A Reviewer's Remise

This is prose, not true poetry. It came to me when reflecting on the reviews I give to so many people.

Review. Tis a sweet melody to most here on Writerscafe. We all seek the common recognition and praise for our work, but when is it -dare I say it- justified? I have read a thousand works here, eager to leave my thoughts and praises for some, eager to leave critique on others. However, what gives justice to the words I speak? By whose authority do I tell people what to fix and what to keep? I find myself struggleng with the fact that there are so many good writers here on our esteemed Writerscafe, and yet so many of them need improvement. But who am I to be the one to tell them that? I look at the reviews of others and recognise they give nothing but praise. Am I supposed to tell people what is wrong or right with their work? Should I? I claim to be superior to nobody. I am naught but a set of words on a screen, happily coming together in a set order by the destining of this thing you call a soul. But what gives it purpose? What gives it merit? What about my words is so significant that it must be written down? And then, why should anybody read them? A thousand laments for the man who wakes and discovers this truth!

 

Regardless, I write because I write. I review because I know, or moreso fathom to know; what it's like not to be reviewed. My will is shallow; my soul is meek. But for some reason, it still holds taunt. I review on no authority, I write for no one's merit. And somewhere along the way, my soul will fade. Insignificant.

 

Sincerely,

Writer

Reviews

[...]

... it's a very thought-provoking write ... my thoughts? ... i'd like to start from scratch ... and start by talking about life ... what's the most important thing? ... human rights ... for me it definitely is ... what is the biggest challenge in a multi-cultural setting? ... offending someone unintentionally ... what is poetry? ... it's a finger print of the soul ... what does it celebrate the most? ... the freedom of expression ... what is the one competence that poets ought to have? ... being able to be respectful all the time and not being disrespectful especially when it comes to choice of words ... between verbal and non-verbal communication, what is significantly more potent? ... non-verbal communication ... we always communicate more through the tone of our writing than through the choice of words ... what is the potential harm of leaving a positive comment? ... the poet is reassured and will take more risks and experiment more ... is that really harmful? ... i don't think so ... what is the challenge? ... we must not validate something that we do not believe in ... and here i'm referring to ethics and they are universal ... and not morality which is subjective ... having said that ... i have a very clear understanding of the word "review" ... it is a second look ... in a review ... i view again ... what i see ... and let the poet know what i saw ... then it is for them to decide whether what i saw is more or less or equivalent to what they meant to show me ... when i chance upon a value or principle being spoken of that i don't agree with ... i make sure that i don't validate it ... for instance ... if someone is talking about committing suicide ... something that i do not agree with ... i may notice grammatical inaccuracies or find the potential for recommending structural enhancements ... but what becomes more important for me even then ... is to not validate the idea ... and i don't ... similarly ... if i come across a write that has some minor grammar issues or potential for structural enhancements ... but has the music of life in it ... then i validate it ... i think communication was never a victim of grammar and structure ... and there are many of us here for whom english is not the first language ... besides ... is it really possible to fix someone's grammar by giving feedback on one or two or three or even ten pieces? ... i don't think so ... is it possible to change someone's thought process and get them to structure poems differently by giving feedback on one or two or three or even ten pieces? ... i don't think so ... i am too small an entity in the universe of verse and i have a long way to go as a human being ... it's enough to get my human rights song right ... and if i manage to accomplish that ... it's enough for me to validate ethical thoughts and actions ... when i'm done with that ... and become an expert ... as also become the expert in saying things in such a manner that the choice of words as well as the tone of my words has no potential to hurt anyone ... who by the way ... might be in another corner of the world ... suffering from severe depression or oppression ... then i'll critique a poem ... i'm a long way from that right now ... anyhow ... this is an amazingly enriching write ... it educates me about another perspective ... and i am indebted for the opportunity to express my thoughts ... god bless ... and thanks again ... (serah) ...

... p.s. ... the knowledge of grammar and structure comes from extensive reading ... there are enough writers here in the cafe who are great at grammar and structure ... and those who are not pretty much know who to read ... still ... if i really feel the need ... then i'll recommend a particular poet to a poet who is not good at grammar and structuring ... rather than talk down to them ... that is a far more non-threatening way to critique ... and when i have done so ... it has always worked ...

[GunMetal]

I change my reviewing style depending on how I feel. I'm guilty of giving half-assed reviews to poems because I just want to get through my read requests. If it is someone I know gives constructive reviews, I will try my best to be constructive as well. And it's true that I enjoy the simple, "great work", and "I really loved this" reviews, but if I get too many, I think to myself, "why do you people really like this?" I want to know what made them like it, how it was interpreted by them. But as I know I'm guilty of those reviews myself, I can't object to them.

[WriterSki7]

People like to be patted on the back. Honestly, i like the reviews that say Good Job and Great Work. And I admit that harsh reviews can be hard to hear. But truth of the matter is that if you're unwilling to accept what you're doing wrong you cannot imporve. So albeit I might feel singed from some reviews, I do take the time to consider them and improve my work further.

Conflicting reviews are another story. Gotten a few of those before and they're confusing as hell.

(if you're just joining the ones at the bottom are the oldest. Read the the poem/rant, then the reviews, and THEN post your response)

[The Analog Kid]

You guys are exactly right. What is the happy medium? In truth, only a few that I know well and have a rapport with will I go back and forth with more in depth reviews. Otherwise, if I remember someone that was brutally honest with me, I have no reservations about returning the favor in a good OR negative way. I will say, if you do that with your garden variety WC member, many get defensive as hell..LOL!

[Dutch Jr.]

Truthfully, I'm guilty of being the overly nice reviewer guy, so I can relate to everything you're saying. I made the mistake of being brutally honest before on here, so now I'm trying to lighten my critiquing up a bit. I try to point out the good things in a person's work, then I might throw in a thing or to they can do to improve. But these improvements I throw in are said as nice (and probably too nice) as I can put it. Personally, I only want BRUTAL HONESTY. If it sucks, tell me it sucks. I'm only going to get better that way. But a lot of writers on this site can't exactly accept that brutal honesty. I only dish out that honesty to the writers I personally know or writers who clarify that they want that type of honesty.