Danger of over editing?

[milo]

Question- Is there a danger of over editing making a poem, maybe structurally/technically better but somehow sterilized/generic; the writer's voice removed?  I have been struggling with this issue in offering my own critiques lately and it just occurred to me to ask what others might think.
Thanks,
Bryn

This issue is always timely. I love getting a lot of ideas on how to improve a poem. I love the challenge of trying to implement them and I especially enjoy the conversations about every nuance of the poem. And then new edits bring additional critiques. In the past it was not unusual for me to edit the poor things to death. Rowens is a master at sniffing out a dead poem that has lost what was special about it. Sometimes I miss my original poem and the final edit is the original with a few tweaks. I'm trying to be more sane about it this time around, but who knows, reverting to a previous version is always an option.

For me, a lot depends on the type of poem it is. For me free verse will start out pretty much the way I want it, with a specific energy that probably shouldn't be messed with too much. When writing in a form I find that for me the polishing is necessary, when I look back at the mess of the original I can appreciate how much all the polishing helped.

When giving crit I think giving as much as you have is best, one of the great things about this site is all the different voices. If 3 people notice the same weakness it's probably best to see if you can strengthen the poem there. If 3 people love something it's best to protect it. I think everyone should comment on everything when they have the time and it's up to the poet to cherry pick.

meh - i don't know - I realize that sometimes we lose the original seed of an idea or get off track but sometimes we end up with an entirely new idea for a poem and we can always go back, nothing is ever lost