The new hierarchy?

[twelveoone]

While it is fine to like something and not have a reason for it, that is a personal value judgment, but as soon as A becomes better than B, you best have a list of specific reasons.

The implied reasons:
1.) on my say so
2.) "everybody" recognizes A as being better.
are delusional, invalid, and can be counterproductive.

without going into specifics...but if you do want to set up a hierarchy, (as was tried and done in the past) do so here, in the open, where I will have get pleasure in tearing it to pieces.

till then
namaste

 

[bronzeage]

Why would anyone need a list of specific reasons?

The only time a personal judgment needs to be explained or defended is when trying to convince another person that the judgment is correct or valid. This takes it out of the realm of logic and into salesmanship.

 

[butters]

*pulls up a chair, opens the popcorn*

 

[twelveoone]

Why would anyone need a list of specific reasons?

The only time a personal judgment needs to be explained or defended is when trying to convince another person that the judgment is correct or valid. This takes it out of the realm of logic and into salesmanship.

Bingo!
An elaboration, in some cases, it is just an error in judgment, in others I'm not so sure. I've been here a while, seen it done so many times, so many ways, been called a lot of names.

 

[butters]

i don't give two figs for heirarchy - if i like it, i like it, and will say why. it's up to others to agree or disagree as they choose. it does bug me, though, if people can't say why they do or don't like something. ok, sometimes it takes a few moments to sit and think about the whys - but it's good practise from where i'm sitting. helps me identify stuff in my own that maybe does or doesn't work for similar reasons.


*munch*

 

[PoetGuy]

but if you do want to set up a hierarchy, (as was tried and done in the past) do so here, in the open, where I will have get pleasure in tearing it to pieces.

To order ordered lists, revision rank,
Relink the ill-forged chain of Reasoned Art,
He came. Some called him Wit, some called him Crank,
To whit came the numbered heresiarch.

His bony scythe sliced all vainglorious
Poets thin, their weak-weft cuprous sones
Diced into mere poor, sob-storious
Strict metered verse that bled in wat'ry tones.

We miss our hierarchies! the Poets cried.
He laughed a cruel laugh, played some Zevon
(The bloody one where headless Roland died),
A madman across the water. Like Levon,

He proudly wore his war wound like a crown
And swore to flip all windmills upside down.






What hierarchies?

 

[butters]

To order ordered lists, revision rank,
Relink the ill-forged chain of Reasoned Art,
He came. Some called him Wit, some called him Crank,
To whit came the numbered heresiarch.

His bony scythe sliced all vainglorious
Poets thin, their weak-weft cuprous sones
Diced into mere poor, sob-storious
Strict metered verse that bled in wat'ry tones.

We miss our hierarchies! the Poets cried.
He laughed a cruel laugh, played some Zevon
(The bloody one where headless Roland died),
A madman across the water. Like Levon,

He proudly wore his war wound like a crown
And swore to flip all windmills upside down.






What hierarchies?

damn, this is funny/cool/clever.

 

[bronzeage]

Bingo!
An elaboration, in some cases, it is just an error in judgment, in others I'm not so sure. I've been here a while, seen it done so many times, so many ways, been called a lot of names.

I do not understand this.

 

[theognis]

i don't give two figs for heirarchy - if i like it, i like it, and will say why. it's up to others to agree or disagree as they choose. it does bug me, though, if people can't say why they do or don't like something. ok, sometimes it takes a few moments to sit and think about the whys - but it's good practise from where i'm sitting. helps me identify stuff in my own that maybe does or doesn't work for similar reasons.


*munch*

I gave you a five on your whore frost (I can't figure out how to italicize here for some reason) poem without saying why; is that really a problem for you? Obviously I think it's very, very good, and I see no reason to explain why I like it any more than I think I should be required to explain why I like certain paintings, or certain songs, or any other form of art.

 

[twelveoone]

cuprous scones?






What hierarchies?

been here awhile?
you know how it's been
you know what I'm after

I gave one example, I trust you'll find another

 

[Liar]

While it is fine to like something and not have a reason for it, that is a personal value judgment, but as soon as A becomes better than B, you best have a list of specific reasons.

I don't get it. So I can say "A is good" and don't have to back it up. But I have to have a reason if I say "A is better than B"?

Why can't I like A better than B? Why is a hierarhical statement different from a stand-alone statement of something's value?

If you claim something is objective, you best have a list of specific reasons. Whether that is hierarcical or not.

If you don't...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4104/5166465451_ded900eaf8.jpg

 

[butters]

I gave you a five on your whore frost (I can't figure out how to italicize here for some reason) poem without saying why; is that really a problem for you? Obviously I think it's very, very good, and I see no reason to explain why I like it any more than I think I should be required to explain why I like certain paintings, or certain songs, or any other form of art.

no, please don't misunderstand me here. you don't HAVE to say why. my argument is that if someone says they like it, i kind of want to know that THEY know WHY they like it, so it's not just a throwaway comment that is, in effect, meaningless. there is a difference in knowing and not saying, and saying without knowing.

and thankyou for the 5!


p.s italicising: when your reply box is open, across the top there are the icons for bold etc... if it's not showing, at the right hand bottom of the box is a button that says Go Advanced. try clicking on that. anyway, the italic button is between the Bold and the Underline. either hit the button then enter what you wish to be italicised, or type the words first, highlight then hit the button.

 

[theognis]

no, please don't misunderstand me here. you don't HAVE to say why. my argument is that if someone says they like it, i kind of want to know that THEY know WHY they like it, so it's not just a throwaway comment that is, in effect, meaningless. there is a difference in knowing and not saying, and saying without knowing.

and thankyou for the 5!


p.s italicising: when your reply box is open, across the top there are the icons for bold etc... if it's not showing, at the right hand bottom of the box is a button that says Go Advanced. try clicking on that. anyway, the italic button is between the Bold and the Underline. either hit the button then enter what you wish to be italicised, or type the words first, highlight then hit the button.

Okay, I'll take a moment to say I like the play on 'hoar frost' a lot, and I think the poem is close to being as good as I can imagine. I think I would prefer this, if I have to find something to critique:

"after last night's hot words
a cold front's settled in -

there's ice everywhere this morning"

I only suggest the change because hoar frost, when it forms, is usually everywhere, not just underfoot, and women can be thoroughly icy when aggrieved, such as after being called a whore during a heated argument.

p.s.

Thanks for the info on italicizing.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

So should one also explain why you don't like something? I can hardly put your poem bored me rigid, I'm getting enough hate mail as it is I will have to try and block them this end and just hope Lit doesn't need to contact me urgently!

 

[Angeline]

While it is fine to like something and not have a reason for it, that is a personal value judgment, but as soon as A becomes better than B, you best have a list of specific reasons.

The implied reasons:
1.) on my say so
2.) "everybody" recognizes A as being better.
are delusional, invalid, and can be counterproductive.

without going into specifics...but if you do want to set up a hierarchy, (as was tried and done in the past) do so here, in the open, where I will have get pleasure in tearing it to pieces.

till then
namaste

Remember when we tried to set up criteria for critiquing a poem here? To try to standardize it? Yeah that went over like a boatful of pregnant nuns.

However, I use the following criteria to evaluate. I don't think these things through one at a time after I read; it's more holistic than that, but here's what goes into it:

If the poem uses a variety of poetic devices (like image, metaphor, interesting/effective line and sentence breaks, interesting or unique word choice) and does so smoothly and with a consistent voice to convey a theme, idea, mood, or extended image it's tops for me. Extra points if it makes me laugh or otherwise moves me emotionally.

If the poem attempts the things mentioned above but doesn't quite make it because it feels unfinished to me or wanders away from the theme, idea, etc., it seems to be establishing but still has good parts, it's almost tops (i.e., four). And the main problem I usually see in poems I would call "fours" is a lack of consistency or cohesion.

Beneath that I don't give scores because I don't consider anything less than that worth saving because such poems usually display cliches or tired or boring word choices, too much extra language that tends to stomp on what poetry is there and/or lack of central theme, idea, etc.

Of course it's always just my opinion and I respond better to some poems than others because I like the subject or something in the poem touches some memory of my own and thus engages me more. Thus I reserve the right to like what I like! But hey, at least I have a set of criteria that I apply pretty consistently when I read.

So feel free to tear that up, my dear twelvie.

 

[butters]

So should one also explain why you don't like something? I can hardly put your poem bored me rigid, I'm getting enough hate mail as it is I will have to try and block them this end and just hope Lit doesn't need to contact me urgently!

i think that if someone says they don't like it, it's reasonable to hope they'd say why. of course, as we all know, that doesn't always happen - just the same as someone dropping by and saying they like it but then not elaborating on the why for whatever reason - like time is against them, or they don't feel in the mood to justify their comment...

i don't always go on to give details, but i think when people do (for likes or dislikes) it serves purpose: it gives other readers an insight into a different way of looking at things and also shows how varied the responses to a write can be. it can help strengthen a viewpoint by reinforcement, or ameliorate it by negation. it undoubtedly does the author a favour both as a reader and a writer, so long as the comments are given with honesty.

 

[bronzeage]

So should one also explain why you don't like something? I can hardly put your poem bored me rigid, I'm getting enough hate mail as it is I will have to try and block them this end and just hope Lit doesn't need to contact me urgently!

I find it more difficult to state why I like a poem.

I have not written many less than positive comments, but when I have, I try to be specific.

If I can't express what I didn't like in a concise sentence, I'll just pass over the piece and read the next one.

 

[vrosej10]

I know good when I see it, bad too. i vote and comment accordingly.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

I find it more difficult to state why I like a poem.

I have not written many less than positive comments, but when I have, I try to be specific.

If I can't express what I didn't like in a concise sentence, I'll just pass over the piece and read the next one.

that's what I often do pass on by

I know good when I see it, bad too. i vote and comment accordingly.

but that's good in what you like not everybody I've seen you like stuff that does nothing for me

 

[ishtat]

a boatfull of pregnant nuns.

That'd be a good theme for a challenge.

 

[ishtat]

Why should I?

I like some of Lauren Hynde's work. Some of it, I don't like at all. Some I engage with, some I don't.

But most times even the stuff of hers that I don't like is interesting. When criticizing her work or that of anybody else for that matter, I don't have much use for comparison because my point of view tends to be from inside the poem: being involved with it. Comparison, necessarily changes my point of view to an external one and I'm not sure that is where I want to be.

You can substitute Lauren's name with a number of others but I always think of her as an example of a writer of Graeco-Roman poetry, poetry that has to be wrestled with sometimes. Unnecessary comparison can be unhelpful.

I remember the exam questions at school which started "compare and contrast" and my first thought was always, why should I.!

 

[Angeline]

That'd be a good theme for a challenge.

Isn't that a hilarious expression? I have an old friend whose mother used to say it and it always stuck with me. Perhaps not surprisingly, she was not Catholic.

By the way, one of these days Ishtat you will have to explain to me what you meant when you compared the phrasing in my poem Jazzstory to being read to in Welsh. Is that sort of phrasing a tradition in Welsh stories? It's a way of writing I particularly enjoy but I just made it up, kind of from the jazz rhythms I often listen to when I write. I've been wondering about that ever since I read your comment.

 

[Koba]

I could never really make a living as a critic. For one I am not that good as a poet. For two, I don't always understand many poems. That combo makes it difficult for me to judge much of what I read. Therefore, oftentimes when I read a poem that doesn't connect for me, I just pass by it. Sometimes, I will like a poem but not know why. Then I will give it a good grade and leave a comment saying something positive. If I really like the poem and know why then I will leave a longer more detailed note in comments. I think people appreciate the comments far more than the votes so when something strikes me as good I let the author know.

Now, I usually pass by poems that I don't like without making comments or voting. I don't like putting things down as at times I know that when I let loose I can be rather caustic. So, usually I hold my tongue even if the poem is clearly god awful. The only exception to this is a poem that was posted over a week ago. It made no sense to me. Many of the words in it were completely made up. It really was nonsensical. Another commentator said "great words, too bad they don't make any sense." And that was the truth. And I said something similar.

Well, it may be just a coincidence but within a couple of days three of my poems which had recently received "H's" were knocked out of the box by being given scores of 1. One of them was given three 1's in order to knock it down. (I am much better at math than I am at poetry!) I think this was vengeance, pure and simple. My poems were no longer on the "new list". Someone went to my list, found the ones with higher ratings and whacked them on purpose.

Now, so what! Life goes on! I will live! Absolutely! And I will continue to write and post! But in the five minutes of shitty feelings I allowed myself to have for this person I thought some horrible thoughts. But screw it! The idea is to write poetry. Whatever anyone thinks about it is none of my business. If they think well, great! If they think not so well, great! In the end, it all doesn't matter. The learning process is what is important. And as long as I'm learning, I'll stick around.

 

[serpentwrap]

A work of art - be it a poem, a painting, a song or even a beautiful woman - sometimes touches the viewer's soul. Its possible the work of art is truly great. Its equally possible the audience relates to some portion of the art in a far more personal manner. Its also possible that the audience at the time of viewing, is in a vulnerable state of mind / emotion and likes or dislikes the piece of art instinctively. A man looks at a beautiful woman, and goes Whoosh! Ask him to explain why he liked the woman, chances are he will be incoherent. But the does not negate or diminish his appreciation of the art.

I might like a poem instinctively, it reads well, it emotes well, I relate to the thoughts implied, it just seems perfect to me. Why should I be bothered to explain my reasons. Words often fail to express what the heart sees and understands. Even the mind.

 

[twelveoone]

Remember when we tried to set up criteria for critiquing a poem here? To try to standardize it? Yeah that went over like a boatful of pregnant nuns.

However, I use the following criteria to evaluate. I don't think these things through one at a time after I read; it's more holistic than that, but here's what goes into it:

If the poem uses a variety of poetic devices (like image, metaphor, interesting/effective line and sentence breaks, interesting or unique word choice) and does so smoothly and with a consistent voice to convey a theme, idea, mood, or extended image it's tops for me. Extra points if it makes me laugh or otherwise moves me emotionally.

If the poem attempts the things mentioned above but doesn't quite make it because it feels unfinished to me or wanders away from the theme, idea, etc., it seems to be establishing but still has good parts, it's almost tops (i.e., four). And the main problem I usually see in poems I would call "fours" is a lack of consistency or cohesion.

Beneath that I don't give scores because I don't consider anything less than that worth saving because such poems usually display cliches or tired or boring word choices, too much extra language that tends to stomp on what poetry is there and/or lack of central theme, idea, etc.

Of course it's always just my opinion and I respond better to some poems than others because I like the subject or something in the poem touches some memory of my own and thus engages me more. Thus I reserve the right to like what I like! But hey, at least I have a set of criteria that I apply pretty consistently when I read.

So feel free to tear that up, my dear twelvie.

Angeline, Liar, and VR,
let's get on the same page.
If I say Angeline is good, a don't need a reason, because it could be any of a variety of reasons, or none at all, no harm done. If I say Angeline is better than Liar, well Liar might want to know why, now in that case I better have a reason...preferably a list of them.
Now VR, to respond to you, no you don't, not all the time, anybody that thinks that is a fool, and will run afoul of me.
Now, what do I know about poetry, not much. But, I know enough to, shall we say hold my own against PoetGuy and group, because we go back, don't we?
And I noticed a slight shift in the past couple months, because you aren't just looking at ankles are you bud?