[Philip Smith]

As a relative newcomer to this site I caught myself cynically looking for poems to critique so I could post my own.

I decided to give myself (and any others who might do the same) the following telling off

Good site and some really pro poems here

Mine isn't one of them

Phil

The chiefest pitfall, I submit
Submitting poetry to crit
Is not the crit not liking it
Though that's a blow for sure

It is the reasons that (s)he cites
For why the poem "isn't right"
Or elsewise "fails to delight"
That's hardest to endure

One stands upon a narrow ledge
On either side a fatal edge
Stylistically one has to hedge
One's bets with the reviewer

Avoid the following ripostes
By any means, at any cost
Or motivation will be lost
In critical ordure

"Disjointed" or "too metrical"
"Too liter-(metaphoric)-al"
"Self-consciously poetical"
"Simplistic" or "obscure"

You took advice from Dylan T
And eschewed all lucidity
But he was joking wasn't he?
Obliquity abjure

There's danger in the two extremes
Or so the poem's critic deems
(S)he's also had enough of "dreams"
And "streams of consciousness" for sure

"The imagery's obvious"
"The almost-rhymes are odious"
"The point you make is tedious"
"What did you write this for?"

And layout's
ripe too
For
Comment
Beware superfluous
indent
Or you may not
mean
What you meant
For which there is no cure

Be careful where your stresses fall
A diagram will explain all
“*/*/**//”
Correct this, I adjure

As Waldorf to Astoria
So Vagueness to Aporia
“Such tropes we trust no morier -
so let’s have something newer”

"Lose the first three lines perhaps?"
"Try substituting 'shit' for 'crap'"
"And change the title - there's a chap"
"Alliterations - fewer?"

"The poem seems a little long"
"You've got the sonnet form all wrong
...although the first line's almost strong"
(S)he’s got you on a skewer

Responding to this harsh review
Your epic's now a brief haiku
What you intended wouldn't do
(S)he flushed it down the sewer

(S)he made it seem so personal
And often was so terse and all
(S)he put you off of verse and all
thats left now is to lapse into that dense prosey style with no line breaks capital letters rhyme rhythm or punctuation that seems so popular nowadays i mean yes its all very clever im sure but is it art

The epilogue

But remember…

You too must deride and scorn
In order for the right to earn
To submit poems in your turn
Fifteen times will inure

Your sensibilities to shame
You’ll pretty soon be glad you came
For though this path leads not to fame
An audience is assured

[Janet Kenny]

Philip,
Bravely said.

Fifteen putts using self control
until drinks are served at the 16th hole.

Cheers,
Janet

[Mark Allinson]

For though this path leads not to fame
An audience is assured

Ah, the truth at last!

Philip, welcome to the 'Sphere!

Although I suspect this thread might soon be closed (or vanish) for subverting the sacred 15 crits before posting rule, alluded to by Janet.

But I must say, I very much enjoyed your introduction.

Some really fine rhymes in this, too:

(S)he made it seem so personal
And often was so terse and all

I look forward to having you around the place.

Perhaps you might tell us something about yourself - are you, perhaps, the Hundred Best-Loved Poems Philip Smith?

Anyway, welcome to the 'Sphere.

[This message has been edited by Mark Allinson (edited January 21, 2008).]

[Rose Kelleher]

Well, admittedly I haven't had my second cup of coffee yet, so my sense of humor hasn't fully kicked in, but unlike Mark I'm not looking forward to more of this sort of thing from yet another member who thinks we're all a bunch of morons whose feedback is worthless and shame on us for giving our opinions when asked. If that's what you think, why waste your time here?

I'm about to make a big cup of cocoa/coffee, though, and everything may look a little brighter after that.

[Michael Cantor]

Phil -

I'm with Rose. Before you dance and prance, and post your own poem in General Talk to show everybody how clever you are - first pay your dues. I see all of two crits.

And then you might consider posting your poem on the poetry Boards, like everybody else does.

[This message has been edited by Michael Cantor (edited January 21, 2008).]

[Quincy Lehr]

Oh, in the spirit of charity, I'll take this in the stated spirit...

Thing is, it's not a race to get to the first poem. I think it took me the greater part of a year to build up the requisite crits, mostly because I was composing the things more slowly back then, having to build up the chops of how to criticise in this sort of forum, some of which is a matter of instinct. When is a crit likely to have the most impact? When do I have something to say that hasn't basically been said already? How do I know if a poem is still active, versus sliding off the board? Because being able to say things about other people's work in a clear way is an acquired skill, too.

Quincy

[Philip Smith]

Last word on the subject, promise

I totally appreciate the purpose of the rule

Mine was a personal feeling of temerity about offering opinions on others' work without having exposed my own flank

Which in a strange way I have now done

And Rose and Michael have, albeit lightly, pricked it

For which thanks

Now I feel better about the whole thing except I'm slightly stung by the "morons" comment...not true I assure you all

I don't feel clever at all and as for dancing and prancing well...let's just say its been a while

If I ever do get to post anything here it will be precisely because I need the crit...I can't think of one thing I've written to date that I feel totally happy with

I think there should be another rule though

"Don't offer criticism of a poem you don't like"

One's starting point ought to be, I think, to respond to a thing which one feels fundamentally has value and is "almost there" and to offer positive comments about how one feels that final "polish" could be achieved

Cheers

Phil

[Robert J. Clawson]

Originally posted by Philip Smith:

I think there should be another rule though

"Don't offer criticism of a poem you don't like"

One's starting point ought to be, I think, to respond to a thing which one feels fundamentally has value and is "almost there" and to offer positive comments about how one feels that final "polish" could be achieved

I pretty much agree with this except in cases where you're accustomed to the writer and feel that he/she hasn't met your expectations. A good writer should be able to accept from a friendly critic that he/she might have written a clunker.

Bob

[Robert J. Clawson]

Originally posted by Quincy Lehr:

...I was composing the things more slowly back then, having to build up the chops of how to criticise in this sort of forum, some of which is a matter of instinct. When is a crit likely to have the most impact? When do I have something to say that hasn't basically been said already? How do I know if a poem is still active, versus sliding off the board? Because being able to say things about other people's work in a clear way is an acquired skill, too.

Quincy

I'm pretty much on your page, Quincy. I like most of this and would recommend it as the proper self-inquiry before composing a crit. "When is a crit likely to have the most impact? When do I have something to say that hasn't basically been said already? How do I know if a poem is still active, versus sliding off the board?"

I'd, myself, reject the last question, because I don't feel the timing of the crit is as important as its potential value to the writer. So what if you bump it up after it's sagged? Your crit may help the writer. If it also enlightens other members of the forum, it might provoke a new look at the piece. If it doesn't, it too will slide.

"Because being able to say things about other people's work in a clear way is an acquired skill, too."

With this, as with your first two questions, I heartily agree. I try to make my crits useful to the writer, which takes, at least, persuasion. I think it's good to ask writers to try things, to exercise a new choice or two, to re-think the value of an adverb when a better verb would do. Stuff that could be useful to the writer in a well-considered revision.

We're lucky here to have contributions from so many good readers. At least I feel lucky when someone reads a piece I post and considers it with care. The last two pieces I posted here have become poems because of criticism by intense, caring readers, and I thank them. I hope that I can also be felt as an intense, caring reader when I take time to address a piece that's triggered my critical conscience.

In that it's a workshop, a good piece of criticism here should be informed by generosity.

Bob




[This message has been edited by Robert J. Clawson (edited January 22, 2008).]

[Rose Kelleher]

One's starting point ought to be, I think, to respond to a thing which one feels fundamentally has value and is "almost there" and to offer positive comments about how one feels that final "polish" could be achieved

I don't want to start another of those long tiresome threads where the Nicey Nicey Critters gang up on the Nasty Evil Critters and bash their brains out with baseball bats decorated with little Jesuses and Buddhas in the name of "generosity," so I'll just say that reasonable people may disagree on this point. Very often when I post something, I'm not sure what I think of it, and if people think it's not worth investing a lot of time and effort in, I want to know. Depending on who it is and the reasons they cite, I may ditch the thing and move on. And when I think of those threads later -- for example, in the case of that goofy Anglo Saxon piece that a couple people here convinced me was never meant to be more than a formal exercise -- it's with gratitude to those who stuck their necks out and said what they really thought instead of just taking the easy way out and sprinkling happy dust everywhere. I'm glad I didn't spend hours "polishing" that thing and then run out and get it published (and there's always some editor, somewhere, who will take a given piece, no matter how bad it is). So before you try to impose rules on the rest of us, you might consider the possibility that not everyone shares your preferences.