critting: what is expected, an invitation to discuss Options

[Guest_Toumai_*]

Hi everyone,

I have been reading with great interest the comments on what type of critique various members would ideally like to receive, which gives valuable insight for all of us learning this process.

Critting work is almost as much of an art form as writing.

One important lesson I have learnt, is that a crit does not necessarily mean offering suggestions for improvement.  What I enjoy most when critting work is when I can offer my own interpretations of what I have read.  Sometimes I grasp the meaning and sometimes I do not, especially If the poem is very abstract.

Extract from NINA's comments.

As a 'newbie' to all of this I doubt very much if I can crit as any poet - or prose writer - would ideally like, and I often feel I should beg indulgence for my ineptitude as I stumble along the path of learning.

However, I also wonder if it is ever fair to say to a critter 'this is how I wish to be critted' as the critter is the one doing the work at this stage. If a piece of work is in an open crit forum it may be interpreted in many different ways, seen in many different lights.

So what if it is a form piece that will only be published in such a journal eventually - perhaps a new insight will arise from review by those more used to free verse. So what if it is a means to a message - a discussion of rhythm may improve it's flow.

With love to all - and appreciation for all the wonderful crits I have received here on MM - thank you.

Fran

[Cleo_Serapis]

Hi Fran.  

I remember when I first started to critique others' works. BOY - was I nervous! I wasn't quite sure what to do?    

I thought perhaps I would start out by using a thesaurus. I figured if I could suggest 'flashier' words that perhaps the author would bite.    Turns out that just made most folks angry with me (they thought I was trying to re-write their work).

As I came to realize a few months later, that really wasn't what most of the writers were looking for in a crit. So, back to the drawing board I went. I then decided that I would focus my critiques on punctuation and titles. Well.... that was 'ok' but some folks simply prefer to either follow the PP (punctuation police) or not - their option.  

So... next I decided that I would concentrate my readings on meter and message. Well - that was a bit harder to do for free verse poems - although you can have a great rhythm in FV too, I was stumped!

Now, I read each piece, create my own interpretion, and offer suggestions based on the one or more of the following criteria (as posted on)Poetrymagic.co.uk :
[*]title — appropriate to subject, tone and genre? Does it generate interest, and hint at what your poem's about?
[*]subject — what's the basic situation? Who is talking, and under what circumstances? Try writing a paraphrase to identify any gaps or confusions.
[*]shape — what are you appealing to: intellect or emotions of the reader? What structure(s) have you used — progressions, comparisons, analogies, bald assertions, etc.? Are these aspects satisfyingly integrated? Does structure support content?
[*]tone — what's your attitude to the subject? Is it appropriate to content and audience: assured, flexible, sensitive, etc.?
[*]word choice — appropriate and uncontrived, economical, varied and energizing? Do you understand each word properly, its common uses and associations? See if listing the verbs truly pushes the poem along. Are words repeated? Do they set mood, emotional rapport, distance?
[*]personification — striking but persuasive, adds to unity and power?
[*]metaphor and simile — fresh and convincing, combining on many levels?
[*]rhythm and metre — subtle, natural, inevitable, integrate poem's structure?
[*]rhyme — fresh, pleasurable, unassuming but supportive?
[*]overall impression — original, honest, coherent, expressive, significant? "

I may not ask myself ALL of the above, but I do try and pick two or three and use them in my analysis....