09-15-2013, 04:18 AM
Tectak always types vicariously, it's the only way he knows how.
I'd say what gets under his skin, and the skin of many a tragically misunderstood poet, is that people tend to fairly clumsily ascribe authoritative meanings to poems as if they're indisputable fact, e.g.
"This is an excellent poem describing the tragic plight of the homosexual springbok in wildebeest-dominated territory -- twelve thumbs up, old chap, nobody could argue anything less."
For starters, telling the poet what the poem is about is kind of redundant -- which is NOT the same thing as giving your interpretation on specific phrases or explaining how the themes are drawn out or whether the central metaphor is holding its own. Non-specific "interpretations" are, as Tectak points out, fairly easy to do and take all of about 5 minutes, often just based on a single read of the poem (sometimes little more than a skim). Then they're padded out with some platitudes about how wonderful the poet is so that the only possible response is really "thanks so much, you're a champion, wow it's lovely to have such a fan club", because if you write "fuck off until you can give me an actual insight that you've used your own brain for", it's seen as you being a bit uppity.
You don't have to be an expert to offer quality feedback -- you just have to read and be thorough, especially in the Serious forum. If you see a device you don't recognise, or you're not sure why a poet is doing something in particular, then ask. It's a learning area for all -- sometimes the poet might be doing it on purpose, sometimes it's a mistake that they just didn't notice, so you've done them a major favour by drawing attention to it.
We don't ask much -- just that people don't treat feedback like a chore that they have to do and can get away with doing a half-arsed job. Feedback is a gift that benefits both parties, and the rest of the site community.
I'd say what gets under his skin, and the skin of many a tragically misunderstood poet, is that people tend to fairly clumsily ascribe authoritative meanings to poems as if they're indisputable fact, e.g.
"This is an excellent poem describing the tragic plight of the homosexual springbok in wildebeest-dominated territory -- twelve thumbs up, old chap, nobody could argue anything less."
For starters, telling the poet what the poem is about is kind of redundant -- which is NOT the same thing as giving your interpretation on specific phrases or explaining how the themes are drawn out or whether the central metaphor is holding its own. Non-specific "interpretations" are, as Tectak points out, fairly easy to do and take all of about 5 minutes, often just based on a single read of the poem (sometimes little more than a skim). Then they're padded out with some platitudes about how wonderful the poet is so that the only possible response is really "thanks so much, you're a champion, wow it's lovely to have such a fan club", because if you write "fuck off until you can give me an actual insight that you've used your own brain for", it's seen as you being a bit uppity.
You don't have to be an expert to offer quality feedback -- you just have to read and be thorough, especially in the Serious forum. If you see a device you don't recognise, or you're not sure why a poet is doing something in particular, then ask. It's a learning area for all -- sometimes the poet might be doing it on purpose, sometimes it's a mistake that they just didn't notice, so you've done them a major favour by drawing attention to it.
We don't ask much -- just that people don't treat feedback like a chore that they have to do and can get away with doing a half-arsed job. Feedback is a gift that benefits both parties, and the rest of the site community.
It could be worse