Grammar, Punctuation & Good Critique

[wasellajam]

Since joining this forum I've had so many great discussions and gotten some excellent notes. I also notice plenty of critique that points out grammar and punctuation "errors" as if we are all writing for the Wall Street Journal. 

I think this is frankly completely misguided. There's no reason to think a poem can't use fragments, or must link two independents with a full stop, or whatever normal rules of engagement apply to punctuation and syntax. 

If it doesn't serve the poem, say so. But this is POETRY y'all! There is no inherent reason to reify conventions of Standard English. 

Ok, Fox out!

I think it's pretty well accepted that to punctuate or not depends on the poem. To omit it because the poet is free to is not a valid reason IMO. I have posted unpunctuated poems where a critic has worked pretty hard to explain to me why it would improve the poem. It's always an interesting exercise but solely up to me whether or not to include it. When other techniques are well used and allow the poet to guide the reader as intended a poem can surely work without punctuation.

When I suggest in a critique that someone experiments with adding punctuation it's because after repeated reading I've found the confusion annoying as opposed to delightfully interesting. The poet is always free to ignore me but there's nothing wrong with poets thinking about it.

Here's one of I'm sure multiple threads on the issue if anyone wants to read it but a current (comma?) active thread on the topic is surely welcome, I'm curious about how people think about this. Thanks for posting, Fox.

old punctuation thread