Critiquing Other Critiques: Yes or No?

[poetinahat]

What do you think about poem critiques that respond to other crits, rather than the original poem? For example:

Crit 1: "I thought the ending was weak; it was an anti-climax."

Crit 2: "You missed the point; it was a delightful irony."

How do you feel about it as:
- the poet?
- the author of the crit being critiqued?

[The Lady]

If it's a simple vote you're looking for, I'm good with critiques being critiqued.

Discussion is vital. People don't always express their point well and if a crit is to be valuable, the writer of that crit has to be able to stand over it and say what they meant (and occasionally recant). It's all got to be done in a civilised fashion of course but I can't see why a crit should be precious.

[wyzguy]

I don't think a crit should be more precious than the poem which caused it. However, I regret that the dialogue between Bret and myself hijacked the thread. I don't know the best path, but I don't think we found it.

[Pat~]

It seems that responses to poems are fairly subjective; they can vary widely. I think it's probably best to keep the crits focused on the poem, rather than critiquing someone else's subjective response. Not that crits can't counter one another, though. In the example above, Crit 2 could better say how he responded to poem differently, what he got from it, etc. That way Crit. 1 won't feel 'corrected' and won't be gun shy about offering a crit in the future.

[LimeyDawg]

I vote for addressing the work, not the person. Crits on the poems are all valid, even if they disagree. One may say "that is cliched" and the next might say "I didn't find that cliched." Really, crits should be aimed at the poem and if one disagrees with another's crit, simply address that disagreement in the form of another crit.

[dahmnait]

I have to agree with both Pat and LimeyDawg, gear the crits towards the poem.

[P.H.Delarran]

I agree also that the crit should be focused on the poem, but sometimes a I may feel strongly the opposite to. Like if someone said a certain word was out of balance but I really liked it, I would comment to that point only.

[kdnxdr]

I too believe that crits should be poem focused, however, I love the incredible dialogue that often ensues as we begin to dig into deeper meanings.

Sometimes, I wish there was just a thread that we could get into just for the purpose of philosophical dialogue where anything is fair game.

I appreciate everything that each and every person posts because even when I don't agree with them, I learn from them. Collectively, when it's all read through, it's feels like you just ate a 7 course meal, and then some!

[dahmnait]

Sometimes, I wish there was just a thread that we could get into just for the purpose of philosophical dialogue where anything is fair game.Sounds like you are going to have to start a new thread. I'm game.

[veinglory]

You can respond to a critique without rebutting it.

C: I intended the ending to be subtle and ironic. How do you think I could fine tune this approach to avoid the ending seeming too weak?

If you really aren't open to considering the comment as valid, why debate it?

[dahmnait]

Now I need clarification. Poet, are you talking about other people critiquing a crit, or the OP responding to one?

[wordsheff]

i don't think it's bad to respond to another's critique because disagreements allow for more insights to come out ... instead of someone saying "oh how delightful...really got me in the gut and i'll carry it with me all day" someone who would have wrote that will read "that wasn't good" and then they'll be driven to refute that.

[moblues]

What do you think about poem critiques that respond to other crits, rather than the original poem? For example:

Crit 1: "I thought the ending was weak; it was an anti-climax."

Crit 2: "You missed the point; it was a delightful irony."

How do you feel about it as:
- the poet?
- the author of the crit being critiqued?


I would think that discussing another's crit be would acceptable if the discourse served the original poem. If it opened up a greater dialogue with other critters, then that would be fine. Back and forth nits wouldn't serve any purpose.

I've seen this done correctly with class and respect in the SYW Science Fiction threads. There is a fine line. Just don't hijack the thread. I did this recently without any intention of doing so. All it took was three combined posts to accompish this. I won't let it happen again.




Mike

[ddgryphon]

I'm in the camp of critique the poem, disagree if you like, but state why in a helpful way. No need to get sidetracked with each others disagreement about the poem -- the poet is well capable of making their own decisions in what to listen to, and what to not listen to.

Clear?

[poetinahat]

Now I need clarification. Poet, are you talking about other people critiquing a crit, or the OP responding to one?
What I meant was the former. Thanks, damh.

OP responding to crits -- that's another issue altogether. I believe the SYW forum here follows the convention that the OP doesn't dispute a crit, but accepts it with a "thank you" and uses it, or not, as the OP wishes.

I'll go find the link and add it here.

[dahmnait]

That is what I thought. :) I’ve been thinking about this and would like to elaborate a little on my initial response. A critique has two potential factors, one is hard rules and the other is personal opinion. It is one thing to correct someone when the give wrong information. E.g., crit 1 posts incorrect information and crit 2 brings up the correction in a respectful manner. To me, that is ok.

When I say keep the crit focused to the OP, I am referring to personal opinion. Everyone reads a piece differently. Not everyone will like, not everyone will "get" it. Take your example. There is no reason for crit 2 to invalidate crit 1's personal opinion. It is up to the OP to decide whether or not the crit has feedback they can use.

Now if your example read:

Crit 1: "I thought the ending was weak; it was an anti-climax."

Crit 2: "I didn't get that. I thought it was delightful irony. Would you mind elaborating on what you saw as anti-climatic?"

(Ok, not the greatest rewrite of your example, but hopefully you get the idea.)

In this example crit 2 is not invalidating crit 1's opinion. This opens it up for discussion in which the OP will get useful information. The other option should be to just state your opinion. There is no reason to tell the person that they don't get it, that they are wrong, or that they missed a point. It doesn't help the OP, or anyone else, which is the reason we crit, right?

[Bret]

Focus first on your opinion of the piece. Not someone elses. Form a reply before you read the other responses.

Even so, a discussion forum will naturally engender "discussion." Thats kind of the point.

I have no problem with someone's honest disagreement with my POV. If I can't defend my position, maybe it isn't worth having. If being challenged over your assertion is a daunting prospect, stay away from people with opinions other than your own.

I am one person with one way of seeing poems. Right, wrong, whatever. My opinion is fairly insignificant. Its only "what I think" at best.

[aspier]

What do you think about poem critiques that respond to other crits, rather than the original poem? For example:

Crit 1: "I thought the ending was weak; it was an anti-climax."

Crit 2: "You missed the point; it was a delightful irony."

How do you feel about it as:
- the poet?
- the author of the crit being critiqued?


Those who want to talk about ... eh whatever, there are boards for that, no? Reader-writer relationship is a precarious one and poetry boards are a most specific , needed and welcomed by both 'personal' meeting ground. I cannot imagine that poets would appreciate it when crit-dicussions turn into post-flares in their threads. Altough I dare say the idea has some merit. A better idea would be to put up a crit school of some sort. As it now is, its only the examples that are set re crit that inspires ... this however does work in a small way, don't you think?

[Rivana]

Critique the poem. If one disagrees with another person's comment it's an easy thing to do to just convey this to the author of the poem, not the author of the critique. Critiques -no matter how well educated, are always subjects of opinion.

For example

a:poem

b: You should stay away from religious themes.

c: I don't think you should stay away from religious themes, I found this poem very insightful.

Thus focus is put on the poem and not the various critiques or the people giving them. This should avoid unnecessary debates mid-thread and leave the spotlight on the poem -where it belongs.

[veinglory]

What I meant was the former. Thanks, damh.

OP responding to crits -- that's another issue altogether. I believe the SYW forum here follows the convention that the OP doesn't dispute a crit, but accepts it with a "thank you" and uses it, or not, as the OP wishes.

I'll go find the link and add it here.

SYW doesn't have a hard policy except that there should be no personal insults and I tend to step in when a writer and critique just hammer the same point over and over without progress in a you're wrong/no you're wrong sort of way (frequently leading to breaking rule #1 )

Writers may certainly respond to crits in SYW but I agree that it should be with an open mind not just to refute the criticism and say how it is outright "wrong".

IMHO (not as policy) the overall tone of the complete response should be able to be summarised as 'thank you'. That is more likely to make the whole interaction a positive one.

[veinglory]

A recent example here has the poet just name the critiquer and say 'I totally disagree' -- I don't see the value or point of that. It's like taking a gift and tossing it in the bin before the giver has even left the room. Even if the gift was the most hideous thing you have ever seen that just isn't polite.

[aspier]

IMHO (not as policy) the overall tone of the complete response should be able to be summarised as 'thank you'. That is more likely to make the whole interaction a positive one.

Yes appreciation yet poetry is also 'playing ball' - the toupher (omg how does one spell taffer!) the opponent the more one is libel to respond better. Not relly compitition but if one gets crit that's fundamental and points can be proved (I differ a bit from Rivana that seems to hold the opinion that crit is only subjective) then this is really valuable to the person who posted the poem. The critter anyway should have the insight to crit the individual 'write' - firm and fair yet always to the appealling towards the 'higher'.

I wonder if I am making a point here at all...

[dahmnait]

You are making a perfect point. :)

(is the word you are looking for "tougher"?)

[aspier]

tnx + when the tougher gets going the poet goes to bed with his wife ... this is not an a) religeous comment b) nor an extremist-a-la-al-kaaida of one. (Just for the record in case there are critters lurking in here to crit what I said about crit.)

[Godfather]

man, i think it's a good thing to discuss or challenge other crits. if you disagree with a crit, make a point of it. why the hell not? it's an indirect crit of the poem.

[JAlpha]

I'll offer up two real examples where my lone, descending crits regarding small elements in the poems of two AW poets ended up being discussed and or criticized.

In this first example I felt my contrary opinion had been of some benefit–food for thought if you will–to the poet and the other posters and readers.
http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=500543#post500543


In this second second example, I felt I was about to be eaten alive.
http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=500942#post500942 (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=500942)

In face to face critique groups as well as on-line forums, contrary reactions to my critiques often come down to personality and writing style clashes; I accept that. But in the case of on-line forums, sometimes it does bother me when I come back hours or days later and find my opinion being criticized or made to be proven wrong, especially by people who have no knowledge of my history of commitment and level of success in supporting and helping other writers get recognition for their work.

Here’s my honest and personal point of reference that fuels my negative reaction to having my critiques critiqued . . . I have judged several poetry and writing contests. I have also won a number of them too. And I've been an editor of an on-line literary journal as well. In those circumstances there was no necessity for me to have my opinion debated, the judgements and or spoils were mine to make and or take. In the case of contests with multiple judges, a scoring sheet is suffice to weigh the cumulative value of each judges opinion. In other words, when I’m in a judging or editing mode, the theme, tone, efficiency, level of craft etc. of a particular piece I am presented with either connect with me quickly or not.

I have also participated in a number of university level writing workshops, were all the participants debate and or defend ad nauseam all the finer points of a particular piece for hours on end, week after week. In that sort of environment of face to face give and take, I actually love to debate, defend and blather on and on about the finer points of craft.

But my preference of critiquing styles for on-line forums is to get in and get out, react to the piece quickly, exactly as I would if I were judging it for a contest or considering it for publication and then move on.

Admittedly, it's a method that works better in face to face round robin styled critique groups, where each individual critter speaks in turn about their reaction to the poem, and not their opinion and or reaction to the previous critique. The writer is left to tally the opinions.

Now, after several years of participating in several on-line and face to face crit groups, I've pretty much decided my crit style and emotional temperament are better suited for face to face groups, and lengthy academic workshops. Which is why I haven't offered up many crits recently on the AW forums.

Great thread Poet :idea:

IMHO the practice of critiquing crits is a fluid situation that evolves with the dynamics of the group at any given time. But it’s always a good idea to shine a light on the subject from time to time, if for no other reason than to encourage a healthy balance–a comfort zone–for the posters and the critters.

[aspier]

A very good input Jalpha ... tilts the level of the thread to its height. Serious reflection re crit, its expected level, the nessaccity of it, etc. is an absolute must for members of a board that aspires to be a worth it one.

Tnx for the post!

aspier

[kdnxdr]

I'm jealous JAlpha for those "face to face, lengthy adcademic workshops"!

kid

[Pat~]

Which is why I haven't offered up many crits recently on the AW forums.


This is to our loss. And I think this is why I prefer that critiques stick to critiquing the poem. Critiques can still disagree with one another, but potential critiquers won't be discouraged from participating when critiques stay focused on the poem.

[caseyquinn]

I wanted to give this thread a bump - As I read this thread you realize people critique in a WIDE range of ways. There is no wrong or right way, just the way YOU go about doing it. If you want to focus your crit on the poem, go for it. If you read a crit and feel you wanted to comment, go for it. Discussion is good and is not harmful.

Let's all try not to be rude but understanding of the fact we all do things differently and not try to force our will on how others work. Putting down others or trying to be pushy only deters people from making critiques or comments on poems.

Thanks -

[LimeyDawg]

I think that misses the point of the forum. The forum, and correct me if I'm wrong, is designed to help people improve their poetry. A writer posts here and hopes for input on his poem in an effort to work out the bugs, see what works and what doesn't, and generally get a feel for the poem's impact.
What the poetry forum has not presented itself to be is a place for discussions on why person x dislikes person y's input on a piece of poetry. And nor should it. It's simple. People should feel as free to post comments on the poems as they do to post their work. I doubt anybody here wants to feel victimized because they didn't like a poem that the majority did. That's about as counterproductive as it can be.
Have you checked the response rates to poems lately? How is it that so many can get less than ten responses? Probably because people dislike the poem, but don't feel comfortable here in saying so because it is not PC to do so. Why post if your opinion is going to get panned? But there's the sticking point: this isn't a place to discuss opinions about poems, it's a place to DISCUSS POEMS.
I'm sure I'm the target of the "pushy" comment. Fine. But go back a few thousand posts and see the vitriole and spit that happens when people's opinions get challenged. It absolutely destroys the character of the forum. The point, again and again and again is to help poets with their poems, not try to sway somebody who gave up their time to give input because you disagree with what they say. It's damned disrespectful to do so, given that this is a forum for the discussion of poetry. Or, let's just allow the thing to denegrate into a pissing contest about opinions. That way, there will be plenty of posts per poem. Problem is, none of them will do a damned thing to improve the work.

[caseyquinn]

But again, that is YOUR opinion and you have every right to it. So YOU should not critique other crits, you have every right not to, what you don't have the right to do is tell others what THEY should be doing. Let the poet who posted the poem see what they get value from. It isn't YOUR place to make that decision.

[Priene]

I'm with Limey on this one. I can't see much difference between critting back and critting another critter. The biggest disincentive to critiquing is negative responses, and having received plenty both from OPs and other AW members, I don't see much difference between them.

[Ambrosia]

I probably shouldn't step into this, but really, since I have been posting in the poetry crit forum, almost a year now, there has been a rule not to crit crits. I am not innocent, by any means, of doing this. But I try to stop myself, knowing how much damage it does to the person criting the poem. It is the person's opinion. And telling them their opinion is wrong is not only insulting and rude, it removes whatever value may be gained from that crit by the author of the poem. There may be one gem of truth in what they say that will help the author improve their poem. But if the author is told the crit is useless, which is again another opinion, they may not look for that one gem.

Yes, sometimes I want to slap a critiquer for being obnoxiously rude. But that really isn't my place. I am not saying I haven't done it. I haven't done it often. That should be left to the Mods. What I try to do is give a crit to the person that has value and let them know every person's crit is just that person's opinion, to take what works for them and leave the rest. That way, I have not critiqued a crit, but still hopefully mitigated any damage a person may have done to a new person with a harsh comment. It is the kinder, gentler way. In my experience, it works.

Food for thought.

[LimeyDawg]

But again, that is YOUR opinion and you have every right to it. So YOU should not critique other crits, you have every right not to, what you don't have the right to do is tell others what THEY should be doing. Let the poet who posted the poem see what they get value from. It isn't YOUR place to make that decision.

Absolutely not. It isn't a free for all. There ought to be rules of decency that exist. Check out the effect of YOUR point of view. I used to be one of the most prolific critters here, good or bad. I've been absent for almost five months, more or less, exactly because of this. No loss to AW, but what of the poets? Surely in my 2800 posts I've helped at least one?

And by YOUR definition of what is right or wrong here, I absolutely have the right to tell others what to do, because in your world there are no rules, no boundaries, except where they impact your very jaded view of what should and should not be. How about expending some of your time in giving decent crits (decent meaning extending beyond "I love this" or "the other critter is an idiot because he doesn't get the poem"). There's some value for you.

[caseyquinn]

LD, you are too funny - hope you have a great new years man !

[caseyquinn]

And just to clarify, I am only saying we should respect each other, if that gets you defensive man, not sure what to tell you. Discussions can happen without offending anyone when they are done with respect likewise a critique can be done without offending anyone when done with respect.

When you fail to respect people the system breaks down, to me that is the only real rule in place. Seems like some times people have a bad day and rip into people and make rude comments which do not help anyone but the poster feel better about themselves.

[kdnxdr]

I've kinda "been away" from the forums, life got in the way and I was attempting to write my novel for NANO (which I did not complete on time as a novel but was so inspired to try. It ended up as a short story and I submitted it to Glimmer Train, my first submission for publication. :)

I don't think there are really sides to the issue and I say that because in the past where crits and counter crits ensued and the "conversation" got deeper than just one or two posts regarding the poem.

I do agree that when that happens it is not fair to the initial poem/poet who is asking for help and (I'm sure) affirmation as a poet. Often, we "test out" our poems on one another to see how they will fly. Revisions often taking place in a different place at another time. It's also rude and counterproductive to have one's critique, one's opinion, unvalued and will result in less critiques being offered.

I'm one of those types that likes a friendly arguement, believing the art of argument is in process as much as any other art form. As well, critiquing is itself an art form and, I believe, that as our critiques are critiqued by our fellow writers, we stand to benefit as writers. Many famous people have made their careers as critics: food critics, art critics, movie critics, political critics, and as writing critics.

I don't remember if we've done this before but I think it could serve a good purpose if someone does become caught up in critiquing the critiques and those involved want to continue the "discussion", they could have a place to go and do that. If anyone wants to follow that discussion or become involved with it, they go to that place. If no one is interested as to what those people have to say or the poet doesn't believe it's of any benefit, they simply don't involve themself with that particular discusion.

Writing is writing and we all come at it from so many different angles. Some of us are very tender and need lots of nurturing and protection. Some of us don't mind losing a "paw" in the heat of a writing battle. For me, it's all good and you can simply pick and choose your arenas. I stay out of some because I'm offended. I stay out of some because they are way over my head. I stay out of others because I am a woos. That's what I love so much about AWforums, it's like a big garden that you can dart in and out of and linger at the flowers you enjoy the most. :)

(Disclaimer: I don't consider myself a troll though I have been snapped at a couple of times. I just peek into places and if I'm not comfortable or don't feel accepted, I leave. I try to stick to where I'm most comfortable and rarely attempt to topple anyone's cart.)

xoxoxox

kid

[ajc]

I think saying no "absolute anything" seems counterproductive for any growth. Of course, the time should be spent on the poem, and the reason for posting is to help with the poem, but if Limeydawg posted a poem and Casey followed up by saying this poem is not good enough to wipe my gran's arse and it is not a poem but a bunch of ugly words thrown in a pretty way, but not even that pretty of a way. Then, I would exercise my free-will and say that this is just an opinion and that my gran would never wipe with anything but 2-ply.

And for the record LD, AW poetry lab did miss out for your absence.

[Polenth]

The poetry forum is prone to arguments. The sort that seem to come out of nowhere, leaving you wondering what you missed. It stopped me posting here for ages. Now that I do, I often feel isolated and ignored by the people fighting. The few times I've posted something for critique, I was more worried about an argument starting in the thread than anything else - it meant people would ignore my poem in favour of arguing with each other.

There are times when it's best to walk away or send a PM instead of replying in the thread (or report it to the mods, if it's that bad). The environment the arguments create is unfriendly and it doesn't do the original poster any favours when you hijack a critique thread for a personal disagreement.

[ajc]

The poetry forum is prone to arguments. The sort that seem to come out of nowhere, leaving you wondering what you missed. It stopped me posting here for ages. Now that I do, I often feel isolated and ignored by the people fighting. The few times I've posted something for critique, I was more worried about an argument starting in the thread than anything else - it meant people would ignore my poem in favour of arguing with each other.

There are times when it's best to walk away or send a PM instead of replying in the thread (or report it to the mods, if it's that bad). The environment the arguments create is unfriendly and it doesn't do the original poster any favours when you hijack a critique thread for a personal disagreement.

Good points -- all. I think poets are passionate and thus maybe more sensitive (either that or a bunch of argumentative idiots!).

I was just thinking about it and it seems okay to agree with someone's crit and say how super-duper brilliant that critter is, but never ever should it be the other way. I think we run into problems when we say "never ever". It is so important to remember that there are people behind the poems, and people behind the crits.

[Dichroic]

I'm one of those types that likes a friendly arguement, believing the art of argument is in process as much as any other art form.

That is it, right there.

That's exactly why I hope never to see a strictly enforced "don't crit the critter" policy here, because you could lose something very useful. Very often I find myself responding to other crits, not to complain or applaud them directly but because they help me see something in thepoem that I would have missed otherwise, like discussion in a poetry class. I won't say, "No, you got it wrong", but I might say "I agree with this part of so-and-so's criticism, but I disagree with this other part because...." and then get into what I hope will be useful discussion of the poem.

I suppose I could rewrite the sections I agree and disagree with, but that seems silly and unwieldy, plus it seems more honest to respond directly to the post that made me think about something in a different way.

For the record, LD, I've never said this in public before, but a comment of yours very nearly caused me to quit this forum on about my second poem here - it wasn't a response to the poem itself, but a brutal (in my opinion) comment on my response to another critter. Fortunately (or un-, depending on your viewpoint) my response to criticism is sometimes to become more stubborn. Not everyone responds that way or has skin toughened by decades on the Internet. It's something I've tried to keep in mind in my own crits ever since, especially to new people here. I've given my share of "this is pretty bad" crits, and even some "that's not a good way to respond" comments, but unless the person gets really obnoxious about it, I do try to temper them with some hope or gentleness.

ETA: Also for the record, I was entirely in the wrong in the response I mentioned and it was completely appropriate for someone to correct me. (I quibbled with the perspective of a crit, when I should have either say said thank you and left it at that, or at most phrased my response as a question. ) But "That's not how we do things here; remember that someone has taken time to think about your work" would have been enough.

[Magdalen]

That is it, right there.

That's exactly why I hope never to see a strictly enforced "don't crit the critter" policy here, because you could lose something very useful. Very often I find myself responding to other crits, not to complain or applaud them directly but because they help me see something in thepoem that I would have missed otherwise, like discussion in a poetry class. I won't say, "No, you got it wrong", but I might say "I agree with this part of so-and-so's criticism, but I disagree with this other part because...." and then get into what I hope will be useful discussion of the poem.

Excellent point! I like that aspect of crits also. In the 2+ years I've been here I've tried to be even-handed or at least polite in my comments. Sure, I've failed miserably a few times and usually ended up editing the worst ones and apologizing. Learning to take and give criticism is not easy, but I think it is worth the time spent, on both ends.

[kdnxdr]

Hey, L.D.,

Just want you to know that I've got some good perspective adjustments from some of your crits and have enjoyed reading your work.

kid

* But, I'm not taking sides or anything......

** There are some really great poets and crits that aren't on the boards any longer because they liked to deviate from the subject and get off into tangents.....and I miss them alot, they always took things beyond the "norm".