[grasshopper]

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

[Roger Slater]

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!!!!!

[Terese Coe]

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).]

[nyctom]

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

[Rose Kelleher]

No one can force, cajole, encourage, or tempt anyone to create. It has to come from oneself; surely we all know that?

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).]

[Gene Auprey]

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.

Gene

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

[Robt_Ward]

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)

[Janet Kenny]

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

[Jim Hayes]

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).]

[nyctom]

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).]