leonardcohenforum.com

Posted: **Mon Sep 20, 2004 3:31 am**

'CRITICAL SCRIPTURE' by dericlee http://allpoetry.com/column/427500

'PATHOLOGY' by Maatkara http://allpoetry.com/poem/781142

Posted: **Mon Sep 20, 2004 5:54 am**

With the ongoing 'battle' here, I felt motivated to click on these links, and am glad I did. I found that they were both worthwhile in the context of this ongoing battle. Hence, I'm bringing them here, in case some might be motivated enough to read them, but not be motivated to go to the links. I included the first response to the first one, as I feel it also makes a valuable point. I went ahead and included the first response to the second one, as well. I'm considering my use of these to be 'personal.'

"Critical Scripture
by dericlee on Oct 05, 2001 (Column) (bookmark) (print) (next)
Author's Last Login: 4 minutes ago
In Category: Education. 1 views this week. 430 total.
This item is syndicated.
These are some concepts I expressed a few years back, that a friend recently brought back to my attention, telling me that he regarded them as his "Critic's Bible"

(How flattering can you get!?)

Though I admit they're didactic and authoritarian, I stick by 'em, and thought I'd run 'em up the pole here, and see if anyone saluted.

There is no purpose and no place in a poetic critique for the following:

a ) any remark that devalues or denigrates the background, intelligence, culture or upbringing of the poet. In fact, it has no place anywhere in human conversation, and no one abridged that rule for poetry forums. If someone told you they had the authority to do so, they lied: stop listening to them.

b ) any remark indicating that the subject of the poem is not worth a poem. That decision rests with the poet alone. If you feel it ISN'T worth a poem, you aren't qualified to address the poem...so don't.

c ) any remark calculated to discourage the poet from trying to write poetry, including any semantic equivalent of "you have no talent, so give up!" There is no governing body empowering certain individuals as Guardians of Poetry and authorizing them to protect its Pure Nature by making "sub-standard" poets stop writing. If anyone has told you he is so empowered, he lied: stop listening to him. If anyone has told you that he has so empowered you, he lied: stop doing it!

d ) any remark calculated to cause emotional hurt, or any remark involving a judgement of the poet, rather than the poem. If you are incapable of saying the strongest negative concerning a poem in polite and respectful words, you aren't a poet...go get a better vocabulary and try again next year. If it is in your nature to NEED to render judgements in hurtful tones, go find an equivalent of 'masochists.com'...they need you...we don't.

In essence and in sum...If your purpose in offering crit is not to help the poet improve the poem and improve as a poet, DON'T CRIT. There are better ways for you to waste your time.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment? All rights reserved, © dericlee. Copying without permission for non-personal use is forbidden.

Before:

Author's Questions/Comments
Make of it what you will.

Add your comment ->

Comments
Next Comments > (View All)

Stormie on Dec 28, 2003, 11:34
"Just keep swimming...." 1615 critiques, 101 poems. said:
SALUTES

Amen to your words!
I just got done reading a poem by a 14 yr. old.
He's only got a couple up.. and I thought I'd read
at least one. I read the poem.. and found it intriging..
I looked at the comments he had gotten.. and found that
an ignorant member..called it Stupid.

That just boils my water! I am going to read
some of that person's work..and see where he/she
has the place to say that. Anyway... why try to
'stop' a person from writing? Maybe it's all they have.
Like myself, it's a way of releasing stress.. it's a way
of dealing with pain... why stop someone's way of being healthy.

Boy o boy it aggrivates me! I always leave a possitive
comment wherever I go.... I give pointers, but don't expect
anyone to change them. Build writers up... don't knock them
down.

~Aimee (reply?)"

[There ya' go

.]

Posted: **Mon Sep 20, 2004 6:06 am**

Hi Lizzy ~

Thanks for the copy & paste (I still don't know how to do that, maybe I'll figure it out when I really need it).

By the way, those are not the "first responses" on either of those pages, you need to click "View All" next to the 'Comments' heading to get the first page of comments on Columns, poems etc.

Actually, to simply click on a link doesn't take that much "motivation", does it? I thought they looked much better on their original pages - and where one can read all the comments.

~ Makera

Posted: **Mon Sep 20, 2004 4:38 pm**

Well, I can surely, and will be happy to, delete them, Makera

. That way they'll be more visually pleasing when read. However, I felt their content was of greater import than their appearance. The likelihood of too many people from here clicking to read all the additional comments [if even to go there] is pretty low; my gut-level guess. Of course, I could be wrong, in which case, you're home free

. However, I guess if you'd 'really' felt the 'need,' you'd have gone with it, and found out what you needed to know to do the copy-and-paste yourself

. I even considered that at the time, but then opted to do it, anyway. You could still bring them back here, if you chose. The process is really simple.

"Motivation" via clicking ~ yep, I chose the right word. I have too many other things going on right now, to visit other sites [that time can be better spent answering my personal emails and PMs, both of which I'm behind on]......and hadn't for many months gone to that one, or even been motivated to [despite the current discord, and there being a poem re: Leonard, by George, whom I've always liked], until I saw the 'titles' in the links. When I read them, I felt they were worthwhile to simply bring here. I included what appeared to me on the page to be the first response on the first one, due to there also being younger people on this site who, for all we know, may be sharing their writings. That response was a very relevant and good one. I included the 'first' response to yours, primarily to be 'fair'.

Now that I've typed all this, I'll just go ahead and delete your poem. That way, those who are interested can go and read it in its proper, attractive context. The 'Critics Credo' is well thought through and particularly relevant for a site such as this, where the majority of people aren't even laying claim to being aspiring 'poets,' but simply want to share a bit of themselves, through what they hope to be considered 'poetry.'

~ Lizzy

Sorry for that pesky difference in times. I ended up with two of this message; and then having to copy-and-paste [ironic, eh

?] the second one, as the first wasn't complete, per my edits. The end result was the message with a whole, new time.

Posted: **Mon Sep 20, 2004 6:45 pm**

Hey, Lizzy, I wasn't being critical of your decision to paste them here!

On the contrary, I do understand and appreciate it.

I only wanted to remind anyone reading them here that they may find more of additional, relevant interest on the actual pages.

Hoping all's well with you, Liz.

~ Makera

Posted: **Mon Sep 20, 2004 7:28 pm**

There is nothing inherently wrong with the "guidelines" , and perhaps they could help prevent the baby rants of posters like Martine if applied here.

However, what is far more needed is guidance for beginners like George about the use of rhyming patterns and clichees, the need to take his time and search for inspiration instead of counting the number of poems he can produce.

Posted: **Mon Sep 20, 2004 7:52 pm**

Hi Makera

~

All's well [all things considered] ~ and my time has been limited for a wide variety of reasons.

~ Lizzy

Posted: **Mon Sep 20, 2004 9:44 pm**

Well, it is apparent that our resident 'wannabe critic' did not read (or comprehend) the links provided, or my response on the first column.

He has, however, provided an excellent demonstration of his 'double standard' and 'fixation' (re 'Pathology'). Also proving my points regarding 'The Big 3' (ref. my comment on the column).

As a simple but significant example, one who stubbornly persists in misspelling a word with the ludicrous excuse that he doesn't "know how to find the accent" on his keyboard, is hardly an example anyone could find credible.

~ Makera

Posted: **Mon Sep 20, 2004 10:02 pm**

As a so called friend I met in Corfu once said, Quality not Quantity. Critic 2, you remind me of that person..........
Georges

Posted: **Mon Sep 20, 2004 10:12 pm**

Makera, thank you for your really good point about my misspelling of the word clichee. I still don't know where the accent is on my keyboard. But I do feel I am providing you a therapeutic service by the repeated mistake as it means you can avoid the "issue" of George's poetry. If you like the man, then help him improve. His excited palandromic encounter with the WOW fans at allpoetry means he may never learn the basics of writing.

Help him to calm his excitement at rhyming "start" and "part". Show him there is another way beyond banality.

Be a real friend to him.

Posted: **Mon Sep 20, 2004 11:21 pm**

Goodbye Critic2.

Posted: **Tue Sep 21, 2004 1:28 am**

deleted.

Posted: **Tue Sep 21, 2004 12:18 pm**

Now, what did I tell you about the pot calling the kettle? Hmmm?
Shall we take a little look at some of the 'baby rants from posters like Mr.Slimy-Ass himself?

Of course we shall...

"pot and ketle" predictable clichee
"shall we take a little look" overstylised and overused form
"Slimy-Ass" unimaginative and dull abuse

Posted: **Tue Sep 21, 2004 3:40 pm**

deleted.

Posted: **Tue Sep 21, 2004 3:46 pm**

and rotting my teeth....

leonardcohenforum.com

For Wannabe 'Critics'

For Wannabe 'Critics'