless there is some reason why they should be emphasized [...] ) (ii) Polysyllabic function words Every polysyllabic function word - such as "before," "under," "therefore" -- has a main stress, just like polysyllabic content words [...] But in some situations (having to do with rhythm of the sentence and the speed of utterance) that stress can disappear. [...]. The net effect of these properties of polysyllabic function words is that, unlike content words, they are extremely flexible, and can be used by poets with a considerable degree of freedom." [This message has been edited by Essorant (10-01-2006 12:52 AM).] |
||
|
UseTheIllusion Member
since 2006-02-06
Posts 223In a state of limbo |
Sorry to have wasted the time of many people on this forum, but I am ready to give up. My line of thinking runs thus: if it doesn't come naturally, why try? Why artificially attempt a shot at perfection when it is so out of reach? For me, to use an old cliche, it is like shooting a needle in the dark. This task you lay before me is so frought with technical jargon that it makes my brain bleed just trying to comprehend it. I can deal with a simple suggestion. I can deal with changing a coma here, or a line there. But I can't even begin to try to understand what it is you are telling me. It isn't that I am stupid (I hope), it is that I don't have it in me to apply these conventions you describe to my writing. So, in summary, I am sorry to have wasted your time, and will retreat now into the dark forums, where I began my stint at PIPS. |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
I understand, UseTheIllusion, what you mean about all that technical jargon. It's a mind blower for sure and I'm struggling right along with you. But you're bright, literate so it's not out of your reach unless you give up on it. Anyway, I also post in Dark, so I'll keep a light on. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I, for one, love your title. Cataract-- a medical condition that cannot be treated until it has grown to be a visable obviate. Nicely done, and considering all the self congratulatory replies, this is a great poem! I love it. Keep the passion m'friend. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Use I note Karen's reply above. I am not sure what she means by "self congratulatory replies". It sounds as if she is denigrating the other replies you have had in this thread without really explaining why they are apparently "self congratulatory". That in my book is not very helpful and a bit of a cheap shot. I for one am simply trying to help you write better poetry and I am sure Ess is doing the same. In my opinion Karen is very wrong to call this a "great" poem. It's not a great poem. Like I've said before, it depends what you want from your readers, but one has to assume that if you're posting in CA then you want to improve. You certainly won't improve if you believe people when they tell you this is good. All the best. M PS What is so technical and difficult about buying or borrowing a good handbook on meter? |
||
|
iliana Member Patricius
since 2003-12-05
Posts 13434USA |
I've always thought it was helpful in analyzing poetry to look at the meaning of it. I do not critique but I do try to understand. It seems to me that, perhaps, Serenity understood what the poet was saying here and she appreciated what he had to say. I think it's a great poem, too, in that regard, if I have interpreted it correctly. And....this is why I never come into this forum. Why subjugate myself to crucifiction. After observing the insults to Use the Illusion and reading the nonsense in one of the other threads, I don't believe I'll ever come back. Constructive criticism is one thing...but, frankly, some of the comments here have come across as belittling. That is no way to help a person. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I was referring, moonbeam, to the repartee between you and Essorant. I didn't find any of that constructive I'm afraid. In fact, I felt it demeaned the poet. And you took my reply out of context, but of course you would. It wouldn't serve your purpose to analyze the title as subtextual context, but I would like to think that you would, at least, consider that. In the context of the replies, I said I thought the title was great, as I prefer the humor implicit in the title "great" as opposed to the sparring tennis match of "constructive critique" offered by you and Essorant. If the tone was not self congratulatory, as I perceived, perhaps it is true I am hypersensitive to the author in this regard--if that is indeed so, I humbly apologize. But I maintain the title of "Cataract" is humorous, considering the nature of the joviality amongst (or would that be between) the two of you, and I might add that exchange certainly didn't seem to benefit the author. I'm quite certain, however, that such interpretation will be claimed as defense for seeming impropriety. I'm also quite certain that the shield of interpretation should also be my own defense as to associations of said hypersensitivity. I maintain that I enjoyed the spirit, the title, and generally the gist of the poem. If you don't like it, okay. If you think it is bad poetry, that is okay too. But I am allowed to disagree. And I am left wondering as to how Ginsberg would be received here as well... I wonder of Jackson Pollack. Jean Michel Basquiat...? Vincent Van Gogh? I appreciate critique, but if you would like a very proper critique forum, I would also like to see an accentuation of the positive. I despise blanket statements of "art form." Therefore, I love the title and premise of this poem, "Cataract", as it alludes, refers and underlines a way of seeing that is, perhaps beyond the average "eye". A Cataract is a treatable condition, and one that must be allowed to mature before a medical procedure may be authorized as a standard practice. But then? I'm crazy yanno. But look it up. Even brain damage has its own usefulness. When one portion of the brain is limited, another door opens. (Look up "echoaudience"). click-click-click That just happens to be how some folk get around. *peace* |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
UsetheIllusion I fully agree with Jennifer and Moonbeam. This is is not out of your reach at all, especially if you take the time to read things carefully , practice and make sure to ask as many questions as possible so others may help and offer explanation on things you may be having difficulty understanding. There are many others that may benefit from continuing, and in the mean time we may all learn how to improve in the exchanges we give. It has only been a week I think, and most of that didn't involve the latter parts of this discussion that are a bit more difficult, but surely it doesn't deserve to be discarded so quickly? I hope you will reconsider... |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
Maybe Essorant gave you a little more technical information than you actually needed at this time. But understanding, or at least recognizing, stressed and unstressed syllables is absolutely essential if you ever want to write anything metrical or even rhythmic. Start by just reading anything aloud. It doesn't even have to be poetry. Or even just notice your own voice when you speak to someone. Also pay close attention to theirs when they respond. You surely will hear that some syllables come through louder or longer than others. These are the stressed and unstressed syllables we are talking about. To write metric poetry, you must very carefully arrange your words so that the order of these long and short syllables for some predetermined pattern. Even in free verse this is critical although I am not the one to explain that to you. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Karen Of course you are allowed to disagree and say you like the poem and I am allowed to say the poem is rubbish. What you shouldn't be allowed to do is come wading in after Ess (especially) and I have put effort into helping Use and call our posts "self congratulatory". Then to be followed by another seraphic member who posts with the sole intent of rubbishing the forum and what goes on here. Without any action from the moderator. I've just spent 2 hours doing a crit on your poem and Sheli's, together with a little piece on flow, and a suggestion for a poetic challenge. You know something, I haven't the least intention of posting another constructive critique this forum until this sort of crap is stopped by the moderator and/or the rules. I've done my best to set out some suggestions to make the place less susceptible to such time wasting diversions, but if, every time somebody with good intentions, and some knowledge, tries to offer genuine help to a poet in a manner that offends the Patricius sensibilities of some import from Open we're going to get silly histrionics and useless intervention, then I for one, am not going to waste any more of my time. M Footnote to Pete: Please please can't we set about introducing some sort of rule(s), guidelines, which will allow people to post negative comments on a poem without being subjected to this nonsense. Warmhrt's post seems to be slowly sinking without trace. |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
Sorry M but fair is fair. Just as you are allowed to state a poem is rubbish, so is someone else allowed to state your critique is rubbish. |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Fair may be fair, but isn't this forum about critiquing the poem not the critiques? And, when the discussion deteriorates into personal attacks, well, something's gone terribly amiss. Time to think seriously about fixing it. I do realize that learning how to critique is extremely important, but giving your honest opinion on a poem shouldn't mean that you're fair game for personally directed attacks. I'm wondering if perhaps the workshop forums might be a better place for the less experienced to post rather than CA which seems on the verge of imploding. Any thoughts on that? I'm new to the site so I really don't know much about them. ` |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Pete said: quote: And I wanted to thank you for that. I have trouble with meter, and I sought private e mail advice for years for help with it, but this encapsulated for me a bit I've had particular trouble with. (I also owe Balladeer a nod for his gentle patience with me as well.) I learn more in a conversational manner. I suspect it is a cultural difference of educational styles, but it does help me to have a less formalized atmosphere. I apologize that if that attitude hinders others--it's not my intention, it is merely my personality. So if I am bugging someone with my fluffy hugs and jokes, just skip over the parts with my name on 'em. I not only won't mind--I won't know. *peace* and thanks again Sweetie Petey!  I'm certainly gonna start trying this one.AND OH--does anyone know where I can find examples of different meter read aloud online? I had a site marked in my favorites once, but I think the site died....  |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Pete I have no problem with people disagreeing with my critiques, I DO have a big problem with people denigrating either directly or indirectly people who are genuinely trying to help new poets. self-congratulation (slfkn-grch-lshn, -grj-, -kng-) n. Congratulation, especially self-satisfied congratulation, Adj. 1. self-satisfied - marked by excessive complacency or self-satisfaction; "a smug glow of self-congratulation" smug I am sorry too Pete but the phrase “self congratulatory replies” was a direct comment not just on the replies but on the people writing them. And it wasn’t even supported by an explanation. If I’d written such a thing against one of Marge Tindal’s replies for example WW3 would have broken out, but because a longstanding member does it, it’s apparently fine. That sort of thing, and this: “And....this is why I never come into this forum. Why subjugate myself to crucifiction. After observing the insults to Use the Illusion and reading the nonsense in one of the other threads, I don't believe I'll ever come back.” and your lack of action in dealing with such things, is the reason why, for the moment, I’ve decided not to participate any further. I would politely request that my poem “Breaking Up” is deleted from the server, together with my comments thereon, and preferably the whole thread. Thanks. M |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
M, Before you make such a request, you may wish to read the Forum Guidelines and consider the last three paragraphs under the final topic, “Mass Deletions” here. It would be a shame to see you just give up like that and not come back, considering the critique of late has indeed improved on this forum, notwithstanding a few opinions to the contrary. But consider also that you have been able to make some valid points lately that few have attempted to make in quite a while. There will always be someone with a martyr complex dropping in suddenly; taking a sudden rabbit punch of a swing, then dropping out for fear of having their perfectly proper, award winning record of sweetness sullied. I say, lean back in your leather office chair, relax, pour another cup of that good ol’, all-day-coffee and move on to the next critique. Sid |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
Good advice Sid. You said it better than I could have. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Pardon me while I quote myself: quote: I'm not sure what else you would like Pete to do here, moonbeam. I admitted that my observation could have been erroneous, and my hypersensitivity regarding heavy handed critique is based upon the fact that my daughter is a member of this forum. And it is that consideration which sparked my obvious initial bristling, and yes, I had hoped to make a point through my postings. But I am getting the distinct feeling that my posts, critiques or otherwise, are not welcome in this forum. It doesn't seem to matter that I am not a new member--it doesn't seem to matter that I have participated in workshops, poetic challenges, deputy moderating forums, newsletters, philosophy discussions, private mentoring, and yes, just about everything I was allowed to do here at Pip I have tried. I could go find every derisive comment regarding replies received in other forums. But I confess I am a bit tired, and besides, Christian Speaks said one right here in this thread: quote: So derision of praise seems to be okay, by this particular group, but the "fluffy" poets who utilize the entire forum are simply fodder for more derision, and dismissed as unknowledgeable or insincere when they are bold enough to disagree with a reply in THIS forum. I agree it would be a shame if moonbeam decides to leave the forum--but I believe it is more of a shame that people, who by the apparent collective opinion of the regulars of Critical Analysis are in most need of constructive criticism, are too intimidated to post here. Scroll up and read the quote again moonbeam. I simply expressed my feelings, which is how I happen to write poetry as well, and even went so far as to apologize to you if my feelings hurt yours. Pete has nothing to do with it. And I wish I had more time, but I don't. I do read here fairly regularly, and post occasionally, but I had no idea it was an exclusive club. Before I close, I would like to thank some friends who give me private critique. Alicat, DarkAngel, Balladeer, Brian Sites, Janet Marie, and oh, Christopher and Local Parasite have been extremely helpful to me as well. And Nan. There are so many of you to thank, and none of you ever made me feel stupid for asking either, so thanks much. Love to all. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
quote: Karen ROTFLMFAO Balladeer, Christopher! Intimidated! Come on, at least stick to some semblance of reality. You are really talking nonsense here. Until I came and made a few waves a few weeks ago the people in here were providing a critique service for pussycats. For heavens sake, they were as nice as nice could be. Not achieving much, but ever so nice. So don’t pretend CA was fearsome, that’s just not true. And all I’ve been doing since is trying to help lift the standard of critique and poetry and help introduce some rules that KEEP it that way. I can be a very lovely person when I’m not feeling like I’m having my time and effort wasted, I can even do love to all’s. M |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Thanks Sid for the link. I was dimly aware of the deletions policy. I only want my poem deleted and my replies in that thread - it wouldn’t take Pete long to do that. Thanks also for your other comments. Karen (and Pete) Thank you for pointing out the apology. I accept it, but my problem isn’t really a personal one, so much as the fact that it could happen at all and, more to the point, the aftermath. quote: Not so. Pete has everything to do with it. From the time I came here I’ve tried to address the issues raised by Warmhrt’s post as regards quality and the reasons for the lack thereof and all that follows should be read with that underlying aim in mind. Though I have reservations about it (and have tried to address in Warmhrt’s thread) the policy here right now is a very laissez faire one towards posting on other’s threads. People are allowed to comment on other critiques. It’s perfectly possible for two critics to get into a discussion about their own critiques as Ess and I did in this thread. We were having a bit of friendly banter about our differing approaches to formal poetry. (Although in this instance I’d contend that what we were saying could have been useful to Use). When this happens the resultant discussion may end up ranging a long way from the poem in question. Apparently that is fine by Pete and the “rules” and, to be frank, I am warming to the way these discussions can develop. I’m willing to concede that they can be useful. However if we are going to go down the route of critiquing critiques, without any guidelines or strict moderation, what we don’t need is people then castigating us for “ignoring” the poet, “being rude to the poet”, “belittling the poet”, “ignoring the thread” etc etc We also don’t need people barging into the middle of the thread and basically in two lines dismissing all our comments with a post effectively saying: “These two are smug know-it-all’s I am a member of the seraphic order of Ronhood listen to ME - your poem is GREAT” The way this site is run Karen you have a double responsibility because of your silly angelic title and all your friends in PIP. If you want to argue with a critique in here you should damn well make the effort to research not only this thread but any other thread Ess or I have been interacting with Use. Then you should make sure that you don’t use weighted personally slanted language and you simply confine yourself to saying precisely why you felt the critiques were wrong. When you do what you do, you simply demotivate me, for one. Not because I take it particularly personally - frankly I couldn’t care a toss about what you think of me - I do however happen to care about the things raised in Warmhrt’s thread and by doing what you did you start to drag us backwards down the slippery slope to a forum of mediocre lacklustre writing and the occasional smattering of slanging. Look what happened shortly after your post. You were “followed” into the forum by another long standing member who seemed to have the apparent sole aim of bolstering the position you’d adopted and knocking CA. Well I for one am not gonna spent weeks working on a poem or hours working on a critique just to post it in a forum which happily allows this sort of selfish comment to remain on the board for more than a day: quote: You say: quote: No disrespect to Pete as a person, and I know he’s busy and I know he’s subject to PIP policy, but he is seemingly the only moderator here. He is the only person who can deal with out of order posts. Unless more quasi-moderators are appointed who can start to implement some of the things we discussed in Warmhrt’s thread this forum ain’t going to change. Before that however there has to be an appreciation of the damage comments like yours and posts like iliana’s do. Then there has to be a willingness and an ability within the rules to deal with them. Right now I am not sure Pete even has the willingness. He seems to condone what you said: quote: That betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the situation or else a disinterest or, worse still, a connivance. Ignoring iliana’s post and hunnie’s silly comment in Sheli’s post indicates the same. All this from Pete simply sends out the signal to all and sundry that it’s ok to post this sort of reply in this forum. Until the moderators of this forum start to get serious and stamp on bad behaviour (including mine if necessary) and fluff posts you’ll never attract new “blood” into the forum or experience poets and critics. Sid suggests I should go get a coffee and relax a bit, do another crit. Sure, that will be fine till the next idiot comment, or saccharine sweet antidote to a negative crit is posted from a Member Next To God .... and Pete just ignores it. I’m not going to spend any more time on this. I’ve said what I think needs to be done to make this place work as a long-term stable “workshop” forum - but if Pete can’t even see that your and iliana’s comments should have been deleted, or at the very least censured, as a step in the right direction then frankly I really am wasting my time. So Sid I will go and get that coffee and then I shall go and write some poems and perhaps check out your forum link; something I’ve been meaning to do for a while now. M |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Moonbeam I really believe that something needs to be done to clarify better what critical analysis expects and accomodates of people. But I'm really at wonder at what your poem has to with this and why you would take what is being done especially in this thread out on a perfectly good thread you and others had with "Breaking up" Right when we have a hiccup, we no longer deserve your poetry? That doesn't seem very fair. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
sigh Ess It seems like a petulant response I know. Maybe it is. The truth is that I feel that you, Sid, Jennifer, Rhia, Grinch and quite a few others kind of saw what I was saying and, though you might not have agreed with me all of the time, I was starting to think things might change a little in CA. I had also come to respect your immense knowledge of language. So, yes, I do feel a bit bad about asking Pete to delete. But from my point of view I started posting poetry in the belief that things WERE changing. I was wrong now, I see that, I should have waited for something to actually happen. The fact is that right now if Pete doesn't even see that there is anything wrong with the post that Karen made, and he's willing to let posts like Iliana's and Hunnie's stand in the forum, then as far as I'm concerned, he's not on my wavelength at all; not even past first base, as you say. Given that, I feel angry and annoyed with myself, that I got drawn in to posting a poem because quite honestly, while I recognise it's letting you and Sid et al down to withdraw it, I really don't want my poems on the forum while it's still in this state. It's only one poem though I suppose, and the comments I received were very helpful - so I'm not going to push it. I apologise to you Ess. M |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
quote: Oh, and you can add this piece of insightful crap from Karen's poem to the list of useless replies that should be addressed by Pete. And yes Pete, here is me critiquing the critique in quite a forceful and personal way. Ok? M |
||
|
divine chaos Senior Member
since 2006-07-09
Posts 617dancing 'neath the moon |
Moonie, I really have to agree with Essorant on this one. It seems terribly unfair of you to pull your post, especially after the ones of us that were posting there spent so much time on it. I didn't spend nearly as much time as the others did, or give as in depth critiques, but I did take the time to read it several times, to give suggestions, etc. You say you don't want to "waste your time" critiquing poems here if you have to contend with the fluff posts; but, isn't it a waste of my time, as well as the others, if you just pull yours now after we've all spent so much of our own time on it? So what if there are "fluff posts" in UseTheIllusion's thread -- it was becoming clear that he didn't want anymore help with it anyway. There are others of us that DID, and STILL DO appreciate the suggestions given and can carry on our threads without paying attention to the fluffy stuff. Can't you just use what you see going on in different threads to learn which posters really want critiques and which ones don't? It seems very simple to me, Moonie, and I know you'll argue this .. but, if you have a bad time in someone's thread because they won't take the suggestions, don't want the help, or just want the fluffy comments, then Don't critique that particular person anymore, stick with the others that WANT the critiques, WILL listen, and WILL post, like I did to hunnie, that while her comments were appreciated, it's not what we're looking for on this particular board. The truth is, Moon, this board may never come up with guidelines that everyone will be happy with, or abide by. It may never be exactly what you want it to be. But, there are those of us that appreciate the time and suggestions of people like you, Sid, and Essorant .. as well as others. Walking off in a huff because of a few that don't agree, don't really want help, or want to make accusations .. well, that makes you no better than them really. They make their posts, you fire back with frustation and condescending comments, calling them "silly" or otherwise worthless, and they post more, to defend themselves -- you're just fueling the fire for more of those posts. Ignore it, and it goes away. I'm not gonna beg ya to stick around, and I don't believe that's what you're going for -- but, I'll miss you if you go. You have something worthwhile to add here, it would be a shame for you to pack up your toys and go home just because one of the other kids on the playground said something you didn't like. ~Sheli |
||
|
divine chaos Senior Member
since 2006-07-09
Posts 617dancing 'neath the moon |
hm .. you posted while I was posting ... and even after reading your responses, I still think the same thing |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: Why not? Are you and Essorant above reproach now? The two of you just convinced someone they can't learn meter, and you threaten to stop posting "constructive critiques?" Forgive me, moonbeam, for not breaking into cold sweats. While this analogy is admittedly an exaggeration, if only because UseTheIllusion probably isn't six years old, you simply can't hand a kid a textbook on algebra and expect it to help him learn arithmetic. The result is all too predictable. Effective teaching requires more than just knowledge of a subject. It requires patience and empathy, two qualities sadly lacking in this forum right now. quote: How can you do one, Jennifer, without also allowing the other? If someone gives blatantly bad advice surely others can't be expected to let it stand unopposed? quote: No, it definitely shouldn't. Calling someone's posts "self-congratulatory," however, strikes me as no more a personal attack (and, in truth, quite a bit less an attack) than is calling someone's poem rubbish. The former, at least, is specific and potentially helpful in that it might result in better posts. The latter is too general to be helpful by itself. Honestly, I'm not entirely comfortable with either approach. Both, I think, bring into question the intent of the comment, but more importantly I suspect neither is likely to affect constructive change. It might have been better, for example, to ask moonbeam and Essorant to take their off-topic fun somewhere else, as this probably wasn't the best place to be showing off or patting each other on the back. However, while I don't like either approach, I do believe allowing one automatically allows the other. As long as critics continue to be rude they can expect to be subjected to rudeness themselves. I will not curtail one without curtailing both. Put another way? If a poet is expected to develop thicker skin, should any less be expected of the critiquer? quote: LOL. That's some double-standard you have there, moonbeam. While it's not a term I would personally choose, presumably you would be more comfortable if someone called your critiques utter rubbish? quote: The lack of understanding is entirely yours, moonbeam. Pete clearly understands that rules and conventions have to be applied uniformly if they are to have any meaning. You don't get to rule the roost by making up your own personal set of rules. You contend you and Essorant "were having a bit of friendly banter about our differing approaches to formal poetry," and further claim "what we were saying could have been useful." I don't have a problem with the former and agree with the latter. Your failure as a teacher, however, is evidenced by an unwillingness to accept -- or apparently even entertain -- that what you were doing could just as easily be construed as showing off and just as readily brought about harm to the poet. And the issue isn't even which contention is valid, but rather whether both contentions deserve to be heard. Are you really so very sure, moonbeam, that you're always right? Or perhaps it's that your so unsure that you can't abide any suggestion otherwise? quote: The irony in all of this, moonbeam, is that if I was ever willing to make this place the elitist society you want it to be ... you probably wouldn't be allowed to join. The strength of truly open dialogue, however, is that even those with limited skills can contribute because their liabilities will be neutralized by others even as their assets are reinforced. The bottom line, moonbeam, is that you and Essorant clearly didn't help UseTheIllusion in this thread, and may well have damaged his progress. Instead of making excuses for the failure and decrying the cross-examination, it might be a good time to try a little self-examination. |
||
|
divine chaos Senior Member
since 2006-07-09
Posts 617dancing 'neath the moon |
UseTheIllusion, For what it's worth, I don't think you're too thick to get what Ess & moonbeam were trying to get across. What I do see is this: 1. You might be prickling a bit still from earlier arguments between yourself and moonbeam and feeling that he's talking down to you because of that. 2. The more in depth technical explanation of stresses was a tad confusing and further concretes what I said in #1. One thing that may help you understand what they're talking about with the meter and stresses would be to record yourself reading it aloud, at a normal speaking volume. Then, close your eyes and just listen to it. You'll better be able to hear the little glitches in the meter, the lyrical rhythm. One line should just flow into the next without a clunky feel in between. It's like driving a car, or riding a bike. You should come to smooth stops, instead of slamming on the brakes and jarring your whole body. The same is true with poetry, smooth stops and pauses make it a more pleasurable read Does that help at all?My saying that you didn't "want" anymore help (in my previous post) may have been a bit off target. Perhaps it's just your frustration that made it seem so. If that's the case, I apologize -- and that thought is why I am posting this. ~Sheli |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Just to clarify something and then I'll shaddup. I was typing fast last time as I have to share my computer now, but I apparently left something unclear. The people I thanked at the end of my last post are not the ones I thought should take advantage of the learning capabilities of the Critical Anal. forum. I was thanking those people who had helped me privately here at Pip, via critique, proofing, and suggestion. (There are other names that ought to be on that list, but I have had so much help, I can't think of them all at once.) I wouldn't presume to go through the open forums, archived or otherwise and tell someone else that they need to come here to get some work on their writing. I have no idea if they have help elsewhere, as I did. For all I know they could be English Education majors. But I do think some people assume too much--and that is that if someone at Pip doesn't participate in this forum then they aren't serious about improving the quality of their work. That just ain't necessarily so. I'd like to apologize to Use The Illusion, as well, for participating in the hijack of this thread. That wasn't very nice and I'll try not to do it again. And I still like the title. Sometimes a title can explain the main idea, and I thought it worked nicely in that capacity.Don't give up though. If you find the atmosphere here a bit much though, you might try the ways I have gone in the past. Find an author you enjoy, and study them. Ask them questions. If you are on friendly enough terms ask them to critique something before you post. (And whenever you ask someone, remember they might have to say "no" as some people have time limitations as well.) But anyhow. Keep writing for as long as you enjoy the craft. *peace* |
||
|
warmhrt Senior Member
since 1999-12-18
Posts 1563 |
Hey, hey, everyone....calm down! I regret writing "Decomposition" now, as it has caused so much infighting. This is not at all what I intended. All I wanted was for anyone who wanted critiques to be able to post a poem and receive some helpful, intelligent replies. Also, I wanted those who post here to be genuinely interested in improving their poetry. Though the quality of posts has improved, I feel the replies have been a bit too harsh. I did say once that I was very empathetic, and I feel that is needed here. We all want to hear something encouraging along with the advice on improving. I don't feel a poem should ever be called "rubbish", and detest these personal attacks. Please, people, stop and consider how YOU would want to be treated in a reply to your post. If you absolutely cannot find one small positive thing to say, don't say anything at all. Kris "It is wisdom to know others; It is enlightenment to know one's self" - Lao Tzu [This message has been edited by warmhrt (10-03-2006 12:14 AM).] |
||
|
ChristianSpeaks Member
since 2006-05-18
Posts 396Iowa, USA |
Whoa- Hadn't read this thread in a couple of days - that went south fast. I thought about just copy and pasting all of the comments from Warhrt's thread, but that's time consuming. M- I like what has happened in the forum over the past few weeks. It was your dropping of the stone into the PIP lake that caused it. I think that (until now) critiques have been stronger and the harmful language has been changed into clear analysis of a piece through the critics scope. That being said, I still think that you are full of it about half the time. It is not a grand benevolent gesture that you and Ess bless us with a critique - even if you know exactly what you are talking about. This is a pro bono community. You critique to offer your experience to another. That's it. If that person tells you to shove it - WHO CARES! If, like myself, they decide to listen even though the critique is firm then great. They may learn. But, the I'm-taking-my-toys-and-going-home attitude that you show when people bristle against your advice needs to go. Otherwise you will build integrity only to loose it. CS |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
To Ron: ‘Fraid that this time round Ron there’s not much you’ve said that I agree with. quote: No Ron, I’m not. In fact I’m often wrong. And you’ll have seen my apologies acknowledging that in many places on this forum. What I’m not wrong about is the abysmal level of the poetry and comment in this “Critical Analysis” forum over several years. And I’m also not wrong to point out your talent for the selective quote designed to twist people’s words around, not to mention your selective application of your rules. Where I WAS wrong was in thinking I could do anything to help raise the level of poetry and critique in this forum. It’s your site, your rules and ultimately Ron this site and forum are made in YOUR image, and I have to say that right now they are a pretty accurate reflection. You’re obviously quite happy with that, good for you. .............. And to Sheli: quote: It doesn’t though Sheli it keeps coming back and back. That’s the point. This “Critical Analysis” board has been going nowhere and achieving nothing for years now - just look back at the history. Fundamental changes needed to happen. And I now know for certain that Ron has absolutely no intention of changing anything. And yes, I know I fly off the handle Sheli; it’s purely frustration at being able to see what the board COULD be. I know also that I behave badly sometimes and that gives [EDIT by moderator] like Ron, opportunity to magnify that behaviour to my detriment. But as I said above, it’s not my board and ultimately not my business. I guess what’s really got to me in the last few days is that I actually thought that when Pete said in the Warmhrt post that he cared, he meant it. And that when Ron said he’d listen, he meant it. I actually don’t believe that either of them have had any intention of changing anything, and the thought that I wasted a lot of time making, yes, constructive suggestions, riles me a little. Sorry I didn’t get to your poem, and thanks for at least being receptive to some of what I was saying despite my tantrums. I’m grateful for that. ................. And to Karen: Unlike Ron’s little diatribe, there is a lot in what you’ve said with which I agree. I do KNOW there is a lot of talent out there in the other forums. Maybe buried in all the fluffy stuff, but there all the same. I very much like Martie, Alicia, Christopher, Kamla, some of Brad (heh), (Megan) Liz Cor, Maree (simply gorgeous even for an Aussie!), and of course your poems are very compelling and weird! too. Incidentally I wasn’t too keen on the title of your post here, I thought it came off as a bit pompous maybe, but some of the images and diction were simply stunning (I even learnt a plant name!). Opening syntax needs looking at though, I thought. One thing I wondered was whether you’d tied all those images closely enough to the metaphor. I was scrabbling around a bit trying to catch all the nuances. But then you probably intended that. Anyway, look at me, I’m starting a crit and I didn’t intend to at all. But getting back to the talent, as it were. Yep it’s there in the other forums - so why doesn’t it come here? Pointless, that’s why. This place has nothing to offer poets like that, and it never will have so long as some of the suggestions I and others have made aren’t implemented, and, I have to say it, so long as Pete, in thrall to Ron & Co, is the only moderator. Which probably means never. I like your poetry Karen, and for that matter, I’ve always liked you. ~smiles~ quote: Well there ya go Karen. The wicked witch of the Moon is no more - so now all the fluffy bunnies from Open etc can come here without fear of having their tails docked. Let the fun begin. As I lurk in the coming months I expect the forum to become a veritable warren of pink and fluffy learning. Best to all the rest of you. M [This message has been edited by Not A Poet (10-02-2006 06:05 PM).] |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Sorry Christian Cross-posted. Yep, I get passionate about this place. Long story. End of current chapter. Good luck with your writing. M |
||
|
divine chaos Senior Member
since 2006-07-09
Posts 617dancing 'neath the moon |
Moon, You don't always have to make a big splash to make a difference. The little ripples help too -- and spawn more little ripples. There are a few that do want the critiques, and do listen -- it's a shame that you won't be contributing anymore. best wishes ~Sheli |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: What do you don't get, moonbeam, is that caring and agreeing with you aren't necessarily synonymous. The other thread you referenced died a quiet death because, when I tried to commit everyone to a definition of "the" problem, you kept coming back to standards. I waited, hoping someone would disagree. Or, at least, offer something more helpful. If you want professional critiques of professional poetry you should probably look for a job in New York City. They have very high standards, indeed, and I honestly wish you luck with that. You'll need it. This site, however, isn't about setting high standards for either poetry or critique. You don't have to write like Keats or Plath to post here. What would be the point? Raising standards is just a euphemism for excluding people. I am not going to move poems or delete responses because they're not good enough. That doesn't mean I don't care and it doesn’t mean I wasn't listening to you. It simply means I care about different things than you do and what you had to say wasn't convincing enough to sway me to your side. Your goals are not my goals. And that's okay. The Internet is big enough to serve both of us. I believe the problem Kris described in the earlier thread has less to do with higher standards of poetry and critique than with perceptions and purposes. The problem doesn't start with poetry, but with people. With expectations. Stay tuned. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I am only here to state that I love Poertry.  Now why don't you hop like a bunny back to my thread and show me what you mean about my syntax and all that other stuff. I would like to stick around here too, because, it has come to my attention that my writing is too obscure, some have even called it inkblots, and that was never my intent. I would like to make my metaphors and the correspondences more accessible, and I really wish you would help me. Nuff said? And for the record, I love rabbit stew, and fried rabbit tastes just like chicken.  |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
I thought it was a bit of a shame that no one even gave the reading from Attridge's book a chance. It takes time and carefulness to read and learn about meter, to ask questions, critically discuss things and make it go somewhere. If UsetheIllusion and others having trouble with meter aren't willing to take such time and carefulness, then of course it won't go anywhere. I still stand by this thread if UsetheIllusion wishes to renew any discussion and take up some of the latter suggestions. By all means we may approach things in a different way. Neither moonbeam or I were ever suggesting there is only one way to go about these things. But in order for critics to adjust their approach they also need more insight into what the writer thinks, has questions, or difficulties about, and help from anyone that may better the appoach to the subject. Running away from the issue doesn't help anyone. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: Running away, Ess? Or being chased away? Attridge's book may, indeed, be wonderful. But, then, in my opinion, so is Newton's Principlia. I don't think either should be offered as primers. Your answer to someone who didn't understand meter was to throw a whole lot of confusing buzz words in their path. "You don't have to learn just one thing," you effectively said, "You have to learn all this other stuff simultaneously." Your post was guaranteed to frighten away any neophyte who wasn't also a masochist. Writing and teaching rest on a common fundamental, Essorant. Failure to communicate always rests with the one trying to communicate. Neither the reader nor the student can ever fail. I think a good teacher, like a good writer, accepts that responsibility. Blaming the student means no one learns anything, while blaming the teacher at least opens the door for change. |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
quote: Ron, Allow me to try. Ess, Maybe I can help you understand where you went wrong. At the same time, I may help Moonbeam—heck even myself—learn where we went wrong collectively. I’ll try to communicate this in terms we can all understand; by applying Ron’s very useful brothel analogy: Based on that stimulating model, you must know that its up to the Head-madam of any particular room to teach those under her charge, how to encourage their customers, as well as teaching any spectators who, although they have paid less just to watch, are nonetheless paying customers. Each Head-madam has already undergone a bit of tutelage herself by one or more, Tutor-madams, who have been taught in many instances, though not always, by the “Head-Head-Madam—the “Hoary” One herself. First, in how to properly stroke the ego of each customer then in how to stroke his other more delicate instrument; as well as in properly encouraging all participants in any self-stroking attempts—however clumsy such attempts may appear. It is forbidden for any madam, to laugh or call these attempts “rubbish,” or even, “really bad!” Each Head-madam must then teach every girl in her assigned room. Every ‘girl’ must learn her craft well enough to get her ‘customer’ motivated— enough so, that he is sufficiently stimulated and feels a significant elevation, of both motive and desire. If he can’t experience for himself a resultant swelling, of ego, then it’s certainly not his fault. After all: He was in the right place! He was promised a passionate experience through a release of inner tension! And certainly, there have been scores, of examples by others around him who were getting properly stroked, and reveling in new found passion as well. So you see, it can never be any customer’s fault, even if he himself may have been diagnosed recently as being totally impotent. He still at least has, passion! It’s not even any of the Head madams’ faults, much less that of the “Hoary” Madam herself. It is the fault of whichever Madam-tutor was in charge of teaching the “girls on call” in his particular room. For ultimately, it is they who must see to it that their customer is properly stroked, one way or another! If he becomes dissatisfied and leaves, it’s not that he simply ran away: He was chased away, and one Tutor-madam or another must be made to feel responsible. I hope this helps. If you must carp: Carpe diem! ICSoria My Poetry Forum |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
quote: OK okkkkkkkkk I didn't think there was anything, anything at all, that could induce me to post here for at least a year, but this!!!!!!! THIS is just terrific and powerful in its truth and accuracy. I'm running out of LOL's and tears. Sid, you are the mighty king of instructive parody - I'm at least leaving on the biggest laugh I've had for ages - my hero!! PS "heck even myself" - ~shaking my head~ off to a tee, lol, masterly, just masterly. quote: Politically correct balderdash. .......... Dumbing Down Our Kids: Why American Children Feel Good about Themselves But Can't Read or Write By Charles J Sykes Synopsis "Dumbing Down Our Kids is a searing indictment of America's secondary schools-one that every parent and teacher should read. "Dumbing Down Our Kids offers a full-scale investigation of the new educational fad, sometimes called "Outcome Based Education" -the latest in a long series of "reforms" that has eroded our schools. -Why our kids rank to, or at the bottom of international tests in math and science -Why "self-esteem" has supplanted grades and genuine achievements -How the educational establishment lowers standards and quality in our schools-while continuing to raise their budgets and our school taxes -The dumbing down of the curriculum so everyone can pass-but no one excel -How parents, students, and teachers can evaluate schools and restore quality learning Reviews "This intelligent and devastating book...brings together every aspect of the current disaster...all in clear, well-researched detail." --"The Boston Globe "A spirited call-to-arms...Sykes asks brave questions." --"Cleveland Plain Dealer "A scathing critique that grabs America's educational establishment by the scruff and shakes it...Parents and visionary educators, if not educrats, should sit up and take notice." --"Kirkus Review "A very important book." --"Washington Post Book World ............. Read and learn Ron. [This message has been edited by moonbeam (10-04-2006 06:55 AM).] |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: Even in parody, Sid, you still get it all wrong. When a teacher takes a seven-year-old and teaches them that reading and writing is drudgery and things to be avoided for the rest of their lives, it's the fault of the teacher, the principal, the board of education, the state, and ultimately, the parents. If I didn't feel any personal responsibility, I'd just let the blitzkrieg run its course in here. Trust me, I have better ways to spend my time than babysitting people who never learned how to get along at recess. quote: You're confused, moonbeam. I'm not suggesting we give our kids only what they want. I'm arguing we should make them first want what they need. Before there is craft (or reading or writing or 'rithmetic), there must be desire. |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
I've not been participating in this thread because you're all saying what I'd say. I agree with both sides of the argument, up until the point where moonbeam talks about 'dumbing down our kids'. My son is being educated here in Barcelona, at a very traditional school. His maths is a problem...because his teacher calls him an imbicile. I am providing extra tutoring, because maths is taught in Spanish at his school. He has learned through this extra tutoring that he is not an imbicile, he just has more to learn, because he's not learning maths in his 1st language. Poetry is like another language to some people, but that doesn't mean that they cannot enjoy learning it. Serenity Blaze says something I think important. Rules are good for standard, but what happens when a rule-less talent shows up? Are we going to oppress something beautiful just because it doesn't adhere to some rules made up by other people? For me, this forum is for improving unique writing, not just to produce regulated form. There are other forums that are very strict in their expectations...if you're not 'properly' educated, then you're ridiculed. I ask again...what of Basquiat? I will say, though, that generic responses annoy me, but sometimes, confidence needs to be built up before we see changes in response. ps; I thought the 'friendly banter' about metre between Essorant and Moonbeam was very helpful to me, but it did seem like UseTheIllusion was being used as 'subject', not the write, when a little intelligent wording could have stopped the disregard for his/her feelings. I'm on the fence. On one hand, I think moonbeams unput is helpful to someone like me who enjoys a full breakdown, but on the other, I can see how she/he frightens some people off (still think you're a girl, moonbeam...although one fully immersed in logocentricism!) |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Ron - peace (and zen). Sid - still in awe. Kif kif - kiss kiss. |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
quote: Ron, Do you really think I expected you to agree with me? This is your site after all and my parody was about your ideas of leadership, which I rather feel is a parody in its own right. quote: The difference is, I don’t expect everyone to get along at recess. It must be, that utopian playground within your mind is the exception, but on mine, all children have their personality quirks. Even the most phlegmatic youngster who seems to coast along in the most laid back, agreeable way has his opinions, some which would no doubt shock his teacher, though he may not express them as readily as someone else. Even so, the best teachers ‘babysitting’ at recess allow each child to develop his individual personality, in a positive way. This doesn’t mean, back in class, that a teacher then must allow any of them to skate by doing inferior work. Sure, allow them to make the children feel good about themselves. However, if these teachers are too quick to hand out the gold stars, just to give them desire, what’s that going to accomplish! I would never want a teacher giving my child an ‘A’ for ‘F’ quality work; I would not want that teacher giving my child a gold star, just to soothe his/her feelings. If they’re going to call themselves teachers, let them teach. |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
My point about teachers is that some methods don't teach, because they don't work for everybody. My son's only 11 years old, and already fighting with his maths teacher. He's been given a faulta d' order for shouting back "I'm not an imbicile!", and the whole personality clash between him and his teacher is holding back his learning. Incidentally, though, I decided upon that school precisely because it was utilising traditional teaching methods...he was a class clown in Britain (and his grades were terrible), and when he came here, he realised that popularity (even between the kids) rests on how well they do in lessons. So, although I have had to pay for extra tuition in his maths, I think the caustic school teacher has done us a favour by highlighting just how far behind he was in his own development. Of course, if I couldn't afford the extra lessons, I think the teaching he's getting at school would destroy his confidence for future, because if you're told you're bad, you either believe it, or think [EDIT], I'll show you how bad I can be. It's a very special person that can make something positive out of something negative, and I wouldn't expect it of anyone, for too much expectation can kill off desire, and as Ron says, that's what learning's all about. [This message has been edited by Not A Poet (10-04-2006 12:04 PM).] |
||
|
ChristianSpeaks Member
since 2006-05-18
Posts 396Iowa, USA |
I wonder if anyone here is actually a teacher. Has anyone ever gone to college or university to study education? Has anyone ever been assigned to read "Dumbing Down our Kids" and then discuss it for what seemed like weeks on end? Has anyone been in the position to witness how that book relates on some points, but misses all together on others? Finally, who here knows what the hell that has to do with CA in a literal sense? Just wondering CS |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Ron quote: The "teacher" giving a handout to read is not chasing him away. It wasn't meant just to sit on the desk as cold knowledge. It was meant to be taken up with critical analysis, asking questions, discussing and explaing things together as may be need. Nor was that meant to be done in one hastey moment. Your mistake is suggesting that that knowledge was meant to stand on its own. It wasn't. quote: Well, whether you think it or not, Attridge's book is an introductory book to the subject. Does that mean that there is no challenge? Not at all. It takes careful reading, perhaps even looking up a few words in the dictionary. But moreso, it takes at least giving it a chance instead of running away from it on the first glance. quote: Yes, I think it does. That's why this thread could've used HELP from Serenity and you in approaching these subjects instead of a bunch of paranoid accusations. In my opinion the paranoia you and Serenity brought into this thread made more problems than anything moonbeam and I brought into this thread. We were already having difficulty. We could've used some help from you and Serenity. Instead you two basically gave it the deathblow, and then treat us as if we should be ashamed for it. I think Serenity and you need to do a little more critical examination of how well your approach worked to help this thread. So far I don't think it did work. |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
C.S, you've hit on something there. I think it's a mistake to appoint yourself teacher or pupil in a forum such as this. If I wanted taught 'properly', I'd go to school. Critical analysis for me is to share in creative knowledge(which is mostly opinion), not enforce it. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
CS--once upon a time I was an English Education major with a minor in psychology. I also had some practical business English training at Soule' Business College and they had an interesting approach to teaching English--you were never done. When you finished the book, you flipped it over again and began again. You NEVER got out of English class there, as it was their belief that grammar is too easily forgotten and should be reinforced. For ever, and ever, and ever.... I hope to continue my education as soon as I can--Katrina, and I swear I hate blaming everything on that b itch, but she put a lot of stuff underwater, and records in our area are a total mess. But I did have a job offer to teach English as recently as July. ( 's to a special someone out there.)So wish me luck, at least. Right now I'm having trouble getting a social security card issued. Between the flooding of New Orleans Vital Records and the new Homeland Security Laws, I'm stuck in nowhereland as a non entity. As for Ron, he'd have to answer himself as I don't know, but-- I'm pretty sure that Ron is a teacher as well. As is nakedthoughts (who helped us on another thread) and Nan, who runs the Poetry Workshop. And Essorant, I am sorry if you were disappointed by my behavior. I wasn't interested in helping "the thread", or, sorry to admit this, helping YOU further your point, I was more interested in helping "Use The Illusion". Now back to CS: I have not yet completed my studies, but I had hoped my choices would lead me to help the more challenging students--the ones who had psychological chips on their shoulders. My goal was to teach inner city high school kids. It was a dream of mine (along with a friend who is currently teaching English in the New Orleans inner city school trenches) to open a small school, catering to just those types of students. We had some cool ideas, some of which included child care and flex time studies for unwed mothers. I know. It's all very corny, but it's what I wanted to be when I grew up. |
||
|
ChristianSpeaks Member
since 2006-05-18
Posts 396Iowa, USA |
I teach elementary music. I know about the arts, and I know how to engage kids (young and old) in the ideas of creativity. You must nurture and take care of these kids or they will shut you off forever. That being said, this isn't Public Education - this is critical analysis - there are no teachers and no students - just opinions and the ability to accept or decline. Moon- if you haven't, you should read "Be Kind" by Charles Bukowski. It kinda reminds me of you - and a lot of me too. The "age is no crime" line I took to mean experience or knowledge. It's a good read. cs |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I came here to learn CS. I would hope that has been made clear. All I have to offer is my opinion, and even Ron's advice, as much as I respect him, is taken in the same spirit. As I told a doctor once, there is no such thing as Doctor's orders. There is only advice. I sure hope I ain't arguing something here, because I am puzzled, as I don't think that I have done anything to insinuate I considered myself anything other than just another participant in this forum. (and I don't wanna run for President, either ) |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
quote: Why? I was trying to help UsetheIllusion too. So was Moonbeam, so were others. And we (including UsetheIllusion) were focusing on a line of discussion from Usetheillusion's poem that went to speak more generally about poetic structure and meter. I don't see what was wrong about that. No one is or claimed that they certainly had the perfect way of dealing with such things. I don't understand why you couldn't respect the context of the discussion, even despite the fact we were having difficulties. I don't think your approach had any less difficulties, especially with the (over)reactions that came shortly thereafter. Don't you think it would be better to try more respectfully to help and influence each others approaches to the writer's benefit, than to insult and seemingly try to give a "deathblow" to one just because it is so different from the other? |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: Why not, Sid? I've agreed with you in the past. And if you had been active throughout the forums since the early days (and most of those threads still exist), you'd have seen me change site policies more than once as a result of feedback from others. If I appear adamant to you, it's likely because I've had the same discussions, examined the same issues, and made the same decisions a few times already. You've simply said nothing yet to convince anything has changed. quote: Sid, handing out unearned gold stars only serves to devalue the gold stars, not motivate people to learn. See, I actually agreed with you on something! But then, I never suggested gold stars, did I? I suggested motivating people to learn. Or, at the very least, refraining from demotivating them. I don't think that requires dishonesty, any more than I think it requires brutality. quote: Actually, ChristianSpeaks, yea, although the curriculum was Child Development, not Education. And although I've worked with 11- to 13-year-olds on a limited basis in GearUp, most of my teaching experience has been at college level or above. I'm not sure that's relevant, though. Treating students like people instead of like recruits in boot camp should appeal to common sense, not to authority. Should we discredit Kif Kif's experience with her son because it wasn't something she learned in college? I don't think it takes a Ph.D. to realize people can't be forced to learn. quote: That depends on the handout, Essorant, and more importantly, it depends on the student. If there's no attempt to match one to the other, then yea, giving the wrong handout to the wrong student at the wrong time is tantamount to chasing him away. quote: You're right, Essorant. I wish I had jumped in earlier (for the record, that would have been just about the time moonbeam suggested meter and rhyme should be abandoned). I'll admit I didn't see the danger flags quickly enough, either, and unfortunately my time, like everyone's, is sorely limited. I have to choose where I spend my minutes, and my choices are far from always being perfect. I should have intervened earlier, and I accept responsibility for not having done so. And that's all I've asked of anyone, Essorant: accept responsibility, not feel ashamed. That's how we learn. Critiquing a poem is easy. This trope is good. That line is wrong. When the critic goes beyond that point and starts teaching how the wrong parts can be fixed, the weight on their shoulders increases dramatically. Anyone inclined to get on a soapbox should write articles, which is certainly not a bad way to teach. I'll even be happy to publish good articles on the main site, where they can potentially help more than two million visitors a month. That's the teaching role Attridge plays, after all, and it's a good role. That is not, however, the teaching role played in an interactive environment, be that a classroom or an on-line forum. The student is no longer faceless, is no longer a group, but rather is now an individual, and no two students are ever the same. Attridge can made assumptions about a group that we can't safely make about individuals. Instead, we have to use the interactive environment to help eliminate assumptions. We need to ask questions, to determine an individual's level and (here's that word again) their desires. We can't get away with writing articles and expect our audience to find us, like Attridge does, because this isn't that kind of learning environment. We're talking to real people here. One on one. And unlike Attridge, what we say carries the potential to hurt right along with the potential to help. Unlike Attridge, it gets personal because it IS personal. No one has to accept an interactive teaching role to be part of Critical Analysis. Most of us have our hands full just expressing opinions. When someone takes a teaching role upon themselves, however, I think they have a responsibility to get it right. Otherwise, they should stick to writing articles. It's not necessarily easier, but it's a whole lot safer. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: As far as poetry goes no, we're all students, some of us are trying to improve by swapping ideas among ourselves, some of us are struggling to understand and some of us are poking the other kids with rulers and pulling pigtails. Some kids want to stare out the window occasionally and some want to swap love letters under the desk and giggle at some private joke. In this class there are no teachers but there is a principal and a hallway monitor, they're here to ensure we don't burn the school down or kick pieces out of each other. They're also here to ensure the Spanish kid at the back isn't bullied simply because he's struggling to understand. No one has the right to give out gold stars or force people to sit exams, there's no detention and homework isn't compulsory but could be useful. Entry into the class is controlled by two strict rules, you have to be in the catchments area of the class and want to write better poetry. |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Warm fuzzy pats on the back for shoddy work are patronizing, demeaning, dishonest or a cop out in a CA type forum. I’m not here for a therapy session or a confidence boost, I’m here to learn more about poetry. If my poem sucks, do me a favor, tell me and tell me why you think it does. Don’t leave me stagnating in a pool of delusion about the quality of my work. That’s grossly unfair and non-productive. If I’m not open to suggestions or if I’m unwilling to do whatever work it may take to improve my poem, and/or if I’m not willing to critique other poems to the best of my ability, then I shouldn’t be posting in a critical forum, should be told so and encouraged to post in Open or whatever. Critics who argue or debate with each other in the thread on my poem are being rude. Address the poem, the poet or start your own thread. Just my opinion. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: That's what you want, so should we treat everyone the way you want to be treated? |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I tell ya what. If anyone would prefer I not comment, critique, or read their poetry, or address them in any capacity, either state so publically or write me privately and I will be more than happy to oblige. That's about the best I can offer. And Jennifer, I agree with you that the hijack of this thread, and using UseTheIllusion's post as a podium is wrong. So I offer my apologies to UseTheIllusion for my participation in that and withdraw myself from further commentary that does not address the poem. |
||
|
ChristianSpeaks Member
since 2006-05-18
Posts 396Iowa, USA |
Serinity- I think that we are on the same page. Learning is not always synonomous with education. However, in this instance we learn from the advice that is given. The delineation of teacher and student do not apply here because in the accepted definition there is a heirarchy which I don't believe belong here. I think our opinions are more similiar than different cs [This message has been edited by ChristianSpeaks (10-04-2006 04:56 PM).] |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
As I said, just my opinion. But, yep, I think everyone who posts in this forum deserves nothing less than open honest critique. Do you think they deserve or should expect less than that, Grinch? The blurb about CA reads "Post poems here to invite more in-depth critiques, and join the conversations on what makes poetry work." No where does it say, pop on in for a hug, a cuddle and a couple of strokes. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Who ever mentioned less? Which is better a 200-word critique that scares a newbie out of the forum or a one-line reply that encourages them to stay and improve? Which is less honest? quote: Maybe that's one of the problems because nowhere does it say DON'T. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
On reflection I thought it might be better if the discussion regarding this Forum continues in another place, so that we aren't trampling someone's thread. To that end I've opened a thread here. /pip/Forum6/HTML/001422.html |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Serenity's point is well taken, and I agree, time to turn this thread back to discussion about to the poem. Maybe it's time for a moderator to start a new and less emotionally charged thread about expectations (as Ron mentioned) and critiquing in general? Grinch, it might be a good idea to review very carefully what actually happened in this thread. Be sure to start from the beginning. Maybe then you'll understand what I was getting at. If not, feel free to email me. I'd rather not get into a discussion about who said what, what happened, etc., in a public forum. |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Great idea Grinch! |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
quote: Yes, I actually recall both instances in fact, and I’ve even commended you in the past for at least offering coherent debate. OK, since that last debate, posts and posts ago, I’ve no longer told anyone their “poem” is a heap of cow paddies. You should give me credit for changing on that point. Even though, at least when I had made such a comment, I offered evidence supporting my conclusion. Which is more than you can say for so many others offering comments with not the slightest bit of substance. That is what originally prompted that particular debate. One point of contention where neither of us has really given in, and likely never will is on whether every poem is salvageable. I contend that some writes are simply hopeless as poetry and should be put away, maybe picked at from time to time for parts, like a line or a phrase; that such a poem isn’t necessarily worth fixing, anymore than it’s worth wasting a LxL critique upon, just to boost the writer’s ego. You on the other hand—due no doubt to that “wide streak of idealism” you possess— seem to desire that every “poet” tell his fellow “poets” how great his ‘poem’ is, notwithstanding evidence to the contrary. So I simply, respectfully ask why you can’t be as adamant in asking that such “critics” offer evidence as to why any particular, reeks-of dung-poem is being labeled, “Awesome!... Great!” or something akin to, “Best thing since pizza, dude!”, in their “critiques”? This alone might at least, somewhat raise the standards of CA. One more point, Ron: I hope you don’t misjudge me as some angry pedantic recluse, just because I’m not into putting smilies in my posts. I never meant to come across that way. Although I admit to becoming annoyed listening to certain samples of tediously unintelligible commentary, I really do enjoy an intelligent debate, and you at least attempt to debate points intelligently. I think you’re mostly wrong, but you at least debate well. Sid |
||
|
UseTheIllusion Member
since 2006-02-06
Posts 223In a state of limbo |
Wow, this thread has gone downhill fast. I left this alone for awhile because all of the information being thrown at me was a heavy load to bear. That it was too heavy for me has not changed in the least. I do not resent either moonbeam or essorant for their attempt to help me with my poetry. However, I stick by what I have said in the past, and still believe today..a poem should be applauded or criticized for BOTH its content AND its structure. A critcism for its structure and praise for its content, or vice-versa, are EQUALLY valid. Praise is not inherently bad, which I take to be the underlying argument for many of the opponents of "fluff" on this board. I learned something in my linguistics course recently: while language has rules, those rules are arbitrary. I think that this applies to poetry, just as it applies to spoken words. I am not far from stating at this point that the conventions which were initially lauded in this thread are borderline-meaningless. That is to say, they are arbitrary constructions, the function of which is to perpetuate the control of an elite, just as is the case with such terms as "Standard Enlgish" or "Recieved Prononciation", which are held up as the "true" way of speaking, rather than just another dialect of English. There is no correct language. There is only effective communication. To adress the point the cynicRus made recently, I still believe that any poetry which has been written is not worthless. It is this insensitivity, not just to the poet, but to the very act of having written at all, which causes many misunderstandings here. Another thing that I leaned in linguistics is that value judgements about language are in the eye of the beholder. It is that simple. There is no, to use a Platonic idea, Form, which describes a bad poem. It is all opinion. And to use the word "rubbish" as a generic description for something which "shouldn't have been posted" is false because it appeals to that nonexistent Form. Sorry for rambling, but I had to state my opinion on some of the things brought up in this monster of a thread which I seem to have inadvertantly created. |
||
|
iliana Member Patricius
since 2003-12-05
Posts 13434USA |
I taught music for several years and I worked with many beginners. My approach was similar to Ron's because I, myself, was taught in the same manner and truly learned to love music first. I didn't add scales or arpegios until they were hooked. That approach was very successful with my students. Additionally, I have children who were easily turned off by the approach that was pointed out by Serenity and myself that got everyone so ruffled. That approach not only takes a toll on self-esteem on a beginner but destroys the creative process. After all, isn't the creative process the art of poetry. Agreed, there are some who welcome sophisticated and harsh criticism, or as someone said "brutal" criticism. So, I have a suggestion for Ron. Would it be possible to add four choices at the top of the window where the poet first posts indicating whether or not they are 1) beginners, 2) advanced, 3) came here for enouragement and gentle help, or 4) want advanced and harsher critiquing. Or, in the alternative, maybe there could be a separate section in their profile regarding the critical analysis forum in particular. Maybe everyone could be happier that way.  |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: LOL. Oh, I do, Sid. I truly do. More importantly, however, I appreciate it. quote: Depends on what you mean by salvageable, Sid. In almost eight years time I think I could count on one hand the number of poems I've seen that are salvageable in the sense they might withstand the test of time. Are you willing to put any of the poems you've written up against Shakespeare, Browning, or Frost? Can any of your work be "salvaged" to reach that level of craft and insight? No, not every poem is salvageable, Sid. Indeed, most aren't. In ten years, fifty, a hundred, most will be as digital dust, buried and long forgotten. But I'd like to think that each, while it yet lives, can still be a stepping stone to something better. You don't have to critique the ones you personally feel unsalvageable, just as I suspect we'll probably never get a poet laureate in here to critique yours and mine. It's all relative. However, that idealism of which you accuse me insists there's an important distinction to be made between poems and poets. The former may not be salvageable. The latter must be. quote: I'm glad to see you return to this thread, UseTheIllusion. Now, perhaps, everyone can be less concerned about us having hi-jacked it. The rules for language aren't completely arbitrary, nor are the rules for poetry. Some of them actually exist for a reason. But even that doesn't matter. What matters is that the rules for everything are pretty much arbitrary. I have no idea why a bishop can move diagonally, while a rook has to move at right angles (and what's with that knight, any way?), but if you and I want to play a game of chess together we nonetheless have to play by the same (arbitrary) rules. Even if the rules for language and poetry are all arbitrary, failing to recognize them is always going to impede communication. And that's the key word, I think, when you talk about the intersection of content and structure. Not only isn't one more important than the other, but I honestly don't think one can exist without the other. We can neither praise nor criticize content without also talking about structure, because without structure the content can no longer be communicated. The opposite of structure, after all, is chaos. The biggest difference between the Critical Analysis forum and Open Poetry is a matter of what is emphasized. If you want feedback on what you have to say (content), Open is often going to be a better venue. CA is more geared to analyzing how you say it (structure). That certainly doesn't mean one is more important than the other. It's just a convenient (and arbitrary) way to talk about this thing we call communication. And just for the record? Meter is a lot like music in many ways -- not the least of which is that both can get VERY technical and yet can still be used and enjoyed by anyone with a normal sense of hearing. I don't know diddly about chromatic scales, diminished seconds, or compound intervals, but I can still hum along with the radio just fine, thank you very much. Buzz words are created so we can talk about things (which makes them important), not so we can do them. Forget the buzz words until you need them and just concentrate on listening. This may not be quite as technical as Attridge, but you'd be hard pressed to find a better reference on meter than Kit's poem, Playing With My Feet. It helps put the fun back into learning, I think. |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
quote: Now who’s “…coming back to standards” as you accused Moonbeam in Post 63. You just offered me some extremely high standards here. In answer to your question though: No, I wouldn’t put my poems against any one of them, most especially Will, the Master. But I would put them against yours and that of anyone else here if you’d ever care to exchange honest critiques. I think a great deal of my poetry will stand the test of time: How about yours? Mine has been out there for a number of years while I’ve been rewriting and revising—essentially fine-tuning. You'll never see me posting something I just wrote the night before except in fun. You can find my complete collection on my own site. I’d welcome you or anyone else dropping by my critique forum. Critique away. And be as brutal as you like. I won’t run off in a huff, nor lash out at you in a tit for tat. (pardon my gratuitous use of the word, tat) All I ask of anyone critiquing there is that they back up their comments. Call my poems rubbish, if you like; just show me exactly which parts are rubbish, so I can analyze the value of the comments before deciding whether to revise. Feel free, Ron. Will you then allow me to critique your poetry as well? I’ll even be nice. You already know I can be fair. quote: Ron, Here, we actually agree. In fact, I’ll go even further and submit that many of those so called “stepping stones” on most forums, simply sank in the muck long ago. So forget about two years, much less ten or fifty. quote: Oh, I no longer do. And don’t get me wrong; I’ve seen many poems that overall were dull and unconvincing, but which had one or two exceptional lines. I have no qualms about saying so. I certainly have no qualms about telling someone I'm envious over a certain line or complete poem for that matter. So I have been known to encourage now and then. But I still get miffed whenever certain “poets,” supposedly seeking Critical Analysis, invite their friendly, stroking-crew, to give them their little ego boost. Vapid comments accomplish nothing and benefit no one. I know you’re getting tired of hearing me say it. So I will stop doing so. quote: That wasn’t an accusation, Ron. I quoted you. quote: It’s sort of strange hearing you speak in absolutist terms now and then. That’s OK, I’m willing to concede that the writers themselves are salvageable. Since you’ve just admitted that not all poems are. Sid |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: LOL. That was my whole point, Sid, which apparently I didn't make clearly enough. I was trying to show you why the word 'salvageable' implies the adoption of your own personal standards. When we applies a different set of standards, like trying to write as well as Shakespeare, very little becomes salvageable. Left unsaid, if we move the scale in the other direction, very little becomes unsalvageable. You're shooting at a moving target. |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
Some of us seem to be remorseful about hijacking this thread. Long ago it became "public property" and will surely remain such. UseTheIllusion, you are welcome to resubmit your poem in a new thread if you actually want analysis of it. I will not allow the new thread to get away from you. If you do repost it, you might first consider some of the early critique before the thread got away Pete |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
quote: Accused was a bad choice of a word. It was late. The point I was going for, which I didn’t make clear enough either, is that indeed, we all have standards. It seemed to me, given what was said, that you didn’t wish to apply any here. Or that you desire to keep them so low that it’s as if there really aren’t any. I think that’s the feeling some of us get regarding CA lately. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Ron I thought I done with this place but Sid is valiantly trying to pin you down, so I shall try again. Cutting through all the semantics, the misquotes and the opinions about opinions etc - you say: quote: Please tell me Ron, whether if someone posts something akin to the following: “I love ur poem. Its a great write.” you would ever countenance allowing the moderator(s) of CA to delete the message and replace it with something like: “Dear Poster, We are happy for everyone to participate in this forum, but this is the one forum at PIP where we like to encourage people to explain WHY they like or dislike a poem. We would therefore be grateful if you would read the guidelines on critique above and re-post with any further comments you might have about this poem. All the best, Your friendly Mod.” I suppose a yes or no answer would be too much to hope for? M |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
I hide in this forum because things like this happen when I venture out. In honesty, I don't think my writes are worth the space yet, but because I really want to improve, this is the best place for me here. The problem is response, and when I respond in other forums with my opinion about a response given to me, I'm given a 'warning'...which makes me then walk backwards, bowing. There is a difference here. I feel free to speak my mind (minus the swear words). I don't think censoring fluff replies will help, though. Personally, I really dislike being censored (I put up with it here because I value what some people say here, and it's only the odd word, or phrase), but I think totally censoring naive coments could scare most people off, and then you 'proper poets' would have a small elite society that's difficult to enter for the likes of me...because I'm not educated to any academic standard. Plus, a closed society is not a good thing in my opinion, eventually, it stagnates. I like this forum how it is, and with all groups that are in flux, people will eventually seek out those like minds and specific attentions we all desire. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
KK I think Ron was right to say what he said to you in that thread. You were posting outside of CA. My whole point from the beginning has been that CA should be one place in PIP that is slightly different. Nobody is talking about censoring. I wanted to ENCOURAGE ALL people to post here, but to encourage them to post thoughtful replies to the best of their ability. Despite what Ron likes to impugn I’m not some academic elitist - people can post fluffy huglet replies anywhere else in the entirety of PIP surely it’s within the spirit of CA to insist that if they post here they at least TRY to make a contribution, assisted by guidelines. Does this: “Dear Poster, We are happy for everyone to participate in this forum, but this is the one forum at PIP where we like to encourage people to explain WHY they like or dislike a poem. We would therefore be grateful if you would read the guidelines on critique above and re-post with any further comments you might have about this poem. All the best, Your friendly Mod” honestly strike you as censorship?! M |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: The standards applied at this site, Sid, are all listed in our Guidelines. And, no, just to be perfectly clear, none of them address artistic quality. We don't have anyone qualified to set those standards. quote: No. There's a longer answer, but I wouldn't want to squelch your hopes by offering it. Besides, Kif Kif already more or less did it for me. |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
I realise the moderator and Ron were right, that's why I'm here. As I've said, it is much more 'brutally' honest in Critical Analysis. My point is, not everybody that benefits from being here could actually meet these standards you propose, unless given a chance to participate. My writing feels like it's getting better from being in Critical Analysis, and that's what it's all about. To your censorship question. Yes, to delete a comment then repost a message in it's place is censorship. |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
heheh. Great minds think alike! Oops, better censor me...there's no dischord! |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: If you delete their comments, moonbeam, it doesn't matter what you say to them. Yes, it's censorship. You just cut them off at the knees An interactive forum should be exactly that: Interactive. That means engaging in a dialogue. As an aside, I don't think it's the Moderator's job to tell people what kind of comments YOU want to hear. That's your job. If the Critique Message in your Profile doesn't tell people you don't want pats on the back, you have no reason to complain when you get pats on the back. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
KK quote: Silly me. Sorry, I thought you might have picked up that I was referring to the spirit of censorship in the context of THIS critical analysis forum. If you think that deleting a “crit” that says “Great poem, Huglets” and replacing it with a helpful direction to guidelines and an invitation to re-post, is actually a damaging suppression of information in CA then there’s no more to be said. .................... Ron quote: I think you mean “raise” my hopes. The “No” squelches quite nicely thank you. It also shows me that it might have been a good idea to ask you that question at the outset and save myself a lot of time. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
And the same to Ron: quote: Silly me. Sorry, I thought you might have picked up that I was referring to the spirit of censorship in the context of THIS critical analysis forum. If you think that deleting a “crit” that says “Great poem, Huglets” and replacing it with a helpful direction to guidelines and an invitation to re-post, is actually a damaging suppression of information in CA then there’s no more to be said, except: As I think you said before, we have irreconcilable differences over what CA should be. Really your aim is ensure that it permanently bears the ghost label “Open MkII”. Thanks for the quick and succinct clarification Ron. M |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Wait a minute. Forget about deleting. Can't we all still express our expectations for much more in a speciality forum such as this? Also could not Not A Poet still lead by an example of responding with such a comment as: “Dear Poster, We are happy for everyone to participate in this forum, but this is the one forum at PIP where we like to encourage people to explain WHY they like or dislike a poem. We would therefore be grateful if you would read the guidelines on critique above and re-post with any further comments you might have about this poem." Without deleting any comment? We have two issues here: deleting, and keeping this forum pointed towards its speciality - critical analysis. I don't think either is dependant on the other. Why do any posts need to be deleted in order to clarify better the critical expectations of this forum? |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Good idea Ess. It's called compromise. But say the poster ignores Pete and carries on posting one line comments? What then? M |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Repetition is the mother of learning. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: Again, why should it be the Moderator's job to decide what everyone wants? Would you like him to fill out your Critique Message for you, too? Critical Analysis will not be homogenized. I really don't know how to make it any clearer than that. quote: If someone ignores your requests as detailed in your Critique Message, then you have a right to complain (politely, of course). Posters who ignore the Critique Message have always been dealt with consistently in the forums. There's no reason that should be expected to change. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Because it IS generally what everyone wants in this forum and what this forum is meant for. Who specifically wants an "I luv ur poem" comment in a forum specially for Critical Analysis? |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Ron quote: He wouldn't be deciding what everyone wanted, he would simply be applying rules that had been clearly posted at the top of the board for all to see. "Thou shalt to the best of your ability try to critique a poem so that you say WHY you like it - bearing in mind said above guidelines" All this business that you keep referring to of what Ess wants and what I want and what Sid wants is simply a smoke screen Ron. You know damn well that there is no way EVERYONE is going to unanimously agree to a way forward, and you're simply playing on that to avoid changing anything at all. You've already said "no" to an incremental change I suggested above. You're now effectively saying "no" to what Ess suggested. This has nothing whatsoever to do with a mythical collective "want" and everything to do with what YOU want. And what you want is the status quo. And if you can retain it while at the same time appearing to be Mr oh-so-reasonable, instead of what you ARE: Mr Owner of the Site [EDIT], then so much the better for your credibility elsewhere in PIP. I don't blame you at all for wanting what YOU want, I just wish you'd be honest and say that you aren't going to change anything in CA, ever. Then we can all get on with more productive things. M [This message has been edited by Not A Poet (10-05-2006 05:24 PM).] |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
~Sigh~ And while I’m at it, getting in deep again. I might as well answer some of the rant you directed my way Ron; quote: Perhaps this is one of the reasons why you’ll probably never be a great poet Ron - you seem to have a spasmodic or selective grasp of linguistic nuances. If someone calls someone’s poem rubbish (which incidentally I would never do without explaining why I thought that) then they are calling the writing rubbish and there is really no implication with regard to the character of the poet at all. If someone calls someone’s writing “self-congratulatory” there is a simple and direct reference back to the character of the person writing - i.e. that that person is smug. So when I said: quote: And you replied: quote: My answer would be yes, of course I would be comfortable with that. I’d expect the person saying it to be very careful to back the statement up with a detailed explanation (which Karen didn’t), just as I would give supporting reasons if I called a poem rubbish. My critiques on the internet Ron are usually quite long, and the threads I critique in usually develop, simply because if I make a negative comment and someone comes back at me and asks for more information I really really try to help them understand why I said what I did. Making me out to be a gratuitous rubbisher of poems is a fairly crude and unsupported attack Ron, not worthy of you; or maybe it is - prove me wrong. quote: If you accept a forum where criticism of the critiques is permitted (which I accept you want here) then of course the critic should expect as rough a time as she/he gives. That doesn’t however include personal comments, either direct or indirect. quote: You are inordinately fond Ron of putting words in my mouth to suit your political presentations. When have I EVER suggested an elitist society or a closed forum. Quite the reverse in fact - I chided someone in another thread for effectively implying that that was what we should have. quote: ... heh heh - believe me Ron I ran a mile from secret gangs run by intellectual bullies at school and I ain’t about to start accepting invitations 30 years later. M |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
Why should we need a moderator to either censor a 'fluff'comment, or step in to type what's expected, when it's already been clarified that the thead starter is authorised to explain here? I'd like to maintain my own resonsibility with communication in this forum, not have someone else doing it for me. |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
moonbeam...did you run after you stole their tips? |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
quote: Sorry KK, explain? M |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
I've not grasped how to edit yet, but the most recent *'tip' you gave was " that's why you'll probably never be a great poet..." *stolen from the "intellectual bullies". |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
~sigh~ KK, sorry, I am probably being dense, or I'm just tired. I don't understand what you're getting at. Oh, wait... I think I see. You are sort of making out that I'm an intellectual bully for haranguing poor old Ron about his poetic abilities. ~smiles~ I certainly don’t think Ron needs you to defend him! Anyway never mind. As to your point about the originator of the post as “self editor”. I’ve got no quarrel with that. I’ve got no quarrel with anyone here in fact. If you want everyone to be in charge of their own threads that’s fine. Like I keep saying, Kris’s thread prompted me to start posting in response to what I perceived was a question about how CA could be made a “better” place. My interpretation of better was to try and raise the standard of critique and poetry. Clearly that’s not what you want. Not what some others want. Not what Ron wants. Not a problem. You carry right on. All the best, sincerely meant Moonbeam |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
The standards applied at this site, Sid, are all listed in our Guidelines. And, no, just to be perfectly clear, none of them address artistic quality. Ron, Who the hell mentioned artistic quality! How does asking someone to post comments other than lame, tediously inarticulate drivel, equate to requiring “artistic quality?” Enough with the sophistry! As I attempted to point out before: quote: Go back to the first debate and you’ll see that this has been my main point since the begining, before any arguments began with all your perfectly prim angelically titled members. But, when you get a chance sometime, take a moment and listen to yourself talk. I mean, pay attention for once to what you are saying: quote: quote: You seem to be admitting here that there may indeed be a lack of quality. But, you’ve yet to show us your “good stuff “as it applies to CA, Ron. quote: I repeat my reply: “Whether you admit it or not, you have set the rules, thereby setting the level of quality that will pervade...” You’ve just willingly and knowingly set the bar extremely low so as to maintain a semblance of value in such pathetic statements as that above. By default, you wish for your own words to continue to be the standard for anyone who dares ever think they’ve anything other than the usual tediously stale bits of slop to offer. This has been the basis of my personal problem with this place since first shaking some delicate egos a few years back. Well, I’m smart enough to know that it will soon, revert once more to what it was a few scant weeks ago. I can understand you saying, quote:But I would have thought you might desire to set the standards of CA at least a notch above the others. Otherwise why give it such a name? I say again: If it’s neither Critical nor Analytical in its thinking, what’s the point. And if you are encouraging the same, you are being intellectually dishonest. If you were honest, Ron, you’d admit to having never wanted anything more challenging on CA, than what is already offered on Open and every other forum here. I simply thought CA could be something that stood out. I was wrong. You’re going to do what you want anyway, so feel free to do it without my poking at anyone’s sensitive nerves any longer. The only ones who ever have had to follow rules which you suggest as non-existent, are those who attempted the honest approach in speaking up against the puberulent nest you seem desirous in having this place become—again. I say again, because beyond this thread I won’t be blowing away anymore of that precious downy lining. I’m at least honest enough to admit that CA will remain as it has ever been. I’m also smart enough to know when to call it a day. quote: Well, Ron, you’ve certainly convinced me at last. This is never going to be anything more than a pathetic little fungal outgrowth spawned by Open, and every other forum spawned by that one. You’re right in saying that you don’t have anyone qualified. If you yourself don’t have what it takes to set even a basic rule for your fine little brothel, which at the very least, would define the difference between a kiss and a kick in the assets, then who else is going to take the initiative? Sid |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: No, Sid, you're assuming a cause and effect that doesn't exist. I refuse to set the bar so high that only an elite few can get over it, but that doesn't mean that you or anyone else has to stoop to get under it. If I set anything at all it is the level of the floor. The ceiling has no such boundary. quote: Why in the world would you think that? If anything at all, I expect the quality of poetry in CA to be lower than in the other forums, not higher. People aren't allowed to post the same poem in Dark and Open, Sid, but they are encouraged to post the same poem in CA and Open. Why? The expectation is someone will post a draft in CA and a bit later, when the work has been polished, will post a final version in Open (or any other similar forum). Put another way, if I'm satisfied I've done all I can with a poem, I'll post it in Open. Why in the world would I post that poem in CA? This forum, by its very nature, is for works in progress. quote: See, I honestly think that's the real problem here, Sid. Everyone bristles when I use the word "'elitism," everyone quickly denies that's what they mean, and yet every time you compare CA to Open that is exactly the implication you leave in your wake. You want something more challenging, something that stands out, something that is better than Open. In my opinion, you're not going to find that on the Internet. The poetry in Open is about as good as it gets outside the classical poetry section in your local bookstore. Not every poem, of course. Sturgeon's Law and all that. But Open, I think, has the best of the best. Critical Analysis was never meant to be something better. It's not an elitist's version of Open. It's simply a different venue, a different vehicle, a different way of looking at what is still essentially the same thing we practice in ALL the forums. Critique is just a different way of learning, not a better way. Reading and emulation, something that happens every time someone opens a thread in any forum here, are just as important. You and everyone else here can have exactly what you want any time you want it, Sid. All you have to do is put it in your Critique Message. Instead of telling people to be honest (do you really think anyone uses their Critique Message to ask people to NOT be honest?), tell them to refrain from critiquing your work unless they can use the word "rubbish" at least three times. No, really. You and moon and Ess can, within the guidelines, start your own little clique within the forum just by agreeing to use the same standards in your Profile. I'll even help you enforce your Critique Message, Sid. What I won't do is force everyone to adopt it as their own. Sadly, your current Critique Message, as I already implied, is pretty much useless. Of course you're still ahead of Essorant and moonbeam, who haven't filled theirs in at all. You make assumptions about what a Critical Analysis forum should be -- assumptions clearly not based on the description for the forum, so presumably they come from experiences on other sites -- and then expect everyone else posting here to make your same exact assumptions. Why not try using the tools that are available to you, Sid? Why not just tell people what you want? |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
quote: Ron, You’re in danger of making yourself look completely ridiculous. Asking people to simply say WHY they like or dislike a poem is setting “the bar so high that only an elite few can get over it, is it”? Are you living among men or monkeys Ron? M ~~~Later~~~ [EDIT irrelevant personal comment] Oops sorry Pete - what I was trying to get over was the idea that Ron might have started to regard himself rather as the king of an inferiors. Is it ok to say that? I think it's important to make the point. Let’s see; from just recently: Member Rara Avis Larry: quote: and from you: quote: and you again: quote: Personally I hate the word “kid” - a “kid” is a young goat. Most teenagers in my experience hate it, and when adults treat them like “kids” they behave like adults expect them to behave; immaturely. Treat young people in a respectful way, and yes, challenge them with material that will stretch them sometimes, and you generally discover thinking young people. I think Sid is right. You’ve managed to collect a lot of people here Ron who at the very least tolerate, and possibly even like, what is beginning to emerge as a particularly unsavoury brand of autocratic paternalism. Really, the things you’ve been accusing Sid and I of: double standards and elitism particularly, apply to you. I used to believe that you’d created an open family orientated site where new ideas and free speech were welcome. What I actually think has happened is that over the years you’ve ended up with a cabal by default. An elite of hoary old members and a flotilla of acolytes who have to be “protected” because they are less articulate, less intelligent, and less able to think than you apparently. You say: quote: That's patently untrue. It's not materially different. You won’t budge one inch towards making CA slightly different because you’re concerned that this might threaten the stability of the cabal. You might lose some control. What are you frightened of Ron, a forum where the monkeys begin to think for themselves? M [This message has been edited by moonbeam (10-06-2006 12:55 PM).] |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
quote: No, Ron. Here is what I think is the real problem: You speak for everyone who’s too timid or inarticulate to tell you what they feel, and when they do tell you, you turn right around and interject your interpretation—what it is that they really feel, according to you. You should know by now that you don’t have to speak for me. So please don’t attempt to insult my intelligence by telling me what it is I really mean to say. I have made my point clear from the beginning. quote: That appears to be a pretty weak argument, or at least paradoxical—considering it seems to be a high honor in these parts to achieve the rank of Member Elite. I understand they even hand out roses and chocolates. Probably just a rumor though. quote: Based on what? That they’ve all "won" chances to be published in a Poetry dot com Anthology? When I see your Open “poets” overtaking the shelves of classical poetry in my bookstore, I’ll certainly be inclined to agree with you, Ron. I can’t afford to hold my breath waiting on that bit of Science Fiction to become History though. And if you really think the clichéd babble of Open is as good as it gets, [EDIT irrelevant personal comment]. Sturgeon’s Law and all that. quote: I never once used words related to “elitism” either. Somehow, [EDIT irrelevant personal comment], you’ve convinced yourself that I need to embrace the meliorism of that feckless forum known as Open. As long as I can still think for myself, I don’t see myself going after one of the fancy titles so prominent there. And we both know I’ve been here long enough, that I could have been an Empyrian/Seraphasourus by now myself. Yeah, a few hundred fluffs a day and before you know it: I’d have a gazzilian posts to my credit—OK, maybe only a half gazillion. But I’d surely have been a Member Elitist by now. quote: [EDIT irrelevant personal comment] Considering, I used that word only once, in parody. It's not a word I’ve used in any critique. Regarding using “honest” in my Critique Message though, you may want to share your assertion with the other members of your flock who are prone to use the same word in their CM—but maybe with a slightly less condescending tone. Most of them are apt to have much thinner skins. Then afterwards, you may care to quote the remainder of my Message, which would clarify it well enough for all but the most aphasic among you—as well as those who may exhibit the same indiscriminate-editing tendencies you do. In fact, you could go down the line of Open posts and check their Critique Messages, to see how many really equate critique with absolute honesty and how many would have run off long ago had they not been protected by mods shielding their egos from such “brutality” as I’ve been accused of displaying. quote: Ah, “Useless!” Akin to calling something, “rubbish.” Wouldn’t you say? quote: A splendid idea, Ron. But, if you’ll recall, I’ve already put out a similar message to you and everyone else who wanted to have a go at criticizing my poetry. I’ve even said you and they could call my stuff rubbish as well. As long as you or they are willing to defend such comments. This is no less than I’ve been willing to do in critique which I handed out. But please, do feel free to tell me how really bad my poetry is. quote: More sophistry, Ron. This is a point I never once brought up or even suggested though you’d like to make it look like I did. quote: I'm also assuming your presumptions to be a bit warped, considering you can’t presume to know my history anywhere but here on PIP. Nevertheless, what exactly am I supposed to assume in a forum which promises “to invite more in-depth critiques, and join the conversations on what makes poetry work.” I always assumed “in-depth critique to mean more than cutesy little descriptive words. Something which serves to reinforce the term: CRITCAL ANALYSIS! I still think, such terms to you and most others around here, are synonymous with “Fluff.“ You’ve yet to prove me wrong. Sid [This message has been edited by Not A Poet (10-06-2006 11:43 AM).] |
||
|
ChristianSpeaks Member
since 2006-05-18
Posts 396Iowa, USA |
quote: Wow....I prefer the term primate, thank you. (where's my banana) |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: Everything I said, moonbeam, was directed towards poetry, not replies. If you would like to dictate responses to your poetry, feel free to use the Critique Message to make your requests. quote: Do you honestly believe, Sid, that you have explored your own inner depths so thoroughly there are no surprises left for you to discover? You have no subconscious left because everything you say and do is now done on the conscious level? Go back and count how many times you've mentioned Open, Sid, in a discussion that has absolutely nothing to do with Open. Go back and count how many times you've made a comparison that in any poem you critiqued would be called spurious. If my interpretation of what you say is wrong, Sid, then it's wrong. But please don't suggest I shouldn't interpret. That's what readers always have to do. quote: Is that the criteria you want to use, Sid? Where does your own poetry fall within those boundaries? Where does any living writer fall, for that matter? quote: You keep sarcastically coming back to the Member titles, Sid, almost as if you think they mean something special to everyone but you. The post counts, which is all the titles reflect, have about as much significance as birthdays. They prove nothing. Like birthdays, they simply suggest possibilities, and they are similarly celebrated. Were your own post counts higher, Sid, it might suggest you had read a lot of poetry here, but it certainly wouldn't be taken as proof. And before you ask, yes, the quality of a read is more important than the quantity of reads. That's a given. It's just not so easily measured. quote: And you thought I was using it seriously? I do apologize if it offended you, Sid, but I think the word "rubbish" has become something of a banner for those who feel CA should embrace a more brutal manner. Blame moonbeam for that association, if you like, but I suspect you agree with me, else it would not have been an effective word to use in a parody. quote: Almost no one is using their Critique Message to its fullest, Sid. I admit that. I lament that. Then again, none of them are complaining about critiques, either. quote: Okay, let's do. Critique away! I can "take it," just as well as I can "dish it out!" So you may as well be honest! Which hidden message in there, Sid, tells me that I shouldn't ever tell you I like your poem unless I'm willing to explain why? quote: Sid, both "critical" and "in-depth" are words that describe a line, not a point on a line. They are subjective and relative. Not everyone wants brutality, and not everyone believes "I like that" requires an explanation. Those are your crosses, and you're certainly free to carry them in regards to your own poetry. Personally, I tend to fall somewhere in the middle of that line. I'd very much like to encourage a little more depth than what we've been seeing of late. The key word there, however, is "encourage." As I recently said in a related post, I prefer options to mandates. I've already started making a few changes (the Critique Message, as of two days ago, can be much longer), and I'll be making more in the days and weeks ahead. I'm going to try my best to lead the horse to water, Sid. I'm not going to make the mistake of forcing it to drink. |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
All right folks, this is a useful discussion and certainly the most active topic in CA that I can remember. Recently, however, there are too many personal insults showing up. The down side of that is that I have to waste my time editing them out. I have better things to do with my time. Go ahead and express your ideas, both positive and negative, but let's avoid any more personal insults. Thanks, Pete |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Sorry Pete. ................... Ron quote: Fine Ron, but please say the rest of it. You feel the same way about replies don’t you. Well, clearly you do as you have already pointed out that I’m “elitist” for merely wanting a poster in CA to be required to say WHY a poem is liked or disliked. And elitism of that extreme nature won’t be tolerated. Apparently. M ..................... CS Sorry “primates”. xx |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
There needs to be more possibilities in the Universe than just "very loose" or "very tight" for the CA forum. The belt doesn't hold up the pants being one, and it hurts the waist being the other. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Ron I don't see why comparisons with Open were amiss here. Critical Analysis may not be "better" overall than the Open forums, but I think it deserves to be better at at least one thing: being a Critical Analysis forum! Critical Analysis is the speciality of this forum, therefore why shouldn't we expect it to be generally more and better than an "Open" forum so far as offering an enviroment that maintains critical analysis? |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Ess I think Ron would say that he has no problem with that at all. He's just not prepared to do anything to make sure it happens. M |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
quote: Perhaps you've discussed these changes with the mandarins in the mod forum Ron. Perhaps you're making them unilaterally. Do you think it would be a good idea to discuss them here, before you make them, with the people who have been so concerned and who actually post here? You never know it might make the people here feel like we are being consulted rather than dictated to by either you yourself, or, much worse, by "faceless" moderators who rarely have anything to do with CA. M |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: It's only now becoming apparent to me that I probably should have been much clearer in all of my posts when I was referencing poetry and when I was referencing replies. I can see I've probably confused this issue more than necessary. Let's see if I can remedy that. Poetry: There is no "artistic" standard applied to poetry in these forums and, frankly, it's highly unlikely I would ever be willing to accept one. I won't be put in a position to tell anyone they're not good enough to post here. I interpreted Kris's poem, Decomposition, that originally started these deeper discussions in CA, as a lament on the quality of poetry being posted in this forum. MOST of my comments since have been shaped by that interpretation. Again, I apologize for not making that distinction more clearly earlier. Critiques: Beyond our Guidelines, any standard for replies has to be set by the author in their Critique Message. If someone asks you to be gentle, I expect you to be gentle. If someone asks you to pull no punches, you're free to respond as brutally and bluntly as you wish. If someone specifically asks you to explain WHY you might like or dislike something, I again expect you to comply with their wishes. If someone asks you to hit your head against the wall three times before commenting on their work, you should get yourself a big bottle of aspirins -- or skip to the next poem, which is always an option to be exercised when you can't or won't comply with their Critique Message. To answer your direct implication (there was no question), moonbeam, no, I don't consider "wanting a poster in CA to be required to say WHY a poem is liked or disliked" to be an example of elitism, and I'm sorry if I gave you that impression previously. When applied to your own poetry, I consider it entirely justifiable. When applied to someone else's poetry, however, I don't think it can be so easily justified. If "I like your line breaks" doesn't always need an explanation to be valuable to a writer, I'm not convinced "I like your poem" should necessarily always be of no value, either. Would I like to see more depth? Sure, I would. But when you stand on a street corner with a tin cup in your hand, it's a little rude to throw nickels back into someone's face because you were expecting more. If that someone happens to be young, and the nickel happens to be half their weekly allowance, it goes beyond rude into the realm of deplorable. If you really don't want nickels, you need to put a sign on your cup. Then and only then do you have a right to complain. And even at that, you don't have a right to preclude ME from graciously accepting those nickels down on my corner. quote: You're probably right, moonbeam. In my defense, I was fully prepared to discuss solutions in the other thread, as I think I implied several times, but only after someone was willing to define the problem we were going to try to solve. When the only problem definition was unacceptable to me, that our standards for poetry are too low, I lost any hope of a consensus. It makes little sense, after all, to discuss solutions when we're not even talking about the same problems. I haven't had a lot of time (I'm not a casual writer and these posts are consuming half my day), and my plans are still fairly nebulous, but I'm certainly willing to discuss the direction in which I'm heading. For example, I'm pretty sure I want to move CA down into the same section with the Workshops. People are fairly predictable and most people discovering the forums are going to explore from top to bottom. A few years back, CA was the last forum in the Poetry and Prose section, and we purposely moved it to just under Open (it was only recently bumped down by Insights) to increase activity. Of course, any increase in quantity is always going to be offset by a relative decrease in quality (relative meaning the actual quality remains the same, but is buried more deeply in the quantity). My hope is that by moving CA out of the direct path of newbies, we'll have less people inadvertently posting in CA. In my opinion, THAT is the problem that was being highlighted by Kris's poem. I think people are wandering into the forum without a clear expectation of what to expect. It is that problem, not a standards issue, that all of my plans are designed to lessen (it can never be entirely eliminated). FWIW, and I've hinted at this elsewhere, I've also considered shifting CA to its own subdomain (critique.piptalk.com), removing it largely, if never entirely, from the driving philosophies of this and the main site. The only way to effectively do that, however, would be to use the new forum software that has been under construction for most of two years (or has it been three?). That's not a solution I can implement over a weekend, though. I am, of course, open to other suggestion that address THE problem. I'm even still open to redefining the problem as I see it. I won't be willing to set high artistic standards, and probably won't ever be convinced to arbitrarily define a point on what I think should remain a continuum. I feel rather strongly that there has to be room within these walls for ALL levels of critical analysis. While I agree rules are necessary, you are always going to find me reluctant to add more than are necessary. I'm likely to be much more receptive to giving people options that motivate them to do what is desired instead of trying to force everyone to comply. It just seems to work better, in my experience, and frankly, it's just more palatable. Anyone and everyone is still free to convince me otherwise, on any of these points, but you should know it's going to be an uphill battle. I'd like to think I'm not yet too old to change, but I can guarantee you I'm too old to change easily. |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
Ron, FWIW, I well agree with moving CA to the Workshop area, specifically for the reasons you stated. I think it may well help. I am not so sure of the subdomain idea though. That may take some convincing. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Well I’ll be darned Ron, a coherent, logical and understandable response from you. I don’t mean to be rude, I’m just kind of surprised. But then I’m easily surprised I guess. You say that you should have been clearer, and when I look back I must admit that maybe I haven’t exactly been very clear about what I think either. Ok, Poems First: quote: I agree entirely. Not least because I think “artistic standard” is so subjective that it’s nearly meaningless as a yardstick for a “rule”. Everyone should have the chance to participate. Where I think we might still diverge a little is in the way that new posters should be treated. A good example was the recent advent of the poster called Master666. In my ideal forum I admit that the rules would not have allowed three posts like that in quick succession. The latter two would have been removed pending Master666 making a contribution to the site other than his/her poems. I could go into further detail as to why I think this would be desirable for the overall good of the board but I haven’t time right now. If you violently disagree with me then obviously I’ll try and make time in due course. Rather than artistic standard I think my ideal criterion for participation would be something like “willingness”. I can see you now Ron throwing up your hands, and the “pah”! echoing over the Atlantic waves. But, you know, it’s not so difficult for experienced mods to determine when a person is trying to participate and when they are just interested in “taking”, “causing trouble” or simply there to repeatedly pat a friend on the back. A friendly note posted in the thread referring them to guidelines is all I’m suggesting - not excommunication or execution! quote: That sounds like an excellent idea. As I mentioned some days ago it would also be nice if somehow people who ARE interested in critique could be “caught” in some way. But you’re the one who knows how people enter the site Ron. And moving on to Poems and Critiques: quote: Yes I certainly agree with the wandering into the site bit. My experience elsewhere bears that out. That’s why I was suggesting a very prominent sticky at the top of the forum (I know that doesn’t work all the time either, but combined with mod directions it helps). A sticky could also help with the “standards” issue too. But again I’m not suggesting a draconian clamping down on the first newbie who fails to be a Harold Bloom. quote: I agree totally. Why on earth would I want to exclude anyone? I want people to learn. The whole point is that the bar should be set so low that anyone can come here and start from zero knowledge and participate. Heck Ron - there shouldn’t be a “bar”. But you know Ron there is a world of difference between the people who come to CA with the intention of trying to write better and those who come with other intentions, either innocently blundering in or deliberately trying to obtain “something for nothing”. People can, and in my opinion should be challenged in CA; challenged as to their aspirations and also challenged intellectually. And that doesn’t mean some academic inquisition, it simply means trying to recognise a poster’s level of ability and then attempting to interact with him/her so as to draw the best out. Still, despite the positives in your post, at the back of all this I’m rather dismally aware that you gave me a blank “no” to my question about posting a direction along the lines of “Dear Poster, Please refer to the guidelines and re-post etc etc”. I don’t pretend that I understand your thinking on that, and while I of course accept your perfect right to say “no” I don’t think it is the “right” answer. I believe this to the extent that until some form of intervention by the mods along those lines is sanctioned I don't feel I can participate. Except of course to continue to arg ... er, I mean, debate with you .M PS Following Pete's post, I have to admit that I don't understand the implications of the sub-domain idea either. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Now this is a much better tone and mood for discussion. I think it is a very good idea to move CA to the workshop area so people better know it is a workshop. The only possible weakness that may come is less and less new members ever posting, and the activity level may decrease quite a bit. Hopefully not as unbusy as the English Workshop, but you never know. I wonder if Moonbeam's suggestion may help to make up for that a bit. Could there be some sort of a mention of CA on the welcome-page or an obvious spot, to help inspire those that may be interested in workshopping poetry to consider going to the CA forum? |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
I don't have a lot of time at the moment, but I want to make two quick points if I may. quote: Those are only three of at least a thousand possibilities, and I welcome ALL of them with open arms. Especially those trying to obtain something for nothing. They need this place more than most, I think. People who have been here a while, and I hope especially those participating behind the scenes, know that I don't believe in ever asking for more than someone wants to give, nor is what they give ever too little. Takers are just as welcome to take as givers are to give. In the end, I believe both get exactly what they deserve. quote: No, what I said, moonbeam, was that I don't think it's a Moderator's job to make that post. In the first place, they have enough to do without being babysitters or coaches. In the second place, Moderators can't easily make friendly suggestions, especially to newbies. It's too much like a police officer "suggesting" you drive a little slower. In the third, final, and most important place, the Moderator shouldn't be expected to read the author's mind. Maybe the post the Moderator is correcting was exactly what the author wanted to hear? What you call fluff posts, moonbeam, I call open doors to dialogue. And that dialogue, in my opinion, shouldn't be between the poster and the Moderator. It should be between the poster and the author. (I give up. That really was supposed to be "quick" points. Instead, I'm now late for dinner. ) |
||
|
ChristianSpeaks Member
since 2006-05-18
Posts 396Iowa, USA |
quote: Has anyone noticed that no one has posted any work today? the only posts have been in this thread. Do you think that what Ess is bringing up is starting to happen for a different reason? CS |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
CA has traditionally been a slow forum, even at its busiest time a few years ago. It is not unusual to have a day or days when no new work gets posted. When there are interesting topics on board, whether poems or discussions such as this, there will still be plenty of activity. That is probably more a good than a bad thing. It gives more time for in depth discussion of whatever it is that we are discussing, something along the lines Sid, Moonbeam and Essorant have been arguing. |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
Sorry about this late post which essentially steps on others since its relevance was to Ron’s post #126 I had written it earlier, then went to take care of some business. When I got back, I forgot to refresh the page and now, given all that’s happened since, it’s rather obsolete. It would have been my last post to this thread anyway. Sid quote: Ron, You are the one who’s been dangling such criteria like some ostentatious bauble. You keep holding up my poetry against what you consider to be the high standards of PIP, to say nothing of some of the Greatest Dead Poets. I don’t really mind being called out, as yours or anyone else’s little whipping boy. My ego can handle it, for it is every bit as big as yours and theirs—though most of them are ashamed to admit to having one at all. What I still don’t see you doing is offering critique on just why my poetry is so bad, if indeed you feel it is. Perhaps you’d care to offer your own samples of critique on any of the works on this forum, as examples of what a good critique should be. No sarcasm implied in that suggestion either. quote: In fact, I actually believe they do. But, I’m willing to leave that point alone now. I suppose it’s nice that some people realize a sense of accomplishment through such honors, however abstract and intangible. quote: It might suggest such to you, Ron. In my mind, it might suggest that I had spent an inordinate amount of time writing ponderous, instant poetry and cute little “critiques” as you like to call them. As you implied though: It proves nothing. But I agree with the last part of your thought. quote: Well, after all, you failed to use one of your cute little smiley faces. It almost broke my heart and made me want to use the frowny face—almost. quote: I can agree that that’s how you and your crew see it. The bigger problem, as I see it, is that all the Johnny/Janie-come-latelies, now seem to think the word was actually used in a CA critique, when in fact it was used in a discussion of critique. That’s not the same to me. quote: There again, go back and read everyone else’s CMs. In order to paint me as the “complainer” regarding critique, using them as standards, you have to also compare them with the Mod edits on their behalf. Due in large part to this, the types of critiques offered are indeed of a different standard than CA. I suppose that’s as it should be. quote: Thank you. quote: No hidden message was implied by me. You on the other hand seem to feel it should be more severe somehow, to reflect what you consider my “brutal” critiquing style. quote: As anyone can see in reading through the thread, Ron, you’ve tossed out plenty of your own little sarcastic barbs. I don’t really see myself as the one with the messiah complex here, but why attempt to beat on another, may-as-well-be-dead horse, at this point? Why don’t you now let us see via some examples: What’s the most “brutal” thing You can find me having said since I’ve been critiquing these last few months? I will at least be honest right away and tell you what one of the harshest things has been. Regarding a certain opinion expressed; I referred to it as “horse fluff”. I also said some pretty straightforward things Or maybe you feel this is “brutal?” Perhaps you don’t like this as a critiquing style. If not, tell me what would have made it better in your mind. I’ve critiqued with what I know to be certain strong points of mine—as regards rhyme and meter, as well as on obviously dry metaphors and similes. I’ll even concede to getting the rhyme and meter slightly wrong now and then, as Pete has more than once made me aware—and I’ve always appreciated that. Granted that post was slightly sarcastic at that, but it was not one whit worse than the sarcasm in the poem itself. I still offered some good advice. Or, maybe you’d prove me wrong? Maybe you didn’t appreciate the humor in my own little bit of poetic whimsy, here . But I’m not sure if you knew it was simply an answer to Pete’s, which I considered quite fun, and well done. OK, I’ll admit that poem won’t ever “pass the test of time.” It was after all, one of those spur of the moment things. Nevertheless I had fun with it because it’s not often that anyone attempts metrically tight poetry on any of these forums like Pete did. His just inspired some thoughts and meter play of my own. I’ve given and taken as my Critique Message said. Sorry it wasn’t clear enough for you, but if you had compared it to my attitude in swallowing my pride and accepting good suggestions, you would have understood it better. But, do you really consider it such “brutality” to say what I’ve said in the above posts? Sure, you can go back beyond the recent past to find all my really sarcastic posts on this forum—you yourself acknowledged that I’ve toned it down though. And, are you also willing to weigh all those posts along with these recent ones, in the balance scales of objectivity? Would you, as freely point out all my other critiques wherein I’ve actually ,(gasp!) praised someone’s work, even after offering honest suggestions for correction? I’m sure you and anyone else could find plenty of those, if you really wanted to. But just remember what has really been at the heart of my “complaining” all along: That vapid, gratuitous comments don’t belong on CA. OK, so you have a differing opinion. Now, we have attempted to express our opinions. And your side has expressed opposing ones. Your side has concluded we are elitists and brutal, form-fanatical-bullies, while your side is considered by us, as being much too soft, with misplaced ideals—and now we’ve got a mile long thread which will never be appreciated for any salient points made, by either side. What a shame. So, I think I’ll just call it a day and add no further comments. You get the last word, Ron, as well you should. It’s your site. Want a dollop of honesty, Ron? I honestly appreciate the opportunity at least to vent on this—even though in the end, I can see it will have accomplished nothing. Sid If you must carp: Carpe diem! ICSoria My Poetry Forum [This message has been edited by cynicsRus (10-06-2006 11:31 PM).] |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
Getting ready to head to bed, but I wanted to address what I hope are two misconceptions in your latest post, Sid. I'll try to be quick. quote: I don't know where you got that idea, Sid. I thought we were talking about the general level of poetry in the Critical Analysis forum? The only time I've referenced your poetry at all was in questions, when I've rhetorically asked you to compare your own work against something else being discussed. It's a little embarrassing to admit, Sid, but I've read no more than a smattering of your poems in recent times, and those few were read very quickly. I wasn't, at any time, denigrating your poetry, Sid. quote: That's not entirely true, but it's probably true enough that I'll apologize for it. In actuality, I wasn't referencing your brutal critiquing style, Sid, so much as I was referencing the brutality that you often seem to advocate. I've only been reading regularly in here for the past few weeks (which is why I've read very little of your poetry), but what I've seen in that short time was impressive. I meant what I said before, and I'm sorry if rewriting your Critique Message for you suggested otherwise. You should also realize, I hope, that even when I direct my comments to an individual, I'm still addressing all the participants, all the readers, not just the one. Birds of a feather and all that. For example, no, you may not have used the word rubbish in a critique, but others with whom you appear to stand have. It has become a banner for a reason. If painting you with the same brush was offensive, I apologize. If you thought I was attacking you personally, I again apologize. All attacks were directed at the cause you have advocated, not at you, not at your poetry, and not at your recent critiques. |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Ron I don’t have a lot of time either, and if I don’t get out of here now it will be a lot more than dinner I’ll miss! Though I’m sorry you missed yours! You post was very interesting as it really finally encapsulates the reasons behind the difference we have. It’ll take me a while to respond, so maybe later in the weekend or early next week. M |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
quote: CS It’s called - trying to create a critical analysis forum for people to post in. M |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Oh one other thing (last thing). When I get back I'll also give my "official" stance on my use of the word "rubbish" seeing as Ron especially seems very agitated by it. More misunderstanding (deliberate or otherwise) I suspect. M |
||
|
Ratleader
since 2003-01-23
Posts 7026Visiting Earth on a Guest Pass |
Then I'd humbly suggest making it your signature! ~~(¸¸¸¸ºº> ~~(¸¸¸¸ºº> ~~(¸¸ ¸¸ºº> ~~~(¸¸ER¸¸ºº> ______________RUBBISH!______________ |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Rat Thanks for reminding me of this. You don't have to be humble - certainly not here in CA .All I was going to say is that under "normal" circumstances I wouldn't use that word at all - and if I did I would take very great care to explain precisely why I thought something was "rubbish". Anyway nice to see you here. Stay awhile. M |
||
|
Ratleader
since 2003-01-23
Posts 7026Visiting Earth on a Guest Pass |
I'd like to, but it isn't really up to me, whether that might happen. It would depend entirely on things that have little to do with the forum, or with critique of poetry, for that matter. So, I'll just say I'll think about it, and if I think it's something I can do, I'll give it another try. ~~(¸¸¸¸ºº> ~~(¸¸¸¸ºº> ~~(¸¸ ¸¸ºº> ~~~(¸¸ER¸¸ºº> |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
No problem. Whenever you can. Take care. M |
||
|
firy New Member
since 2006-04-07
Posts 8florida |
the poem if reflecting on you reveals alot about you . I am not writing to judge your poem only to say, if you do feel that way try things by yourself to see if they make the world seem brighter or your worries go away. for if they do you know it is not a false idol. but what makes the difference between a good one and a great one is when it improves your soul and not just soothes it. chief |
||
|
Twain_Crusador23 New Member
since 2006-12-08
Posts 5 |
Mark Twain would have a hayday critiquing this poem.... |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Why would Mark Twain want to get into this mess?! |
||
|
Russell8624 Member
since 2006-11-28
Posts 99Minnesota |
Of all the forums I've been to, I have to say this was the longest running one I have ever seen. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
