Enjoyment from poetry - writers vs readers

[Chicklet]

okay

i've gotten quite a few very negative feedbacks about my poetry, people writing to tell me it's shit, that my style sucks, that i don't make any sense, that i just keep producing crap. you know what? I enjoy writing it, crap or not.

Question to the real poets out there:

What's more important? The enjoyment you get out of your writing, or the enjoyment the readers get? Should I keep going, whether it's taken well or not, or should I keep it to myself? Well, maybe not what *I* should do, since I will keep posting as long as I enjoy it, but what would you do?

-Chicklet

 

[HomerPindar]

okay

i've gotten quite a few very negative feedbacks about my poetry, people writing to tell me it's shit, that my style sucks, that i don't make any sense, that i just keep producing crap. you know what? I enjoy writing it, crap or not.

Question to the real poets out there:

I'm an artificial poet (just add water) does that count any?

What's more important? The enjoyment you get out of your writing, or the enjoyment the readers get? Should I keep going, whether it's taken well or not, or should I keep it to myself? Well, maybe not what *I* should do, since I will keep posting as long as I enjoy it, but what would you do?

-Chicklet

Well, this is sure to stir up quite the debate amongst this crew. I'm not familiar enough with your poetry to offer any insight, but if you like and think it'll help a wit, I'm willing to give it shot. Although, I suggest holding out for the real editors around here, Angeline, Eve, Lauren, KM or (if we're really lucky) Judo ... ok ok, I flattering the ladies. shees...anyhoot,

So far as what you should do - life is short, enjoy it. If that means sitting on the crapper watching Three's Company reruns, so be it. If, on the other hand, it means working at writing, then so be it.


HomerPindar

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Interesting questions.

My rule in life:
- Don't do anything you don't want to do.

If you don't like what you're writing, stop. Simple. If you feel like you have to write something you don't like in order to be appreciated, you're only tricking yourself and wasting your readers' time.

The way to deal with negative feedback can only be one, in my view. Try to understand the reasons behind it. Look for help, post your poems here if you feel confortable asking for vicious feedback, but try to really understand what your critics are talking about. Learn. Once you understand the arguments, you are at total liberty to dismiss your critics and keep on writing the way you want, because you'll be knowing exactly what you're doing and making a conscious decision of what is best for you, or you can incorporate what you've learned in your work, if you recognize the critiques' validity.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I'm only kidding about that whole "vicious feedback" thing. Mostly.

 

[HomerPindar]

I'm only kidding about that whole "vicious feedback" thing. Mostly.

This from the lady holding the gun


HomerPindar

 

[Shotokan07]

Addition to what Laur has said, I personally like how emotions play into the poems. Sometimes when you write poems, you tend to have a specific mood which only you can feel. So if you're attacked by a vicious feedback, you have the authority of how you want to treat it. I don't write many poems, nor do I dislike them. I only write them my moods enforces me to do so.

~Cheers

 

[Shotokan07]

This from the lady holding the gun


HomerPindar

Haha, be careful. She already has the safety off... Most likely because I'm here

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Addition to what Laur has said, I personally like how emotions play into the poems. Sometimes when you write poems, you tend to have a specific mood which only you can feel. So if you're attacked by a vicious feedback, you have the authority of how you want to treat it. I don't write many poems, nor do I dislike them. I only write them my moods enforces me to do so.

~Cheers

Actually, I think that's part of the problem. Poetry can't require specific moods or empathies from the readers to be "good" or understood. If emotions play any part in poetry, they should always be provoked by the poem, not required by it. A successful poem should lead the reader into the mindframe(s) intended by the author or otherwise derived from the poem, not be only accessible to those who already are in that mindframe.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Haha, be careful. She already has the safety off... Most likely because I'm here

Careful, Mr.

 

[lickmyboot]

Actually, I think that's part of the problem. Poetry can't require specific moods or empathies from the readers to be "good" or understood. If emotions play any part in poetry, they should always be provoked by the poem, not required by it. A successful poem should lead the reader into the mindframe(s) intended by the author or otherwise derived from the poem, not be only accessible to those who already are in that mindframe.

I would tend to agree with you LH. I rather like to think of poetry as a snapshot of what the poet was experiencing at the very moment that inspired the poem. That being said, I enjoy it more when the poet leaves the poem open for interpretation rather than spelling everything out for me in black and white. Maybe that's where Chicklet's criticism is stemming from. After exploring a few of her poems, I would like to see something less literal and more subtle from her. An exercise for all of us perhaps?

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I would tend to agree with you LH.

That would be because I'm always right, not because of the gun.

 

[lickmyboot]

That would be because I'm always right, not because of the gun.

Well that and the fact I can't resist your cute bum.

 

[WickedEve]

What's more important? The enjoyment you get out of your writing, or the enjoyment the readers get?

I always enjoy what I write but I never once forget that I write for an audience. Occasionally, I'll keep one version of a poem for myself and submit another version for the readers. I aim to please.

 

[Angeline]

It's all about purpose

I personally would do what I love, but a poem needs to appeal to its intended audience like any writing. So I know if I use the standard conventions of the genre--metaphorical language, imagery, rhythmic construction, and so on, I write better poems.

As a reader I want a poem to move me--I want it to evoke whatever it means to through those conventions. If I'm not doing that as a writer, I know I'm not reaching readers. And why share writing with anyone if you know it's not communicating?

One of the hardest things for me to learn as a poet--and I think this is because I've worked as an editor, always trying to make writing clear and straightforward--has been that poems need to show with poetic conventions, not explain in the conventional sense. That is very different from prose--even moody, evocative prose--because even there you mostly need to be straightforward.

Learning to write more subjectively, subtly--to convey without explaining--is what the craft of poetry is all about. And like anything, if you read about the process, read poetry, and then practice, you get better at it. This is how a person gets taken more seriously as a poet.

Feedback, I'd learn from and not worry about the nasty factor--some people have to make themselves feel good by beating on you. We all get that. Personally, I tend to ignore any feedback that isn't explained. If someone can't tell me *why* my poem is crap, they probably don't know what they're saying.

 

[OT]

RE: What's more important -- readers or writing

Writing without readers is akin to cooking without eating.

There's a work-place saying that goes something like:
One Oh-Shit , wipes out ten atta-boys.

I think the opposite is true for feedback.
One woo-hoo easily wipes out ten crap-sayers.

Listen to the sayers of crap, and then either take their advice or not.
Whatever you do, do on purpose.

 

[KillerMuffin]

I write for myself, but I write to readers. When I put up anything for public consumption, it's something that I've written that I hope will please my Reader. Some readers like it, some don't. But my goal is to please the reader when I write for public.

Sometimes I write for myself. I write stuff that's from the heart and has heavy meaning to me. I don't share that because I've written it to myself. I've written stuff to the StudMuffin. I've shared it only with him. I share my work with the audience I've written it for.

I write to please myself. I publish to please my readers. To do anything else is unthinkable.

That said, considering the other reports I've heard from others in the contest you've been compared to, I think most of your hate mail in the poetry realm comes from one person who wants you to quit. One thing to look for when it comes to feedback is what do they get out of it? Answer that and you'll know what to do.

 

[Chris_R_O]

I would keep writing. I suggest you do so as well. And keep posting if you wish. Unless you are using a specific style for your poetry, you can't do it wrong. Your putting emotions and thoughts down, your trying to express them to others. Many may not understand, but some will. I personally like poetry I do not at first understand, I like to study it and try to feel what the poet felt, try to see what they saw. It's true that a lot of good poetry guides the reader, but I do not think that is a requirement to make it good. Bad reviews are diappointing but try not to take them so hard, write for yourself and write for those who WILL understand. And do try to learn from the criticism, as was perviously said, that's good advice.


Chris_R_O

 

[Guest]

I thought about this for quite a bit before posting.

When I came to Lit it was with writing stories in mind. I've written poetry for ever but never "put it out there".

After a bit I submitted some and was pleased to see them in print - as it were,

In all honesty, I write for myself. I love getting feed back of any kind but I never look at my "stats" - how many points, how many readers or how many votes. In fact - I'm seldom in my profile area unless it's to do an update or to submit.

My ego likes to know someone's read and enjoyed a piece but I'd still write anyway.


Keep writing....the readers are out there. oh, and read other's work too. vote and send feed back because everyone likes it.

 

[Shotokan07]

Actually, I think that's part of the problem. Poetry can't require specific moods or empathies from the readers to be "good" or understood. If emotions play any part in poetry, they should always be provoked by the poem, not required by it. A successful poem should lead the reader into the mindframe(s) intended by the author or otherwise derived from the poem, not be only accessible to those who already are in that mindframe.

Hey you said it Missy, I just write them. You be the critique altho I'd want you to be doing other things.

 

[Senna Jawa]

writer-reader team: dummy is not permitted to offer any advice or comment on the game

What I will write below addresses both the poetry and the prose.

The perception that there is any reader-writer conflict is due to a misunderstanding. In fact writer and reader form a team like a pair of bridge players. Both have to understand the game, both have to play by the rules. Also, the writer is the one who chooses the conventions.

The first rule is that the writer, like a bridge player, is not suppossed to whisper to the reader directly or kick the reader under the table. Artistically this means that the author is allowed only to convey images, sounds and other objective, external, sensory signals and data. That's all. (This means that those images etc have to hold water). The reader's duty is to recreate the images etc. That's all. (If the images etc. do not hold water than the reader has a right to call the writer all the names by which bridge players lovingly call their partners).

While the writer has the initiative during the bidding, during the play the writer is the dummy and the reader is the "declarer", is the one who actually scores the tricks..

Remember:

        Dummy is not permitted to offer
        any advice or comment on the play

(I have lifted this phrase from a bridge page).

A time ago I have compared a poem to a bridge--an engineering construction, not a card game. I said that the actual text of the poem should have only the very lowest parts of the bridge, that the author is not allowed to talk about the top of the bridge. That would be like a bridge player illegally talking about the cards during the bidding or a dummy giving advice to the declarer.

That's all, it is that simple. Now you have no excuse.

 

[Senna Jawa]

Re: writer-reader team: dummy is not permitted to offer any advice or comment on the game

A time ago I have compared a poem to a bridge--an engineering construction, not a card game.

Actually, I have introduced the bridge-card game metaphor still years before I have introduced the one with the bridge-engineering construction.

 

[Cloudbrst9]

okay

i've gotten quite a few very negative feedbacks about my poetry, people writing to tell me it's shit, that my style sucks, that i don't make any sense, that i just keep producing crap. you know what? I enjoy writing it, crap or not.

Question to the real poets out there:

What's more important? The enjoyment you get out of your writing, or the enjoyment the readers get? Should I keep going, whether it's taken well or not, or should I keep it to myself? Well, maybe not what *I* should do, since I will keep posting as long as I enjoy it, but what would you do?

-Chicklet

_______________________________

All is life looking to be discovered. Poetry is the subtlest method of its discovery. You are the discoverer, you are the seeker. Others are those who help you to discover.

Are you ready to learn how others may help you to discover your life? If so, put it out there, but be aware that they may not be of your mien. If there are those not as you hoped for, learn to cull them, to find what is useful.

Poetry, IMHO, is the fertilizer of the knowledge of Life. However, as with most fertilizer, it is 99+% inert material. So, then, would be most critisism. Still and all, the good must be surrounded by the inert, else how would one recognize the good that stands out like a beacon?

Write on, unless it troubles your soul too much.

cb9

 

[HomerPindar]

I just got email today from someone (who, sadly, did not identify themselves) that they liked my writing, in particular Chocolate You poem. While I would have prefered to be able to open a line of communication with the reader, this one line, four word response, help cheer up my day.

Mind you, I'd'a asked "So, what do you like about it?" so I know what works...but hey, something's better than nothin...

HomerPindar

 

[anonamouse]

Interesting questions.

My rule in life:
- Don't do anything you don't want to do.

If you don't like what you're writing, stop. Simple. If you feel like you have to write something you don't like in order to be appreciated, you're only tricking yourself and wasting your readers' time.

The way to deal with negative feedback can only be one, in my view. Try to understand the reasons behind it. Look for help, post your poems here if you feel confortable asking for vicious feedback, but try to really understand what your critics are talking about. Learn. Once you understand the arguments, you are at total liberty to dismiss your critics and keep on writing the way you want, because you'll be knowing exactly what you're doing and making a conscious decision of what is best for you, or you can incorporate what you've learned in your work, if you recognize the critiques' validity.

Three... blasts from the past

 

[dcpoet44]

Maybe I can provide a different type of insight to this. When I first started to write, I wasn't very good at all. Quite frankly, I was a very weak writer, but I wanted to be a writer. Writing takes muscle and it takes nerves of steel especially when wanting feedback. From what I saw as to what you wrote, I related to very aspects as to it not making sense. It took me a long time to get a focus. Sometimes just starting out, one can be all over the place. It is hard to say how much reading you have done as to other poets and such, For instance, when I started to read poets, I read the classics, then I got into contemporary stuff. Here I was trying to gobble all of it all at once. It takes time. Also, one has to be receptive to negative feedback. I get it from time to time. And when I first started to send stuff out to publishers I'd get rejected, but it didn't stop me. The thing is one has to decide whether it is worth the negative feedback to get better. It takes time to develop a voice. But if you want to succeed, you've got to swallow the pill to build your skills. Just keep this in mind - great writers wrote shitty stuff too. I hope that has been somewhat helpful....Don