[Lo]

For what it's worth, this thread has re-awakened in me a concern I sometimes have about being a helpful critiquer. I still feel that some others gave the first draft of this poem a far kinder response than called for. I thought they went a very long ways in making assumptions, "filling in" and "correcting" a lot of what actually lay on the page.

But then your comment really struck me about how necessary those positive readings were to you. You said they showed you there was something that "spoke" to others in the draft that was worth developing. Obviously you NEEDED those positive reactions in order to be moved to improve the draft as you did.

So just a critic's dilemma, I guess -- I want to be the most helpful critic I can, yet I could not have honestly given a positive response to that draft no matter how much I wanted to be kind and helpful. (Makes me wonder, should I have pretended to like something or things about it? Or maybe just looked harder for what I could really like in it



This was a response to a poem and it's favorable responses that was posted on The Deep End. I thought about answering it there, but it didnt seem the place to ask questions or make statements, and so I am taking the liberty of moving it over here to General Discussion. What I have to say is not poem-specific, or even person-specific. It is a question (and some statements), plain and simple, about assumptions.

One of the reasons I always hesitate to comment on a poem of any sort is the distinct possibility of being mocked for it, or thought of as less-intelliegent or less-knowledgable than others who regularily wade in and fire away. Responses like the one above only serve to confirm that my trepidation is, at least, somewhat founded.

Someone once remarked in a similar thread that they *held back* on their comments so as not to influence others or to become the lone dissenter. They waited to see if anyone else agreed with "their" opinion before they voiced it. I found that sad, I still do, and yet I find it perfectly understandable.

Why should anyone find a positive response, which differs from their own, "far kinder than called for"?
Aren't we all entitled to our likes and our dislikes without being thought of as simply being "kind"? No two people read the same words and come away with the same sound in their head, no two people hear the same music, no two people like the exact same things for the exact same reasons. One is not more valid than the other. It seems it should be the author's choice to value one higher than the other, if at all.

When someone offers comments on something I've posted, I take it all into consideration....not the positive alone, not the negative alone. (as did the author of this poem, and wisely so, I believe) But I do not negate either and I do not consider any of it to be *flattery* or *kindness* or (God forbid) "pretending". I actually find those remarksto be quite insulting to those who made the comments, to be brutally honest.

People see what they see, they read what they read, they hear what they hear. Some people like rap, some people like soul, some like rock, some like Bach......doesnt make any of them wrong, just makes them different, and different is what turns the world and makes each of us able to fill a void in others.

If someone doesnt like a particular poem, I have no problem with them saying so in whatever terms they feel right and necessary in order to help the poem grow. However, I do have a small problem with someone critting the crit, so to speak. A response is not a poem, it doesnt need *help* it doesnt need *comment* it doesnt need *fixing* It is an opinion offered, and all of us are entitled to our opinions. If it is possible to have a "wrong opinion" then I am unaware of how that works. Isnt negating one personal opinion with your own simply more personal opinion?

I guess what I am getting at is this; Are there people whose opinion is more valuable than others? And if so, should those whose opinions are less valuable simply hush up and remain silent? Just who are we writing for in that case? There is always talk about how to get poetry to the *masses* and yet, who knows what the "mass" wants to read? It seems we are always a bit disdainful of them and their opinions and that we dont really want to appeal to them, we only want them to find us appealing. Truth is, there are way more of "them" than there are of "us", and they matter. They matter a lot if we want poetry to survive in more than just a small isolated area surrounded by the graves of dead poets.

Anyhow, now that I am quite done ranting, my question is this: Is it a valid assumption that if one person in particular doesnt like something that the something being discussed isnt good? Even if a whole bunch of someone's dont like that something, does that still make it not good? Or does it just mean it hasnt found the right audience yet? If you played Eminem at a Bach concert, you'd get boo'd off the stage, but if you played him to a different audience, you'd get footstomping approval. (however, of course, they'd do more than boo you if you played Bach in their backyard ) There's a lot of talk here lately comparing music to poetry, so I think the *audience* question is a valid one. Who we want to appeal to is our business, of course. How we do it is also up to us. I still think that we should be able to find a way, if not to appreciate all of it ourselves, to at least allow others their right to enjoy it.

In other words, I dont mind my poetry being torn to shreds, but when my opinions are questioned, I do admit to being a bit "miffed"

Wrong of me? (This one is ok to shred coz I am asking)


Lo









[This message has been edited by Lo (edited May 17, 2004).]

[MEHope]

Lo,

Is it a valid assumption that if one person in particular doesnt like something that the something being discussed isnt good?

No.

[carterj98]

If I think a critter is way off base, I might send the author a private
e-mail telling her to ignore that crit, and why. Otherwise, I do my own
and keep my mouth shut.

Critiquing crits publicly is a bad idea, for, as Lo says, it could
discourage some critters, and every crit, no matter how naive or
misinformed, is worth something to me as an author.

Take the smiley at the end away, Lo--you're right.

Carter

[Wild Bill]

The most helpful critiques I have received have been those which several people speaking their own minds independently told me approximately the same thing about a certain passage or word choice or the like. The second or third might have remained silent because the first had already pointed it out, but I would not have had the same benefit.

The least helpful I have received came when someone jumped in to straighten someone else out or to answer a question directed to me. In the first instance, the critter may have miscued because he just plain misread, but it could have been the fault of my poem and I needed to know it. In the other, I'm perfectly capable of speaking for myself.

I find it especially valuable when people tell me what images my poem gives them. If it's too contrary to my intentions, I need to check for some misdirection in the poem.

I say screw your courage to the sticking place. Tell the poet directly and honestly what you think. The more of it you do, the better you will become at it. If it's any help, Lo, I have always found your remarks intelligent, considered and articulate. If they hadn't been, I would have said so.

Bill

[Michel-Antoine Xhignesse]

I for one opt for your 'audience' option. If I (or anyone else, really) deems a poem worthy to be posted up for critique, then there has to be something good in it. It's my personal belief that no poem is totally unsalvageable (though sometimes salvation seems to require altogether too much effort) and I really loathe it when people here (or elsewhere) tell someone else to scrap a poem. As far as I'm concerned, these claims usually indicate a failure to make the effort required to write a proper critique: it's the lazy man's way out of helping someone else. And in a way, this touches upon a problem I have with this very site: little or no attempt is made to help the uninitiated/more amateurish poets. There is no real way for a new poet to learn from the more experienced poets on this site, unless it is by lurking. And in the end, lurking can only take you so far. And this is this community's major failing: it in no way attempts to welcome new poets to the fold. Instead, it adopts a more conservative standpoint.


What really embarrases me, though, is when I think a poem means something and post accordingly, only to find out that the author and next dozen or so posters see it as being representative of something entirely different. All subsequent posts then only serve to ridicule my own. And so I ask myself: why did I see it as representing something totally different? And so you analyze it all over again, and I generally have a tendency to come up with the same interpretation. Sometimes the other interpretation makes sense, and sometimes it really doesn't. Anyhow, this is going virtually nowhere, I think. I'll just end by saying that I've learned that, once one has posted a critique, one is done one's job. There's little point reading the other critiques.

And, as an author, one also has to remember that those other critiques which may seem far-fetched/a total misinterpretation also have to be carefully considered.

------------------
If I'm not wasted; the day is.

[VictoriaGaile]

Are there people whose opinion is more valuable than others?


Yes, I think so.

We're not just doing "subjective opinion" here, we're also doing "informed opinion about reasonably objective matters". Some of us are more informed, more experienced, more educated, more skilled, than others of us. Their informed opinions are more valuable to me than the opinions of those who are less skilled, less educated, etc.

Most crits contain both subjective and informed elements.

If it is possible to have a "wrong opinion" then I am unaware of how that works. Isnt negating one personal opinion with your own simply more personal opinion?

For subjective opinions, this is so.
For informed opinions about relatively objective matters, this is less so. Meter, cadence, rhyme, slant rhyme, diction, metaphor, allusion, are all reasonably objective matters, about which it is indeed possible, IMHO, to have what might be called a "wrong opinion".


And if so, should those whose opinions are less valuable simply hush up and remain silent?

No, of course not. How would we all learn anything that way???

The purpose of a crit isn't just to help the crittee, IMHO. I've gotten far more out of *doing* crits here than receiving them on my own work.

Is it a valid assumption that if one person in particular doesnt like something that the something being discussed isnt good?
Probably not.

Even if a whole bunch of someone's dont like that something, does that still make it not good?
Odds improve with every additional someone to the bunch.
Of course, there's also the audience element, as you mention.

The thing is that a good critique is more than "I liked it" or "I didn't like it". It's more specific and focussed than that.

One of the reasons I always hesitate to comment on a poem of any sort is the distinct possibility of being mocked for it, or thought of as less-intelliegent or less-knowledgable than others who regularily wade in and fire away.

I know things get brutal around here sometimes, but it seems pretty rare that actual mocking occurs. As for being thought of as less knowledgeable than some others, well, for me that's part of the cost of admission to learning. If I can't cope with appearing less knowledgeable than others, then I can't learn from anyone who actually IS more knowledgeable than I am. I take great comfort from the line from the Desiderata, "If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain and bitter; for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself."

Though, I suppose you are asking about the case where someone ELSE compares you with others. In which case, the desiderata would probably prescribe "Ignore those who compare you with others, lest you become vain and bitter."

[Tracy Estes]

Lo,
No matter how it's sliced--Critting someone else's critique is bad manners. PERIOD.

One of the reasons I always hesitate to comment on a poem of any sort is the distinct possibility of being mocked for it, or thought of as less-intelliegent or less-knowledgable than others..

Only by people who haven't read your work or one of your critiques. I extend the invitation to anyone to comment on one of my poems. No matter the opinion. Even if they want clarification before giving a crit. The more diverse the comments, the merrier.

The only thing that I've noticed (Here and other boards) is if the first critter doesn't like your work and expresses a negative attitude toward it, a lot of people who follow pick up on those negative cues and are influenced by them.

Why should anyone find a positive response, which differs from their own, "far kinder than called for"?

Don't know who you're referring to (that started the ball rolling, as it were) but it implies that everyone else's comments were wrong compared to his/her so the answer to your question---a condenscending attitude.

And as to your audience for modern poetry (what the masses like)...walk down the aisles of the Hallmark store. See those people reading the cards? There you go.
Is that saying I'm a better person/reader/connoisseur of poetry? Nope. Just different tastes.

Michel,

Dude, I ain't picking on you but...

It's my personal belief that no poem is totally unsalvageable (though sometimes salvation seems to require altogether too much effort)

Effort on whose part? You seem to indicate later that you think the critiquer can somehow pull a magic trick out of their hat (or elsewhere) and help a poster turn around a poem that was questionable to start with. Yeah, I could take the same words that my 10 year old uses to write a poem, put a spin on them/ edit out the bad parts/ change the syntax/ correct the spelling/make sure that all the tenses agree/add some imagery/ slip in a really cool metaphor...(etc) But if I did ALL that, haven't I in effect written a new poem that really hasn't got anything to do with my daughter other than she originally penned the words?

and I really loathe it when people here (or elsewhere) tell someone else to scrap a poem. As far as I'm concerned, these claims usually indicate a failure to make the effort required to write a proper critique: it's the lazy man's way out of helping someone else. And in a way, this touches upon a problem I have with this very site: little or no attempt is made to help the uninitiated/more amateurish poets.

That's why in the introductions, everyone is informed that this board isn't for amateurs.

There is no real way for a new poet to learn from the more experienced poets on this site, unless it is by lurking. And in the end, lurking can only take you so far. And this is this community's major failing: it in no way attempts to welcome new poets to the fold. Instead, it adopts a more conservative standpoint.

Of course my poems are not up to this board's better standards, but as to your last comment--I was welcomed. Openly. I also took my lumps. Oh, and I lurked for about a 16 months.


------------------
It's a dog-eat-dog world and I'm wearing Milk Bone underwear.

[Michel-Antoine Xhignesse]

Originally posted by Tracy Estes:


Effort on whose part?

Effort on the part of the writer, of course. The critiquer is there to help point the writer in the right direction, but it is up to the writer himself or herself to actually find and tread a path.

That's why in the introductions, everyone is informed that this board isn't for amateurs.

I hope you know that I realize that; I too read that warning. I'm merely lamenting the fact that this is so, and that there is no forum (for example) to help those who wish to learn. All this does is propagate the image of poetry as being an elitist indulgence with no relelvance whatsoever to the "common folk". It seems that poetry is becoming, increasingly, something reserved for a cultural elite, which it really isn't. We're just alienating both an audience and a future generation. But those are my opinions, nothing more.

And let me add that while more is expected of members than simply a 'trash this' comment, you need only read a few responses to see that the rule isn't always obeyed. Some people post saying that they'll return later and, in the end, never do come back. Seems like trolling to me, people choosing not to heed the warning issued when you join. But that's all to be expected, no?

Of course my poems are not up to this board's better standards, but as to your last comment--I was welcomed. Openly. I also took my lumps. Oh, and I lurked for about a 16 months.

Had you never written a poem before in your life? All I've seen here is 'friendly' hostility towards the uninitiated. And that's just an observation taken from my experience here, which is rather limited I admit. Of course lurking can help --- I did say so earlier. But it does not provide the same insights that would be available if the more experienced writers here could simply share their wisdom with the uninitiated, critiquing their first poems in a manner geared towards teaching them how best to write.

Having said that, I'll re-state the fact that I realize full well that this website is more of an online workshop than anything else. Workshops have their advantages and disadvantages, including the fact that they exclude those new to the craft. If we see poetry as an educational system, Workshops are probably at the CÉGEP/Undergrad level. I realize that. I just think it's a shame that we have no Kindergarten level, as it were.



[This message has been edited by Michel-Antoine Xhignesse (edited May 17, 2004).]

[Carol Taylor]

Michel, if you wandered into an advanced swimming class and couldn't swim from one side of the pool to the other, would you expect the class to stop and teach you face-float-and-kick? Or would you expect them to fish you out by the scruff of the neck, set you on the bank, and tell you you were in the wrong class? It's a matter of finding the level that is most helpful to you at your particular stage of learning. Perhaps you are confusing the concepts elite and advanced. There are many beginner and intermediate boards out there and plenty that don't set any standards at all--you just need to start where you are comfortable and work up.

Lo, as to your original question about critting the crits, in general it's a no-no. Mind you, there is nothing wrong with saying, "I disagree with So-And-So about line 13..." Just don't get personal. Address the poem, give your own opinion, tell why you disagree (or agree) with a particular point someone made, and don't be afraid of looking stupid. Especially if you feel strongly about the poem, and most especially if you disagree with all the responses the poem has received so far. It could be (and often is) the ovine thing working there. Besides, doesn't the poet deserve to know what a stupid person thinks? Or is he to be left with only the opinions of better-than-average and more vocal readers and critics who may be influenced by each other's better-than-average opinions? Collective response on a forum doesn't represent a fair cross-section of the opinion of individual readers. As a writer I want to reach the initiated, but I also want to know what the poem is going to deliver to the general readership looking at it for the first and last time in some magazine.


Carol

[bvanstaa]

I assumed, after reading that the board is not for amateurs, that that warning was more of a way to get people in "serious poet mode" and be open for brutual critique. I'd say that the vast majority of poets on this site are indeed amateurs if we adhere to the definition of the word.

I too have reflected that the more experienced writers on this site tend to "stroke their own" and tear apart newcomers. It seems at times that, once a person has reached a certain level--an accepted member of the "workshop," say--their poems are generally accepted regardless of their quality. I've darted in and out of this site at various points (just call me Lurk) and have seen poetry that honestly deserves to be torn apart but receives high praise from the "non-amateurs" on the site. (Welcome to the club, great work, stroke, stroke, stroke...)

There are also a number of established personalities on this site who are permitted to ignore don't-crit-the-crit etiquette and take potshots at those they don't see as worthy of critiquing or receiving genuine critique. One gets the feeling that a few souls 'round these parts have spent so much time reading their computer screens that they just don't have the patience to deal with new and unfamiliar ideas. Rather than looking for what a poet's writing needs, they spend more time floating their ideas about the poet's worthiness.

The solution? Ignore those who are so full of themselves and their comments that they don't see poetential away from their inner-circle, pay attention to the poets who are trying new and uncomfortable things in their writing, and make commments as though the person receiving them could use your honest input.

Brent

[This message has been edited by bvanstaa (edited May 18, 2004).]