Welcome to Gaia's forums, where millions of members gather to discuss random stuff, make new friends,
complain about life, argue about nothing, laugh at dumb pictures, discuss serious issues and/or curse like sailors.
Lurking is creepy. Quit skulking in the shadows and join the conversation!
Register to reply| I'm here for the poetry guide! |    |
43.5% | [ 381 ] |
| I'm here for the critiquing guide! | |
19.7% | [ 173 ] |
| I'm here because someone else pointed me here. | |
6.7% | [ 59 ] |
| I'm here for the gold. Didn't it say it had a poll? | |
30.0% | [ 263 ] |
 |
Poetess Laureate Navigation: Would a list of "topics" in the initial post help that? absolutely. |
|
|
Johnny xFATHOMx Poetess Laureate Navigation: Would a list of "topics" in the initial post help that? absolutely. Included in first post now. I may move the "who am I" bit to the placeholder. It's just there because I get asked that by defensive poets a lot lol. Anyway, ASTAIRE!! Astaire 3) If the poet is asking for "gentle critiques," please be mindful of that. But Astaire, sometimes I go into someone's thread and see they've written, "And I only want constructive stuff, none of this bad stuff" -- and there is bad stuff in the poem! What do I do? Ok, dropping the... whatever tone... I just came out with for some forsaken reason, what I'm getting it is that sometimes "be nice" really is just a cover for "pat me on the head and tell me I'm good." What now? Should the critic really avoid pointing out that sometimes negative feedback can still be very helpful? Defend! biggrin |
 |
|
|
Poetess Laureate Anyway, ASTAIRE!! Astaire 3) If the poet is asking for "gentle critiques," please be mindful of that. But Astaire, sometimes I go into someone's thread and see they've written, "And I only want constructive stuff, none of this bad stuff" -- and there is bad stuff in the poem! What do I do? Ok, dropping the... whatever tone... I just came out with for some forsaken reason, what I'm getting it is that sometimes "be nice" really is just a cover for "pat me on the head and tell me I'm good." What now? Should the critic really avoid pointing out that sometimes negative feedback can still be very helpful? Defend! biggrin I THINK YOU SHOULD TELL THAT b***h TO SUCK IT UP AND TAKE IT LIKE A REAL POET Nah, kidding. That is a very good question. The quick and dirty answer is no, you should not avoid pointing out the flaws in such peoples' poetry. After all, it's better that you point out their flaws GENTLY vs. some troll coming into their thread, recognizing their inability to take negative criticism, and slicing them open for it. (Believe me, those people exist.) If it's obvious that the person you want to critique isn't ready for being torn apart like a bad check, then you're going to have to point the flaws out carefully and without sarcasm. Don't overwhelm them; start out slow, especially if they seem resistant to ANY sort of critique. Try to show sympathy in order to get these types to trust you: for example, if they make a mistake that you see commonly on the forums, tell them that the mistake is common and that they shouldn't be ashamed of making it; rather, here is how they can learn from it. Usually, it helps if you tell these types something positive about their poetry (and, if god forbid you shouldn't find something positive about their poetry, commend them for trying and taking interest.) Also, if you see a poet upset about your critique (especially if it's harsh,) it's always good to offer to go over the critique with that poet to make the points easier to digest and understand. That's my take on the answer, anyway. Ultimately, though, there will always be those poets who will REFUSE to take criticism, for whatever reason; remember, you cannot change everybody, and sometimes it's best just to leave people to their own vices. heart |
|
|
Astaire Also, if you see a poet upset about your critique (especially if it's harsh,) it's always good to offer to go over the critique with that poet to make the points easier to digest and understand. That's a good point, too. Sometimes I leave a general crit that does point out the basic flaws but doesn't give detail or example. If they respond with thanks or at least politely, I usually head in very quickly to say, "Ok, now I'll slow down and try to explain a bit more". There's a difference between a red pen highlighting the errors, and general advice to fix them. (Though I try to steer very clear of any specific advice, since they need to write the poem.) |
|
|
|
Poetess Laureate Astaire Also, if you see a poet upset about your critique (especially if it's harsh,) it's always good to offer to go over the critique with that poet to make the points easier to digest and understand. That's a good point, too. Sometimes I leave a general crit that does point out the basic flaws but doesn't give detail or example. If they respond with thanks or at least politely, I usually head in very quickly to say, "Ok, now I'll slow down and try to explain a bit more". There's a difference between a red pen highlighting the errors, and general advice to fix them. (Though I try to steer very clear of any specific advice, since they need to write the poem.) Yeah, specific advice is where some poets may say that you're trying to "write poetry for them" or that you're "forcing them to conform to your style;" I've found it's usually not a good idea to get TOO specific for those reasons, especially if the advice is, "you should do it THIS way." I think there's a delicate balance between rewriting the poem for them and having the poet figure out how to redo it for themselves. But figuring out that balance comes with time and practice, methinks. |
|
|
Astaire I think there's a delicate balance between rewriting the poem for them and having the poet figure out how to redo it for themselves. But figuring out that balance comes with time and practice, methinks. I think it's pretty cut and dry. Let's take a poem that lacks imagery. If we tell the poet, "This needs imagery" we've highlighted the problem with red pen. If we go on to say, "When you add some, try to keep it concrete -- things we can see/touch/taste/smell/hear. That will pull us in more and show us your message instead of telling us" -- we're giving advice. It's general but tells them the direction to look in as they decide what to say. If we say, "You should say, 'love is a tennis shoe instead of a ballroom slipper' here" -- we're writing the poem for them. We decided. |
|
|
|
Poetess Laureate Astaire I think there's a delicate balance between rewriting the poem for them and having the poet figure out how to redo it for themselves. But figuring out that balance comes with time and practice, methinks. I think it's pretty cut and dry. Let's take a poem that lacks imagery. If we tell the poet, "This needs imagery" we've highlighted the problem with red pen. If we go on to say, "When you add some, try to keep it concrete -- things we can see/touch/taste/smell/hear. That will pull us in more and show us your message instead of telling us" -- we're giving advice. It's general but tells them the direction to look in as they decide what to say. If we say, "You should say, 'love is a tennis shoe instead of a ballroom slipper' here" -- we're writing the poem for them. We decided. Fair enough. I must admit that a lot of my critiquing knowledge comes from intuition/my own critics (i.e. professors/other Gaia members that I respect.) I was never formally trained, so some of the things I learned through trial and error may very well have logical cut-and-dry explanations. |
|
|
Astaire I must admit that a lot of my critiquing knowledge comes from intuition/my own critics (i.e. professors/other Gaia members that I respect.) I was never formally trained, so some of the things I learned through trial and error may very well have logical cut-and-dry explanations. Ditto. That's why this thread makes such a big deal out of "be overly observant and analytical" -- that's really how I learned...everything I do know. Nitpicking to see, "ugh I just CANNOT read this -- why not?" or "OMG THAT WAS AMAZING -- why?" |
|
|
|
Poetess Laureate Astaire I must admit that a lot of my critiquing knowledge comes from intuition/my own critics (i.e. professors/other Gaia members that I respect.) I was never formally trained, so some of the things I learned through trial and error may very well have logical cut-and-dry explanations. Ditto. That's why this thread makes such a big deal out of "be overly observant and analytical" -- that's really how I learned...everything I do know. Nitpicking to see, "ugh I just CANNOT read this -- why not?" or "OMG THAT WAS AMAZING -- why?" It would be amazing if we had classes for aspiring critics on this board somehow. heart I'm sure I could even stand to have a few, myself! |
|
|
Astaire Poetess Laureate Astaire I must admit that a lot of my critiquing knowledge comes from intuition/my own critics (i.e. professors/other Gaia members that I respect.) I was never formally trained, so some of the things I learned through trial and error may very well have logical cut-and-dry explanations. Ditto. That's why this thread makes such a big deal out of "be overly observant and analytical" -- that's really how I learned...everything I do know. Nitpicking to see, "ugh I just CANNOT read this -- why not?" or "OMG THAT WAS AMAZING -- why?" It would be amazing if we had classes for aspiring critics on this board somehow. heart I'm sure I could even stand to have a few, myself! How would that differ from crit threads -- at least a crit thread that starts getting really nitty-gritty? Or from this, Pi's sticky, etc and people asking questions and engaging in thread discussion? (Honest question, if that sounded sarcastic. What would be different to make it more what you have in mind as a "class"?) All I can think of offhand from the term is "set times" -- so would these classes be thread discussion opened/closed at set times? Or...? Edit: Ohh, you said for critics. That WOULD be something different. But I'm still curious how you envision it. |
|
|
|
Poetess Laureate Astaire Poetess Laureate Astaire I must admit that a lot of my critiquing knowledge comes from intuition/my own critics (i.e. professors/other Gaia members that I respect.) I was never formally trained, so some of the things I learned through trial and error may very well have logical cut-and-dry explanations. Ditto. That's why this thread makes such a big deal out of "be overly observant and analytical" -- that's really how I learned...everything I do know. Nitpicking to see, "ugh I just CANNOT read this -- why not?" or "OMG THAT WAS AMAZING -- why?" It would be amazing if we had classes for aspiring critics on this board somehow. heart I'm sure I could even stand to have a few, myself! How would that differ from crit threads -- at least a crit thread that starts getting really nitty-gritty? Or from this, Pi's sticky, etc and people asking questions and engaging in thread discussion? (Honest question, if that sounded sarcastic. What would be different to make it more what you have in mind as a "class"?) All I can think of offhand from the term is "set times" -- so would these classes be thread discussion opened/closed at set times? Or...? Edit: Ohh, you said for critics. That WOULD be something different. But I'm still curious how you envision it. I don't really know how I envision it; obviously, we'd need people to teach the newbies basic critiquing skills, and we'd need incentives for them to come, and we'd need a place to teach them (like a guild or thread.) One thing you must know about me: I can come up with grand ideas, but they are often not based in reality. whee More like the vast expanse of randomness that is my mind. The idea of classes for critics was just one I decided to throw out there into THE MASSIVE LAND OF THE INTARWUBS ...to see if anyone had anything to say about it. heart |
|
|
Astaire Poetess Laureate Astaire Poetess Laureate Astaire I must admit that a lot of my critiquing knowledge comes from intuition/my own critics (i.e. professors/other Gaia members that I respect.) I was never formally trained, so some of the things I learned through trial and error may very well have logical cut-and-dry explanations. Ditto. That's why this thread makes such a big deal out of "be overly observant and analytical" -- that's really how I learned...everything I do know. Nitpicking to see, "ugh I just CANNOT read this -- why not?" or "OMG THAT WAS AMAZING -- why?" It would be amazing if we had classes for aspiring critics on this board somehow. heart I'm sure I could even stand to have a few, myself! How would that differ from crit threads -- at least a crit thread that starts getting really nitty-gritty? Or from this, Pi's sticky, etc and people asking questions and engaging in thread discussion? (Honest question, if that sounded sarcastic. What would be different to make it more what you have in mind as a "class"?) All I can think of offhand from the term is "set times" -- so would these classes be thread discussion opened/closed at set times? Or...? Edit: Ohh, you said for critics. That WOULD be something different. But I'm still curious how you envision it. I don't really know how I envision it; obviously, we'd need people to teach the newbies basic critiquing skills, and we'd need incentives for them to come, and we'd need a place to teach them (like a guild or thread.) One thing you must know about me: I can come up with grand ideas, but they are often not based in reality. whee More like the vast expanse of randomness that is my mind. The idea of classes for critics was just one I decided to throw out there into THE MASSIVE LAND OF THE INTARWUBS ...to see if anyone had anything to say about it. heart I'd be up for that, maybe. I'll whap people into good critting shape. >_> That said, you either weren't clear or made a minor boo-boo in your comment about paradelles. Go look. redface EDIT- As for incentive: crit contests. With prizes. Nough said. Everyone likes prizes. And we (being whoever heads up said guild) could shamelessly take advantage of said contests to get bunches of good crits on a piece. (I'd envision it as taking one piece from one of the guild 'heads' or someone high-up, having anyone entering crit it, vote on winner). I kinda wanna head this guild up now. >_> Wanna help? lol |
|
|
|
I believe Hoodi tried that. It didn't work out very well.
|
|
|
Oxxidation-12 I believe Hoodi tried that. It didn't work out very well. Do you mean Inkblotters? That was more a poetry guild than critiquing guild. I mean, it was a guild for people to give crit, but not to learn to give crit. That said, if you mean something else that he tried that flopped, why did it flop and could the idea be salvaged do you think? |
|
|
|
point is, if ur questing for tickets, i will give u some. i wasnt kidding around yesterday (yes im generally a nice person, hard to believe eh?)
im so in the mood to go off topic here. |
|
