 Melden Fred Associate, 1848 posts |
Gee Laurie, why not open a can of worms? First, because it is art, there is no definitive and final answer. To a large extent it's taste and times - that is, "experts" can differ; and the era determines judgement. The Red Wheelbarrow would have been judged as pure amateurism in 1800. A poem written in the romantic style today would be judged a cliche. Some editorial boards would instantly judge my "The Mystic" as circlular-file fodder because of the partial rhyme scheme; others because it contains the word "soul" (even though the speaker is supposedly a mystic). Lawrence Durrell considered Hemingway a poor writer (mostly correct), while other experts were gushing over Hemingway. And Dylan Thomas' "A Letter to my Aunt" names several contemporary poets widely praised in his time (but not by Thomas) who today are unknowns. The best thing I can say is that one needs to read a lot of poetry from a lot of authors with different styles. Ask yourself which ones you think will stand the test of time - be considered (by a reader with your familiarity with poetry) a half-century or more down the line as something inspiring. It's not much of an answer, but it may be the best we get. Let's see what others say. Alcuin |
 Shannon McEwenfrom Canada 463 posts |
I agree with Alciun, but I also think it comes down to personal experience and preference that makes a poem "good" or "bad" to a reader.
For instance, I'm a mother. So poetry that has been written past and present about real things that happen in daily life appeal to me. they may not appeal to a single man who doesn't like children. (I don't really like children either but that's beside the point!)
Since I am an amateur when it comes to poetry too, I can't answer your question with any subject matter expertise, but it's a great question, that I've often wondered myself. ----- Life is what happens while you wait for great things. Life is what happens while you wait for great things. |
Melden Fred Associate, 1848 posts |
I have one disagreement with Shannon. There is a difference between whether a poem is good, which to me means well conceived and written, and whether it appeals to us. For instance, ee cummings is clever; his poems are good. However I personally don't care for them. This also has to be distinguished from whether the poet writes in a style I like. WC Williams is definitely good (though in some cases I believe excessively fawned over), even though his style is far different from my own. Assessing a poem is very difficult when the piece is in a style we don't care for and on a subject that disinterests us (or takes a position contrary to our own opinion). That requires great objectivity Alcuin |
 Laurie Blumfrom Cloud 9 Associate, 2074 posts |
I guess that is a part of my question, sometimes I see a certain poem being "fawned" over as you say... yet it doesn't look like anything special to me, maybe it is cliche or something I have seen a hundred times. I suppose my inexperience is showing here, do I need a larger knowledge base to appreciate these kinds of poems? Because often I just don't get it... why do readers think it is good? |
 Rene Jonesfrom somewhere in the orbit of my own sphere 558 posts |
You know Laurie, you have asked the question that begs to be answered yet you already answered it yourself. It is hard to say what is good, why it is good or why others like and you(and or I) do not. I have learned in writing class this semester to be able to do a constuctive critique of work or styles that don't particularly appeal to me personally. For instance, one of the guys wrote an extremely political poem that didn't necessarily get to me BUT I saw some fantastic imagery and wonderful use of style in his poem. We had to write a sestina and did a simply awesome job with it. Keep reading though, you learn so much that way. You learn even more when you look for ways for others to improve their work...it seems to give one a more outlook when proofing their own work. I have learned more from workshop and reading than I ever did from writing itself. ----- Rene' I am orbiting, I don't know where, but I am orbiting something! |
 Jennifer Raganfrom Camillus, New York 423 posts |
In my unprofessional opinion, I think it's all about the delivery....a strong beginning, middle and end. I also think it's a feeling you get from reading something that touches you, capturing your interest. Well known poets often write in riddles, at least I think they do. If you can figure out what they are saying, it makes you feel like you are as clever as they are? Needless to say I don't get much....that's why I stay in the shallow end with the kiddie poems:)
|
Laurie Blumfrom Cloud 9 Associate, 2074 posts |
Thanks so much everyone, it is evident there are many differnet ways to appreciate poetry. Including those pieces I don't particularly like myself. I suppose I could use one of those critiquing classes my self! Hey Rene, Email me...I wnat to know how your knees are doing!
|
 Stephan Ansteyfrom Lowell, MA Associate, 6232 posts |
I think, by my estimation, though good poem has to have a certain appeal to at least some group, i think the most vital, important part of a 'good poem' is the thought behind it. Without some idea, some concept, some meaning it doesn't matter how good the technique is, and or even how interesting and fun the poem might be, without something worthwhile to say, it isn't a good poem. (or good writing for that matter) I very frequently can not fathom the meaning of a poem, because i've got such limited mental capacity, so in those instances, i check technique and such, but seldom comment. I figure i don't need everyone to know how stupid I am. But meaning, is, to me, the most important element in any and all writing. -----
|
Melden Fred Associate, 1848 posts |
I'm not certain that I would agree that "meaning" is what's important. After all "Jabberwocky"'s meaning is not clear - and isn't supposed to be. However, we can say what it is "about". It's about silliness and nonsense. That's what it communicates, and it does it well. It also tells us about the characteristics of poems that we recognize. I've taken a lot of heat by well-educated writers over my declaration that poems should communicate. I find it ironic - poems "should merely be" said Archibald McLeish, and poems need not communicate anything, and yet...these same poets go to great lengths to get their works read by others, and read aloud at poetry meetings, and try to get them published so thousands of others will read their words...but supposedly communicating is not important in poetry. This is the reason that I'm so insistant that a reasonably adept reader should be able to tell what a poem is 'about', even if looking up a few words is required. If a person wants to be cryptic, let him write in cyphers that require a secret decoder ring, but don't waste my time. Alcuin |
Shannon McEwenfrom Canada 463 posts |
I agree with Stephan, the meaning beyond the poem is important. Alciun has some great points too but I don't think everyone has to understand the same thing about a poem. We each read from our ownn experience, our own beliefs, so what I get from a poem might be different than what you get from it. ----- Life is what happens while you wait for great things. Life is what happens while you wait for great things. |
Stephan Ansteyfrom Lowell, MA Associate, 6232 posts |
I am not sure I agree with me exactly, because I also agree with Papa Smurf. Though perhaps, meaning is greater than the specific meaning of the words. Meaning might be the impression, the image, the sculpting of the entire piece and the overall effect it has on the audience. I think, one bit of laziness that always strikes me as painful is the idea that 'everyone can take what they want' from a piece. Bullshit. The writer writes. What is written means what the writer means, not what the audience takes from it This isn't to say that the audience can't find more than the author intended, just that the intent must be respected. If it is unfathomable, then the writer has failed in the first mission of any writing.
-----
|
Shannon McEwenfrom Canada 463 posts |
well now I disagree with you Goober, becuase it's not bullshit.
Either that or my poetry is just bullshit, which is likely. ----- Life is what happens while you wait for great things. Life is what happens while you wait for great things. |
Stephan Ansteyfrom Lowell, MA Associate, 6232 posts |
Why would that make your poetry bullshit? My point isn't just aobut the writer, it's also about the reader. The Laziness is both ways. A reader too lazy to fathom the writer's intent, and a writer too lazy to write clearly enough that an audience can undersatnd it. Your poems are coherent. If they lack anywhere it'd be in technicque and at times artistry, both of which you have been growing for years. You are significantly better now than you were a year or two ago. And you're moving in the right direction. So.. no bullshit. -----
|
Melden Fred Associate, 1848 posts |
Why is it called bullshit? Why not cowshit? Sexual discrimination, I say! Alcuin |
 Leanne Hansonfrom Just west of the lounge room Associate, 3708 posts |
"I think, one bit of laziness that always strikes me as painful is the idea that 'everyone can take what they want' from a piece. Bullshit." With all due respect Anstey, screw you. Once I write something, it's not up to me to tell people what it's about. I'm not big on explaining. If you get something from it, and it's not what I expected, I don't care. If you get nothing from it, well, I'm not going to die then either (but you suck as a reader). But I'm damned sure I'm not going to write with a heavier hand and make my metaphors completely transparent so that readers don't have to work a little. If you don't work a bit, you're not going to appreciate it. |
Rene Jonesfrom somewhere in the orbit of my own sphere 558 posts |
Well now, I am with Shan and Leanne on this 100 percent. Actually speaking, when someone reads one of my poems and GETS a whole different perspective than what I got from it, I am humbly honored that I managed to touch them in that way. Maybe it's a memory, maybe it's a metaphor, or maybe just maybe...it what the NEEDED to see at that moment in time. I figure if you want to be absolutely sure that everyone sees what you want them to see, you don't use metaphor. ----- Rene' I am orbiting, I don't know where, but I am orbiting something! |
Stephan Ansteyfrom Lowell, MA Associate, 6232 posts |
Once I write something, it's not up to me to tell people what it's about. I'm not big on explaining. But it is still about what you say it is about, regardless whether they get it or not. If they get somethign you didn't intend, that's fine, i'm with you, I don't really care. However, the piece is still what you meant it to be, not what they found there. And if they were too lazy, or like me too incompetent, to figure it out, that speaks to a lacking in them as audience. Unless of course, as a writer, I didn't give them enough to figure it out. For eample, 3 disconnected images and a title that doesn't really clarify. -----
|
Stephan Ansteyfrom Lowell, MA Associate, 6232 posts |
I figure if you want to be absolutely sure that everyone sees what you want them to see, you don't use metaphor. I disagree. completely. Just because something is a metaphor doesn't mean it isn't clear and understandable. If my point and idea is indiscernible then I have failed in the primary mission of writing. I consider any writing of mine that no one 'gets' to be a failure. Even if they love it. Even if everyone agrees it's 'brilliant.' Even if Leanne and Fred give me a page each on why it's a wonderful poem. If my meaning didn't come across, it is still just a beautiful failure. Which of course suggests it wasn't worth doing, or it is trash. That isn't what I'm saying at all. I'd say most of what I write are failures. However, they're not complete failures. They just fail in one or another aspect of great writing. Perhaps in other aspects they're raging successes. It totally depends. -----
|
Shannon McEwenfrom Canada 463 posts |
is this a gender difference then?
----- Life is what happens while you wait for great things. Life is what happens while you wait for great things. |
Stephan Ansteyfrom Lowell, MA Associate, 6232 posts |
is this a gender difference then?
I don't know! Maybe? that's an interesting question. Does poetry have gender? -----
|
Jennifer Raganfrom Camillus, New York 423 posts |
Maybe we could try an experiment to see if poetry does have a gender. Stephan could post a few anonymous poems that people here submit (poems have haven't already been posted)and see what happens. It will be fun:) |
Shannon McEwenfrom Canada 463 posts |
Sounds fun! ----- Life is what happens while you wait for great things. Life is what happens while you wait for great things. |
Melden Fred Associate, 1848 posts |
I think that one of the things that makes poetry an art is the impossibility of making hard fast rules concerning when a metaphor is too obvious or too obscure. I still say that poetry is one form of communication. So certainly, Leanne, you want others to understand your writing - not everyone, but certainly those with some degree of understanding of writing. You (and I) certainly don't appreciate readers who remark that a poem "doesn't have to rhyme", but if you posted a poem that none of us monkeys could comprehend, that feedback should make you pause and say, "Maybe I was a bit too obscure". If you did not care, then why post? I agree and disagree with Rene. No, I'm not running for office! I agree that it's nice to touch someone, even in an unintended way. However, if our intended meanings are picked up by no one, then I think there's a problem. I tend to be too literal, and recognizing this, I'm gradually developing a more symbolic approach. On the other hand, some writers are indecipherable to nearly all. I think that is another extreme that should be avoided. Alcuin |
Laurie Blumfrom Cloud 9 Associate, 2074 posts |
I guess my lack of formal poetry education is showing here, but I think the original question was less about understaning the writer's intent , I usually "get" most poetry. What I wanted to know was why certain cliche or what I thought was kind of a commonplace poem received accolades and others which I feel show much deeper thought and complexity were ignored. Is it the particular author? The subject matter? (And as an aside on subject matter... I often see when someone writes about some tragic occurance in their life... they almost universally garner positive comments, no matter how badly written.) Does a rough or tragic life make for a better writer? |
Jennifer Raganfrom Camillus, New York 423 posts |
I think what you are referring to at other poetry sites might be part popularity and part a following. You know, if you comment and say how great my poem is I'll do the same for you, even if it sucks. I think of sites like that as a way to see if my stuff appeals to the public while a site like this makes me a better writer. Having a rough life is rough. I think people find a way to vent through poetry and misery loves company. That doesn't make you a better writer. I think it's about compassion, insight and having an unbreakable will to learn and make your poems the best they can be.
|
Leanne Hansonfrom Just west of the lounge room Associate, 3708 posts |
Some people enjoy cliches. They are easy to understand, require absolutely no knowledge of anything except how to put letters together to make a word, and give instant gratification to the fast food reader. Some poetry sites -- and some writers -- thrive on writing and reading such simplicity because it generates lots of activity in a short period of time and that makes the site look good as well as the "poet". This is about as helpful for poetry as Hallmark is. To the point about gender -- although I believe confessional "I" poetry may be gender biased, I've read some horribly girly work by men. I've also carried on conversations on other sites for months without realising that the person I was talking to actually thought I was male. So I'd say that it entirely depends on how much a person is defined by gender as to how much their poetry is. And to Fred: one of the most important aspects of poetry is communication, of that there is no doubt and should never be. However, that communcation need not be what I intend. Once it's written and posted, it's out of my hands. Just like the experiment with describing an elephant, the same words will have different meanings for different readers. Some of my great successes -- as people rate these things -- have been poems that originally meant nothing like the interpretations. That's ok, I have communicated something. It's as much in the hands of the reader as the writer -- or rather, it's MORE in the hands of the reader. The writer only has one shot at it, the reader can come back and add more at leisure.
|
Laurie Blumfrom Cloud 9 Associate, 2074 posts |
" I've read some horribly girly work by men" I just wanted to see this in print again! |
Rene Jonesfrom somewhere in the orbit of my own sphere 558 posts |
is this a gender difference then? That would depend on whether or not you put gender into it. If not, then it would depend on what the reader saw in the words. I do not believe that the differences in what we think of as good poetry has anything to do with gender though. But hey, what do I know anyway? ----- Rene' I am orbiting, I don't know where, but I am orbiting something! |
Leanne Hansonfrom Just west of the lounge room Associate, 3708 posts |
Rene: I absolutely and utterly agree with you. Gender is, after all, a social construct. Do free verse poets have free verse gender? |
Stephan Ansteyfrom Lowell, MA Associate, 6232 posts |
Leanne: I don't know if i buy into that completely, but I certainly lean that way. While I definitely think men and women lean towards different types of thinking and perception, I just think it's a tendency not an absolute. Therefore, it makes perfect sense that men can write girly poetry and women macho poetry. -----
|
Leanne Hansonfrom Just west of the lounge room Associate, 3708 posts |
You just want an excuse to write girly poetry and stay manly. |
Stephan Ansteyfrom Lowell, MA Associate, 6232 posts |
" You just want an excuse to write girly poetry and stay manly. " yes -----
|
Melden Fred Associate, 1848 posts |
Like I said, Laurie: A can of worms; but I think we've caught a few fish worth eating. I would say that we all write for different kinds of meanings. I don't hold metaphor to be as important as, say, Leanne or Kat. I don't care about traditional forms, like sonnets, as much as some do. I am concerned with the sound of a poem. Is it like music? How does it hit the ear? If I could label it, I guess I would be called a 'tonalist'. What makes one of my poems good or bad: Do I achieve my tonalist goal in a poem; also any other obvious goals, like conveying an idea, a feeling, or whatever. When Leanne writes a sonnet, we should judge it good or bad (unlikely) on whether the rhyme and meter are correct and come off smoothly. If she intends metaphor, then we have another handle on which to judge her. So the question regarding Laurie's writes is: What are her goals for a particular piece, and does she achieve them? Does this sound reasonable, or just the late night ramblings of a half-mad man? Alcuin |
Leanne Hansonfrom Just west of the lounge room Associate, 3708 posts |
Actually, first and foremost to consider when you read a sonnet is whether it should be a sonnet or not -- the same goes with any form of poetry including free verse. The one thing that is guaranteed to make me instantly dislike a poem is if it seems jammed into the wrong shape -- unfortunately, to recognise when that shape is wrong requires knowing what it ought to look like, and that means reading a lot of poetry. Though it's not entirely possible to say what makes good poetry, it is certainly possible to say what makes a poem a really bad example of what it's claiming to be. It just doesn't fit. |
 Colleen Sperry 622 posts |
Leanne: I think I need to read a lot more poetry.. I'm never sure about what form to use... I've been trying to learn the some of the different forms just to see their differences and maybe learn how to use them! |
Rene Jonesfrom somewhere in the orbit of my own sphere 558 posts |
Now, this has been quite an enlightening thread to say the least. Wouldn't it be just totally awesome if we all would spend this much time with each others poetry, making comments, suggestions, and asking questions? That is where the real learning of poetry lies(at least in my humble opinion anyway).  ----- Rene' I am orbiting, I don't know where, but I am orbiting something! |
Stephan Ansteyfrom Lowell, MA Associate, 6232 posts |
" Now, this has been quite an enlightening thread to say the least. Wouldn't it be just totally awesome if we all would spend this much time with each others poetry, making comments, suggestions, and asking questions? That is where the real learning of poetry lies(at least in my humble opinion anyway). Actually, I think both are necessary. Poets learn very little to nothing from comments if they don't have context. This time is just as important as time spent with each other's poetry. In fact, reading draft-poetry and the type of poems posted on this site and many others isn't really a supplement for reading published, vetted poetry. -----
|
Laurie Blumfrom Cloud 9 Associate, 2074 posts |
I just bought a huge book entitled "Immortal Poems" It has like 600 pages of poetry and verse. I will try to read all of them...although I have skipped to a few poets I really wanted to read. I can always learn something new from reading! |
Rene Jonesfrom somewhere in the orbit of my own sphere 558 posts |
Actually, I think both are necessary. Poets learn very little to nothing from comments if they don't have context. This time is just as important as time spent with each other's poetry. In fact, reading draft-poetry and the type of poems posted on this site and many others isn't really a supplement for reading published, vetted poetry.
I didn't mean to imply that we don't need to read 'vetted' poetry by an stretch of the mind. Quite the contrary as far as I am concerned. I have read several books of poetry this semester and for this moment in time, my favorite modern day writer has got to be hands down, Sharon Olds. She hits on nerves of mine with a clarity that gets right to the point. She writes her own life in a cathartic process that I can feel come alive in my hands. I have also learned that listening to and reading other writers input on your own work gives you (the writer) an insight that you may not have had before. I believe that constuctive critiquing is a necessary tool for furthering ones own work and that of others in the same process. Which ultimately brings me back to your own words Stephan...a poem (in your view) is not successful unless the meaning that you intended is comprehended by the reader. How else will you know if it is understood unless someone(preferably more than one) gives you feedback and lets you know what they saw and what they think might make your point clearer? ----- Rene' I am orbiting, I don't know where, but I am orbiting something! |
Melden Fred Associate, 1848 posts |
"How else will you know if it is understood unless someone (preferably more than one) gives you feedback and lets you know what they saw and what they think might make your point clearer?" Well stated Rene. Too bad you're not running for some office or other, because you'd definitely have my vote. This site has some awesome writers, and I like the idea of a publication. Both make this site special. But some poets have responded to my critiques with personal messages expressing thanks followed by regret that more commenting on their poems does not occur. We learn from getting critiques, and then we learn a lot more by giving critiques. It's part of the process of development, even if the writer thinks his/her critiquers can go take a leap. I think we should all make a goal of critiquing at least one piece a day on this site. Alcuin |
Laurie Blumfrom Cloud 9 Associate, 2074 posts |
I for one, hardly feel qualified to make any kind of critique. The few times I have tried to provide feedback to someone I usually just get ignored or told thanks, but no thanks (even for puncuation or spelling suggestions) I will mention when I like a poem, but I feel I cannot assist others very much when I need alot of help myself. All I can say is I apprecaite ALL the feedback I get on my poems. |
Stephan Ansteyfrom Lowell, MA Associate, 6232 posts |
Rene, I wasn't saying that comments and such aren't vital, i was saying that discussions like this are equally vital.  I agree, how else would we know. I agree with you. The impression I got from a previous comment was that you felt like this conversation was a waste of time and would be energy better spent commenting on poetry. That may or may not have been your feeling on the matter. I was preemptively saying, I think both are important.-----
|
Stephan Ansteyfrom Lowell, MA Associate, 6232 posts |
You are very qualified Laurie. Don't make me give you a publich thrashing and call in Leanne, Tracey adn Julie to kick your ass. As much as I love a girl fight, I would like to spare you the humiliation. -----
|
Leanne Hansonfrom Just west of the lounge room Associate, 3708 posts |
I have been giving this a lot of thought and I've come up with my own definition of great, not just good, poetry:
|
Melden Fred Associate, 1848 posts |
Ah yes...now I remember why I bow down to Leanne. She has designated the criteria of good poetry not in terms of an "is" but of a "does". Of course, this leaves a bit of subjectivity in it - obviously, many of the semi-literates who read a book every year or two would not be moved by great poetry. So I would add that the judgement of a piece should be made only after people with a decent familiarity with writing or reading have had a chance to consider it according to her criteria. Alcuin |
Rene Jonesfrom somewhere in the orbit of my own sphere 558 posts |
Rene, I wasn't saying that comments and such aren't vital, i was saying that discussions like this are equally vital.
I agree with you here Stephan, both are extremely important parts of what goes into forming 'great' poetry. I also agree (for the most part) with Leanne on the guidelines she set out here for what makes great poetry with the exception that; sometimes, what moves me (or someone) may not move someone else so that makes it just a tad bit harder to distinguish what is actually great per se. I also feel that great poetry is timeless, it works now, it works tomorrow, and it works years from tomorrow. The comraderie of a workshop builds trust among individuals. This means that when someone you have worked with before says to you that they think there is a problem in your poem, you are more likely to pay attention to them than to someone who has never worked with you before. Someone who is unwilling to listen to your own comments/critiques would be hard put to get you to listen to their own on your own work. It is not that a certain clique is formed, but more that trust is built among people who have been consistently reading each others poems. I am orbiting, I don't know where, but I am orbiting something! |
Leanne Hansonfrom Just west of the lounge room Associate, 3708 posts |
Alcuin, I'm afraid this is one of those rare occasions where I actually disagree with you (at least I think I do). You see, when I write poetry I don't write it for poets to read, I write it in the hope that someone who's never picked up a book of poetry will find himself surprised that it might be for them after all. In that regard, I think a great poem should speak to the semi-literates as well as the great bereted literati. Most of my own favourite poems were, after all, written in the bardic tradition and those who knew them probably couldn't do more than scratch an X for their names. All poetry is, of course, subjective. Rene is perfectly right to say that what moves one will not move another. Personally, I hate both Eliot and Cummings (I refuse to do the pretentious small c thing). Many would flay me alive for voicing such a thing. I also dislike, with passion, Ogden Nash. But the poetry I enjoy will not be enjoyed at all by many others (Mr Of York is not a Rimbaud fan, I believe). So perhaps I should qualify and say that the definition of great poetry doesn't change, but its application varies from reader to reader, and if a consensus is ever reached then I think it's time for the lot of us to give in, because on that day it truly will be a dead art. |
Rene Jonesfrom somewhere in the orbit of my own sphere 558 posts |
I am in TOTAL agreement with you here Leanne. (I can't stand Cummings either). You have summed this all up rather well! I am orbiting, I don't know where, but I am orbiting something! |
Stephan Ansteyfrom Lowell, MA Associate, 6232 posts |
I'm going to agree too, because being a lemming is my thing. |
Leanne Hansonfrom Just west of the lounge room Associate, 3708 posts |
Anstey was a kamikaze
|
More in Modern & Classic Poetic Discussion
What makes a poem good?
I have read alot of poetry in many books and on several websites. What is it that makes a poem "good" or well written? What is it that makes a poem "Bad" or amateurish? Is it personal preference? Is it style? I know what I enjoy, but figure I certainly don't know that much about poetry. What is it about those "good" poems that capture your interest?
Invite participants
Share at Facebook
Share at Twitter
Share at LinkedIn
Reference this page- Monitor
- Recent files
- See also
- » Nov 2007 (71 pages)
- » Week of 11/05/07 (12 pages)