[Orwn Acra]

What James said. It's just a push by Jim for us to all spend time on his bad poem and to focus the attention on him, while he offers no substantial critique of his own and hasn't been here for 10 years.

[James Brancheau]

The level of ability, the precision of critique, whether I agree or not, is at a high level here. I have my problems, but that's me. I pretty much have problems with everything. The deep end assumes that we change gears. I have one gear.

[Richard Meyer]

I haven't read all of the comments in this post, but discussion about the continued relevance of The Deep End has occurred before. My position on the issue remains the same: TDE is essentially a dead limb. Lopping it off seems the best course of action. When I joined the Sphere, two non-metrical boards existed: one standard and the other advanced. The advanced non-met board was dropped long ago. I imagine there are very few people who remember the existence of the defunct non-met board.

Richard

[Ann Drysdale]

A large part of the problem is the rubric. It is daunting.

"If you feel uncomfortable with close attention and emphasis on craft... or attention to the standard or lack thereof of your critique especially by TDE moderators, then post at Metrical."

I feel very uncomfortable with the idea that my critique is being criticised and I am not confident that it is of Deep End quality. I am sure other people feel the same. Sometimes a poem would sit for ages without criticism and I believed that was why Aaron P abandoned TDE some time ago in favour of Met.

The tone of that rubric is consistent with what I understood the "old regime" to have stood for; it feels like being held at gunpoint by Clint Eastwood. And I just didn't feel that lucky.

Perhaps a change in the terms of engagement might help?


(PS. The last poem I posted there was something that had arisen from a game that some of us enjoyed and which had been scornfully condemned. I was making a point and wanted to know if I had really achieved a poem by those implied higher standards.)
.

[James Brancheau]

Never mind. Too off-topic, as usual.

[Jayne Osborn]

Has anyone even considered what Alex might think?

You can make all the suggestions you like, criticise all you like... but it's up to Alex. His game, his rules. The Deep End will exist until Alex decides to alter the boards, if indeed he ever does, so in the meantime all this is rather pointless; it's all been said before anyway.

Jayne

[Roger Slater]

Jayne, Alex makes the decision, of course, but that doesn't mean he is oblivious to other people's opinions and suggestions. It would only be "pointless" to argue the point if we supposed that Alex was incapable of listening to other opinions and possibly changing his mind. Since I take it that he is no such thing, it's all well and good if every now and then the minions dare to speak up and say how they feel.

[Jim Hayes]

De mortuis nil nisi bonum dicendum est

I had known Alan for many years, I supped with him, and with Tim also, and never witnessed or heard anecdotal evidence of misogyny.
A strong cohort of female poets, Rhina, Jennifer, Wendy, Janet, Gail, Terese, Rose, Alicia even and you too Julie, flourished under his aegis, all strong, confident voices who would have given short shrift to mysogeny.

Jayne, I wasn’t trolling, I was attempting to shake up a complacency and right what I thought was a wrong. My mistake was to assume I was dealing with adults, I was in the main, but a few shrill individuals took it upon themselves to defend the honor of Metrical by spearing the messenger.

Anyway, people should be mature enough to take it or leave it, I am not going to repeat it here as any consistent response would evidently mean that this thread would be locked also.

Jim

[Susan McLean]

Jim, it is good to hear from you again after such a long absence. Welcome back. I am still very grateful for the warm welcome you gave me and the students I brought to Ireland when we visited you there, and I look forward to seeing more of your work here. I've enjoyed reading your book.

I have to say that I concur with Julie about the way Alan ran TDE. There were many people who were helpful and supportive of me when I posted on TDE. Alan wasn't one of them. I did not, on the whole, feel harassed, mainly just ignored. But I did take it ill when he posted one of my poems (with his unwanted changes) on his blog without asking me, thereby making the poem published online and ineligible for publication elsewhere. I don't think that harsh criticism is always helpful. It can turn into bullying, and has, on occasion. I think having two boards always catered to elitism, and that we work together most harmoniously when we treat one another in a respectful and egalitarian way. However, I also recognize that different people respond to different kinds of motivation, so if some people want a separate board for a different approach to criticism, I have no objection. I just don't think I'll be visiting it much.

Susan

[Jim Hayes]

Susan, I should have included your voice also and I really delighted in you and your students.

To Jayne, by way of furthe explanation, I did not post under a pseudonym as a ‘prank’
My intention was to ease my way back gradually, and in the fullness of time, if ever, disclose my identity, my motivation is unclear even to myself, maybe I just wanted a new start, who knows?

But In the time I was away from here, I had never lurked, i wasn’t prepared and I got a shock when I saw the neglect of the Deep End, I initially thought the whole site was moribund until I saw the activity on Metrical.

I’m afraid I rather lost the run of myself, posted too stridently and blew my cover prematurely.

Regarding this thread here and the future of the Deep End, reaction to my current post there is revealing, apart from the ‘you asked for it’ dumps (for shame) and a one line dismissal from the Moderator there was constructive and helpful commentary.

The critiques that had little interest in the poem but in playing to the pea nut gallery I could dismiss for what whey were, but cogent commentary from Ann calling a passage ‘bollocks’ I understood immediately, it wasn’t insulting, it was calling a spade a spade and I was encouraged to do something about it.

The thing about the Deep End is that while critiques could sometimes be brutal, they were honest and never expressed insultingly to the poet.

What to do with the Deep End now, well I’m afraid that all I’ve achieved in doing
Is destroying it. Like Wilde “Each man man kills the thing he loves”

If I post there now, or indeed anyone else I suppose, it will be seen as provocative attention seeking or affectation even.

In past times I posted as much in Metrical as in the Deep End, because the was a different outcome in both.

If now they are consolidated into one, then may it be so, and let the Deep End die with all due ceremony and dignity.

Jim