02-28-2012, 07:46 AM
It is quite a natural thing, not to offend, and particularly so in the case of people one has come to like, hence all the 'awesome' stuff. Perhaps the insistence on constructive critique may make that easier. When everyone knows the name of the game, there should be no cause for offence.
I have a slight problem: first , we should say something, right? If not 'Great', at least what impressed us, what our reaction was. Yet I find, that a poem may be fairly mysterious, obscure if you will, and I am left saying that the richness of the words, or sounds, I like; tho in reality it is more than that, just as I could not give a detailed explanation of why I like bananas, beyond 'the taste'.
I do know at least one person who left after a while, and told me that the reason was that she felt out of her depth on the critique front. I understand that. The heart sinks when one sees a few obscure words, or phrases, and a reference to Grundsteinism. With Wiki and Google to hand, that is in truth lazy, but even so, it can give a dismal idea of the general ambiance. I find it more odd when people leave who have had ample opportunity to read both serious-ish stuff, and plain silliness.
I admire people immensely who say: what does that mean? I do not mean 'what does the poem mean?' (another question, much thrashed out), but just referring to some phrase or word, or whatever, which comes up in comments etc. The question may well make the writer have a think before replying!
Was this balanced? Am I?
I have a slight problem: first , we should say something, right? If not 'Great', at least what impressed us, what our reaction was. Yet I find, that a poem may be fairly mysterious, obscure if you will, and I am left saying that the richness of the words, or sounds, I like; tho in reality it is more than that, just as I could not give a detailed explanation of why I like bananas, beyond 'the taste'.
I do know at least one person who left after a while, and told me that the reason was that she felt out of her depth on the critique front. I understand that. The heart sinks when one sees a few obscure words, or phrases, and a reference to Grundsteinism. With Wiki and Google to hand, that is in truth lazy, but even so, it can give a dismal idea of the general ambiance. I find it more odd when people leave who have had ample opportunity to read both serious-ish stuff, and plain silliness.
I admire people immensely who say: what does that mean? I do not mean 'what does the poem mean?' (another question, much thrashed out), but just referring to some phrase or word, or whatever, which comes up in comments etc. The question may well make the writer have a think before replying!
Was this balanced? Am I?