/lit/ - Literature

>>21534801
You have been measured in this, but fail, i think, to see my central issue. I am not against *requested criticism*. If a poet goes and opens himself up, and says publicly "i am not finished with this poem, i have been working on it, but i sense some problems that i'm not sure i can fix alone", and someone comes to them and provides the service of effective criticism, then i am overjoyed at that person's growth and the critic's service rendered. What I am absolutely against is a person whose work is finished being dismantled as an exercise to please the audience of the forum, or chatroom, or what have you. It's rude and inevitably going to fill arteries with acid. I do see something infinitely wrong with the greentext in this instance, there is a clear disconnect there, namely the idea that the expression or mood was ephemeral, and that the critic is trying to help them for "next time". as if one's mother dies every week. the point being that such poetry often involves -striking while the iron is hot-.
I do think criticism can be a vehicle for personal growth, but the ridiculous notion that anyone who shares a poem opens themselves up to the attack of every stumpfuck who glances at it is a rot at the root of the culture.
The fact that the general poet has been made to feel comfortable dismantled, his voice vitiated, and made to believe he is being assisted, to me is the worst of it.
I understand that I seem unreasonable, but I do not concede to the foundations of this wretched abuse, and cannot stand beside you as you would have me. again, you're a better man than i am, gunga din.