When I started the "Poetry Review" thread I did so because people were posting poems elsewhere on Discussions and asking for feedback on their poetry and I thought it would be reasonable to have an area where poets could comment on other poets work. However, as far as I can see this isn't working. What generally happens is that someone post a poem and is either ignored or told "it is wonderful" etc. No one actually offers a critique of the work and/or offers suggestions for improvements or even proof-reads the poem. I suppose that this is only natural as no one wants to seem critical in public and risk being attacked for making suggestions etc. However, I can't remember any time when a revised poem has been posted later to show that the writer has been back to re-assess, edit and/or re-write a poem.

So what is the point of "Poetry Review?

Coming out of the current discussions the idea seems to be that Poetry Review isn't a review at all but a publishing place for poems and the rather strange notion that if a poem isn't on Poetry Review it can't be seen and somehow doesn't exist. But is this what a thread on the Discussions forum should be about? Surely the Poets' Showcase is about displaying/publishing your work and quite frankly I can't see the issue with putting a link from discussions to publicise a poem. As to "filling up" one's profile with loads of poems, I would suggest older poems are removed, or put in a blog say, so that the newer poems are easily accessible.

That having been said, is, or should, one of WOL's objectives be about publishing poets/poems?
If it is going to be an objective then shouldn’t poems be of a standard for publication i.e. be fully edited and proof read? Should we rename Poetry Review, and if so to what? Does the standard of poetry reflect positively/negatively on the site? Should poems be vetted before being published, if so by who and using what criteria?

When you reply could you try to address all the issues and not just one please.

Over to you then for a thorough, thrash-about/discussion

My poem Your A- Z of lovers was criticised by Cayn and Peter,
I have criticised one of Cayn's poems and Darren Thomas's,
I have whilst remarking on their incredibleness also informed John Togher of the difficulties of hearing some of his words clearly in Landing in PC, I have also suggested ways he can make his new one Orchestration of Waves an audio one.
I think maybe this should count as review?
Darren and Peter and Steven have all commented on Phil's poetry - so to some degree it does work, but I also think that yes it has become a place for poets to share their work. I really think one of the beauties maybe the biggest is the informality and I fear with too many rules to ascribe too, it will lose it's uniqueness.

I guess giving critiques is a lengthier and more demanding process than just commenting. And most of what has happened on the review thread, I would say, are comments.There are exceptions. But to properly help the poet and the poem takes time and deliberation. A fast and honest response, although a bit of an ego boost -- and we all need those from time to time -- may do a disservice to the poetry because it does not help it evolve and improve.

I suppose there is value in being read and immediately appraised, but there's greater value (for both poet and reader) in being studied and responded to.

Problem is Moxy, whose got the time?
Though I must say I keep going back to John Togher poem Landing in PC and everytime I find something new that I like about it, isn't that a critique also that I am picking it apart by the bones?
Does a critique always have to be a negative response?

A critique is an honest, fair response and so shouldn't be negative -- it's done in the spirit of wanting the best for the poem and wanting to know more about the poem -- it's about the poem engaging the reader's imagination. But I do think it should take time. If there's a poem you like you do take time with it and the more time you take with the poem, the more measured, and possibly valuable, your response is to the poet. A poem deserves the time to be read and thought about and pondered and valued. It's the nature of poetry to demand time and effort from both writer and reader. Otherwise it waters poetry down to the level of instantly accommodated jingle.

Fair play - I have done this with Landing in PC.
Hey hey maybe I could make a living out of this stuff after all.xxxx

And why not? Think back to how much you enjoyed critiquing poems on your B.A. -- the thrill of following their ideas through, revelling in the flow of language and structure.

Paul,

A very diplomatic post there. It demands a thorough and detailed response which I will do later after work. Most likely in the twilight hours when my mind comes alive.

I think they way you have put the poetry thread up for scrutiny is informative, diplomatic, and raises issues I had not previousley thought about. May I take this opportunity to briefly say, thank you for a balanced and non biased question / debate topic, it shows a calm and tempered and intelligent approach of which invites the same in return.

I will endevour to offer my thoughts later.

As I come from a non literay background I admit to be ignorant of such protocols and etiquite and consequently struggle with them , perhaps finding them dictatory. However you have made the issue a lot cleare andled me to see it from a new angle.

Im sorry this particualr response does not directly address the topic, it does path the way for a reply later.


Many thanks

Peter

Hi Paul

Im back from work. Ok, lets see.

IF one of write out louds objectives would be to actively try and get our poems published, there is no question the poems must be proof read. Absolutely. At least in terms of spelling and the bare essentials. The final product must be polished. I am a perfectionist to my annoyance sometimes and I see my youtube as the place where my final poems go. I am guilty of using WOL as a thrashing board, a painters pallete to workshop, roadtest and jam my ideas. It worked but, it cant continue if the site is to progress so I am aware of this and will stop doing that. I will present the poems as a link to you tube.

I dont like using the WOL system as it is not sophisticated enough, I dont mean that as a criticicsm, its good for what it is but i enjoy audio and the ocasional video technique too. (I know you have the audio sample but its outdated---yes ! yes! you have a budget - I appreciate that)

That said ill still post on my profile and I take your suggestion on board to rotate or remove old ones.

The other option is we build our own websites and blogs etc. I considered opening up a free for all chatroom for general poetry chit chat and sex talk, talk about cars, bras, whatever you get the idea just a no pressure place to hang out.

You raise the question of standard of poetry reflecting on the site. The implication being that a bad poem may refelct badly on the site hence the urge not to have a poetry review. (whatever a bad poem is)

If the poems were all works of art, original, stunning, evocative, first class etc then would we even have an issue? Would someone say "Hey theres too many good poems on here, go post them on your profile instead"

doubt it.

it is only becuase of the 'grown wild' aspect of the review thread that it is under scrutiny.

As you mentioned Paul your original idea is not working.
I think thats unfair on yourself, the intention was fantastic and commendable.
From my point of view it is, though it is overloaded with poems now and, yes many dont get a look in or a comment on, I have tons of 'tumbleweed' poems. I also have some that people post on and the egotistical returns are fantastic. People comment 'Dear POET that was fantastic' , well if thats waht they thought , they should say it.The sense of arrival and achievemnet when the reader is satisfied is un measurable. It is this that keps me going. I cant perform to myself, or write on an invisible wall. My site does not get many hits (youtube) it seems the youtube crowd arent searching out for poetry, here its different.

You could rename poetry review 'overgrown poetry garden stream of conciousness crazy place' though that title is a tad long, seriousley though, yes rename it , poetry wall or something, a place to scribble little things, but they MUST be in the form of a poem. Just an idea.

I dont think anyone visits our profiles on here much.
How can they know what kind of poet to look for.

The showcase has no catagory or order.
Some dont want it.
But I notice that WOL uses 'terms' to describe poets quite often. Especially when plugging the particualr artist.
So why not catagorise the poets profiles else how can we show who we are? it takes too long to browse through.
How about we opt into catagories? Or is this stupid. Answers on postcard please.

I am certainly not everyones style, they may require a different type of poet say a verse or prose affair, not my rantings. Thats why it was good to post a poem on review, it got you noticed, and yes ok, i Like that, yea sure im a narcissist, definatley but I dont see it as an affliction more a itch. I ask though how many performers and poets muscians are narcissistic. tons.If I were not a narcissist, empty a poet I would be.

Im not so sure as it better to be that way than up your own ass type snob poet, though I dont know any, im sure they are out there...................>

so yes, we loved review for the fact it got our poems up for discussion, almost like a news item, say look !!! a new poem from XYZ , lets give em some feedback.

It did seem an unwritten rule that middle of the road poems got no response! for example , "I have a cat that gets confusing chasing knats' but not always, many many read and enjoy and dont choose to comment but wait until they meet you or they may tell you in an email, so it was working in that respect.

I dont mind if its removed or not now, I have understood the reasons you raised and I see the points.

A lot of us feel like we are fighting to be noticed. Im not the only one that thinks this. A lot of us see the clique invite only guest poet stuff and we feel it is unjust.

We feel that its about who you know, whos in the 'club' whos mate knows whos mate , OR even worse who is the next 'poetry darling' that to me is worse than any 'proof read'
the unwritten rules of who are the darlings. The review section was a way to show people our talent not the 'chosen talent' All i do when i go out is refer people to WOL , I plug it on youtube, I plug it on my poetry credits on youtube, on my films etc. At the read arounds I encourage people to get up and read and I will give them feedback based on performance. I am much more proficent at giving performance feedback than litery criticism, I am a technical and dynamic type.

so with this said I hope I have covered some points in depth and the reason I ention that I have plugged WOL is that you guys have helped me. It is this that I appreciate, as do many others. Indeed you will know that I have read personal poems to all 3 of you.Written about you, for you to show my thanks and gratitude for what you have achieved for so many people.

the fringe and the minority,the drunken, oversensitive, explosive, the mad , plaugurist and the wailing should not be forgotton just becuase they throw wobblers, squash cushion of air, fall off a stage or abuse threads, indeed what is required is a deeper understanding of the human condition and compensatory steps be taken in order to accomodate it, such as chat rooms, poetry jam sessions, social evenings (with no poetry) DONT FORGOT a great deal of friendships have emerged by using or abusing the threads, the common denomonator being the thread not its use or misuse. the result in 99% of cases was beneficial. In terms of the outside world looking in at us at WOL I agree it may look unprofessional and this is why I see how it needs to be rectified. As Tony Walsh mentions 'onward and upward' definatley.

sorry about spelling. Please install a spell robot. Oh I get carried away and type then just want to post it. Is this a mistake? I fear so.

as an additional comment. May I suggest a 'paypal' donate button. You will find every now and then people will drop the odd fiver in. We could also do fundraising for the site.


Peter

I read once that someone said , ooo well he cant be bothered to check his spelling, I replied, thats all you can be bothered to post.


-

Thanks Peter
That's a great input and has given us lots to think about and digest. I hope other people will be as wide ranging and honest as you have been.
Cheers
Paul

This really is a linguistic minefield. Trying to find the correct words where intonation is not, at best, misconstrued, and at worst, deemed offensive. However, it appears that a massive over reaction has once again taken place inside the environs of WOL’s cyber world. Why?
Paul & Co. have merely, in their capacity as Administrator’s of the site, stated what they find acceptable and what they do not. This happens all the time in major organisations where internal discussion threads are made available on an Intranet facility. This, we are told, is to maintain a professional looking site and not one that turns into a social networking site.
It’s no coincidence that this type of site has become both successful and financially rewarding for those involved in their conception and their subsequent maintenance. The WWW is awash with this type of site. What ISN’T readily available, as a series of choices, are Internet sites that ‘encourage poetry performance’ and this is where the problem lies.
WOL, by its very nature, would demand that individuals become involved on a personal level. By encouraging ALL its members to attend at various locations throughout the UK to both support and be entertained by their peers.
Before the ‘Poetry Review’ section was made available there was nothing to stop those that wished to shop around the site, like you would a library, and click on any one of the poet’s profiles. I did this in the first instance and was pleasantly surprised by both the standard and the quality of those that were listed. I made comments in their personal profiles which I considered truthful. However, if they wanted an opinion of how I personally thought something could be improved, then I made this distinction too.
The site has to maintain its integrity. Threads can be made available for ‘ramblings and chunner’ (see Wonderland thread for details) and threads can surely be made available for the submission of works that are complete. However, for their contents to be appraised then surely the author has to include some background to the poem, what they hope to achieve with it, where it’s likely to be submitted and so on? But the problem arrives when there are many, perhaps too many opinions. Each publication usually only has one person who decides just what goes in – and what stays out.
If each member of this site WAS an editor, or a publisher even, or anyone who is empowered to commission or sanction a piece of work then we would all choose differently. However, there is an overall acceptable standard that has to be reached before anything is considered for publication.
Yet this writing appears to detract from what the whole ethos of this site is all about.
‘ENCOURAGING PERFORMANCE POETRY’. In my particular case it did.
I submitted work. I had positive feedback. I attended at one of the WOL gigs. I enjoyed what I saw. I enjoyed what I heard. I enjoyed what I drank.
If we want proper feedback on our poems then come along and PERFORM them. Poetry exists through speech. If we want constructive feedback on what we write, from people who we do not know, there are many courses ran with this in mind.
Now come on – let’s all cheer up.
A thread or ‘Wall’ as they call them, can surely be made available within the site for informal, nothing to do with poetry, sort of thing. But a large part has to remain which at least looks as if we both understand and/or appreciate what it is we are trying to promote in an artistic sense.

I do hope that all makes sense?



Darren

How you choose to use the site has a lot to do with how you view it. The way you use it gives it a personal definition. It is as physically easy to enter the poets' gallery part as it is to enter the discussion thread. It is only a pyschological imperative/inclination that makes one set of clicks more attractive (and seemingly easier) than another. Nothing wrong with that. We all have preferences. The proposed changes are to help both site and poets evolve. All of us want to create the best poetry we can. All of us want to ensure our poems are the best they can possibly be and it is in all our interests for WOL to be the best site it can possibly be -- we have chosen it to represent us to the world. Of course there's no shame in a poem that is still being revised and worked on -- how could there be when every poem is exactly that at some point -- but the poem (and poet) can be damaged if it's opened up to public scrutiny too soon. It makes good sense to be coy about early drafts. An unfinished poem offered for concensus can dwindle into a poem written by committee -- the poet having lost focus. 'Protect and survive,' as they say. 'Change and grow,' they proclaim. I'm all for it.
As for 'chat' -- I'm tempted to say we need that because our poetry doesn't yet speak fully for us. Perhaps we need the small talk that connects us as a kind of route finder for the poetry?

Some great points Mox and Darren.

The chat being a routefinder is a good one.

Im happy we are able to have these discussions and hopefully come out with a succsefull and viable solution.

What about someone who reviews for us, checks , then posts?

I mean we sort of have that at the moment with 'Poem of the Month' but how can we progress quickly (should we want to) be waiting to see if by some small chance we get discovered and be the chosen poem of the month.

I read some poets work, some who post on the poetry review and think, WHY ON EARTH IS THIS NOT POEM OF THE MONTH!

Pome of the month in a way is connected with poetry review because they are both WOL featured poets. We are not putting say, Larkin on poem of the month. Yet, again here you have good poets held down by frustrating systems that cant cope with the creative explosion, many with poems finished and complete with no place to showcase them, and now with an ever decreasing chance to get a time slot to read them as attendance levels grow.

Becuase there are not enough local events we have to all cram into one small room, ok I'ts not always like this but the ones that cant make it to read or are too nervous, some of those people would use the poetry review as a virtual stage. That is a good idea, a virtual stage, a cyberstage.

What will happen when write out loud is too big?
One thing is we will celebrate and have aprty, that will be fun (I suggest a meal, a quiet pub then the Ritz, Manchester on the soul train night)

after the party we will say, ok theres not enough space at Bolton (howcroft) , would any poets mind not reading tonight?

So the ones that have been too loads of gigs will feel unfairly obliged to step down, this has NEARLY happened, and indeed it did happen at riders (THE RIDERS ON THE STORM - EVENT) (though i appreciate thats different)

I Live in the town of Ainsdale near Southport and we have no poetry events around here. There was a night at formby but its stopping I think.

I travel becuase I can afford to and I really enjoy travel, but what about others?

So you see why poetry review seemed to go big time.

Its the next best thing to performing.

Thanks Darren and Moxy - two excellent contributions.

OK Peter you have strayed slightly outside the topic so I'll briefly comment on a couple of points you made.

Poem of the Month is chosen by the last person to win it from all of the poets profiles on the site, some of whom haven't put poems on their profiles so they haven't a hope of winning it. If you trawl through the list of PotM winners I think I'm right in saying that so far no poet has won it twice, so hopefully your chances of winning it are getting better.

The Howcroft Inn Bolton is increasingly looking too small for the numbers we are attracting and we are actively looking for bigger venues. However, you do raise the thorny issue of a big event being too intimidating for newbies and again that's something we need to give some thought to - thanks for raising it.

As to poetry nights elsewhere, we would be happy to support anyone who wants to start a poetry night, so if anyone wants our help please get in touch. Peter, we're going to get a meeting together soon and we'll try and progress your idea about an Ormskirk or Southport night.

Similarly, we have ambitions to experiment with the technology to work out how virtual and real events can collide e.g. next month we're hoping to test out an interactive video link between Bordeaux and Bolton which should be able to be seen by web users too - well maybe.

Now get back on topic at once you naughty person! lol

I think all points have been covered

Quite good debate / results.

Well done all.

Shall await the conclusion

Thanks Paul, sorry for straying a bit there, ok, see you all soon.