So I wrote a poem..

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

I'd love to see some more!
Are you here all week?
Is the veal any good!


cheers...j/k pooley! It was average ...sort of...you're in primary school, right?

*immediately regrets posting it*

[Brian37]

[...]
Do you have any suggestions?
[...]

Hmmm... Try using the word "heart" more...

You were an enigma to me once.

But now you have carved your face in my heart

Your face eternal you evoke my long hidden emotions.

Without you I experience a drought in my heart.

Without you a meaninglessness to my heart,to my life,to my
long hidden emotions.

You are the heroin of my life.

You are the one who I've been waiting for.

For your presence makes my heart skips a beat.

Your heart illegible to my mind.

Your smile as though the moon.

Your gaze confuse my rhythmic heart beat for your love

Your eyes reincarnate my heart in your engaging soul

You are my only and true love.

For we are the only and truly soul mates.

Also - try rhyming. Bad poetry, that rhymes is often amusing.  As in:

Roses are red
Violets are blue
I'd like to stick
My penis in you.

Roses are red
Violets are blue
Nobody is obligated
To listen to you

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

I wrote it when i was 15.

[Brian37]

I wrote it when i was 15.

Still, doesn't matter, the fact that you write is how you end up putting out something people like, not that you put out something people don't like.  The repetition will produce something people like as long as you are doing that while reading the works of others, not just famous poets, but even local unknowns.

As I said before, I wouldn't be at 700 plus if I gave up after my first critic. You click on the link in my sig, and read enough, sure you will find some you go "jeeze that sucked" but read enough, you will hit some you like. 

My point is just keep doing it, for you, don't do it for the critics, don't do it expecting to become the next Poe or Plath, do read others works like I said, but be you. Nobody stands out by being a parrot or always trying to please everyone all the time.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Very, very bad poem.

He had the guts to post original work. What do you have besides catcalls from the peanut gallery?

Demonstrate your qualifications to critique poetry, by posting poetry you've written. Only then will your opinion have any worth.

[Brian37]

Very, very bad poem.

He had the guts to post original work. What do you have besides catcalls from the peanut gallery?

Demonstrate your qualifications to critique poetry, by posting poetry you've written. Only then will your opinion have any worth.

Not quite. 

Art is subjective. I've learned over time that what is important is being yourself, you wont hit every time but if you do it enough you will hit eventually. Critics are a dime a dozen. But I do agree, if you aren't putting your own stuff out there, you sound even more ridiculous than the critics who do, but even then, even those who do write sometimes fail to understand that what you may like someone else may not like. 

I've seen well metered 50 letter word attempts at Shakespeare that I thought were junk. And then read short poems like Dickinson that I like. For me, what is more important than mimicking others, is being yourself. I value message more than anything else when I read.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Well, I think if someone criticizes another person who opens himself up to critique using such vague and useless terms then the critic should show, in one form or another, what he thinks is wrong with the offering, and how the critic's idea of poetry finds its expression.

Everyone's a Monday-morning quarterback. It takes skill to perform.

I'm not confusing "good" poetry with technical prowess, either. My opinion on art is that if it moves the reader/viewer/listener to feel the emotions the artist felt at the moment of creation, then the work is a success on that level. Judging art on technical criteria is like judging a piece of machinery on its beauty.

[vorlon13]

I think I want to touch myself























in the throat


























































to induce vomiting

[ignoramus]

You're such a bastard Vorlon.
How could you? He's just a kid!

[Brian37]

Well, I think if someone criticizes another person who opens himself up to critique using such vague and useless terms then the critic should show, in one form or another, what he thinks is wrong with the offering, and how the critic's idea of poetry finds its expression.

Everyone's a Monday-morning quarterback. It takes skill to perform.

I'm not confusing "good" poetry with technical prowess, either.  My opinion on art is that if it moves the reader/viewer/listener to feel the emotions the artist felt at the moment of creation, then the work is a success on that level. Judging art on technical criteria is like judging a piece of machinery on its beauty.

My opinion on art is that if it moves the reader/viewer/listener to feel the emotions the artist felt at the moment of creation, then the work is a success on that level.

Yep, and that is all it takes right there. Which is why I am no fan of critics. I think it is ok to have your favorites sure, and it is also ok to not like something personally. But art really is in the eyes of the viewer and that changes from person to person.

There was a brief show on Bravo called something like "The Next Great Artist", and the judge on it said what I knew for a long time, "Art is simply that which works".