Jejudo, South Korea
bottom line? No debate? SD, this is Brad you're talking to (Did you forget?)
At what point do we call any particular criticism 'trash talk'? Do we ban that word along with profanity? Criticism of any particular poem is always going to ruffle some feathers as is any particular theme. There's plenty of stuff here that I don't like that's in the opposite direction; it's too nice. Should I be banned for trying to make my point (as politely as I can but, of course, I still get into trouble occasionally-- the only difference as you mention is I do try to explain my point)?
The controversy is not going to end with one story (that should be obvious by now) but it seems to me that as long as people are willing to keep it within the context of any particular poem, I say okay. I've just started reading some of your examples at the Alley and much of that seems to have moved into personal mode. The 'trash' comment was not. Aren't you arguing that if you find something offensive, it should not be discussed? That you should keep your mouth shut: "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it" -- well, I disagree with that cliche. We need more talk. We need more discussion. Civility should be strived for. Politeness should be strived for. But, in the end, what we need, in my opinion, is trying to get more people to explain themselves.
If you see a bad movie, don't you say so? If you read a bad book, don't you think you can say that? What is the difference in this forum? It is a piece of art and as long as it is in a semi-public forum, a reader should have the ability to comment negatively (and as long at they follow the general guidelines already mentioned).
Point: If someone called what I write trash (and they have, they have ), I ask them for reasons. If they don't respond, I can choose to disregard that statement -- because to be quite honest I see that comment as someone still stuck in the chains of a particular culture; the unwillingness to speak is a weakness in my book. If you believe in your poem, if you believe in your comment, you can back it up. If you can't, maybe you should think about it. Contrary to certain well known documents, nothing is self-evident.
Does everyone have a 'right' to an opinion? Yes. But some opinions are more persuasive than others. If you're opinion is unpersuasive, it is useless for me and I can ignore it.
This site is growing too fast and with that speed, more debate will ensue as to the nature of this site and what is good for the most people here. I have no interest in most of the debates already presented but I do have an interest when people start making suggestions that, in my opinion, already go beyond the stated guidelines of this site.
My point is lets start discussing the cultural value system that tells me one: no debate and two: that a poem is trash without explaining that EITHER. Doesn't it go both ways?
Why don't we stop using imperatives altogether (except Ron) and start asking more questions? Let's start finding out about each other (and in the process develop thoughts that maybe people haven't thought before).
Anything less doesn't solve the problem; it just hides it -- to resurface again and again and again . . .
No more imperatives. More questions. (and I'm not saying we should ban imperatives either. )
To say 'no debate' is just fightin' words in my book.