Some years back at a gallery full of my father in law's abstract art, what I dreaded happened. He walked up behind me as a gazed on a frame full of squiggles and asked me what I thought. In the next few minutes, he explained to me that if I simply related what happened in my head when I looked at it, that was 100% as legitimate and 100% as valuable as the criticism of the most knowledgeable experts.

Same is true of poetry. Yes, some writers post replies that contain technical references or suggestions, but they are no more helpful, and often less so, than posting just your plain old reaction. "This reminds me of Aunt Millie." "This makes me angry." "I was excited here but got frustrated here." etc. Simple. All statements that are incontrovertibly true, all statements that are invaluable to the writer's understanding of what happens when a reader takes their poem out for a spin - and no judgements needed as to whether the poem is "good" or "bad." The writer can then decide if they want this kind of reaction, or want to change the poem to go after something else. No reader is more important than the next, so each person's reaction is equally important.

So--don't be shy! You are the world's living expert on how you react to each poem! Share the knowledge! Tom

Tom,

Are you saying that all criticism is created equal? An interestingly egalitarian viewpoint, I must say. Certain bones in my body want to agree with you (and I think I understand your motive) but, burdened by a 'big picture' mind, I can't help but think about how this philosophy you've outlined can be applied to the canon of literature (a stupid thing, anyway, I know!).

Certainly, you would agree that a simple layman's interpretation of Four Quartet's is not on the same playing field as, say, a scholar's who has studied the various influences, allusions, and relevent contextual information that went into its creation. That is not to say that the layman's interpretation and reaction are not as valuable or valid, but does the layman's reaction help the world at large gain access to Eliot's message? I don't think so, or at least, I think the scholar's may be far more comprehensive, dynamic.

Maybe I am digressing away from what you mean to get at, here. I think you are talking about it in terms of what those comments add for the writer, and I am thinking more in terms of how those comments add for the audience. What do you think? Am I on the same track?

what will help the world at large gain access to Eliot's message is for ten laymen to say "I'm confused" and for Eliot to make it clearer, I think!

Oh, man. I think I can hear him turning... :)

Well, obviously you need to be trained in order to read poetry.  At a minimum you need to be trained in how to read English.  You also need to know enough about life to be able to understand what the poet references.    Beyond that, it's helpful to know enough about poetry to have an idea what the poet is doing.   But everyone is otherwise wrong.  It's not too relevant whether a poem frustrates you or makes you angry.  What is important is if it gives you an emotional reaction that causes you to see or feel something new or insightful about life.  A good poem will do this for the reader, but maybe not every reader.  So should Eliot dumb down his work?  Not really.  But should stuff like that only be accessible to the favored few who have graduate degrees in how to read it?  Probably not either.  Eliot is a bad example because he felt the need to provide footnotes for his nearly incomprehensible Wasteland.  But still that wonderful poem was evocative and amazing on some level.  People who try to emulate it now, however, fail.  Today, the ability to speak in simple language, using those words to paint and convey useful or complex images, is more meaningful.     

If the writer wishes to disregard the reactions of certain audiences, fine. Writers can write for the average person, only highly educated people or French-literate people or combat-experienced people or whoever they choose. My point is that when criticizing a piece of writing, in a forum like this one or elsewhere, you provide your reaction, whoever YOU are, and that reaction is true and informative. No one need think, I'm not qualified to speak.

"No one need think, I'm not qualified to speak."

Right on, Tom.

Yeah, I agree with that. 

Absolutely. I agree. That was what I thought you were getting at in your original post...apologies for my massive digression.

i personally take issue with the notion my opinion is lesser because i'm not trained.  joy in reading and understanding requires no training, neither does judgement.  judgement requires no training (repeated for those who didn't hear). and to say "someone who has studied this topic in and out is better able to judge" is a load of BS because in the end, it's just someone else's opinion.  it's just someone else's judgement.  and, judgement is not scientific.  it's not rule based.  it's an opinion.  so, for me to hear someone stand before me to explain why i should feel a certain way about Eliot based on his/her findings is as helpful to me as if i were deciding burger king or mcdonalds.  and, to proclaim certain works triumphs because they are technically sound is a farce, imo.  i hate sock poems!

i saw the posting about the iambic pentameter.  i was honestly floored.  i had no idea such a thing existed.  and, i equated it to someone asking me how much meta data is encapsulated in the first 5 packets of a fiber channel frame on an FDDI (fiber distributed data interface) ring, and how many bytes are allocated to those first five, and what process is used to break a fiber frame that's too large into fiber packets, which are then turned into ethernet packets.  
                                                 I DON'T GIVE A SHIT!

all i know is, for me, bukowski rocks, ginsberg not so much!  so in the us vs. them debate, i'm them.  

i hope this doesn't offend. :D

tiko

P.S. Silent Lotus, i agree with your post whole heartedly.



GAVE MY RESPONSE SOME THOUGHT, AND

OK, that's not to say academics don't have their place.  but, i think sometimes, they are given too much power over what is and is not acceptable (form, content, etc.).  i like them. i'm just not very impressed.  for me, it's read it, like it, don't like it, and here's why.

Tom, I really appreciate you bringing this up.

I was wondering if I was considered qualified to speak, but figured if I wanted you all to respond to me I better do the same.  PC is a delight!

nrw

tiko, ironically the same father in law who taught me to just tell what I thought when I looked at paintings, he always argues with me that people need to be educated about art traditions. go figure.

nrw, that's one of the reasons I started the thread. we can't afford to be wallflowers. if we all want, say, 6 responses to what we write, it can only happen if we respond to 6 of our colleagues for each poem we ourselves post. tom

I'll be back after work...this post will change then It's to remind me where I want to be later!:)

Just mix in a little Under-Dog too and no one will notice.