| Author | Message | ||
| Admin
Board Administrator Username: admin Post Number: 61 Registered: 11-1998 |
We are thinking about a new forum. It seems that we have a vacuum on the board for those writers who are interested in how the poem they’ve written impacts the reader. That is, writers want to know how the reader interprets the content of the piece. In the past, many members have included a content statement in their critiques as well as word choices, line breaks etc. However, as Wild has evolved we see more critiques on the structure of a piece and fewer critiques on what the damn thing means to each reader. So we are asking these questions of the membership. Right now this is in a discussion stage but we want to put something out there that is useful to as many of you as possible. 1. Would you value a forum where only interpretations of a piece are offered and do you think the author should come back to the thread eventually and state what his/her intentions were when writing the content or should he/she just remain silent? 2. If we do put an interpretation forum up, should we allow the author to double post the poem in CV or Bio to get other types of critique? And if so, do you think that members would soon tire of critiquing a the same poem in two different places? 3. Or, should we just allow any type of critique in the new forum but require that part of that critique be on interpretation and not allow double posting? These are out thoughts. All input welcome. Thanks for reading Admin | ||
| Ava South
Advanced Member Username: avasouth Post Number: 1054 Registered: 05-2006 |
I think I like option 2 the best. I know I don't mind seeing a double post, pulled from other forums. Generally, I like the most comments and crits I can get on my poems so that I can draw from them for revision. Also, I like it when I get different reader interpretations. Often I get a whole new idea that I had never thought of for the piece. That's just me, of course, but you asked, ~smile~ Ava | ||
| penny
Senior Member Username: funnyoldlady Post Number: 2668 Registered: 06-2006 |
Hi Mods - I think a new forum is a great idea - but it would be helpful for me to know the author's intention as well as what it meant to me. IMHO, the double posting wouldn't be necessary if the forum required that part of the crit be on interpretation. Thanks for asking! penny (-:= Let us so live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry. - Mark Twain. | ||
| Zephyr
Senior Member Username: zephyr Post Number: 5906 Registered: 07-2003 |
Thank you for asking us, I liked option two but is that going to take up a lot of space, or be a problem for mods? Knowing the authors intention before reading a poem might affect the readers own interpretation? Wouldn't it be better to read it blind and then get the authors intention? (Message edited by Zephyr on February 19, 2007) Best wishes Zephyr Igor Stravinsky In order to create there must be a dynamic force, and what force is more potent than love? | ||
| Gary Blankenship
Senior Member Username: garyb Post Number: 11045 Registered: 07-2001 |
Thanks for the poll. I don't think it matters, time and chores dictate most of what we say. Actually, I avoid talking about themes, because except for whether the poem relates it if way we can understand and be moved, any theme but the most base is acceptable. In addition, I believe we can have too many forums, sometimes like in a ku, fewer is better. Smiles. Gary A River Transformed The Dawg House January 2007 and last FireWeed | ||
| Lazarus
Senior Member Username: lazarus Post Number: 2859 Registered: 10-2005 |
Dear Admin, I don't know if you are really serious with this post, because you seem to be not quite yourself. This line: "However, as Wild has evolved we see more critiques on the structure of a piece and fewer critiques on what the damn thing means to each reader," just doesn't sound like you. Are you feeling OK? I have never known Wilders to withhold on critiques. When a poem touches one of us in some way most of us will say so, in either sub, CV or BIO. It's my view that poetry and meaning are only slightly connected. But if a poet has some intent that they don't think has come through, it is always their option to ask the readers if it was missed. IMHO- Wild doesn't need another forum to only talk about one aspect of a poem. If an author wants to find out anything about their readers response they need only ask, and I can only wish good luck to any one looking to find out what an author meant in writing any particular poem. "When I sense an electrical charge around a person, event, or place I know there's a poem in it" ~ Susan Goldsmith Wooldridge Poetspennies eBay Window | ||
| Penelope
Intermediate Member Username: penelope Post Number: 656 Registered: 07-2005 |
M,honestly I would have trouble keeping up with two critiques/forums for one piece. Heck, I don't seem to get to all the poems I want to as it is. Couldn't authors who want or need a specific interpretation of content ask us to briefly comment on that in our critiques in CV? Of course, if I do that, I want the author to share the intention. It seems to me that Sublux and, especially, Bio already deal specifically with interpretation because of the detailed nature of the critques and workshopping. It's hard to avoid it there when the author needs that information to work the piece more effectively. Could it be that some writers would like a little more detailed critique than CV but not quite the level of Bio? I guess, I'm just having a problem with separation of interpt and poetics in anyway. Don't know if that's much help. But it's my very respectful take on it. I much appreciate all your efforts to meet our needs. Wonder woman. Penelope | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 9713 Registered: 11-1998 |
Thanks for joining in the discussion, folks. And yes, Laz, this was posted by Admin (steve to be precise who is just as much Admin as I am). And yes, we're feeling OK. *LOL* This is just a discussion about a concept we're kicking around. We have no definite plans about anything yet. What we have noticed about poetry forums -- not just Wild, but others as well -- is that lots of attention is devoted to making suggestions to authors about improvements to a piece, but very rarely is a critiquer brave up to step up with a comment to the author about his/her individual interpretation of a piece. Not the meaning, but rather the perception of the reader as to what that poem is saying. Interpretations are all very personal and unique, and come not only from the reading of the poem itself, but also from all the background and baggage a reader brings to the read. Of course authors will have a particular interpretation or meaning in mind when they write the poem (or at least, they should have). But this is often very different from what the reader sees. We thought it might be valuable to authors not only to receive suggestions for edits but to have a place where only interpretations were given. Speaking for myself personally, I find it very instructive when someone leaves me his/her ideas on what the poem is saying or how they are interpreting the words. My readers often see things I never would have expected, things I did not know I wrote into a poem. This is valuable information. I may be pleased with these alternate interpretations no matter how varied they are from each other or my own or I might wish to continue to work on the poem so that reader interpretations are more closely aligned with my ideas on the subject, theme and content. But the only way I can know that is if someone is brave enough to tell me. Most are often reticent to do so for fear of being wrong, not realizing that with regarding to meaning in poetry, there is no right or wrong. Simply closer or further away from author intent. And unfortunately, I don't get this kind of feedback (nor see many other people getting it) often enough. Yes, Laz, it might seem that if an author wants to find out reader response they need only ask, but very rarely do our members return to another author's poem once they have read it and left a comment. By having a forum where only interpretations are encouraged, the author wouldn't need to ask or hope people might click on the thread again to answer the query. We're not trying to find out what an author meant by writing any particular poem. We are trying to give that author feedback on what his/her readership is seeing in the work. It is then up to the author to decide what to do with that information. As I said, we are merely kicking this idea around the town square. In order for writing forums like Wild to remain vibrant and active, we not only have to be responsive to our membership, but think up new and useful ways of engaging one another. If we just continue to do the same old thing the same old way, we risk becoming stale. Grow or get left behind, you know? Please continue the discussion. Your thoughts are proving most enlightening! Love, M & s | ||
| LJ Cohen
Moderator Username: ljc Post Number: 6305 Registered: 07-2002 |
Where I see it as a moderator, is that CV has become a catch-all for everything from light general comments ("I really love this poem") to line edits likely more appropriate to BFB. Rather than having a sub board for meaning/interpretation, I would like to see a "sharing" board which would be for poets who wanted to get general comments without critique. That might clarify what CV is used for. I could see the interpretation/meaning happening there. In terms of double posting, I don't see a problem with moving a piece from one level of critique to another and I believe only a small percentage of wilders would want to do that anyway. I can say as a poet/reader, (not in my moderator role)I would be less likely to spend a lot of time in the interp/sharing board, as one of my goals for participating at wild in developing my skill as a reader and in critique. best, ljc Once in a Blue Muse Blog | ||
| sue kay
Intermediate Member Username: suekay Post Number: 360 Registered: 11-2005 |
Hi M! I myself am most drawn to interpretation, but I do try not to make that the focus of commentary (but fail). But as you noted, most forums are quite circumspect about analysis of meaning. Still, seems to me there is a certain questioning begining in the poetic clerisy of the simply lyric.(or the complexly lyric, but the lyric is most important). Are you ahead of the curve in suggesting a format for discussing other considerations? You might be on to something there. Still, I don't think it would be a popular forum, but it could be something that other sites will wish they had done first......... Rather a bold thought. I look forward to more discussion regards Sue | ||
| Zephyr
Senior Member Username: zephyr Post Number: 5908 Registered: 07-2003 |
M I agree interpretation would be useful, though when you are sharing Americanisms/cultural things of which I am ignorant my interpretations might be a giggle. I read about chickadees a few times before realising they might be the same as our coal tits.  Best wishes Zephyr Igor Stravinsky In order to create there must be a dynamic force, and what force is more potent than love? | ||
| Bren
Advanced Member Username: bren Post Number: 1886 Registered: 12-2001 |
Hi Steve and M, It's a wonderful idea, we tried it at the Shell and it worked so well for a time but then it became like a catch all forum which I deleted eventually BUT since Pen Shells is a closed board I think that's the reason it didn't go over. People tend to stay mainly in one forum there no matter how many I put up. I'm one of those who loves knowing what others see as they read because my poetry tends to be out there circling the planet with my brain. LOL I think I could count with one hand the number of poems I've written that actually come across as what I had in mind BUT I love knowing what's there to everyone else. I say try it, you can always close it down if it doesn't work out. I for one am ready to go in there and POST away>>>  Bren PenShells | ||
| Penelope
Intermediate Member Username: penelope Post Number: 657 Registered: 07-2005 |
M, I agree. Feedback to what the readership is seeing is very important, maybe essential, to an author and the craft...especially if the piece is complex/layered/surreal/abstract...not easily accessible on a literal level. Penelope | ||
| Lazarus
Senior Member Username: lazarus Post Number: 2860 Registered: 10-2005 |
Well... It's good to see that someone hasn't hijacked the Admin handle! M, I can understand what you are after but I can't agree that we don't already have that here. Some people just may not wish to say, or feel qualified to say very much about how a poem affects them. In each major forum you have interesting critiques going on all the time and I think each of them do the job they were designed to do. Face it, you've got a really great board here that functions beautifully and has top notch writers dedicated to keeping it that way with their creativity and their generosity. Perhaps something could be done on the formatting side to allow posters to specifically ask for certain types of critique on certain posts- a heading or something- But really, just a heads up in the bottom of the post is all I've ever used to say this is for fun, or this is really giving me trouble, to get the kind of help I've needed for my writing here at Wild. "When I sense an electrical charge around a person, event, or place I know there's a poem in it" ~ Susan Goldsmith Wooldridge Poetspennies eBay Window | ||
| steve williams
Board Administrator Username: twobyfour Post Number: 1373 Registered: 05-2005 |
Just to reassure myself, i did a quick scan of 20 comments left in the top 10 poems or so on CV. there was only one post that remotely addressed the interpretation of a piece and what it meant to the reader. I think that there are several reasons that content is not addressed very often. Some I can think of would be: the poem is fairly straightforward and doesn't lend itself to multiple interpretations. the poet doesn't want readers to post content comments and thus posts the piece in a forum where those kinds of comments rarely happen. the reader feels uncertain whether the poet would welcome an interpretation of content and thus says nothing. rarely does content lend itself to critique as there is truly no right or wrong answer as to the meaning of a piece. So, a new forum would remove a couple of these barriers. Poems that don't need interpretation probably wouldn't appear there. Poets who wish interpretation can post there and by doing so give their consent to others to interpret away. and mostly, poets who wish to see if their intentions in writing the piece are being passed to the reader or not can now find out. that is, if the poet desires clarity in his/her meaning and discovers there isn't any, this kind of feedback will help flush out that issue. also, poets can discover that for 10 different readers they receive 10 different interpretations, perhaps that is not the best of all worlds, and perhaps it is, but now the poet will know more about the communication process between the writer and the reader. thx to all for posting their views, tis a valuable discussion so far. s | ||
| Zefuyn
Valued Member Username: zefuyn Post Number: 191 Registered: 12-2006 |
Thank you for putting this idea forward, I agree there seems to be little comment on content and of the reader's connection to a poem. I don't think the author should supply commentary, that can be dangerous I think and the reader should be allowed their freedom. But, if a writer is hoping to convey something and is struggling to do so it's a good idea to mention. As an idea, what about a forum, that can occur after the workshop/bio feedback stage, for completed work, and there readers are encouraged to talk about whether it resonates etc.. ? Just a thought. Melanie. 'Not for a moment, beautiful aged Walt Whitman, have I failed to see your beard full of butterflies' Lorca | ||
| Will Eastland
Valued Member Username: dwillo Post Number: 139 Registered: 07-2006 |
I think this is a great idea. I have had at least one poem I posted here where it appeared to me that everyone who read it missed what I intended for them to come away with. It could be that I am a little bit of a control freak about this. I don't mind if a reader sees more than I intended in a piece, but I would like them to at least understand what I did intend. If they get more after that, great! We could do something as simple as prefacing the poem with a note as to the type of comments that are welcome. I did this when I knew I had a loser title, and the folks here gave me some great options. Maybe we could just note that we would like reader responses on theme/interpretation as well as the standard critiques? Thanks for starting this dialogue, Admin. EDIT: After a more careful reading of the posts above, I see this idea was already put forward. I think option 2 is also viable if it is felt that a separate forum is best for this. I also would like for the writer to come back and tell us what they intended, but that is a preference and I don't think it should necessarily be mandatory. (Message edited by dwillo on February 20, 2007) Take these dreams and lay them to rest in a quiet room in their Sunday best. | ||
| Gary Blankenship
Senior Member Username: garyb Post Number: 11053 Registered: 07-2001 |
I like mel's read on what it might be, but for only a few poems, even and I think this has been tried, a different poet each day to read and discuss... Smiles. Gary A River Transformed The Dawg House January 2007 and last FireWeed | ||
| Lazarus
Senior Member Username: lazarus Post Number: 2862 Registered: 10-2005 |
I would just like to add that each of the forums are like little communities and communities must have a certain amount of commitment for participation if they are going to survive. My concern is that a new community would drain off the membership from your already healthy, but not overburdened forums. In CV for instance there is a feeling of dialogue as time goes by each poem following another, the ones with more comments and the ones with less all billed equally. I think you can assume that if the theme doesn't come up in the comments then it was self evident. In sublux you have poems coming to the top that the author is working on and a goodly amount of helpful comments to winnow out the theme, language, and poetics. In Bio if a poet is really looking to finish off a piece the critiques there will help, and the theme of the poem is always under scrutiny because if it wasn't what would the point be really? Can those of you that have participated in live critiques add to this discussion and let us know at what point in a critique the theme comes up? Is this something that is saved for the end of the discussion? And at what point does the author of a piece explain their intentions? I think in this fast paced virtual world it is too much to ask that any forum or board give us everything we want. In a perfect world we could discuss each of our poems endlessly, and not one gem would drop out of sight before it was loved by everyone. But that's just not possible. Poems come, and poems go, and in the end, only the poets remain. "When I sense an electrical charge around a person, event, or place I know there's a poem in it" ~ Susan Goldsmith Wooldridge Poetspennies eBay Window | ||
| Fred Longworth
Advanced Member Username: sandiegopoet Post Number: 1095 Registered: 05-2006 |
As many of you may know, I disagree enormously with the whole premise that, as Steve puts it -- there is truly no right or wrong answer as to the meaning of a piece. The primary purpose of language is not to fill our nervous systems with arbitrary and heterogeneous meaning. The primary purpose of language is for meaning resident in a speaker to be transmitted to an auditor. This presumes some preexisting convergence in knowledge bases: denotative, connotative, literal and semiotic. If I shout to someone "Duck!" I really do mean right now, not later, lower your head and upper body to keep from colliding with something. By the suddenness of my speech and the intonation, I expect the listener to assume I'm NOT referring to a water bird; neither am I referring to a cotton fabric or an amphibious vehicle -- though all these meanings cluster around the intended meaning in various states of communicative probability, and may well come to mind. When a poet writes a poem that is not so unidimensional that it forecloses multiple interpretations from the get-go, it is nonetheless true that the poet has certain elements he or she wants to communicate to listeners and readers. And, even if many of the poem's alternative interpretations are exciting and entertaining -- and may in and of themselves have considerable literary value -- it nonetheless remains true that if the intended cluster of meanings didn't get across to a significant number of others, and if the poet continues to desire that intended cluster to assume a foreground position, then the poet may well benefit from knowing that the intended meaning cluster didn't really get across, and this knowledge may be of great value when he or she pens the poem's next draft. So, I do think an additional forum would be a good thing. Fred | ||
| Kathy Paupore
Moderator Username: kathy Post Number: 4666 Registered: 12-2003 |
All you can do is try an interpretation forum and see how it goes. Those that want to use it will and those who don't won't. It is another level of critique, important to some and not to others. It is nice to be offered meatier comments on the content of your poem than just getting a "lovely." It is nice to know what it makes the reader feel and what they see in the work. Often, those comments hit on something deeper than intended with the work. I can see a lot of heavy discussion on the meaning of the poem, writer frustrations, and tempers flaring. It could be a labor intensive forum.  KYou're invited to: Wild Flowers "A poem is made up of words and the spaces between them." WCWilliams | ||
| ~M~
Board Administrator Username: mjm Post Number: 9729 Registered: 11-1998 |
I'm just checking in to say thank you to all of you for adding your thoughts and opinions and keeping the discussion going. And just to reassure you, Kathy, since you are a mod and this affects you perhaps more heavily than a regular member, I don't envision writer frustation or tempers flaring. At least, that was not my intent when this idea came to me. In case it isn't clear, I was hoping this forum would just be a place where a poet would post a poem and people would come in with their interpretations. No crit, just interps. "I saw this . . .," "That word led me to think . . .," "I thought you were trying to say . . ." Not a lot of room for argument there. I mean what is an author going to come back and say? "No, you did not think that! No, you did not see that!" Authors would not be encouraged or required to respond at all. If they wanted to say something, that would be great, but there's certainly no point in arguing with people about what they see. They see what they see; that's not up for debate. The reader interps would be posted for an author to review, nothing more. And use to assist in further editing if the interps prove that the poem is missing its mark and that is of concern to the author. Or just for the author to read through for his/her own edification. Many poets don't mind multiple interpretations and wouldn't want to change the work, but I'm sure they are curious like me about what people see and think regardless. It's a gift to hear the thoughts of a reader and what your poem inspired in and for them. It's a whole different kind of concept I'm shooting for with this idea. Not like crit at all. You are correct. Those who want this kind of feedback would post there and those who didn't, would not. In addition, not every poem is appropriate for this type of forum. Those written on a simple level, those that are straightforward, don't need this sort of analysis. I was hoping this forum would attract multi-dimensional poems that most of us write either often (in Bren's case, for instance) or occasionally. Those where the meaning resides below the surface level. They are a whole different beast. Love, M | ||
| Gary Blankenship
Senior Member Username: garyb Post Number: 11065 Registered: 07-2001 |
Authors would not be encouraged or required to respond at all. If they wanted to say something, that would be great, but there's certainly no point in arguing with people about what they see. They see what they see; that's not up for debate. The reader interps would be posted for an author to review, nothing more. And use to assist in further editing if the interps prove that the poem is missing its mark and that is of concern to the author. Me, a believer in acknowledging what is said about my bits. I happen to like alternate views and sometimes do not find out what I meant until they tell me. Smiles. Gary A River Transformed The Dawg House January 2007 and last FireWeed | ||
| steve williams
Board Administrator Username: twobyfour Post Number: 1374 Registered: 05-2005 |
As to Fred's issue, i didn't intend to state that the writer doesn't have a specific meaning. what i was referring to is the there are as many interpretations of a piece as there are readers and that we each bring our own filters and experiences to a piece. Thus each read is unique but not right or wrong. That being said, i'm not fond of poems that are so vague or lacking in any form of logic that they become interpretation factories. i think fred's 'cluster of meaning' concept is rather a nice way to talk about how interpretations can vary along the same theme. if you take M's last poem about her scarecrow, there were many different interpretations of that piece, none of which to date are exactly what she used to build the piece but all valuable and illuminating. sorry for the confusion s p.s. there are some people in CV now who really don't want to crit or to leave critical comments. I think an interp. forum might appeal to them and give those people a more fulfilling experience at wild. ok shutting up now... | ||
| Vienna
Senior Member Username: vienna Post Number: 567 Registered: 11-1998 |
"I saw this . . .," "That word led me to think . . .," "I thought you were trying to say . . ." Not a lot of room for argument there. I mean what is an author going to come back and say? "No, you did not think that! No, you did not see that!" Well as dizzy as I am, I would find it most helpful to see if I had succeded in putting specific thoughts and pictures into a reader's mind. Indeed, if a reader sees something entirely different to what the writer intended, it could provide a very useful springboard for further experimentation and reworking. If the reader has completely disparate thoughts, then it would show the writer that he or she maybe has not made what he or she firstly meant to create and could either revise to clarify or expand the new horizons. However you choose to implement it I would welcome it. Maybe if in both crit forums, the writer could just ask politely for this? Cheers V 'It's incidental, not integral; if you know what I mean' ~ Maude. | ||
| Emusing
Senior Member Username: emusing Post Number: 4125 Registered: 08-2003 |
What an interesting discussion. The forum could have distinct advantages for the writer. (1) seeing if the poem was received as intended, (2) seeing the various permutations in which an abstract poem is understood. Possibly, you could post a poem with the writer's intepretation below it. Or, you could post a poem with no interpretations. The writer would be silenced (as is practice in some live workshops) for a period of time while the poem is active. This is arbitrary, maybe it's a week. Then the poet would be allowed to "explain" his/her poem after the time period is over. I think the poet would have to be willing to be misinterpreted during the period of silence. Just be there and perceive what people are saying about the poem. I agree that there are no right or wrong ways to perceive a poem. I also see that in some poems we want people to understand something very specific. In others, we prefer to let people play with the concepts and create their own vision. I find that sometimes my concepts within a poem may not be interpreted correctly by a reader. The only time for me when it is an issue is when the reader is confused. If I leave the reader in confusion then I have not done my job. E p.s. Dream Analysis (or some such) for the forum title? Word Walker Press | ||
| Michael MV
Senior Member Username: michaelv Post Number: 1597 Registered: 11-2003 |
Perhaps the objective of this proposed forum is actually sufficiently available already via the forums already present? Michael (MV) | ||
| Kathy Paupore
Moderator Username: kathy Post Number: 4667 Registered: 12-2003 |
M, thanks for the reassurance. I do think the interpretations will be useful and beneficial to those who are interested and brave enough to post in the forum. I'm thinking you're going to need specfic guidelines on how to comment there until members get the hang of it. Everyone is so used to the crit of mechanics and this is totally different. I do see interpretation as a kind of crit though, what you see or don't see, feel or don't feel from the poem is a different kind of crit. A higher level than the crit of the mechanics. Here in lies the key: "I think the poet would have to be willing to be misinterpreted" (thanks E) KYou're invited to: Wild Flowers "A poem is made up of words and the spaces between them." WCWilliams | ||
| Barbara Martin
Valued Member Username: babs Post Number: 162 Registered: 01-2007 |
M, I have been following this discussion, but just haven't had the time to comment (until now). I can see a forum for content as being very useful. Poems that are abstract, more surreal, or enriched with deeper metaphors need to be understood before critiquing on the mechanics. Often times, if the author follows suggested critiques on word choice or line breaks from someone who didn't understand the poem, the intent of the poem is also changed. I have certain poems where receiving input on reader interpretation would be more helpful than a critique on the mechanics. Once the author's meaning or intent of a poem is understood, members/readers could suggest posting in CV if they had suggested mechanical critiques they thought would be helpful improvements; or, perhaps begin mechanics critiquing in the content forum after the author posts their original intent. From this discussion, I understand that not all the members of Wild would desire to participate in this new possible forum, but it would be a place to go for a few who are willing to participate on this level. I don't think the author should post the interpretation at the time the entry is posted. IMHO, this would be a conversation killer. It would be at the very least a courteous gesture for the author to come back to post their personal intent once the discussion has ceased. Without a meaning, a poem is just a series of words strung together. I think a forum of this nature would be another place to learn, teach and share. And that sounds good to me! I understand that other's interpretations are not wrong and could very well differ from my own. To me, that just enhances the poem and the creative process. | ||
| Jana Bouma
Valued Member Username: violamama Post Number: 171 Registered: 06-2006 |
I would certainly be pleased to see more readerly responses to our poems. As poets, we use rhythm, imagery, metaphor,line breaks, etc.--all the the mechanics of poetry. But our goal, ultimately, is a response within the reader. That response won't necessarily be an "interpretation." It may be an emotion, or a thrill at a particular turn of phrase or aural effect, or an "ah ha" moment, or a moment of painful revelation. We may not be seeking one single, predetermined response, either. But we are seeking to create some sort of response. Any poem that doesn't elicit a significant response in the reader isn't doing its job. (Though it's also possible that the poem hasn't found the right reader--but that's the beauty of having a forum with multiple readers.) Advice about the mechanics of poetry can be immensely helpful. But it can never do one thing: It can never reveal to us the work that our poem is doing (or failing to do). I don't believe that a new discussion board is the best way to address this issue. Every critique would be enhanced by at least a bit of "readerly feedback," and separating the two strategies would simply impoverish the "critique" boards by further discouraging "interpretive" responses there. Providing readerly feedback is a sophisticated skill. I think the better way to increase the qualitiy of readerly responses would be a thread discussing the hows and whys of a readerly approach. When the discussion is complete, the thread could be archived in the library and highlighted for new members within the "Getting Started" link. Thanks for working on this issue, dear leaders! (Message edited by violamama on February 23, 2007) Jana | ||
| Lei Price
New member Username: celimlodyn Post Number: 1 Registered: 02-2007 |
Hello all. I'm new here and haven't participated on very many other poetry boards, but I wanted to add my opinion. What I've learned in the past is similar, I think, to what Barbara said. I don't feel comfortable making suggestions regarding the mechanics of a poem without first saying what I have felt like it is saying; because the two are inter-related. The mechanics should (hopefully) be backing up the meaning, so any suggestions I make for changes are based on what I read the meaning to be. Am I reading the other posts here correctly that people don't usually do that here? I'm also wondering if my style of critiquing will fit in here if that's not what the majority of people are wanting. Thanks. | ||
| Jana Bouma
Valued Member Username: violamama Post Number: 186 Registered: 06-2006 |
Lei, I think you'll be just fine. I don't think it's that most members here dislike interpretive critique. I think that many folks are simply more used to providing a more technical response. I hope you stick around! Jana |
