Thread: Reader Response

What do you look for in responses to your poetry? Compliment or critique? What is the most useful to you?

Personally I prefer people to flag up the areas that they think I need to work on, or that they didn't understand. Or they might even tell me that the whole thing doesn't have much mileage, or the structure is fundamentally flawed, or whatever. I find it much more useful than generic praise. Compliments are nice, but they're the sort of thing I might receive easily from my family or friends. And they feel a bit fake. When I post things online, especially, I'm looking for honesty. For a fresh pair of eyes with no emotional ties to look objectively at my writing.

for me. its people pointing out the simple mistakes i make. or when phrasings are wrong

i dont think a crit should ever dig into the subject, since, the subject is what it is, to meddle with it is to create another poem entirely (not necessarily a bad thing)

oh and i like when people dont/barely use punctuation because it feels more verbal to me
which is why i do it...

Simple mistakes, like grammar or spelling, I think the writer should really erase out before posting a poem for critique. That's the easy bit. If they're expecting someone to take time out to read their piece and make suggestions, it should be spell-checked and proof-read, absolutely the best they can make it before asking for opinions from others.

As for subject matter, I think if the subject is typical teen angst, or completely and utterly cliché, or whatever, then it's perfectly valid to point that out. There's nothing wrong with writing a new poem - taking a fresh angle on something you might have originally written in a clichéd way.

yes they should. but i tend to use the internet as a wall to throw a poem against and see if it sticks.

so if i make a mistake that word isnt going to pick up (like words that are correct but misspellings of other words like the extra o that sometimes finds my o's)

i always post right after i write. the only editing being done is in the process of writing. then i read it there in the post. then i fix my mistakes that are stupid. then i wait for the crits to see where i need more work.

i am an odd case surely though

I once read the line, "Publshing a book of poetry is like throwing a rose petal into the Grand Canyon and waiting for an echo."

Originally Posted by lin

I once read the line, "Publshing a book of poetry is like throwing a rose petal into the Grand Canyon and waiting for an echo."

*laughing* Amen !

I have to fly the flag the other way here, because on many occasions those requesting a crit are the rude ones, and the poor bastard that has tried to be helpful is the one on the receiving end. First off, we have to accept that if you post your work, you are soliciting for feedback. That someone then spends their time to offer advice and help is a gift to the original poster. That's their own precious time they've given to help. That's real value. They can give any old dickhead a few coins to go away or to take the good cause elsewhere, but their time is their own, irreplaceable. They can earn more cash, but their time is finite.

Now, having given of their time freely, they then get responses from the opening poster such as "you didn't look deeply enough" or "you missed the point" or "well, I disagree with your statement that ... " or best of all, "I am good enough to know that I am right and you are wrong because...".

People can argue the toss over this until the cows come home, but writing of all types is a communication, and the reader is the receiver of that information. If the reader doesn't like the message, or the way it is delivered, then that's a fact. They cannot be wrong, because they are the target at which you aim. If you fire an arrow and it misses the target, it's your fault. Anything that the reader doesn't like is valid, and it's NEVER their fault. It is yours and mine, the people that didn't get the writing spot-on. If the message goes over the head of the reader, then the writer has failed. If the reader tells you that, then accept it, because it's true.

In the few days since WF has resurfaced, I've already got a number of people that I won't crit, because of their negative attitude to others. As writers, if we can't listen and learn from each other, then we don't deserve the help. When a reader puts your book back on the shelf, that's the judgement. You can't tell them they're wrong. When an editor spikes your work, you can't tell him he knows nothing. When you're filling up your scrapbook with unpublished unread work, guess whose fault that is! It's not the readers fault, not at all!

If people are serious about improving, they need to put their egos in a box and face the truth. I once had an editor burn something I'd written in front of me and my colleagues. It wasn't a nice experience, but it taught me to never ever think I could just serve up something average to him. He didn't pat me on the head and tell me well done, but maybe I might like to consider... If he had, I would never had developed.

I actually think we could benefit from two forums, one where those who want a biscuit go, and one for those who want some honest truth, warts and all. In the latter, poets could only say thank you or ask questions about the points raised when they received comments. As it stands, there's a mixture of hobbyists, people who write for fun, and a few who want the hard graft to try and crack something. Mix them all together, and someone's going to get pissed at some point.

That said, there's no room for the "this sucks" nor the "awesome" type comments. Neither help anyone.

Amen, Pete.

Now, having given of their time freely, they then get responses from the opening poster such as "you didn't look deeply enough" or "you missed the point" or "well, I disagree with your statement that ... " or best of all, "I am good enough to know that I am right and you are wrong because...".

People can argue the toss over this until the cows come home, but writing of all types is a communication, and the reader is the receiver of that information. If the reader doesn't like the message, or the way it is delivered, then that's a fact. They cannot be wrong, because they are the target at which you aim. If you fire an arrow and it misses the target, it's your fault. Anything that the reader doesn't like is valid, and it's NEVER their fault. It is yours and mine, the people that didn't get the writing spot-on. If the message goes over the head of the reader, then the writer has failed. If the reader tells you that, then accept it, because it's true.

In the few days since WF has resurfaced, I've already got a number of people that I won't crit, because of their negative attitude to others. As writers, if we can't listen and learn from each other, then we don't deserve the help. When a reader puts your book back on the shelf, that's the judgement. You can't tell them they're wrong. When an editor spikes your work, you can't tell him he knows nothing. When you're filling up your scrapbook with unpublished unread work, guess whose fault that is! It's not the readers fault, not at all!

If people are serious about improving, they need to put their egos in a box and face the truth. I once had an editor burn something I'd written in front of me and my colleagues. It wasn't a nice experience, but it taught me to never ever think I could just serve up something average to him. He didn't pat me on the head and tell me well done, but maybe I might like to consider... If he had, I would never had developed.

I absolutely agree with this save one thing , disagreement. Now ! If it is " I disagree with you that this is a bad poem. " , etc. (You get the jist ) Then I say put your ego in check. But if it is along the lines of " I disagree because I am not seeing what you are seeing. " That is another matter entirely. I have done that on many occasion ( requesting more detail along with it ) It is nothing more than a discussion on the differences in styles, methods, and even preferences. Isn't that what writers are spose to do ? There should always be open dialogue between writers.

Originally Posted by MaggieG

But if it is along the lines of " I disagree because I am not seeing what you are seeing. " That is another matter entirely. I have done that on many occasion ( requesting more detail along with it ) It is nothing more than a discussion on the differences in styles, methods, and even preferences. Isn't that what writers are spose to do ? There should always be open dialogue between writers.

Well, it's less of a disagreement than a clarification of the crit, I suppose. Mind you, as I read that I did laugh to myself, trying to imagine such an exchange.

Reader: I find the juxtaposition of images clashing with imposition of metaphor, and this imbalance is not helped by the iambic bastardisation at the end of the third stanza.

Poet: I am sorry, I do not understand your point. Please elucidate further.

Reader: I mean your poem sucks, you one-legged arsehole freak!

This is why the interweb reaches out to us all.

Originally Posted by Pete_C

Well, it's less of a disagreement than a clarification of the crit, I suppose. Mind you, as I read that I did laugh to myself, trying to imagine such an exchange.

Reader: I find the juxtaposition of images clashing with imposition of metaphor, and this imbalance is not helped by the iambic bastardisation at the end of the third stanza.

Poet: I am sorry, I do not understand your point. Please elucidate further.

Reader: I mean your poem sucks, you one-legged arsehole freak!

This is why the interweb reaches out to us all.

LOL ! I do like your bluntness ! I ask people to explain further all the time. There is always something to be learned I think. Not that I am looking forward to getting my knuckles cracked by you ! LOL BUT if I can learn something I will endure the pain. *grins*