a point arose about this is not poetry

[billy]

no one's being overly aggressive yet

you can feel free to call any poem of mine shit and i will reply thanks you for the feedback.
i'll have learnt that someone thinks my poem is shit.
if it's off someone i deem to be a reasonable poet i'll take note of the fact and try to ascertain why they would think it shit, either by question (with thanks) or by going over my poem a few times, i would hope that i got more than a "this is shit" reply but i wouldn't be that upset...i've had my fair share of nasty, harsh and sometimes unfair crit. it no longer worries me, all that worries me is this, were they correct. sometimes they were and i learnt something, sometimes they weren't...and i learned something. inspiration will never make a poet write beyond their capability. education and feedback of almost any sort, even when it's some bad shit will

[bena]

Hey billy---

Is a bag of flower supposed to be flour? Because I'm not especially afraid of explosives hidden in flowers, but explosives hidden in flammable material....that is something else....might even beat my RPG, especially if all the targets are spread out!

[abu nuwas]

billy, lets be honest, if an exchange literally went like: "this is shit" ---> "thank you for your feedback," first of all, the thank you will always be ironic, secondly, who has learnt anything, who has imparted anything? except, "this person thinks my writing is shit" (this is all we can know for sure! we can;t just assume, the writer will suddenly be inspired to write better, there are too many possibilities).

---

and I'm sorry if I seem aggressive/stubborn, I'll try to stay away from personal attacks, yes we're all friends..

Exactly. The comment has no value. I missed the start of this, so I don't know why Billy is thinking people will fall out.

[Erthona]

Part of the problem, and we have seen it in this discussion, is that people feel no compunction about using hyperbole to characterize what someone else has said, causing the discussion to go on a tangent that is neither germane nor beneficial. I do not say this is done intentional, but I point out that this is often the same process that is occurring in a person's mind in relation to criticism. It is the nature of the beast that until we gain some separation between ourselves and what we write,we will continue to turn the smallest molehill into the largest mountain. Of course the critic must constantly question his motives so he does not use the critique as a platform to display his cleverness, or as a way to denigrate under the guise of being helpful, but to suggest that he should concern himself with the possible reaction to his words is to kill truth before it can be born. As it is said, "One man's poison is another man's passion. Or as it is demonstrated in the story of belling the cat, "it is easy to suggest impossible solutions".


Dale

[Apophrades]

We must make a distinction between a critic and what is (should be) done here at the workshops. A critic will evaluate, yes she is capable of suggesting corrections and the like, but I think the intention of most critics has never been to see the artist improve, rather it is whether their work should be read/seen: should it enter the canon, be remembered? should we buy a ticket at the theatre? The mentor/group review situation is about improvement. With this distinction in mind, we must must take into account how the artist will react. A critic really only cares about the work not the artist, the mentor is concerned with the artist, why? Because it is she who creates the work.

[milo]

We must make a distinction between a critic and what is (should be) done here at the workshops. A critic will evaluate, yes she is capable of suggesting corrections and the like, but I think the intention of most critics has never been to see the artist improve, rather it is whether their work should be read/seen: should it enter the canon, be remembered? should we buy a ticket at the theatre? The mentor/group review situation is about improvement. With this distinction in mind, we must must take into account how the artist will react. A critic really only cares about the work not the artist, the mentor is concerned with the artist, why? Because it is she who creates the work.

I only ever care about the poem. I hope others can reciprocate when they comment on what I write.

[Leanne]

I, too, only really care about the poem -- or the future poems that a poet might produce. I don't come here to make friends (although occasionally they turn out to be an unfortunate side effect). It is also true, however, that poetry is one of the most essentially human endeavours and nurturing the human poet will produce the best results. By nurturing I do not mean coddling. Empty praise is, as has been said several times here and elsewhere, often far more damaging than any other kind of feedback.

What I do recommend is this: if you are not the preeminent expert on any given topic, do not make definitive statements that will instantly set others on the defensive and lead to their rejection of your opinion, even if it is ultimately valid. Just as nobody particularly likes religious folk preaching at them on their doorsteps, stating your own belief as if it is the only possible truth is not a good way to get your message across.

It is not sugar coating to ask that people not be destructive in their criticism -- and I do mean criticism, in the truest sense of the word. To criticise is to look at a piece from several possible angles, to break it into its component parts and to consider all aspects, both positive and negative. "Literary critics" these days rarely practice criticism, but censure.

[Apophrades]

the future poems that a poet might produce.

I don't see how this is different from caring about the poet. A critic isn't going to care how, someone's work will turn out, but rather whether it is good or bad. A critic is not involved in the process, but I think in this forum, we are.

And I agree with you, it is a goldilocks issue

---

I dont want to venture into a long debate over criticism but i'd rather stick to what is done on this forum, since i think we have some immediate control over it

I don't think anyone is going criticise a work if they don't think it is worth it because it involves such rigorous analysis, that is, I don't think you can separate judgment from criticism.

[Leanne]

No, you can't separate judgment from criticism -- but judgment is both positive and negative as well. Kritikos means to make judgments.

And I don't give a damn about poets themselves. I don't want to share personal details, become close to anyone, have anyone adore me or any other kind of interpersonal exchange on anything but the level of poetry itself. What I am concerned with is that people don't continue to think they're amazing and keep writing the same old dross; similarly, if there's potential to develop I hate to think of it being wasted. I am selfish. I write poems and I don't want the general populace to associate the masses of shite masquerading as poetry with what I do when I tell them that I'm a poet. For that reason, I don't tell many people that I write poems simply because the shite is too much to shovel through yet, but I'm working on it

[Apophrades]

Ok, I guess I know now what you mean by poet. I'm just saying a 'poet', simply as someone who will produce more poems, is different from the poem in that, although a poem can be rewritten, has power to influence other poets, has its own flaws, it cannot write itself. And, whether you'd like to admit this, you are all concerned with (the act of) writing, which is a function of the poet not the poem, and I think I've seen comments from all of you that would suggest this.

[milo]

Ok, I guess I know now what you mean by poet. I'm just saying a 'poet', simply as someone who will produce more poems, is different from the poem in that, although a poem can be rewritten, has power to influence other poets, has its own flaws, it cannot write itself. And, whether you'd like to admit this, you are all concerned with (the act of) writing, which is a function of the poet not the poem, and I think I've seen comments from all of you that would suggest this.

You seem to feel like you have it all figured out, why not respond as you see fit and the rest of us will do the same?

[Erthona]

When I read a piece, I just read. If something is disruptive to the reading, I note it. If I understand why it is disruptive, I note that. If I have a solution that would correct the disruption I may include that. Some things are easily remedied because they are of a technical nature, e.g., grammar, syntax, meter, and so on. Sometimes the problem is more esoteric, and though I might be able to explicate, it would require more than I am willing give to do so. Lastly, there is the problem that, for whatever reason, I am unable to identify/explain it's nature. I still know it is a problem because it is disruptive to the reading. Personally I think it is enough on my part to note that a problem exists. To give specific reasons why it is a problem is a luxury, and to offer possible solution even more so. When I am being critiqued I expect no more than the person to note any problems they see, I assume it is my responsibility to come up with a solution if I concur with their assessment. As far as praise, this has been my experience. I have had pieces praised by a group of people, that when exposed to a wider audience were received with a big yawn. An assessment of my skills is no more valid than an assessment of the validity of my poem. If I find something remarkable in the work, or in the person I will comment on it, but as this rarely happens I do not consider it encouragement. Anything beyond this I feel I would be playing the person false, I would be just as guilty as the tens of thousands of sycophants that exist on the many vanity sites that populate the web, maybe to a lesser degree and with more understanding, but still no different. If someone can tell me a rule to know when I pass from encouragement to flattery I might reconsider, although I doubt it. I do not think I know myself so well yet that I am willing to bet I always know what my motives are, or wise enough to know where such "encouragement" will lead. So I think I will leave it to those wiser than myself to offer encouragement to the discouraged poet, that is not an arena I am willing to enter.

There is a Sufi tale that goes as follows:

A master and his pupil were walking down a road. In the middle of the road was a small turtle. The pupil, feeling compassion for the turtle and fearing that he might be in danger of being run over, picked him up and moved him to the edge of the path. His master asked him why he did such a thing and the pupil explained his reasoning expecting praise from his master for being so kindhearted. Instead his master rebuked him, saying, "As the turtle was not moving one way or the other when we came upon him, how do you know which way he was going. It is possible all you have done is wasted the effort he had already made, and increased his danger as he now may have to cross the entire path instead of just half."

Dale

[Apophrades]

You seem to feel like you have it all figured out, why not respond as you see fit and the rest of us will do the same?

I thought it would be useful to have a discussion about this, but if you want to leave it like that, so be it.

[milo]

When I read a piece, I just read. If something is disruptive to the reading, I note it. If I understand why it is disruptive, I note that. If I have a solution that would correct the disruption I may include that. Some things are easily remedied because they are of a technical nature, e.g., grammar, syntax, meter, and so on. Sometimes the problem is more esoteric, and though I might be able to explicate, it would require more than I am willing give to do so. Lastly, there is the problem that, for whatever reason, I am unable to identify/explain it's nature. I still know it is a problem because it is disruptive to the reading. Personally I think it is enough on my part to note that a problem exists. To give specific reasons why it is a problem is a luxury, and to offer possible solution even more so. When I am being critiqued I expect no more than the person to note any problems they see, I assume it is my responsibility to come up with a solution if I concur with their assessment. As far as praise, this has been my experience. I have had pieces praised by a group of people, that when exposed to a wider audience were received with a big yawn. An assessment of my skills is no more valid than an assessment of the validity of my poem. If I find something remarkable in the work, or in the person I will comment on it, but as this rarely happens I do not consider it encouragement. Anything beyond this I feel I would be playing the person false, I would be just as guilty as the tens of thousands of sycophants that exist on the many vanity sites that populate the web, maybe to a lesser degree and with more understanding, but still no different. If someone can tell me a rule to know when I pass from encouragement to flattery I might reconsider, although I doubt it. I do not think I know myself so well yet that I am willing to bet I always know what my motives are, or wise enough to know where such "encouragement" will lead. So I think I will leave it to those wiser than myself to offer encouragement to the discouraged poet, that is not an arena I am willing to enter.

There is a Sufi tale that goes as follows:

A master and his pupil were walking down a road. In the middle of the road was a small turtle. The pupil, feeling compassion for the turtle and fearing that he might be in danger of being run over, picked him up and moved him to the edge of the path. His master asked him why he did such a thing and the pupil explained his reasoning expecting praise from his master for being so kindhearted. Instead his master rebuked him, saying, "As the turtle was not moving one way or the other when we came upon him, how do you know which way he was going. It is possible all you have done is wasted the effort he had already made, and increased his danger as he now may have to cross the entire path instead of just half."

Dale

There is another Sufi tale (that I am too lazy to quote) about helping a butterfly escape the chrysalis but then it dies because it needs that resistance to build strength to survive.

The moral is this: you don't know that encouragement benefits poets anyway, they may need discouragement. Having something to fight against makes.the strong survive and the weak ? - let's face it, they are going to give up once they find out it's hard anyway.

[Apophrades]

Personally I think it is enough on my part to note that a problem exists.

Enough for what? Enough for the poet to simply know her piece is problematic? Enough to inspire the poet to change? To continue with your parable, you have already displaced the turtle by telling the poet there is something wrong. The point is, you know (or should, or think you should know) in which direction a poet should be headed, and that is towards good writing, however 'subjective' it is.

[Erthona]

The tale of the turtle was not a metaphor for a poet.

"The point is, you know (or should, or think you should know) in which direction a poet should be headed"

You assume too much!


Dale

[Apophrades]

Ok... so you just randomly put down some Sufi tale after concluding, "So I think I will leave it to those wiser than myself to offer encouragement to the discouraged poet, that is not an arena I am willing to enter," and expect us not to think there is a correlation.

You assume too much!

If you don't think it is 'your place' to tell poets what to do right, why do you do it. You acknowledge a problem, which presupposes a right way of doing something.

[Erthona]

Do you think the Sufi made up tales about poets?

I think you are young and idealistic, and very much in love with your own thoughts: theoretical thoughts that have little or no grounding in experience. I've been there, I get that. I envy you, but when I was in that place, I could hear nothing but myself, and all I wanted to do was fight. However, now I am too old and too tired to fight just for the sake of fighting, I fear you will have to find someone else to spar with.

Dale

[Apophrades]

I still don't know why you mentioned the tale if it has nothing to do with this discussion. Perhaps it's part of being old, wise and jaded. I dread the day.

[Erthona]

Some things you just have to figure out for yourself

Dale