"Yes, a typo. Sorry! Explain away!
Terese"
Terese, pardon me for "Therese."
In the piece that opens this thread, I specify two readers that would be of no help to me: one attacks me personally, one attacks the poem (but doesn't cite specific reasons, just calls it "unmetrical claptrap).
When I find a reader who seems to readily understand or empathize with a poem AND who cites reasons from the poem, I listen. When I discover that a reader laughs out loud at the poem at the point where I think I've written a funny line, I figure that's my reader. If someone takes something I meant to be funny or ironic dead seriously, that's not my reader.
If a reader understands my diction, my choices, that's my reader. If a reader clearly hasn't explored the possibilities of a "difficult" word...hasn't taken time to use the dictionary, explore the roots..that's not my reader. If I employ a specific bird, or other thing, of which the reader was ignorant,
Bob but has troubled to find out about it (dictionary, guide, whatever), that's my reader. If a reader calls me arcane because I write about something that reader hasn't seen on television, that's not my reader.
When a reader discussing my poem talks about its "layers," oh boy, that's my READER!
Now, if you can transfer this kind of thinking to what you're doing, I THINK you might be able to sense who your readers are.
I've had readers tell me that using brand names in poems is wrong. Not my reader. I've had readers tell me that the subject of child molestation doesn't belong in poetry. Not my reader. I've even had readers say that I shouldn't repeat a word in a poem. Not, definitely not, my reader.
I think you have to learn to recognize the readers who are expert at the craft, especially at things you're working on, such as meter, but watch out if they start sounding too dogmatic.
Enough to chew on?
|