2009 Survivor Poetry Challenge: Discussion and Announcements

[pushkine]

OK, I will think about this some more and come up with something. I confess I hadn't thought about the problem with the same title poems. I didn't expect things to be going as smoothly and with such great results either. I thought that if two or three people made it through all 25 forms and 50 triggers into a second round, it would have been a good run already.

The same title poems are not a technical problem any more than multichapter stories are a problem. You have "zero-gravity tea ceremony" and "zero-gravity tea ceremony 2" and 3 and 4, up to "zero-gravity tea ceremony N".

There's actually a kind of weird appeal in that—write a book of poetry in which all of the poems have the same title.

The problem is not exactly the triggers (though those are part of it), nor exactly the forms (though ditto). The problem is that I think the contest as structured generates a lot of bad poetry. Maybe that's just bad poetry from me:

The Ballad of Tiger's Woods
Some podic garbage which twists polemic at the end.

In older times, they would be wood
And not be made of metal.
Persimmon, block or laminate,
Craftsmen would on settle.

But times are very different now.
Wood's woods are wood no more.
They're probably titanium,
To make his golf ball soar.

He'll smack the piss out of the ball,
If balls had piss to smack.
(Nope. Rubber bands 'round solid core
With dimples on their back.)

A Tiger wood is custom made
By Nike, Beaverton—
A town in very western state
Near Portland, Oregon.

He'll carry different degrees loft.
At least his caddy will.
For legally, he's fourteen clubs
To sportsman's task fulfill.

(I guess I've shown I'm rather bored
With writing ballad form.
I think it's time consider we
Survivor rule reform.)​

I mean, that's really awful and pointless and, I know, the basic response would be "well, if you think it's so bad, don't write that. Don't post that."

But the structure is a contest where He (or She) Who Writes The Most Wins. So quality doesn't come into play.

I'm not sure how it should, though.

To quote darkmaas, though,

The organizers can now pat themselves on the back, MORE POETRY.

I am not convinced that volume increases quality, personally or collectively.

 

[Angeline]

OK, I will think about this some more and come up with something. I confess I hadn't thought about the problem with the same title poems. I didn't expect things to be going as smoothly and with such great results either. I thought that if two or three people made it through all 25 forms and 50 triggers into a second round, it would have been a good run already.

How about a thread for people to brainstorm triggers? If each participant came up with ten triggers, you'd have quite a list from which to choose. Even five from each would be a great help. And people don't have to be participating to come up with triggers, right? So we all generate this big list and you choose and/or adapt the ones you think will work best. Takes some of the pressure off you, too.

The other thing that comes to mind is that poetry challenges obviously do not always lead to great poetry. As someone who has participated in many challenges here over the years, and written clunkers like the ode to the poppin fresh doughboy and the disco zombie sonnet, I know this all too well. What a sustained challenge like this does do is force one to do a lot of writing. I personally find that a great gift as I had gotten out of the habit of writing poetry every day. And the main reason I didn't was because I felt burned out. I felt like I had written so much on so many different topics that I felt blase about any idea for a poem. So for me the triggers are great for inspiration. For others who may be writing daily already there's not so much of a benefit.

But I'm not doing this contest to be number one or win any prizes. I'm doing it to push myself to write with better discipline again. And if the triggers don't make me produce the best poems I can write, practicing daily wll definitely help me be a better poet overall. And that, to me, is the more important goal.

 

[pushkine]

The other thing that comes to mind is that poetry challenges obviously do not always lead to great poetry. As someone who has participated in many challenges here over the years, and written clunkers like the ode to the poppin fresh doughboy and the disco zombie sonnet, I know this all too well. What a sustained challenge like this does do is force one to do a lot of writing. I personally find that a great gift as I had gotten out of the habit of writing poetry every day.

But one doesn't, presumably, want to be in the habit of writing bad poetry every day, does one?

I don't. And I think the contest, as structured now, promotes that.

Yes, my weakness. I know I don't have to write bad poems. Well, at least not so bad poems. (And, please, don't sic Senna Jawa on me.)

Except those triggers. And those forms. And competition. I look at some of those triggers and go, "Hey! Another suckaholic poem!"

Do you feel different? I'd be curious to know.

The idea of the contest is good. The instantiation of the contest is, meh.

And remember, I'm ahead. By a lot.

 

[LadynStFreknBed]

But one doesn't, presumably, want to be in the habit of writing bad poetry every day, does one?

I don't. And I think the contest, as structured now, promotes that.

Yes, my weakness. I know I don't have to write bad poems. Well, at least not so bad poems. (And, please, don't sic Senna Jawa on me.)

Except those triggers. And those forms. And competition. I look at some of those triggers and go, "Hey! Another suckaholic poem!"

Do you feel different? I'd be curious to know.

The idea of the contest is good. The instantiation of the contest is, meh.

And remember, I'm ahead. By a lot.

I feel quite different. I have no idea how many poets here have had any formal education on poetry. I can tell you that I have not (as one might have guessed).

For those of us who are learning, what does this competition do?

It has brought us together to help each other learn forms.
It has encouraged me to practice writing poetry much more often than I normally do.
It has promoted discussion on writing techniques and tools.
It has exposed me and others to some forms which were totally unfamiliar.
It has generated some fine examples of the forms and some quality poetry.
It has encouraged poets to stretch beyond their comfort zones and challenge themselves.


The negatives that I see as a result of this challenge have been some attitudes that have been judgmental of poets' honest efforts and the value of their poems. There is also an assumption that people are rushing to produce poetry that is substandard. I think this is a false and hurtful assumption. The other detriment has been some hurt feelings over criticism of poems, though I do not think this has been intentional.

 

[annaswirls]

Y'know, if the poetry is so crappy you really should stop reading it. We might rub off on you and despite your efforts to convince us otherwise, yours is good.

Ange and Lady have said what I wanted to say--

And my brain is working in new ways. That cannot be a bad thing. Sticking only to what you do well, that is a bad thing. It is arrogant to think one should only do what one does well in order to be a better person.

There are other competitions without as much structure.-- the 30 in 30, for example. I chose this one.

I hope next year you might be in the position to come up with the Survivor Rules and triggers, etc. I would be interested to see what you come up with that will make us all better writers.

Are you angry or disgruntled because your suggestions were not followed in the suggestion thread before the contest started? You are mystery.

But one doesn't, presumably, want to be in the habit of writing bad poetry every day, does one?

I don't. And I think the contest, as structured now, promotes that.

Yes, my weakness. I know I don't have to write bad poems. Well, at least not so bad poems. (And, please, don't sic Senna Jawa on me.)

Except those triggers. And those forms. And competition. I look at some of those triggers and go, "Hey! Another suckaholic poem!"

Do you feel different? I'd be curious to know.

The idea of the contest is good. The instantiation of the contest is, meh.

And remember, I'm ahead. By a lot.

 

[pushkine]

I feel quite different. I have no idea how many poets here have had any formal education on poetry. I can tell you that I have not (as one might have guessed).

Nor have I any formal education in poetry, which should be obvious.

I'm glad you feel differently about the competition. Actually, I hope most others do as well, for then there is a simple resolution. I just drop out.

Which, perhaps, I should. Or should have earlier.

For those of us who are learning, what does this competition do?

1. It has brought us together to help each other learn forms.
2. It has encouraged me to practice writing poetry much more often than I normally do.
3. It has promoted discussion on writing techniques and tools.
4. It has exposed me and others to some forms which were totally unfamiliar.
5. It has generated some fine examples of the forms and some quality poetry.
6. It has encouraged poets to stretch beyond their comfort zones and challenge themselves.

Some valid points. I would say

1. This is perhaps true, though form is only half the challenge.
2. I can't argue with this, as it is a personal point with you. I am glad you find the contest personally valuable.
3. I guess, reluctantly, I agree with this, though I think most of the discussions have been uninformative. That may just be me.
4. Can't argue with this, obviously.
5. I think there are a few poems that are quite good. A lot that are not bad. Mine suck. (Yeah, I know. Sounds like a personal problem.)
6. Perhaps. This hasn't been so for me.

I'm sorry to be such a crank about this, as I was very interested in the idea of the contest, but it simply isn't satisfying for me. The triggers are a major part of it. I can't think of any way in writing a poem from the POV of a Persian Carpet that isn't simply bad. Maybe you'll come up with some clever way of doing that. For me, that is simply rote. Easy to do, but unsatisfying result.

Hey, if everyone else is happy with the contest as is, that's good. I have a simple solution to my personal dissatisfaction—just drop out.

It may be it simply doesn't work for me, or that I have the wrong attitude about it.

The negatives that I see as a result of this challenge have been some attitudes that have been judgmental of poets' honest efforts and the value of their poems. There is also an assumption that people are rushing to produce poetry that is substandard. I think this is a false and hurtful assumption. The other detriment has been some hurt feelings over criticism of poems, though I do not think this has been intentional.

I hope I have not been negatively "judgmental of poets' honest efforts and the value of their poems." If I have been unduly so, please tell me and I'll shut up.

I don't believe the "[rush] to produce poetry" is producing substandard poetry. I think it's the structure of the contest.

Feel free to disagree with me, as you have.

 

[pushkine]

Are you angry or disgruntled because your suggestions were not followed in the suggestion thread before the contest started? You are mystery.

Is it somehow wrong to be unhappy with how something is instantiated and to suggest it be rethought?

As I said, if everyone else is happy, my dissatisfaction is moot. You yourself complained about the triggers as being reused for the second round. I'm suggesting we rethink the structure of the contest. If no one else wants to, that's fine.

One of the things that bothers me is how there seems to be an attitude that this is Happy Place, where poets all kiss and hug and tell each other how wonderful each other is. Say X writes a villanelle in "iambic pentameter" that clearly isn't. Should I fawn over X and say the poem was masterful and marvel at the use of classic form?

Who does that help?

Part of learning to write is learning to deal with criticism. Serious, often rather nasty, criticism. I hope I have not been nasty, as I personally don't wish to be.

But I'd like to, for a change, be truthful. Which I haven't been before.

 

[LadynStFreknBed]

I hope I have not been negatively "judgmental of poets' honest efforts and the value of their poems." If I have been unduly so, please tell me and I'll shut up.

I don't believe the "[rush] to produce poetry" is producing substandard poetry. I think it's the structure of the contest.

Feel free to disagree with me, as you have.

I was not talking about you in particular, though I would conclude that your statements about the contest generating bad poetry devalue the contributions of the participants.

About the triggers, this is supposed to be a challenge, right? I think you underestimate the creativity of the poets here if you have determined that no good poetry could come from some of the triggers.

 

[LadynStFreknBed]

One of the things that bothers me is how there seems to be an attitude that this is Happy Place, where poets all kiss and hug and tell each other how wonderful each other is. Say X writes a villanelle in "iambic pentameter" that clearly isn't. Should I fawn over X and say the poem was masterful and marvel at the use of classic form?

Who does that help?

Part of learning to write is learning to deal with criticism. Serious, often rather nasty, criticism. I hope I have not been nasty, as I personally don't wish to be.

But I'd like to, for a change, be truthful. Which I haven't been before.

I'm not sure where that is coming from. I know you are familiar with the workshop and the advice and critique that has gone on there. No one is asking for false praise (that I know of). I've stated at least once that I welcome critique or advice that will help me improve. That is the whole point of this contest for me.

I am sure that some of us, myself included, are very sensitive to criticism. But if it is done as a suggestion for improvement, I welcome it. Nasty criticism really has no place here. Everyone is learning. Perhaps, it would be different if we were claiming to be goddesses of poetry.

In the learning stage, I do think that volume increases quality if the poetry produced is done thoughtfully and meticulously. I don't think volume itself has value or decreases the value of the poem. Volume in and of itself is neither good nor bad. Rather, it's the spirit in which the poetry is created that matters. If a volume of poetry is created with no regard to its quality and the improvement of the poet, then it's rather pointless. However, all I have seen here is poetry created in endeavors for improvement. Who can have anything against that?

 

[pushkine]

I was not talking about you in particular, though I would conclude that your statements about the contest generating bad poetry devalue the contributions of the participants.

I was talking primarily about my own poems, but I fail to see how "write a poem as if from the point of view of a Persian carpet" is likely to produce a good poem. It may, of course. A really good poet can probably write a good poem about anything.

And, I will be careful to say, I am in no way maligning the talent of any poet who has, or will in future, write a poem on said theme.

Which, I think, is part of our problem. No one is willing to say anymore that someone's poem is bad. We're all too sensitive, and we need to get over that.

There are some very talented people here. And even they often write very bad poems.

Is there something wrong about saying that?

About the triggers, this is supposed to be a challenge, right? I think you underestimate the creativity of the poets here if you have determined that no good poetry could come from some of the triggers.

I did not say no good poetry could come from some of the triggers. I expressed doubt about the likelihood that, for some triggers, any good poems could be written, yes. I'd love to be proved wrong.

 

[annaswirls]

Is it somehow wrong to be unhappy with how something is instantiated and to suggest it be rethought?

of course not. Your dissatisfaction seems to go beyond the structure of the game.

As I said, if everyone else is happy, my dissatisfaction is moot. You yourself complained about the triggers as being reused for the second round. I'm suggesting we rethink the structure of the contest. If no one else wants to, that's fine.

I agree with you in that the triggers are limiting. I have disagreed with this from the time we had open discussion. I just do not think complaining about it to any serious degree now we are in the middle of the first round is very productive.

One of the things that bothers me is how there seems to be an attitude that this is Happy Place, where poets all kiss and hug and tell each other how wonderful each other is.

In light of all of the ugliness of the past months, I think most people are just wanting to try to keep some sense of peace and reason.

This is the first time in ages I have been able to stand it here.

Say X writes a villanelle in "iambic pentameter" that clearly isn't. Should I fawn over X and say the poem was masterful and marvel at the use of classic form?

Of course not. I have not seen you doing any fawning nor would I expect to.

But know that not everyone has the same level of experience, so to encourage the process of learning, who does that harm? Do you expect perfection or progress?

You continue to give a show of humility when it is clear that you know what you are doing. It is okay. You have an advantage of experience and knowledge that some of us do not have. It is okay.

Part of learning to write is learning to deal with criticism. Serious, often rather nasty, criticism. I hope I have not been nasty, as I personally don't wish to be.

I have not seen you be nasty in your criticism, and you are right, it is part of learning. You criticized my very first poem and I deleted it and wrote one that worked. I was not upset with you over the criticism, but with myself. To expect that everyone will immediately accept failure with grace is unreasonable.

But I'd like to, for a change, be truthful. Which I haven't been before.

Now that is interesting. Very interesting. Makes me think about the past, and question.... honestly it all just makes me sad. How is that for honest?

 

[annaswirls]

Which, I think, is part of our problem. No one is willing to say anymore that someone's poem is bad. We're all too sensitive, and we need to get over that.

Not true. Maybe no one has said "Your poem is bad" but plenty of people have said "this is not a haiku" or "that does not make sense" You know this, I will not waste time and quote the reviews.

 

[pushkine]

I'm not sure where that is coming from. I know you are familiar with the workshop and the advice and critique that has gone on there. No one is asking for false praise (that I know of). I've stated at least once that I welcome critique or advice that will help me improve. That is the whole point of this contest for me.

I'm not sure which workshop you're referring to, but all of them have, in my opinion, become rather toothless over time. We're all (well, most of us) afraid of offending people, because we like to mingle and chat. There's nothing wrong with that, but there is no serious criticism of poems. Note that I consider serious criticism to include statements like "this poem is garbage" without further discussion.

The standard reply to this, usually expressed in some kind of damaged, hurt voice, is "then tell me what is wrong."

You can't always, other than to say something like "start over—this doesn't work." A poet can take or disregard such criticism, and in fact should learn to judge criticism as valid on invalid.

I am sure that some of us, myself included, are very sensitive to criticism. But if it is done as a suggestion for improvement, I welcome it. Nasty criticism really has no place here. Everyone is learning. Perhaps, it would be different if we were claiming to be goddesses of poetry.

But if you're doing something dumb, shouldn't you be told that? It is preferable that the critic be civil, of course, but should you reject the message simply because the messenger is rude?

In the learning stage, I do think that volume increases quality if the poetry produced is done thoughtfully and meticulously. I don't think volume itself has value or decreases the value of the poem. Volume in and of itself is neither good nor bad. Rather, it's the spirit in which the poetry is created that matters. If a volume of poetry is created with no regard to its quality and the improvement of the poet, then it's rather pointless. However, all I have seen here is poetry created in endeavors for improvement. Who can have anything against that?

As I've said, I may simply be angry with my own contributions, with which I am obvioously not happy. I think the contest, as designed, does not encourage good poems. That also is my opinion.

Your opinion is different and, I hope, correct.

 

[annaswirls]

this ...

 

[pushkine]

of course not. Your dissatisfaction seems to go beyond the structure of the game.

I don't think so, but perhaps it does. I wouldn't be here other than for the game.

I agree with you in that the triggers are limiting. I have disagreed with this from the time we had open discussion. I just do not think complaining about it to any serious degree now we are in the middle of the first round is very productive.

How else does one institute change, or even discussion?

In light of all of the ugliness of the past months, I think most people are just wanting to try to keep some sense of peace and reason.

This is the first time in ages I have been able to stand it here.

That's good for you, of course. I am sorry if I am making it difficult for you or compromising your enjoyment of the forum.

Of course not. I have not seen you doing any fawning nor would I expect to.

But know that not everyone has the same level of experience, so to encourage the process of learning, who does that harm? Do you expect perfection or progress?

You continue to give a show of humility when it is clear that you know what you are doing. It is okay. You have an advantage of experience and knowledge that some of us do not have. It is okay.

I do not know what I'm doing. I am merely confident in my ignorance. That's a different thing.

I am not, in general, objecting to the forms. That should be clear, although, having now written a sestina, I have no interest in writing another one. I dislike the triggers, I think, more than anything.

As for experience, I have been writing poems for 3.5 years. I'd bet most of you have more experience than that.

I have not seen you be nasty in your criticism, and you are right, it is part of learning. You criticized my very first poem and I deleted it and wrote one that worked. I was not upset with you over the criticism, but with myself. To expect that everyone will immediately accept failure with grace is unreasonable.

I have gotten angry when people ignore (or, misunderstand) clearly written definitions of what constitutes a form. Perhaps the guidelines are not as clear as they appear to me. But it is frustrating to conform to a form and have someone else write something that clearly does not conform and have that pass in the great big friendly smooshiness of joy that we're all poeticizing.

Now that is interesting. Very interesting. Makes me think about the past, and question.... honestly it all just makes me sad. How is that for honest?

I am honestly sorry that you're sad. How's that for honesty?

 

[annaswirls]

I think part of the problem with critiques is that we need 1201 or Carrington or TaraBlackwood or (oh my god I can't remember her name, the awesome critic that died years ago???? I hate myself for forgetting her name!!!) YDD at any rate, we need someone along those lines to be able to give feedback to Pushkine. I feel badly because I gave a too easy positive review to his Valentine's poem and did not put enough thought into my criticism. I wish I could help him improve his poetry, because if he is not happy with it, that is what matters.

I apologize, I do. I will try harder to be a better critic and to try to balance the positives that one gives from encouragement with the positives one gives from tough love.

 

[pushkine]

Not true. Maybe no one has said "Your poem is bad" but plenty of people have said "this is not a haiku" or "that does not make sense" You know this, I will not waste time and quote the reviews.

You're missing the point. There is no one, at least that I am aware of, who gives raw and honest comments on poems. (Always excepting the mercurial Senna Jawa, of course.) Just go look at the comments on posted poems. They're "Ooh, wonderful!" and "So touching!" kinds of comments. Maybe someone might say that a word is misspelled or something. That's about it.

Your experience may differ. We probably haven't read the same poems.

 

[Angeline]

But one doesn't, presumably, want to be in the habit of writing bad poetry every day, does one?

I don't. And I think the contest, as structured now, promotes that.

Yes, my weakness. I know I don't have to write bad poems. Well, at least not so bad poems. (And, please, don't sic Senna Jawa on me.)

Except those triggers. And those forms. And competition. I look at some of those triggers and go, "Hey! Another suckaholic poem!"

Do you feel different? I'd be curious to know.

The idea of the contest is good. The instantiation of the contest is, meh.

And remember, I'm ahead. By a lot.

Well we obviously have different ways of seeing this. I don't think the contest will necessary produce bad poetry. It might for some at times. But writing poetry at all produces some poetry that is bad sometimes.

There are forms in the contest I despise. Some I absolutely don't look forward to writing. There are triggers that interest me not in the least. I didn't design the contest and if I did, I doubt I'd have chosen some of the forms and/or triggers that are there. But that doesn't bother me in the least because as I said earlier I'm interested in using the contest to help get back into writing daily. Of the five poems I've written so far, I'm pretty happy with two. Not because I think I followed the rules perfectly, but because I think they're pretty good poems. Others may disagree, but that doesn't bother me either. If that sort of thing did, I'd never post poetry anywhere.

And I do appreciate that Lauren has put in a huge amount of work on her own time for this contest. I'm sure she recognizes that she can't please everyone.

If you can think of ways to make the contest better, you should mention them to Lauren. She's always open to suggestion. I think my idea of letting everyone brainstorm triggers is a good way to let people suggest ideas that they think would work well for them, that--at least in theory--wouldn't produce poems that suck. And you know if you decide that the contest can't possibly produce anything but bad poetry for you, well isn't that kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy? You also have the option of not doing the contest if you don't think it's working for you. Then you can write on subjects you feel will produce better poems for you. Obviously, most people who are participating don't feel as you do--at least not that I can see from what I've read here.

I see that you're ahead and if you want to win, then that's a good thing, right? As I said before we don't see this the same way because I'm playing to write, not to win. Really.

The comment about Senna is irrelevent, to me. I have no power to "sic" him on anyone. If you want his opinion on what he thinks constitues bad poetry, ask him.

 

[annaswirls]

How else does one institute change, or even discussion?

Good question. I was disappointed in all of the triggers. It is hard enough to write the forms without the added stress of the trigger. I just do not know how we could change that at this point. Round 2 is another story. I really really feel strongly that there should be some triggers that give more freedom.

That's good for you, of course. I am sorry if I am making it difficult for you or compromising your enjoyment of the forum.

You keep it interesting and I respect you.

I do not know what I'm doing. I am merely confident in my ignorance. That's a different thing.

well you hide it well, you seem to know what you are doing.

.....

I have gotten angry when people ignore (or, misunderstand) clearly written definitions of what constitutes a form. Perhaps the guidelines are not as clear as they appear to me. But it is frustrating to conform to a form and have someone else write something that clearly does not conform and have that pass in the great big friendly smooshiness of joy that we're all poeticizing.

I can understand how that must be frustrating. We are judged not only by our work, but by our experience, potential, previous work, etc. I know where you are coming from, I do.

I think it would be helpful to try to do it for just yourself and not worry about others.

I am honestly sorry that you're sad. How's that for honesty?

It is very good.

 

[pushkine]

I think part of the problem with critiques is that we need 1201 or Carrington or TaraBlackwood or (oh my god I can't remember her name, the awesome critic that died years ago????

YDD.

I hate myself for forgetting her name!!!) at any rate, we need someone along those lines to be able to give feedback to Pushkine. I feel badly because I gave a too easy positive review to his Valentine's poem and did not put enough thought into my criticism. I wish I could help him improve his poetry, because if he is not happy with it, that is what matters.

I apologize, I do. I will try harder to be a better critic and to try to balance the positives that one gives from encouragement with the positives one gives from tough love.

pushkine's poetry is bad. That Valentine terzanelle was particularly bad. The history I read about in writing it was interesting, which made it worthwhile, but the poem was dreadful.

I deleted the poem I had posted for tomorrow. It was—wait for it—bad.

So I won't inflict that on you.

 

[champagne1982]

I think part of the problem with critiques is that we need 1201 or Carrington or TaraBlackwood or (oh my god I can't remember her name, the awesome critic that died years ago???? I hate myself for forgetting her name!!!) at any rate, we need someone along those lines to be able to give feedback to Pushkine. I feel badly because I gave a too easy positive review to his Valentine's poem and did not put enough thought into my criticism. I wish I could help him improve his poetry, because if he is not happy with it, that is what matters.

I apologize, I do. I will try harder to be a better critic and to try to balance the positives that one gives from encouragement with the positives one gives from tough love.

anna, you mean YDD. That lady could condense a thesis full of critique into one well thought comment on a poem.

I still feel a review is different than a critique which is definitely different than the public comment feature on the poems posted here in both the forum and the index. All have their place. I apologize that I've been slack and idle in giving critical reviews . I have tennis elbow ow! and my knee's been ugly sore. So, I've been in no good mood for well considered critique and feedback.

All things take time and maybe we should just ask T-zed to email a critique to Pushkine so that all poetry gets the proper level of regard. Or maybe, we can simply take some time to give a generous and well considered comment on his poem. I, for one, absolutely adore the double word play and twisty meaning pushkine finds to write about.

Anyway, I've typed too much and must ice my arm...

 

[annaswirls]

YDD.
pushkine's poetry is bad. That Valentine terzanelle was particularly bad. The history I read about in writing it was interesting, which made it worthwhile, but the poem was dreadful.

I deleted the poem I had posted for tomorrow. It was—wait for it—bad.

So I won't inflict that on you.

Okay I give up. Your poems Pushkine are bad bad bad Yes, your work sucks. Instead of following you around telling you that you are intelligent and that yes opinion counts, I will follow you around saying "Bad"

I may even carry a rolled up newspaper.

But seriously, I hope that you and happiness find each other somewhere in this contest, because your poetry has brought it to others, no matter how bad you think it is.

 

[annaswirls]

One more thing, I hate all terzanelle. So to me a "bad" terzanelle is the same as a good one. I think they all suck. I would like to meet a good one so I can say hello to it. I do not like poems with repeating lines. They make me nauseous.

 

[pushkine]

Okay I give up. Your poems Pushkine are bad bad bad

Thank you. Someone should understand that this self-flagellation is all for the best.

 

[pushkine]

There are forms in the contest I despise.

Despise?

That seems rather strong, but makes me curious. Which ones, if you'd care to share?