congrats
 

congrats to the winners. thanks for a well-run contest.

Nemo is correct to complain. I also take exception to the phrasing employed in the post "Cathy's Picks", where some posters, with whose viewpoints one judge disagreed, are described as persons...

who, based on the sonnets chosen as finalists, rather churlishly whined about being most horribly assailed by wistful sentimentality and dollops of treacly nostalgia (underline added)

The remark is both ad hominem and inaccurate. I read nobody as 'whining' nor do I recall any 'dollops of treacly' nostalgia being complained of. I, like Nemo to my recollection, did find some of the poems, in my case particularly "The Last Dance", overly sentimental and some of the other poems - not all the poems chosen as finalists - overly concerned with nostalgia. Those are still my opinions. Am I disallowed from holding them - or is doing so to be characterised as 'churlish' and 'whining'?

I'd also like to point out that my own selection included the winner which I placed second; that my choice for first place was also that of the other judge (and came fourth overall) and that my choice of third was also the third place choice of the other judge. My evaluations of order do not seem to be so far adrift - and I think it unfortunate that a judge's final report should have been used ex cathedra to denigrate the attitudes of site members whose views are not agreed with.

That judges have an extremely difficult task is clear and I, like everybody else, am suitably grateful that they give so much time and effort to it - and even more so where difficult personal circumstances have increased that burden. The bake-off is nothing without both them and all the entrants - but it is also nothing without the free expression of the critical views of the site's members, who, however, much they may disagree with views held by a judge, should be respected.

Lest this post be similarly characterised, may I add that what I started off with the intention of posting, before I had read "Cathy's Picks" in detail, was a suggestion that, either through the good offices of the site or on the initiative of the Hon. Menshs themselves, it would be extremely helpful if, out of so splendidly large a field, we might have sight of more of the sonnets - a potential doubling of our pleasure and of our chances for critical appraisal. Could that be done - jointly or severally? I hope it goes without need for further elabioration that I warmly congratulate all the poets selected and especially the winners.

Hey Nigel,

Those honorable mentions won't be posted, they never are, and for good reason: the whining would never stop. I've tired of the shit-shows that go on here for time to time - any measure taken to avoid another exhausting and pointless recrudesce is welcomed from this member.

I kept expecting to be able to participate substantially in these conversations, but I never really managed it for a number of (generally benign) reasons. Still, I enjoyed the poems and discussions very much, particularly when they focused on the poems (but the what's a sonnet stuff was ok too...). So I want to say a hearty thanks to host, judges, and poets. I hope that in retrospect it will appear to all that a little testiness is inevitable and, anyway, part of the fun!

Particular thanks for mentioning my poem honorably (it's in iambic tetrameter, by the way...). That's a nice compliment in such distinguished company.

Finally, I'll apologize here for any past and future weirdnesses I post because of the wildly enthusiastic autocorrect on my iPad. On Tim Murphy's thread here, I used the words "unrewardingly" and "trimeter," which were converted before I spotted the error to "unrewarding lay" and "trimester"... Sorry.

Now that's what, in the face of Nigel's well-reasoned and polite posting, I would call, to quote Catherine's ill-advised gibe, "churlish whining".

By the way, Jesse, are you under the impression that "for time to time" is a meaningful phrase, or that "recrudesce" exists as a noun?

On a more positive note, thank you for introducing me to the wonderfully poetic word "shit-shows".

Catherine, while I, like everyone else, appreciate and thank you for the enormous effort you've put into this, I must take exception to the following:

On July 21, Kim Bridgford posted the following question on Facebook: “When is a sonnet not a sonnet?” ... I replied: “When it doesn’t sing.”

That seems to me, to say the least, a touch disingenuous.

Congratulations & congratulations again!
 

First, congratulations to all the finalists, thank you to all the participants -- those who submitted, those who posted and commented variously, and all the insight and enthusiasm you brought to the event, especially, the sonnets themselves. In my humble estimation, this is our most successful sonnet bake-off event ever. I hope some of the new members who came to or discovered Eratosphere through the public announcements of the event outside the Sphere will stay awhile longer!

Mostly, congratulations to our 2013 Able Muse/Eratosphere Sonnet Bake-off winners Mathew Buckley Smith, Stephen T. Harvey, and Elise Hempel. I'll be contacting you privately with instructions for the publication of your sonnet in Able Muse, print edition.

Furthermore, there are two other sonnets that had much appeal for me--for their grittiness, audacity, for their effective, subject, setting, fresh and vivid imagery . . . amongst their many other admirable attributes. Thus, with some minor edits, they too have been accepted for publication in Able Muse. Yes, congratulations also go to Marly Youmans for "The Baby and the Bathwater," and Peter Spagnuolo for "For Two Lindens Newly Planted on Avenue D." Coincidentally, these two sonnets also achieved fourth and fifth place in the popular voting, making it possible for me to simply say that the event's top-five sonnets will be published in Able Muse.

Finally, about the request for posting the honorable mentions, that's never been done in past bake-off, and I'll like to keep it that way. We've had our vigorous discussions, pro or con, about various facets of this bake-off, especially, about the sonnets themselves, how or why they were selected, and so on. I think we've all come out of it unscathed, and learned a thing or two along the way. However, I don't believe we're ready for another round of the same--especially since I'm already seeing signs of the tempest in a teapot brewing again in this thread. So, please, no posting of the honorable mention sonnets by the judges or by the authors themselves.

Thank you everyone ... and until next year. And especially, thank you to our hosts and judges, Gail & Cathy for a splendid and most successful event!

Cheers,
...Alex

Yes Brian you're so right it's recrudescence , an obvious typo, don't be a douche. What I said is on point and I stand by it. Nothing churlish about it. Imagine the annoyance of having the not chosen posted on the heels of the bake-off! I bet yours would be the first and foremost voice in the sour grape choir. Put that in your pipe.

I'm out.

I want to thank Gail, Catherine, and Alex and say that I was honored and surprised to find that I was one of the ten finalists when I came back from a week at our family cabins in northern Wisconsin (no computer or internet access). I also want to thank everyone who commented on my slightly unconventional sonnet (I often end up mixing different types of sonnets to find the heart of the poem). Some interesting comments! Thought I'd clear up that there's no (intended) symbolism to the snake; I had no fear of snakes as a kid and used to "play" with them. Once, I took home a dead one and couldn't understand why my mother was so freaked out....

I must admit, I found the contest to be a little confusing, but then again it was my first bake-off. And this is a tough crowd! I do feel a bit emotionally exhausted; time to jump the fence and get back into that field!

Cathy and Gail,
thank you for all your work. Thanks Alex for making it possible, and
all your work in general.

Congratulations to all the winners, to the finalists, and to the honorable mentions.

Martin