So... I have a question...

[Snuffy]

Why is it that only certain people can post on the Merciless page? My poems may kinda suck, but I still like having my heart wrenched out, roasted over a spit and fed to me with a fine Cianti!! Call me maiosocistic (sp?), call me a wierdo, just let me post! Please!!!!! I thought poetry was all about individual thought and feeling, and that is what makes this place special. So, why the censure for the one place that makes it easier to better yourself? I just want the oppurtunity to get burned.

Thanks
Snuffy

[Howard Miller]

Did you bother to read the Forum Description for "Merciless" which includes the phrase "for the considerably more experienced" and goes on to specify that "Merciless" is for work that is on the verge of being publishable in professional poetry journals? Your work doesn't even begin to fall into that category. It is quality of work, not the writer's desire for critique, that determines suitability for the upper-level forums.

Read the forum descriptions and get a grip on PFFA reality before you go blundering again into forums you are not qualified for at this stage in your writing.


Howard

[This message has been edited by Howard Miller (edited 08-24-2002).]

[Snuffy]

Ouch. Did I really deserve that? That wasn't a poem. That is who I am. That's personal...
Ha! I sound like a bad movie! Anyhoo... Did you actually read my poems? Well, I hope so, but no one else has. It was just a question Unworthy of your malice. Keep that for people who actaully have quams... please. But I guess this is what I get. It could have been worse in Merciless, right? Maybe that was your point, though!

Thanks for your quick reply
I won't be trying to post in Merciless anymore

Snuffy

[Donner]

So, I have a question for you:

Can you hit a baseball?

Then you're ready for the majors, right?

Start at the level of your ability. Some of the same people who comment in Merciless also comment in General C&C and in the non-critical forums, so you'll get the same quality of critique in a way that will benefit you. You'll learn far more if you post and work on your writing skills in an appropriate forum than if you get flamed, toasted and roasted.

Donner

[Snuffy]

Thankyou! That didn't hurt a bit actually. I have been posting like crazy. No one's reading though so I thought it would be easier in the Merciless forum. Maybe that is my forum youth. I will try to be patient. Sorry for sounding so absolutley absolute in my wretchedness. I didn't mean for it.

Thank-you, again
Snuffy

[Etain Homme]

Originally posted by Snuffy:
So, why the censure for the one place that makes it easier to better yourself? I just want the oppurtunity to get burned.


Hi Snuffy:

Howard has, of course, answered your question correctly. But I just read your poem that was moved from Merciless to GC&C. In a few minutes I will go back and critique it, but first I wanted to add a little something here. The words I left at the top of this post indicate that you did not understand the Posting Guidelines.

The General C&C is the first place where you ". . . to better yourself." There are over 40 pages of post in the Merciless forum. If you review them you will note that those gathering the greatest number of crits and the greatest number of positive feedback will, for the most part, have a history of many poems in General C&C, then High, (or one of the other steps), and finally in Merciless. There are exceptions, but in general only writers with a great deal of experience can benefit from Merciless.

In Merciless you need to know all the tech. jargon of meter, sonics, and all the mechanics of poetry writing. It is expected that you will make none of the beginner mistakes of clichés, abstractions, forced rhyme, poor meter, and the over use of Adj./Noun pairings.

The truth is, General C&C if a better 'learning tool' than Merciless. Merciless assumes that you have already learned ALL of the basics. Snuffy, I have read your poem. You have, as so many of us do, a lot to learn about the basics. This is a good thing, it is why you are here. Believe me, the Mods did you a favor moving your work to a forum where it can be read by people who expect there to be problems, and are there to critique just that sort of thing


Good Luck,

Etain

------------------

Posting Guidelines (http://www.everypoet.com/guidelines_gencc.htm)
Five Beginners' Blunders (http://www.everypoet.com/poetry/poetry_forums/Forum27/HTML/000034.html)
Suggested Reading (http://www.everypoet.com/readinglist.htm)
AND
The Blurbs of Wisdom (http://www.everypoet.com/poetry/poetry_forums/Forum27/HTML/000046.html)

[Snuffy]

I get all this not ready stuff. I just don't see how poems can be so cut and dry as to have rules. I know that they are not really super set rules, but there are so many people with so many good ideas that might not write them beautifully, but write them truthfully. I'm not claiming to be one of those people with anything to say that might interest anyone, but I feel like I do have something to say, no matter how unartfully. I know this isn't really an answer to you as much as it is a rant. Perhaps this is the anarchist in me trying to get out. I by no means meant to offend you in this reply, just to let you know where I'm coming from. I'm not looking for glory, I'm looking for truth.

Thank-you for listening to me quite possibly make a fool out of myself. And thank-you for replying.

Snuffy

[Snuffy]

I don't want to make enemies. I just had a question and it was answered. Thank-you for that. I never meant to sound like a b@#%h.
Snuffy

[Howard Miller]

"many people with so many good ideas that might not write them beautifully, but write them truthfully. . . . I feel like I do have something to say, no matter how unartfully."


And that clearly defines the fundamental truth about the nature of poetry that you haven't yet grasped: Poetry is art, and what determines the quality of a work is not its "truth value" (which is often subjective and personal, in any event) but the skill with which it is crafted, i. e., whether it is "artful" or not. There's comparatively little "truth" in Shakespeare's sonnets that hadn't been stated before by other poets; what makes his sonnets great is the craft--the artfulness--with which he stated those ideas.

If it's only the ideas that matter, write prose and state those ideas succinctly.

Begin to get the idea?


Howard

[Donner]

Snuffy,

Yours is an honest question, one many people ask--what's poetry about anyway? For one thing, it's not what's said, but the way it's said. In other words, the way the language of the poem is crafted. (You'll hear that word in context of poetry a lot and rightly so.) Take a look through just the Subject Index of the "Blurbs of Wisdom" forum and you find an vast array of topics on crafting a poem--grammar, rhyme, meter, imagery, avoiding clichés and abstractions, figurative language, metaphor, sound, line breaks--all elements that need to be explored and tools that the writer needs to write effective poetry. The operative word there is "effective".

Instead of trying to explain it all here, read this thread, "What is Poetry" (http://www.everypoet.com/poetry/poetry_forums/Forum27/HTML/000014.html). It will get you started.

Donner


[This message has been edited by Donner (edited 08-24-2002).]

[Howard Miller]

snuffy--

Consider the following:

1. "I'm lonely because I'm away from everything I care about."

2. "Western wind, when wilt thou blow,
The small rain down can rain?
Christ, were my love in my arms
And I in my bed again."

In terms of "truth value," the first is the more explicit. Which, however, is the better poem? Why?

[Etain Homme]

Originally posted by Howard Miller:

"Western wind, when wilt thou blow,
The small rain down can rain?
Christ, were my love in my arms
And I in my bed again."



Howard,

This has nothing to do with this tread. Just wanted to say thanks. The above quote is one of my favorites, but not thought of recently. Tonight, my love is traveling, and I am reminded of why I love poetry so much. Verses, like this, are as good as old and dear friends. I am less alone. Thanks again. To bed, now.

Good night all,

Etain

[Howard Miller]

I once had a student to tell me he understood "Western Wind" because he'd spent six months in jail in Tucson, Arizona. Who can know what poem will speak deeply to someone?


Howard

[Snuffy]

I know your points are extremely valid. I guess I'm too simple. I see beauty in both. It is hard to say how you really truly feel, perhaps more conscious. It is somewhat easier to be both wordy and illusionary. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". Not the most artful quote and full of cliches, but fitting, I feel.
Although my words may not sweetly spill from my fingers, they humbly derive from my heart.
or
I can not write as well as I can feel.

Maybe that interests no one but myself. But it is my heart and my words. And I guess in the end my choice. Perhaps I will never be a great writer but I will always be a great feeler.

Thank-you
Snuffy

[Scavella]

If it's your heart that drives you to write poetry, then in all honesty PFFA is probably not be the place for you. Certainly the critical forums will always be dangerous for your heart, as the people who frequent them are really interested in the craft of poetry, and are not above shredding a poorly-wrought piece of work. If you write from the heart, it will get pretty bloody in there.

I'd suggest sticking to Compartmentalized Chaos if you insist on feeling your way to writing a poem. Or trail on over to the PPoP — a palace made for great feelers.

Over here, we tend to pay more attention to the writers.

Cheers.

[MSPav]

Originally posted by Snuffy:
I see beauty in both.Snuffy, I find that the more I read, the more sensitive I become to lousy writing, especially if I try to avoid the lousy stuff and pick books and poems that are well written. I don't know how much you read or what material you choose, but for a general recommendation: read more. And pick something challenging, something that really makes you think.

Mark

[Snuffy]

At this time I am reading "Victorian Prose :
1830-1880" and I have been thinking whilst I read. It is mostly philosophical. The words within it are not poetically beautiful. They are personal truths with which one may not agree but can not help but listen to. I have not said that I do not enjoy a poem well versed. I can understand them, though you may doubt this. I will just say that how can you really, truly tell how the poet feels unless they just say it sometimes. I am not sick of allusion, I just will not trust it. Simple words I trust, for who can say if they come from simple people or from simple emotions. Yes, yes, emotions aren't so cut and dry. I know, hence the want of attractive poetry. Poems are supposed to be easy to relate to in some small way. But there are many things I have never felt and perhaps simplicity is how I can better empathize and not sympathize. This I feel, however, is somewhat out of context to the original question posted. I flow to the words of Dylan Thomas and,(this may be arguable as to worth) Leonard Cohen. However I live not in their worlds nor their words. I live in my world. My words. And what if my world is simple? What if my words are too true to be beautiful. However, I do not speak for myself, nor do I dare speak for you. I am just saying that there is beauty in every person who is willing to share themselves in even the "worst" poem. The rythmn may not touch, the context may not require intense thought, but, my God! Have you ever heard someone read a horrible poem and not thought that "I've never felt that. I'm glad to hear how they feel about that" We may all feel love, sadness, pain, but not in the same way. I am not so cut and dry, nor is anyone else.

I will continue to feel this way, no matter how well read I am. I didn't want this to become a battle between pure poetry and pure thought. I was just defending myself after an attack on my poetry which I doubt was ever read. Not that it is oh, so great. You don't have to agree with me, but don't attack me and who I must be for my beliefs. Please. Attack me for my artlessness perhaps but not my beliefs. Not who you think I am. Not because I may think differently from you. Please.

Thank-you to those who actually read this and thank-you to those who care not to.
Thank-you to everyone, I don't discriminate.
(and that wasn't meant to be sarcastic)
Snuffy

[JohnBoddie]

Snuffy,

What you are doing, in effect, is proclaiming that poetic knowledge is no better than poetic ignorance - that the motivation of the author is the only thing that really counts.

Such a position completely ignores the reader and the use of language - two crucial elements that are at the heart of poetry's value.

If you ask not to be attacked for espousing such nonsense, you are in the wrong place. You are demonstrating both an ignorance of poetry and an unwillingness to learn about the manner in which poetry operates between author and reader. You deserve to be attacked for this sort of stupidity, and far more strongly than you have been.

I doubt you have ever asked yourself "What's in this for the reader?" before posting the drivel you've placed in front of pffa readers.

If you learn nothing else, please learn that readers will give less than a quarter of a s**t about your motivations for posting, your character as a human being, and the nobility of the themes in your poems. What readers care about is what the poem helps them to feel and the ways in which it stimulates them to see the world through new eyes. Self-absorbed, inept writing guarantees failure in this regard at any but the most abstract level.

The good news is that the Pink Palace is right next door. The theories of poetry you are putting forth are accepted as gospel over there.

JB

[Etain Homme]

Snuffy:

We are not trying to beat you up. But here, at the Poetry Free For All, we are most interested in modern poetry. The simple fact is that said poetry has rules..

It does not matter how great the truth is that you are trying to manifest in the words of a poem, song, or speech. If those words do not engage the reader / listener then they are worthless. Words should capture the reader on multiple levels: logic, sound, meter (beat). The words should be a pleasure to read aloud, each fitting that which comes before and after, they should be a pleasure to hear. Think of Winston Churchill's most memorable speeches. It was not just the truth that he spoke, but the way in which he spoke; the pauses, the inflections, the drama of his words. This is the art of writing, this is what poetry should be; the art of words. If all you wanted to write was truth, then you could be a mathematician, or write dissertations on biology. But if you love poetry, then it is the art of the words that you love. Even Picasso, or Dali had form and structure to their work. Picasso's Cubist art was as much math as art. It is the rules that turn our grunts and scribbles into Language! Poetry too, has rules and form and reason. No one is saying that you do not have any truth, or ideas to deliver. But, if you want to deliver them as poetry, then you must write them as poems. Minds work, in general, a certain way. By writing in a format that BEST engages the method of the mind, then you can give power to your truths. If, instead, you write poorly, then you may as well whisper you truth to the house plants. The evolution of who / what we are as thinking beings is bound-up in our language, and, again, our language has rules.


All we are doing here is helping you learn the rules, and maybe, helping you tell your truths, lies, fantasies, hopes, dreams and realities--just a little better. If it helps, do not think of PFFA as the place to learn all poetry, but a place to better your ability to adhere to the rules of modern poetry. Being here implies that you wish to better your skills, that means that you must also better your ability follow the rules that apply to those skills.

Regards,

Etain

[This message has been edited by Etain Homme (edited 08-24-2002).]

[trillion]

Think of it like painting, Snuffy.
A great masterpiece is a work that the artist has deliberated over. The artist has considered carefully the potential and limitations within the chosen medium. S/he has mastery over his/her tools (brushes, palette knife, oils, watercolour, canvas, etc, etc). S/he has considered the balance of the composition, the colours to be used, the symbolism in the finer details, what to include, what to leave out, and so much more. Masterpieces are rarely painted by someone who is just picking up a paintbrush or stick of charcoal for the first, or 100th, time. The artist must go through an apprenticeship of sorts, as does the poet.

All art is as much mind as it is heart. To believe otherwise will only stunt your growth and inhibit your true potential.
Learn, work, practice, practice, practice...(and don't fear your failures - you will learn more from your poetic mistakes than you do from your more serendipitous successes!)

Mary Olivers' "A Poetry Handbook" is an excellent introduction to Poetry. It is a most enjoyable read, full of wonderful information for the beginning poet. I'm certainly pleased I invested in it!

[Andrea345]

but, my God! Have you ever heard someone read a horrible poem and not thought that "I've never felt that. I'm glad to hear how they feel about that"

My first suggestion is that you read ten pages in love with the idea in mind that there should be one concrete offering that you could make to the writer to improve their work. Just one, not three, not four. Notice how often the same phrases are used again and again. Notice how the same similies, metaphors, and phrasing comes up. Until you truly invest your time and thought in another person's work you can't even being to have the experience of what a cliche is, of what an abstraction is. Until you begin to read others work with the idea that somehow it's your responsibility to offer up a suggestion on what would make the work stronger, in your opinion, then you're not reading someone's work. You're not paying attention to the work.

I was just defending myself after an after an attack on my poetry which I doubt was ever read

As far as "being attacked" in Merciless. You posted in Merciless. You posted a substandard piece of work in a forum about which you knew nothing. And then you criticize the reception it received? You received the level of criticism the piece deserved. Sorry, but poetry is not a joke here. The art is not a joke. The love of words is not a joke. The thoughtfulness and time is not a joke. The learning is not a joke. The expectation that a critter (someone writing the critique) knows when to call "tripe," is not a joke.

If a critter at this board does not call "tripe" tripe when they see it they can be asked to leave off commenting in the higher critical forums. That is how dead serious we are about the quality of the critique here.

If you want to improve your poetry, PFFA is a grand place. If you want to have some "slack" cut for you, it's not. It's really that simple. If you have a love of words and want to learn how to use them effectively to move the reader Gen C&C is a fabulous start. Merciless isn't. And any critter in Merciless giving you the crit you should get in Gen C&C is wasting everyone's time here. Those are not the same "level" of critique. The function of Gen C&C is to deal with the initial issues of writing or in a first draft. A person writing a critique in Merciless, is expected to write one which will help the writer finish polishing a piece of publishable quality.

Enough of my sterness. This topic comes up about once a month from someone new to the forum who's just gotten their first review in Merciless or High. It's a cliche now.

If you want poetry written in simple words, here's two of my current favorites:

Punishment
by Seamus Heaney
from "Seamus Heaney, Selected Poems 1966-1987, Farrar, Staus & Giroux, New York, 1999. p.84

I can feel the tug
of the halter at the nape
of her neck, the wind
on her naked front.

It blows her nipples
to amber beads,
and shakes the frail rigging
of her ribs.

I can see her drowned
body in the bog,
the weighing stone,
the floating rods and boughs.

Under which at first
she was a barked sapling
that is dug up
oak-bone, brain-firkin:

her shaved head
like a stubble of black corn,
her blindfold a soiled bandage,
her noose a ring

to store
the memories of love.
Little adulteress,
before they punished you

you were flaxen-haired,
undernourished, and your
tar-black face was beautiful.
My poor scapegoat,

I almost love you
but would have cast, I know,
the stones of silence,
I am the artful voyeur

of your brain's exposed
and darkened combs,
your muscles' webbing
and all your numbered bones:

I who have stood dumb
when your betraying sisters,
cauled in tar,
wept by the railings,

who would connive
in civilized outrage
yet understand the exact
and tribal, intimate revenge.

SONG
by Rhina P. Espaillat
"Where Horizons Go, Pems by Rhina P. Espaillat," New Odyssey Press, 1998. p. 26

From hair to horse to house to rose,
her tongue unfastened like her gait,
her gaze, her guise, her ghost, she goes.

She cannot name the thing she knows,
word and its image will not mate.
From hair to horse to house to rose

there is a circle will not close.
She babbles to her dinner plate.
All gaze and gaunt as ghost she goes--

smiling at these, frowning at those,
smoothing the air to make it straight--
from hair to horse to house to rose.

She settles in a thoughtful pose
as if she understood her fate,
her face, her gaze, her ghost. She goes

downstream relentlessly, she flows
where dark forgiving waters wait.
From hair to horse to house to rose,
her gaze, her guise, her ghost, she goes.

************************

My suggestion, if you want critical commentary, post in Gen C&C. If you don't want crits, post in General or RC&C, or PPop.

best wishes,
-a

p.s. ditto JB, Etain, & trillion

[This message has been edited by Andrea345 (edited 08-25-2002).]

[Clive2]

Snuffy, I think John has pretty much hit the nail on the head. Personally, I don't give a monkey's what the poet was thinking and feeling when they wrote the poem because once the poem is in the public domain, it belongs to me not to him/her, and if it doesn't satisfy me as a reader, then it has failed.

The major thing that disappoints me as a reader is the language in a poem. If it's flat, prosaic, uninspiring, then I am left unsatisfied and, generally, irritated that the writer didn't try harder.

[Howard Miller]

"I will just say that how can you really, truly tell how the poet feels unless they just say it sometimes."

This entire view of poetry is predicated on the false assumption that the purpose of poetry is for the writer to "share his emotions" with the reader. What this amounts to, in the hands of beginners such as yourself, is nothing but a list of emotions you feel--sadness, depression, loneliness, isolation, etc. And what's my reaction to your list? Boredom. Personally, I don't give a damn what you feel about something; I want a poem to make me feel something, and your simply naming your emotions doesn't make me feel anything. What you're talking about is what is often referred to here as writer-centered work; such work never amounts to more than a diary entry which may be fascinating to you but does nothing whatsoever for me. Poetry is reader-centered; it is the use of the full resources of language in order to evoke emotional response in the reader, and that's a totally different thing from what you're talking about. Until you understand the difference, you're not likely ever to write any actual poetry.

What you really mean when you talk about "sharing emotion" is an adolescent and rather naive misunderstanding of the term "self expression," which is all too often thought to mean the same thing as "poetry." Again, they're quite different. "Self expression" simply means "I've written down what I feel," and 99% of the time what is "self expressed" bears no resemblance to poetry. It's just someone saying, "Look at what I feel! Aren't I really sensitive and deep because I can feel such things?" Actually, that sort of thing is nothing more than the emotional equivalent of a toddler who's undergoing toilet training showing everyone what he's just deposited in his potty: "Look! Look! Aren't I a big boy? Praise me." Save your "self expressions" for your diary, and spend some time learning what poetry really is.

To understand how "self expression" manifests itself in successful poetry, study Keats' "Ode on Melancholy" and "To Autumn," two of the greatest short poems ever written, in great detail. Both are "self expressive" in that they present Keats' view of the nature and value of earthly life. However, the emphasis in both is on "expression," i. e., the craft of using language well to evoke emotional responses in the reader, rather than "self"; there are, in fact, precisely zero instances of first person singular pronouns--not an "I," "me," "my," or "mine" anywhere in sight; Keats himself never appears in the poems. That is "self expression" in its highest and genuinely poetic form.

"my poetry which I doubt was ever read"--You keep repeating this particular whine. The fact is, your poem was moved out of "Merciless" precisely because I read it; that's how I know that it clearly doesn't belong there. And your repeated whining about it further shows that you don't belong in "Merciless"; after all, the forum description says "No whining," another lesson you have yet to learn.


Howard

[This message has been edited by Howard Miller (edited 08-25-2002).]

[This message has been edited by Howard Miller (edited 08-25-2002).]

[Snuffy]

Okay, Okay! Enough please. I get it. I get it all. I do love poetry. I love beautiful words. I do. Please don't doubt that. I am sorry for the unusual ruckus I have caused. I do want to better myself. (What's that from?) Anyways. I am here to become a better writer, and poetess. I guess I hit a nerve that I didn't expect. I've never shared my poems with anybody before. I guess they really suck because even the most profound lines I have are misunderstood. I guess understanding them would be a profound change for everyone. I'm sorry to have wasted so many peoples time with this. I didn't expect such passionate and plain responses. I just "said what I meant and I meant what I said" a Snuffy is faithful, one hundred percent. I think that may be the best rhymne scheme you hear coming from me. Thanks Dr. Suess. Thank-you all.
Snuffy

[This message has been edited by Snuffy (edited 08-25-2002).]

[Melanie]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Snuffy:


I guess I hit a nerve that I didn't expect.

even the most profound lines I have are misunderstood. I guess understanding them would be a profound change for everyone.

*To insinuate that people here don't understand your deep thoughts because they'd need to change their way of thinking is nuts.
Simply:
This isn't the right site for Jack Handey poems.

[Snuffy]

That's not what I meant at all. It is just that what I think is profound seems to be common knowledge here. I can't be profound here. I can't be anything here but a terrible poet. I suck. That's it. I'm the least profound person on the planet. I give up trying to say that I have something to say. Obviously I don't. I've been getting my ass kicked enough. So, I'll just go my own Very Unprofound Way.

I'll stick strictly to the songwriter's forum. I promise. I don't want this. I've tried to state my position and no one wants to hear it, so I quit. My position stands, but I will no longer find the need to defend it.

Thank-you
Snuffy

[Howard Miller]

The "Songwriter's Forum" is a critical forum, as well, as are all the forums at PFFA. If what you want is to escape critical comments altogether, try here:

Pink Palace of Profundity and Praise (http://www.everypoet.com/palaceforum.htm)

[Snuffy]

No thanks. I like the critique. I just don't want a big thang. I just can't believe 26 posts or whatever. Ahh!! This is not the way to do it. I didn't mean it to get this edgy. Irksome, even. Thanks for the suggestion, but I'll try to rough it out.
Snuffy

[Etain Homme]

Originally posted by Snuffy:
I just can't believe 26 posts or whatever. Ahh!! This is not the way to do it. .
Snuffy

Hey Snuffy:

Don't feel bad about 26 post. You did it right. Everyone who contributed wrote what they believed, because they wanted to contribute. That is also what a workshop is for. I want to commend you. You never lost your temper, never once used the word 'Nazi' http://www.everypoet.com/poetry/poetry_forums/smile.gif and your responses have remained polite. Though I have only been here a short while, I am sure that many who read these 26 post will gain some insite, and appreciate at least some of what was written.

I am glad you are staying. I wish you good luck and hope to read your post in the future.

Etain

[This message has been edited by Etain Homme (edited 08-25-2002).]

[Urizen]

What Etain said.

Bill

[Snuffy]

Thank-you. Thank-you. Thank-you.
Snuffy

[antigone507]

Originally posted by Snuffy:
... I am sorry for the unusual ruckus I have caused.

Hey Snuffy--if you read through this section, "Gripes...", and in "Outside, the interpersonal resolution area", you will see this thread is definitely not "unusual". Also, if you go to the threads in "The Blurbs of Wisdom" Etain directed you to, you will see discussions much like this--but each thread will have a specific focus, such as abstractions, etc.

...I am here to become a better writer, and poetess. I guess I hit a nerve that I didn't expect.

I don't believe you hit any of our "nerve[s]" but since you haven't "shared" your poetry with anyone prior to coming here, the workshopping process can be quite difficult. This is not a vanity board where posters say, "Ooooo, I liked it cuz I went thru that too," or "Wow, I could feel the emotion." Those kinds of comments simply are not permitted in the critical forums, where you chose to place your poems.

I guess they really suck because even the most profound lines I have are misunderstood. I guess understanding them would be a profound change for everyone.

Not one person reading your poem could misunderstand your words because you told us your feelings, using abstract words like love, loneliness, etc. Feelings are universal; everyone, at one time or another (barring psychopaths), has experienced these same feelings--it's the situations that change. One of the tenets of poetry is to describe in concrete words the situation instead of writing out the abstract word "love." In other words, Show, Don't Tell. So, for all of us to suddenly conform to your idea of what is "profound" would be a little silly, wouldn't it?

I also don't believe any of us thought this was a waste of time, otherwise we wouldn't have spent any time addressing your posts, either here or in Gen C&C. Since you have never shown anyone your poetry before, you need to learn quickly, if you are going to continue to post, that we are not critiquing you as a person, or your potential as a writer. Believe me, this is the easiest way to learn. You don't have to read your poems in front of your peers in class, or sit with a prof while he or she reads them, holding a blue grease pencil while they draw all over the pages. Both are quite painful! This venue is anonymous--and the advice and direction you receive is free.

Thanks for taking the time to read this. I hope I have helped, even a bit. K:)

[Snuffy]

Thank-you! you have. I was feeling this all very personally before, but I'm getting over that. I just needed to take a deep breath. OoooooHooooo! Okay. I'm good. I like this whole critical forum thang, I just took forum personally. My mistake. Well, I hope to begin expanding on my writing. I know I need it!

Thanks again
Snuffy

[Howard Miller]

Good. Separating your ego from your work is an absolutely necessary step for anyone who wants to grow as a writer. Many can't make it; "Outside" is full of them. You sound like you're taking that step. Congratulations.


Howard

[Snuffy]

Thanks Howard!

Snuffy

[Foof]

Oops -- I seemed to have hit "reply" instead of "edit." Newbie error. See below.

[This message has been edited by Foof (edited 08-26-2002).]

[Foof]

Originally posted by Foof:


Ditto Howard. Kudos Snuffy.

I think you touched a nerve (albeit one that's been hit many a time before)because poetry, dance, and fine art are all being run into the ground by those who believe the artist's mantra is "I feel, therefore I am."

Perhaps it's because arts education (hell, education period) and NEA funding in the US is so poor that this is the prevailing notion of not just the outside public, but of some "artists" as well.

Post-modernists like Deborah Hay may have walked across a stage and called it dance, but that doesn't make every pedestrian a dancer.

Snuffy, if you want a to read a good book on these issues, check out Robert Hughes' Culture of Complaint (1992?). Not all of the book discusses the arts, (and some of the non art stuff, in my humble opinion, is off base) but it is worth a look. Good luck with your writing!

Foof

[Clive2]

Just as an aside, Snuffy - don't worry and fret about 'being profound'. Poetry doesn't have to be profound. In fact, poetry that tries too hard to be profound is generally crap. Profundity should take a back seat to enjoyability in my opinion.

[This message has been edited by Clive2 (edited 08-27-2002).]

[Mud Puppy]

**I'm sorry to have wasted so many peoples time with this.**

I, for one, am glad for the time, thought, and energy that's gone into this discussion. I hope the time I've spent reading it hasn't been wasted, nor the 19 pages it took to print it out, also the time I plan on spending rereading it when I am away from the computer.

Thanks all.

[Snuffy]

Wow, that's kinda cool. Huh? *disbelief*
Snuffy