i turn my back on you for one minute Funky Seagull and look what you go and do!
sorry, Barnacle. it *is* confusing dealing with all these pseudonyms though.
Well, well. I was at Tottenham Court road on Sunday!
Hurried pace is very evocative, and rhythm is enchanting - not sure about exploding mobile phones though!
come ON you guys ... chant's poem is not up to standard ... its sloppy ... if it gets a cherry i will eat my hat (not for the first time of course) ...
funnily enough i gave it a good fishing and sent it back to him ... before any of this was on thread ... i meant the comments on the poem to be private but i don't mind putting them here if chant has no objection ...
now please sharpen up your judgements and play the game properly!
I looked through that one and I didn't pick it. (My skills don't need *that* much sharpening)
*dons Don's pencil sharpener that's wide enough for a head*
thanks for your crit, Fish! don't know whether to respond to you by e-mail or here - you're coming at me from all angles! and thanks Ralph and Hen and Misst for liking poem. of course you can put the crit here, Fish.
funnily enough, you crit in exactly the same way as Liana - you want to remove all the points where i doff my cap to American style. from a technical point of view, there are too many 'thats' and too many 'ands' in the poem, you're right. but these words serve a rhythmic purpose - i find you can't get a poem to really swing without them. i sacrificed precision for metre. was aiming for a kind of blues jazz feel.
It would be nice to see Fish and Liana's crit here. I'm sure that Chant wouldn't mind and it would be very useful for us naive poets/critics.
I remember Chant critiquing one of Alison’s poems online and although it did deteriorate into ‘well I though it nice, leave her alone’ postings, I found it very useful.
As good as ABC is, I think a more open critique method, along the lines of a writer’s group, would be very useful. I suppose it may not be to everyone’s taste but I know I will only improve my poetry by hearing what others think of it.
By seeing how other people critique a piece of work would also help me to feel more confident in returning the favour and would hone both writing and critiquing abilities.
Who’s up for it?
I think you're getting into very tricky territory when you say there are too many of a certain word. I didn't notice an excess of 'and's and 'that's before and even with the criticism in mind I don't feel that it's the case. They lend to the poem the quality of a stream of consciousness - the images sewn together hastily and roughly.
Sharpen up my judgements indeed! You think that was a pout? *This* is a pout! ;-)
As for critiques, I think they're fair enough - but it surely has to be a report of the reader's response - if one 'feels' there is too much or too little of some element, that's fair enough, but I can see nowhere arguments arising out of any statement of fact. Remember, the reader takes an active part in the effect of a piece, and writing for a good response is like buying shares - you can only go for what you've got a good feeling about, and see what the market does.
But if the market doesn't like your writing then you have two choices: adopt a different voice/style/subject or plod on and accept than no-one will ever enjoy your work.
I don't agree at all. I think you have no choice but to consistently write what you'd like to pick up and read. There is no one style or genre of writing that everyone is going to appreciate. If you try to please all you'll please no-one, least of all yourself.
And I think it would be good if there was a forum area solely for crits.
Where you might expect to get blasted or patted on the back, rather than just stumble upon it.
yes you did.
chant, be clearer you bad lad.
i think about 6 months ago i did a crit for chant - didnt appear on the forums, it was a private thing via email.
it was a prose piece as opposed to poetry.
The market's pretty wide, Stu. I don't think it's possible to write a piece that *everyone* hates.
But if it came to a choice, I'm more drawn to the Kilgore Trout character - who writes stories that no one but porn magazines will publish, and often throws them away after he's finished them. Rather that than pandering to an audience.
original words in brackets are my suggested deletions ... tho i would take out the entire first bit after moving fast up to the lights are buzzing ...
It's hard to judge what speed we're travelling at
we're moving fast
(practically speaking how can you be unsure of speed
when the doors are closing, surely train is at a
standstill? – unless speed is metaphorical?)
the doors close behind us on
Tottenham Court Road.
Abandoned on the seat (there's) an (abused) Metro
(that) lies (I’d always take “that”s out – they are
usually useless)
(devoured and waiting ) (I think these words are over
emotive and bordering on melodramatic)
(that) has passed through many hands
today
and will welcome many (wild-eyed) (unnecessary)
travellers
through the night.
(this is where the poem really gets going … above is
scene setting I think)
The lights are buzzing as you tell me (that )
everything's permitted
and we buy some chips
and talk
and
I'm telling you (that) the Lord God
judges over all of us
but you're not really
listening.
Your mobile explodes and you won't bin it
as I want you to and
it's hard to judge what speed we're travelling at
as I roll a cigarette
to share
and you're texting someone I don't know
and the smoke plumes out like angel wings (what
smoke?)
on the breath of the traffic
and the city swings on.
But standing and smoking under the hood of the tube
we watch the people walking
and in that quiet mood
and scarcely talking
and burdened by their many hours on Yahoo and AIM (?)
that has drained them through the working day (?) (how
do you know this?)
and (that) calls them home now.
And when you tell me again
that everything's permitted
I feel the wind change
and swear
that you're a godless soul
and have misread Dostoevsky
and you're laughing and aging as
the lights go red and
a taxi halts
and someone shouts
and the city (seems to) tremble
like a palace of surreal lights
in a painting by Monet or someone like that
for a second.
And then( don’t think you need both and and then) the
clouds collapse into rain.
so it would read:
It's hard to judge what speed we're travelling at
we're moving fast
The lights are buzzing as you tell me
everything's permitted
and we buy some chips
and talk
and
I'm telling you the Lord God
judges over all of us
but you're not really
listening.
Your mobile explodes and you won't bin it
as I want you to and
it's hard to judge what speed we're travelling at
as I roll a cigarette
to share
and you're texting someone I don't know
and the smoke plumes out like angel wings on the breath of the traffic
and the city swings on.
But standing and smoking under the hood of the tube
we watch the people walking
and in that quiet mood
and scarcely talking
And when you tell me again
that everything's permitted
I feel the wind change
and swear
that you're a godless soul
and have misread Dostoevsky
and you're laughing and aging as
the lights go red and
a taxi halts
and someone shouts
and the city trembles
like a palace of surreal lights
in a painting by Monet or someone like that
for a second.
And the clouds collapse into rain.
i wrote the poem in an attempt to meet the rhythmic demands of the song 'Godless' by The Dandy Warhols. i understand why you've rewritten the poem as you have done. you have rewritten it to fall within the conventions of English poetry. the English language places most importance on precision of meaning - poetry being the best words in the best order, where each word is carefully chosen for meaning. you remove the 'thats' because they add no meaning to the lines.
my problem with this is that in the process of so doing, you destroy the poem's internal rhythm. for me, you turn a river into a lake. the poem becomes stagnant, which is a contradictory effect to the sense of movement that a 'stream of consciousness' has, where thoughts and feelings accumulate randomly and in an unpatterned way.
the loose structure is an attempt to reflect that fact; when we think and feel, very often, we do not do so grammatically. i think that too high a premium is placed on what one SEES, as opposed to what one HEARS.
the interesting topic raised by this, i think, is that of 'poetic ear'. of what FEELS right to us, as we write/read from a rhythmic point of view. clearly, the way Fish and I 'hear' and 'feel' poetry is very different.
It's hard to judge what speed we're travelling at
but we're moving fast
(practically speaking how can you be unsure of speed
when the doors are closing, surely train is at a
standstill? – unless speed is metaphorical?)
yes, speed was intended to be metaphorical - the sense of how slowly/quickly the characters are burning through their lives.
the doors close behind us on
Tottenham Court Road.
Abandoned on the seat (there's) an (abused) Metro
(that) lies (I’d always take “that”s out – they are
usually useless)
(devoured and waiting ) (I think these words are over
emotive and bordering on melodramatic)
you don't like my pathetic fallacy?! the epithets are intended to be transferable - abused, devoured, waiting - these are all words which apply to Londoners, i think.
(that) has passed through many hands
today
and will welcome many (wild-eyed) (unnecessary)
regular metre would remove it - i inserted it to give a sense of the unexpected - deliberately broke the metre.
travellers
through the night.
(this is where the poem really gets going … above is
scene setting I think)
The lights are buzzing as you tell me (that )
everything's permitted
and we buy some chips
and talk
and
I'm telling you (that) the Lord God
judges over all of us
but you're not really
listening.
Your mobile explodes and you won't bin it
as I want you to and
it's hard to judge what speed we're travelling at
as I roll a cigarette
to share
and you're texting someone I don't know
and the smoke plumes out like angel wings (what
smoke?)
character has just rolled a cigarette - a few steps on in the narrative.
on the breath of the traffic
and the city swings on.
But standing and smoking under the hood of the tube
we watch the people walking
and in that quiet mood
and scarcely talking
and burdened by their many hours on Yahoo and AIM (?)
that has drained them through the working day (?) (how
do you know this?)
how does one know that people will get drunk and attempt to get laid at office parties? descriptive induction not unallowed, i think. i like Yahoo because, as well as being a search engine which most office workers will use at some point during the working day, it's also nods to the Swiftian coinage - the brutalisation of London life.
and (that) calls them home now.
And when you tell me again
that everything's permitted
I feel the wind change
and swear
that you're a godless soul
and have misread Dostoevsky
and you're laughing and aging as
the lights go red and
a taxi halts
and someone shouts
and the city (seems to) tremble
like a palace of surreal lights
in a painting by Monet or someone like that
for a second.
And then( don’t think you need both and and then) the
clouds collapse into rain.
not for purposes of meaning, certainly, but felt right for the rhythm.
A poem is a collection of words that looks like a poem. ;-)
As well as rhythm, I think Chant would be sacrificing voice if he were to make those cuts. Naturally, it seems like the kind of cuts Fish would apply to her own poetry, after a first draft, say, and as such (or maybe I'm imagining it,) the poem is slightly Fisherised. It also seems a little wrong to meticulously strip any words that one deems 'unnecessary' - the writer surely has a feel for them as he or she writes and edits. To apply anything more strict than this feeling is moving into the territory of removing the qualities of the language itself and leaving only a bare meaning, a statement.
Also, I'm certain that a poet could toil for years on a poem, stripping and editing until they have chiselled it into a form where every syllable is utterly necessary and meaningful, and nothing more could be taken without destroying the poem completely. They could then load it up on abctales and find no one takes much notice of it. That's not because they're at fault, but because interpretations differ so wildly. I know, for instance, that short poems I've spent several hours solidly toiling on and frowing over are up here unmarked, whilst long ones that I scrawled out in a moment of frustration of inspiration have been cherry-picked, five-starred and even used as key examples of my skills. That, surely, is an indication that voice is of utmost importance.
Don't throw me off, Chant - I wasn't trying to steer the thread towards me, but I'm a living example of my argument, or so I say.
Put the baize cloth down.
Now. Drop it.
Or I shoot.
*bang*
Oh my God. What have I done?
Agree with Chant, here. The original one DID have "unnecessary" words, but as he said, they are part of the feel of it : it seemed a flickering film in the dark as opposed to a well lit painting, which I guess is the point? The movement, of the tube, their conversation, our eyes over the words. It is vivid, personal. I think is one of his best, alongside the David Beckham one, and that one about the building site at dawn
i think it makes a difference to hear it read aloud.. that way, a poem often alters hugely.....
so chant. can we expect you on stage at the next ABCTales meeting?
Nobody knows more about a poem than the author.
Your version of what you thought Chant was saying is OK, Fish - but the original is better. Now Moth isn't bad but if you just ....
you shot me. i can't believe you shot me Hen! what's your most underrated poem on the site, do you think?
right Liana, i think some poems are written to be read, and others to be spoken.
thanks, Misst. i thought it was one of my better ones too. there is, as Hen says, often a big divergence between what we think is our best stuff and what other people think is. what's the best poem you think you've written? don't tell me now. i'll put up tomorrow what i think are your top two. will have to be tomorrow because i can't get into sets or the top 10 on my aol connection. keeps timing out.
now, Fish, your comments are always appreciated, and, like Choose, i would like more of this kind of thing to go on in the forums - helps us all to get an idea of what we're about.
thanks, Mykle! the real problem with that poem of Fish's, of course, is that we never learn how big the moth is. ;-)
Chant - heres a tip
Don't run the last ten through aols browser, use a separate one, IE for example. Now access last ten, and when you get it, click on last 50 (or whatever) add it to favourites, and it'll be way quicker.
AOL is an @!#$..
well i'm afraid i didn't like that poem chant, with or without the amendments. i don't suppose that makes it a bad poem - but things like "and the city seems to tremble like a palace of surreal lights" don't engage me.
i wasn't going to post any comment here but i was interested by your comment that this is one of your best pieces. as you know i like your writing normally, and recently i read your For Lovers Are Markers poem and [as i think i told you, but i can't remember], loved some of its lines. how would you compare the two poems?
This is just the sort of open critisism this site is (generally) lacking. I found it extremely useful and interesting.
In one small thread we begin to see Fish's approach to editing, Chant's passion for rythym over technical writing, and that Stoaty would rather be a trout.
Brilliant!
It's alright, Chant - the bullet went straight through your left atrium - no harm done!
I'm not sure whether the question is a cunning ruse to draw me out...I shall answer it anyway. Hard to say, but I remember being particularly surprised that the new version of 'Through the night of doubt and sorrow' was never noted, as I had spent most of the previous day straining over it. At the opposite end of the spectrum, 'The contempt of some old men' has been advertised on the front page for over a month now, and I scribbled it down in five minutes after a sudden vision of being roasted by elder critics.
I have problems with the AOL browsers too - IE is required for the top 10, or indeed any assurance that the uploads will work.
rightio mykle ... next time i am teaching a poetry class i will tell my students that there is nobody else who knows more about their poems than them ... i will just say well done old fruits and offer no useful crit at all ...
will make my job easier anyhow ... i hope some of them bring cakes ... we can have a nice long chat about nothing over an extended teabreak ...
glad you found the experience interesting tho chooselife ... shall we do one of yours next?
*looks up guiltily from plunging Robert's head into a trough of water. 'like it, damn you! like it!"*
thanks for the tip, Liana. aol has been particularly crap for me lately. it logs me out all the time, loses its connection with the server when searching for web pages, doesn't upload the home page correctly, but still manages to take up its usual half hour loading the ad for the 'now say it now send it' gadget i don't want.
i had a think about it and the poems of mine i consider the best are the ones i like to read out loud when p.issed. Auden, of course, placed major importance on the sound of a poem, and wrote all his stuff with the listener, as opposed to the reader, in mind. i think maybe when i write something that looks like it should be spoken i think, ah, this is what a poem SHOULD be.
some of it also has to do with how much energy i put into a piece. most of my high energy pieces are crap, but the ones that work tend to become my favourites. For Lovers.. was a technical piece of work. i felt i made it more with my intellect than my emotions. writing pieces like that is less exciting for me, so maybe i feel less enthusiastic about them.
Chant, interestingly, how does my poem Praha work?
I ask you, because you saw it before you heard me read it.
Which way do you think it was written? for the ear or the eye?
I find it strange that almost every book I've read about writing poetry stresses the importance of reading your work aloud. This would suggest that it's more important for a poem to be heard than read.
I think you're right Chant: your technical pieces are haunting but the rythmical ones expose your energy.
Now dry Robert's hair before he catches a cold.
i wasn't expecting Praha to work at all as a spoken piece - it read like a very private poem to me - like proof's spirit, not for common useage! thought it was very much for the reader. was consequently surprised at how successfully it worked as an aural piece.
*reluctantly stops drowning Robert.*
It wasnt written to be heard at all, but to be read off a page - when i speak it, the layout is lost, the line breaks and pauses i feel are somehow invisible. Although i can attempt to replicate it, the original offering is completely lost and it becomes a different poem.
Right again.
Not sure if this thread's gone to sleep, feel bit guilty waking it up
am with Chant and Funky on this. One of the things that appealed to me about Chant's poem was how the "imperfections" conjured up the imperfection of travelling on a tube : the jolts, flickering lights. Painting has changed so much and so has music, to reflect the changing rhythms of life brought by technology. I thought Chant did a brilliant job. The world we create around us is NEVER perfect, and often not beautiful, the trick is to find beauty and mystery still, to write it. I did NOT find it sloppy. ok, a few things could have been clearer, but I would never sacrifice rawness for clarity, excitement for perfection?
Again, the poem (as I read it) is about movement, time passing. The futurists tried to do this in tumbling shapes, photraphers tried with long exposures. These images are not "perfect" like a Leonardo, that is not their point? Maybe they look sloppy, but even the word sloppy implies movement, water tipping.
Pages