Poetry Discussion Circle - part 2

[Angeline]

I'm going with Model 1. I wonder if a new poem each day is too quick, though.

I'm also curious if there will be any rules/moderation about the way critique/criticism/suggestions are offered. I would hate for a poet to get discouraged by criticisms that offer nothing constructive.

Lauren and I were talking about this on Yahoo this morning. My feeling is that if you don't tell people anything about what sort of critique to give (like the rubric I posted in the poetry workshop thread I started), you will have a few people who will do thorough, specific reviews and a lot of people who will say they do or don't like a poem without explaining why. I'm not suggesting that anyone is a slacker lol, but most people are not used to articulating what exactly in a poem makes them think it works or not. To me, being able to address specifically how theme, organization, word choice, and mechanics work (or don't) is a pretty straightforward starting point. I'm sure there are other ways to do it that would work just as well or better (my rubric is just what I thought of), but I think it's good to say something about expectations for a review: a common understanding of what we are about makes more sense to me.

 

[wildsweetone]

as we're not born with the knowledge on how to critique thoroughly, it is good to have examples (i.e. by knowledgeable reviewers and by rubric) and it is also appropriate to allow novices to say they like or dislike something... not everyone knows why something doesn't work for them. they should be allowed to comment in that manner and if they're willing to learn, they'll be able to read other comments and learn why a particular poem works or not.

critiquing is a learning process... it begins with having a feeling something doesn't work and it goes from there. each step up the skill level one learns more specifically what needs rewriting and why.

...the other difficulty with reviewing is when a novice follows an experienced reviewer. sometimes i'm left speechless as an experienced reviewer sees way more than my limited skill level can see.

but all this is just waffle. we learn by doing. when the sub-forum is up and running any participants will be able to review... and no matter how small a review, ALL reviews are worth looking at.

 

[mischievousgrin]

Well I have gone ahead and voted for #1. I like the idea of something heavily moderated that keeps the chit-chat down *when in the midst of critique*.

Personally I see this as a chance not just to improve my poetry but to improve my analytical skills when looking at the poetry of others. I'm new to critiquing others so there's plenty for me to learn.

and now to prove i'm not a chit-chat hater --

I JUST TOOK 1ST PLACE IN AN ONLINE POKER TOURNAMENT FOR $500!!!!!

WOOOOOOOOOOOOT!!!!

DRINKS ARE ON ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am so pumped full of adrenalin right now........

 

[flyguy69]

I like model two for it's egalitarian nature. I've always been hot for e-gals.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I JUST TOOK 1ST PLACE IN AN ONLINE POKER TOURNAMENT FOR $500!

Congratulations!

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I'm going with Model 1. I wonder if a new poem each day is too quick, though.

I think that 1 day should be the minimum, under that model. But if after 24 hours a certain poem has only received 1 or 2 comments, I think we should give it more time before the next is posted. 1-per-day is flexible, and sensitive to what is happening on the board.

 

[twelveoone]

Lauren and I were talking about this on Yahoo this morning. My feeling is that if you don't tell people anything about what sort of critique to give (like the rubric I posted in the poetry workshop thread I started), you will have a few people who will do thorough, specific reviews and a lot of people who will say they do or don't like a poem without explaining why. I'm not suggesting that anyone is a slacker lol, but most people are not used to articulating what exactly in a poem makes them think it works or not. To me, being able to address specifically how theme, organization, word choice, and mechanics work (or don't) is a pretty straightforward starting point. I'm sure there are other ways to do it that would work just as well or better (my rubric is just what I thought of), but I think it's good to say something about expectations for a review: a common understanding of what we are about makes more sense to me.

Respectfully I disagree, in part. You and Pat are two of the best linear writers around here, this rubic works extremely well in that context, but it is also closed circle. This tendency of similar looking at similar breeds poetry by consensus. It should be guarded against.
All of these things mentioned: theme, organization, word choice, and mechanics, transfer to a degree, across all types, but there can there be agreement on what contitutes good organization, etc. except between similar types of organizers.
As examples re: word choice, what contitutes a good word choice for a Pat Carrington, may not be a good word choice for a Liar.
Your organization and mechanics (which I admire, greatly, BTW) would not be good for annaswirls or WickedEve (which I prefer).
I have a tendency to look at things differently, for each poem, trying to find why it is working or not working, some do not fit in well with your rubic cube.

These are things that most commentors will have to train themselves to look for. They have gotten far too slack in analyzing why they like what they like, as most writers here have gotten far too slack in writing what they write. It is a shame that new poems has gotten so critic adverse, it should have been that over there.

I would prefer to see type two, with the writer's defending what they wrote, as what Pat Carrington's "not for the thin skinned" started. And I think you self absorbed poets should comment or question at least 5 others. Remember it is more important to read than write.

Either way, the mods should be (near) ruthless with off-poem banter, should be a good excercise for you three also.

All that said, I wish you well, and frankly hope to see more of annaswirls, and WickedEve, and Pat Carrington, and others. It would be a good way for people to learn.

 

[My Erotic Tale]

Respectfully I disagree, in part. You and Pat are two of the best linear writers around here, this rubic works extremely well in that context, but it is also closed circle. This tendency of similar looking at similar breeds poetry by consensus. It should be guarded against.
All of these things mentioned: theme, organization, word choice, and mechanics, transfer to a degree, across all types, but there can there be agreement on what contitutes good organization, etc. except between similar types of organizers.
As examples re: word choice, what contitutes a good word choice for a Pat Carrington, may not be a good word choice for a Liar.
Your organization and mechanics (which I admire, greatly, BTW) would not be good for annaswirls or WickedEve (which I prefer).
I have a tendency to look at things differently, for each poem, trying to find why it is working or not working, some do not fit in well with your rubic cube.

These are things that most commentors will have to train themselves to look for. They have gotten far too slack in analyzing why they like what they like, as most writers here have gotten far too slack in writing what they write. It is a shame that new poems has gotten so critic adverse, it should have been that over there.

I would prefer to see type two, with the writer's defending what they wrote, as what Pat Carrington's "not for the thin skinned" started. And I think you self absorbed poets should comment or question at least 5 others. Remember it is more important to read than write.

Either way, the mods should be (near) ruthless with off-poem banter, should be a good excercise for you three also.

All that said, I wish you well, and frankly hope to see more of annaswirls, and WickedEve, and Pat Carrington, and others. It would be a good way for people to learn.

I agree 12

This will be a larger version of the thin skin thread and closed at that, open to those that wish to dabble in critic and display of literay habits from people that see things from their own perspective and I think you mentioned two have the creditials to do this ...I say there is one and they are not on the list. Blind leading the blind.

but the up swing, positive part, those that wish to play with words >> interact with others that want to play with words, simple. If a group is happy slapping at and disecting poems, so be it. Clearly it will be a circle of those that like to "PLAY" this way.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Respectfully I disagree, in part. You and Pat are two of the best linear writers around here, this rubic works extremely well in that context, but it is also closed circle. This tendency of similar looking at similar breeds poetry by consensus. It should be guarded against.
All of these things mentioned: theme, organization, word choice, and mechanics, transfer to a degree, across all types, but there can there be agreement on what contitutes good organization, etc. except between similar types of organizers.
As examples re: word choice, what contitutes a good word choice for a Pat Carrington, may not be a good word choice for a Liar.
Your organization and mechanics (which I admire, greatly, BTW) would not be good for annaswirls or WickedEve (which I prefer).
I have a tendency to look at things differently, for each poem, trying to find why it is working or not working, some do not fit in well with your rubic cube.

I don't see where exactly you're disagreeing, to tell the truth. You say that theme, organization, word choice, and mechanics, transfer to a degree, across all types, but that what contitutes a good word choice for a Pat Carrington, may not be a good word choice for a Liar, for example. This is true, but poems are critique'd by their own, not in comparison to others. If you are commenting on the mechanics of a poem written by Angeline, why would you need to say that that same mechanics wouldn't work if applied to a poem by annaswirls? It's not a competition, and it's not a matter of personal taste of one over the other. The commentator isn't required to rate the poem.

Either way, the rubric that Angeline posted - or any other rubric - are indications, guidelines to help people who think they don't know how to comment on other people's work get started. Not laws. Each poem is different from the next, and they don't all fit in well with any rubric.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

This will be a larger version of the thin skin thread...

Only if you've been distracted and forgot to read the two threads about it so far.

... and closed at that, open to those that wish to dabble in critic and display of literay habits from people that see things from their own perspective

Completely open to everyone who wishes to give and receive focused poetry critique, engage in sound discussions and grow. Each person sees things from their own perspective, and this is why practically everyone in the forum has voted in favour of this sub-forum's creation: it will be a venue for interested poets to hear those individual perspectives, in-depth, honest, and stripped of chit-chat and fluff.

 

[twelveoone]

I agree 12

This will be a larger version of the thin skin thread and closed at that, open to those that wish to dabble in critic and display of literay habits from people that see things from their own perspective and I think you mentioned two have the creditials to do this ...I say there is one and they are not on the list. Blind leading the blind.

but the up swing, positive part, those that wish to play with words >> interact with others that want to play with words, simple. If a group is happy slapping at and disecting poems, so be it. Clearly it will be a circle of those that like to "PLAY" this way.

Don't misread me Art. I advocate openess and non jargon. Every view is worth consideration, and I share WSO concerns here.

Am I going to not listen if some tells me my tire is flat.
Just because they are not a mechanic (Expertise)
Or if they are not an executive (Status)
Or some gang on a street corner (number)
if it is flat, I'll take a look, thank you whoever.

However, if I get heart surgery, I want someone that has a lot of living testimonials.

I think poetry lies somewhere inbetween.

 

[My Erotic Tale]

Only if you've been distracted and forgot to read the two threads about it so far.


Completely open to everyone who wishes to give and receive focused poetry critique, engage in sound discussions and grow.

is this not the same as chit chat? I am not debating what is inevitable only pointing out that the same POETS that critique now will critic there and there is no one 'here' with a professional CREDIT to say they know what they are talking about, there fore it is another 'Hang out' for what is being coined as the more serious poets. So Be It, have fun and enjoy doing what it is you like to do.

Each person sees things from their own perspective, and this is why practically everyone in the forum has voted in favour of this sub-forum's creation: it will be a venue for interested poets to hear those individual perspectives, in-depth, honest, and stripped of chit-chat and fluff.

poetry feedback and Discussion ...who would have thought of that? Like I said ...have fun, play the way that makes you happy, just don't pull the wool over peoples eyes about the seriousness of this circle your creating. I have to admit you have my curiousity on how this will be any different (~_*) from the thin skinned ramblings.

I have never hid my distaste for poetry disecting, it is not a pass time of mine though so many like to take them apart and re create that is where we differ, as for grow, I do not know a single poet here who does not want to grow. We are all different flowers, there-fore grow in our own way. GOOD LUCK and bottom line ...HAVE FUN

 

[twelveoone]

I don't see where exactly you're disagreeing, to tell the truth. You say that theme, organization, word choice, and mechanics, transfer to a degree, across all types, but that what contitutes a good word choice for a Pat Carrington, may not be a good word choice for a Liar, for example. This is true, but poems are critique'd by their own, not in comparison to others. If you are commenting on the mechanics of a poem written by Angeline, why would you need to say that that same mechanics wouldn't work if applied to a poem by annaswirls? It's not a competition, and it's not a matter of personal taste of one over the other. The commentator isn't required to rate the poem.

Either way, the rubric that Angeline posted - or any other rubric - are indications, guidelines to help people who think they don't know how to comment on other people's work get started. Not laws. Each poem is different from the next, and they don't all fit in well with any rubric.

The disagreement was in part, a small part. More of a warning. Angeline can pick up what Pat overlooked as an example - their writing styles are similar, their values in "tool" choice are similar. They are both excellent. I do not think she would question the value of the "tool" choice. I see that in another thread.
Something opposite was done to Pat early on in "not for the thin skinned", he defended but questions where forced on him, I think he got something better out of it.
The duel between him and Jim really was one of the high points on this board.
I'd like to see that happen again. I use these people as best examples.
Hegel, sort of.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I am not debating what is inevitable only pointing out that the same POETS that critique now will critic there and there is no one 'here' with a professional CREDIT to say they know what they are talking about

On the contrary. Everyone here has a professional credit to say they know what they are talking about, since all we talk about when we comment on other people's works is our personal, individual perspective as readers. There's no one in the world better credited to talk about my opinion as a reader than myself. The poets among us that are interested in knowing what those opinions is will know where to look. Others that are less interested in other people's opinions than in having their own egos brushed, will probably live long and happy lives anyway. Ignorance is bliss.

 

[My Erotic Tale]

On the contrary. Everyone here has a professional credit to say they know what they are talking about, since all we talk about when we comment on other people's works is our personal, individual perspective as readers. There's no one in the world better credited to talk about my opinion as a reader than myself. The poets among us that are interested in knowing what those opinions is will know where to look. Others that are less interested in other people's opinions than in having their own egos brushed, will probably live long and happy lives anyway. Ignorance is bliss.



On the contrary. .................There's no one in the world better credited to talk about my opinion as a reader than myself.

The poets among us that are interested in knowing what those opinions is will know where to look.

Others that are less interested in other people's opinions than in having their own egos brushed, will probably live long and happy lives anyway. Ignorance is bliss.

....repeat line one....


YES MA'AM IT IS,

enlightenment is allowing others to discover for themselves...

(~_~)

I wish you well with your endevour...

 

[Lauren Hynde]

The disagreement was in part, a small part. More of a warning. Angeline can pick up what Pat overlooked as an example - their writing styles are similar, their values in "tool" choice are similar. They are both excellent. I do not think she would question the value of the "tool" choice. I see that in another thread.
Something opposite was done to Pat early on in "not for the thin skinned", he defended but questions where forced on him, I think he got something better out of it.
The duel between him and Jim really was one of the high points on this board.
I'd like to see that happen again. I use these people as best examples.
Hegel, sort of.

That sort of dynamic, with critiques both building on each other or confronting each other, is one of the things that I believe will be encouraged by this new sub-forum. Both models, really, but I believe especially #1, because the more people focus simultaneously on one poem, the more likely it will be for (civil, informed) discussion to ensue. It's all good.

 

[twelveoone]

Completely open to everyone who wishes to give and receive focused poetry critique, engage in sound discussions and grow. Each person sees things from their own perspective, and this is why practically everyone in the forum has voted in favour of this sub-forum's creation: it will be a venue for interested poets to hear those individual perspectives, in-depth, honest, and stripped of chit-chat and fluff.

One small disagreement here, also. I think if a valid question is asked, i.e. why are you doing it this way, especially from a newcomer should be accepted instead of a focused poetry critique, if a number quota is imposed.
Kill the chat, kill the fluff, kill the bullshit in one small part here.
Oh, and Lauren
and Angeline
Pat can grow his own.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I think if a valid question is asked, i.e. why are you doing it this way, especially from a newcomer should be accepted instead of a focused poetry critique, if a number quota is imposed.

All valid questions are welcome in a sound discussion.

 

[Angeline]

Respectfully I disagree, in part. You and Pat are two of the best linear writers around here, this rubic works extremely well in that context, but it is also closed circle. This tendency of similar looking at similar breeds poetry by consensus. It should be guarded against.
All of these things mentioned: theme, organization, word choice, and mechanics, transfer to a degree, across all types, but there can there be agreement on what contitutes good organization, etc. except between similar types of organizers.
As examples re: word choice, what contitutes a good word choice for a Pat Carrington, may not be a good word choice for a Liar.
Your organization and mechanics (which I admire, greatly, BTW) would not be good for annaswirls or WickedEve (which I prefer).
I have a tendency to look at things differently, for each poem, trying to find why it is working or not working, some do not fit in well with your rubic cube.

These are things that most commentors will have to train themselves to look for. They have gotten far too slack in analyzing why they like what they like, as most writers here have gotten far too slack in writing what they write. It is a shame that new poems has gotten so critic adverse, it should have been that over there.

I would prefer to see type two, with the writer's defending what they wrote, as what Pat Carrington's "not for the thin skinned" started. And I think you self absorbed poets should comment or question at least 5 others. Remember it is more important to read than write.

Either way, the mods should be (near) ruthless with off-poem banter, should be a good excercise for you three also.

All that said, I wish you well, and frankly hope to see more of annaswirls, and WickedEve, and Pat Carrington, and others. It would be a good way for people to learn.

Everyone has their own perspective, but poetry is meant to communicate whether its structure is linear or circular. It may not be meant to communicate a story; John Lennon's lyric I Am the Walrus simply communicates a series of images and there are poets who do very avant garde sorts of constructions, but they still intend to communicate something, don't they? I don't think anyone should be judged on what type of poem they wrote, rather on the basis of whether whatever they chose to do is an effective poem. I wouldn't expect a sonnet and free verse in the style of, say, ee cummings to work the same way.

And I don't understand how anyone's type of writing is above or outside being reviewed for word choice and mechanics unless the writer states up front that they specifically went off-kilter because that's some effect they were trying in the poem.

I understand that the banter thing bothers a lot of people, but I always thought this site was supposed to be about learning *and* having fun. I doubt I'll be participating though, so it doesn't really apply to me anymore. I only came into the thread because Lauren has worked really hard on this and asked my opinion. I just wanted to try to help her.

 

[Du Lac]

This will be short.. I promise...

It is as easy as this.

Submit to the forum if you feel you want to. If you like what is happening there then YAY~

If you do not like it then do not go there again, start your own thread or post on one that is already started that you feel comfortable with.

It is easy. You still have free will and choice. No one is making you post your work there. Only you the poet can decide what is best for your writing.

Now that was easy wasn't it?
blessings
du lac~

 

[champagne1982]

It's all well and good to voice
an opinion
on what shape
this subforum will take.

When push comes to shove
honest participation
will be what truly
determines its borders.

Spout your thoughts
say what you will,
write your verse
but remember, until
you act to send
down roots,
there'll be no fresh
green poetic shoots.

This is a big forum, if a group of people choose to either build a subforum or even ask a moderator to sticky a discussion thread, it simply all comes down to levels of interest. If Lauren builds the subforum and people don't take part in it, guess what? Subforum removal is likely as easy as tacking it onto the bulletin board is in the first place.

Stop boiling the tar, fellas, you're building speed bumps where noone's been speeding anyhow, don't waste effort.

 

[champagne1982]

It is as easy as this.

Submit to the forum if you feel you want to. If you like what is happening there then YAY~

If you do not like it then do not go there again, start your own thread or post on one that is already started that you feel comfortable with.

It is easy. You still have free will and choice. No one is making you post your work there. Only you the poet can decide what is best for your writing.

Now that was easy wasn't it?
blessings
du lac~

Amen to that duLac. Thank you.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I'm going to be away for a few days, and we'll create the new sub-forum after I return.

Play nice while I'm gone.

 

[flyguy69]

I'm going to be away for a few days, and we'll create the new sub-forum after I return.

Play nice while I'm gone.

Have a good holiday.

Show off your tan-lines when you get back!

 

[annaswirls]

Have a good holiday.

Show off your tan-lines when you get back!

we can rate them for mechanics, clarity, depth, placement.... etc. I will start a thread when you return