I know many writers work to speak to and about themselves, to explain themselves to self or others. However, I have trouble getting personal value out of something so very personal and private almost. I also have trouble with the ideas of princess, magic, and hearts on sleeves. There are too many cliches here, though I'm glad the writer is speaking so positively to herself. I hope the act of writing has healed something inside her.

Not to pander, but I believe the above comment missed the point about why this person wrote this. It takes guts to write, more guts to say what you really think about yourself, and even more to admit to open judgment. "Sillymillie," I like you, and not just because I happen to be a boy. I like this because it tells me who you are. I work in addiction treatment, and the hardest problem people have psychologically (in my experience) is simply not knowing who they are, and not knowing why that has happened. You understand both, it seems, and deserve a gold star, thumbs up, pat on the back, etc. Keep writing! Don't let chauncy artistic elitism get you down. I don't believe this notion that you were writing to heal yourself either. Thinking that you should be healed opens up for debate your health--a matter which I expect only you know, and not the rest of us. To reiterate: I like this very much. I wish most of my addicts could write self poems half as well.

There's nothing elitist about ems2's comment; it's merely pointing out the abundance of cliches. I tend to agree. Writing like this gives me an understanding of sillymillie on a very base, universal level. Yet there's nothing exciting or particularly interesting about using common, heard-daily turns of phrase. Furthermore, I think that the poem doesn't give me a character that's endearing. It seems self-serving and shallow to exeunt with "I can't help it if my strengths attract the boys." It leaves a bad taste in my mouth. And, in light of the lines that preceded it, the whole thing comes off as pithy, as if the writer is oppressed, and we should admire her strengths in the face of such indomitable (which are what, the presence of love/lust?) circumstances.

I think the true problem in writing--and workshops in general--is sunshine-pumping. Millie, this poem needs work, and quite a lot of it. But keep at it.

Again...Completely missed the point of why to comment constructively, as opposed to destructively: behind every story there is a person--weather you want to admit that or not. And a person isn't going to want to keep writing if all they hear is, "Really needs work, but I can't tell you what that work is, I can only point out the flaws." So in light of the fact that there aren't any HELPFUL suggestions as to make this thing better, let's just say that it could be more specific. It could point out specific instances of "feeling like a princess" or "attracting the boys," which perhaps might be analogous to other life experiences she's had. You don't have to not admire someone's strengths just because they said them in a way you disapprove of.

To sum up, "It leaves a bad taste in my mouth" is not helpful, and not constructive. So why even go down that road? At least "sunshine-pumping" has the potential to increase the association of writing with a positive energy...Whereas the Clench way would do what, exactly? Mock us into becoming better writers? I've known sports coaches who try this same tactic on their teams, only to get a whole lot of quitters mid-season, 'cause they won't stand for verbal abuse. So next time you want to blithly be unempathetic (Clench), think about not just your audience, but what your audience might feel, and how those feelings might in turn affect the quality of work being displayed. Any good teacher knows that.

It's cute how you pick and choose lines like "it leaves a bad taste in my mouth," when in context, I provide a FREAKING quote to back up my opinion. I implied that the cliches needed to be removed, which is far more constructive than what you did, which is say "blah blah blah, I like this," without ever actually offering specific examples of why you like it (which is what constructive criticism is), other than some arbitrary idea of "I understand who you are."

Writing is a craft, and your insistence that "cliches be damned," and that it doesn't matter how you write it, is a ludicrous notion. When it comes to cliche, there IS a distinctly correct way to use them--or in this case, not use them at all.

Furthermore, I'm not really sure how I "verbally abused" or "berated" anyone, besides offer a blunt reaction to the piece. I didn't attack sillymillie at all, I just talked about the character that is presented. You, on the other hand, chose to directly equate the author to the character in the poem (this is never explicitly stated as a self-reflective poem, either. POV is not a strong enough indicator), a no-no if you've ever actually attended a workshop or knew how to critique.

To sum up, fuck off Mr. Nuts, you're the exact type of person that is worthless when it comes to actually critiquing.

A "comment" is what there is to provide here. Not strictly "criticism" or "critiques." Let's say that someone is operating at a "lower level" of writing. Why not just accept that and only try to say helpful things, as opposed to incorporating shrewd powers of negative language and cliche-bashing. Yes, cliches are cliche for a reason. Maybe, though, there's a nicer and more helpful way to say it--so that your words can actually have a GREATER impact on the writer. That was all I was getting at. It is an idea that isn't granted as much stock as simply finding fault with another's work, and I think it should, so I raised the level of debate.

I picked out your phrases (Clench) because you said them. You CHOSE to say "fuck off" and "arbitrary" and "blah blah blah" when "critiquing" me just now, so what confidence does that inspire in your ability to critique? Why on earth would I take you seriously, anymore? Why would anyone who reads this? Please just reconsider the way you comment. I probably should have phrased it like that the first time.

Also--this, right here--not a writer's workshop. It's a discussion...I should've made my discussion more open-minded, sure...But I have valid points that don't deserve the kind of language you (Clench) attributed to them.

I think it's interesting that you've decided what everyone here is supposed to provide. I must have missed your coronation ceremony. I would argue that the things I wrote in my initial comment were miles more helpful than what you wrote. So I was blunt, but at least I provided things that can be improved upon. You did nothing.

And I CHOSE to say things like "fuck off," "arbitrary," and "blah blah blah" because YOU turned this into a personal attack. Then, for you (MR. NUTS) to whip around and whine about how words hurt and attempt to play the victim, it's laughable.

Honestly, I think you might have HAD valid points initially, but they flew out the window when you attacked ems2 for "chauncy (by the way, what the hell is this word?) artistic elitism," and equating me to some sort of brow-beating, abusive sweat-jockey. You're the one that turned this personal. So that's why I want you to take your silly indignation, hold it up to a mirror, turn around, bend over, and shove it up your ass.

wow, you guys, nice fight in public, but I doubt it helps the original writer too much with critiquing her poem. She's just watching the ping-pong match. I can't imagine my original comment was "artistic elitism" since I don't have an MFA, and am not a professional- just a small-time writer, and BTW, I won't ever post here again, nor share a poem, given this kind of exchange I'm seeing. I do have, on the other hand, over two dozen poems published around the web, so I do have some experience. But my comment (I hope) simply said that the use of cliches such as "princess in me" (I think of Barbie), "heart on sleeve" (I think of Hallmark), "magic of a ride across the sky" (I think of Grimm), detract from a more serious consideration of the topic of self-affirmation. In addition, what comes across to me as self confirmations is doubtless of value to the writer, a public statement of worth and respect, but for poetry, one also needs to touch the reader such that the reader also begins to examine his/her own life, beliefs, viewpoints, etc. Poetry is not only about the writer, but how it leads a reader to consider deeper issues of living from a novel and hopefully beautiful ("artistic") way.
Gentlemen (I use that term loosely here), I hope this comment may be considered positive, helpful, and not elitist. I'm also an English teacher, by the way.

^

Oy vey, spare us the schmaltz. So we're both throwing insults, who cares? It happens all the time. I don't actually hate anyone on the internet because I don't know them. And anyway, I defended you. But by all means, take your ball and leave.

"We have created this standard in hopes of creating a stronger community and an open exchange of thoughts and knowledge between authors. We here at N&GN passionately believe that authors blossom in environments where they can share their own ideas, methods, opinions as well as benefiting from those of others. Feedback is a cornerstone of our foundation."

I apologize for my part in this. I didn't intend to devalue or undermine the website. I was attempting to make a point which was easily misconstrued, making it de facto not a point of reason, but a point of contention only. Sorry.

this is what the paying customers in the bleachers want to see. this is better than hockey!

Evidently, there's a bit of princess in everybody.
The sentiment in this is sweet. In the end, it comes down to whether you (silliemille, not the critics) are writing solely for yourself, or (and this would appear to be the case, because you posted it) if you are in pursuit of a higher form of the craft. And it is a craft, and technique is something all serious writers hone, hone, hone. The gift is in both the finished product, and the process. As I said, the sentiment here is sweet, but unless it is simply a song to yourself, you might do one simple exercise with it- just for the fun of seeing what you can come up with.
Remove all references to yourself.
Part of the fun of creation is playing with the medium- you have all the words in the universe at your disposal; how else might you express what you feel?

I came late here but it seems things resolved themselves.
It is true that the cornerstone of our philosophy revolves around feedback and growing through feedback.
We might not always want to hear the truth, when someone finds our work less-than-pleasing. However, writers cannot address flaws that may exist in their works if other feel restricted in speaking their minds or if they are unwilling to consider the opinions of other- and often more experienced- writers.

That said, we also need to remember that these are opinions. We can consider the opinion and advice of others and look at our work with an objective eye- determine whether the criticism applies to what we are trying to accomplish or not, utilize the advice or thank the adviser for their thoughts but discard the advice.
I founded The Grace Notes Foundation myself- and N&GN is but a part of what we do but a very important part. When I set up this community it was for the purpose of open exchange and the chance for authors and poets to consider the advice/opinions of others from various stages of the process.
I am a fairly accomplished writers in the fields of poetry, fiction, cnf, and screenwriting. In all these areas I worked and struggled over the years, constantly growing/learning/evolving. I am not finished evolving either, even writing since childhood and working seriously for 16 years solid. A huge part of this process for me has been seeking and considering the thoughts of other writers. It's not always easy to hear a negative opinion. It never fails to piss me off, even now-- but only at first. But after that initial "Fuck YOU!" feeling, I consider. I look at it as a challenge to address whatever I may not have accomplished, whatever fell short of the mark. I don't defend my work or explain reasons for certain choices.
The results are that, inevitably, my work improves as a result-- and here I mean not only the piece in question but also works in the future. Each lesson sticks with you and you carry it with you as a writer, adding it to past lessons.
If a writer intends to pursue this- if they want to write seriously and someday maybe be paid to write- feedback and criticism are essential. The ability to take in feedback, process it, learn from it, is the only way to perfect and hone whatever natural talents nature gave you.
I have never read a perfect manuscript- be it poetry, fiction, essay, or a screenplay, be it long or short, there's always something that could be done to improve and for every reader there will be yet another way to accomplish it. I have also worked with hundreds of new writers through the Grace Notes Foundation and the thing I have learned above all others is that those authors who refuse to consider criticism never improve. Even very talented writers tend to grow stagnant without constantly working to become better.

My own opinion of this piece follows much of what has been said: Though the piece has some interesting moments, I am no fan of abundant cliche and think the author might do well to re-think the use of these common phrases, try re-wording or even playing off these cliches to create the same feelings and points but with fresh language. I particularly enjoyed the phrase "the sand is singing to me" and think the contradiction could be tremendous in terms of the senses- but preceding this line, the water is described as simply "wonderful" which detracts from the potential. I would highly recommend a revision with an eye toward removing the common or rearranging the cliches to breathe some fresh air into them. Also, take a look at the senses and use then to your advantages: sight, smell, taste, touch.

To Harmoni,
I'm glad to see a thoughtful if belated response to the above exchange. I'm glad someone is paying attention here. However, I will stand by my first statement that I won't participate here anymore, and have requested instructions on how to delete my account, to no avail. Thus I am making this public request to the admin staff for information on how to withdraw my account here. Thank you for your attention.

EMS2,
I'll check on your account and attend to removing it, if you want. However, I think it seems like an extreme move- deleting your account- considering that this was not even your post. Arguments happen and an apology was made. Had you made a complaint directly to the moderators, we could have deleted the thread entirely with respect to the author.
We do host discussion forums, after all, and you're all free to go there if you'd like to have a lively debate or a knock-down verbal brawl, whatever.
But I find it personally offensive that you would deem our entire community worthless based on a commonplace disagreement. I put a great deal of energy into The Foundation, managing a dozen different projects myself, in order to give author and poets this kind of literary environment in which to learn, grow, and socialize.
But if you want your account deleted, fine.
Best of luck elsewhere.
Harmoni