a point arose about this is not poetry

[Leanne]

A good critic should probably be able to guess, but we don't all start out as good critics, so what you're suggesting is not at all a bad idea. I don't really want people to explain their meaning -- that's something I think should either sink or swim on its own -- but perhaps a little note like "experimenting with line breaks/ rhyme scheme/ building an extended metaphor" would be very helpful.

[billy]

i see a poem in the feedback forums and expect that they want feedback as to how it works for me (one of many readers)
my feedback is more affected by what i read as to what i'm told i'm reading.
if someone says i could do with feedback on this or that then i'll do my best to help but and this is a big but, it won't negate me giving feedback on other stuff.

[Leanne]

and it shouldn't

Once you post a poem I'm afraid that you don't really get to dictate the kind of feedback you get... but that doesn't excuse critics from being constructive and mindful of feelings.

[billy]

i'm one of those who doesn't see the point in telling me where you want to go straight off the bat. you know what you want, i give feedback you decide does it fit with where you want to go or your world view of the poem. after that i'm fine with the poets input in saying i want to go in this direction etc. tell me what you want to do taints the feedback i give.

---

and it shouldn't

Once you post a poem I'm afraid that you don't really get to dictate the kind of feedback you get... but that doesn't excuse critics from being constructive and mindful of feelings.

yeah this something i whole heartedly agree with.
feedback should be honest but not cruel

the hard thing to decide is where does honesty end and cruelty begin.
i look at the feedback a person gives in general, if it's informative and helpful then i'll take an odd comment that feels a bit harsh with a pinch of salt, dale is welcome for instance to comment as he wishes on any of my poetry because i see that in general he's helpful with what he states.

newbs may see some feedback off any of us and think, what a bastard they are, i can only suggest "stick it out" once you come to know us you'll see there's no malice

[tectak]

I don't really agree with your narrative point. Would you consider this Emily Dickinson poem more prose than poetry, because there is a clear narrative? Or is it a prose poem? But then again, it's written in verse not prose.

I died for beauty, but was scarce
Adjusted in the tomb,
When one who died for truth was lain
In an adjoining room.

He questioned softly why I failed?
"For beauty," I replied.
"And I for truth - the two are one;
We brethren are," he said.

And so, as kinsmen met a-night,
We talked between the rooms,
Until the moss had reached our lips,
And covered up our names.

No, this is not prose poetry because it has strict syllable counts 8/6 and it has stanzas. This is blank verse. Prose poetry has no meter, rhyme or structure, but is very poetic. Here's a great example, by E. Alexandra:

There were tiny hounds sniffing out their gilded cages. Fireplaces
chaste, unlit and beds soft as the pears I ate from palms outstreched.
The hem of my dress was wet from the fountain and finally it lay on
the floor like the slick blue skin of a fish. We danced silver as a
shiny hook. I heard them clap: red nails flashing smiles. One
misplaced kiss, one eye shut. The concierge bald and fat, cuddling
his little pink prick. The elevator stuck. The city was singing.
Someone was taking pictures. My legs splintered at the hips, and
that night New York wrecked and swelled inside me. A beautiful girl
is a great storm, slapped around by the hands of her own desire.
She lifts up the green skirt of Central Park, wading twelve floors
below, and wishes once more for coachmen and carriage: to be salt
and tear in the horse’s eye, to dissolve beneath his blinders.

AT LAST!
Quote CS above[b] Prose poetry has no meter, rhyme or structure, but is very poetic. [b]
Here is the encapsulated point. "This not a poem" is an entirely different fish from "This is not poetry"
On a bad day I could try to excuse either comment as valid crit but something warns me away from "This is not a poem" because of the danger in upsetting the pride of the poster who thinks that is what "it" is. On the other hand, "this is not poetry" is always valid as it is a comment (opinion) on the content of the effort.
We can argue all day about prose/prose poetry (and the difference is?) or prose/free verse (and the difference is?) but when we see "poetry" we know it. Almost equally, when it ain't poetry, we know it.
Funny how we can hugely endear ourselves to another by critting thus wise;
"Ah, this is pure poetry" but cannot say "This is not poetry" for fear of being asked to prove that we know what we're talking about.
Well, I know poetry when I see it. So what do we want? Another category?
OK. How about this as a sub-divide...good poetry/bad poetry. Suck on that.
Best,
tectak

---

i feel for dale yet i'm not sure i've ever said to someone this is not poetry, i have skirted such ideas by saying this is prose etc.

(i'm just getting the ball rolling)
and if i wasn't such a thick skinned piglet i'd be aghast at being told my poem wasn't poetry.

i think leanne has a valid point in pointing out that one person's non poetry is another's good poetry or not.

i alos think some should be able to say this is not what i see as poetry, which is not the same as "this isn't poetry" being old school if someone told me this isn't poetry i'd more want to know why not than worry about what had just been said.

all the above aside, i'm one of those people who try to be honest without being harsh (and yes, sometimes i fail) sometimes harsh is the only way, my opinion on the said poem is this, no pics in serious poetry and i did see it as a poetry. it needed an edit as most poetry does on this site but it had some good lines, (i'll leave feedback later)

this thread isn't about that said poem though,

it about all the other things i mentioned.

I said " This is not poetry". Dale said "This is not a poem" but he is a better judge than me.
Best,
tectak

[billy]

you knew what i meant

[Erthona]

Thanks for realizing that Tom, and it is a wonderful cunt hair of a distinction.

I think the point is being missed by getting all bent out of shape about labels. The point really is, does this work better as prose, or does it work better as poetry. I think only people who have a natural prejudice of one over the other would be bothered by having it characterized as this or that. Just because we cannot create a concise easy definition that separates one from the other doesn't mean such separation does not exists, just as there are any number of areas related to poetry that cannot be rationally and logically explicated, or even if they can it would take nigh on a book to encapsulate such an explanation. I would think that it is generally understood that we rely on our many years of experience to make such judgments, as that is hard won knowledge that cannot be had from reading an instruction book.

However, if the point is that poetry is better than prose and therefore it is an insult to characterize it as prose instead of a poem, you shall get no satisfaction from me on that point. I will ask this question for you to ponder.

If the writer thinks what they have written is a poem, and a critic thinks that it is prose, is the writer always correct, and thus are in the right to be insulted to have their opinion challenged?

Dale

[tectak]

you knew what i meant

I knew and dale knew and you knew. That seems to be about it!

Best,
tom

[Erthona]

I missed this from Todd, and I think it is a valid question.

"If someone does not believe that prose poems are a real thing, should they attempt critique or should they bypass them?"

"Prose poetry is poetry written in prose instead of using verse but preserving poetic qualities such as heightened imagery and emotional effects"

I took that from Wiki, and while not in depth it appears fairly workable.

This may not be a definition to use academically, but one must admit it has been vetted by thousands.

I would say that obviously "prose poetry" is not written in verse, as verse generally means it is written in meter. We have many examples of poetry written with a cadence or beat, and not in verse. If that is the definition then Whitman wrote prose poetry, and few would argue that what he wrote was poetry, the same of Ginsberg. "Howl" by definitions is obviously prose poetry, yet no one would characterize it as anything but a poem.So maybe part of the problem with "prose poetry" is in the definition. It could also be that the term is simply no longer valid as we already except, at least in it's original meaning, prose poetry as poetry. We should not forget that this was a term coined in the 19th century to delineate between poem written in verse and poetry not in verse. The majority of 20th century poetry is prose poetry.
Today I think poetic like prose (literary prose), that is prose that one would characterize by a narrative that is dense and rich because of the lush image laden description it employes is what most people think of as "prose poetry" (if arranged correctly), because in my experience this is what people often offer up as as prose poetry.


As I am tired I will leave it at that.

Dale

[billy]

Thanks for realizing that Tom, and it is a wonderful cunt hair of a distinction.

I think the point is being missed by getting all bent out of shape about labels. The point really is, does this work better as prose, or does it work better as poetry. I think only people who have a natural prejudice of one over the other would be bothered by having it characterized as this or that. Just because we cannot create a concise easy definition that separates one from the other doesn't mean such separation does not exists, just as there are any number of areas related to poetry that cannot be rationally and logically explicated, or even if they can it would take nigh on a book to encapsulate such an explanation. I would think that it is generally understood that we rely on our many years of experience to make such judgments, as that is hard won knowledge that cannot be had from reading an instruction book.

However, if the point is that poetry is better than prose and therefore it is an insult to characterize it as prose instead of a poem, you shall get no satisfaction from me on that point. I will ask this question for you to ponder.

If the writer thinks what they have written is a poem, and a critic thinks that it is prose, is the writer always correct, and thus are in the right to be insulted to have their opinion challenged?

Dale

sorry dale, it seems toms the one we should all hate

i think they have the right to be insulted about anything but sometime having the right to do something doesn't mean you're actually right about what you thought you wrote.

[milo]

My question is this - if you read something and it reads like prose with line breaks what is the benefit of not mentioning it to the writer? Isn't the writer posting it to get objective viewpoints from readers just like you?

The worst thing anyone can do as a critiquer is to lie or sugar coat their observations to somehow spare the feelings of the author.

The poem is not the poet.
The poem is not the poet.
The poem is not the poet.

You can't insult a poem, it doesn't have feelings. If someone writes something that is.absolute shit they need to know it to improve, if you try to somehow spare their feelings, they will just write more absolute shit.

[billy]

please stay away from my poetry

it hard to argue with what you say.
though i'd quantify it as something you think is absolute shit.

and sometimes point everything out in one go cause many newbs an overload.
the acceptance that the poem has no feelings is a must. it saves seeing your children go to the slaughter

[milo]

please stay away from my poetry

it hard to argue with what you say.
though i'd quantify it as something you think is absolute shit.

and sometimes point everything out in one go cause many newbs an overload.
the acceptance that the poem has no feelings is a must. it saves seeing your children go to the slaughter

Everything I write is what I think, what is the point qualifying what should be obvious?

[Apophrades]

they don't need to know that "it is absolute shit," but yes agreed, you should tell them exactly what you think is wrong, don't sugarcoat. again, i see this forum as more for mentoring than actual critiquing, yes you do analyse poems, but people come here to get help with their writing. imo, a good teacher won't offend the student.

how close is your writing to your ideas? how close are you ideas to who 'you' are? no matter how many times you tell yourself "the poem is not the poet," you won't stop your emotions, all your doing is putting on a front.

[Erthona]

I think you never know what is going to hurt someone's feelings,and someone who is a poet will continue no matter what because they do not have a choice. Even if everyone in the world told me my writing was shit, I would still write. The muse will wake me in the middle of the night and not let me get back to sleep until I write down what she wants me to write. If you are going to be a poet, you need to grow a thicker skin so you can get past all the BS and learn to hear criticism effectively. The paradox is that the only way to grow a thick skin is to have people tell you things you don't want to hear, coddling someone only keeps them from growing. A poet will never develop if his ego is constantly hanging out there to get batted around like a cat playing with a ball on a string. Egoism stops the creative energy.

"a good teacher won't offend the student"

A good teacher will offend his student if that is what the student needs. People hold sensibilities that are not conducive to their growth, and so they need to be made aware of this. Such an encounter is rarely pleasant.

Dale

[Apophrades]

I'm pretty sure if you literally tell someone their work is shit, you expect a bad reaction. I'm not asking you to coddle, but simply saying someone's writing is bad won't help, not only wont it help but it's unnecessary because growing "thicker skin" isn't going to improve someone's writing. What if growing thicker skin meant becoming indifferent to good advice?

Interesting that when everyone is calling you shit, the only voice of ENCOURAGEMENT is your 'muse,' (the fact that you just have to put something down, no matter what anyone says) the only motivation to keep going is one of encouragement, not useless insulting.

[milo]

Saying a poem is shit is not insulting. Poems can't be insulted, they are just words. Sometimes the most useful comment you can hear is "this is shit, burn it and start over" it let's you know.

If it is shit, and no one tells you, you will just keep writing shit.

[Todd]

Saying a poem is shit is not insulting. Poems can't be insulted, they are just words. Sometimes the most useful comment you can hear is "this is shit, burn it and start over" it let's you know.

If it is shit, and no one tells you, you will just keep writing shit.

True. Sometimes the answer is:

There is nothing to build upon here. You need to start over.

I've had that delivered to me from time to time, and its a good thing to know.

One thing to clarify from an earlier post, In my opinion the reader isn't your teacher. The reader is simply a reader. That they have a strong, bad reaction tells you something.

You can feel free to agree or disagree with them as the writer.

[ChristopherSea]

Saying a poem is shit is not insulting. Poems can't be insulted, they are just words. Sometimes the most useful comment you can hear is "this is shit, burn it and start over" it let's you know.

If it is shit, and no one tells you, you will just keep writing shit.

True. Sometimes the answer is:

There is nothing to build upon here. You need to start over.

I've had that delivered to me from time to time, and its a good thing to know.

One thing to clarify from an earlier post, In my opinion the reader isn't your teacher. The reader is simply a reader. That they have a strong, bad reaction tells you something.

You can feel free to agree or disagree with them as the writer.

That's a much better way to say it, verses this is crap.

[Apophrades]

yes poems are just words, well done milo. clothes are just fabrics, hair is just molecules yet we are still insulted when someone says you have shit clothes, you have shit hair.

also, telling someone their work is shit isn't going to make them miraculously better, if they knew what to do they would've done it. you will keep writing the same way regardless, or stop, OR seek help from someone who tells you what to do, who doesn't just call it shit.

---

@Todd, I wasn't suggesting that the general reader be your teacher. I'm saying in the context of this forum, people are generally looking to improve their writing, so if we are to give a "critique" we should act like teachers. after all, I'm sure most writers don't hear from the majority of their readers, and when they do hear from them it doesn't involve, "you should make this or that change." It's "This worked/didnt because..." "I liked/didnt"