Ranger12 Aug 2006

Rules? Where did I ever talk about rules? No literature follows absolute rules, otherwise how would Carrol, Lear, Joyce etc. have survived? I took great care to use 'guidelines' instead. Once again, in your determination to abuse me, you've failed to read what I wrote. The whole idea of poetry is that it's subject to various features which distinguish it from ordinary prose. Hence the existence of all the poetic devices (alliteration, assonance, onomatopoeia etc.) With the exception of some crude rhyme and rhythm, I don't remember seeing a single example of these devices in your friend's poem. What's more idiotic: careful, skilled manipulation of language or the slapping down of a bunch of basic emotive words?

Now let's return to your original complaint, namely that I dared to criticise a published poet. As I've already said - and you appear to have ignored entirely - I did so to get discussion going with someone who I could potentially learn a few tricks from - and also because it was not a very effective or interesting poem. Before you explode with indignation at my rudeness, let me suggest something to you:
1) - she claimed to be a published poet, and as I'm a generous soul I assumed that meant 'published by a credible source'.
2) - some of her poems must be good enough for publication.
3 - the poem she posted was not good enough for publication (if it was, why was it on a public site?)
4) - therefore, the poem she posted was one of her weaker efforts, and she would be humble enough to acknowledge that she could do far better.
5) - as such, I wouldn't have received such a mountain of shit from her accomplices; instead I'd have learned something poetically useful.

Seems I was wrong.