Judge's Report

[David Campbell]

Below is part (comments on individual poems are omitted) of the judge's report for a poetry competition run by the Peter Cowan Writers Centre in WA. It's not a bush poetry competition, but I thought it might be useful to reproduce the comments here because of the references to rhyming verse. It's also interesting to see how the judge broke down the 348 entries. Significantly, only 52 (15%) were deemed interesting enough to be worth a second look. I entered a free verse piece which didn't win an award of any sort, so I can only hope it managed to make it into that 15%!

Cheers
David

Judge's Report, Glen Phillips Poetry Prize 2012

If my count is correct there were 348 entries. Reading them all was fun, like exploring a new English-speaking city: at first it seems familiar but it soon reveals quite a few surprises.

Several times I recognised a poem from a reading or workshop, but rarely did I remember who'd written it. When I did, it was difficult to be objective and judge the poem without thinking about the poet, but I did my best.

126 of the entries went into the reject pile on the first reading. I wanted to tell these writers, you are not Keats. Be yourself! Stop trying to be 'poetic': it isn't working. Listen to your own 21st-century voice and write down its words. In many cases I wanted to shout, for heaven's sake, drop the rhyme! It's crippling you! Rhyme can be entertaining; rhyme can increase the impact of a poem by highlighting and unifying ideas. But it must be done skilfully or it's a fast-track to dreadfulness. If your idea of a poem is a string of clichés with lame or painful rhymes at the line-ends, you'd be better off to spend your entry-fee money on...poetry books! If you want to be taken seriously as a poet, read widely. Familiarise yourself with all the ways in which poetry has been written during the past 50 years or so, and let this cornucopia of styles influence you. Perhaps start with a recent anthology aimed at students. A 'poet' who doesn't read new poetry is like a 'painter' who never goes near a gallery.

118 entries went into the 'meh' pile. These poems were reasonably well-written and often expressed worthwhile ideas, but lacked the 'X-factor', the 'grab', the originality or depth to draw me back for a second and third reading.

52 entries went into the 'frustrating' pile -- poems that contained some original ideas or language but were not well-written enough to shortlist. I felt like writing to each of these poets individually to say, you've got something! Keep writing! Keep reading! Go to workshops!

52 poems were interesting enough for a second look. At this stage my left brain wanted to help with the judging, so I made a spreadsheet. I gave each poem points for six aspects of specialness -- impact, appropriate tone, aesthetic quality, originality, economy of language, depth -- and deducted points for weak spots. A numeric sort floated up most of the poems my right brain had already picked. After that it was fairly easy to choose the winners and highly commendeds, but I agonised over the commendeds and the encouragement award. There were about ten more poems I would have liked to commend or encourage! Choosing the overall winner was difficult, too, like looking at the fruit-bowl just before shopping day: there's one apple, one orange, and a weird tropical thing that no-one's dared to try. Which has the best flavour? It depends who's tasting.

Jackson (aka Janet Jackson) 23 October 2012

[David Campbell]

Agree entirely with your comment about the spreadsheet approach, Marty...it's a very poor instrument. Might as well try measuring intelligence with a ruler.

[David J Delaney]

oh! well, looks like I need a loooonger ruler...

[Heather]

A spreadsheet is a silly idea - because of course the judge is going to give more points to those elements of poems that her brain already says she likes - it's almost like she needed the maths to prove what she liked.

I'd agree that:

Rhyme can be entertaining; rhyme can increase the impact of a poem by highlighting and unifying ideas. But it must be done skilfully or it's a fast-track to dreadfulness. If your idea of a poem is a string of clichés with lame or painful rhymes at the line-ends, you'd be better off to spend your entry-fee money on...poetry books!

There's nothing wrong with that thought -we've all seen some awful rhyming poetry - just as we've seen some amazing rhyming poetry (Mal McLean's winners for instance) and then there is awful free verse and beautiful free verse

[Zondrae]

I'm coming in on something I know little about.., This particular competition that is.. but

I just had to say. I admire Ms Jackson for having the courage and conviction to voice her true thoughts. I have been asked to act as judge (on a panel mostly) a few times recently. I tried to get out of it but have been pressed into it. The first time I was quite timid and allowed my judgement to be totally tramped on. I am learning to stand firm. I may not agree with everyone but in future I will sort out the reasons I select a poem or discount another, and stick to my guns.
I have now experienced 'the judge on the day' rule from both sides.

[Neville Briggs]

I disagree that the spreadsheet method was somehow mechanical. The reason for my view is that the points awarded for the spreadsheet were based on broad poetic merit. such as originality, economy of language, impact etc.
If the judge had used a spread sheet to note things like, typos, syllable counts, imperfect rhymes, pedantic punctuation etc, Then I would agree it would have been mechanical.

I thought it was an excellent statement of fine judgement.

[David Campbell]

One of the underlying problems with the spreadsheet approach is that it requires the creation of categories and then, because scores are presumably added, the assumption that these categories are somehow discrete. And equally weighted...unless further hard-to-justify reasons are invented to rationalise unequal weighting.

In this case, how do you separate (for example) 'impact' and 'originality' or 'depth' and 'aesthetic quality'? There's too much overlap. If you give a poem 8 out of 10 for 'impact', it's unlikely to get 3 out of 10 for 'originality'. In fact, a poem's overall impact will depend on all the other components so it seems highly probable, following on from Heather's comment, that the numbers will merely reinforce decisions already made.

I'm happy to use numbers when marking maths tests, but trying to do it with any form of literature opens up a huge can of worms. If you deduct points for 'weak spots', is it one point off for each fault? What happens if the same fault is repeated several times? Do you overlook grammatical mistakes in a high-impact poem that is original, deep, aesthetically pleasing, economical with language etc. etc.? This is what makes judging (and reviewing, for that matter) so tricky. A numerical system can unreasonably punish very good writing...and I make that observation in the light of a couple of excellent poems recently posted.

I reckon the judge's most telling general comment is the one about the apple, the orange, and the "weird tropical thing". In the section of her report not included, it seems that she might have given first prize to the "weird tropical thing"!

Cheers
David

[Terry]

Hi David,
I didn’t enter this one myself as I was away for quite awhile earlier this year and missed most of the Comps.
One thing that really impressed me in the Judges’ comments was her advice to be yourself and to write poems about your own lifetime, but at the same time learn to do it well.

I suspect you would need something unbelievably good to win that comp. with a rhyming poem, but I maybe wrong; it would be interesting to see what type of poems were awarded.

If I may, I would suggest to all aspiring poets (myself included) if you want to learn more about writing quality competition poetry, just watch and read those poets such as David himself who are consistently winning competitions and even when they miss out they’re never far away. This means they write the type and quality of poetry that appeals to most judges.

Cheers Terry

[Neville Briggs]

I reckon the judge's most telling general comment is the one about the apple, the orange, and the "weird tropical thing". In the section of her report not included, it seems that she might have given first prize to the "weird tropical thing"!

Yes indeed.

Although I thought the most telling comment could be,

Which has the best flavour? It depends who's tasting.

In the end is it all a subjective matter of taste ?

[David Campbell]

You're right, Terry, her suggestion to: "Be yourself. Stop trying to be 'poetic'" is excellent advice. In any competition there are always poems where the writer is simply trying too hard, quite possibly imitating a style that is inappropriate. It's important to understand your strengths and weaknesses. Far better to write about the familiar, especially when starting out, and then perhaps experiment more as confidence develops.

I'm flattered if anyone wants to use my poems as reference points, but the same word of caution applies. Some people (including judges) don't like my verse at all, particularly when it comes to subject-matter, and would cheerfully consign much of it to the bush poetry 'rubbish' pile. So it's a case of interested poets taking what seems useful, but developing a style that sits comfortably with individual experience.

As Neville points out, tastes vary!

Cheers
David