Read this article in Rattle.
I guess mostly it bugs me because why not more poetry? In whatever form someone chooses to write it.
1) If you don’t participate in the culture or technology do you have the skills and knowledge to offer a nuanced critique.
2) When choosing your evidence it’s a bad look to trash what you yourself selected. Instead, choose a poem that challenges your argument.
3) You gonna criticize an egalitarian platform and in the same breath prop up a system that lacks transparency and has, as a system, failed to be inclusive.
4) You don’t need rejections to write poetry you want to share. You need to be able to think critically, like a reader. And understand where your expectations and the reader’s overlap.
5) Good poetry is subjective.
6) Criticizing the voice of poets on instagram? Ummmm have you ever read the bland broth that is most lit magazines?
7) Instagram Poets and poetry on Instagram are two separate things–could have at least recognized that many establishment accepted poems have used social media to spread to wider audiences. Good Bones, anyone?
8) Smoke Signal analogy only makes sense if you assume the users of the Smoke Signal app didn’t also have The Sit Around and Discuss app. Poetry fits on a page sure, but it can also fit a screen. Poetry can serve a different purpose on Instagram than it does in a book.
9) rupi kaur and Nikita Gill might as well be the same? That’s just a lame and useless foot note.
10) Who cares how Kim K got famous and makes her money. Do you want to be famous and rich? Or do you want to write good poems? The two don’t really go hand in hand. Are we holding out for that moment when poems are as popular as beautiful naked people?
11) On that note, humans are varied and complex enough to like pornography and poetry. Instagram poetry and book poetry and spoken word poetry and slam poetry.