Comment inspired by Donna Rae's last post

Trying something new is always good. Most of my poems are short, free verse (despite the fact I prefer rhymes--I just write what comes to me), and I prefer writing stories to poems. A while ago I tried something new--A five page long rhyming narrative poem. (I like narrative poems, but this was my first written one.) It was great! I have written another (much) shorter narrative poem since then. Trying new can be fun. If I had said "I've never done this. I can't do it" I would have missed out on a fun poem style. (Narrative poem style is now my favorite.)

Marcy

...gee... thanks Hermie!...that's absolutely.......right.......i think.

ps.
By the way Hot Wife you get there on your profile pic.... oooh!....interracial?.. Prose 'n Poetry indeed! [winks:]

message 113: by Jerin1701 06/06/2009 04:14AM
LOL!!!

Nary songs 'n poetrys up here can I ever compare with yours , master Malcolm, which I still believe , it is by far the most melopean...("How green are your Eyes")..... In all its simplicity its far beyond this age.....and therefor it never won .... A testimony for our duty bound to ' buttonhole' the stupid majority...... Reminds me of a Shakespeare 'n Rumi combine.......

Anyway, back in goodreads town, we all should share 'n toast!.........to Supreme Literature!!!
--------

This is awesome! Probably best commentary here ever, like a prose and poetry together join. Very good summation of entire discussion here ever. Very cool too.

ps
Herman

Jim, im glad that you're back, im glad that you can still be of service here. this is very interesting discussion. Keep it up! we can all still learn ..

[sorry for my english:] im not english native..

ps.
Herman

Herman wrote: "Jim, I feel I've had a tough couple of years, but I sincerely hope that I never become as bitter and angry at the world as you. If I was religious, I would pray for you. Honestly. Your sarcasm is t..."

"This is a very funny paragraphs. The one directed to this 'Jim' is very good."

I agree, Herman. I've been laughing at it for days.

Jim, I feel I've had a tough couple of years, but I sincerely hope that I never become as bitter and angry at the world as you. If I was religious, I would pray for you. Honestly. Your sarcasm is truly ugly and remarkably offensive.

-

So, Ivy and especially lil Jean, please keep posting (though, not necessarily here, on this thread - I think enough's been said here!), please keep questioning, and please keep writing your poetry the way you want to write it!

Nathan


This is a very funny paragraphs. The one directed to this 'Jim' is very good.

Ruth's comments are indeed an online seminar in writing, and they're one of the main reasons I even read this thread. To tell the truth, I've started to skim over the remarks of some of the people who so violently disagree with her, because I don't find much useful there for me. I marvel at Ruth's persistence in continuing patiently to explain basic principles of good writing, and I appreciate being reminded of them. Thanks, Ruth. Thanks to you, too, Jimmy.
Jan Steckel
Author of Mixing Tracks (Gertrude Press, 2009) and
The Underwater Hospital (Zeitgeist Press, 2006)

Jim's pov works for me, I said it once before here that I have tons of student loans for much of the info Ruth and others shared and I went to a progressive college that encouraged free verse/experimental work, now I am in a traditional university and am at a loss when metrical studies are attempted and my fellow students can hear the stresses and can identify the poetic tools used. It is not the college I went to fault; it is mine. I chose my classes to avoid learning this because I felt I didn't want to write like that. I was stubborn. I too believe like Jim, that you need to know the rules to break them and also that word choices, rhyme and line breaks hold much gold. People can be stubborn especially when it comes to there pleasures but an open mind can expand these pleasures. My biggest learning experience comes from the reading of others. I do not judge by the form they use or the use of rhyme or lack of or line breaks but what takes the top of my head off like MS.Emily said, yet form and use of white space and all the poetic tools work to accomplish this desired result. Can u make me feel, can u make me experience what u feel what u see what u think. Do yourself a favor Please Do not limit your expression to rhymed poems nor unrhymed You might surprise yourself by trying what you are uncomfortable with. I know it has made a dif to me.

Growing old is mandatory
Staying young is optional.(-:

Ha HA! Brixton,,,, Just read your about me on your profile





BUAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHH



Jimmy better to be young at heart then old and bitter.

Brixton wrote: "Secretly, Jimmy works for a carnival guessing people's ages blindfolded."

Okay -- how about young at heart?

Jimmy, the Carny Man

Secretly, Jimmy works for a carnival guessing people's ages blindfolded.

Dear Nathan -

That's the kind of post I hoped I'd get from you. You really took in my views. Who could ask for anything more than that? Thanks so much, dude. I only disagree with one argument of yours: the younger folks were NOT "giving," in my opinion. The tone of their posts was hostile and defensive and not much else. The tone of the "older" folks was slightly pompous, but steeped in knowledge of their craft and worthy of respect. Being young can, and ought to be, a mixed bag: on one hand one wants to look backward at what's come before, and learn what rules have been established, but on the other one wants to look for ways to break those stodgy rules and forge new pathways. My ideal young person would politely absorb the rules of his or her elders, and then, in private, find ways to break them, to "give the finger" to his or her elders! The younger folks on this site are adept at "giving the finger" but I'm not convinced that they've amassed a body of knowledge that will see them through say, the next decade in the field of poetry. Ruth and Jim have been at this a long time; they're not perfect, but if I've had any influence on you at all, I'd wish you would temper your remarks, Nathan. "Pathetic bullying?" You know that's an exaggeration, so why commit it to your post? But finally, I'm for the young folks, in spite of their hubris---because they've got energy and passion and ideas and they're searching for their own way of expressing it. If they keep at it they will find it --- and they'll have dragged poetry into the 21st century. So let's wish them well. Lil Jean and Ivy and Brixton, and Nathan, you have a great and solemn responsibility on your heads. You are the future, you are OUR future. As Tom Hanks said in Saving Private Ryan, "Earn it!"

Thanks again! Not a huge fan of country music but know a good artist when I see one. Brad Paisley was awesome! I could have kept shooting him and Taylor Swift forever. Neither one of them ever got boring.

Ana wrote: "great.is great hav all u guys herre.who share the same lov 4 poetry(writing)not liked my mother....who will kill me if a hav a book in my hands."

Ana, in amongst all the discussion over form and content, and high and low-brow poetry, your comment was the one that hit me most (even though I almost forgot to say it). It is great to have people like you here, who maintain their love of poetry, even in the face of adversity, and especially in the face of severe punishment and persecution.

Poetry (reading and writing) has helped me through lows and lifted me high too; and I hope you experience the same joy and love for it as you have now, always.

Nathan

lil Jean,

Looking forward to hearing/reading more from you, either here or on your blog...

Enjoy all the music, the photography (I dropped and broke my lovely Leica camera last weekend!), and of course, Brad Paisley.

Jimmy,

Firstly, trust me, if I was not open to it, I would not have read the full discussion in one late night session as soon as I found it; then, tried to digest it all as soon as possible; and, finally, commented in response to the things (and people) that I felt a need to respond to.

Secondly, I really don't want to get drawn into a discussion about this discussion, in this discussion - everyone's gone around in enough circles already, don't you think?

Thirdly (though I think I've covered this first!), I didn't express my feelings at the moment this was going down, because I didn't know it was going down...

Fourthly, Jimmy, everyone gives of themselves and their unique experience here - isn't that the point of this discussion forum (and the main reason we're all here: the monthly open competition)? - but there is no call for the preachy condescension, lowly sarcasm and pathetic bullying that has been going on, whether or not it is interspersed with some well meant advice.

Finally, Jimmy, (no-one else seems to have said) I have appreciated your peace-keeping interjections here. You remind me of my Dad - always encouraging both sides of an argument to feel and express whatever their feeling, but also trying to help each side see the others point of view.

I think if everyone else was as open-minded, patient and willing to listen as you have been, this discussion could have borne more healthy fruit.

I too find much to admire on this site.

And Brad Paisley for all the ladies!

...two beautiful blondes!! Taylor Swift!! and
lil Jean!! boy!

This truly is the greatest thread in goodreads history!!!!!

Thanks Nathan!

I don't intend on stopping posting. This debate is lost and it's useless to even try to help such angry people.

I will post again once my life calms. Just been really busy lately with photographing concerts. Check out my blog if anyone wants to keep track of my whereabouts: www.wakingupjean.blogspot.com

I have pics of Taylor Swift up now and will be posting Keith Anderson and Brad Paisley tonight... hoping to get James Otto and Lady Antebellum up soon also! Hope those of you that visit enjoy! I am very greatful of the talents/opportunities I have been given in life and love to share with anyone that may appreciate it!

Nathan -

Ruth and Jim, while dismissive/sarcastic (Jim) at times, were also brimming with sound advice and extremely generous in posting it. For me, it was like a free online seminar, if one were open to it.

Yes, sometimes it's as if they were delivering dicta from "on high" -- but the folks to whom their remarks were directed were stubborn and full of their own unassailable sense of rectitude, and their pronouncements did seem kind of "green" or immature to me. Perhaps not to you.

Clearly the two "sides" were not really hearing each other.

I think Ruth and Jim were absoutely right to cite "singsong" as a major risk when things rhyme regularly, especially from less experienced poets.
Yet they never ever made a blanket condemnation of rhyme, as you would have it.

Nobody likes to be told what to do, what to feel, "these are the rules", by others. And I think this angered Lil Jean, Ivy, et al. Plus they felt, rightly or wrongly, that the competition was slanted towards a certain type of poem.

Don't you find greeting card poetry singsong? Yet it exists and even provides a living for some folks (more power to them!) I think you are letting your strong feelings get the better of you when you compare "singsong" to "rag-head and "Nip." From what you write, one would think that it is only "Allied" forces that use pejorative nicknames.

I don't even know Ruth, but I could see from the beginning that she was not anti-rhyme per se. My little ditty rhymes in the way comic, satiric verse does. It's not at all a contradiction for Ruth (or anyone) else to be amused by it and still hold to her high standards.

Anyway, I'm not a poet (I'm a musician/composer) but I always find much to admire on this site. the works by so many of the poets here inspire and comfort and motivate and move me -- all the things a poem can do.

I say three cheers for your strong feelings, Nathan -- but I wonder why you didn't express them at the moment this stuff was going down---and I think you are overly rough on two people who, whatever their flaws, gave of themselves and their wide experience. Of course, you're free to reject any and all of what they said -- but, in my opinion, far more of it than you acknowledge was offered for good, decent and generous reasons.

I just wanted to post my support for both Ivy and lil Jean, though they both seem to have left this discussion now.

While I don't necessarily agree with all that they've been saying (such as Ivy's opinion that all poems should rhyme and have neat line-breaks so they "look" like poetry), I am wholly appalled by Ruth, Jim and Harvey's condescending, arrogant, aggressive, dismissive and elitist comments. It's shocking. Your quick use of cheap labels, such as "singsong" poetry beggars belief! It's insulting in the same way that the Allied armed forces make up nicknames for their enemies, like "Rag-head", "Gook", and "Nip".

Ruth, in "message 114", your response to Jimmy's poem is baffling. While I commend Jimmy on his "off the cuff" writing and summation of the discussion to that point (which I was quite amused by); isn't it the type of poem that you're insisting Ivy and lil Jean don't write? Yet, you "love it"?

Jim, I feel I've had a tough couple of years, but I sincerely hope that I never become as bitter and angry at the world as you. If I was religious, I would pray for you. Honestly. Your sarcasm is truly ugly and remarkably offensive.

-

So, Ivy and especially lil Jean, please keep posting (though, not necessarily here, on this thread - I think enough's been said here!), please keep questioning, and please keep writing your poetry the way you want to write it!

Nathan

I really enjoyed the poem and the posts. I just plain love writing.

Marcy

Thanks David J from Australia. It feels like you have said it all simple and straight from your heart, great poem and, without really getting all personally involoved. I relate to your poem very much.

I didn't think I was going to make any comments regarding this discussion either, especailly since I am so new, and I really don't know what it was suppose to be about in the beginning but, I don't see how anyone here can not now, walk away without feeling some (sense) of togetherness, because of this poem. After all, we all came from our very first attempt at writing poetry, prehaps in the beginning some of us had the education to go along with it and some not. We all had to start some where. And the examples discribed in "I Love Writing" discloses some of those first attempts, does it not? It's a personal queston to ask yourself.

I can not help to feel we all have some thing in common, perhaps we just don't feel it quite the same way or at the same time but, it must "be" (exist) or we would not be here, posting, writing, sharing. Trying to connect as some one had mentioned. There is a deeper place we tap into as writers, experts or not. What can this common element be.....

Thanks for just listening.

Gail.

I have been watching this thread with great interest & wasn't going to comment as I feel I am not a great poet & am still learning & don't have the education of most here, but, I love poetry & love writing poetry & my poems touch so many that when I 1st started writing had so many people asking me to publish a book, this I did in 2008 followed by another in 2009 & am now in discussions with a major publisher for my 3rd, I write rhyming poetry OLD style with some having modern day story lines, & I mainly write Australian Bush Poetry which is so popular here & gaining popularity in other countries, I am not an educated person (you can pick this up in this response)& often feel intimidated around those who are, I write from a picture or memory in my mind then through my heart & I write for anyone who enjoys my poetry not to please the purists.

An exerpt from my poem "I love Writing" this can refer to anyone in any country not just Australia.

I love writing, not worried pleasing experts I meet
Knowing at times I miss the meter, rhythm and beat
I love writing, like writers all over Australia
Anyone who writes should never be labeled a failure

I love writing, though not good with spelling and exclamation
But isn’t it people like us who helped forge our great nation?
I love writing, the contentment and feeling so exciting
I now tell all, I love writing, cause, I love writing.


David J Delaney (c)

Amen, Trish!

I agree with Marcy (above).

I wanted to add a quote that is so poignant to me that I keep it in my journal (and put it in each new journal). It came on a postcard from Poetry Magazine. Now while I don't always agree with the many somewhat snooty selections that always seem to make this publication, I must say that the editor's quote (below) never fails to remind me why I, we write poetry. To summarize: we want to add beauty to something that sorely needs it; we want folks to look for the beauty already there--and poetry is the handbook, the map, the guide on just where to look, and what exactly it is one should look for.

Here's the quote from Christian Wiman, Editor of Poetry Magazine:

"Let us remember...that in the end we go to poetry for one reason, so that we might more fully inhabit our lives and the world in which we live them, and that if we more fully inhabit these things, we might be less apt to destroy both."

I simply can't think of a better reason for writing--or reading--poetry. Can you?


Trish Lindsey Jaggers

I believe that variety is important here. No one will agree on everything about poems. That is the beauty of poems, their versatility. Emily Dickinson highlighted this in her poem "I Dwell in Possibility." She said that poetry has unlimited ways of expressing itself and is beautiful because of that.

She does have cool hair...

I'm not about to leave this debate before I address a few things. It's going to be a spatter of this and that.

First of all: Ruth, it seems to me that you think I'm very stupid. Quite a few posts ago, you were talking about what to do or what not do when writing good poetry. You post seemed to say that I had no idea of what some of these poem components were. Like alliteration, assonance, metaphor, symbolism, irony, simile, and others. Though I haven't studied poetry in depth, I have learned about poetry. I've also been writing it for many years.
Michael, I would also like to say I don't exactly refer to myself as a poet. And I do not think I'm incredibly wise either and I've never said my poetry is "great". Ruth and Jim, however much they say they're still learning, are terribly arrogant. One of them, in past posts, said that someone who had poetry written in a similar style of the older poets would ever get published. That makes me laugh, since there are people who do have poetry like that published.

Also, I do not agree that you need to have an "education" to write good poetry. That's like saying you need to be a professional cook before you can make good food.

Ruth, I'm answering to your post 234: I have already said this, why do I have to say it again??? Okay, I love rhyme, but a good meter is what a poem needs. Even if there aren't end rhymes, you still have the nice smooth flow of a POEM.

Harley, I know that if I was talking to these people face-to-face, my ideas and "defending attitude" wouldn't be much different. But isn't that a good quality for a poet? Or any writer in general? The way of getting your feelings transferred to words....

Amy,

Isn't it time we all "left the building" and moved on to a new contest.... please, please, please?

...folks, Norma Jeane Monroe has left the building...

And so shall I too. (winks:)

Jimmy wrote: "It must be admitted, however, that the "mature" folks failed to make a dent in the views of the "immature" folks. "

That is because they know all. They would not want an "immature" poet to know of things they could not learn through their textbooks and workshops.

Their points although not lost, have little credit when the arrogance of their ways radiates. I apologize for grouping Jim with Ruth cause although I think he may have a bit of unfounded superiority as Ruth, I think his posts to be at times useful. For that I am sorry. It would be nice to be constructive and not so demeaning. Not everyone will agree. I didn't join this debate to demean anyone but felt like a cornered animal at times and reacted as such. For that I also apologize. I did not mean to insult anyone and the few I feel I have done wrong to, I have taken up in private conversation.

I will leave this debate on that note knowing my views to be of no importance to the superior members of this board. Michael your post is of interest to me and I plan to research it further. I think that view of great knowledge and if anything came out of this debate it was to open my eyes to that. So thanks!

Such beautiful thoughts from Michael and Harley,
much of them following through on ground initially covered by Ruth and Jim. And my own thanks go to R & J for giving of themselves in terms of time and effort with formidable knowledge and passion. I feel lucky to have read -- and saved -- the many helpful posts that they were inspired to contribute.
A deep and profound thank-you to both of you. Know that your patient words were valued immensely.

It must be admitted, however, that the "mature" folks failed to make a dent in the views of the "immature" folks. I kept wishing that there were some magic words or a formula that would bring people together, that distances would be bridged, opposing views reconciled. But that's probably a failing of mine to expect such a miracle.

Meanwhile, in writing, as in life, we each learn one step at a time; and we learn the lessons we're supposed to learn at the precise time we're supposed to learn them, and not sooner----through risking, through mistakes, through hubris sometimes, humility other times.

Harley's point about the superiority of face-to-face communication is so true -- and it brings into relief the deficits, in so many ways, of cyber communication.

Ah---but the joy of finding a new poem, or a new poet, online! Or anywhere.

Not to mention the satisfaction that the Goodreads contest affords each month.

Ciao.

When I graduated from college in 1971 with an degree in English, I was looking for someone to mentor me and teach me the art of writing. I approached Nicholas Lindsay, one of my professors and son of the American poet, Vachel Lindsay. Of course, he could not afford to take me on as an apprentice. Over the years I have found only one writer's group that I felt comfortable in and I was a member for 3 years before I moved. I have had to teach myself the art of writing through reading books and by simply writing. All of this was prior to the internet and such sites as goodreads.

All of us on this site have an opportunity to learn from each other. There is so much I still need to learn at the age of 60 and so little time in which to learn it. I think we should be thankful that we can connect over thousands of miles and teach each other.

I earn my living as a professional speaker and trainer, not as a poet. The National Speakers Association of which I have been a member is the most giving organization that I have ever belonged to. Great speakers like Zig Ziglar, Jeanne Robinson and others readily share their knowledge with beginning speakers. And the beginning speakers listen, learn and grow in their careers. Unfortunately, I have never found the same to be true with writers until I came across this discussion group. I find Jim, Ruth and others in this posting to be very giving and willing to share. And if we open our hearts and accept the gifts that are given, we will all be better writers.

I speak and train on interpersonal communication skills and one of the things that I have learned is that the best way to communicate is face-to-face. The second best is over the phone and the third is by writing. If we were all sitting in a room talking face-to-face, I don't think people would be so defensive and rude. Research shows that 93% of interpersonal communication is body language and vocal tones. The actual words we say is only 7%. When you read what is written here, remember you are missing 93% of the communication so let's give people the benefit of the doubt and not be so quick to judge and condemn.

Thank you for posting this, Jim. I haven't read Eliot's essay before. I've printed it out so I can put my feet up on the coffee table and read it at leisure.

Lil Jean mentioned that she feels Jim and Ruth (and others) think of her as an "idiot." As an observer of the threads with young writers over the past month, I want to add that Lil Jean (and Ivy and other new poets) are not thought of as idiots. Rather, they are doing themselves their own disservice by painting themselves as highly immature and quite simply clueless about the art of poetry (specifically exhibited by their self-idealized notions of poetic greatness and unteachableness in the face of experience and sound wisdom).

These young writers have what I like to call the Pinochio syndrome: just because they say they are poets or just because they can write end-rhymes, etc. then they feel they are "real" poets. One essential characteristic of a "real" poet is understanding you are always learning and honing your skill. And yes, both Jim and Ruth acknowledged in one fashion or another that even though they have years of writing experience, they are still learning. No matter what form of philosophy or art one subscribes to, one should always have the sentience to know there is always more to learn.

In closing, I wanted to introduce to you a link to an essay by T.S. Elliot regarding the mature vs. the immature writer: "Tradition and the Individual Talent."

In this essay, Elliot explains the "Impersonal Theory," highlighting that the mature poet writes from a wholly selfless, "impersonal" place. Writing from this "impersonal" place is probably the hardest skill a poet must develop--to be the conduit for the universal message. On the other hand, a writer may write from the "personalized" place, in which the universal message is sacrificed for the desires of the immature writer, whose writing is easily recognizable because it is full of preaching, commands, and artifice.

Without further adieu, T.S. Elliot (key points display in bolded text):

The other aspect of this Impersonal theory of poetry is the relation of the poem to its author. And I hinted, by an analogy, that the mind of the mature poet differs from that of the immature one not precisely in any valuation of "personality," not being necessarily more interesting, or having "more to say," but rather by being a more finely perfected medium in which special, or very varied, feelings are at liberty to enter into new combinations.

The analogy was that of the catalyst. When the two gases previously mentioned are mixed in the presence of a filament of platinum, they form sulphurous acid. This combination takes place only if the platinum is present; nevertheless the newly formed acid contains no trace of platinum, and the platinum itself is apparently unaffected; has remained inert, neutral, and unchanged. The mind of the poet is the shred of platinum. It may partly or exclusively operate upon the experience of the man himself; but, the more perfect the artist, the more completely separate in him will be the man who suffers and the mind which creates; the more perfectly will the mind digest and transmute the passions which are its material.

In other words, the poet with honed skills is the better poet at interpreting and retaining the integrity of any scene -- visually and emotionally -- given him/her.

That's what this thread is about: mature poets vs. immature poets. And honestly, the proof is all in the product of the writer. And the product of the unskilled and immature poet is starkly and noticeably inferior in content, imagery, rhythm, and descriptive, engrossing language. Immature or lazy work is just that evident.

Read the essay in its entirety here.

Jerin1701 wrote: "...if so why don't we have a revolution? ....By the way, master Jim, do you know the song Revolution by Beatles White Album?"

I think you need to be less obstructive and more constructive. This is my first comment here EVER...your attitude and "talking down" tone in your comments has given me rise to actually say something.

Get off your high horse and give some constructive criticism that isn't based on your point of view. It's the poem that you should be talking about...not your own preference of what you like.

If you can't appreciate poetry as a whole...the contemporary with the rhyming archaic...then you aren't a poet and you sure have no room to be a poetry critic.

Reading a variety of Poetry from around the country was attractive to me, and I thought the whole point of this discussion was about accepting help and constructive critism.
It now seems like a rationalization to cover the petty insecurities of a self entitled defensive non-progressive anything goes 'cause I say so...
Boring and not productive for Poets trying to learn their craft. I'll come back when we all "grow up."

So long,
PepsieJ

Jim wrote: ""think that knowing the alphabet and having some "feelings" are all that's needed to be a poet. "

If this was directed at me, then I think you missed my point. I think it argumentative that people think knowing the alphabet and learning imagery to make them a poet....?

Emotions and expressing them through words takes more than imagery otherwise anyone could be a great writer.

Alas it takes BOTH abilities to make a memorable piece. That I can agree. Works without imagery are lacking but works with no emotion are lacking all the same. You can't write with just imagery and no emotion yet many writers these days do just that. Write because they think that society will approve of their words and have no meaning or emotion behind those words. I find these pieces boring and insulting to poetry. Poetry is a form of self expression. Self expression is one's feelings and emotions. Any work lacking as such is not poetry in my eyes.

John wrote: But anyway, all this talk about "feeling" and "emotion" leaves out the technical side, which can be taught. Beethoven and Picasso had teachers, of course."

Completely agreed! But nonetheless there are things in every form of art that just cannot be taught.

um... the full quote:

Jean wrote: I just doubt any great poet of history would sit here calling people amateur as if they were some superior writer. Granted a historically great poet probably wouldn't be here in the first place. lol

I think the post I was trying to make is that any great artist wouldn't stick their nose to the air as some have here. It radiates of insecurities, unprofessionalism, and plain disrespect for the art in itself. The last sentence was more directed at the fact that they have better things to do then meddle with such frivolous things.


I don't know all the rules nor do Ruth or Jim. Their only claim to fame is having a couple works published as many have here. Ruth even states her studies are a more recent thing and that "she started late in life." It begs to wonder how she consider herself so much more knowledgeable than those of us that have devoted our entire lives to writing whether it be poetry or other things. I find it insulting that someone thinks they can spend all the money in the world and think they better than I whom have actually been doing this all my life. Considered talented and gifted as a child and studying the art of reading and writing from a VERY young age.

I also find the demeaning nature of a few select to be rude to the group as a whole, and don't understand where their superiority is founded. I don't see them any further in the literary world than the next yet their minds are closed to other people that do things different than them. I DO know my weaknesses and have learned in this group yet these few think themselves to be perfect. I know for a fact my work to never be perfect but I also know who I am. I know my talents not to be wasted.

Jimmy wrote: "Ruth and Jim are squirming not to sound patronizing (and not always succeeding), AND they are giving of themselves and their vast experience in this field. [...:] But otherwise it appears that their words are falling on deaf ears.

Is it the giver -- or the receiver?"

A good nurturer/educator/sharer of something learned doesn't squirm to not sound patronising. Good teachers, parents, or other guiding people don't have to force themselves to not put their student, child, etc down as a person. There have been displayed here a great number of communication techniques that are verbally violent. It's quite natural someone on the receiving end would turn off completely. That response doesn't mean the person on the receiving end is petulant, resistant, rebellious, ignorant, immature or impossible; it means they're a normally functioning human being. Why say the ears of some are deaf but not also that the voices of some are deafening? There's a real difference in telling someone WHO ASKS, "Maybe try this [insert suggestion:]?" and "You should [this:], you shouldn't [that:]." The former is helpful, the latter is arrogant.

And besides, if someone wants to learn about stars, they don't have to go to an astrophysicist. A preschooler can teach something about stars too, depending what is desired to be learned.

I guess I'm ok saying that since many of these arguments have been going on for thousands of years, that's a pretty good indication no one here is going to suddenly be RIGHT about what's GOOD. Anyone who claims they've got a line in on that one can hardly be taken seriously.

And cut the ageism, people, seriously. No one is superior/worthy of being listened to just because they're older, and no one is stupid/deserving to be dismissed just because they're younger.

If we could be around in a hundred years to collect on the bet, I'd wager a technically masterful experiment in oh-sounds isn't going to be remembered by anyone. But if it earns you a few bucks, or makes some people ooo and ahh for a short time, or kills a few hours of your day, then go for it. If sing-songy gets your girlfriend back, then go for it. If bloodying your typewriter with your soul keeps you alive a little longer, then go for it. Was I mistaken when I joined this group that some works here will be good (i.e., I'll like it), some will suck (i.e., I won't like it), but all of it is allowed?

Full disclosure: While I've looked in on this group from time to time, I finally joined so I could vote for James Davis's poem. I found it sincere, and clever, and I could relate to it. It caused me to FEEL strongly (without any "teenage angst" [which I, anyways, consider real and valid and important feelings to those having them:], I assure Jim) that it should win, and would have been disappointed if it lost by the one vote that would have been mine. End of unsophisticated/uneducated analysis.

"The aim of poetry and the poet is finally to be of service, to ply the effort of the individual into the larger work of the community as a whole."

-Seamus Heaney

This guy writes poems that rhyme, and he writes them brilliantly enough to have won the Nobel Prize. I'm sure that some of our great rhymers have never heard of him and wouldn't like his poetry because it doesn't have enough teenage angst. However, this seems a pretty good quote for me to leave this discussion on. I can no longer be of service here and I'm wasting too much of my own time trying. And, Jimmy, you made an excellent point. It's amazing how many people who wouldn't call themselves a brain surgeon without going to medical school, even if they owned a scalpel, think that knowing the alphabet and having some "feelings" are all that's needed to be a poet.

Amen to Jimmy. Totally correct. Karla

I knew it would not pay off to get in between the crossfire of this discussion, seeking common ground. I used the word AMATEUR because its root is LOVE in Latin. That's not a put-down, it's an affirmation, Jean.

I wouldn't want to be have surgery performed by an "amateur" doctor, but when it comes to music and painting and poetry and a thousand other things, it's not necessary to have a college degree to love it and do it --- and share it with others.

I don't know if Jim or Ruth pointed out that many practitioners of the free verse form are as clueless as their rhyming counterparts. If not, then they certainly should have.

No, I don't think you know all the rules, Lil Jean, based on your resistance to anything that's said -- even by someone on your side. Nor do I know all the rules. But so what? And yes, Ruth and Jim appear to have studied hard, paid dues, grown -- over many years -- as writers, in a manner that would mark them as "professionals." That's not a dirty word, is it?

In the field of medicine or, let's say, chemical engineering, I don't think you would find this sort of debate! Everyone would have gone to school to learn the basics -- and no one could argue against that path towards knowledge and expertise in the field.

In the arts, it's different, of course. Being creative brings joy to anyone who does it. And no one should get to be "holier-than-thou," -- but it happens all the time.

Ruth and Jim are squirming not to sound patronizing (and not always succeeding), AND they are giving of themselves and their vast experience in this field. And I'm taking! It's like having a free poetry seminar. But otherwise it appears that their words are falling on deaf ears.

Is it the giver -- or the receiver?

Beats me. But bless you ALL for caring and feeling.

lil J said "I just doubt any great poet of history would sit here calling people amateur as if they were some superior writer"

Ha HA! I'd be shocked if they didn't! But anyway, all this talk about "feeling" and "emotion" leaves out the technical side, which can be taught. Beethoven and Picasso had teachers, of course.

This whole discussion started out interesting but has devolved into...something else. So, in order to keep my own sanity, I must bid you all farewell and good luck

I like to call creativity, when it is a compulsion, "the mental illness."

Jim wrote: "So, I think that the whole anti-poetry-is-the-only-way-to-write rhetoric is what smacks of dishonesty."

Then it's a darn good thing I never stated anything of the sort. Whew! I'm going to give myself thumbs-up for thinkin' ahead.

I had an amusing vision this morning of people sitting around a table and having this discussion, except Charles Bukowski was also there, smoking cigarettes, shifting in his seat, rolling his eyes, and swearing. He walked out, grumbling, then went home and wrote a poem about passion. Critics hated it. They said it was undisciplined crap. A lot of readers hated it too. It didn't rhyme. Bukowski laughed all the way to the bank, while the people at the table continued poking each other with forks.

I didn't say I didn't have room for improvement. I just don't think you are here to help others. You are here just to make yourself feel better. I have yet to see anything constructive come from you. You say things as if the writers here are morons and say nothing of importance to me. That's my opinion. When you start making posts of actually quality, I may change my opinion on you. I don't see you as more experienced than the rest of the writers of this board. I see you as thinking you superior to this board. Perhaps it is you that does not understand?

I will always take constructive advice on how to better my work. I know my weakness and know my strengths. I know myself to not be perfect. Ruth, do you think your work to be perfect?

Ruth your points are pointless

All right, lil J. If you are happy in every way with what you write, and you feel you have no need of help from people more experienced than you are, that you know everything there is to know and sincerely have no wish to learn more. I will stop trying to help you understand.