Criteria of Quality

A discussion of Drew Morse's preface to The 2007 Rhysling Anthology: The Best Science Fiction, Fantasy, & Horror Poetry of 2006 touched on his assertion that "we lack an important source of motivation to be constantly pushing our craft and our vision, as well as a clear sense of what defines 'quality' when it comes specifically to SF/F/H poetry."

I am invariably baffled when people say that quality is difficult or impossible to define. Criteria of quality that I seek in poetry include:

1) It has a compelling sound in the ear and feel in the mouth, which makes the reader want to read it out loud.

2) It follows the rules of its form correctly; i.e. if it rhymes, the rhymes will be both perfect and appropriate.

3) It uses figurative language to talk about things which are difficult or impossible to talk about literally.

4) It takes advantage of the way the linguistic parts of the brain react to certain patterns by triggering interest and pleasure. Repeated sounds (rhyme, alliteration, etc.) and regular rhythm set up expectations, kind of like the setup and punch line of a joke, creating and releasing tension in enjoyable ways. Most poetic techniques are designed to stroke the brain somehow, and the more and better a poem does this, the higher its quality.

5) It looks at the ordinary in a way that makes it extraordinary, to make it fresh and interesting; or else it looks at the extraordinary through the lens of the ordinary to make it comprehensible. It offers a new perspective.

And so on. Regarding speculative poetry in particular, criteria of quality include:

1) It must excite the reader's sense of wonder. This is why people read speculative anything; if a speculative poem doesn't do this, you might as well be reading the phonebook.

2) It uses language -- often by warping words and grammar in nonstandard but still coherent ways -- to transport the reader out of ordinary reality.

3) A science fiction poem will follow the rules of known science and be free of factual errors.

4) A horror poem will bestir emotions on the horror scale; i.e. it will be creepy, disturbing, thrilling, terrifying, shiversome, horrifying, grotesque, etc.

5) A fantasy poem will present the impossible in a plausible way; its magical aspects will follow rules which are different from this world's natural rules but internally consistent.

Don't settle for "I know what I like when I see it." Pay attention to what you like, lay favorite pieces together and look for similarites, until you can figure out specifically why you like something and what makes it great. Then when someone attacks your favorite literature (or whatever) as being inferior, you will be able to chop their pathethic argument into dogmeat. You'll also be better equipped to distinguish good from mediocre from awful material -- and do so quickly -- which is handy if you're standing at a book merchant's table trying to decide whether or not to part with your hard-earned cash.

Criteria of Quality

A discussion of Drew Morse's preface to The 2007 Rhysling Anthology: The Best Science Fiction, Fantasy, & Horror Poetry of 2006 touched on his assertion that "we lack an important source of motivation to be constantly pushing our craft and our vision, as well as a clear sense of what defines 'quality' when it comes specifically to SF/F/H poetry."

I am invariably baffled when people say that quality is difficult or impossible to define. Criteria of quality that I seek in poetry include:

1) It has a compelling sound in the ear and feel in the mouth, which makes the reader want to read it out loud.

2) It follows the rules of its form correctly; i.e. if it rhymes, the rhymes will be both perfect and appropriate.

3) It uses figurative language to talk about things which are difficult or impossible to talk about literally.

4) It takes advantage of the way the linguistic parts of the brain react to certain patterns by triggering interest and pleasure. Repeated sounds (rhyme, alliteration, etc.) and regular rhythm set up expectations, kind of like the setup and punch line of a joke, creating and releasing tension in enjoyable ways. Most poetic techniques are designed to stroke the brain somehow, and the more and better a poem does this, the higher its quality.

5) It looks at the ordinary in a way that makes it extraordinary, to make it fresh and interesting; or else it looks at the extraordinary through the lens of the ordinary to make it comprehensible. It offers a new perspective.

And so on. Regarding speculative poetry in particular, criteria of quality include:

1) It must excite the reader's sense of wonder. This is why people read speculative anything; if a speculative poem doesn't do this, you might as well be reading the phonebook.

2) It uses language -- often by warping words and grammar in nonstandard but still coherent ways -- to transport the reader out of ordinary reality.

3) A science fiction poem will follow the rules of known science and be free of factual errors.

4) A horror poem will bestir emotions on the horror scale; i.e. it will be creepy, disturbing, thrilling, terrifying, shiversome, horrifying, grotesque, etc.

5) A fantasy poem will present the impossible in a plausible way; its magical aspects will follow rules which are different from this world's natural rules but internally consistent.

Don't settle for "I know what I like when I see it." Pay attention to what you like, lay favorite pieces together and look for similarites, until you can figure out specifically why you like something and what makes it great. Then when someone attacks your favorite literature (or whatever) as being inferior, you will be able to chop their pathethic argument into dogmeat. You'll also be better equipped to distinguish good from mediocre from awful material -- and do so quickly -- which is handy if you're standing at a book merchant's table trying to decide whether or not to part with your hard-earned cash.

Criteria of Quality

A discussion of Drew Morse's preface to The 2007 Rhysling Anthology: The Best Science Fiction, Fantasy, & Horror Poetry of 2006 touched on his assertion that "we lack an important source of motivation to be constantly pushing our craft and our vision, as well as a clear sense of what defines 'quality' when it comes specifically to SF/F/H poetry."

I am invariably baffled when people say that quality is difficult or impossible to define. Criteria of quality that I seek in poetry include:

1) It has a compelling sound in the ear and feel in the mouth, which makes the reader want to read it out loud.

2) It follows the rules of its form correctly; i.e. if it rhymes, the rhymes will be both perfect and appropriate.

3) It uses figurative language to talk about things which are difficult or impossible to talk about literally.

4) It takes advantage of the way the linguistic parts of the brain react to certain patterns by triggering interest and pleasure. Repeated sounds (rhyme, alliteration, etc.) and regular rhythm set up expectations, kind of like the setup and punch line of a joke, creating and releasing tension in enjoyable ways. Most poetic techniques are designed to stroke the brain somehow, and the more and better a poem does this, the higher its quality.

5) It looks at the ordinary in a way that makes it extraordinary, to make it fresh and interesting; or else it looks at the extraordinary through the lens of the ordinary to make it comprehensible. It offers a new perspective.

And so on. Regarding speculative poetry in particular, criteria of quality include:

1) It must excite the reader's sense of wonder. This is why people read speculative anything; if a speculative poem doesn't do this, you might as well be reading the phonebook.

2) It uses language -- often by warping words and grammar in nonstandard but still coherent ways -- to transport the reader out of ordinary reality.

3) A science fiction poem will follow the rules of known science and be free of factual errors.

4) A horror poem will bestir emotions on the horror scale; i.e. it will be creepy, disturbing, thrilling, terrifying, shiversome, horrifying, grotesque, etc.

5) A fantasy poem will present the impossible in a plausible way; its magical aspects will follow rules which are different from this world's natural rules but internally consistent.

Don't settle for "I know what I like when I see it." Pay attention to what you like, lay favorite pieces together and look for similarites, until you can figure out specifically why you like something and what makes it great. Then when someone attacks your favorite literature (or whatever) as being inferior, you will be able to chop their pathethic argument into dogmeat. You'll also be better equipped to distinguish good from mediocre from awful material -- and do so quickly -- which is handy if you're standing at a book merchant's table trying to decide whether or not to part with your hard-earned cash.

Criteria of Quality

A discussion of Drew Morse's preface to The 2007 Rhysling Anthology: The Best Science Fiction, Fantasy, & Horror Poetry of 2006 touched on his assertion that "we lack an important source of motivation to be constantly pushing our craft and our vision, as well as a clear sense of what defines 'quality' when it comes specifically to SF/F/H poetry."

I am invariably baffled when people say that quality is difficult or impossible to define. Criteria of quality that I seek in poetry include:

1) It has a compelling sound in the ear and feel in the mouth, which makes the reader want to read it out loud.

2) It follows the rules of its form correctly; i.e. if it rhymes, the rhymes will be both perfect and appropriate.

3) It uses figurative language to talk about things which are difficult or impossible to talk about literally.

4) It takes advantage of the way the linguistic parts of the brain react to certain patterns by triggering interest and pleasure. Repeated sounds (rhyme, alliteration, etc.) and regular rhythm set up expectations, kind of like the setup and punch line of a joke, creating and releasing tension in enjoyable ways. Most poetic techniques are designed to stroke the brain somehow, and the more and better a poem does this, the higher its quality.

5) It looks at the ordinary in a way that makes it extraordinary, to make it fresh and interesting; or else it looks at the extraordinary through the lens of the ordinary to make it comprehensible. It offers a new perspective.

And so on. Regarding speculative poetry in particular, criteria of quality include:

1) It must excite the reader's sense of wonder. This is why people read speculative anything; if a speculative poem doesn't do this, you might as well be reading the phonebook.

2) It uses language -- often by warping words and grammar in nonstandard but still coherent ways -- to transport the reader out of ordinary reality.

3) A science fiction poem will follow the rules of known science and be free of factual errors.

4) A horror poem will bestir emotions on the horror scale; i.e. it will be creepy, disturbing, thrilling, terrifying, shiversome, horrifying, grotesque, etc.

5) A fantasy poem will present the impossible in a plausible way; its magical aspects will follow rules which are different from this world's natural rules but internally consistent.

Don't settle for "I know what I like when I see it." Pay attention to what you like, lay favorite pieces together and look for similarites, until you can figure out specifically why you like something and what makes it great. Then when someone attacks your favorite literature (or whatever) as being inferior, you will be able to chop their pathethic argument into dogmeat. You'll also be better equipped to distinguish good from mediocre from awful material -- and do so quickly -- which is handy if you're standing at a book merchant's table trying to decide whether or not to part with your hard-earned cash.