The contest.

Why is it when i read the contest winners, there are many poems that arnt very good > . > they lack an inner meaning.. ive seen many with just gibberish with random spacings and new lines, too create a masking of it seeming good. i wish not too win ANY contests, or even that you read my work, i only wish that in future, you truley read the poem and understand it as a whole with the emotion from the writer, and not just because others have dubbed it good.. i know that not all of us have the same perspective, but there are certain things we all know are writen from empty words.. thanks

I agree fully with you dude, some of the stuff that win are trash. But i disagree with one thing you said.

"you truley read the poem and understand it as a whole with the emotion from the writer"

in reply to this
Poetry is so vague in elements these days, you could write a poem about world war 2, but not mention the killings, corspes or nazi's and someone could pick it up and interpret it as a poem about something that has nothing do to with WW2. but As for the Contest Winners and quality of the poems I agree.

Dude you completely shitted on him. I think he ran off the site crying

It is never (or should never) be about liking or disliking a poem, it is about execution and prowess.

Personally, I detest Ted Hughs' poetry, but that doesn't impair my judgement; I can't deny he was a poet.

'Maybe if you are a critique but an ordinary reader, like myself
focus more on the "emotional connection" with the poem rather then the "physical attributes" of the poem'

That's why I used Ted Hughs as an example. I realise, as a writer, their is worth in his poetry, so I can understand and appreciate why he would win competitions and evoke in many an emotional connection and reaction. Because I appreciate and understand that, the fact his poetry doesn't do that for me doesn't make me question whether his poetry should win competitions.

Without reading critically and consciously (as readers, writers and people) we limit ourselves to superficial understandings of a poem, which can make it difficult to understand how a poem we think is awful would win a competition.

I'm saying it how it is in the 'literary world', the model which almost all poetry competitions, and certainly all long standing poetry comps' follow. I don't have to agree or disagree, and I haven't started where I stand, personally.

They may be unwritten and they are certainly challenged and evoled, but there are rules of sorts...poetic 'standards' , fashions and movements without which we'd not even be able to recognise a poem. We'd have no poetry, thus, no competitions.