Poetry is a meadow, full of all kinds of plants, insects, small creatures, fungi, rare species never seen anywhere else, little scuttling lifeforms, bacteria, flowers, rootsystems, worms and moles underground.

It isn't a monoculture full of one single crop, regimented into rows and sprayed with weedkiller, only kept alive by artificial fertilizer.

Nice metaphor of 'Poetry is...', Steven. Not so sure how effective your 'monoculture...single crop' is though, as formal poetic structure is so richly varied, and most 'artificial' poets plant many different kinds of 'regimented rows'.

Can but agree. Perhaps that makes WOL an SSSI.

An interesting thought! I think I have become a mole hiding away underground lately!

I'm like Ann I think hiding underground with new poems recently but I shall be back overground before you know it! lol x

The metaphor of crop husbandry is well observed by Steven , how annoying it is to see ones work commented upon and described, almost apologetically, of course you must appreciate that this is not a poem…uhh?

Whilst it is well written and very descriptive moving me to tears or loud belly laughs it really is not a poem … its , its more, what’s that word …

Prose or a short story a commentary or essay …… but it is beautifully written.

For all those wordsmiths and wannabe poets out there the name of this Farm is WRITEOUTLOUD not POEMSOUTLOUD, the crops of poetry in all of its forms together with its introduction and cross fertilisation is endless, the sad thing is we hardly seem to scratch the surface.

As to what and when a poem is not a poem...…well ???

When is an essay not an essay?

When is prose not prose.?

Who knows…?

Oh God that rhymes were back on poetry again ...
or are we ?

And are there any cowpats in your beautiful, idyllic meadow Steven?

Regards,
A.E.

I'll take the pleasure of describing myself as a 'rare species never seen anywhere else' thank you :-)

Gus - if there were no cowpats, there's be no natural fertiliser...

But watch out where you're walking...

I beleive it was due to some anti-biotic stuff that used to be added to cow's feed that meant that no bugs took up residence in cow pats which in turn led to the extinction of the Cornish chough. But they are coming back now! Good for them!! (I am choughed in fact!)

Cowpats - interesting. It must surely follow then that some poetry is indeed - s***e?

A.E.

Quote
Cowpats - interesting. It must surely follow then that some poetry is indeed - s***e?
Unquote

Nobody as far as I am aware EVER said that there wasn't s***e poetry.
Of course there is s***e poetry!

Just as there is the good, bad and everything inbetween. The same is true of painting, drawing, sculpture, architecture, music etc.

This is true with all 'things' which are judged in a comparative sense. There will always be the least favoured in relative terms.

The prior debate from which this is an off-shoot (retaining the biology reference there ;) was NOT about whether bad poetry existed- it never was.

Rather it WAS about an objective versus subjective evaluation of poetry. Anthony You rightly or wrongly were in the objective camp.

The problem was neither you, or the person in accordance with you provided anything approaching an objective definition, or criteria for what 'objective' meant in this setting.

As a result the debate was utterly meaningless as the objective position was wooly/undefined and well....

not remotely objective lol.

Part of your main post was about would-be poets claiming would-be poems (most of your doomsday scenarios didn't exist at all and were a combination of slipery slope, non sequitur and strawman fallacies) and in some way ruining the precious world of poetry. Your argument called (via implication) for the setting of an objective bar. You appeared to want to set a bar for what was or was not poetry.

Arguing what is and is not poetry is of course a completely differing argument from whether or not bad poetry exists or not.

The latter will always exist at least in a relative sense irrespective of any method of evaluation.

And like I said earlier nobody was arguing with you that s***e poetry does not exist...nobody lol

Isn't this all a bit circular? I thought that when I saw the thread go up. I swore I wouldn't contribute and here I go. Someone get me a razor - I'll go slit my wrists.

We all, of course, know what bad poetry is when we see it.

But we all have different definitions of "bad poetry" as much as we do of "good poetry."

I have an abiding interest in some of the odder byways of poetry, including "visual" and "sound" poetry; and I sort of know when a "visual" poem doesn't work. It's sort of when I sort of seem to have sort of seen it all sort of before. Sort of.

The same is true of sonnets: when you've seen too much of something that was probably good 100 years ago you just get bored when you see it again.

To many sort ofs? Yes, but then to put any absolute idea of taste onto any kind of art is to objectify it.

Some people like Helen Steiner Rice poetry; that really is their idea of good poetry. Are they wrong? Well, I wouldn't read it; I like to think of myself as much more "sophisticated." It's bad according to my criteria; but objectively? I don't know...

Quote
Isn't this all a bit circular?
Unquote

In terms of the specifics of this particular debate it does not have to be internally circular at all.

If those who claim that poetry can be objective evaluated simply clarify what it is they are actually arguing 'for', then the debate will clearly move on.

If the objective is defined, if we are afforded a criteria, then this debate is anything but internally circular.

Quote
We all, of course, know what bad poetry is when we see it.

But we all have different definitions of "bad poetry" as much as we do of "good poetry."
Unquote

Yes 100% correct in terms of subjective evaluation. We all inherently know it when we see something that we think is poor and of course these judgements relate to our own subjective criteria. Parts of this criteria are most likely subconcious to each of us and not easily stated.

Flowers surrounded by shit are, presumably, better flowers than they would be otherwise?

The image of a meadow is growing on me. It's a dynamic, living environment which is constantly changing, yet it manages to be restful too. Open to the world yet somehow secluded. Inviting yet private.

If monthly competitions ever get resurrected, 'The Meadow' would be a lovely theme.

At Fyvie's gate there grows a flower
It grows both broad and bonnie
At days the end amidst of it
Its name is Andrew Lammie

O give that flower within my breast
For the love I burn in body
So bright and merry I would be
And kiss my Andrew Lammie

Hmmm, that's enough of your private fantasies Winston! ;-)

I admit to going back to read some poems I have hugely enjoyed years prior, and then nearly 'flipped' to realize they were actually sonnets, so skillfully written that the form was subliminal, providing only beauty of image, sound, rhythm and thought.

Just a few "definitions" and quotes re poetry - from those obviously much more learned than myself. I have picked these at random, with no personal preference. I thought they might be of interest.

Merriam-Webster:

writing that formulates a concentrated imaginative awareness of experience in language chosen and arranged to create a specific emotional response through meaning, sound, and rhythm : something likened to poetry especially in beauty of expression.

Wikipedia:

Poetry (from the [Greek] 'poiesis'/ποίησις [poieo/ποιεω], a making: a forming, creating, or the art of poetry, or a poem) is a form of literary art in which language is used for its aesthetic and evocative qualities in addition to, or in lieu of, its apparent meaning. Poetry may be written independently, as discrete poems, or may occur in conjunction with other arts, as in poetic drama, hymns, lyrics, or prose poetry. It is published in dedicated magazines (the longest established being Poetry and Oxford Poetry), individual collections and wider anthologies.Poetry and discussions of it have a long history. Early attempts to define poetry, such as Aristotle's Poetics, focused on the uses of speech in rhetoric, drama, song, and comedy. Later attempts concentrated on features such as repetition, verse form and rhyme, and emphasized the aesthetics which distinguish poetry from more objectively informative, prosaic forms of writing, such as manifestos, biographies, essays, and novels. From the mid-20th century, poetry has sometimes been more loosely defined as a fundamental creative act using language. Poetry often uses particular forms and conventions to suggest alternative meanings in the words, or to evoke emotional or sensual responses. Devices such as assonance, alliteration, onomatopoeia, and rhythm are sometimes used to achieve musical or incantatory effects. The use of ambiguity, symbolism, irony, and other stylistic elements of poetic diction often leaves a poem open to multiple interpretations. Similarly, metaphor, simile, and metonymy create a resonance between otherwise disparate images—a layering of meanings, forming connections previously not perceived. Kindred forms of resonance may exist, between individual verses, in their patterns of rhyme or rhythm.Some forms of poetry are specific to particular cultures and genres, responding to the characteristics of the language in which the poet writes. While readers accustomed to identifying poetry with Dante, Goethe, Mickiewicz and Rumi may think of it as being written in lines based upon rhyme and regular meter, there are traditions, such as Biblical poetry, that use other approaches to achieve rhythm and euphony. Much of modern British and American poetry is to some extent a critique of poetic tradition, playing with and testing (among other things) the principle of euphony itself, to the extent that sometimes it deliberately does not rhyme or keep to set rhythms at all. In today's globalized world poets often borrow styles, techniques and forms from diverse cultures and languages.

Wiktionary.org:

Composition in verse or language exhibiting conscious attention to patterns.

About.com – contemporary literature:

Definition: Poetry is an imaginative awareness of experience expressed through meaning, sound, and rhythmic language choices so as to evoke an emotional response. Poetry has been known to employ meter and rhyme, but this is by no means necessary. Poetry is an ancient form that has gone through numerous and drastic reinvention over time. The very nature of poetry as an authentic and individual mode of expression makes it nearly impossible to define. Perhaps the characteristic most central to the definition of poetry is its unwillingness to be defined, labeled, or nailed down. But let's not let that stop us, shall we? It's about time someone wrestled poetry to the ground and slapped a sign on its back reading, "I'm poetry. Kick me here."Poetry is the chiseled marble of language; it's a paint-spattered canvas - but the poet uses words instead of paint, and the canvas is you. Poetic definitions of poetry kind of spiral in on themselves, however, like a dog eating itself from the tail up. Let's get nitty. Let's, in fact, get gritty. I believe we can render an accessible definition of poetry by simply looking at its form and its purpose:
One of the most definable characteristics of the poetic form is economy of language. Poets are miserly and unrelentingly critical in the way they dole out words to a page. Carefully selecting words for conciseness and clarity is standard, even for writers of prose, but poets go well beyond this, considering a word's emotive qualities, its musical value, its spacing, and yes, even its spacial relationship to the page. The poet, through innovation in both word choice and form, seemingly rends significance from thin air.

The freedictionary.com:

1. The art or work of a poet.
2. a. Poems regarded as forming a division of literature.
b. The poetic works of a given author, group, nation, or kind.
3. A piece of literature written in meter; verse.
4. Prose that resembles a poem in some respect, as in form or sound.
5. The essence or characteristic quality of a poem.
6. A quality that suggests poetry, as in grace, beauty, or harmony: the poetry of the dancer's movements.

Yourdictionary.com:

poem (pō′əm)noun1.an arrangement of words written or spoken: traditionally a rhythmical composition, sometimes rhymed, expressing experiences, ideas, or emotions in a style more concentrated, imaginative, and powerful than that of ordinary speech or prose: some poems are in meter, some in free verse.

Encarta.msn.com:

1.literature in verse: literary works written in verse, in particular verse writing of high quality, great beauty, emotional sincerity or intensity, or profound insight.

oxforddictionaries.com:

•literary work in which the expression of feelings and ideas is given intensity by the use of distinctive style and rhythm; poems collectively or as a genre of literature.
•a quality of beauty and intensity of emotion regarded as characteristic of poems.

Quotes:

A poem begins as a lump in the throat, a sense of wrong, a homesickness, a lovesickness.
Robert Frost

Poetry should please by a fine excess and not by singularity. It should strike the reader as a wording of his own highest thoughts, and appear almost as a remembrance.
John Keats

I was working on the proof of one of my poems all the morning, and took out a comma. In the afternoon I put it back again.
Oscar Wilde

Every English poet should master the rules of grammar before he attempts to bend or break them.
Robert Graves

Poetry is just the evidence of life. If your life is burning well, poetry is just the ash.
Leonard Cohen

We don't read and write poetry because it's cute. We read and write poetry because we are members of the human race. And the human race is filled with passion. And medicine, law, business, engineering, these are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But poetry, beauty, romance, love, these are what we stay alive for.
Dead Poet's Society

There is as much difference between good poetry and fine verses, as between the smell of a flower-garden and of a perfumer's shop.
Augustus William Hare and Julius Charles Hare, Guesses at Truth, by Two Brothers, 1827

You can tear a poem apart to see what makes it tick.... You're back with the mystery of having been moved by words. The best craftsmanship always leaves holes and gaps... so that something that is not in the poem can creep, crawl, flash or thunder in.
Dylan Thomas, Poetic Manifesto, 1961

What is a Professor of Poetry? How can poetry be professed?
W.H. Auden

The crown of literature is poetry. It is its end and aim. It is the sublimest activity of the human mind. It is the achievement of beauty and delicacy. The writer of prose can only step aside when the poet passes.
W. Somerset Maugham

Poets are masters of us ordinary men, in knowledge of the mind, because they drink at streams which we have not yet made accessible to science.
Sigmund Freud

Poetry is the rhythmical creation of beauty in words. Edgar Allan Poe

Poetry is language at its most distilled and most powerful.
Rita Dove

No man was ever yet a great poet, without being at the same time a profound philosopher. For poetry is the blossom and the fragrance of all human knowledge, human thoughts, human passions, emotions, language.
Samuel Taylor Coleridge

One demands two things of a poem. Firstly, it must be a well-made verbal object that does honour to the language in which it is written. Secondly, it must say something significant about a reality common to us all, but perceived from a unique perspective. What the poet says has never been said before, but, once he has said it, his readers recognize its validity for themselves. W. H. Auden

Poetry is not a turning loose of emotion, but an escape from emotion; it is not the expression of personality, but an escape from personality. But, of course, only those who have personality and emotions know what it means to want to escape from these things
T. S. Eliot

Poetry is ordinary language raised to the Nth power. Poetry is boned with ideas, nerved and blooded with emotions, all held together by the delicate, tough skin of words. Paul Engle

If I feel physically as if the top of my head were taken off, I know that is poetry.
Emily Dickinson

Poetry is not an expression of the party line. It's that time of night, lying in bed, thinking what you really think, making the private world public, that's what the poet does.
Allen Ginsberg

Poetry is either something that lives like fire inside you --like music to the musician or Marxism to the Communist --or else it is nothing, an empty formalized bore around which pedants can endlessly drone their notes and explanations.
Unknown Source

You will not find poetry anywhere unless you bring some of it with you.
Joseph Joubert

Spring has returned. The Earth is like a child that knows poems.
Rainer Maria Rilke

Verses which do not teach men new and moving truths do not deserve to be read.
Voltaire

A good poet's made as well as born.
Ben Johnson

I wish our clever young poets would remember my homely definitions of prose and poetry; that is, prose = words in their best order; poetry = the best words in the best order.
Samuel Taylor Coleridge

Poetry is nobody's business except the poet's, and everybody else can fuck off.
Philip Larkin

A poet who reads his verse in public may have other nasty habits.
Robert Heinlein


Perhaps no person can be a poet, or can even enjoy poetry, without a certain unsoundness of mind.
Thomas Babington Macaulay

Poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of cheese.
G. K. Chesterton

The third from last quote surely says something about "performance poetry"!

The penultimate quote seems to be a fairly succinct reference to a previous thread.

The final quote maybe suggests the subject of a future competition?

Regards,
A.E.

http://www.writeoutloud.net/public/blogentry.php?blogentryid=6710

Ha - sorry Anthony - it has already been done - but not to death, I will admit. Then of course there is Alan Gray - formerly known as Gordonzola - it wouldn't surprise me if he doesn't have something in his back catalogue. I am tempted to suggest a very rude brand of cheese - but am restraining myself on this very public site. It would be something new and fresh - or not as the case may be.

It is lovely to have you back Anthony - you lower the tone enough for me to be crude and raise the bar enough to satisfy the intellectuals on here. I loved the Monty Python clip on disagreeing BTW.

As for performance poets having nasty habits - I would have to agree - but perfection is dreary, don't you think? x

Gordon Zola's a poet? Who knew?

Actually, there was another poet who wrote about cheese; but he was pretty stinky and I can't remember his name.

I love all the definitions - trying to define poetry is a bit like trying to define God - every time you do it's already left the building.

Thank you Anthony... Who could possibly argue with that?!

Indeed Francine. I'm in agreement Steven - that must be a first :)
Trying to define poetry is like trying to define cheese. Does one go French, Swiss or your tried and tested Lancashire? Full fat, soft or hard? I'm feeling verbose - just had some gin - am compering tonight, so bricking it...
If performance poets have nasty habits, comperes must rank even worse! Waffling on discussion threads whilst under the influence being one of them... xxx

Have fun Isobel!
Wish I could be there to make faces... xxx

I guess we all have our personal definition of poetry. Surely that's not a bad thing? If we all had the same taste in everything the world would be a very uniform and boring place. I would no more attempt to define poetry than I would define the rules of debate/argument. I'm not that smart.

Perhaps, given the huge scope and disparity of definitions it might be simpler to describe what poetry isn't - but I'm not going to try that either. Possibly to try to define any form of "art" - if you subscribe to the notion that poetry is art - is not only a forlorn and hopeless task, but is not one worth attempting anyway. Concepts which are easily defined often seem to lose their mystery and attraction when categorised. "Ars gratia artis" and all that.

What I do believe - and I'm not asking anyone else to agree or disagree, is that some poetry is deemed poetry purely by the assertion of the author. If that's the criteria, then indeed everything may be poetry purely by assertion. What does this then do for poetry?

I realise that as someone who writes, I would rather have my writing judged by others, and let them them decide whether it's poetry or not. Otherwise it's surely just vanity? Likewise I pick up a brush/pencil occasionally - but what I create isn't necessarily art.

As for perfection; I once visited a silk carpet workshop in the Turkish mountains. The guide informed visitors that each carpet is purposely made with a small, almost imperceptible flaw. This was done because of the belief that only God creates the perfect. I rather like that concept.

It's good to be back Isobel - despite some palpable hostility - if only to mix with self confessed crude and gin-soaked women! Thank the lord for earthy females! Hope it all goes well with the compering - go for it and assert yourself girl!

Regards,
A.E.

That's better. We're going again.

Well thank you Anthony. It's all over now and what a brilliant night! More to do with the quality of the poetry than this gin soaked crude, earthy female, I should add...

I am much relieved. Compering is something I've always been scared of - had to fight a few personal demons to do it - so I feel proud of myself.

John - where were you? xx

Well done Isobel :-)

Is this turning into a gig feedback? If so I'd like to say it was a brilliant night - wouldn't have missed it for the world. people were saying you did really well Izz. I totally agree - although that is a matter of opinion (unless, of course, someone can come up with objective standards for compering. Aaaaaargh.....)

Not sure how I fit into this debate? On the one hand I write experimental totally unstructured pieces but I am equally fascinated by the ghazal which is a form with one of the most rigid structures there is?

I suppose I haven't bothered to try to write poetry that follows a formal path except for some ghazals. Maybe one day soon I'll give it a go. So far, and obviously cos it's easier, I've written outpourings but with some care to rhythm and language. The trick would be to merge this poetry of feeling with a more structured style of poetry. Here, the meadow analogy fits - so far my poems have been wild meadows. Not marble paved courtyards with topiary and classical statues. But I think meadows are much more me! So I don't think I'll effin' bother! ;-)

Thanks Win and Dave, for the feedback. Last night was a lot of fun combined with hard work of course!

On the thread discussion side, I would say that being able to switch between structured and less formal verse is probably a good thing. It shows versatility, an open mindedness, willingness to grow and develop. At the end of the day we should all just go with the flow and do what feels right for us.

Peace on earth man - someone hand round the meadow grass... xx

You unstructured sods (meadow, you see)! how can you write about poetry and structure and, and, and stuff, and then go and put a REVIEW on this discussion thread!
Please, someone create another thread about last night; which, by the way, was superb, and brilliantly compered.

...and, to agree with Cynthia a bit:

Is the oppostie of a meadow a monoculture? what about "structured' gardens that nevertheless give the impression of having been created in a haphazard fashion? Cottage gardens, for example. Does structure really mean regimented rows? Perhaps the best structure is that of which we are unaware. Perhaps we could see it as some people wanting the scaffolding of structure to create their piece of work, and others feeling they can do without it?
Or do I mean needing architectural drawings?

There is a conflation of differing issues here to be fair.

There is the conflation of structured and unstructured poetry and the entirely differing subject of the evaluation of poetry.

The conflation of the debate between the subjective opinion on one hand and an 'objective evaluation' on the other.

I am 'into' structured and non structured poetry. It is about the right tool for the right job for me.

Another conflation is the definitions of poetry and the aforementioned debate.

I asked for those pushing for an 'objective evaluation' of poetry to please provide the criteria and definition of such.

So far that has not been done and those on that side of the debate have failed miserably on this KEY issue.

Without a definition/criteria that can be tested, it is utterly impossible to evaluate any claim here, impossible to assess how good or how bad their position is.

On which note Anthony- thanks for copying and pasting great amounts from wikipedia and dictionaries etc Thanks also for providing subjective anecdotal opinions as to what poetry 'is' from the mad, bad, great and the good.

However;

None of it is actually relevant.

That is NOT the issue here.

This is a debate about the evaluation of poetry.

It is a debate between subjective opinion and some objective way of evaluating poetry.

The scientific method asks that those who make claims substantiate them. The claim that an objective evaluation of poetry is superior to that of subjective opinion is all well and good.

BUT!

You NEED and it is a MUST...MUST!!!

That this 'objective evaluation' is set out clearly in terms of its definition/criteria so that it may be tested and either substantiated or rejected accordingly.

To fail to provide the above is to fail to provide any legitimate debate, it is to fail to provide any side of this debate in logical terms.

It leaves us with something entirely untestable, something at best in the minds of the few that claim it.

We end up in a position where one or two people can claim objective relaity. Those people can say that they are factually correct, they can say if they so choose that a given poem or poet is factually shit. They can if they choose say that they are correct and that this is something that has gravitas that outweighs any one persons opinion.

Yet without any objective criteria which anyone can use and test;

What is this claim apart from the arrogant opinion of a few would-be elitists who really have no objective reality at all?

To Anthony and anyone else wishing to claim that objective evaluation of poetry is superior to that of subjective opinion;

Anyone that claims that we can do this in a pragmatic workable way.

Please provide the criteria!

To use the coarse phrase;

Put up up shut up!

(don't take the last bit too seriously ;)


P.S

It has been said that this is a debate between liberals and conservatives. I reject that claim.

Currently this is a debate between those that state their case- namely those on the side of subjective opinion and those that refuse to even tell us what their argument/debate actually is! LOL.

It is like an agreed dual whereby one of the parties runs off into the woods instead of choosing their weapon LOL.

I am ALL for ANY method of evaluating poetry here at WOL as long as it is superior to what we already have (subjective opinion).

If we can test an objective evaluation and it works we should use it.

Just need that criteria then Haha

A. E., I read your posts with great interest, and considered them right on target to support the interweaving of ideas on this 'thread'.

Comperes need warmth, wit and a certain sharp edge. Isobel, you must have been terrific.

Formal Notice


To all members, readers and participants of the website known as “Writeoutloud”and any other persons known or unknown to whom this may be of concern.

Anthony Emmerson wishes it to be known henceforth that, for the sake of clarity:

• He has never, and will never profess or assert to be any kind of expert – on any subject.

• His opinions, assertions, remarks or any other hysterical ramblings should be completely ignored by those of a mind so to do.

• He has no preference for either structured or unstructured poetry.

• He is neither intelligent enough nor determined enough to offer any kind of personal definition of the respective values, merits or otherwise of any form of poetry.

• He has not, and will not be attempting to provide any definition, criteria (objective, subjective or otherwise) or rules as to how poetry may be judged; despite this possibly marking him out as a miserable failure on this key issue.

• He has no wish to test, evaluate, trial or assess any system or method proposed by anyone for the purposes of categorisation, judging, examination, investigation or other method of vivisection of poetic works.

• He acknowledges that his own position on this subject may well be seen as pretty poor and that any information he may offer to share with any other persons for the purpose of possible mutual interest is of little or no relevance.

• He has never and will never wish to enter into any debate, discussion, argument, contretemps, dispute or otherwise whereby poetry is discussed, substantiated or subject to scrutiny via scientific criteria.

• He does not, has not and will not have any particular preference as to how, when, where or why poetry and its merits is discussed or debated or argued by those persons other than himself.

• He does not and will not claim that his opinion carries any weight, has any relevance or should be of any concern to anyone, anywhere at any time.

• Admits freely, openly and without coercion or duress that he has singularly failed abysmally to provide any relevant information, proof, scientific evidence or good reason to further advance any theory, assertion or statement that any other person deems him to have made.

• Has no desire to claim objective “relaity”, assert that he is factually correct, say that any given poem is factually shit, claim any degree of gravitas or legal, moral, ethical or spiritual authority on the subject of poetry or any other form of printed spoken or digital literature.

• He professes neither liberal nor conservative allegiance, nor any other permanent political affiliation other than the universal right of suffrage.

• Has no desire to pursue any kind of “dual,” armed, unarmed or by any other means of combat, be it physical, mental or otherwise, with any other sentient or semi-sentient life form.

• He is entirely content for any other person or persons, known or unknown to suggest, initiate and evaluate any subjective or objective method, be it deemed superior, inferior or neither, for the purposes of the examination or categorisation of any written or spoken word or words.

• He hereby states that he does not wish to engage in any exchange of views, debate, argument, altercation, beef, bickering, bone of contention, brannigan, brawl, clash, controversy, difference of opinion, disagreement, dispute, donnybrook, dustup, face-off, feud, finisher, flap, fuss, hassle, quarrel, rhubarb, romp, row, ruckus, ruction, rumpus, run-in, scene, scrap, set-to, shindy, spat, squabble, stew, tiff, wrangle or any other form of altercation with any other person wherein that other person is likely to reinforce their point via the use of shouty capital letters, repeated and pointed quotation of the postings of other persons or repeated repetition.


I hereby attest that this declaration is freely signed on Friday March 11th in the year of Our Lord 2011.


Anthony Emmerson.

Yes Steve, I do appreciate the injection of humour into all these wranglings too.

Darren Thomas is away writing lurrrrv poetry at the moment which maybe accounts for him doing none of his acerbic reviews. I do miss those - they kind of balance things up. If everything was sweetness and light and sugar we'd probably stop reading. That isn't meant to encourage folk to keep slugging it out by the way - just an idle thought.

Steve, just a small correction: I aspire to using strict meter; at the moment I'm stuck on feet and inches.

Please note: whatever rules or lack of rules you lot may or may not impose upon yourselves, so long as you don't go around saying that your little patch of the meadow is the most important bit, or the only 'real' or 'authentic' bit of it, is OK with me.

The meadow of poetry is full of fascinating structures, some traditional, some never before seen, some robust, some delicate and fine, and long may it be so. (I don't think you can have any poem without a structure: language itself is a structure.)

Great last comment, Steven, and outstanding final sentence. Instead of brackets, use CAPITALS.

If we cultivated gardens
Till angels would fellate us
You'd have just grown cabbages
And I'd have just grown 'taters.

Angels that fellate us?
Is that Genesis - Eleven?
Nail me in a wooden box -
And ship me off to heaven!

I agree :)

Steve
My horticultural offering isn't targeted at any person - only at the silliness of the entrenched positions we take.

I am, however, rather pleased with it as a "short".