Help an outsider.

[Bartholomew]

I dabble in poetry; but I have problems gauging the quality.

I know poetry I like when I hear it; but what makes a good poem tick?

[kdnxdr]

Hey Bmew,

I was courious if you were referring to the quality of your own poems or of poems of others?

kid

[Rivana]

Um...That's kind of hard to point out just like that. Like any art form poetry is a very personal matter and tastes may vary quite spectacularly.

Generally it's:
A good flow.
Natural sounding rhymes (if it's a rhyming poem).
Good imagery and if it's inventive and new then even better.
Being true to its purpose. A humours poem should be funny, a serious one should make people thoughtful. Etcetera.
Understandable (it should make sense to someone who isn't the author, though not necessarily the same sense you understand).
If it's done in some sort of set form like a sestina or haiku it should flow within the constrictions of that form and still make sense to those who aren't familiar with the style. Nothing should ever feel forced if avoidable or not done intentionally.
The poem should leave something behind with the reader, a feeling, thought or emotion.

These general rules all seem clear enough. The trouble comes when using them to critique or write a poem because people's tastes vary so much. I've read poems that other people thought brilliant which leaved me cold and I've found precious what others thought were mere juvenile scribbles.
I know I wrote some other advice somewhere around here on this subject, but I can't remember where, but I think it was in one of poetinahat's threads.
Anyway -read lots of poetry and find your style. Write lots of poetry and find your style. Listen to critique while still trying to stay true to your own style...'
And that's basically the deal. Good poem is as good poem does, either technically or by the way it leaves you yearning for more...
(Insert another etcetera.)

[Dee]

KTC,

I totally agree with you. I'm one of those people that hates all the "poetry rules". It seems to me, the some of the best poetry is without those boundaries.
If the poetry speaks to you, then it's "ticking". Poetry, to me, is the most subjective of the writing genres. I've read the work of famous poets and found some I like and was touched by and found some in which I was very disappointed.
We all have our own style and voice. Be true to yourself and it will come through in your poetry.

[Norman D Gutter]

I think the best poetry is reader-centered. So often poetry is said to be an overflow of emotions, a personal "essay". So with poetry we tend to get the angst of the writer, the inner feelings, a confession. I've written confessional poems, and think I've done them well. But a steady diet of that will harm the poetic body.

Like prose, good poetry should seek to create a positive reaction in the reader. If all the poet does is spill his/her guts, what is in it for the reader? The personal confession poem has been so overdone that readers are turned off.

Diverse subject matters, focus on the reader (even in the occasional confessional), excellent phrasing, images that appeal to several senses, attention to the line as a unit, inclusion of a variety of poetic devices. IMHO, these are what makes good poetry. A poem ought to look like it spent some time in the brain on its way from heart to paper.

NDG

[Dee]

Like prose, good poetry should seek to create a positive reaction in the reader. If all the poet does is spill his/her guts, what is in it for the reader? The personal confession poem has been so overdone that readers are turned off.

Diverse subject matters, focus on the reader (even in the occasional confessional), excellent phrasing, images that appeal to several senses, attention to the line as a unit, inclusion of a variety of poetic devices. IMHO, these are what makes good poetry. A poem ought to look like it spent some time in the brain on its way from heart to paper.
NDG

I do agree with what you say here... truly. However, it is also a truth that the writer's emotions cannot be disentangled from their writing. This is especially true in poetry. So, while the writer should strive to put something on paper a reader can be touched by, he should also write something true to him/herself. If that is not done, there is a hollowness to the poem that will forever be. A mesh of the two seems to be the way great poetry is created.
I'm working on a collection of faery poetry right now and while it's true I have never been a faery or seen one, there is a bit of my heart and soul in every one of those poems... and they were all written to evoke some sort of feeling or response in the reader. It is my belief that if I only wrote them for the reader and had not included some personal feelings in there, they would be dry and dead to said reader.

[Godfather]

brother, if it sounds good to you
it is good.

[DeniseK]

I think the best poetry is reader-centered. So often poetry is said to be an overflow of emotions, a personal "essay". So with poetry we tend to get the angst of the writer, the inner feelings, a confession. I've written confessional poems, and think I've done them well. But a steady diet of that will harm the poetic body.

Like prose, good poetry should seek to create a positive reaction in the reader. If all the poet does is spill his/her guts, what is in it for the reader? The personal confession poem has been so overdone that readers are turned off.

Diverse subject matters, focus on the reader (even in the occasional confessional), excellent phrasing, images that appeal to several senses, attention to the line as a unit, inclusion of a variety of poetic devices. IMHO, these are what makes good poetry. A poem ought to look like it spent some time in the brain on its way from heart to paper.

NDG

I agree, well said, Norman.