Two years ago, when I joined Write Out Loud, the discussion groups were very lively places, and contributed to making me want to join. Although a lot of the comments made were light-hearted, there was also a lot of intelligent and informative debate going on, that doesn't seem to be the case anymore - we don't actually seem to discuss poetry very much in the discussions.
Has anybody any thoughts as to why? Or what, if anything, can we do about it?
Cx

Do you have any?

I have noticed since the discussion threads were turned upside down, how interesting the old ones often were (I just see this when someone adds something new after a long time lapse.) You see a comment and think "Hey! Must add something here!" and then see it was written in 2007! Can't think why this is. It seems that when an interesting topic comes along it quickly fizzles out. I think quite a lot of the newer poets don't seem interested in commenting. What to do? Dunno! xx

Maybe Ann, maybe, there is an element of self-congratulatory expectation in the original posting: we post to be posted, we post in hope of the 'life-belt' that will be thrown our way. Maybe people are tired of 'giving first aid' on yet another deserted beach, only for the rescuer to see the survivor dash headlong back into the waves. Is not any form of posting -this one included- a 'look-at-me: I'm drowning'.

I don't see posting as that at all Tommy. Just a way to communicate with other people on here, and maybe read something interesting/funny/thoughtprovoking. However, if what you say is applied to the need to write poetry I would agree with you! Speaking for myself anyway!! ;-)

I’m guessing you are saying discussion has dumbed down over the last couple of years Chris – with a lot of threads centring round argument, chit chat or banter.

It’s a difficult one to legislate on. As we’ve seen in other areas, discretion is not an easy thing to impose or define. I must admit that I often join in discussion to have a laugh – it is an extension of the social side of the site for me. If someone were to tell me I could no longer do that, it would be a definite turn off. Having said that, I appreciate that one sense of humour can be very different to another. What makes me laugh could leave someone else stone cold or bored or exasperated even…

Perhaps Admin could set up a separate discussion thread area specifically for serious poetry review and featuring the work of chosen classical/professional poets. Guidelines could be used on the ‘type’ of discussion looked for. Or maybe if Admin perceives this to be a significant problem, it needs to just issue guidelines for the current discussion threads. Maybe that would satisfy the needs of the more serious minded and relieve the site of site of the lighter weight contributors, myself included. I’m a very law abiding citizen – I tend to follow guidelines.

To me it seems obvious that the bulk of discussion is circular. Most of it has all been done to death before – if people had the time or inclination to read the threads from start to finish that is.

The thought occurs to me... don't think I've ever discussed discussions before - this is a first!

Chris, very good point. Even last autumn there were quite dynamic discussions. I agree that many topics are circular, and most of us who contributed with enthusiasm in prior months/years don't want to be repetitive. Or sound pedantic. Generally, the deliberate, cutting comments of many, and the banter (sometimes idiotic) can be quite off-putting. Also, when statements are made that denigrate the least hint of scholarship, many fine contributors may back off, unwilling to participate any more, or at all. It's our loss as a site. I used to enjoy the battling ideas because poetry has always been a minefield of opposing views. Good comments take thought and time. Perhaps we are now a very lazy lot.

Jeez, I hate this spidery font!

Mmmm. I think if we discussed it in Verdana it would be much nicer! And I am being serious here.

palatino for me ta

well put cynthia

Change is inevitable, but I think Discussions were easier to read and follow before... And this colour just does not excite me.

I have joined in discussions now and then, but I prefer to look closely at a poem to discover how it is constructed, before discussing it. A lot of commentary is on the lines of 'I like it' or 'I think it's bad' etc without any evidence either way. Then it gets into a wrestle based on opinions which goes nowhere. I would be happy to join in discussions that give real arguments with reasons as a basis for opinions.

I do so agree with you Freda. So here’s a poem. I love the poetry of Eleanor Brown. In Bitcherel she combines humour with great technique. None of the rhymes seem forced. She has the timing of a comedian combining rhyme rhythm and punch line. She maintains the voice of her character throughout the poem. In fact ,I think she gives the character such life that she leaves the page and I encounter her as I do the daily round.


ELEANOR BROWN
Bitcherel
You ask what I think of your new acquisition;
and since we are now to be ‘friends’,
I’ll strive to the full to cement my position
with honesty. Dear – it depends.
It depends upon taste, which must not be disputed;
for which of us does understand
why some like their furnishings pallid and muted,
their cookery wholesome, but bland?
There isn’t a law that a face should have features,
it’s just that they generally do;
God couldn’t give colour to all of his creatures,
and only gave wit to a few;
I’m sure she has qualities, much underrated,
that compensate amply for this,
along with a charm that is so understated
it’s easy for people to miss.
And if there are some who choose clothing to flatter
what beauties they think they possess,
when what’s underneath has no shape, does it matter
if there is no shape to the dress?
It’s not that I think she is boring, precisely,
that isn’t the word I would choose;
I know there are men who like girls who talk nicely
and always wear sensible shoes.
It’s not that I think she is vapid and silly;
it’s not that her voice makes me wince;
but – chilli con carne without any chilli
is only a plateful of mince…

I'm all done with online discussions. They're -- and I'm generalising -- a waywardly assembled flat pack factory whose irregular product is a description of variously odoured air. My loosely described nostrils do not wish to inhale them. I fear they may be linguistically carcinogenic.

A bit like IKEA then? ;-)