I recently wrote a short entry for my blog (pacnadview.blogspot.com) about recognizing dimensions of our own lives by perceiving what ISN'T present in them. In some ways this is a much easier question to answer by pointing to the kinds of criticism that isn't helpful.
Among the least useful comment I've heard - not necessarily on this board, so much - is that lines in a poem are "cliched." I know that certain things are of the "I know it when I see it" ilk, but I've tried to ascertain a definition - even a fuzzy, flexible one - of "cliched" without success. "Roses are red/violets are blue" works in specific circumstances - if it is meant ironically, for example. I think I have a pretty sharp eye for cultural chestnuts and tropes, and if I miss a cliche I wonder if it really is a cliche - or if it is something else.
"It just doesn't work for me..." isn't invalid, it just isn't helpful - unless it is part of a mea culpa-type expression. It's sort of like teaching someone to speak Spanish by telling him or her when he or she has said something that you don't understand.
I tend to appreciate comments that focus on "form and function" kinds of things. Since I never hope to be a "working" poet, most often I write content that is close to my heart - subjective, personal and intended to inspire an emotional response. But then there are mechanics. The mechanics are, I think, universal regardless of the content, and most worthy of correction. I know that the line between the two isn't always clear or even discernible. But I'd prefer to be given advice about the technical than the contextual.
Danny
|