Somewhere in this section... I'll find it and bring it to the top, I quoted a section from a book on beginning to write poetry. It asks [in my quoting it, presumably, of people coming to this section to contribute] for people to share what it is they want in the way of feedback. It's well written in the way it makes it clear that some people are aspiring poets who want constructive feedback [does anyone ever want destructive feedback ?] and others come simply to share what's in or on their heart. It often seems fairly clear to me from what perspective people are contributing here.
Your ways of expressing yourself, Jimbo, are very heartfelt and poetic. Your contributions really do belong here. I hope you'll continue to put them here. There is nothing wrong with constructive feedback, if you're willing to accept it... and if it's kindly placed. I'm baffled as to why it wouldn't be kindly placed.
I hope to read much more of you here. I like the way you write. Your punctuation and spelling are the least of my concerns.
~ Lizzy
"Be yourself. Everyone else is already taken." ~ Oscar Wilde
I'm having second thoughts about weighing in here but - what the heck.
We've all been in tighter corners.
Lizzy,I read your comments on the other thread on this subject so I'm cross pollinating.
You wrote:
"Conversely, in a minority of contributions I've seen here, the writers have actually sought, or at least welcomed, constructive criticism [what the nature of criticism ought to be about to begin with, as I see it]."
Firstly, not all criticism can be constructive. There are things which require destruction or deconstruction in all writing - that's why writers work with agents and editors. The assumption that only good things should be said about a piece of writing is a denigration of the writer's work and the reader's faculties.
I'm not quite clear what the exact purpose of this section of the forum is but, in reading it, I've seen material I liked, material I disliked and material I really, seriously disliked. But, I've also seen some pretty trenchant criticism of work and I've thought that was a good thing.
As it happens, I make my living as a writer and I teach a creative writing course in an Irish University - I just want to put that out there so that I can't be accused of not being straight.
When people come on a course (I don't teach a poetry course) and produce a short story or a section of a novel I understand their fragiliity. All of us are fragile when we put our work into the public domain and I've experienced both sides of the critics pen over the years. But, putting a piece of work into the public domain not only invites but demands criticism (good, bad, brutal, whatever). I say that because to be other than honest with someone about what they've written is to do their effort a disservice.
Writers write to be published, Being published involves getting past yourself, your agent, if you have one, and a series of editors before you get close to readers or critics. The world is full of would-be writers and there isn't room for all to be published. And, of course, very good writers often don't get published but they won't stand a chance until they learn to listen, to assimilate and then to decide whether what they heard was wrong or right for them.
I'm not going to comment on the poem that started this very healthy discussion. Like everything else I've read on this forum, I have an opinion on its merits and demerits but that isn't the purpose of my reply.
I have to say that the fact that some posters give and take robust criticism suggests that any poster who puts material up here can or should expect the same. It's interesting that some people - Lizzy you'd be self-confessed in this regard, I suspect - only seek to comment in a positive way and that, I believe, could lead to a false sense of ability, craft, technique and feeling in those whose work is being assessed. But, worse still, it could do them the disservice of treating them as "fiddlers" (no insult to violinists intended) rather than writers.
If we, as writers, cannot accept criticism we should not put our writing in the public domain. And I refuse, point blank, to accept this argument that some people are amateurs and beginners. If you want to be a writer say you want to be a writer and then do what writers do - write. Don't apologise for the fact or try to mask it as a hobby or a pastime. Be a writer but be a listener as well - listen to what others are saying. The reader and/or critic has spent time reading your work so be prepared to hear what they took from the time they spent with your work.
I rarely learned much from people who said something I had written was great, I learned a lot from those who criticised my work - which is what you need to do with all writers' works.
If you post a poem on a Leonard Cohen web site you are rubbing shoulders with genius. If you rub shoulders with genius, expect some sparks.
As a matter of interest (or maybe not), I strongly dislike women being referred to as "girls" even by other women but that's another argument for another place.
PS
While writing the diatribe above, I missed Lizzy's later post which reads, in part:
"Your ways of expressing yourself, Jimbo, are very heartfelt and poetic. Your contributions really do belong here. I hope you'll continue to put them here. There is nothing wrong with constructive feedback, if you're willing to accept it... and if it's kindly placed. I'm baffled as to why it wouldn't be kindly placed.
I hope to read much more of you here. I like the way you write. Your punctuation and spelling are the least of my concerns."
I don't believe anyone suggested Jimmy's work did not belong here and I don't believe anyone questioned his spelling.
The question raised by dangermouse regarding the punctuation is one I would raise, simply because I believe Jimmy chose that form of punctuation and I'd love to hear why.
Jimmy, I'm sorry if my criticism seemed harsh.
Guess it's the way I'm feeling.
Think it's best if I leave the forum because I think it is.
Sorry Birdonawire, won't make the Travel Lodge.
Keep writing Jimbo, that's cool.
Cheers
Well, I'm trying to respond to this, but my other window has frozen .
No idea what to do... seem to have lost a whole bunch of writing.
It appears I'm being hijacked in that window, as my Activity light is going bonkers, and I'm staring at a blank screen and an hourglass, no matter where I put my cursor.
Strangest thing I've ever seen... and not seen! Nothing in sight in that other window. If anyone has any ideas on how I might break the spell and get that window moving again, I'm all ears. How can just ONE window freeze when the rest of my computer isn't!?! And, it's a window to this site!?!
Well... I had gone into sufficient detail on the ideas of semantics as to what's meant by the term "constructive criticism" and on some [several] broad assumptions you're making in the context of your position. With my own comments, I will never give anyone the idea that I know what I'm talking about in any technical sense. I will only presume to share what I like about what they've written and/or why. Now, if I could only retrieve all of what I've said, I wouldn't feel so discouraged right now. I feel like my computer has destructively criticized that window, I feel disspirited, and I feel like disengaging... not really on the latter, but awfully close. Trying to reconstruct it all is going to be a bear.
It's seeming that my computer may be freezing up one window at a time, so I may be outta here totally rather soon. So odd. If in the interim someone has made the points I already did [in some depth, I might add ], please don't be surprized if I come along behind you and agree and say, yes, that's what I think and said. I'm not going to try doing it all over again until I know it's going to stay. Dang it.
~ Lizzy
"Be yourself. Everyone else is already taken." ~ Oscar Wilde
Hi Red Poppy, I find the 'girls' question interesting. Here it's a general term used for a group of women regardless of age, just more of an informal term. It's not derogatory in nature, most particularly when used by a woman and can even be a sign of friendship between women. Maybe it's different in England now but when I go home, it still seems to be in common usage, at least within my family and friends, and again not in a bad way. The same's true when I visit my relatives in Dublin. But I certainly wouldn't want to offend anyone with its usage so yep, I'm absolutely interested in your take.
Some years ago I attended an establishment for Higher Education. 'Presentations' were expected and endured/enjoyed, in equal measure by the student and the listening students. At the beginning of our studies I noticed how the 'audience' never took the road of criticism of the 'presentation' but always gave positive 'feedback' to the 'presenter.'
To open my own first 'presentation,' I told my fellow students that if they couldn't be brutally honest with my efforts, then they were wasting my time, and theirs. Ever afterwards, honest appraisals took place, except for the obvious close friends amongst the 'girls.' (18 years old; Red Poppy!) Those friendships, while being honest, did not allow for honest criticisms between the girl friends, which was sad in a way. The very few males in the room took perverse delight in attacking each other's presentations.
We learn by our mistakes. If we never make a mistake we will never learn anything of value. We can all remember embarrassing moments from our past. We learned from those events, which is why we remember them.
It is the work which is being given critical attention and not the writer. HTH
"Bipolar is a roller-coaster ride without a seat belt. One day you're flying with the fireworks; for the next month you're being scraped off the trolley" I said that.
This by necessity, since it's now Saturday morning and I have a list to address... will be the abridged version and maybe then only partially-addressed of what I wrote last night. My sentences won't even be near complete. I just want to get the basics and I can maybe return later to add more.
Semantics. There's a difference [at least in my learning] between positive feedback and constructive criticism. Terms such as "delete, omit, revise, tighten, flesh out, approach differently," etc. ad infinitum are included in construction criticism... it is constituted of specific suggestions that can make the piece better, and it is related to the 'writer' [henceforth, simply writer] in a positive vs. denigrating way, in the interest of the piece being the best it can be. It includes [for learning purposes] the why's for these changes, such as "conflicts, undermines, too wordy, contradicts," etc. It has nothing to do with lauding the piece in every which way just to make the person feel good. It also includes what works in the piece and the reasons why whatever it is does work... "consistency, mood, goal," etc.
Destructive criticism, likewise, has nothing to do with deconstruction for the purpose of reconstruction. It is, as it says, destructive. It is criticism giving without reason and can include the writer, as well... such as "I don't like that. What a waste of time." "That sucks, man." "What'd you write it like that for?" ~ constructive criticism would include, "Why don't you like it? Why is it a waste of time? Why does it suck? What terms or approach makes you feel that. What are some specific ideas you have that might make it better or be more effective? Why did I write it like what for?" Destructive criticism is vague and attacking... destructive toward the piece and/or the writer. It is disspiriting and can result in someone's giving up on writing altogether. Not everyone has the same mental/emotional level of combativeness. There is some wonderful writing out there that had the person not gone through their growth stages, as there really ARE amateur and novice writers, fledglings in the art of writing, we may never have had the pleasure of reading their work now. Some of these may have experimented on their own and grown on their own. Others may have shared their work and received some constructive criticism... such as writing groups tend to give. Others may have been subjected to destructive criticism and rallied, anyway, as that's their nature.
Constructive criticism takes both the writer and the work seriously and treats each with respect. Destructive criticism is more self-indulgent on the speaker's part, a platform for them to 'show' their 'expertise' without benefit of specific suggestions to the writer related in a way that is respectful. Constructive criticism is never a waste of anyone's time. Great ideas and sweeping changes can result from it; and the writer can depart the exchange with a feeling of worth and desire to keep writing.
I'm going to Submit this now. My "Avasti" virus function seems to have disappeared and I may be in danger of losing stuff, even though I ran three things last night after losing everything I'd written in response to you.
What I gave Damellon recently was semi-constructive criticism, but at least not destructive. I commented that [given others that had preceded it] it was simply too wordy. I didn't have any specific suggestions for improvement as the writing of the verses is the Goddesses' realm. I was merely commenting "Yay/nay" with my 'why.'
I'll continue in another posting.
~ Lizzy
"Be yourself. Everyone else is already taken." ~ Oscar Wilde
These are in no particular order of importance, but my next comment has to do with Public Domain and this being a Forum dedicated to Leonard.
This is the public domain, yes. It's not a poetry class online or a poetry development workshop online or a space dedicated to poetry critiqueing. These are designated as such and are entered into with an implicit agreement between the joiners and the previous members. It is also [as I understand] outlined when you join. Even then, I believe there are some agreements made as to what is acceptable and what is not, and some general expectations of how one is to conduct oneself with regard to their own and others' submissions.
This is the section of the Forum designated for Forum members to share what they've written. Nothing more has been spelled out than that. This is a VERY big difference. Because some have had high-energy, high-spirited, healthy exchanges of critiqueing and discussion does not necessarily mean that this is what this space is all about. It doesn't mean that a person should "expect" to receive such reaction to anything they place here... simply because it's what's happened between some other members. I've seen some pretty doggone defensive reactions, and refusals to take a single, well-intended AND well-presented suggestion, by very accomplished and published writers here. So, even 'the best of the best' [so to speak] aren't always de facto "open to suggestion." Over the years, the sharing aspect has outweighed the "destructive criticism" or even constructive criticism.
To get my own responses out of the way in this discussion, I have always tried to make it very clear that I am not a poet or a qualified critique'er... and I am most likely going to tell a person what it is that works for me in their piece... and why. What touches me, moves me, what it reminds me of, the memories it evokes, etc. If something doesn't work for me, I may tell them that as well... and why. I will do it kindly. Lambasting someone accomplishes little, so far as I've been able to tell.
Leonard was part of a strong and spirited group back in his early days. They did lambaste each other and that was understood going in. Even there... with that understanding and agreement, some deep alienation between two people happened and it never healed. As I understand it, it was the destructive criticism that caused it.
This is 'Leonard's forum' ~ yes. Leonard is a genius writer. No doubt about it. However, we are not rubbing elbows with Leonard, nor should anyone expect that they must present their writing in such a way as though they were. That is very much an elitest view. Over the years, I've seen some people come here who appeared to come simply because they thought they were rubbing elbows with Leonard, and wanted Leonard to see their work and maybe even write to them to comment, after he had. Leonard is a phenomenal, an excellent, a genius writer... so, yes, he attracts people who are accomplished in that area, as well.
Leonard is also someone who touches people's hearts and souls and he is kind. It shows in his writings. He can be an extreme critique'er; yet, when it comes to that, he is his own harshest critics... and we are the benefactors of that. Leonard's work is carefully constructed with that very reality in mind... the many windows and doors, the pathways for us to walk down, are there so that we don't have to have expertise in writing in order to bond with what he writes. We don't need to have expertise in writing in order to share what we've written, either. The segment I copied here [in the thread that's now nearby] spells it out rather clearly how our purposes in writing and presenting work and the expectations that come with that varies.
Over the years, we have experienced many warm and wonderful sharings; and learned people's about the hearts and souls of Leonard Cohen fans. It didn't matter whether they ever planned to be "A Writer."
I don't know if you're a golfer, but kids often start out with putt-putt. Then, they might get a club and ball and tee and such and hang out around their backyard, practicing their backswing. Eventually, they may go to a golf course and take some lessons and observe, or merely observe and try. If they were given the 'message' earlier in their life that they'd better be prepared to be criticized according to PGA standards before they set foot on a golf course and try swinging a club, there would be many men and women today who would not be enjoying the relaxation and exercise of an afternoon on the golf course. It's no different with any skill, with writing being only one of many.
More to say on this, but don't want to lose it. So, for now, I'll move on to my next point.
~ Lizzy
"Be yourself. Everyone else is already taken." ~ Oscar Wilde
Everyone who writes wants to be a writer. I disagree. Perhaps, because of your field and the people you know, this really has been the case with people whom you know, who write. Perhaps, their goal is to be published or maybe they already are. However, there are many reasons people write and some of those have nothing to do with this broad generalization:
Being published involves getting past yourself, your agent, if you have one, and a series of editors before you get close to readers or critics.
If you're teaching a class such as "Writing for Publishing," this couldn't be a better synopsis or advice.
This, however, simply isn't true:
Writers write to be published
For one thing, not everyone who writes is, or wants to be, "a writer." Much less one that would involve publishers, editors, and such. Eventually, becoming a writer or publishing something may occur to them as something of interest. Or, it may not. They may spend their lives writing for the pure satisfaction of writing; for clarifying their thinking; for getting another perspective, by getting their thoughts out of their head and on to paper; for saying something lovely to someone else in a form that the other person can hold on to forever or for a week or for years or maybe not for long at all, but to see that another person cared enough to write something down about or to them. Many personal journals are of a level such as they could be published, but were never written with that intent, at all. Some people write just so they can keep a record of their life. That writing may come in the form of sentences and prose, or it may come in the form of poetry. A poem written 10 years ago will vary substantially, in its perspective and content, from a poem written now.
Going to stop again, lest I lose this. It's also getting to be the time where I need to leave for awhile. So, maybe I'll just do that, instead. If you respond in the interim, I'll answer you, but will first finish with everything I'd done last night... or nearly as possible. I'd made seven different points, expounding on them all, and hadn't finished, as I still had more... when I lost it all.
~ Lizzy
"Be yourself. Everyone else is already taken." ~ Oscar Wilde
Lizzy, who are you to decide the appropriate way to respond to poetry, in here, or in any other place?
Determining the difference between constructive criticism and what you have coined "destructive criticism" is all well and good, but I can't see any reason why an adult who posts here can't sift amongst the feedback and determine for himself whether the comment is valid. I don't see why your big brother preemptive strike of comment filtring so noone will ever ever be offended is necessary.
Not everyone who posts poems here will be seeking publication. This is not a section on unfinished poems to be worked on, either.
Lizzy, who are you to decide the appropriate way to respond to poetry, in here, or in any other place?
I'm giving my views, in lieu of different contexts where poetry is presented.
Determining the difference between constructive criticism and what you have coined "destructive criticism" is all well and good,
Not so sure I coined this phrase, though I did put it out there as the alternative to what's already an established one of "constructive criticism." If I coined it, it was readily picked up here.
I don't see why your big brother preemptive strike of comment filtring so noone will ever ever be offended is necessary.
Big brother. Preemptive. Strike. Pretty strong words for someone who's suggesting kindness.
I've seen some serious overreactions to presumed [or feigned presumption of] criticism here, as well as in the Chatroom... being "picked on" and such. Being kind here is not such a bad idea, "preemptive strike" or not. I'll continue to advocate for it.
Not everyone who posts poems here will be seeking publication. This is not a section on unfinished poems to be worked on, either.
And who determined that? I've seen some very constructive processes of, "Any suggestions?" where suggestions followed and revisions made. When, as well, is a poem ever finished? Perhaps, like Leonard's own poetry and songs?
Thanks for contributing your own positions.
~ Lizzy
"Be yourself. Everyone else is already taken." ~ Oscar Wilde
?] and others come simply to share what's in or on their heart. It often seems fairly clear to me from what perspective people are contributing here.
.
