Focus.

Slowly pulling, gently, forcefully.

White trail.

I don't really know for sure what Alex is getting at, but after thinking about it I really don't think I want to know. I liked this Cosmo! You should do a " guess the game based on this poem" post. 

I'm not sure what to do with this.

I'm a masters candidate in poetry--so I feel like I shouldn't comment because my instinct is to workshop.

Why did you go with centered text?  Was there an artistic reason or simply a non-considered aesthetic choice based on a preconceived pop-culture notion of what a poem "looks" like?

I'd have to say that stuff like driving quickly and hastily are two words doing the same work and are both abstract concepts that don't mean much placed against a relative backdrop.

Beyond that the same is true of stuff like revolving and rotating.  Yes, they're mildly different, but not enough so to make a key point.

For those of us who do this for a living we wouldn't really call this poetry--more like a list you might find if a dude wrote some stuff about Halo down on a notecard.  That isn't meant to be as dismissive as it sounds, but only an encouragement to check out a site like Ploughshares (http://www.pshares.org/) and take a look at some really solid poetry.

Not because I hope to discourage or dismiss what you're trying here, but to encourage you to reach a little further than you have so far.

Wow Steven, you've managed to break down poetry to a completely boring formula. I could care less what you think poetry should be, I enjoyed Cosmo's poem. I hate things like this. "This isn't art!" "This isn't poetry!" Maybe slap less rote designations on things and just enjoy them? Keep it up Cosmo!

Steven- Don't you hate it when that happens? You try to make a constructive comment and end up coming off like a dick. I have done that before too.

.... I might have with this comment.

D'oh!

@Frank - Haha, very true. It seemed like he was going to constructively criticize, but in the end, saying someone's poem isn't really poetry and you should know, is pretty pretentious and dicky. I don't think Cosmo deserves that. Steven should have ended with saying that he didn't think the similar words were necessary, and moved on.

Nothing in Steven's comment is anything you won't hear if you take an intro-level creative writing class. Having done so myself, I can say from experience that this is a pretty gentle critique. I guess it's just because we all have different experiences, but I didn't think it came off as pretentious or dickish.

Also, there's some serious irony in complaining that someone isn't offering constructive criticism after making a comment like "I could care less what you think poetry should be." That's hardly constructive.

Cameron- Don't you hate it when that happens? You try to make a constructive comment and end up coming off like a dick. ;)

Seriously- Your comment is funny to me because I have been in many creative writing classes and think his comment would have come off pretentious and dickish in any of them. Not just 'intro' level ones.

I am all for offering advice on people's work, but I think you need to do so with some humility. Not the 'holier than thou' stance his comment took.

I asked that old master of debate, Socrates, to weigh in on this conversation. Here's what he had to say:

"I decided that it was not wisdom that enabled poets to write their poetry, but a kind of instinct or inspiration, such as you find in seers and prophets who deliver all their sublime messages without knowing in the least what they mean."

Frank, I don't see where I came off as a dick in trying to defend Steven. I feel like he said some pretty reasonable stuff, and the response he got was being called names and told that his opinion doesn't matter. If wanting to see a more constructive discussion than that makes me a dick, then, ok, I'm a dick.

Frank, I'd wager I've been in more creative writing classes than you have, and Cameron is right.  I was extremly gentle.  It's not dickish just because I don't happen to agree with you.  If someone posts something and calls it poetry on a public forum, they're begging for commentary.

If they don't want commentary from people who are trained to comment on it, then they'd probably be better off using a far more private venue--like a yellow legal pad.

I used the type of comment that I've had teachers use--actual PhD professors, not the associate professors working on their own degrees.  This is what to expect at any level and I'd bet that the bitmob editors have both given and received far harsher notes.

Here's what's holier than thou: assuming that anyone can take a random set of words, center justify them, and not string them together with any sense of narrative or craft, then call it poetry.
 Or assuming that people who invest their time and their lives in pursuit of a craft won't have a vested interest in seeing that craft treated with respect.

Poets read poetry. They study. They expect and receive criticism. Especially any true writer who wants to improve his or her craft. An inability to consider the past isn't avant guard--it's not art for arts sake--it's just lazy.  I made my comments assuming that, at his core, the original poster really wants to be a poet.

Most poets I know, the ones who publish and sweat and work very hard at it, they anguish over every word, every line break, every piece of white or negative space.  They certainly don't pump out two or three poems a day on a whim and assume that a rough or semi rough draft is enough.

If what you guys are looking for is a pat on the back for everything ever written, or a hearty congratulations for having the energy to type something up, then maybe you should try 1up.com.  I think that anyone who posts here, in a world that's supposed to be about promoting a real connection between writers, readers and the lines between--well that's supposed to suggest a community of more than glad handing congratulatory masturbation.

I can promise you, if what I typed up there--or right here--is in any way too harsh for you, then you are in no way prepared for the amateur world of undergraduate writing workshops--let alone the higher levels, and especially the type of stuff that comes when working as a professional.

And make no mistake, that's what my comments were.  Whether you like it or not, there are conventions about craft, form, discourse and history. It's not fun to hear that in a professional world what we love isn't always what is respected or ratified.  That doesn't mean that we can wish it suddenly to be ratified.

I had to learn this lesson too, and I'm constantly reminded that I'm not quite there yet (and I do this for a living).  I work with professors with books on the way who still get the same type of honest and often bruising commentary.

A lot of time stuff like this gets posted because someone got positive feedback once before and they want the same kind of feedback again. However, this site can't be all about the happy parts about writing something and being congratulated.  Now then, if I made a mistake and this writer never wants to improve, doesn't want to learn anything about the way craft is taught, talked about, or improved--then clearly I was out of line. 

If the original poster would like to have an honest and sometimes painful discussion about how to cultivate strangeness and wring the greatest pouring of affect into their work as possible--then perhaps we should all learn to take things a little less personally.

Especially if you try to convince people like me, or Cameron it seems, that you know what it's like to be in a serious writing workshop when you thought my original comment was even close to over the line. All I can say for sure is that this poetry would be dismembered in a freshman workshop by people far crueler than I am.  I did my best to be extremely polite.

Maybe the problem is that people don't like to admit that there are people like me out there, who spend a great deal of time reading about craft, reading books of poetry and writing for hours a day. It sucks to let it register that people take literature and the pursuit of it as seriously as some people take law degrees or their third playthrough of Borderlands. We want quick gratification, instant success, and when someone who works hard in a field--say poetry--we don't like to really admit that they know more about it than we do...at least if we can, even for a moment, pretend that it's entirely subjective.

But it's not--sadly. A lot of it is, but basic construction and basic awareness are not subjective. Trained poets can tell if we're reading someone who breaks the rules, or doesn't know them. It's just one of the many ways that 4-8 years of education in a specific field create specialization.  I have it, you don't, and that must be awful, but I paid a lot of money for it and I earned it through a lot of really hard work. You don't have to respect me for it--but it's a shame that you choose not to.

By the way, some of that last post was very intentionally dickish. Feel free to click that little negative sign if it hurts your feelings.

First: Wow, I really appreciate all of the comments, guys!

@ Steven - I put the poem in a centered format because I like it. No other reason, really. Also, I purposefully used words that meant the same thing. To me, it desribes Halo: doing the same thing over and over, but sometimes with different results.

And I do appreciate constructive criticism. I've never really written poetry before, and I'd love to see some feedback on my other poems:

http://bitmob.com/articles/poetry-and-games-final-fantasy

http://bitmob.com/articles/game-poetry-final-fantasy-reprise

Jay,

Socrates was way less polite than I am, and would have ripped the poem apart and then damned me for my barely collected rant up above.  Not a great example.  Plus, the god touched nature of poets that carries from Aristotle to Socrates to Emerson--it doesn't suggest that the sublime is somehow unfocused. Inspiration can do a lot for us, but the poet filters that inspiration into a focused beam of the divine.

The socratic example you give suggests that a poet simply "IS" that if he was born a poet then he is God touched--and yes, how dare I argue against his poetry.  If, however, there is some craft to it, then we have to assume that there's more to it than divinity.  I wrote this in response to a question a couple of years ago about the notion that poets neither affirm or deny in poetry--but it seems appropriate (if syntactically dated):

"
I can’t even keep my own internal devil’s advocate from rearing up at this question.  I suppose we have to reach into the coffers of what makes a poem (or a poet for that matter) “real.”  If we assume that the real poet is a God touched or Nature endowed being, then there is some sense of divinity about him.  If this is the case, then the poet might be seen as a diviner or a soothsayer.  These people often speak in riddles via trances to tell the future, or envision something distant and far removed.  In this case, we would have to trust the riddles to exist amidst some truthful rooted origin.  If, however, the poet is any man or woman brave enough to pen verse—then I might question whether each love poem is absent affirmations of falsity.  Beyond that, I’d need to question whether intent to falsity is the same as falsity.  My instinct, I suppose, is to say that I agree with the statement in it’s most hermetic and responsible context, but fear calling it true—probably for the very reasons it espouses poets as those who never lie."

@Chris

I hope you realize the more--dickish (?) comments I've made were not directed at you. I appreciate your attitude about it and the ability to answer the questions and defend your work is a good sign. Defending and being defensive are two different things, and I like that you chose the more responsible and progressive attitude--especially since I was certainly not trying to be mean.  Cameron was right on when he said that my comment was tame, and I can promise you I didn't intend to be dismissive--only honest in the types of appraisals the trained eye will make when seeing the work. I'd be happy to look at the others and I might even post some of my own--since it's only fair to put myself out there if I'm going to offer criticisms of others' works.

@ Steven - Yes, I did realize that. :) And I'd love to read your work as well.

Ah that Socrates.  Always bringing the knowledge.  I have to remember to invite him to the party more often.

Steven - One important distinction I'd like to make is that, as an editor, I don't typically provide feedback like this unless the person specifically asks for it. I see things that are incorrect all of the time (indeed, things that make my eyes bleed), but I don't publicly single people out for grammatical errors, nor have I ever told someone that the words they put down don't qualify as writing. That's just not a good way to foster a community or encourage improvement.

Though I don't presume to speak for him, I also think that Cosmo (sorry Chris, you'll always be Cosmo to me) was just trying to have some fun, not break into the apparently cutthroat world of professional poetry writing.

Jay, when I mention two words that are doing the "same work" I'm not saying it's a grammatical error.  A grammatical error is something else--it's a Strunk and White sort of thing.  Technically none of what he's done is an error. If he's simply trying to have fun then that's more than valid. That's why I wasn't sure how to respond. One of the things we talk about all the time is what "is" real poetry.

I didn't say he wasn't doing real writing, either, I said that professionals wouldn't call it poetry.  That's entirely different than making the assumption that writing for recreation in invalidated. When I want to be dismissive, I hope it's clear, I use a dismissive tone. When I said I wasn't being dismissive, that was also an earnest statement.

I think, no matter what the form, if someone said something about a game that seemed false to you, you would make a comment of contradiction. Why? Because you do it for a living--it's your passion. For me, I breathe poetry--so if something is called poetry I'm naturally invested in that notion. I want to explore it. When I see unfocused imagination I'm not harmed by it, but I do see a vested interest in promoting craft and care.

Chris (Cosmo?) admits that he's new to the form, he says he'd like help. Maybe I shouldn't have made the assumption that a piece posted on a public forum was meant for public consumption and comment--but I did. In the future I'll show more care.

However my tone came off or the conventions of this may be, I don't see how my critique of poetry is any different than your critique of a game--say Dante's Inferno. You see games the way I see poetry. You diagnose them and sometimes harshly.

Just because game makers work in a different medium doesn't mean it's not a completely parallel situation. I'm not sure if you both make games and comment on them, but for me that's how poetry works. When I see it I see it both as a consumer of poetry and a craftsman. This means that I'm both a reviewer and a practitioner.  I'd say if you have a vested interest in talking about what's wrong with a game--even calling those problems sins--then I have a doubly vested interest in making the same sorts of appraisals of poetry.

Still, for everyone's sake, in the future I'll do my best to not only BE nice, but try to SOUND nice.

@Chris Sorry to hijack a thread that should really be about your work. To lighten things up a little, it's nice to see someone trying to write more creatively about games instead of just doing fan fiction. Keep at it.

@Steven You made so many good points in that post that I won't even bother trying to agree with all of them. Instead, I'll tell a funny story about once when I went to a poetry slam. Random members of the audience were selected to be judges and were given scorecards with numbers from 1-10 on them, which they were supposed to hold up at the end of each reading. All but one of the people given the cards held up a 9 or 10 for every poem. The one person who dared go lower than 9 (sometimes as low as 5!) got booed every time she held up a card. Looking back now, that's eerily similar to how people respond to scores on game reviews. Anything less than 8 might as well be 1.

@Jay: I love the "cutthroat world of professional poetry writing." That's why I ended up in philosophy instead of creative writing: there's a lot less blood spilled there!

@ Jay - Hear, hear. Also, if I ever make your eyes bleed I give you permission to let me know. Preferably in an email, because I am much more fragile than Cosmo and wouldn't be able to handle a multi-comment thread discussing the quality -- or lack thereof -- of my writing. 

@Cameron Actually, that does more to indict scores themselves than it does the people having reactions to those scores. 

On the bright side, this thread is getting mad attention. We're famous!

@Steven I think the major problem was just the way you opened, "I'm not sure what to do with this." You took his writing and made it your dilemma. Everything you said was valid, but I disagree that that is the way to open up discussion about someone else's work. 

Just to give an example. When my girlfriend is struggling with a video game I don't open up my criticism with, "I don't even know what to do with this." Hell, I do my best not to criticize -- as hard as it is to resist that reflex -- because I don't assume she is playing to become a master at whatever she is playing. 

You don't know if the same is true here. Did Cosmo create this poem just to have some fun, or is he trying to be a master poet? I would be an ass to assume that he doesn't want criticism, because he is just having fun. It is equally as bad to assume that he wants your criticisms -- valid as they may be. 

Steven- I think your point simply got lost because you had to state your opinion, however valid, in a tone that was distasteful. I am actually all for giving criticism on this site. Many people here want to be professional writers, but I still think you should put any criticism forward in a way that will not scare anyone off from trying something different.

I happen to just be here for fun, but I take this site very seriously. I think you and Cameron obviously have a lot to add to this community, but would hope you would come here with an inclusive attitude, rather than acting like you are a sole authority on an issue. I think your assumption from now on should be that people here do want critique, but don't want to be talked down to, which is exactly what your post was doing.

I wish you well, though.

I also want to commend Chris on his attitude with this discussion taking place on his post.

-Jeff

I just want you to know, you have a much kinder video game world than we have here.  My fiancee and I live in a constant rotation of New Super Mario Bros. ridicule that frequently includes one or both of us picking up the other in frustration and carrying them around the level to make a point. She once threw me at a group of enemies petulantly and got really annoyed when the throw killed them "bloop, bloop, bloop, bloop."

Damn, maybe we are mean.

Well, we have our moments. The girlfriend was a bad example, but you know what I mean. 

Frank, I really would like to let this whole thing drop now if we could, but I have to mention that I actually pointed to a professional literary journal as an authority way above my own.  When I said I didn't know what to do with it I meant, "Do I appreciate it as a fun sort of diversion, or do I assume it's here to be examined?"

I chose to go with the latter. We'd already had one, "What the fuck is this," but mine just happened to be a less--cuddly--examination of it.

Either way, I think it's clear that I'm not only trying to be nice, but that talking about it further in no way helps the thread or discussion. Can we really make any more points, concessions or accusations? I like to avoid it.

Steven- You have to try to be nice? That's sad.

I liked it, Chris. And I went to college, so you should listen to my opinion.

I think Steve rubbed everyone the wrong way when he came in and said he was a professional poet. That shit would piss anyone off.

I'm neither for nor against. I'm just saying.

But...

Lots was said. Imagine all the poems you could have put together with all them words. Truly amazing.