According to Elliot Engel, writer of, A Dab of Dickens & A Touch of Twain, Emily Dickinson–who is thought to be one of our greatest American poets–didn’t necessarily know how good she was. He says:
As opposed to the famous poets of her era, who were widely published and renowned, Emily Dickinson was unknown. Only seven of her poems were ever published during her lifetime; she was reviewed in print once. The poetry reviewer simply said:
These poems are obviously the work of an oversensitive, coy, ill-disciplined, well-bred, hysterical spinster.
Imagine how depressing it would be to be a poet with the genius of Emily Dickinson and to read this and only this about your poetry.
This particular poetry reviewer obviously didn’t have a clue, which makes me wonder how much stock we should put into poetry reviews. Like most writers, I’ve had my share of good reviews and not-so-good ones. The thoughtful ones I pay attention to because I always want my work to get better. The ones that seem to have an axe to grind, I disregard. In what ways do you think reviewers are helpful or harmful? Are poetry reviewers needed at all?
But, I guess, the bigger question is this:
Would you keep writing even if the one review you received in your lifetime was incredibly negative?
As always, I’d love to hear from you.
P.S. HAPPY HOLIDAYS!!
P.P.S. (added 12/22) Donald Harington, known as “America’s greatest unknown writer,”harbored what he called a ‘long-standing antipathy’ toward the New York Times Book Review,” which he considered “abusive of its power,” and so he started using the names of unfavorable reviewers, he said, as the names for “villains, dread diseases, and pernicious plants in several of [his] books.” An unkind reviewer of one novel became the villain in a subsequent novel….
P.P.P.S. I’m an ex-shrink who writes award-winning novels. Check out my books here.
Email subscribers and facebook friends weigh in:
“There will always be someone who will have something negative to say about anything that one says or does. Personally, I have never selected a book or chosen to see a film based on what some critic had say or write about it. I like the line in the Ricky Nelson song, “Garden Party”. “You can’t please everyone, so you got to please yourself.” As talent comes in many diverse genres, I have very little respect for both judges and critics. To me, most of them are probably jealous has beens who can no longer cut the mustard themselves. I’m not bitter because I’ve received some unflattering review or anything either. As a matter of fact, the few times that I have been judged or critiqued were rather pleasant occasions. I just don’t think we have a need for critics and judges in these areas. The critic who wrote about Emily Dickinson was probably some fat, odious, cigar smoking, bastard with bad breath whose wife left him because he was so obnoxious. (There’s my “critique on him)” Ts.
and:
“”These poems are obviously the work of an oversensitive, coy, ill-disciplined, well-bred, hysterical spinster.” Wow! What a thing to say. Poor Emily. In answer to your question, negative reviews have no bearing on whether I continue writing. When I choose to write it’s for myself. That anyone else is even interested in reading something I’ve written is just amazing to me.” – Elizabeth H.
and:
“I think that when it comes to the creative and performing arts, reviews are basically useless and may even be counterproductive if an artist takes a negative review too much to heart. Beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder and it should be up to the individual to decide for themselves if they enjoy a particular poet, artist, or performer. The act of creation itself is sometimes more important than the end result. I think of the old Sesame Street song “don’t worry that it’s not good enough for anyone else to hear, just sing…sing a song!” -Charlene S.
and finally:
“Wow, that reviewer was off his nut!” -Kimberly F.
I think I’ll always write. I mean, Emily Dickinson must have gotten some good feedback too – even if it wasn’t an official, published “review.” Just getting stuff accepted for publication is a review in and of itself. I’m sure she had friends and family, as well as whoever was publishing her stuff tell her that her work was good. If that’s all I ever get is the encouragement of my friends and family, that would be enough for me. I think it’s enough for a lot of people.
Really good point, Sonja. I’m sure she got encouragement from somewhere. And maybe she didn’t care anyway. Maybe she believed in herself to the degree that no one could stop her.
I think I’ll always write, too, no matter what the “reviewers” say.
Thanks for commenting!
Thought this was an interesting view of the role of critics.
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/02/books/review/Kirsch-t-web.html?_r=1