Bad Poetry

[Leanne]

I think my kids are gorgeous and I love them, but I wouldn't take them out in public before I'd taught them how to behave themselves so they wouldn't annoy anyone -- unless it was specifically someone I wanted to annoy.

Same goes for poems.

[rowens]

We don't have any poets as rich as Shelley and Stevens. We have experts explaining why we should read Shelley and Stevens, and experts telling us why we should read Maya Angelou. Our experts are richer than our poets. Our fluff gathering experts can explain better in a documentary why we should read poetry than our poets have the power and richness on their own. I say we need poets who can survive without experts. And critics who are poetry critics and not literary apologists with talent for mere enthusiasm. But the point is, we wouldn't be reading bad poetry if not for Do It Yourself culture forums. And if not for experts in enthusiasm.

[vagabond]

I think my kids are gorgeous and I love them, but I wouldn't take them out in public before I'd taught them how to behave themselves so they wouldn't annoy anyone -- unless it was specifically someone I wanted to annoy.

Same goes for poems.

maybe it´s cause I don´t have kids that I´d rather compare them to some part of myself - wait, am I the kid here? (feel too old for that).  anyway, don´t take this as a serious theory, just babbling.

[Leanne]

Body parts work too.

#thepenismightierthanthesword

[rowens]

Talking about poetry is my least favorite part about poetry, and the easiest part. So I've made an art of it.

[Leanne]

Talking about poetry is my least favorite part about poetry, and the easiest part. So I've made an art of it.

You could do it better, but then you'd have to pretend like you actually care about making sense.

[rowens]

If poetry made sense, who would take it seriously? Or talking about poetry? Does love make sense? Does death? Death makes sense, but who the hell would bother writing poetry if they wanted to die except the Confessionalists? The Confessionalists were the most honest bunch, despite their faults, that's why they got such a bad reputation among most literary crews back in the days when literary crews took life seriously.

[Leanne]

I say we need poets who can survive without experts. And critics who are poetry critics and not literary apologists with talent for mere enthusiasm. But the point is, we wouldn't be reading bad poetry if not for Do It Yourself culture forums. And if not for experts in enthusiasm.

Which begs the question: why do you bother coming here, if it's such a breeding ground for mediocrity and dreadfulness? I mean, I know you're above such things as critique -- you've told us that, ad nauseum -- but is there another purpose to your maundering? Or does it just make you feel more impressive to tell everyone how much you don't need them? I know you're American, but the irony of that must sink in even to you.

[rowens]

In America, Irony and Satan are two words for the same thing.

[just mercedes]

Satan sheets crinkle when you wash them. Have to use lots of irony on them.

[rowens]

Puns are another thing Americans haven't been around long enough to use so lightly.

[Leanne]

So, serious question (directed at no one in particular): how do you approach critting a piece that is genuinely bad? Not bad in just one way, but fairly crappy in several areas (grammar, punctuation, format, accessibility of imagery, sonics, conceit, meter, etc). Where do you start?

I find it hard to distill the "essence de manure" into a reasonable word limit. Should I just stick with one flaw and go with it? How do you determine which errors are the most egregious?

In the first instance, I would begin with question and suggestion: was this what you meant?  You could always try it this way instead.

Like approaching a frightened bunny... instead of "Bad rabbit! Get away from there before I set the dogs on you!", more like "oh, poor hungry bunny, why don't you try this healthy nutritious carrot we keep here out in the open rather than chewing over that same stinking pile of refuse in the shadows there?"

and link to definitions/examples of techniques being used properly, or good poems that have a similar style/theme.  After all, we're not trying to hoard the secrets of good poetry for ourselves -- we're here to share it around.

The second approach, however, depends very much on the response to the first.  If said bunny then insists that the refuse pile is what it prefers to chew on and does not show any inclination to take up offers of a more nutritious, enjoyable meal... well, bunny's fair game then.  Shoot and leave it for the dogs to fight over.

[billy]

sorry no, you just got your head stuck up your arse is all

Talking about poetry is my least favorite part about poetry, and the easiest part. So I've made an art of it.

[billy]

back in the day i was a goodish troll who could wind people up with little trouble. you're a brightish sort who's capable of some good poetry; i see that in your words but and this is the biggy, you're a bullshitter with a penchant for the limelight. while we're happy to take complaints from members we do expect those who don't like it here to leave...sorry, to fuck off and spout your drizzle in the local library, oh that's right you can't. stop trying to get a rise from us we don't care for it and if you believe that's not what you're doing, fine; you know now. personally i've asked for the mods to ban you on numerous occasions but the fuckers keep overpowering me. carry on and i will just do it anyway. place a little nicer or fuck off.

We don't have any poets as rich as Shelley and Stevens. We have experts explaining why we should read Shelley and Stevens, and experts telling us why we should read Maya Angelou. Our experts are richer than our poets. Our fluff gathering experts can explain better in a documentary why we should read poetry than our poets have the power and richness on their own. I say we need poets who can survive without experts. And critics who are poetry critics and not literary apologists with talent for mere enthusiasm. But the point is, we wouldn't be reading bad poetry if not for Do It Yourself culture forums. And if not for experts in enthusiasm.

[QDeathstar]

Good poets don't just magically excrete a golden flood of words in orgasmic burst. Most had high levels of education, worked with experts in th literary field, were exposed to others writing. So, clearly there is some benefit to being around people who know about writing.

Forums aren't just the blind leading the blind. They consist of people with varying degrees of education. It is up to you to choose who you listen too. You know what good poetry is. It's like porn. You know it when you see it. So, you would be wise to listen to people who write good poetry.

[Achebe]

We don't have any poets as rich as Shelley and Stevens. We have experts explaining why we should read Shelley and Stevens, and experts telling us why we should read Maya Angelou. Our experts are richer than our poets. Our fluff gathering experts can explain better in a documentary why we should read poetry than our poets have the power and richness on their own. I say we need poets who can survive without experts. And critics who are poetry critics and not literary apologists with talent for mere enthusiasm. But the point is, we wouldn't be reading bad poetry if not for Do It Yourself culture forums. And if not for experts in enthusiasm.

The average club poet today is better than Shelley because he already has Shelley as a starting point.
Evolution.

[Leanne]

Good poets don't just magically excrete a golden flood of words in orgasmic burst. Most had high levels of education, worked with experts in th literary field, were exposed to others writing. So, clearly there is some benefit to being around people who know about writing.

Forums aren't just the blind leading the blind. They consist of people with varying degrees of education. It is up to you to choose who you listen too. You know what good poetry is. It's like porn. You know it when you see it. So, you would be wise to listen to people who write good poetry.

I love you Q. Today at least.

[Leanne]

The average club poet today is better than Shelley because he already has Shelley as a starting point.
Evolution.

Yes to this!

[rowens]

My point of view here has little to do personally/directly with anyone on this site. I have my standards, and say what they are. I'm not making it up. They count for me too. I don't always reach my own standards. I usually don't. Sometimes I think I never do. But they're still my honest standards, mixed in with jokes. So trolling is never my intention. I wasn't even attacking anyone or trying to disagree with anyone in this thread until they started disagreeing with me personally.

[rayheinrich]

Angry Penguin Ern Malley? 

I entered a poetry contest here in NZ as Ern Malley. He came second.

Yes. There are SO many lessons to be learned from that hoax and the reactions to it.
I think Angry Penguin should have stone-walled it and continued to sing Mally's virtues -- ascribed
the poetry's creation to the subconscious yearnings of the actual writers. But... they blinked.

Poetry contests...  Ern Malley is alive and well.

---

My point of view here has little to do personally/directly with anyone on this site. I have my standards, and say what they are. I'm not making it up. They count for me too. I don't always reach my own standards. I usually don't. Sometimes I think I never do. But they're still my honest standards, mixed in with jokes. So trolling is never my intention. I wasn't even attacking anyone or trying to disagree with anyone in this thread until they started disagreeing with me personally.

I agree with you. You've been a fave of mine since the first time I read a crit. of a poem
of yours that described it as incomprehensible gibberish. Since the poem made good
sense to me, I interpreted the critiquer's remarks as the product of an intellectual deficit
of some sort. (Mine, of course, being unquestionably inscrutable.)

Trolling, sometimes, is in the insecure eye of the beholder.
Ray


P.S. For every bad poem, there is a worser reader.