Workshop expectations

[Leanne]

We use the word "critique" around here a lot, but what do we actually mean by that?  

To me, critique does not mean censure or praise, nor does it mean proofreading.  It means evaluating a piece of writing holistically, making judgments about style choices, ensuring that meaning is not obscured by unnecessary fluff, bathos or burlesque bullshit and critically analysing a poem's worth based on comparison with other works of its type.  It involves making suggestions for rewrites as deemed necessary to clarify unwanted ambiguity or to minimise the use of prosaic language that jars with the poem's purpose.  

It also means highlighting the good in a poem, encouraging the writer to draw out what is truly poetic (if necessary, by abandoning other parts) and assisting the process of building a better, more complete poem.  

It does not mean puffing up egos, treading on eggshells, forcing others to accept my opinion or denying a poet's right to exist as a poet, regardless of whether I believe that particular poem is of high quality or not.  There is no such thing as a poem that should be discarded entirely -- but there definitely exists a breed of "poet" whose inability to accept imperfection or difference makes them unworthy of the time spent on detailed, valuable critique.

[rowens]

I think critique means taking the poem as it is. Not expecting the poet can do any better, as in a workshop, but taking it as it is and telling how bad or good it is, measure it up, and whether anything's at all worth elaborating on. That is my idea of the difference between critique and workshopping. For someone like me whose writing never gets published, maybe I'm expected to accept workshopping and not to expect the benefit of critique. But I want critique anyway. If I don't deserve critique I'll eventually realize that I shouldn't be writing, get ignored by critics, and just stop writing or try harder.

[billy]

yes to what leanne said. sometimes i come across as a bit caustic but in general i try to be honest as to how a poem affects me, where i think it could be improved [with suggestions or advice] where and why it works for me. i try to be kind in my feedback but not at the cost of being honest. i do realize my feedback may not be the best the site has to offer so like other feedback it should be weighted against what else has been said. if i post a poem i expect honesty in any feedback given me. i don't welcome nasty to well but do know the difference between passion and mean. most on out site are not mean but some can seems so because they're passionate with their feedback.

[Lizzie]

I'm new, obviously, but I've seen a couple of things that I would like to highlight that trouble me:

I have seen newer people that come here expecting not to have their work be critiqued, or take the critique in poor form. There's no excuse for bad behavior. Yet, this expectation that we as poets (of any caliber) shouldn't identify with our work is unrealistic, in my view. I'm sure that it's easier for some to view their work as a separate entity and not as an appendage, but I don't know a single writer that doesn't have some level of attachment to their work.
I think it's entirely appropriate to expect that people won't lash out when critiqued, but there does need to be some acknowledgement of the fact that this is someone's actual, real-time work and to imagine how you might speak differently to them if you were face to face.

The feedback I've received has been quite moderate, and I'm thankful for it. However, I've seen others' work ripped apart as if the commenter was so starved for violence that they decided that a poem would do as a meal in lieu of a flesh and blood person (even though it seems to be the poet's blood that they meant to draw). Like someone sticking pins in a voodoo doll, the intent is to cause harm even if their hands are not bloody.

Ok, enough with the gruesome imagery.

I have not experienced billy as being caustic 

[Achebe]

there does need to be some acknowledgement of the fact that this is someone's actual, real-time work and to imagine how you might speak differently to them if you were face to face.

Some of the best teachers I've known were blunt to the point of being cruel. Of course, being cruel and clueless is deadly, but we don't get that here often.
Being nice is overrated, I think.

[QDeathstar]

There are a lot of poems that should be discarded in their entirety, and I've written my fair share. I could link to examples of poems that should not exist, if you are interested.

[Achebe]

There are a lot of poems that should be discarded in their entirety, and I've written my fair share.  I could link to examples of poems that should not exist, if you are interested.

Why not? I could use a good gloat.
As long as they're not mine. The lord will strike them blind who do.

[UselessBlueprint]

There are a lot of poems that should be discarded in their entirety, and I've written my fair share.  I could link to examples of poems that should not exist, if you are interested.

I am honestly not sure if I agree or disagree. I can be very indecisive, but often pick a side simply for the sake of arguing, because I love to argue. I have not yet chosen a side here.

As for the rest, I tend to look at myself as a pretender, so I place no value in my own critiques, nor do I really think I know what I am talking about at least eighty percent of the time.

[QDeathstar]

There are a lot of poems that should be discarded in their entirety, and I've written my fair share.  I could link to examples of poems that should not exist, if you are interested.

Why not? I could use a good gloat.
As long as they're not mine. The lord will strike them blind who do.

I was going to post a link to one of my gems, but going back through what I've created has just made me depressed - it's all shit.


Time for a wank.

[tectak]

We use the word "critique" around here a lot, but what do we actually mean by that?  

To me, critique does not mean censure or praise, nor does it mean proofreading.  It means evaluating a piece of writing holistically, making judgments about style choices, ensuring that meaning is not obscured by unnecessary fluff, bathos or burlesque bullshit and critically analysing a poem's worth based on comparison with other works of its type.  It involves making suggestions for rewrites as deemed necessary to clarify unwanted ambiguity or to minimise the use of prosaic language that jars with the poem's purpose.  

It also means highlighting the good in a poem, encouraging the writer to draw out what is truly poetic (if necessary, by abandoning other parts) and assisting the process of building a better, more complete poem.  

It does not mean puffing up egos, treading on eggshells, forcing others to accept my opinion or denying a poet's right to exist as a poet, regardless of whether I believe that particular poem is of high quality or not.  There is no such thing as a poem that should be discarded entirely -- but there definitely exists a breed of "poet" whose inability to accept imperfection or difference makes them unworthy of the time spent on detailed, valuable critique.

Yes to all above. it is easy to agree when one agrees. This site is, or should, be about the poetry not the poet. First directive. Once posted then that IS the poem. Where posted determines what the writer expects to happen next. Regarding totally abandoned efforts...my ratio is about 20:1. I have posted crap...but try hard not to. If one slips through please tell me. How is that hard to understand? What I write before posting in pre-poem.
tectak

[Achebe]

my raton is about 20:1

that's pretty huge for a rodent, unless you're counting the tail.

[just mercedes]

Damn. I missed the raton by a ratio of 20:1.

[Magpie]

Damn. I missed the raton by a ratio of 20:1.

Don't feel so bad. Even with a hat on I still missed the raton by a ratio of 20:1

[ellajam]

There are a lot of poems that should be discarded in their entirety, and I've written my fair share.  I could link to examples of poems that should not exist, if you are interested.

I am honestly not sure if I agree or disagree. I can be very indecisive, but often pick a side simply for the sake of arguing, because I love to argue. I have not yet chosen a side here.

As for the rest, I tend to look at myself as a pretender, so I place no value in my own critiques, nor do I really think I know what I am talking about at least eighty percent of the time.

This attitude drives me nuts.

It doesn't matter whether or not you can tell a villanelle from an ice cream cone, if the refrain annoys you or seems unnecessary you should say so. If you think the poem is strengthened by the refrains you should say so. I am an ameteur reader and writer but I still know when a line, or more, grabs me or falls flat. The wonderful learning experience of this site is, for me, having to think about why my response is what it is and trying to express this. It is a deeper level of reading, and through that my own work has grown a bit. I originally joined here to learn how to edit a few of what I thought were my better poems, something I had never done. That is actually dwarfed compared to my inceased reading skills. I didn't know it then, but now I view the structure of this site as brilliant, it expects one to be what they never knew they could be.

When I post my own work, a total dissection from Tom is a priceless gift, some of which I can absorb and sometimes implement. He certainly makes me examine my choices. When milo suggests I reconsider a word, a line or an idea, I damn well better if I want the poem to work on the best level it can. When he says it's a mess it doesn't mean it's trash, just that I need to do it better.
When someone's crit is a few lines long but mentions even just one word that pulled them into the poem or pushed them out it is tremendously helpful to me and when several members mention that one word it certainly effects my edit. It really doesn't matter what level their own skills are on, we are all readers with reactions that can help the poet understand how their poem is coming across.
I have forced the lovely members of the Pen to suffer through an entire page on the word abacus.    But the poem gained from it.

Writers who don't want their work poked at should hang it on their fridge and enjoy it, nothing wrong with that, but a heartfelt string of cliches is still a string of cliches and I am grateful to the members who take the time to critique it instead of just clicking on. Styles of critiquing vary, some harsher, some gentler, but for me that's part of what makes this a community that holds my interest.

OT: Agreed, if your work is already perfect or you are uninterested in how readers view it, no need to bother us here.

[justcloudy]

There are a lot of poems that should be discarded in their entirety, and I've written my fair share.  I could link to examples of poems that should not exist, if you are interested.

I'd agree with this, but I think a lot of those worth discarding are "poems" not poems. I have notebooks and notebooks filled with those from my teen years. I hang onto them for nostalgia's sake, but with full recognition that the vast majority have nothing to do with real poetry.

I'm far from being an expert on anything poetry, but I do know how what I read comes across to me. So that's why my comments entail, and that's all I can expect from others.

[QDeathstar]

Whenever tektak posts in a topic I sorta get that "getting ready to have to talk to the principal" feeling. Your comments are so weighty.

Overall, it's a lot easier to identify shit poetry than it is to identify great poetry. I've made the mistake of calling out decent poetry as shit often than calling shit poetry great.

[aschueler]

I am intrigued by these positions.   First, Rowens post;  I think that communicates what a lot of people are looking for.  Not just how to make things better, but is the poem worth it?  Keep going?  What?    There will always be the paradox of art needing and requiring an audience, although it's not supposed to be for an audience.  That isn't to say looking for adulation for crap, but something honest like "This is an enjoyable piece worth working on, I think the following are aspect to work on ... ;  the next are the strong points ... But overall it has (has not) merit".  If it's crap, then state so.

Then there is the workshopping idea.  I had the privilege of a college course of poetry writing which mostly was workshopping*;  this is why I likely don't get bruised when presenting my poems there are comments that are rough.  That and heck, dudes, this is the internet.  This is really what I was thinking this site was all about.  However, there are times when I wouldn't mind the general idea of critical appraise.  I am not publishing, won't do so most likely, and don't have a network of folks to read over my works.

I can understand where people get excited, artistic people are fractious and passionate.  How to keep things from exploding?  Can you?  Just keep reminding people it's the poem, it's advice, it's the internet, take it or leave it.



____________
* I miss this, didn't appreciate it as much then  as I should have

---

BTW where has Erthona been?

[billy]

i think the take it or leave it advice above is good advice though i would say if you're always leaving feedback and not editing you're on the wrong site and needlessly beating yourself up .

[UselessBlueprint]

This attitude drives me nuts.

It doesn't matter whether or not you can tell a villanelle from an ice cream cone, if the refrain annoys you or seems unnecessary you should say so. If you think the poem is strengthened by the refrains you should say so. I am an ameteur reader and writer but I still know when a line, or more, grabs me or falls flat. The wonderful learning experience of this site is, for me, having to think about why my response is what it is and trying to express this. It is a deeper level of reading, and through that my own work has grown a bit. I originally joined here to learn how to edit a few of what I thought were my better poems, something I had never done. That is actually dwarfed compared to my inceased reading skills. I didn't know it then, but now I view the structure of this site as brilliant, it expects one to be what they never knew they could be.

When I post my own work, a total dissection from Tom is a priceless gift, some of which I can absorb and sometimes implement. He certainly makes me examine my choices. When milo suggests I reconsider a word, a line or an idea, I damn well better if I want the poem to work on the best level it can. When he says it's a mess it doesn't mean it's trash, just that I need to do it better.
When someone's crit is a few lines long but mentions even just one word that pulled them into the poem or pushed them out it is tremendously helpful to me and when several members mention that one word it certainly effects my edit. It really doesn't matter what level their own skills are on, we are all readers with reactions that can help the poet understand how their poem is coming across.
I have forced the lovely members of the Pen to suffer through an entire page on the word abacus.    But the poem gained from it.

Writers who don't want their work poked at should hang it on their fridge and enjoy it, nothing wrong with that, but a heartfelt string of cliches is still a string of cliches and I am grateful to the members who take the time to critique it instead of just clicking on. Styles of critiquing vary, some harsher, some gentler, but for me that's part of what makes this a community that holds my interest.

I came here because I wanted to improve. I grew sick of the mindless praise given to every word that I saw on the "forums" or whatever they were where I previously shared my writing. I value other's critiques a lot -- but as learning is, I acknowledge my mistakes, I just tend to dwell on them more than some might. I also can't consider myself artistic, possibly because I have no idea what being artistic is, and therefore I feel like I am perpetually a novice when experiencing any art.

Meanwhile, @aschueler...
I've taken one poetry course in college, and I can honestly say it taught me nothing about how to write. Most of it was recognizing the use of rhetorical devices, many of which I knew from reading Catullus and Sappho in high school. Some days, we actually learned a fair bit of trivia and admired paintings. But as far as writing, we had "imitation poems" designed to demonstrate our abilities to copy a poet's "style."

[QDeathstar]

good depends on your frame of reference. For Facebook, it's easy to write good poetry. On a poetry forum, it's harder.