[Janet Kenny]

I have sometimes wondered about the responsibility and limited usefulness of one's personal views when writing a crit.

I won't say which poem prompted my present rumination. It was a poem that engaged my imagination in an interesting way. It isn't a formal poem.

Because it's a forum I felt obliged to add my own constructive suggestion.

There were aspects of the poem that irritated me but the poem had engaged my imagination and attention. Who am I to tell a poet who comes from an entirely different background and has a lifetime of different experiences, how to "improve" his/her poem? My first care would be not to harm the good that already existed. I decided not to say anything at all.

Of course that's not how I feel at other times. I have profited from good advice and sometimes I feel close enough to a poem to be reasonably certain that my suggestion will be harmless at worst. But just as every actor on the stage has an aura which other actors respect, so does every poem come with an aura of otherness which we ought to respect.

If we know another poet fairly well we can let them have it with both barrels occasionally but then we must expect to have the missiles returned. Nothing new in this meditation. Just a refresher.

And when a new poster posts something which causes us to shudder do we wait or let 'em have it. OK! Cruelty can be fun.

[Janice D. Soderling]

Well, Janet, if it wasn't a formal poem, it must have been a non-formal one.

If you draw our attention to any instance at Non-Metrical where we have been cruel, it would be helpful for us, for the poet so treated , and for Eratosphere in general.

At Non-Met we strive to deliver fair and honest criticism in such way that the poet will improve his or her craftsmanship.

I suggest that it would be beneficial to the forum if you backed up your poet in a public way by posting a counter-opinion at the non-metrical forum.

[Mark Allinson]

"Whether Mr. John had been sent home with a diuretic or composing draught to some patient far gone in the poetical mania, we have not heard. This much is certain, that he has caught the infection. . . . For some time we were in hopes that he might get off with a violent fit or two, but of late the symptoms are terrible. The frenzy of the Poems was bad enough in its way; but it did not alarm us half so seriously as the calm, settled, imperturbable drivelling idiocy of Endymion … It is a better and easier thing to be a starved apothecary than a starved poet; go back to the shop, Mr. John, back to `plasters, pills and ointment boxes.”

This is part of the famous bad review of Keats’ work by John Gibson Lockhart in Blackwood’s Magazine.

In short, critics can be VERY WRONG sometimes.

And we shouldn’t forget how many famous writers have despised the work of other famous writers. James Joyce and D.H.Lawrence, for instance, both believed that the other was writing absolute garbage.

I have recently admitted how I sometimes criticize stuff for not the mortal sin of being written in my own style and taste. And perhaps this happens with others also.

I suppose all we can ever do is to try and give as honest a response as we can.

[Rose Kelleher]

My first care would be not to harm the good that already existed.

I hate when I make a suggestion and the poet gets all carried away and implements a "fix" that just makes things worse. But there's nothing you can do about that. Each author has control over, and is responsible for, his or her own work, and some are going to wreck their poems no matter what you do or do not say. Just say what you think and accept the fact that it's out of your hands.

[Janet Kenny]

Originally Posted by Janice D. Soderling

Well, Janet, if it wasn't a formal poem, it must have been a non-formal one.

If you draw our attention to any instance at Non-Metrical where we have been cruel, it would be helpful for us, for the poet so treated , and for Eratosphere in general.

At Non-Met we strive to deliver fair and honest criticism in such way that the poet will improve his or her craftsmanship.

I suggest that it would be beneficial to the forum if you backed up your poet in a public way by posting a counter-opinion at the non-metrical forum.

Janice,
My point was about criticism in general and in no way referring to Non-Metrical. I mentioned that it was not a formal poem because many people here will have expected me to be discussing formal crits. I was talking about the wider theme of self-assurance and possible damage.
Of course I won't post anything under the poem now because it would unfairly focus the wrong sort of attention on a decent poem.

[Janice D. Soderling]

The topic at hand is not about a review of a famous person.That is another matter entirely.

It is about workshopping and perceived cruelty to a new member.

A person who puts their work up for workshopping is seeking advice to improve craftsmanship. No one will become a better poet by being praised for bad poetry.

Honesty is no guarantee for quality critique. But since a workshop is a public forum, there will hopefully be input from several members who look at the poem in several different ways. This is a cross-section of the same readership as the general public. At least of the general poetry reading public. The poet who is posting will get some useful opinions and some less useful opinions but all of them have to do with someone's perception of the poem and are as such valid.

The best and most useful criticism will focus on specifics. That gives the poet and others taking part in the discourse, an opportunity to object and say why they object. It is this give and take that one learns from.

However, I would like to hear a little more closely what Janet is objecting to as regards cruel critiques at the Non-Metrical forum.

[Michael Juster]

The "let 'em have it" and "cruelty can be fun" comments illustrate the kind of approach that has diminished Eratosphere in recent years.

What made this site spectacularly successful was a combination of thoroughness, honesty and sympathy. Too many people have forgotten about the third consideration, and the same people often forget about the first.

[Janice D. Soderling]

I have sometimes wondered about the responsibility and limited usefulness of one's personal views when writing a crit.

I won't say which poem prompted my present rumination. It was a poem that engaged my imagination in an interesting way. It isn't a formal poem.

Because it's a forum I felt obliged to add my own constructive suggestion.

Cruelty can be fun

If it was not a formal poem, it was a Non-Metrical poem. You are not leveling a general charge, Janet, it is a specific one. You are saying that at Non-Metrical we have subjected a new member to cruel criticism.

It is our responsibilitiy as moderators to see that this does not happen. So I ask you to back up your charges by pointing out iin what instance we have been remiss. You needn't say so publicly if you don't wish to. You can contact Maryann or Alex or a Non-Met moderator.

Thank you for helping us deal with this.

[Janet Kenny]

Originally Posted by Michael Juster

The "let 'em have it" and "cruelty can be fun" comments illustrate the kind of approach that has diminished Eratosphere in recent years.

What made this site spectacularly successful was a combination of thoroughness, honesty and sympathy. Too many people have forgotten about the third consideration, and the same people often forget about the first.

My comment was making allowance for some entertaining comments by others of a kind which I personally don't practice and for which lack I am frequently reprimanded. Close reading is something to value, as is generosity of spirit. Some lively characters have added greatly to the alertness of the forum. Censoriousness is something else. As you know Michael, I look forward to reading your crits.

[Rose Kelleher]

Thinking happy thoughts, lalalalala