Blog
Just a Nastey Journal

http://www.lowellsun.com/danphelps/ci_10783334

I think I want to defend poetry here.

You can hear it live from this link 

http://www.uml.edu/WUML/Sunrise/default.html

It seems to me that helpful criticism requires a bit of knowledge that sometimes is hard to decipher upon reading one work of a writer, and that is their reason for writing it.

As an example, Jen writes children's verse and comedic verse, and she's quite good at it. But if you were to criticise her material as aimed for an adult market you'd have to change the criteria. 

Understanding what Jen is doing changes how I think of her work.  It is vital to know her audience to make any sort of rational comment on her pieces.

She isn't the only one this is true of. IN fact, I'd say it's true of every piece I read and criticise here. I was really impressed with Keats the other day, the first thing he asked was, "Why do you write poetry?"

That is a fantastic first question. Obviously it doesn't answer everything, but it gives him an idea, when he's reading different works, what that person might be trying to do based on their comments.  

The thought in my head is this - those people who post a poem or two without context here, without commenting on others, talking on the discussion boards, and possibly adding some notes in their journal or on their profile, those people will find it difficult to get any relevant feedback on their work. How can I determine whether the piece works or not, if I don't know what the piece is trying to do?

Suppose they are trying to write a sonnet, but they get the form completely wrong, and it's not labelled as a sonnet. I won't necessarily offer advice on how to fix the form, i may not recognize it as such. If the poem is making a political statement and i can't see it, or I have no idea that that particular poet does that a lot -- my commentary might only touch on the artistry or form and never delve at all into the greater question of whether the work actually successfully makes a political point.

So, what say you all, would you say that Shakespeare's Monkeys is making any headway at all into clarifying the goals of the works posted here such that the commenters are able to give valid and useful comments?

If not, or even if so, how can we work to improve that?

Certainly Alcuin, Derma and Leanne do a remarkable job of discerning such things from the works here, but i'm wondering how we can help all of us to be so good at it? 

Fondly,

stephan 

Well, many of you have noticed that I send out a weekly note just to keep eveyrone informed of the latest going's on on the site. Please take this opportunity to let me know if you think there is some bit of information that I should put out there. I'm not saying everything you ask here will get in my note... but if there's a wide interest in something, I will probably use it.

Thanks!

Fondly,

stephan 

I wish I'd said that. It's so true. Fear of idiocy, by the way, is the prime motivating factor throughout my life. I hate proving how ignorant, foolish and downright stupid I am.

It's not that i don't know that I am, I do, but I hate showing it to the world. Sometimes, it's nice for people to actually see me in a positive light.

In other news: My tooth is killing me! my wife, Anstey Ellen, is being nice enough about it, but I feel bad. I'm a burden. I'm whiny, annoying and lazy. I just sit around and say, "waaaaaah, my toofus hirts"

If I were her - i'd kick my ass and tell me to suck it up.

Love,

stephan

I would specifically like to apologize to Laurie, Joe, Brent and Ruth for not mentioning you and your contributions. I promise, next time I'll do better.

So here it is, Stephan Anstey on WUML's Sunrise program.