HomerPindar
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2001
- Posts
- 963
So far as I’ve read there is two parts to writing good poetry, first is write write write and then write some more. The second is read read read read, and yes, read some more. (Eating, sleeping and paying bills don’t get mentions 
) I’m going to suggest a third important aspect to being a poet; learning to critique poetry. This means not just reading poetry, but dissecting it, understanding what makes, or breaks, the poem and learning how to express your opinions in a constructive critique.
To wit, Critical Mass. Now, to carry this idea, I’ve consider some rules by which we should all play along. By all means, critique the rules. If the thread devolves into a rules critique over a poetry critique I’ll consider the idea to have failed miserably and let it die its slow creeping death down the forum thread list. On the other hand, I withhold the right to edit this post alone in this thread to update any rule changes that might be agreed upon.
The rules to critiquing:
Rule One: CONSTRUCTIVE criticism I had considered calling this thread “No compliments” but decided that no, critiques cover the “good” as well as the “bad.” Yet, we don’t want “I really liked such and such” or “That sucked.” Explain yourself, in detail, backing up your argument from the posted poem as needed.
A Suggested Note here: Avoid using words such as “like,” “nice,” “good,” or “bad.” These tend to get over used without actually supplying any information. If it works, explain how. If it makes you feel, explain what it made you feel. If it sucked, be specific about what doesn’t work.
Rule Two: Comments are on the poem only. There is no need to comment on the poet at any time. Critique what is posted, not some opinion you might have of the author, or sonnets for that matter. If you don’t like the form of the poem, tough cookies, skip the review of that poem if you can’t get over your personal taste.
Rule Three: No Editing Your Posts! Be willing to back up what you say, or don’t post it. (A third option is to accept that you were wrong and be mature enough to post that you were wrong.) Remember, you are posting on someone's poetry, that deserves the consideration it takes to reread your own posts and decide if what you post is what you meant to say.
Rules for posting your own poetry:
Rule One: Just the Poem! No explanations, notes, or sidelines. JUST THE POEM. If it can’t stand on it’s own, consider the poem incomplete, and go back to editing.
Rule Two: When posting your own poetry you cannot comment on the critiques for one week. That’s seven days of silence (ok, while I can’t keep anyone from using PM’s, I highly recommend and urge folks to refrain from posting PM’s about the critiques). Let people answer each others questions, in a round table poetry review (from which these rules are being lifted) such insight is often the most constructive way of seeing how other people see your poetry. Don’t ruin this chance to read what people think. Afterwards, feel free to comment on your review to date and as further reviews come up.
Rule Three: One of your own poems at a time. You can, and are encouraged, to help critique other poems. Since this isn’t a round table, we don’t have to worry about folks all talking at once. So, multiple poems can be reviewed at one time, so long as it is from multiple authors. (If too many poems are on the chopping block at any one time feel free to speak up and suggest that a hold be put on further poems being posted. Seeing as this is meant to be serious, hard-core type of critiquing, I don’t foresee people lining up to drop their work on the chopping block, so to speak.)
Rules for posting Another’s poem:
Yes, I understand this might be seen as something of a radical idea, but if the poem is published, either here, elsewhere on the web, or in a book, the author has submitted for public scrutiny and as such, their work is fair game. SO:
Rule One: This is NOT an opportunity for you to drag in your personal dislike for poet so and so and rip into their poem. See the rules on critiquing above. Be prepared to explain your choice of poetry and back it up as you would a critiquing of the poem itself.
Rule Two: If the poem is from a Lit member you should contact them and explain that their poem is being examined in this thread. You might suggest that they read this post first so they understand what they might be reading more of. Clearly, I do not expect people to pick Lit authors at random and start doing heavy critique’s of their work, but if you’re going to, show enough respect to let them know what you are doing.
Rule Three: If you are not the author of the poem, the author has the right to respond as soon as the author deems it appropriate. In this way, authors need not wait the week.
Rule Four: NO PLAGIARISM Sounds self explanatory to me, but just to clarify, you must show the author’s name in the post, preferably after the title at the top of the post. Supply a link if the poem can be found on the Web, or cite the source if the poem is from a book.
Now, granted, poetry reviews can continue anywhere else, and please, do continue them. This thread just applies some specific rules to the process, and expects a certain level of analysis that might be a bit to much for the newbie to want to handle. Again, if this appears too redundant I’ll let it die that slow death down the forum.
(This is an extension of an idea originally suggested by SeattleRain in her “Interact” thread (but she had no idea this was gonna come of it))
HomerPindar
[Edited 3-16-04 to correct the "Suggested Note" as mentioned by /Ice]
) I’m going to suggest a third important aspect to being a poet; learning to critique poetry. This means not just reading poetry, but dissecting it, understanding what makes, or breaks, the poem and learning how to express your opinions in a constructive critique.To wit, Critical Mass. Now, to carry this idea, I’ve consider some rules by which we should all play along. By all means, critique the rules. If the thread devolves into a rules critique over a poetry critique I’ll consider the idea to have failed miserably and let it die its slow creeping death down the forum thread list. On the other hand, I withhold the right to edit this post alone in this thread to update any rule changes that might be agreed upon.
The rules to critiquing:
Rule One: CONSTRUCTIVE criticism I had considered calling this thread “No compliments” but decided that no, critiques cover the “good” as well as the “bad.” Yet, we don’t want “I really liked such and such” or “That sucked.” Explain yourself, in detail, backing up your argument from the posted poem as needed.
A Suggested Note here: Avoid using words such as “like,” “nice,” “good,” or “bad.” These tend to get over used without actually supplying any information. If it works, explain how. If it makes you feel, explain what it made you feel. If it sucked, be specific about what doesn’t work.
Rule Two: Comments are on the poem only. There is no need to comment on the poet at any time. Critique what is posted, not some opinion you might have of the author, or sonnets for that matter. If you don’t like the form of the poem, tough cookies, skip the review of that poem if you can’t get over your personal taste.
Rule Three: No Editing Your Posts! Be willing to back up what you say, or don’t post it. (A third option is to accept that you were wrong and be mature enough to post that you were wrong.) Remember, you are posting on someone's poetry, that deserves the consideration it takes to reread your own posts and decide if what you post is what you meant to say.
Rules for posting your own poetry:
Rule One: Just the Poem! No explanations, notes, or sidelines. JUST THE POEM. If it can’t stand on it’s own, consider the poem incomplete, and go back to editing.
Rule Two: When posting your own poetry you cannot comment on the critiques for one week. That’s seven days of silence (ok, while I can’t keep anyone from using PM’s, I highly recommend and urge folks to refrain from posting PM’s about the critiques). Let people answer each others questions, in a round table poetry review (from which these rules are being lifted) such insight is often the most constructive way of seeing how other people see your poetry. Don’t ruin this chance to read what people think. Afterwards, feel free to comment on your review to date and as further reviews come up.
Rule Three: One of your own poems at a time. You can, and are encouraged, to help critique other poems. Since this isn’t a round table, we don’t have to worry about folks all talking at once. So, multiple poems can be reviewed at one time, so long as it is from multiple authors. (If too many poems are on the chopping block at any one time feel free to speak up and suggest that a hold be put on further poems being posted. Seeing as this is meant to be serious, hard-core type of critiquing, I don’t foresee people lining up to drop their work on the chopping block, so to speak.)
Rules for posting Another’s poem:
Yes, I understand this might be seen as something of a radical idea, but if the poem is published, either here, elsewhere on the web, or in a book, the author has submitted for public scrutiny and as such, their work is fair game. SO:
Rule One: This is NOT an opportunity for you to drag in your personal dislike for poet so and so and rip into their poem. See the rules on critiquing above. Be prepared to explain your choice of poetry and back it up as you would a critiquing of the poem itself.
Rule Two: If the poem is from a Lit member you should contact them and explain that their poem is being examined in this thread. You might suggest that they read this post first so they understand what they might be reading more of. Clearly, I do not expect people to pick Lit authors at random and start doing heavy critique’s of their work, but if you’re going to, show enough respect to let them know what you are doing.
Rule Three: If you are not the author of the poem, the author has the right to respond as soon as the author deems it appropriate. In this way, authors need not wait the week.
Rule Four: NO PLAGIARISM Sounds self explanatory to me, but just to clarify, you must show the author’s name in the post, preferably after the title at the top of the post. Supply a link if the poem can be found on the Web, or cite the source if the poem is from a book.
Now, granted, poetry reviews can continue anywhere else, and please, do continue them. This thread just applies some specific rules to the process, and expects a certain level of analysis that might be a bit to much for the newbie to want to handle. Again, if this appears too redundant I’ll let it die that slow death down the forum.
(This is an extension of an idea originally suggested by SeattleRain in her “Interact” thread (but she had no idea this was gonna come of it
))HomerPindar
[Edited 3-16-04 to correct the "Suggested Note" as mentioned by /Ice]
Last edited:
