maybe I just don't think about poetry in the same way then; "fragile
growth" sounds a little too delicate compared to the way I often
write. I remember I used to think that way, a long time ago, & treated
each poem as something that was made out of thin crystal, & I remember
how bad most of those poems were. to each their own I think, in that
respect.
and really, I don't see a lot of other ways of expressing opinions
that are 'negative' in any but a 'negative'-seeming way -- (they
aren't intended as insults, as I pointed out). if I find the narration
of a poem bland, I will say so. if I find an image unconncted, I will
say so. exactly as if I find a metaphor original, startling or
otherwise impressive, I will also say so.
KS
On 16/02/07, Roger Day <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I think a snap should be approached with a little more generosity of spirit,
> as if you were approaching someone's initial drafts. Treat it like a lamb, a
> sapling or young child. Something like that may be perfect - and some may
> well have been worked on for a long time already - then it may well be
> treated as a full grown poem, but sometimes you can see the youthful
> problems it has, and you need to be careful in watering it or pushing it in
> a more fruitful direction. Fragile growths need nurturing.
>
> Roger
>
> On 2/16/07, kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > I was thinking about the 'snap/poem' distinction the other day actually, &
> > how to respond to each in critique. I asked myself, "shouldn't each be
> > treated with equal criticality: a snap so that it would have a headstart
> at
> > becoming a full (good) poem, a poem so that it could shape itself up some
> > more."
> >
> > your 'emphasis' is interesting in another way: why should there be a need
> to
> > defend the person whose work is being critiqued? the recipient, after all,
> > is not the _writer_ but the _writing_! writing can never feel offended, &
> a
> > writer (perhaps) never should.
> >
> > KS
> >
> > On 16/02/07, andrew burke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Well, Kasper, I disagree. The tone was quiet and built a kind of diurnal
> > > desperation, although I will agree with you on the end cliches,
> > > particularly
> > > the 'blood/stone' one.
> > >
> > > And I would also like to emphasise that it is a 'snap', not a finished
> > > poem
> > > in the poet's eyes.
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > >
> > > On 16/02/07, kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I found this prosaic, in its meaning of 'bland'. the narration seems
> > > > to think it's saying more than it really is; as a narrational piece,
> > > > this was outright boring for me. maybe it's the fact that the tone is
> > > > so flat. the two clichés at the end don't help the poem's feeling
> > > > either; there seems little or no justification (reference) for them.
> > > > the political presense in the poem was mute, unprovoking.
> > > > the sun/snow image was nice though, & there are bits that could be
> > > > rehabilitated & sent back into the world.
> > > >
> > > > KS
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> My Stuff: http://www.badstep.net/
> "Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious." Oscar Wilde
>
|