Are you being taken seriously?

This is an opinion piece, and I anticipate a bit of flak from some people, but I write this post from a position as an editor, publisher and owner/founder of four successful online poetry groups. And do bear in mind, this piece has been written to try to help poets improve their chances of being noticed and possibly even published in due course. 

Please comment in the box below if you want dialogue on this subject. I'm very happy to reply to serious questions and comments. 

How can you be taken seriously as a poet? Firstly there will be some who might reply that they don't really care whether they are taken seriously or not. But I suspect that most people who write poetry want their work to be taken seriously. At the minimum, most poets would rather not be ignored. And yet that is exactly what I see happening in my online poetry groups. Poeple post poetry that is ignored by most. Or it is poetry that fails to get accepted for anthologies or other publications. 

Pen Names. Firstly, writing under your own name, or at least a pen-name that is not ridiculous is an absolute requirement. How you represent yourself is very important, Those who use contrived pen-names, or noms de plume that are jokey do not generally have their work taken seriously. At Wheelsong Books our editors tend to ignore those who we can't take seriously, and the first impression - the name of the poet - is important in setting the atmosphere for any review. 

Emojis. Secondly, the use of emojis and other embellishment in a poem is often a turn-off to a reviewer or reader. The question must be asked: why does the poet use lots of smileys, hearts, and other emoticons in their work? Is it because they lack any confidence in their own writing? It is certainly a distracting feature, and as an editor/reviewer I tend to ignore poems with an overload of emojis. 

Upper case lettering. Thirdly, poetry that is presented totally in upper case lettering seems amateurish. In old money, upper case lettering was considered shouting in text and social media cultures. In poetry, the overuse of upper case lettering makes it appear as though the writer is desperate to be noticed, and again, they lack confidence that their writing alone will keep the attention.

Be original. Fourthly, if you wish to be taken seriously as a poet, make sure your work is original. There is nothing worse in poetry than reading old, jaded phrases that others have used before. The forced rhyme or the predictable line is a clear indication that the poet is struggling to express themselves and maybe has lost their way.

AI Generated poetry. Finally, as an addendum to the last point, you won't be taken seriously (and may even be sanctioned) if you persist in submitting or posting poetry that has been generated by artificial intelligence. You would be surprised by how many posts each day we reject from our online poetry groups. You might also be horrified at the number of people we ban from the group if they persist in this practice. It's dishonest and might even be breaking copyright laws.

So there you have it. Five key points to remember if you wish to be taken seriously as a poet. I believe most of these apply to online poetry groups worldwide, and definitely apply in the publishing world.

Steve Wheeler 

Photo from Wikimedia Commons

Poetry and Artificial Intelligence

Occasionally we host guest posts on this blog. They are often topical, provocative or simply informative. This guest post by Dr. Iain Strachan is all three. As always, your comments and questions are welcome.

Can AI pass the Turing Test today? by Iain Strachan

In a Invisible Poets Road Show in Derby, Steve Wheeler asked me if I thought AI had passed the Turing test. I replied "Yes ... and No." 

I had just read a poem "A chatBot named Christopher" about Alan Turing, where I had claimed that the answer is "No".

However, AI-generated poetry continues to fool us again and again. I have been fooled by it. I once praised someone's Villanelle on Invisible Poets that on closer examination turned out to be AI generated.

Why does this happen? I think it's to do with the way we interact with pop songs. I asked a member of my family "When you listen to a pop song, do you think about the words?" He replied "Not really. If I know the words, I'll sing along to the tune, but I don't think about what they mean."

I expect most people are like that. Pop songs have to be singable, so the lyrics fit the tune, and so we are only engaging with the words on a superficial level. So they need to flow smoothly, have simple rhyme schemes etc.

Human poetry is different. It doesn't always have a smooth iambic pentameter rhythm; for example:

For thou'rt slave to fate, chance, kings and desperate men (John Donne), or
The soil/is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod (Gerard Manley Hopkins).

See how the strong syllables pile up with no light syllables between. The Hopkins also has enjambment, where the sense carries on over the line break. Song lyrics don't do this - normally each line stands alone.

It's the same with AI generated poetry. It is polished, and flows nicely; each line is self-contained. But, whereas with a pop song, you can find depth and meaning in the lyrics: a story told, or a telling metaphor, if you examine an AI poem carefully, you won't find any depth; it falls apart as a sequence of poetic sounding phrases and clichés strung together with no clear overall message.

So if you find a poem that seems super smooth and polished, take a closer look before you enthuse about it. Don't give the AI fakers their serotonin boost! If it's AI, it will fall apart and you'll find the words of my chatBot poem to be still true:

Chatbots today can't pass the Turing Test
Their show of understanding's fake, at best.

Iain Strachan

Image used under a Creative Commons License

Why some poets use Artificial Intelligence

In my previous post I explored why some people behave badly online. As a psychologist, it fascinates me, but I guess I have an insight into online behaviour from twenty years of academic research. I would argue that this makes Invisible Poets one of the safest online poetry groups in existence. This... and the fact that we also have a computer science expert on our moderator team...now, how many other poetry groups have that?

You see, one aspect of bad online behaviour, and indeed bad poetry behaviour, is the fact that some individuals resort to using artificial intelligence to write their poetry for them. As if this was not bad enough, they then have the gall to claim it is their own work. They are quickly found out and subsequently ejected from Invisible Poets. We use various software to detect AI generated poems, but we don't always need it. AI generated poetry is not that hard to detect. When we spot an AI poem we then delete the post and if necessary (especially for repeat offenders) we eject the 'poet' from the group. They are often simultaneously banned from several other affiliated online groups. 

Why is posting AI generated poetry such a crime?

Firstly it's dishonest. If you use AI to write a poem and then post it to a group with your name attached, you are deceiving the members of the group. Those who do this are firstly touting for responses, likes, comments etc. Maybe they do so because of some psychological inadequacy. More likely they do it because they are lazy or untalented. They do so because they want a short-cut to being recognised by the poetry community. Sadly, many poets are taken in by the deception. 

Secondly, it's plagiarism. If you use an AI model to write poetry, you can be assured that what it is really doing is trawling the web and finding work written by poets, which it then captures and uses in its construction. That's essentially stealing from poets some of whom may rely on their writing to earn their living. 

Thirdly, it's a terribly shallow way to produce poetry. Often the AI model doesn't construct a poem in a way that makes it emotional, or full of soul. That's because the AI model has no emotion or soul. The work tends to be shallow, unconvincing, and certainly predictable. The end rhymes suck. The meaning is often lost because then end rhymes are forced. There is often no meaning or direction in the poem. It is bland and uninspiring. 

There are numerous tell-tale signs that a poem has been written by AI. I won't bore you with details here, but when our Admin and Moderator team spot a poem that seems to be AI written, they are often correct. 

Why do people resort to AI generated poetry? My view is that they are either lazy, or lacking in any literary or creative talent. They are simply jumping on the bandwagon to see if they can gain some quick influence. Some have actually published entire books of so-called 'poetry' that has been completely written using AI. That's not just dishonest and lazy, it's also probably fraud in some legal contexts.

So if you are tempted to use AI to write a poem, don't do it. You'll be found out. You'll be ejected from the group. And you will be embarrassed when you are called out.

Steve Wheeler

Image used with a Creative Commons Licence

Poetic devices 6: End rhymes

What was the first poem you ever read? Bet you can't remember. Neither can I. Chances are it would have included end rhymes. Nursery rhymes are for children and this is usually their first exposure. It will probably have included the simplest end rhyme scheme like this:

Baa baa black sheep
Have you any wool?
Yes sir, yes sir
Three bags full

Or maybe something a little more complex like an AABAAB end rhyme scheme:

Jack and Jill
went up the hill
to fetch a pail of water
Jack fell down
and broke his crown
and Jill came tumbling after

The Cow Jumped Over the Moon, Jack Spratt and several other well-known nursery rhymes feature the exact same format.

The end rhyme adds to the attraction of the verse, and helps us all to remember the story. Plenty of adult poetry is also composed of end rhymes, sometimes in a more complicated pattern such as a Villanelle, Limerick or Sonnet. And yet, when people first start out writing poetry for themselves, they usually default to ABAB rhyme schemes, often in the shape of a 4 line quatrain. 

There's nothing wrong with this of course. We all have to learn somehow. But it's no co-incidence that Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT also default to this same format when asked to write a poem. It's a telltale sign if you are trying to detect poetry generated by AI. 

Tyger, Tyger by the English poet William Blake is a classic example of an AABB end rhyme quatrain:

Tyger, Tyger burning bright
in the forests of the night;
what immortal hand or eye,
could frame thy fearful symmetry?

It's simple but incredibly effective in setting the scene for an atmospheric poem full of imagery. 

But here's a caveat - although end rhyme poetry is something just about every poet gravitates toward, it can also be a trap. Poets can spend hours agonising over how they are going to get their poetry to rhyme. Some end up sacrificing meaning and credibility by coming up with trite and banal end rhymes that detract from the beauty of the poem. 

You know what I'm talking about. It's a trap best avoided. If you are writing poetry with end rhymes, do make sure that the poem doesn't lose its sense or purpose because of a silly little end rhyme that matches sonically, but actually damages your poetry. 

Steve Wheeler

Image from Wikimedia Commons

Other posts in the Poetic Devices Series:

1. Simile

2. Metaphor

3. Repetition and refrains

4. Alliteration

5. Assonance

Poetry Turing Test

If you've read this blog previously you'll know that I'm both a poet and a computer scientist. Recently I have been researching the alleged capability of OpenAI's ChatGPT to write poetry. Some have expressed concerns that AI will soon replace poets, artists, musicians and other creatives. So I thought I would perform a little experiment. Here's a challenge for you: A sort of poetry Turing Test if you will. Can you tell the difference between a computer generated poem and one written by a human being? 

Earlier today I asked ChatGPT to write a Pantoum about love. I also wrote a Pantoum, based on the same rules of the fixed form poem. Both are below. But which one is the AI generated poem... and which is mine? I welcome all of your comments. 

1: LOVE ON FIRE

Love, a feeling that never fades,

An eternal flame that burns within,

A bond that lasts through all the shades,

A journey that never has an end.

An eternal flame that burns within,

A warmth that spreads from heart to heart,

A journey that never has an end,

A connection that's never torn apart.

A warmth that spreads from heart to heart,

A spark that ignites a fiery passion,

A connection that's never torn apart,

A love that defies all reason.

A spark that ignites a fiery passion,

A bond that lasts through all the shades,

A love that defies all reason,

Love, a feeling that never fades.

2: LOVE ON FIRE

I dream of love that never fades,

Igniting flames that rage like sin,

A fire that warms when cold invades,

Hot furnace, blazing deep within

Igniting flames that rage like sin,

A spark that leaps from heart to heart,

Hot furnace, blazing deep within,

A conflagration work of art.

A spark that leaps from heart to heart,

With embers that can never die

A conflagration work of art,

A love that reaches to the sky

With embers that can never die,

A fire that warms when cold invades,

A love that reaches to the sky,

I dream of love that never fades

Image licenced under Creative Commons