commenting v. reading and then commenting

[Senna Jawa]

Let me repost here my note placed elsewhere on Internet. It was with me for months, it is a result of years of observing several poetic Internet lists. I wonder what is your experience and how you feel about the issue. In particular, do you recall skipping yourself the reading stage on occasions, and getting into the critic's gear right away.

*********


commenting v. reading and then commenting


The natural idea that the poems should be read, that they should be given a chance and enjoyed, is long gone on the Internet. Instead of reading poems, the Internauts, who know their ABC (or AB or A) about poetry and not more, comment on poems -- they just comment, criticise, suggest modifications... It doesn't occur to them that a poem can be worth coming back to it over a long time.

The overwhelming majority of poems posted on the Internet are indeed poor. Then the shallow, routine, even mechanical comments by the ABC-experts possibly make some sense (or do they?). It is a very limited situation. Certainly one cannot assist a strong poem by commenting on it without reading it first, truly reading, trying to reflect on it. The mechanical critical attitude blinds the critic to poetry. The whole participation exercise of the ABC expert is then meaningless.

Wlod

 

[My Erotic Trail]

The mechanical critical attitude blinds the critic to poetry.

I have been saying this for a long time. But I find it is the different 'regular' readers that make a difference for some read, absorb, reflect and then speak what they feel as an expression, not so much a lesson.

 

[annaswirls]

far from ink

I am what's wrong with internet poetry
she said

I have the abc and the snap shy star sign
glow my teeth white
I poem
like most people shake a hand
and say
hello
how are you
it has been so long
it has been so long

and again
tomorrow
something new
another hand out
another flip chart snap shot
of this struggle better left pencilled in

 

[wildsweetone]

Let me repost here my note placed elsewhere on Internet. It was with me for months, it is a result of years of observing several poetic Internet lists. I wonder what is your experience and how you feel about the issue. In particular, do you recall skipping yourself the reading stage on occasions, and getting into the critic's gear right away.

*********


commenting v. reading and then commenting


The natural idea that the poems should be read, that they should be given a chance and enjoyed, is long gone on the Internet. Instead of reading poems, the Internauts, who know their ABC (or AB or A) about poetry and not more, comment on poems -- they just comment, criticise, suggest modifications... It doesn't occur to them that a poem can be worth coming back to it over a long time.

The overwhelming majority of poems posted on the Internet are indeed poor. Then the shallow, routine, even mechanical comments by the ABC-experts possibly make some sense (or do they?). It is a very limited situation. Certainly one cannot assist a strong poem by commenting on it without reading it first, truly reading, trying to reflect on it. The mechanical critical attitude blinds the critic to poetry. The whole participation exercise of the ABC expert is then meaningless.

Wlod

when editing prose i completely skip the reading process and jump straight into editor mode - it's a learned act and one that i find very difficult to avoid. i tend to be unable to see past the errors until i have noted them and then i can relax to 'read' the story at ease.

when looking at poetry, if someone i know wants an opinion then i read once and jump in and say my piece. i know full well that there are lots of poets in here whose work requires me to read several times before i understand a little beyond the surface writing. i could sit and read everyone's poetry a dozen times and still come across new little gems that i hadn't noticed before - there are a fair few accomplished wordsmiths here.

i think that unless one asks for an indepth critique, then it is often more helpful to the poet to choose only one problem with the writing to comment on, any more than a couple of problems can simply be overwhelming to some writers.

i think it's up to each individual person to write, to read, and to critique at their own ability.

if your critiques are indepth and you feel comfortable with your advice then that's all that really matters. each of us has our own strengths and abilities and we also have the choice to share as much or as little as we wish.

i often just jump in and make comments about things that 'stick out' for me. sometimes i'm wrong (i think i'm getting better as i gain skills). i hope that by being forward in this way that i encourage other new poets to step forward and voice their own opinions also.

often, with poems i have enjoyed or with poems that have made me think, i will print out the original and then keep track of what the poet does in the end result. sometimes i learn things that i might not have picked up in other ways.

i think that when editing another person's poetry, we are also subject to personal interpretation of their writing. our editing suggestions may therefore slant a poem in a different way to the original intention.

i also believe that all opinions should be welcomed from anyone who feels the urge to comment. it is up to the poet to a) stay openminded and b ) feel confident in their own writing to know which comments are useful to their poem.

i think that commenting on poetry goes beyond the mechanical grammar, punctuation, spelling, form etc... a critique also includes noting whether the poem works or not, whether there is that 'aha' moment or other such things that go, as i said, beyond the mechanics.

sorry this is a bit waffly - you raised several issues in your initial post and i felt like answering many of them.

 

[bogusbrig]

commenting v. reading and then commenting


The natural idea that the poems should be read, that they should be given a chance and enjoyed, is long gone on the Internet. Instead of reading poems, the Internauts, who know their ABC (or AB or A) about poetry and not more, comment on poems -- they just comment, criticise, suggest modifications... It doesn't occur to them that a poem can be worth coming back to it over a long time.

Some poems don't require lengthy contemplation as you yourself have noticed, since you are also guilty of making instant comments on a work or at least of making a comment within a day of a poem being posted. I don't criticise you for making a quick judgement of a poem but the hypocracy of doing something you appear to condemn yourself. Some poems have obvious weaknesses that the majority of people form a consensus on, sometimes those perceived weaknesses are merely a personal opinion. Since all judgement is subjective it is difficult to criticise someone for making a snap judgement. It is simply a matter of taste. One may feel one is more qualified because of education and experience to pass judgement and feel able to base judgements on comparing works to those of the Canon but that is merely assuming that the Canon really is the gold standard of poetry. Many people do not hold the opnion that those who see themselves as the protectors of our culture know what is best in the culture nor know what is best for the culture. Culture is shifting sands.

The overwhelming majority of poems posted on the Internet are indeed poor. Then the shallow, routine, even mechanical comments by the ABC-experts possibly make some sense (or do they?). It is a very limited situation. Certainly one cannot assist a strong poem by commenting on it without reading it first, truly reading, trying to reflect on it. The mechanical critical attitude blinds the critic to poetry. The whole participation exercise of the ABC expert is then meaningless.

Wlod

I would agree that the overwhelming majority of poems on the internet are poor but so are the overwhelming number of poems that are published in books but for different reasons. The majority of poems that are published in books are turgid, academic and constipated and it is difficult to imagine the writer breaths oxygen. Education doesn't necessarily make a poet but if you look at published books, education appears to be more important than ones ability as a poet to communicate. No wonder less and less poetry books are being published and less and less people buy them. If the self appointed protectors of the art sit on their hands as the art declines then they have no one to blame but themselves. We should not forget that many writers that are now exhaulted were once populist or heretics so I would suggest it is the gatekeepers of the art that are the ones with their heads in the sand.

While the internet has many faults, it also has many good points. It has democratised culture for better or worse. That those self appointed gatekeepers of culture are like the church in the face of the printing press and the translation of the bible into everyday language, they are having their power taken away and they don't like it. The internet has shown that poetry is much broader than those protectors of the Canon like but the cat is out of the bag and it's not going to be put back in. Poetry and people's attitude to poetry is changing along with the new technolgy and those conservative people are going to have to get used to it or be satisfied with guarding their ever declining dominion. People might nod towards the Canon as defined by the guardians of poetry like people nod towards the church and priests without really letting them intrude in their dailly lives.

 

[Liar]

Let me repost here my note placed elsewhere on Internet. It was with me for months, it is a result of years of observing several poetic Internet lists. I wonder what is your experience and how you feel about the issue. In particular, do you recall skipping yourself the reading stage on occasions, and getting into the critic's gear right away.

Nope. Because I never feel qualified to do that. I'm a hack and an improviser when it comes to writing (at least in the English language), so the technical aspect (proper language, lines and such) are all by ear for me. So I wouldn't try to force my view of that upon someone else's writing when I rarely apply it to my own.

If I leave a comment (too rarely happens, I'm afraid) it is to say how it emotionally responds with me, as an individual reader.

 

[anniebug's man]

Let me repost here my note placed elsewhere on Internet. It was with me for months, it is a result of years of observing several poetic Internet lists. I wonder what is your experience and how you feel about the issue. In particular, do you recall skipping yourself the reading stage on occasions, and getting into the critic's gear right away.

*********


commenting v. reading and then commenting


The natural idea that the poems should be read, that they should be given a chance and enjoyed, is long gone on the Internet. Instead of reading poems, the Internauts, who know their ABC (or AB or A) about poetry and not more, comment on poems -- they just comment, criticise, suggest modifications... It doesn't occur to them that a poem can be worth coming back to it over a long time.

The overwhelming majority of poems posted on the Internet are indeed poor. Then the shallow, routine, even mechanical comments by the ABC-experts possibly make some sense (or do they?). It is a very limited situation. Certainly one cannot assist a strong poem by commenting on it without reading it first, truly reading, trying to reflect on it. The mechanical critical attitude blinds the critic to poetry. The whole participation exercise of the ABC expert is then meaningless.

Wlod

The Hallmark approach to poetry and critique. Most commentary is up within hours, with inflated language and mostly gut reaction response.

*shrugs* am

 

[flyguy69]

....and mostly gut reaction response.

*shrugs* am

Is there anything more important? I suspect that most, perhaps all, poetry critique is reflexive. We very quickly decide if we like a poem, and then go back to look for justification. Some of us use formally-constructed arguments or the argot of poets (take that, calliope!), some of us describe the sudden distension of body parts. But all of us respond to that initial gut reaction.

There is much to be said for mulling over a poem, or even coming back to them much later for study. But that approach is not inherantly "better" than reading and responding. Awhile back I had a thread for poetry that "dropped you in your tracks," that is, poems that affected you immediately and viscerally. It is certainly one of the joys of poetry to come across one that arrests you as you read.

 

[anniebug's man]

Is there anything more important? I suspect that most, perhaps all, poetry critique is reflexive. We very quickly decide if we like a poem, and then go back to look for justification. Some of us use formally-constructed arguments or the argot of poets (take that, calliope!), some of us describe the sudden distension of body parts. But all of us respond to that initial gut reaction.

There is much to be said for mulling over a poem, or even coming back to them much later for study. But that approach is not inherantly "better" than reading and responding. Awhile back I had a thread for poetry that "dropped you in your tracks," that is, poems that affected you immediately and viscerally. It is certainly one of the joys of poetry to come across one that arrests you as you read.

There is nothing wrong with what you describe. In fact the "readers" response to poetry is preferrably so. However, the "critics" response should neither be viceral nor driven by gut. There is much poetry which does not speak to me, renders reactions or is in my view beautiful. Yet, I can review and understand craftsmanship, ability with words, subtle references to events, historical or otherwise and honor that in a critique. A poem that engenders a favorable or disfavorable viceral response may still be a good read. Likewise a sentimental mushy "awwww" poem that makes me all weak and fuzzy can be the worst poetry and bare of all merit.

I believe the distinction is what your activity is, critique or consumption.

I believe that most so called critiques cannot be taken seriously as such, but may be lovely commentary.

Thanks

am

 

[bogusbrig]

There is nothing wrong with what you describe. In fact the "readers" response to poetry is preferrably so. However, the "critics" response should neither be viceral nor driven by gut. There is much poetry which does not speak to me, renders reactions or is in my view beautiful. Yet, I can review and understand craftsmanship, ability with words, subtle references to events, historical or otherwise and honor that in a critique. A poem that engenders a favorable or disfavorable viceral response may still be a good read. Likewise a sentimental mushy "awwww" poem that makes me all weak and fuzzy can be the worst poetry and bare of all merit.

I believe the distinction is what your activity is, critique or consumption.

I believe that most so called critiques cannot be taken seriously as such, but may be lovely commentary.

Thanks

am

Everything is subjective, even craftsmanship and all has its place. Many a good writer has been accused of being bad and populist when they have in fact been revolutionary. Hindsight has 20-20 vision. When stating a strong opinion in terms of that opinion being a fact, a critic should expect to be attacked in the same strong terms as they have attacked.

Most recognisably good work will probably never be great work because it simply sits comfortably in the consensus and doesn't challenge.

 

[anniebug's man]

Everything is subjective, even craftsmanship and all has its place. Many a good writer has been accused of being bad and populist when they have in fact been revolutionary. Hindsight has 20-20 vision. When stating a strong opinion in terms of that opinion being a fact, a critic should expect to be attacked in the same strong terms as they have attacked.

Most recognisably good work will probably never be great work because it simply sits comfortably in the consensus and doesn't challenge.

I am not entirely sure of the point you are trying to make here.

Everything is subjective, even craftsmanship and all has its place.

I disagree with this notion. What is subjective about i.e. the form of a quatrain or the iambic pentameters? Or for that matter the use of language in free form. Whether you like it or not is irrellevant when looking at the ability of the writer to complete the task he set out to do. What has that got to do with you?

Many a good writer has been accused of being bad and populist when they have in fact been revolutionary.

"populist" ? I am not sure whom you are speaking of. I would be interested to know what poet was considered to be both bad, populist, and eventually revolutionary? People like Shakespeare for instance were considered good and populist in their time and turned out to be revolutionary. Likewise Brecht, etc. Please show I'd be genuinely interested.

Hindsight has 20-20 vision.

Uhmm, yes, and ?

When stating a strong opinion in terms of that opinion being a fact, a critic should expect to be attacked in the same strong terms as they have attacked.

The problem with critics is generally, that they have trouble to distinguish between opinion and fact. Usually it is because they think they are GOD. All critique is opinion, the question is if it is founded in an ability to form judgement. If however we are talking about matters of recognizing form, alas a quatrain is a quatrain. So if the critic says: this doesn't work and he has properly identified what that is, then a viceral response attack on the critic is the Hallmark approach to critquing critics, don't you think?

In any event, as annie generally says: You had to fuck it up with fruit, cheers

 

[bogusbrig]

I disagree with this notion. What is subjective about i.e. the form of a quatrain or the iambic pentameters? Or for that matter the use of language in free form. Whether you like it or not is irrellevant when looking at the ability of the writer to complete the task he set out to do. What has that got to do with you?

Whether a task is completed or not is also subjective unless the writer has given notice what their objective is before hand, then they have laid out criteria by which they can be judged.

As for populist, bad and revolutionary, I have contradicted myself as all are subjective notions.

 

[Angeline]

<snip>

You had to fuck it up with fruit, cheers

I'm not sure what that means, but I like it a lot. Cheers, A & AB's M.

 

[flyguy69]

I'm not sure what that means, but I like it a lot. Cheers, A & AB's M.

I was trying to decide if it was a complaint, or not!

 

[DeepAsleep]

Well, hell...

 

[Angeline]

Well, hell...

You know I once wrote a poem about the Pillsbury Doughboy. I don't like him. Nothing personal, D.A. I liked the pancake bunny.


Why you so happy
in that little chef hat?
Marchin around like
King Spoon of Cup kitchen.

You smug little brat.
You flour-paste thing
come wigglin alive to giggle
some lyin' Mad Avenue jive
in my face!

Better get on outta my place,
evil toddler, and don't dare
ask me how to bake a square cake
in a round pan.

I got your pan right here.
Bend over.

Mr. Spatula thinks
you need a new career.

Enough happy laughs
and insincere words.
Gonna bake you to biscuits,
feed you poppin fresh
to the birds.

 

[bogusbrig]

You know I once wrote a poem about the Pillsbury Doughboy. I don't like him. Nothing personal, D.A. I liked the pancake bunny.


Why you so happy
in that little chef hat?
Marchin around like
King Spoon of Cup kitchen.

You smug little brat.
You flour-paste thing
come wigglin alive to giggle
some lyin' Mad Avenue jive
in my face!

Better get on outta my place,
evil toddler, and don't dare
ask me how to bake a square cake
in a round pan.

I got your pan right here.
Bend over.

Mr. Spatula thinks
you need a new career.

Enough happy laughs
and insincere words.
Gonna bake you to biscuits,
feed you poppin fresh
to the birds.

One summer when I was a student at art college I worked in a Pillsbury Dough factory. I used to sculpt Pillsbury dough men with huge penises out of the dough. I got fired and I've held a grudge against Pillsbury dough ever since, though the factory has long since gone.

 

[flyguy69]

...Gonna bake you to biscuits,
....

Between you and Anniebug we've got a regular food orgy!

 

[Angeline]

One summer when I was a student at art college I worked in a Pillsbury Dough factory. I used to sculpt Pillsbury dough men with huge penises out of the dough. I got fired and I've held a grudge against Pillsbury dough ever since, though the factory has long since gone.

I have issues with that dough boy. He's a condescending little misogynist. I never liked that Snuggle fabric softener bear either. I like "cute" as much as the next girl but those things are abominations.

Your story may inspire me to write a sequel to my poem involving the dough boy and a viagra accident. Eve? You got any ideas on this concept?

 

[flyguy69]

I have issues with that dough boy. He's a condescending little misogynist. I never liked that Snuggle fabric softener bear either. I like "cute" as much as the next girl but those things are abominations.

Your story may inspire me to write a sequel to my poem involving the dough boy and a viagra accident. Eve? You got any ideas on this concept?

Is this the one about the Pillsbury Doughgirl pouring yeast into her boyfriend's pants?

 

[Angeline]

Is this the one about the Pillsbury Doughgirl pouring yeast into her boyfriend's pants?

Maybe you should write it.

 

[flyguy69]

Maybe you should write it.

Maybe you should knead it.

 

[ewopper]

Let me repost here my note placed elsewhere on Internet. It was with me for months, it is a result of years of observing several poetic Internet lists. I wonder what is your experience and how you feel about the issue. In particular, do you recall skipping yourself the reading stage on occasions, and getting into the critic's gear right away.

*********


commenting v. reading and then commenting


The natural idea that the poems should be read, that they should be given a chance and enjoyed, is long gone on the Internet. Instead of reading poems, the Internauts, who know their ABC (or AB or A) about poetry and not more, comment on poems -- they just comment, criticise, suggest modifications... It doesn't occur to them that a poem can be worth coming back to it over a long time.

The overwhelming majority of poems posted on the Internet are indeed poor. Then the shallow, routine, even mechanical comments by the ABC-experts possibly make some sense (or do they?). It is a very limited situation. Certainly one cannot assist a strong poem by commenting on it without reading it first, truly reading, trying to reflect on it. The mechanical critical attitude blinds the critic to poetry. The whole participation exercise of the ABC expert is then meaningless.

Wlod

After reading this I have to say to the true poet, criticism of their work; though painful can be used to springboard them on to another work. My advice to the poet is, if it's going to change the impact or meaning of the work don't change anything, remember criticism is not absolute it's just one person's viewpoint of your work. You also have to take in consideration some people are just critical in nature and they're going to go over your work with a fine tooth comb and they are going to find something if it's no more than the fact that you used a comma where you should have used a semi colon.
remain true to your work if a change must be made make sure it's what you want... after all you are the author

 

[Angeline]

Maybe you should knead it.

No more half-baked suggestions.

 

[flyguy69]

No more half-baked suggestions.

You mean I can't make my "bake until an inserted prick comes out clean" joke?