You know some poems are excellent. They move you. All you feel is a sense of awe and maybe even jealousy that someone could nail it so perfectly, but no matter how long you've been writing it's rare to create something like that. Mostly you have one good idea or some nice phrasing covered up by crap. I think the further you go along in anything the more you see the flaws in your own work, or when they're pointed out to you you can't avoid them.
I don't think encouragement is bad, but it should be genuine. I think when we gloss over real problems in a poem we're not doing the writer any favors.
As far as this master poet thing, I say let people decide that when you're dead. I will always be in process hoping that this year is better than last year.
An editor friend finally encouraged me to submit work, which I haven't done much in decades. My reasoning is the payoff isn't publishing, the payoff is writing better. Since I always see improvement through uncovering flaws in what I previously thought was good, and because my execution improves I'm hesitant to send work in. That said, it doesn't matter to me in the slightest if and when it gets rejected. The point is the writing itself.
So, I get why someone may feel that younger writers need a diet of encouragement but that's like feeding your kid a diet of candy because its what they want. They need solid nutritious food. A diet of only candy ends badly. It isn't really loving or good parenting. If you only praise good writers they won't develop good habits and grow. Yes there could hypothetically be some genius out there that turns out pure gold--but I've never met them. Unapologetic critique can shave years off the process. Again, I'd rather see people grow who want to grow, and yes encouragement can be a part of that but it really is a small one. I guess where I react to these comments is the "senseless academic criticism". I don't see it as purely academic, and I don't see it as senseless.
Many of us have spent years writing. The time put in isn't necessarily special it matters how its been used. I have no issue with Luther expressing his opinion. I think it's a bit one sided though, and I can agree with billy in that there are many sites that give a steady diet of praise--I challenge anyone to show me how they've resurrected the bard. Mostly, I see shallow narcissistic writing from people that don't want to put in the work to be good.
We're far from perfect here. We make mistakes. We over-rotate occasionally, but it has been my joy to see some writers improve. That's why we do it.
My thoughts,
Todd
I don't think encouragement is bad, but it should be genuine. I think when we gloss over real problems in a poem we're not doing the writer any favors.
As far as this master poet thing, I say let people decide that when you're dead. I will always be in process hoping that this year is better than last year.
An editor friend finally encouraged me to submit work, which I haven't done much in decades. My reasoning is the payoff isn't publishing, the payoff is writing better. Since I always see improvement through uncovering flaws in what I previously thought was good, and because my execution improves I'm hesitant to send work in. That said, it doesn't matter to me in the slightest if and when it gets rejected. The point is the writing itself.
So, I get why someone may feel that younger writers need a diet of encouragement but that's like feeding your kid a diet of candy because its what they want. They need solid nutritious food. A diet of only candy ends badly. It isn't really loving or good parenting. If you only praise good writers they won't develop good habits and grow. Yes there could hypothetically be some genius out there that turns out pure gold--but I've never met them. Unapologetic critique can shave years off the process. Again, I'd rather see people grow who want to grow, and yes encouragement can be a part of that but it really is a small one. I guess where I react to these comments is the "senseless academic criticism". I don't see it as purely academic, and I don't see it as senseless.
Many of us have spent years writing. The time put in isn't necessarily special it matters how its been used. I have no issue with Luther expressing his opinion. I think it's a bit one sided though, and I can agree with billy in that there are many sites that give a steady diet of praise--I challenge anyone to show me how they've resurrected the bard. Mostly, I see shallow narcissistic writing from people that don't want to put in the work to be good.
We're far from perfect here. We make mistakes. We over-rotate occasionally, but it has been my joy to see some writers improve. That's why we do it.
My thoughts,
Todd
The secret of poetry is cruelty.--Jon Anderson