While Tim is out of town I'll be putting up the poems from our 2004 crop that Rhina selects for comment, and Sharon will decorate the threads to give us a little holiday atmosphere.

Rhina is emailing the poems to me along with her comments, and I'll begin a new thread for each poem and put Rhina's comments below the poem. Rhina wasn't given the names of the authors, and those names won't be posted until after Rhina has announced her three favorites, so feel free to join in and comment on the poems in the threads and choose your own favorites if you like, but if you know who wrote them, please don't give it away!

Since the poems are coming to me third-hand through email, some of the formatting may have been lost. I'm counting on each poet to let me know by PM if I make any mistakes in line breaks, enhancements, etc.


2004 was a very good year!
Let's see what grew on Eratosphere!

Carol

The first 8 poems are up. Rhina tells me that more are on the way and that out of the batches Tim sent her she's selected 18 altogether to comment on.

Feel free to begin posting your own comments to each thread, but remember, don't identify the writers!

If you have a poem up here, please check it for formatting and PM me if I have the line breaks in the wrong place, words not italicized that should be, or any other mistakes.

Carol

Carol,
Am really looking forward to reading/rereading these poems and Rhina's discerning comments. It's all too easy in a bad week to forget how much good and original work is posted on the Sphere!
Margaret.

Margaret, the 18 Rhina will comment on are just a small sampling of the volume of tremendous work we've seen this year on Erato. Remember, each poet who submitted sent only one poem, the one he considered his best out of all those he workshopped in 2004, and then Tim narrowed the field further and sent Rhina only a few dozen of those. Rhina selected 18 to comment on, a time-consuming and extremely generous effort on her part! But what is being presented here is just a fraction of the good work we've produced. I think we could fill our own anthology with the fine poems that are workshopped on Erato in any given year.

Carol

How interesting--and revealing--that of all the "fine" poems produced at Erato this year, not a single free verse poem has been highlighted in this "best of the year roundup". Not one.

But hey, what do I know...

<FONT >Man, where's Jimmy the Greek when you need him!</FONT c>

<FONT >Happy Holidays Bro!</FONT s>

Indeed, Tom, that is very true.
Also some outstanding metrical poems are missing.
Two that come to mind are Hannah (Stephen Scaer) and WillIamb's Little Big Horn. There are others.
Best wishes,
David

a) How many free verse authors submitted their work for consideration?

b) Indeed, how many free verse poems in total were submitted for consideration?

c) Is there, somehow, a case being made that some works of outstanding quality have been ignored because they were free verse?

d) Why is it 'interesting' that not one free verse poem has been selected?

e) What is the significance of expressing 'fine' in commas?


f) Were Hannah and Little Big Horn submitted by their authors for consideration?

g) Are the authors above complaining or is there now a complaint being made on their behalf?

h) Where was it said that Rhina was going to pick the best poems for review?

i) What is wrong with the present method of selecting poems for review?

j) Should we all vote annually to pick the poems to be reviewed?

k) Is any one convinced that adopting this last would mean that the soreheads would be silenced?

Jim

[This message has been edited by Jim Hayes (edited November 29, 2004).]

I'd think it highly unlikely that Hannah or Little Big Horn were submitted for consideration; the point being that the selection is only made from poems submitted, not from the totality of poems workshopped here, something Tom may not be aware of.

Thanks David, I think that's pretty much my point, most likely the same applies to many free verse authors.

Best regards;
Jim

Perhaps others, like me, submitted nothing for a number of reasons (in my case, the primary one being to give others the chance to profit from Rhina's critique, as many of us already have; no small boon!).

I didn't submit either, but not for any altruistic reason, I simply didn't think I had anything good enough. The fact that I was co-opted, as it were, as a makeweight in the comic relief section, does not diminish either my delight at being critiqued by Rhina or my appreciation of the work contributed by Tim, Carol and Sharon.

Jim

--From the description on the Poet Lariat Board


--Carol Taylor, posted above. Emphasis added to indicate quoted remark in my original post.


--From Jim Hayes post above in this thread

Given that not a single poem posted on the free verse board from the entirety of 2004 was chosen--either because it was not submitted or, as Mr Hayes said above "co-opted"--as part of "some of our best poems from the 2004 crop," I find what that implies "interesting." But I leave it to everyone else to draw their own conclusions.

I would appreciate, however, Mr Hayes, if you would engage in this discussion without stooping to such insults as "soreheads."

There is much to be learned from discovering why people DON'T participate in activities such as this as why they do.

Jeez, Tom, the one time something of mine gets picked for something, do you have to make me feel guilty about it?

When the judges of what's "fine" are Tim Murphy and Rhina Espaillat, it's a safe bet that metrical work will receive more attention than non-metrical. So? Have you seen Best American Poetry 2004? Should we all write protest letters to Lyn Hejinian demanding equal space for metrical poetry, or should we just chalk it up to her personal taste?

It might be interesting to use this thread to nominate work by others that we think belongs in the best of 2004. Maybe the person submitted a different poem, or was too modest to submit anything, or couldn't submit something because it was being considered for publication, or whatever.

Tom, your Vermeer lacemaker poem was workshopped here in 2004, wasn't it? That would be one of my picks. Sorry it's metrical.

I can't remember if Wendy v's "North of Mist" was from 2003 or 2004. Either way, she's probably sick of hearing me rave about it. It's such a memorable poem.

For Maz, I'd choose either the pie poem or the bee poem.

Williamb's poem--was that that wonderful villanelle (usually that's an oxymoron in my book)?

Bugsy's Coy Mistress parody was one of my favorites, along with that bizarre poem about wigglin'.

I don't visit Non-Met as often, but when I do, eaf usually has something good there. Was his polar bear poem posted this year, or is that an older one? His one about the wife and the storm was also really good.

Add to this list, anyone?

I post in both metrical and non-metrical sections and I must confess I don't see as many polished poems in non-met. I won't ask: 'Why is that?' , but I would have expected metrical poems to predominate here, as they have. The extent of the domination is food for thought, though. I wonder how many free verse poems were submitted (though I realise that may be restricted info.)

Regards, Maz

Rose:

When someone states that something represents "some of the best of" and then exclude an entire category without explanation, that raises troubling issues for me. If this had been called "The Cream of the Metrical/Formal Crop" or, more accurately, "Highlights from The Deep End in 2004," then at least there would be truth in advertising. I find it hard to believe that not a single poem posted on the FV board in the entire year is included. Not one. I find this particularly galling when I learn that not every poem selected was even submitted for consideration in the first place.

If you want to write to the publishers of The Best American Poetry series, I would encourage you to do so. Or do what I do and vote with your wallet--don't buy it.

I'm sorry if you feel "guilty"--it was certainly not my intention to disparage what IS there. I simply wanted to raise some concerns about what has been so obviously excluded. I stopped writing poetry altogether, and this example of the poetry world in action just reinforces my own particular feeling that I have made the right choice for me.


Tom

[This message has been edited by nyctom (edited November 29, 2004).]

Tom,
Excuse me being blunt, but stuff the poetry-world (whatever that may be). I don't even know why I started writing poems, but I'm certain the poetry-world wouldn't stop me. I get such pleasure when the words come together, when I've feel I've made something. The fact that other people sometimes enjoy what I've written is a bonus - it's mainly the creative process itself that keeps me addicted. I love words - I feel so lucky to have the whole of the English language open to me.
It seems so sad to me that you can give up poetry writing. Don't you even write for yourself now?
Regards, Maz

Thank you, Maz.

So the news is that not everyone wants to write poems, or to write them for years and years? We all do what we want to do, as the saying goes. No one can force, cajole, encourage, or tempt anyone to create. It has to come from oneself; surely we all know that?

BUT there's some information missing here: were any good f.v. poems submitted, or not?

When I hear that a poem that wasn't even submitted was included I think that renders the whole idea of "submission" rather uhm hazy.

And if a majority of people who write free verse DON'T submit their work, don't you think it might be at least beneficial to some extent to ask why? Why don't they?

Maz, I am only speaking for myself. I am glad for you that you get pleasure from the act of writing. Good for you.

Tom

Good grief Tom. It's possible nobody sent any FV poems or not enough of those that should have been sent.

One does write for an audience I think and that audience can be one other sympathetic person.

I wish you would write again but I know that certain periods of one's life lead in other directions.

I think giving up writing because of the "poetry world" is like giving up loving because of war.

Come back Tom when the muse strikes, I like to read you.

Janet

PS,
Some of this energy (everybody here) might be better employed under the poems Rhina has commented on. (awful sentence.)

[This message has been edited by Janet Kenny (edited November 29, 2004).]

Terese,
I'm not sure why you regarded my reply as some sort of attempt to force Tom into writing poems against his will - what I responded to was not the fact that he had lost his inspiration or interest or whatever, but that it seems his disillusion with the 'poetry world' was the reason. I do think it's sad that anyone with poetic talent should stop writing because of an external thing like this. One of the wonderful things about poetry is surely that we create our own 'poetry world' with each poem we write.

But come along, Tom, ve haf vays ov making you vrite....

Regards, Maz

There's nothing wrong with having a site that concentrates on metrical poems, or which has metrical luminaries who are generous enough to share their passion and their expertise. This isn't a government entitlement program. It is one small metrical enclave in a world of free verse. Tom, from what I've seen you are much better at metrical verse than you are at free verse (generally speaking), and that probably goes for most of the people around here. But here's the real issue: why weren't there any children's poems represented!!!!! http://www.ablemuse.com/erato/ubbhtml/smile.gif

Maz, the second paragraph was addressed to everyone. I should have made that clear.

Sheesh. Everyone's so touchy around here. ;)

Edit: let me say what I was thanking you for: "Stuff the poetry world"!




[This message has been edited by Terese Coe (edited November 29, 2004).]

Maz:

I thought I made it clear I had "stuff[ed] the poetry world." ! But I still like to read it, and was disappointed to see such a LARGE part of it excluded in this particular instance. And that, after all, is the reason I spoke up in the first place.

Still, thanks for the laugh. Or is that laff (spoken in my bestest Hogan's Heroes's accent)--

Tom

Absolutely, and if someone simply has no desire to write, that's one thing, but Tom's post implies he quit writing because he's disillusioned with the way the poetry world works. I think Maz's point was that we shouldn't let that stuff get us down. For my part, I just see so much boring dreck out there that it's sad to see someone whose stuff I actually like giving up. It's like if pandas got depressed because they were endangered, and killed themselves.

[Edited in: Jeez, you guys are too quick to argue with, lol!]


[This message has been edited by Rose Kelleher (edited November 29, 2004).]

Well I for one am very pleased to have an opportunity to reread some excellent poetry and to gain a greater insight and appreciation for that poetry via Rhina’s astute crits.

Even though I post primarily in Non-Met, I did submit a poem,(wasn’t picked) ‘course it was one of my few metrical ones, figured that if Tim was doing the culling having a few iambs about couldn’t hurt. http://www.ablemuse.com/erato/ubbhtml/wink.gif

Gene

[This message has been edited by Gene Auprey (edited November 29, 2004).]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I started writing (at a very young age) because I wanted to be heard. For me the act/art of writing lies in this dialogue between the writer and the reader. I was considered very promising when I was young, was recruited by writing programs etc, and became so disillusioned with the "poetry world" that I essentially stopped writing poetry and became a visual artist.

What disillusioned me? At that time, metrical verse could not be heard. I had great teachers, all praised my "voice", all encouraged (or demanded, sometimes) that I lose the rhyme and meter so I could be published. This was before the "New Formalism" hoo hah happened. I was outraged, that I literally could NOT get publiushed (in any place that mattered to me) and so, being young, I said "stuff it" and moved on.

I continued to write occasiuonal verse; for anniversaries, for funerals, for weddings, for seduction, whatever, and all that got heard, one-on-one, and this was good. Only recently did I realize formal, metrical poetry was possible again, when Annie Finch sent me to this place.

So my experience in some sense parallels Tom's, in the sense that I grew disenchanted with the po-biz and turned my back on the organized manifestations of it. And this long-winded spiel is by way of saying: "It may be so that some (or even most) of you write because you have to write and take pleasure in doing it, without need of further input, but it's ok to write to be heard also, it's an honorable thing, and it's hard sometimes to see writing that should be heard not being listened to."

I think the younger you are, the more that matters. At my age, I can just glissade my way over the "wrongs" I witness, and take the good from wherever I find it. For me, I see here a year-end celebration that's posted up 18 very nice poems, and not posted at least that many equally-nice poems that could have stood in for any of those posted. And I say, so it goes; I'm grateful for the ones I get to read, more grateful still for Rhina's wonderful commentaries, and appreciative of the efforts of all involved who made this happen, and I thank all participants in and makers of this event.

There!

(robt)

Robert,
A singer-friend whom I have known for most of my adult life, just phoned me in tears because she was moved by a poem on my website that was about a shared experience--that of being New Zealanders living abroad for our work. Foreigners in an alien landscape. She is the sort of receptive reader who occasionally reads poetry. These are our most valuable readers I think.

She asked me about the poetry scene and I said that although splendid FV poems were being written they were submerged in such an avalanche of inferior stuff that many fine poems would inevitably be over-looked. I also said that although there was nothing more ghastly than a bad metric poem, good metric poems were retained in the mind in a way that FV poems tend not to be. Therefore, metric poets who feel depressed and discriminated against will probably prevail in the long run.

I too appreciate Rhina's loving comments--loving in the sense of total dedication and openness of mind.
Thanks to all who made this forum possible.
Janet

Well, I'm right roundly pleased with the poetry world, in so much as one can be pleased at anything on this mortal coil, it isn't perfect, but then, neither are my wife and kids, who are the dearest things in this life as far as I am concerned. That my family falls short of perfection is disappointing and indeed, galling, particularly as I'm pretty well perfect myself.

While on the subject of gall, perhaps I might, en passant, alleviate the condition in the other, self-elected, individual in this thread who is afflicted by it, and hopefully, transport him to a less elevated state of dudgeon, which was seemingly occasioned by my inaccuracy in saying my poem was "co-opted"

To put it more correctly, I was requested to submit, which can be clearly seen in the relevant thread which is still extant. The poem was sent 'blind' to Rhina who made the final choice, thus maintaining the integrity of this event.

My sentiments in the main here are very closely parallelled by the closing comments of Janet and Robt. above.

Jim



[This message has been edited by Jim Hayes (edited November 30, 2004).]

Too bad some--perhaps any--people who write free verse poetry were not also personally requested to submit. I would have had far more faith in the "integrity of this event" if fully one-third of the workshops here were not so blatantly excluded. No dudgeon there but--it might be more accurate to say "because"--no surprise either.

Again, if there were a paucity of free verse submissions, I for one would be curious to understand the reason[s] why. For the three years I've been a member here, I've heard lots of talk about how it's such a shame that poetry doesn't "appeal" to the masses and how to reach out to those who actually might LIKE poetry if they were exposed to it. Similarly, I've heard repeatedly how formal/metrical poetry is given short shift, and that plenty of people might actually find it fun to play around with form and meter if only they would give it a chance. And, at the same time, I've heard plenty about the form wars and how, to quote an earlier posting on this thread which reiterates the theme, "[Erato] is one small metrical enclave in a world of free verse"--as if we were talking about "turf" that has to protected from some "enemy," rather than the apples and oranges of a particular form of art.

I can't see how such conflicts are ever going to be resolved by engaging in the same kind of self-reflexive bias one is complaining to be the victim of. But hey, what do I know...

On the up-side, it IS a good thing indeed to see a group of highlighted poems represented by some new faces, and Rhina's comments are as thought-provoking as ever.



[This message has been edited by nyctom (edited November 30, 2004).]

Only one FV poem was submitted, despite the call for poems appearing at FV. It was not selected. I only personally invited one poet, Hayes, because his latest little Albert so cracked me up I thought "We haven't anything funny in this year's crop." Williamb's Little Bighorn was discussed here last year. I was disappointed to receive nothing from Scaer, Quince, Ayar, Moran, etc. MANY of our best writers declined to participate. But I was elated by the caliber of the eighteen offerings Rhina chose to comment on. And may I suggest we change our focus to the fine poems and lucid commentary on the adjacent threads.

Only one out of hundreds and hundreds of posted poems. Yes, I would be very curious indeed to understand why. What a missed opportunity. What a real shame.

Tim,

I too was disappointed about the absence of Non-Met contributions, as I recall several excellent poems on this board in 2004. Didn't post anything of substance myself - hence no submission. However, not all the most talented FV contributors post daily or even weekly, so perhaps several missed the call for submissions? Possibly we could have longer notice of next year's event? It may also be that some strong 'free' and 'formal' pieces were withheld because they have now been published or have been accepted for publication.

Jim indicates that the volunteered list was supplemented by a special invitation to him. I do feel that if such an invitation was felt appropriate this should have been balanced by an approach to one of our talented Non-Met poets. Another lesson for next year, perhaps??

Meantime, I don't think we should spoil the party by accentuating the negative at this festive season. There's much to enjoy in the poems posted on this board and in Rhina's perceptive critiques! It seems truly weird to find 30 plus comments on this thread while the poem threads on the board have so far attracted minimal attention.

Best wishes to all,

Margaret.



[This message has been edited by Margaret Moore (edited November 30, 2004).]

I actually submitted 2 free verse poems. I couldn't decide between them, so I sent both. Maybe that disqualified my work, "Born Again" and "The Price of Beef" which were workshopped here several months ago. I haven't been around to comment or write much lately, but I drop by to read. I have to say I'm really suprised if only 3 FV poems were submitted. But there are some really wonderful metrical pieces that have been chosen. Congrats to their authors!

Donna

[This message has been edited by fivefootone (edited November 30, 2004).]

I'd just like to thank Rhina, Tim, Carol and Sharon and everyone else involved, as the Lariat thread has been a treat.
While it would have been nice to see some free verse represented, I am aware that if this sort of event happened on another poetry board, I doubt formal/metrical poems would have got much of a look-in. There aren't many (if any) other boards who value metrical poetry as Eratosphere does.
So please, let's all get gruntled again.

Just a suggestion: perhaps next time there could be 2 separate categories for metrical and non-met, to encourage more fv entries?

Regards, Maz

[This message has been edited by grasshopper (edited November 30, 2004).]

We did a best of FV affair with Clive Watkins presiding this summer, and the plaintiff on this thread declined to have his poem included. Enough of this bullshit. I'm locking the thread and moving it to general talk.