Poetry Forum

Ros wrote:Very nice, og. Can't find anything to complain about!

Wabznasm wrote:I think this is superb. Really

Sharra wrote:A great poem

ray miller wrote:Great poem, brilliant last verse.

twoleftfeet wrote:A polished piece (Boom Boom!)

I can't believe you lot. You really love each other, don't you ! This is an Ok poem, nothing more. Believe me ! The rhyme and strict metre I found irritating.

'None can deny your age/or grace;' sounds as though it should be in a birthday card.
'a lifestyle with a steady pace' is very unimaginative
How can a table stand tall !
"But blind cupidity/breeds true" Where's your evidence for this ? You're preaching at the reader - an absolute no no.

"They sought your heart/and ran it through;/brought you to your knees." far too twee, too sentimental.

The last verse is dreadful - ape-like mayflies ! Dear, dear, dear.

Time for me to move on you'll no doubt be glad to read. I really don't fit in here. You are all far too complimentary about your poetry for its own good. I have read some very good poems here but you don't seem to be able to differentiate them from those which are not good. As a group you seem to be writing poetry too fast. I get the impression of conveyor-belt poetry. Sorry to pick on this poem to make a point but all those 'superbs' were sticking their chin out.

Anyway thanks for the hospitality and good luck with your writing everyone. You certainly seem to derive great pleasure from it, and the company it brings, which is good.

Have you tried Poet's free for all, Nigel? No niceness there

Peace 'n' love, y'all.

I had a look at the forum, briefly, it scared me and I ran away

Sharra
xx

As a newbie to PG I think I can relate to a few things in Nigel's valedictory polemic, in particular:

As a group you seem to be writing poetry too fast

There do seem to be a lot of poems being posted in embryo, gradually assuming different forms as more crits come in. I wonder whether a longer gestation period would be more honest.

You are all far too complimentary about your poetry for its own good.

I've asked myself a few times what the criteria on this site are. It's stated that the experienced site isn't a 'love-in' but it does feel like it sometimes (to me anyway). On other writing sites publishability is kind of unspoken standard - i.e. would an editor (out there) look at this twice? I haven't seen it mentioned here. Maybe I haven't been around long enough.

Nigel - I think you should stick around. Dissenting voices are always good. And you're right - there's good stuff here.

Phil

Nigel wrote:
You are all far too complimentary about your poetry for its own good.

I have read some very good poems here but you don't seem to be able to differentiate them from those which are not good.

As a group you seem to be writing poetry too fast. I get the impression of conveyor-belt poetry.

You insult me. I won't speak for the others.

The forum, as a general arena, is hardly the end of the journey. If it is for you, then I hope you find contentment in your own version of mediocrity.

Nigel wrote:
Time for me to move on...

Bye.

Epicurean wrote: There do seem to be a lot of poems being posted in embryo, gradually assuming different forms as more crits come in. I wonder whether a longer gestation period would be more honest.

What's more "honest" than the very embryonic poems you're referring to?

All I hear is fancy drivel. There's no argument of substance. A feat any fool with a dictionary can accomplish.

Read more is my advice. Specifically, this forum.

Apologies to the owner of the thread. Well, not really. But I'm sure you (OG) can appreciate that this is merely an extension or a natural evolution or hey, we can call it a chocolate chip cookie if you want. But you know what I mean.

We will however take any further discussion on the matter to AOB, ok people?

Just start a thread with a pertinent title and we'll go from there.

Good idea to take this, or the relevant bits of it, to AOB. How do we do that anyway?

However, before we do, I agree with you, Phil, that we do perhaps err on the side of kindness here in the critical comments. But isn't that a good side to err on?

I think you'll also find that comments are not consistently laudatory. Look at my comments on og's poem. Just look at my last one (which I rather like) - although the general tone of responses was positive, most people took issue with one part or other of it. You did yourself. And that was fine.

So no, it's not a love-in. Exceptions are taken, and objections raised, but in a mood of congeniality and collegiality. That's how it is here, and that's how I like it, possibly because I'm one of those who have helped to make it like that. It's not imposed. It's voluntary. This is not the Stepford Poets.

As for the embryonic poems, this is a workshop is it not? It's not a showcase.

Nigel has a right to his opinion, of course, and more power to his elbow, wherever he finds himself happy. I'm happy here.

Cheers

David

I like your voice David. It's one of moderation, and I'm drawn to that. But I think it's important to hear what Nigel says, and not to dismiss it out of hand - as you, Samaritan, seem to want to do. Both you (Samaritan) and he (Nigel), in my humble opinion, overstate your case.

The value of these sites is that they encourage all of us to write and to think about writing, and that's unquestionably good. They also encourage us to improve what we do by receiving honest criticism, and I think Nigel was suggesting that a better balance could be struck. I think it's worth at least wondering if he might be right.

Epicurean wrote: Both you (Samaritan) and he (Nigel), in my humble opinion, overstate your case.

And you, in my humble opinion, underestimate my latent cognitive ability. I'm not simply dismissing Nigel while only considering what you believe to be my own narrow disputative angle. I've arrived at my own independent conclusions after taking the information and its implications into account. And stating step by step how I got here would be a more egregious waste of time than trying to convince Kate Beckinsale by handwritten letter that leaving Len and fucking me every second day would be a good idea. So you're going to have to accept that I'm not a complete imbecile here.

There is undeniable value in kicking each other in the arse. And Nigel has undeniable value as a great arse kicker. He's cut from a different cloth than most of us here, and because of that could make semi-unique contributions to the fabric of the site. He's an idiot however for thinking that this is a love-in, and even more of an idiot for going ahead and declaring it. And without getting into what that says about his personality, I can assure you that it shows his complete ignorance of how our little world here turns. Which is of course the same ignorance you've shown in your own statements.

It's not just that I found Nigel's words insulting. That merely shapes my responding attitude. The reality is, what he's saying simply isn't true in any objective context. And I challenge you to prove objectivity wrong.

Philosophize all you want. At the end of the day, PG is a great product.

Oh, how I wish Barrie was around right now.

The value of these sites is that they encourage all of us to write and to think about writing, and that's unquestionably good. They also encourage us to improve what we do by receiving honest criticism, and I think Nigel was suggesting that a better balance could be struck. I think it's worth at least wondering if he might be right.

Wow. I get the stomach flu from hell for a week and I miss all the good stuff!

Ep, had Nigel had the sense to phrase his opinion as you have above he would have gotten more flies with honey than with vinegar.

I can't believe you lot. You really love each other, don't you!

Well, I do.

Does anyone remember Bob? Well, thank the Lord he is gone now, probably rumbling around in some vampire, teenage heartbreak poetry site bullying other children.

Nigel has no manners. I will take a love-in over bad manners any day of the week. I appreciate you bringing out something that can make us all better. Maybe we need to take a better look at how we critique. But compared to other sites we are Light Years ahead of normal crits. The dedication of our mods says it all. As David so aptly put it,the tone of kindness can't be confused with fawning.


Cheers,
Kim

P.S.

And stating step by step how I got here would be a more egregious waste of time than trying to convince Kate Beckinsale by handwritten letter that leaving Len and fucking me every second day would be a good idea.

Select Samaritan you crack me up.....lol!

What is so bizarre is that Nigel accuses everyone of a love in then says he is leaving. Well if everyone with a different opinion leaves then that only leaves people who are semi like minded and increases the chance of a love in.

That aside I feel there is a large amount of disagreement here, the thing is it is carried out with kindness.

Wow - I dip out for a day or so and we get a right little discussion going.

I think Nigel has a point - we can be less than discerning sometimes but not always and when we are not then the crit should be delivered in a considerate manner, no need to be rude or discouraging. Many of us here are finding our way and our voice and it is the interaction with others with similar interests and strong views that help us move forward.

Phil - you make a very good point about poems being posted too fast. Speaking from experience, in my early days on the forum I posted very fast, maybe one per week but that is because I was so unsure of what I was doing I needed the quick feedback to keep me on the right track and yes for reassurance. Now I am at the other end of the spectrum - almost constipated!! Gestation is needed to improve any respectable offering.

Is publishability the standard - I would say not, I would like to think its pre publishability, a workshop to hone the poem and receive the feedback that might allow the writer to consider whether their work can reach that standard, which of course few works do. I find myself wondering what is "publishable" though - I have read some real crap in magazines as well as gems so are we here in a position to judge. I dont know.

Nigel is welcome to stick around. I appreciated his writing and said so in my crits, I also offered thoughts on what didn't work for me and we can only ever say how we as individuals respond to a poem. I would have liked to hear more constructive criticism from Nigel, so we could all learn.

At the very least maybe Nigels departure is a little reminder to keep our critical hats on - but with kindness and encouragement.

elph

I was brooding about this before I read all your comments. It's certainly not a love-in - even the poem on which Nigel contributed his leaving remarks had plenty of criticism as well as praise. We do err on the side of kindness - but that's no bad thing in an on-line forum where I've seen things turn nasty so quickly (in other forums, that is, not here!). I like to think we're serious poets and some are heading for publication, but we're also a social community and I like you lot. So I intend to continue with nice.

Personally, I'm still feeling my feet with the critting - sometimes I can spot problems, other times not, and something one person praises I can't see the value in. The only solution I'm finding is to keep at it, and to keep reading what others consider good stuff in the hope that I can learn what is considered good and why. Nigel did some good crits, and some I couldn't agree with, and the poems he posted I consider only on a par with what I read here most days. So I'm not sure we're talking a huge difference in quality here.

One suggestion which I think might be good - rather than diving in and commenting on most poems, perhaps we should pick one or two in our critting time and do them really seriously, line by line, considering everything. Comments?

Rosemary

At the same time though Ros, I think a 2 line comment which argues persuasively that the poem doesn't work is just as valuable as a 3000 word essay on whether there should be a 'the' in line 3.

As for other workshops, I always think of poetry free for all as an example. It's harsh, but shite. Utterly shite. They encourage all of their critters to spend up to 30 minutes on a poem, and all it produces is a multitude of dissenting voices with no agreement. People feel they have to work as hard as they can on a critique, and so they'll question every single word and get nowhere. Everyone can disagree with words in poems; I think what's important is knowing whether one works, and that comes about by judging a poem on a comparative basis (like thinking of certain magazines, certain editors, possibility for publication, certain forums, etc).

The most valuable kind of critique for me would simply be a 'no' or a 'yes' as to whether something works. Poems are collections of words, but those collectioons create certain effects, and often in a poem there needs to be enough 'meat' to hold it together. One of the reasons I liked Nigel was because he seemed to be aware of what poems consisted of, and knew how to suggest what was wrong (not that others aren't, but you know what I mean; he had a certain conciseness which a lot of us - including me - lacked). Some of his opinions were rubbish, admittedly, and he spoke for a certain type of poetry and a certain type of small press, but he was still useful.

Perhaps, if we want to try and up the ante of our critiques, we should start judging another's poems on what we think the standards are for small-time publication? I don't think it's the way forward personally, simply because you would have to have a different critique for every individual magazine (does it fit into Other Poetry? yes; does it fit into The Stand? no, etc), but perhaps we do need to foreground the idea of publishability a little more in our critiques? Look a little beyond what might be the next feature. But then that means we may have to take this all a little more seriously, and I don't know if that's a good idea. I think Elph is spot on with this:

"Is publishability the standard - I would say not, I would like to think its pre publishability, a workshop to hone the poem and receive the feedback that might allow the writer to consider whether their work can reach that standard, which of course few works do"

So no answer from me. Sorry.

Dave

Wabznasm wrote: he seemed to be aware of what poems consisted of, and knew how to suggest what was wrong (not that others aren't, but you know what I mean; he had a certain conciseness which a lot of us - including me - lacked). Some of his opinions were rubbish, admittedly, and he spoke for a certain type of poetry and a certain type of small press, but he was still useful.

Trouble is, if I can't tell which of his opinions were sound and which rubbish, it doesn't get me very far. He seemed a bit arbitrary. I've skimmed/read many chapbooks from small presses, and I really can't tell what they are looking for. To me, there seem to be a lot of mediocre poems published. So I don't know how to crit along those lines. This may well be my ignorance of the whole area though.

Pity Nigel didn't stick around - I agree that a variety of voices here is a good thing. I would have hoped our comments on his poems were useful - certainly not all praise, but constructive.

Wabznasm wrote:As for other workshops, I always think of poetry free for all as an example. It's harsh, but shite. Utterly shite. They encourage all of their critters to spend up to 30 minutes on a poem, and all it produces is a multitude of dissenting voices with no agreement.

Absolutely right, Dave. People with no discernible feel for poetry are encouraged to swarm all over a poem in a spirit of joyless pedantry. (As for the moderators at PFFA, my dear - such ghastly people! And when you finally track down some of their own poems ... hilarity ensues.)

Wabznasm wrote:Perhaps, if we want to try and up the ante of our critiques, we should start judging another's poems on what we think the standards are for small-time publication? I don't think it's the way forward personally, simply because you would have to have a different critique for every individual magazine (does it fit into Other Poetry? yes; does it fit into The Stand? no, etc), but perhaps we do need to foreground the idea of publishability a little more in our critiques? Look a little beyond what might be the next feature. But then that means we may have to take this all a little more seriously, and I don't know if that's a good idea.

I think not. Ideally, something we choose for a feature ought, by definition, to be publishable, but publishable where? I'm aware there's a hierarchy of magazines, but who stands where in that hierarchy? That's what I'd like to know. How can we find out?

It's not actually that hard to get published, if publication per se is what you want, but the trick is convincing yourself it's somewhere that's worth getting published in. (It's the Groucho paradox, restated, in a way.)

I like your voice David. It's one of moderation, and I'm drawn to that.

Good thing since you're a moderator David

This seems all very strange.

Nigel wrote:This is an Ok poem, nothing more. Believe me !

I haven't actually read this poem yet, but I've read a lot of og's writing and enjoy it very much. By saying "believe me" I would assume that you have (or think you have) a lot of experience in literature of all sorts and feel you can be a fair judge of what is "good" or not. I think that it's all down to opinion actually, like music, some people will like it, others won't.

If you don't like something then fine, this forum is great because it accepts all opinions as long as they are fair. But the problem is that you critise others for having an opinion. If someone says they like something they're not going to change their minds because another says they don't like it. Human nature I'm afraid.

Honestly.

Bye

What a discussion to come back to this evening!

I agree with Ros about the kindness thing, critting with kindness is essential if you want to be at all supportive. There's a whole difference between saying 'Thats shite' and 'thats not working for me'.

I also agree that maybe sometimes poems get posted on here too soon - I think I'm personally a good example of this. But for me the reason is that I'm excited about what Ive written and I'm excited about having people to share it with. And that's what I think is so great about this site. We may not be the harshest critics in the world (although I think a lot are pretty tough), but the atmosphere makes people want to write and to share - and that has to be a good thing. Writing poetry is often quite an isolated thing to do, PG changes that.

I think Nigel just didn't get the lighter side of poetry, it doesn't all have to be about weighing every syllable, we can have fun too

'Experienced' might not be a love-in, but I'm wearing my 'I love PG T shirt'
Sharra
xx

How can a poem be posted too soon in a workshop, Sharra?

Writers of different levels of both experience and talent post what they've got in an effort to take it farther, to make it better. Whether they've written it five minutes prior to posting or have revised it twenty times in the last week is inconsequential. The aim is to get feedback on the piece and to potentially improve it. And what stage in life the piece is at when the writer chooses to post it is solely the decision of the writer. There are an infinite number of reasons to submit a poem at any stage of its life. It's a situational judgement call, nothing more.

I guess many poems might benefit from being sat on for a few weeks and then revised before being posted. But as Sharra says, it's fun to post something when you feel you've just got somewhere with it, and it's encouraging to get feedback, good or bad, I find. And if it wasn't fun, we would lose heart and give up. And it may be coincidence, but I'm seeing many detailed crits on here today, which is great.

Took a long time for anyone to mention fun. Thanks Sharra. If producing what is publishable is the purpose of writing, rather than what is pleasurable, entertaining, interesting then Nigel is your man. I find it disappointing that this "publish or be damned" attitude seems to have passed by virtually unchallenged.Poetry magazine editors expect a certain kind of poem and people fall over themselves to deliver a certain kind of poem and occasionally the poetry community peeps its head out of the bunker, wrings its collective hands and wonders why 99% of the population aren't interested.

As for the "love-in". I'd rather be criticised than ignored. I'd rather not be addressed as if I should feel myself lucky that the critic has wasted his valuable time to descend from poetry heaven to dispense words of wisdom.Be nice to each other.

Yeah, it's nice to be nice but that doesn't mean you should gloss over the shortcomings of a poem for the sake of etiquette. Has anyone heard of Arthur Rimbaud? I'd stake my life he never minced his words where crap poetry was concerned, and his work has survived a century and counting.

You can write whatever you like, that's a given, but if you're workshopping your poems that implies, at least to me, that you want your work to be read and understood. Essentially, you want to remove an idea from your head to someone else's whilst leaving it intact. I believe almost everyone is capable of real expression but few will achieve it mostly because of their attitude; few think improvement is necessary!

If anyone's ever read the collected poems of Philip Larkin, they'll know their isn't very much but everything is outstanding. If you were to write one good poem a year, it would be worth more than ten thousand crap ones!

If you ask me, too many people forget why they started writing in the first place. So many fall in love with the idea of being a writer and never face up to the realities of it. Genuine artists, good or bad, must create as they must breathe and eat. William Burroughs said that shooting his wife brought him in contact with the 'ugly spirit', and left him no option but to write his way out. He was a real artist. Gushing and praising every half-arsed, vain attempt at poetry cheapens the work and the memory of men and women like him.

If you ask me, too many people forget why they started writing in the first place

I think you're forgetting that people write for many many different reasons, some just for fun, some for publications, for therapy, and for a hundred other reasons - not everyone is aiming for publication. But the one thing everyone who writes has to have in common is that they enjoy writing, if they didn't they wouldn't be doing it.

Yes if people are posting (especially on Experienced) they want proper crits, I'm not disputing that, but there's no need to destroy someone's self confidence in the process - I'm sure its common among us poets, that we can be fragile. Crits can be just as helpful if they are framed in a constructive supportive way rather than just ripping something to pieces. Anyone who has experienced a good creative writing tutor knows that.

I agree that

almost everyone is capable of real expression

but if they are ripped to shreds as soon as they start, then they will stop believing that and give up.

And I do dispute that we are

Gushing and praising every half-arsed, vain attempt at poetry

. I do personally make a point of saying what I like as well as what I don't in a poem - else I think I'm giving an unbalanced crit. Also, the comments I make are my opinion there isn't a definitive right or wrong about poetry (well unless we're talking strict meter - but I won't go there)

And I think

Genuine artists, good or bad, must create as they must breathe and eat

is slightly pretentious - everyone has the need to be creative in some way in their life, whether its writing poetry, painting, cooking dinner, daydreaming, or imagining what they would do if they were in the same position as their fav soap opera star. Some people just have more need, drive or opportunity than others.

Just my thoughts
Sharra
x