|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:08 pm
This thread is for protégés of Zeo in regards to critiquing.
Welcome. I'm Zeo, and I've been writing in some form or another since my youth. I am currently majoring in philosophy (which requires, as we all know, extensive critical thinking and analysis) and am intending to get an MFA in creative writing.
I mostly write poetry, although I do write short stories as well. (Not to mention some novels in the works.) My interest has always been to become a comic artist, but unfortunately my real skill stops at writing. (It does, however, influence the way I view poetry.)
I am currently experimenting with non-traditional styles of poetry and writing. My preferred form is prose poetry (and language poetry, though to a lesser extent). I also write free form. I do not tend to work in other styles as much, so my specialty will likely be focused not on structure or form but on the art of the poem.
My philosophy of poetry is to treat it as if it were a painting: to take an aspect of human experience and convey it in a new way. I believe the poem should be what happens between the reader and the poem, and not just the words themselves. A poem should (and I say this from my perspective) impart on you a new way of seeing and appreciating the world. This is what I will focus on in my critiques.
Although I want to help individuals to create meaningful art, I also want to emphasize the importance of knowing and understanding the basics. I've heard this said of art: "to manipulate reality you must be able to understand reality." So it is true of poetry.
This thread is here for discussions/advice on critiquing. Critiquing as I understand it involves two things: does the poem exhibit a comprehension of poetic techniques, and does it impart a sense of meaning and unique conveyance? A passion and intuitive understanding of poetry is also important, of course. With that in mind, I aim to help give advice for meaningful, in depth critiques.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2007 8:10 pm
Well, here are the two most recent examples of my critiquing (The ones PL picked me up for, actually) - I'll just post the links, to save space. Example 1Example 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 11:22 am
Alright. I'm back now, so I can get to business. biggrin
I'll start with the first link:Lady Laurana let's transmogrify, flower and weed cliche, This word seems interesting. My first reaction was to say "what does she mean by this?" I thought about it, and perhaps she is trying to say "transmogrify from the cliched form of flower and weed." Perhaps. But still...something about the word "cliche" made me pause. I'm not sure why. Seems like one shouldnt use the word "cliche" in a poem. Like it's....bad form, or something. into stars and shoot Not to mention, "flower and weed cliche, into stars and shoot" does not make any sense. for something big and burn up (1)like fireworks, was short-lived but worth the delay speaking strictly from me. or just watch naruto in your room (Refer below) (2)bothered by alcohol-enhanced old inside jokes Interesting line here. But somehow, "alcohol-enhanced" (and I'm not quite sure the hyphen is necessary), seems too wordy and not very poetic. I like the meaning, here, though, and would like to see her keep it. It's the language that I feel is too...text-booky for this poem. I might suggest changing the word "alcohol enhanced" with something more poetic sounding, but which retains the same meaning. we can't help but recall with ivory-tower eyes (Again...get rid of the hyphen in the line above. Similar punctuation and word forms like this can sometimes distract from the poem. However, if she were to change the terms in the first line, ivory-tower would not be redundant punctuation.)shining and falling. This line here seems...too plain. This language is overdone and rather trite. I'd suggest changing it to something much more engaging, and especially something that fits the overall tone of the poem so far.you know, if i took advantage of this situation it wouldn't be really (3)taking advantage of you; your girlfriend would be the only one hurt. This stanza, overall, lacks poetic quality. This reads more like prose. I would point out the difference in tone and language in the last stanza. You see how there was imagery at first, and the poet gave a sense of something bigger in the beginning? And now the language takes a turn into straightforward prose, using enjambment as the only indicator that this is still part of the poem. (Enjambment does not turn prose into poetry! That's a mistake that a lot of beginning poets make, as I'm sure you're well aware of.) So, for the poet, I would have suggested to totally rewrite this stanza, keeping in mind the tone, the imagery, and the language that they started off with. (1) - Be careful of your word choice - with all of the other vocabulary you use, "big" seems rather normal, too casual for your piece.
I agree with this. It's good to pay attention to words that don't seem to fit in with the language being used throughout.(2) - To me, this particular line makes no sense. Maybe it has some significance for you, but as a reader, it seems pointless. My problem with this line is that it changes the flow of the poem with the period (the end of the sentence) right before "or just watch Naruto in your room." It doesn't feel like a complete sentence, and it took me a few times reading it to figure out that's what it was trying to say. Reading over it again, I don't think this line should be in it at all. I think it's trying to say something along the lines of "lets do all these fantastical things, or just watch Naruto in your room." But it's...distracting. I get that Naruto is the big pop culture show right now, and a lot of people are likely to get the reference, but the language is bad here. Not only that, but it takes a sharp turn from imagery and poetic quality and nose dives into plain, awkward prose. (And for the love of God, proper nouns need to be capitalized!) (3) - Again, word choice. I've found it's best to avoid words like "really", and I think you should rearrange to get rid of it. Good point, again. All in all, I really like your piece. The broken sentences make the reader pay attention, and your word choice captures your audience. My only other comment is to perhaps go through and think about the rhythm of the lines - it might be just me, but a few of them seem a little off, or forced. I do agree that the rhythm at times seems forced somehow. It's one of those instances that the flow could be either an artistic statement (as you said, the choppiness could aid in helping the reader pay attention and focus on key elements), or it could be just sloppy writing. Hard to say, but in any case, pointing it out as you have makes the poet aware of it if they weren't before, and helps them to understand whether they intended it or not.
This isn't a bad piece. It demonstrates some knowledge of poetic techniques, and carries an interesting note (although it loses said quality at the end.) One problem I had was with the capitalization. As we all know, failing to capitalize certain words can be a style, and many people choose to do it on purpose. However, in this poet's case, the lack of capitalization takes away from the poem. Not capitalizing "I" and "Naruto" for instance just seems sloppy and ugly. Not capitalizing the beginning of lines (to say nothing of incorrect period placements or lack of periods where there perhaps ought to be one) makes it a little more confusing for the reader to understand. In other words, if the poet is trying to make some kind of "style" with this, it's hurting the poem. The use of punctuation can be just as important as the word choice and word placement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:37 pm
Alright. Second link.
I know that the poem was aligned to the right, but I'm going to align it to the left to make it easier to comment on. Lady Laurana dancing like "IF YOU LIVED HERE, you'd be dead. OR 4:53 AM."
I love the title. Good start, so far. Bars were arranged in a seedy pattern about the line of the river, The word "about" doesn't make any sense here. Maybe they meant "above" or some similar word?the sound of the rotting water Wow! Makes you wonder what the experience of seeing rotting water must be like. (Interesting imagery.)sloshing as its fumes rose into the gaudy air. I like the word "gaudy" here. It seems to allude to the next line, lending itself to the image of cheap, plastic whores. The very breath from (red lips, whores whispering )(1)seemed to glisten with ancient secrets. Cherry liquor falls down creme colored chins eyes no longer windows, but mouths, sucking the soul. The air is heavy like a kiss, or wet, decaying murder, forgotten on the shores Interesting language here!as (birds )(2) pick at the flesh. All the hotel windows are dark (but they are loud with desperate moans and cries. )(3)The blood seeped from lips, eyes, as bits of tattered flesh loosed themselves from the back of his head Who is this person suddenly appearing, I wonder? as the revolver slid from slack fingers. Redundancy of the word "as" here, made worse by the fact that this word starts both lines. A good rule of thumb: unless the poet is doing this on purpose to make a point, it's best to avoid starting two lines (especially when they are right next to each other) with the same word.No one would ever know, (but thats how these things went. )(4)The curve of her lips, her smile Now, we have a female. The difference, though, is that this seems to fit in with the poem, whereas sudden mention of a "he" with a gun seemed just that, sudden. the tilt of her neck and the glisten in the corner of her eyes. All pink, all new. I don't really like the word "new" here. Seems too plain. Chemicals raging through bloodstreams as knowledge becomes immorality as the lack of it is granted Redundancy of the word "as" here! Revise one of them!(gracde. )(5)She still strings flowers in her hair, yellows and golds bright against the black. The river hasn't killed her yet. Nice stand alone stanza!and the bars stay (quiet. Capitalize "and" here. Quiet. )(6)Shattered. Senseless ******** in dusty hotel beds, between greasy walls by the dim light of candles her face is lit as all innocence is lost she is the end, and the world crashed. Distracting change of tense here. Not only that, but the phrase "and the world crashed" seems abstract whereas the rest of the poem gives a rich sense of concrete imagery. When I read this line, my first thought was to say: "Whoa, ok. Why should I care?" The rest of the poem certainly outlines that something is happening to her, and perhaps to the rest of the world, but not necessarily that the world is ending or "crashing." This phrase seems too strong (and rather...well, meaningless) to convey what is happening. I don't think it fits the tone this person has set up very well. The wine isn't old enough, and he dumps it into the river and blood cascades from her mouth like a waterfall. Redundancy of the word "and" here!The bartenders are shouting, but no one can hear them over the cracking and splitting of white hot beams as things begin to break and burn and fall. If this were prose, "break and burn and fall" would sound terrible. As it is in this poem, it gives a sort of emphasis to each line "and break" "and fall." So, "and" might work here a little better than, say, a few lines up (where the lines are not disconnected for emphasis). Something did not snap inside her. Something melted. Her skin burned like alcohol ;the whores and the city slipped into the poison river (I love the imagery here.)
and now the (birds )(7) have nothing to chew. Ah, an ending that makes you think, makes you wonder. Lovely! (1) I like the alliteration of "whores whispering", but maybe you could find some way to tie together the red lips and the whores? Instead of having them as two separate descriptions...it just seems vaguely redundant. I'm not entirely sure what you mean here. When I read it, it seemed to me to be saying (again, drawing from the line above it): whores who appear gaudy with red lipstick (and from this we can assume that they are dolled up to look richer and ritzier than they really are). I felt that the red lips and the whores were tied together fine, but if you read it another way, it's good to point it out. Everyone who reads a poem will interact with it differently, and just because you got a different reading or understanding of this line than I did, doesn't mean you don't have a valid point. Perhaps the poet will read through it and see if it makes sense and conveys what he/she is trying to convey properly. (2) I know this is your piece, but personally I think "birds" is a little bit plain for the rest of the extravagance of your piece. Maybe use something like "scavengers", or something equally descriptive? I agree. He/she uses the word "birds" again later, but somehow it doesn't seem to take away from the language the way the first use does. The last line seems to be dark and blunt, (which creates good emphasis), but where the word "birds" first appears here doesn't seem to be carrying the same intent. I agree, I would revise. (3) The way your piece was going up to this point made this particular section seem out of place. The "but they are" seemed odd, after reading your previous long and flower sentences without many conjunctions or anything, you know? Just thought maybe you could shift that around a little. He/she does in fact use the word "but" a few lines above. I thought the use of conjunctions here and later added a new element to the language, but I don't feel that it took away from it. (Again, if you did, this is a good chance for the poet to analyze what they were going for, and if they feel the language they chose was adequate.) (4) Pretty much the same thing I just said - the short sentence and "but" threw me off a little. I almost felt like "but that's how these things went" gave it a kind of ruthless city feel, as if to say "this is the kind of thing you can expect here." It rather fits the mood of the rest of the poem. The argument could be made, however, that the language seems strangely colloquial compared to the rest of the piece. (And the redundancy of the word "as" here is a little distracting...)(5) Typo, I'm sure. Were you going for "grace"? Good catch! But I did point out in the poem another mistake that caught my eye--the redundancy of the word "as" at the beginning of those two lines. It read like an unintentional repetition, and as such it's awkward. (Imagine reading the line as if it were prose, and you'll see what I mean.) (6) I see the emphasis you're trying to make, but this repetition feels unneeded. Maybe there's another word you can substitute for "quiet"? I'd have to agree here, too. Although the use of the word "quiet" here twice does feel intentional, it seems it would still be better if the second (or maybe the first) quiet were changed to a different word. The second quiet seems to be there for emphasis, but as you point out, the redundancy is just distracting. (7) Just the bird thing again. Like I said earlier, using the word "birds" in this line gives a feel of blunt hardness, which I think makes it a strong ending. Although I agree that the first "birds" was too weak, somehow the use of it here (especially when it references the stronger word that we hope will be revised into the poem) seems appropriate. Overall, I really like your piece. I love your word choice, the vocabulary you add in, and the descriptive terms that add new meaning to old mental images. I love reading other people's work, and by all means, if you have something else, PM me! I'd love to read it. Yes, overall, this is a very beautiful, well written poem. It would take me hours to go through and point out all the imagery that I loved, so I only pointed out a few things. The poet, I feel, accomplishes the art I believe they were intending to convey. This is helped by use of (for the most part) strong and poetic language. There's a great, rich sense of imagery. This is the kind of poem I feel like I could get lost in; I could spend all day wondering about the various meanings behind it, which in my opinion is what makes an excellent poem. biggrin
Again, though, you pointed out some places of improvement that I too think would make the poem stronger. Overall the things that I found were slight redundancies in the words chosen to begin lines ("as" was used this way four times in the poem), a couple areas of word choice, and other little things like a capitalization/punctuation error here and there. When critiquing a poem, sometimes it helps to read the poem (or lines in question) as if it were prose. Sometimes people break rules in poetry that they couldn't in prose (which is what poetry is all about). However, sometimes the rules that are broken shouldn't be broken in poetry, either. For instance, awkward word flow, incorrect or inconsistent punctuation, and other things like that are elements that are distracting in both prose and poetry. Keeping this in mind will help make you more aware of language errors the poet might be making.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
