Feedback, please

Picodiribibi

Really Experienced
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Posts
223
Morning Coffee

Black girls always make it right.
White girls--as a rule, it seems--​
make a bitter cup of coffee:​
it's more than a lack​
of sugar; it's also the lightness of cream...​

Perhaps they always make it right
because they know the acid bite​
of something Black​
passed off as​
something White.​
 
Picodiribibi said:
Morning Coffee

Black girls always make it right.
White girls--as a rule, it seems--​
make a bitter cup of coffee:​
it's more than <Strike>a</S> lack​
of sugar; it's also <Strike>the</S> lightness of cream...​

Perhaps they always make it right
because they know the acid bite​
of something Black​
passed off as​
something White.​

I like the way it operates on two levels of meaning. I'd take out a few words that seem unnecessary to me (see my suggested revisions). I also wonder ifmaybe your parenthetical "as a rule, it seems" would work better with parentheses than dashes. The only other thing that really caught my attention is the ellipsis points. I'm not sure they're ging you anything there; maybe a period would be enough.

It also struck me this would work well as an illustrated piece. I gat most of my photos for illustrated poems from The StockXchange. Most of the photographs there can be used for noncommercial purpuses with no charge or penalty.

Thanks for sharing. :)

oops! Strikethrough code doesn't work here, I guess. But those words I surrounded with the <Strike> code are the ones I'd delete. Just my opinion, of course. If you agree great, if not, no worries.
 
Last edited:
Morning Coffee

Black girls always make it right.
White girls (as a rule, it seems)​
make a bitter cup of coffee:​
it's more than lack​
of sugar; it's very light on cream.​

Perhaps they always make it right
because they know the acid bite​
of something Black​
passed off as​
something White.​

I think you made some great suggestions, Angeline. Thank you. I agree that this would make a good illustrated poem (thanks for the website); as soon as I get the chance, I'll play around in Photoshop a bit and see what comes out.
 
Picodiribibi said:
Morning Coffee

Black girls always make it right.
White girls (as a rule, it seems)​
make a bitter cup of coffee:​
it's more than lack​
of sugar; it's very light on cream.​

Perhaps they always make it right
because they know the acid bite​
of something Black​
passed off as​
something White.​

I think you made some great suggestions, Angeline. Thank you. I agree that this would make a good illustrated poem (thanks for the website); as soon as I get the chance, I'll play around in Photoshop a bit and see what comes out.

Glad you find them helpful.

And I hope you were able to resolve submission of the poem we talked about yesterday. I'm really enjoying reading your poems here.
 
A distant view of the format of the text (titled "Morning coffee") could easily induce a mistaken impression that the text is related to poetry. A closer examination dispels such a notion thoroughly, leaving the reader with a trivial and boring author's exercise in a clumsy and unoriginal play with the black-white-coffe-girl words. The potential of this words & images combination was totally wasted in the given text..

The phrases are awful:

-- always make it right
-- as a rule, it seems
-- it's more than a lack of...
-- Perhaps they always make it right
-- because they know the...
-- of something
-- passed off as / something

That's more than half of this text. The rest is not inspiring either: Black Girls, White Girls, bitter coffee, and that routine, Literotica so-great discovery (read: "a common, old cliche") about "lightness of cream..." -- oh, how erotic (yeah, terribly erotic :)).

In a poem, every element should contribute to poetry; in particular every word should contribute to poetry. And here we have but funny format (graphical outlay) and zero poetry.

You cannot take a trivial, worn out notions, without any observations of your own, without anything specific, unique to a given situation, and pass it for poetry. Poetry is not that trivial and cheap.

Don't try to impress your readers with your thinking. You can't. Instead, provide the readers with a very concrete material, and let them think. Leave thinking to readers.
 
I'm rather jealous, Pico

You already have received a signature SJ review. I've always kind of craved one and never received it.

He is blunt. Rude, even. Get over that. He does have much to offer. My suggestion would be to think about his criticisms (once you've separated out the initial emotional reaction to them that most everybody has), and then dump the whole thing.

The guy does make points. I'd pay some attention to them.

He's also kind of fun to tease. Too serious by half.

I liked your poem, by the way. I think Angie said what I might say.

That swirly poem was cool. I liked that one too.

Uh, that's all for now.
 
Tzara said:
You already have received a signature SJ review. I've always kind of craved one and never received it.

He is blunt. Rude, even. Get over that. He does have much to offer. My suggestion would be to think about his criticisms (once you've separated out the initial emotional reaction to them that most everybody has), and then dump the whole thing.

The guy does make points. I'd pay some attention to them.

He's also kind of fun to tease. Too serious by half.

I liked your poem, by the way. I think Angie said what I might say.

That swirly poem was cool. I liked that one too.

Uh, that's all for now.

And you said what I thought. One thing I have learned with Senna over the years is that he won't bother with a critique if he doesn't think there's potential. I may not agree with him on every point he makes, but he gives better feedback than anyone I've ever known. His advice about cutting out excess language that doesn't add to a poem is spot on.
 
Negative criticism is encouraged. I wouldn't have asked for feedback if I only wanted praise.

Everything Senna says is fair. If I understand him correctly, he's reminding me that writing poetry is, first and foremost, an exercise in originality. Cliches and unnecessary words are revealing of a work's lack of original substance and will undermine the reaction a reader has to that work. Point taken.
I don't fault him, btw, for refusing to recognize a work that falls short of being original as poetry; I like high standards :)

SJ said:
Don't try to impress your readers with your thinking. You can't. Instead, provide the readers with a very concrete material, and let them think. Leave thinking to readers.

I'm left with very good advice. I'll try to keep it in mind as I work on improving my writing.

Thank you all for your input.
 
Well, since today I am designated reviewer I find that I can't take my commentator's hat off. So I'll add my two cents here.

I think this

Senna Jawa said:
Don't try to impress your readers with your thinking. You can't. Instead, provide the readers with a very concrete material, and let them think. Leave thinking to readers.

is the worst advice that could ever be given to a poet — second only to the keep-it-simple-stupid advice. A poet is an artist, and is obliged to think and feel to the full extent of his or her abilities, the greater the better. Please try to impress, and never, ever think that readers are there to supply the deficit of your thoughtless productions. Be passionate, and think!

What is wrong with the poem of this thread is that it evinces next to no serious thought at all. But that is par for modern shaped poems. Mostly they are minor reflections in pictorial form. Pico's poem is a representaive of that class: a rather trite (and probably false) observation, dressed up typographically.

I also disagree with the advice about how to improve this poem. I don't think it is improved by leaving out words. It is improved only by scrapping it and starting again, with something interesting.
 
Picodiribibi said:
Everything Senna says is fair.
You're so nice, thank you.
If I understand him correctly, he's reminding me that writing poetry is, first and foremost, an exercise in originality.
A short comment can only signal certain concepts, ideas, approach, etc. Actually, never worry about originality per se. When an author tries to be original then s/he ends up being superficial. Instead, be always authentic. Say concrete things, your own, and limit yourself to the relevant concrete details, etc., so that they acquire symbolic potential (a symbolic meaning). And, again, don't concentrate on the symbolic level but on the down to the Earth level! The symbolic meaning will happen then on its own, in a way which will be different for different readers (depending on their experience, sophistication, education, anxieties, temperament...). Don't try to control the higher level of the meaning of your poem. Leave it to the poetry, to the readers. Thus my message is: be authentic (and then the originality will happen on its own, as a bonus). Also, synchronize and harmonize the flow of your poem (its story) with the artistic means. Once again, you will achieve an original effect in one more dimension--in the technical dimension.
Cliches and unnecessary words are revealing of a work's lack of original substance and will undermine the reaction a reader has to that work. Point taken.
"Substance" is the key word. Poetry is not easy. But when it comes to readers, you never know. I simply do not care for the majority of readers. We are not living in times of a wide spread poetic culture, as it was in the past centuries in some parts of the globe. There used to be folk poetry on one hand, and on the other hand, poetry was a big part of education. On the top of it, poetry didn't have so much competition in the entertainment world. These days we have movies, tv shows, mtv, ... Everybody feels entitled to have an opinion about poetry but relatively few people have a good reason to have one :).

Let me add a few words about thinking in poetry. Author's intelligence is a great asset. However, your thinking should be completely hidden in the background. It does NOT take any intelligence to spill some explicit thinking into a poem. It takes profound, artistic wisdom to keep your own thinking behind the scenes, and to induce the reader into her/his own thinking. You risk this way. Your reader may have ideas very different from those which you intended. That's fine! Don't tell the reader what s/he should think, what should be her/his views, etc. Do not offer any opinions. A mature poet doesn't even need to have any intended for reader opinion.

Best regards, good luck,

Senna Jawa
 
Last edited:
Senna Jawa said:
You're so nice, thank you.
A short comment can only signal certain concepts, ideas, approach, etc. Actually, never worry about originality per se. When an author tries to be original then s/he ends up being superficial. Instead, be always authentic. Say concrete things, your own, and limit yourself to the relevant concrete details, etc., so that they acquire symbolic potential (a symbolic meaning). And, again, don't concentrate on the symbolic level but on the down to the Earth level! The symbolic meaning will happen then on its own, in a way which will be different for different readers (depending on their experience, sophistication, education, anxieties, temperament...). Don't try to control the higher level of the meaning of your poem. Leave it to the poetry, to the readers. Thus my message is: be authentic (and then the originality will happen on its own, as a bonus). Also, synchronize and harmonize the flow of your poem (it's story) with the artistic means. Once again, you will achieve an original effect in one more dimension--in the technical dimension.

quote - Cliches and unnecessary words are revealing of a work's lack of original substance and will undermine the reaction a reader has to that work. Point taken.

quote - "Substance" is the key word. Poetry is not easy. But when it comes to readers, you never know. I simply do not care for the majority of readers. We are not living in times of a wide spread poetic culture, as it was in the past centuries in some parts of the globe. There used to be folk poetry on one hand, and on the other hand, poetry was a big part of education. On the top of it, poetry didn't have so much competition in the entertainment world. These days we have movies, tv shows, mtv, ... Everybody feels entitled to have an opinion about poetry but relatively few people have a good reason to have one :).

Let me add a few words about thinking in poetry. Author's intelligence is a great asset. However, your thinking should be completely hidden in the background. It does NOT take any intelligence to spill some explicit thinking into a poem. It takes profound, artistic wisdom to keep your own thinking behind the scenes, and to induce the reader into her/his own thinking. You risk this way. Your reader may have ideas very different from those which you intended. That's fine! Don't tell the reader what s/he should think, what should be her/his views, etc. Do not offer any opinions. A mature poet doesn't even need to have any intended for reader opinion.

Best regards, good luck,

Senna Jawa

i think this post is so very full of great advice, i don't know what to reread first.

so i will read it over and over, the whole thing.
 
Eluard said:
Actually, thinking is something else. But sure, feel free to use "thinking" as a figure of speech.
A poet is an artist
No kidding.
and is obliged to think and feel to the full extent of his or her abilities, the greater the better.
No kidding.
Please try to impress, and never, ever think that readers are there to supply the deficit of your thoughtless productions. Be passionate, and think!
It would not hurt if you decided to think also when you participate in a discussion. Try it one day (after eating enough of the fish heads).
a rather trite (and probably false) observation, dressed up typographically.
If my comment was "the worst" then why are you repeating what I said? Oh, never mind, skip answering my question. :)
I also disagree with the advice about how to improve this poem. I don't think it is improved by leaving out words.
And whom are you disagreeing with? Never mind. You may skip this question too.

Communication between participants of a discussion is possible only when they have good will to understand each other. Otherwise the whole exercise is stupid (you have provided an excellent illustration--thank you).

The bidding stage of the game of bridge provides a metaphor for communication. The participants of a discussion should be partners, not opponents. The communication/bidding process is possible only when partners trust each other, when they trust that the other one makes sense. That allows a high level of bidding. In a paradoxical situation, a player should NOT think that her/his partner is stupid. On the contrary, such a situation provides a chance for an extraordinarily sharp bidding.

You act like those ignorant players who can offer their partners nothing but epithets. Such thoughtless acting does not cost you a penny or anything on this Lit forum, so you can do it without any responsibility. (You do lose your face, but who cares).
 
Last edited:
Senna Jawa said:
Actually, thinking is something else. But sure, feel free to use "thinking" as a figure of speech.
No kidding.
No kidding.
It would not hurt if you decided to think also when you participate in a discussion. Try it one day (after eating enough of the fish heads).
If my comment was "the worst" then why are you repeating what I said? Oh, never mind, skip answering my question :)
And whom are you disagreeing with? Never mind. You may skip this question too.

Communication between participants of a discussion is possible only when they have good will to understand each other. Otherwise the whole exercise is stupid (you have provided an excellent illustration--thank you).

The bidding stage of the game of bridge provides a metaphor for communication. The participants of a discussion should be partners, not opponents. The communication/bidding process is possible only when partners trust each other, when they trust that the other one makes sense. That allows a high level of bidding. In a paradoxical situation, a player should NOT think that her/his partner is stupid. On the contrary, such a situation provides a chance for an extraordinarily sharp bidding.

You act like those ignorant players who can offer their partners nothing but epithets. Such thoughtless acting does not cost you any money or anything on this Lit forum, so you can do it without any responsibility. (You do lose your face, but who cares).

You are the kind of pompous, ridiculous know nothing who does a great deal of harm on forums by making absurd pronouncements on subjects that you, very clearly, know nothing about. Your comment on this thread is a case in point. You may have gulled a few people here into pretending that your rudeness encapsulates a special wisdom but I am not one of them. I can spot a camp fraud a mile away.

Your 'don't try to impress with your intelligence' remark was clearly one that you've taken to heart — because I see nothing in you to be impressed by. And really, try giving your advice in a real-world situation where you can see the look of disappointment and derision forming on the faces of your listeners — it is the kind of reality-check that you desperately need.
 
And hey, instead of your petulant response to my disagreement with you, what you could have said was: "Sorry, I expressed myself like a complete fuckwit before — what I really meant, and should have said, if I wasn't so intoxicated by the sound of my own voice, was this…"


Senna Jawa said:
Let me add a few words about thinking in poetry. Author's intelligence is a great asset. However, your thinking should be completely hidden in the background. It does NOT take any intelligence to spill some explicit thinking into a poem. It takes profound, artistic wisdom to keep your own thinking behind the scenes, and to induce the reader into her/his own thinking. You risk this way. Your reader may have ideas very different from those which you intended. That's fine! Don't tell the reader what s/he should think, what should be her/his views, etc. Do not offer any opinions. A mature poet doesn't even need to have any intended for reader opinion.

And if you had, I would not have thought that you were a complete idiot — just, say, 75%.
 
[threadjack]

if this new . . . discussion . . . is too continue, it probably should be continued on it's own thread.

to do it here is not fair to the thread's starter, who asked for feedback on a poem, not a fight.

[/threadjack]
 
Eluard said:
Well, since today I am designated reviewer I find that I can't take my commentator's hat off. So I'll add my two cents here.

I think this



is the worst advice that could ever be given to a poet — second only to the keep-it-simple-stupid advice. A poet is an artist, and is obliged to think and feel to the full extent of his or her abilities, the greater the better. Please try to impress, and never, ever think that readers are there to supply the deficit of your thoughtless productions. Be passionate, and think!

What is wrong with the poem of this thread is that it evinces next to no serious thought at all. But that is par for modern shaped poems. Mostly they are minor reflections in pictorial form. Pico's poem is a representaive of that class: a rather trite (and probably false) observation, dressed up typographically.

I also disagree with the advice about how to improve this poem. I don't think it is improved by leaving out words. It is improved only by scrapping it and starting again, with something interesting.

One thing you'll find about SJ... He does not like poetry as much as he likes calling a poem 'pathetic' in public (rather than sending feedback). I personally did not like the poem. but I 'unlike' SJ try and try to be kind when saying so... SJ likes being the 'rude' critic. Probably nothing more than his piss-poor personallity pouring out in his words. So, just ignore his un-helpfull advice.
 
My Erotic Trail said:
One thing you'll find about SJ... He does not like poetry as much as he likes calling a poem 'pathetic' in public (rather than sending feedback). I personally did not like the poem. but I 'unlike' SJ try and try to be kind when saying so... SJ likes being the 'rude' critic. Probably nothing more than his piss-poor personallity pouring out in his words. So, just ignore his un-helpfull advice.

Yes, I had the same reaction to the poem of this thread too — and like you thought that if I couldn't say anything nice that I wouldn't say anything at all. I responded only because I thought Pico might take the original advice — and that this would be rather bad for her (or his, who the hell knows around here!) future development as a poet.
 
Eluard said:
Yes, I had the same reaction to the poem of this thread too — and like you thought that if I couldn't say anything nice that I wouldn't say anything at all. I responded only because I thought Pico might take the original advice — and that this would be rather bad for her (or his, who the hell knows around here!) future development as a poet.

What SJ does... speaks so loud that
I cannot hear what She says.
 
TheRainMan said:
[threadjack]

if this new . . . discussion . . . is too continue, it probably should be continued on it's own thread.

to do it here is not fair to the thread's starter, who asked for feedback on a poem, not a fight.

[/threadjack]

Fair point.
 
I'm no critic, but as a reader, I like the flow and the idea. When read aloud, it feels very lyrical coming off the lips.

I think you did a great job on it. But again, I'm on here for the first time....so take it as you will.
 
Picodiribibi said:
Negative criticism is encouraged. I wouldn't have asked for feedback if I only wanted praise.

Everything Senna says is fair. If I understand him correctly, he's reminding me that writing poetry is, first and foremost, an exercise in originality. Cliches and unnecessary words are revealing of a work's lack of original substance and will undermine the reaction a reader has to that work. Point taken.
I don't fault him, btw, for refusing to recognize a work that falls short of being original as poetry; I like high standards :)



I'm left with very good advice. I'll try to keep it in mind as I work on improving my writing.

Thank you all for your input.

You have the perfect attitude about feedback in my opinion. Good on you. Take what works, discard what doesn't and ignore the personal stuff. Senna is who he is. He's honest. I actually prefer honesty that may include personal criticism over passive-aggressive, snarky digs hidden behind the guise of "helping." I've seen a lot of that here.
 
Eluard said:
I think this
[what Senna said]
is the worst advice that could ever be given to a poet — second only to the keep-it-simple-stupid advice. A poet is an artist, and is obliged to think and feel to the full extent of his or her abilities, the greater the better. Please try to impress, and never, ever think that readers are there to supply the deficit of your thoughtless productions. Be passionate, and think!

I think you might agree, Eluard, that the worst advice that could ever be given to a poet is "stop writing."

I appreciate what you're saying though. I think you're both right: a poet has an obligation to himself and his audience. Now, stop fighting, you two. :)
Eluard said:
What is wrong with the poem of this thread is that it evinces next to no serious thought at all. But that is par for modern shaped poems. Mostly they are minor reflections in pictorial form. Pico's poem is a representaive of that class: a rather trite (and probably false) observation, dressed up typographically.

I also disagree with the advice about how to improve this poem. I don't think it is improved by leaving out words. It is improved only by scrapping it and starting again, with something interesting.

I hear what you're saying here. I think there was an idea there, but perhaps I tried to do too much with it. Oh well, there's always the next one. And maybe I'll come back to this one with fresh eyes someday.

Thanks, again, for your insight. It's all been very helpful.
 
To Picodiribibi:

i know i'm repeating what Angeline said, but it's worth repeating.

your attitude in regards to the feedback on your writing is outstanding.

any writer who takes feedback personally, who thinks it is directed at them and not the poem, simply does not get it.

you get it. :)
 
Back
Top