Writing a critique 102

[paisley]

Hi. I have a question. This is a snipnet off the Cold Front thread. What's your opinion?

"While I enjoy a crit, otherwise I would not post, what is the deal about everyone rewriting other people's posted poems in up here?

I have trouble with writing a crit as I am not very knowledgeable in poetry terms and historical stuff
but if I can just rewrite the posted poems to make read better, to my ear,
or to reflect what I think the meat of the message is, I would really enjoy that.

Huh,that is common practice then? that is okay?
That makes giving a crit almost like doing an exercise and I like them.
I did not realize that was the same as a crit."

Can the Beginners do it, too? What does everyone think? I am interested in hearing views on this.

[Ros]

I don't think a re-write is the same as a crit. Personally, I don't tend to re-write others' poems - it doesn't seem very polite, somehow - or at least, I might only re-write a section to illustrate a particular point I've already tried to point out. Sometimes someone might do a bit of a re-write by paring the poem down and saying 'these are what I think are the important parts'. I think that's fine.

I think I'm trying to say that rewriting some (or all of a short poem) is ok if you are making a specific point. Just a re-write without some sort of justification would annoy me, as the writer.

But that's just my opinion!

There are some good general guidelines for critting here:

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=3537

Or, if anyone (inc beginners) want to work on re-writes, we could have an exercise for it - might inspire something good - we could find a not-very-good poem, and see if everyone could improve on it!

Ros

[paisley]

Thanks, Ros. I feel the same.

Tempting as it can be, one needs to be careful as it can seem rather rude. As a teacher, I often find I'd like to rework my students projects to show them how they can create a final polished project but then they would have learned nothing except how to watch - and the end result would be a colaboration.

Having the knowledge/experience and then teaching it to someone is more difficult.

Giving a crit can be challenging, I do it poorly but taking the words and reordering them on a page is much easier.
I would think many of you would find it quite annoying if I did that.

If not, let me know, i'd love to show you how i could add plasant embishments
just to show you what I think you are really trying to say.

Thank you for listening.

[Elphin]

Paisley

Just another view - I often find that a rewrite/reformat of a poem is a lot easier than trying to explain the point but it must be accompanied by at least some form of explanation. For example, I recently reformatted a poem by Lake to illustrate the benefit (IMO) of structure and white space. I would only do that though with someone I had built up some rapport with.

In line editing is also a common crit technique, not used so much at PG but certainly on other forums. I think that works too.

I suppose in summary, I would say the crit technique to a large extent depends on the relationship that has been built up.

elph

[satyr]

It is not exactly on topic but it is relevant to this discussion to refer you to this discussion in Magma about reviews: http://magmapoetry.com/poetry-reviews/#comments

[Alfie]

In my opinion, rewriting someone's work is not a critique. The aim of a critique should be to help the writer and show them where they've gone wrong, how to fix those problems, and to help them get better as writers as well as improve their own work, not do it all for them. You rewriting someone's work doesn't help them understand where they went wrong, just shows them what you would do differently. There's no learning there. The writer will just type in your alterations and feel better about their work, without actually having gone through their own process of taking on constructive criticism and editing themselves.

If I ever want to show someone how structure, white space or imagery, etc, can be used more effectively/correctly, I use a published poem or a guide as an illustration and link the person to it. Then it's up to them to have a good old brainstorm and use what I've given them to redraft, or not. Rewriting something for someone skips the whole development in both writers and work.

That's my opinion, anyway . . .

[satyr]

I agree with Alfie, although Pound cut much of Eliot's work he didn't rewrite it for him as far as I know:).

There is a problem with feedback though, on this and every other site I have visited and that is to really do a good job on a poem you need to read it several times, deconstruct, analyse and then comment. This takes time and mental energy and sometimes you do it by private message rather than on the board. A couple of lines with a subjective comment helps the poets ego, which, lets face it, fluctuates from ravening monster to timid mouse anyway, but does little to increase his or her understanding. It appears to me that one proper critique is worth all the compliments possible. How do you differentiate between them automatically? If you base it on length the compliment gets padded out.

[brianedwards]

Personally, I've always found length and compliment are closely related . . .

I think some people think too much. Some "Poets" are just too precious about what they write. Lighten up I say. Anything goes.
Sometimes the biggest obstruction to creativity is politeness.

B.

[Ros]

Not sure length is relevant here. I find the only way to see when a crit is 'effective' for your particular piece of work is to stay on a forum and work with the people there. You'll then find a) those who seem to have some knowledge/appreciation in a particular area which is greater than yours, and therefore useful, and b) those whose poetry seems to 'fit' with yours. Their crits then tend to help you achieve the effect you are looking for, rather than changing your poem to something they would want to achieve.

It's always good to see if people in general are 'getting' your poem, but I find for detailed stuff there are a few people who are closer to my mind-set than others, and generally they are the ones I find most helpful. Though I appreciate the effort anyone takes to read and comment. I agree that a good, serious crit takes time and effort, and people (quite rightly) only tend to do those for a poem that really strikes a chord with them.

Ros

[brianedwards]

Not sure length is relevant here. I find the only way to see when a crit is 'effective' for your particular piece of work is to stay on a forum and work with the people there. You'll then find a) those who seem to have some knowledge/appreciation in a particular area which is greater than yours, and therefore useful, and b) those whose poetry seems to 'fit' with yours. Their crits then tend to help you achieve the effect you are looking for, rather than changing your poem to something they would want to achieve.

It's always good to see if people in general are 'getting' your poem, but I find for detailed stuff there are a few people who are closer to my mind-set than others, and generally they are the ones I find most helpful. Though I appreciate the effort anyone takes to read and comment. I agree that a good, serious crit takes time and effort, and people (quite rightly) only tend to do those for a poem that really strikes a chord with them.

Ros

Bravo Ros.
I admire your willingness to not only bother but to do so with intelligence, eloquence and grace.

Ahh, it actually bothers me that people might be offended by rewrites. You give me a poem chiselled in a tablet of stone and I promise you I will definitely not attempt to alter what you've written, even if I think you an egotistical polemical nerd. You post on an internet forum, you better roll with the punches. This is the medium, the century, the world we live in: deal with it or don't post. Simple.

B.

[satyr]

Brian, I don't think Alfie is, and I know I'm not, complaining about our poems being deconstructed, torn to shreds, or otherwise criticised. I think that Alfie is making the same point that I am; you don't learn much from someone else doing your work for you and the result is a collaboration anyway. I suspect that many of us are current or ex academics of some sort or another and this is a pedagogical issue, rather than a poetic one. You may improve my work out of all recognition but it will no longer be my work. If I rewrote a program in Prolog or Pascal for a student it would be mine, not his and the same applies to poetry. On the other hand if you show where it is cliched, clumsy, doesn't scan, uses tired rhymes ineffectively and perhaps show a couple of minor alterations that is fine.

The only reason I mentioned length is that I know of another site where they tried to improve the feedback, using length of review, and people started quoting the whole of the poem being reviewed to drive up the wordcount.

[Sharra]

I definitely don't have an issue with people doing rewrites of my work, sometimes it is easier to demonstrate how a poem could be improved than explain - especially if its a poem that needs some drastic chopping. I doubt anyone on here would literally 'lift' a rewrite, they would choose which bits to keep and which bits to lose.

I don't think it makes it a collaboration - everything we write is influenced by other writers, and even professional poets workshop, its just part of the learning process.
Sharra
x

[Suzanne]

Wonderful to read all this.

This has been a very interesting thread with more feedback than I anticipated. It is good to read what people think about rewrites and crits in order to get orientated to the way things run. For the handful of us who jumped into posting and critiquing without much knowledge of poetry or experience in sharing, it can be overwhelming to navigate. There is much fumbling going on in our heads.

I believe that the more comfortable you are about giving a crit, the more gracefully you can receive them. Confidence comes from doing and trying in giving and receiving. I admit still feeling awkward on both sides of the fence.

Those of you who can give a crit with ease understand the whole process on a different level than us who are less able. As a new beginner, I assumed EVERYONE knew better better than me. It is a confidence thing. If you lack confidence, someone's crit has greater impact.

As a writer I like the meaning to be understood.
Recently, Brian reminded me to reflect on the weight/balance of responsibility of the speaker and the receiver. When my poems are juggled and rewritten and it skews the message, I am unclear where I went wrong, have failed and get frustrated. The full weight rested on me. I am not so sure anymore nor am I convinced that it matters anymore.

I think that the purpose of the crit has different meanings for different people.
Is a crit to help improve the message of the poem? the material within the poem? Or to make it sonically better? For me, the message is the main thing, or it has been anyway. I am working on seeing poems more wholly. It is a transitional thing and doesn't always come easily.

I humbly apologize for sounding bitchy concerning crits.

I love what Sharra just said and her statement it is a great example to follow.

I don't believe I hold my poems tightly, I write for the fun of it. They are only words.
It is mostly fun. But I do get frustrated when I fail and then have not appreciated a crit because my ears have been plugged with my own ego.

I am very stubborn in my flexibility

.
Thanks for the marvelous discussion, it is encouraging in many ways.

Warmly,
Suzanne





It is frustrating to be so damn human sometimes.

[BenJohnson]

If I rewrote a program in Prolog or Pascal for a student it would be mine, not his and the same applies to poetry.

On the otherhand if your student had written a 200 line program to perform X. Then you rewrote that as a 20 line program using functions and recursion and still performed the same X. Might he not better learn from your example how to write concise programs? If you merely returned the program to him and said try re-writing it using a recursive function he might end up totally stumped and think this programming lark is too difficult for me to understand.

Therefore I see benefit in the re-write as a means to illustrate an example, just a re-write on its own teaches me little, but if someone says actually

"I am like a cloud getting blown through the skies by a strong wind" would work better as a metaphor, then proceeds to rewrite "The wind blows me through the skies", the lesson of what a metaphor is and how I could apply in here is more strongly enhanced.

[satyr]

Another programmer who uses recursion? Hail fellow ..., although I am glad to say I write poetry now and try to forget all about programming, systems analysis, database design and even A. I. I take your point, but suspect that you would have to choose another similar problem to demonstrate rather than doing his work for him. It is a moot point as someone admitted that if their poem was rewritten then they would learn from that, but would not use the rewritten text as it is.

I know I am just glad if anyone bothers to read my work:).

[BenJohnson]

The only problem with programming
....Is the desire to indent my thoughts
........until I reach the core point
....Then gradually break back out
Down to the start

Desperately trying not to mark the end of a line with a ;
Forgetting the order of precedence and there(fore) addi(ng) ra(dom) brackets (to get it all) to work right.

In programming it is likely that only part of the program would be rewritten many moving a chunk of code into a function where it belongs, at the end of the day it is still the students program, just the code is better organised, but as you said it becomes more of a collaboration. But as you say it is all pretty moot.

Btw I hate recursion in makes my head spin round and round.

P.S. I haven't commented yet, but I have read your poem. It often takes me a long time to respond though.

[satyr]

To Ben J.
You forget your Pascal syntax and dislike recursion
whereas I get lost using brackets and recursive calls.
You wish to add a semi-colon to the end of every line
whereas I need to put a '/' before the program stalls!

Prolog: Here is a recursive call in a simple ancestors db:
descendent(D,A):-parent(A,D).
descendent(D,A):-parent(P,D),descendent(P,A).

As for LISP I cannot make Head nor Tail
I can't defun a factorial, whatever that may be
everything always comes out as a Fail!
Enough of this programming talk, I want to be free!

[BenJohnson]

To Ben J.
You forget your Pascal syntax and dislike recursion
whereas I get lost using brackets and recursive calls.
You wish to add a semi-colon to the end of every line
whereas I need to put a '/' before the program stalls!

Prolog: Here is a recursive call in a simple ancestors db:
descendent(D,A):-parent(A,D).
descendent(D,A):-parent(P,D),descendent(P,A).

As for LISP I cannot make Head nor Tail
I can't defun a factorial, whatever that may be
everything always comes out as a Fail!
Enough of this programming talk, I want to be free!

[Alfie]

On the otherhand if your student had written a 200 line program to perform X. Then you rewrote that as a 20 line program using functions and recursion and still performed the same X. Might he not better learn from your example how to write concise programs? If you merely returned the program to him and said try re-writing it using a recursive function he might end up totally stumped and think this programming lark is too difficult for me to understand.

But THAT is how someone learns for themselves how to edit their own poems. Obviously you'd give them a bit more than that, though, you'd have to show them how to use whateverthatis or use an example, so they understand how to move on from where they are, but not do it for them. A rewrite shows a good example (sometimes) of how YOU can do it, yeah, but how long is that lesson going to stick in their head? Would you remember how to better write whateverthatis if someone just does it for you, or if you actually had to put the legwork in yourself and use your own mind to work it out?

This is why I don't like rewriting. Point out the problems, tell/show someone how to fix them, give them a couple ideas, yeah, all fine with me, as the author can take on those things and spend an hour or more going over them, using what you gave them to redraft, and learning at the same time. If they get stuck, well there's a forum here, and million more out there where they can ask for help, or even the original critiquer is probably a good bet for help on something they said. So no, I disagree that another person rewriting someone's work helps them learn how to better do it themselves, that is why kids get given homework to do at school, and why teachers are not allowed to rewrite your coursework for you, because, how else do you learn unless you put the effort in to do so?

Plus, with poetry, each work is enterpretted differently by different readers, so a rewrite by one of those readers might not make the connections that other readers, or the writer picked up or put in, as well as references and all the other stuff that goes into poetry. In my book, a rewrite IS a collab because there are two minds working within the text rather than one; two different enterpretations, two different voices, different connotations and ideas from the same text, both working together for a similar, but not identical, polishing of a work. And yeah, one might have written most of it, but at least with suggesting ideas for the writer's own development in a critique rather than rewriting, they can develop their work while keeping their own intentions, connections, etc, and use the process to help them with other works.

Learning is not a quick fix, and shouldn't be treated so. If you want to get better as a writer, as well as improve your work, then take the time to use your own ideas to rewrite/redraft your own work. If other people do it all for you, whether you pick and choose or not, then it's still lazy and skipping the process. Plus, it's more fun to work from other people's critiques and develop your ideas, etc, rather than type up a rewrite with the bits you like.

. . . eh, this got long, sorry. :S

[brianedwards]

The point that seems to be missed is that a rewrite is a suggestion. As a teacher I suggest different ways of expressing ideas to my students all the time. And that's something my own teachers have done in the past, from primary school to post-grad . . .