How Much Should Critique Affect You?
well, we tried... and, yeah, he's clearly just trolling. i like to give people a chance and not jump all over them because of a lack of understanding or a willingness to wonder.
still surprises me, though, the differences people bring to moderating.
still surprises me, though, the differences people bring to moderating.
many of us are intimately connected with our own poetry--no surprises there, of course.
however, when we absolutely refuse to even contemplate the idea that our babies can be somehow improved upon by judicial edits that others suggest, simply because we believe our own piece is "perfect", then we close our mind to possible growth as a writer.
ego stands in the way of too many writers.
sure, the suggestions may not 'work' for you, but decide that AFTER taking a looksee; even if it only confirms your original choices, take that opportunity to look at your piece through other, fresh eyes. it's valuable to us as writers!
when your monstrous ego dismisses all critique rudely, without consideration, you do yourself a disservice as well as those who spent time actually reading your work and gifting you their own, precious time in the thinking and responding. such rude rejections speak more to your own underlying insecurities as a writer than they do to the quality of your writing. there is not ONE poet here whose work is "perfect"; we may strive for the best it can be. stop striving? you stagnate.
constant rude rejection--a different fish to disagreeing with edit-suggestions--will reap you only the reward of fewer and fewer bothering to read or comment on your piece. you want exposure? well, rude replies work directly against your aim (yes, i am speaking about that newcomer who's not 'edgy' but simply rude to others atempting to accomodate his wishes for honest critique).
you want real, in-depth critique? why should i, or anyone, invest that time in someone who cannot handle even the most surface-skimming comments on their work?
a clue: ain't gonna happen
however, when we absolutely refuse to even contemplate the idea that our babies can be somehow improved upon by judicial edits that others suggest, simply because we believe our own piece is "perfect", then we close our mind to possible growth as a writer.
ego stands in the way of too many writers.
sure, the suggestions may not 'work' for you, but decide that AFTER taking a looksee; even if it only confirms your original choices, take that opportunity to look at your piece through other, fresh eyes. it's valuable to us as writers!
when your monstrous ego dismisses all critique rudely, without consideration, you do yourself a disservice as well as those who spent time actually reading your work and gifting you their own, precious time in the thinking and responding. such rude rejections speak more to your own underlying insecurities as a writer than they do to the quality of your writing. there is not ONE poet here whose work is "perfect"; we may strive for the best it can be. stop striving? you stagnate.
constant rude rejection--a different fish to disagreeing with edit-suggestions--will reap you only the reward of fewer and fewer bothering to read or comment on your piece. you want exposure? well, rude replies work directly against your aim (yes, i am speaking about that newcomer who's not 'edgy' but simply rude to others atempting to accomodate his wishes for honest critique).
you want real, in-depth critique? why should i, or anyone, invest that time in someone who cannot handle even the most surface-skimming comments on their work?
a clue: ain't gonna happen
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
Sometimes I think valuable critics are shy to critique, too. As not to insult or discourage. But the rare times someone has with mine, I have made the little tweaks and changes...
That being said, not everyone has the skill (or right) to critique! Like this guy. I think that’s the first thing that comes to the receivers head “oh hey what makes this person an expert...” and with their lack of experience, they will view your work, and decide it isn’t up to par with their likings (often now biased) Thus critique is further ignored. It’s an ego thing... but it’s also... a general intelligence thing. If you’re smart and you’re looking at the big picture— you are always open to growing and improving.
That being said, not everyone has the skill (or right) to critique! Like this guy. I think that’s the first thing that comes to the receivers head “oh hey what makes this person an expert...” and with their lack of experience, they will view your work, and decide it isn’t up to par with their likings (often now biased) Thus critique is further ignored. It’s an ego thing... but it’s also... a general intelligence thing. If you’re smart and you’re looking at the big picture— you are always open to growing and improving.
Rachel_Lauren said:Sometimes I think valuable critics are shy to critique, too. As not to insult or discourage. But the rare times someone has with mine, I have made the little tweaks and changes...
That being said, not everyone has the skill (or right) to critique! Like this guy. I think that’s the first thing that comes to the receivers head “oh hey what makes this person an expert...” and with their lack of experience, they will view your work, and decide it isn’t up to par with their likings (often now biased and coming from inexperience) Thus critique is further ignored. It’s an ego thing... but it’s also... a general intelligence thing. If you’re smart and you’re looking at the big picture— you are always open to growing and improving.
i think it's very sad that people are too shy or unsure about offering their opinions on any piece of poetry offered up for general consumption.
a person may not have the skills to present a full, in-depth "critique"—or, if they do, the time or confidence to post them. it's not about how good you are at critiquing: it's about offering the author valuable insight as to how an individual reader interacts with their work.
the fact someone may not have the skillsets developed as yet to offer that in-depth stuff doesn't negate that they may see something others miss: the reader may simply be able to identify that they didn't connect with the poem—where a phrase or word-arrangement confused them, for example. they can also point out places/lines/words/images that struck them. these things help the author identify strengths and weaknesses in their work.
often crits will vary, even directly oppose eachother, leading to confusion—but there's a sort of golden rule of three:
always consider the source: one viewpoint is valid but lends better perspective when it has at least two others against which to bounce.
if 3 people whose opinions you value all point out the same areas of weakness? you can pretty much take it to the bank that you need to address that.
That being said, not everyone has the skill (or right) to critique! Like this guy. I think that’s the first thing that comes to the receivers head “oh hey what makes this person an expert...” and with their lack of experience, they will view your work, and decide it isn’t up to par with their likings (often now biased and coming from inexperience) Thus critique is further ignored. It’s an ego thing... but it’s also... a general intelligence thing. If you’re smart and you’re looking at the big picture— you are always open to growing and improving.
i think it's very sad that people are too shy or unsure about offering their opinions on any piece of poetry offered up for general consumption.
a person may not have the skills to present a full, in-depth "critique"—or, if they do, the time or confidence to post them. it's not about how good you are at critiquing: it's about offering the author valuable insight as to how an individual reader interacts with their work.
the fact someone may not have the skillsets developed as yet to offer that in-depth stuff doesn't negate that they may see something others miss: the reader may simply be able to identify that they didn't connect with the poem—where a phrase or word-arrangement confused them, for example. they can also point out places/lines/words/images that struck them. these things help the author identify strengths and weaknesses in their work.
often crits will vary, even directly oppose eachother, leading to confusion—but there's a sort of golden rule of three:
always consider the source: one viewpoint is valid but lends better perspective when it has at least two others against which to bounce.
if 3 people whose opinions you value all point out the same areas of weakness? you can pretty much take it to the bank that you need to address that.
butters said:i think it's very sad that people are too shy or unsure about offering their opinions on any piece of poetry offered up for general consumption.
a person may not have the skills to present a full, in-depth "critique"—or, if they do, the time or confidence to post them. it's not about how good you are at critiquing: it's about offering the author valuable insight as to how an individual reader interacts with their work.
the fact someone may not have the skillsets developed as yet to offer that in-depth stuff doesn't negate that they may see something others miss: the reader may simply be able to identify that they didn't connect with the poem—where a phrase or word-arrangement confused them, for example. they can also point out places/lines/words/images that struck them. these things help the author identify strengths and weaknesses in their work.
often crits will vary, even directly oppose eachother, leading to confusion—but there's a sort of golden rule of three:
always consider the source: one viewpoint is valid but lends better perspective when it has at least two others against which to bounce.
if 3 people whose opinions you value all point out the same areas of weakness? you can pretty much take it to the bank that you need to address that.
Yep.
twelveoone's Rule of Three
a person may not have the skills to present a full, in-depth "critique"—or, if they do, the time or confidence to post them. it's not about how good you are at critiquing: it's about offering the author valuable insight as to how an individual reader interacts with their work.
the fact someone may not have the skillsets developed as yet to offer that in-depth stuff doesn't negate that they may see something others miss: the reader may simply be able to identify that they didn't connect with the poem—where a phrase or word-arrangement confused them, for example. they can also point out places/lines/words/images that struck them. these things help the author identify strengths and weaknesses in their work.
often crits will vary, even directly oppose eachother, leading to confusion—but there's a sort of golden rule of three:
always consider the source: one viewpoint is valid but lends better perspective when it has at least two others against which to bounce.
if 3 people whose opinions you value all point out the same areas of weakness? you can pretty much take it to the bank that you need to address that.
Yep.
twelveoone's Rule of Three
JohnnyBlaze said:
LOL it was probably 1201 who somehow started the rumor!
Last I remember he went off to have hand surgery and never came back.i believe he had other health issues, but i so hope you're right. that man was the one who first introduced me to cognitive poetics and the poem he sent to my phone--took him months and months to write--was one of the most glorious things i think i've ever read.
LOL it was probably 1201 who somehow started the rumor!
Last I remember he went off to have hand surgery and never came back.i believe he had other health issues, but i so hope you're right. that man was the one who first introduced me to cognitive poetics and the poem he sent to my phone--took him months and months to write--was one of the most glorious things i think i've ever read.
[ NaPo 2017 ] Only Poets Read Other Poets
A great philosopher, poet
and all around smart-ass
twelveoone
[ pronounced twelve-oh-one ]
said unto me
as we conversed upon
the pinnacle of a Mount Literoticus
"Only poets read other poets."
I held up a stone tablet
carried around for such an occasion
in my backpack
Upon it was chiseled the
Twelfth or Thirteenth Commandment
( can't remember which )
Thou Shalt Not Stereotype!
( I added the exclamation point with a Sharpie )
For all that noise coming out our radios
accompanied by guitars, pianos and such
is poetry! and billions of people
without a poetic bone in their bodies
can't live without it
The real problem is
those billions of people can
and do live without the kind of poetry
we write because not only is it lacking
in music and is not sung
it has been given a bad reputation for
not making any sense
( granted, some poems don't )
coming off like a private joke
( granted, some poems do )
perpetuating riddles without answers
( yes, that is extremely obnoxious
I'll grant you that as well )
Okay, I admit I'm not really
helping our case here .....
So, what now?
Do we just settle for
only being read by other poets?
Or do we write verse embedded
with musicality and prompts
inspiring Average Joe to experience
our poetry as music in their minds?
Go sit under a tree
fire up your I-Pod, Walkman or whatever
and ponder this for a while:
People going through their days
without ear buds or headphones
listening to your poetry
---their playlists set to
REPEAT
Written by JohnnyBlaze
Go To Page
We own our own meat,
We own our own words accepting or not accepting positive suggestions is our right as poets if its refusal is respectful. If someone is rude about another's attempt to critique, then the critiquer should just walk away and not respond. The critiquer, equally should not be rude or be disrespectful to the poet's words and voice. If they are, my advice would be the same - these people have nothing of value to offer you. Walk away and shake them off like a bad dose of flees.
For rude and disrespectful poets and critiquers, my advice is: "Report And Block"
One last thing I think the term honest critique in the tick box in submissions should be changed to "Constructive Feedback". I think that many people tick the honest critique because they don't realise what might come back to them and are sometimes shocked by such hones critiques. I think in-depth critiques should be offered and agreed to by all poets, but shouldn't be done without a personal request
We own our own words accepting or not accepting positive suggestions is our right as poets if its refusal is respectful. If someone is rude about another's attempt to critique, then the critiquer should just walk away and not respond. The critiquer, equally should not be rude or be disrespectful to the poet's words and voice. If they are, my advice would be the same - these people have nothing of value to offer you. Walk away and shake them off like a bad dose of flees.
For rude and disrespectful poets and critiquers, my advice is: "Report And Block"
One last thing I think the term honest critique in the tick box in submissions should be changed to "Constructive Feedback". I think that many people tick the honest critique because they don't realise what might come back to them and are sometimes shocked by such hones critiques. I think in-depth critiques should be offered and agreed to by all poets, but shouldn't be done without a personal request
[ NaPo 2017 ] Only Poets Read Other Poets
A great philosopher, poet
and all around smart-ass
twelveoone
[ pronounced twelve-oh-one ]
said unto me
as we conversed upon
the pinnacle of a Mount Literoticus
"Only poets read other poets."
I held up a stone tablet
carried around for such an occasion
in my backpack
Upon it was chiseled the
Twelfth or Thirteenth Commandment
( can't remember which )
Thou Shalt Not Stereotype!
( I added the exclamation point with a Sharpie )
For all that noise coming out our radios
accompanied by guitars, pianos and such
is poetry! and billions of people
without a poetic bone in their bodies
can't live without it
The real problem is
those billions of people can
and do live without the kind of poetry
we write because not only is it lacking
in music and is not sung
it has been given a bad reputation for
not making any sense
( granted, some poems don't )
coming off like a private joke
( granted, some poems do )
perpetuating riddles without answers
( yes, that is extremely obnoxious
I'll grant you that as well )
Okay, I admit I'm not really
helping our case here .....
So, what now?
Do we just settle for
only being read by other poets?
Or do we write verse embedded
with musicality and prompts
inspiring Average Joe to experience
our poetry as music in their minds?
Go sit under a tree
fire up your I-Pod, Walkman or whatever
and ponder this for a while:
People going through their days
without ear buds or headphones
listening to your poetry
---their playlists set to
REPEAT
Written by JohnnyBlaze
Go To Page
Ahavati said:
OmG! I can't believe you found that! I couldn't even begin to remember the title or when I wrote that. Was that a NaPo 2017 entry?!
OmG! I can't believe you found that! I couldn't even begin to remember the title or when I wrote that. Was that a NaPo 2017 entry?!
Anonymous
The value of a critique is based on the veracity of the source and the critique’s content. “I like the poem” is not a valid critique. A critique from a member of a site chiefly influenced by internal politics is not a valid critique. I know of a site where many good writers have been either “chased off”, ignored or driven to disgust by cliques…a critique from that site should be considered highly suspect.
