how long will it take before i can write good poetry?

[underground]

i know i will get flamed for asking this, largely because the answer is obvious ("it depends"), but suppose i am now freed from every responsibility other than reading/writing poetry and talking occasional walks in the woods. and suppose i have an undiscovered grain of talent to write poetry. how long? guesstimate. ;)

[Virgil]

It's taken me 25 years and I still don't think I write good peotry. Keep learning and trying.:thumbs_up

[subterranean]

i know i will get flamed for asking this, largely because the answer is obvious ("it depends"), but suppose i am now freed from every responsibility other than reading/writing poetry and talking occasional walks in the woods. and suppose i have an undiscovered grain of talent to write poetry. how long? guesstimate. ;)

Good according to whom?

As any other art works, there are always those who praise and others who criticize. I think don't worry too much about what others going to think and just write. Yes, we need both compliments and criticism to make our works better. But as Virg said, the important things are to keep learning and trying.

[mono]

Tough question, underground, but much of the 'time' seems relative; a poet cannot exactly set his/her watch to when good progress in writing will come along, but it depends on the poet.
Of course, geniuses have existed in the past (such as John Keats, who died at age 25, yet many consider him a timeless poet), but, not to sound cynical, they seem one-in-a-million, if not less. One point that subterranean mentioned speaks loudly; merely because publishers have not stalked you to sell your work does not make it 'bad' poetry. 'Good' and 'bad' poetry, themselves, seem greatly relative; many poets whom I adore, others cannot tolerate, and there exist poets whom I dislike, too, though other readers love them.
If you speak of self-satisfaction in your own writing (which I hope you do), that depends immensely upon your own confidence and esteem in writing; any individual, additionally, and no matter how cliché it sounds, exists as his/her own worst critic. Walt Whitman published several editions of the same poetry primarily because he felt unsatisfied with some poems' flow; readers, regardless, loved him before and after the editing.
The fact reduces itself to the concept that every art shall never reach its prime. A material object (whether paint, clay, ink, metal, musical sound, or knitting work) will never equal the absolute thought and concept inspired to create the material object; that seems what makes it art - the unique expression from something inspiring (and individuals of multiple perspectives can feel inspired by the same things). Every poem, play, and song I have ever written, I have critiqued negatively somehow, and the negativity seems to distinguish itself more than the poem's, play's, or song's beautiful aspects; this seems the inevitable bias of the artist, and I have found that time does not change it, but more the open-mindedness to experimenting.

[Nightwalk]

Hello underground. For me, the first question you'll have to ask is do you really like writing. If you're writing for fame or money, or both, then you might undergo a lot of frustrations as the pressing need for such fulfillment would be a strain. And should you attain what you want, you'll most likely be strongly compelled to maintain it, and the inevitable compromises will surely follow, like suiting your art to conform to a mode which grasps on your claim to fame and wealth. The problem is if you turn out to be forced into creating material that is not of your liking, and you'll be trapped in an artistic rut that would be very hard to get out of considering your situation by then.

And another factor to consider is: what happens if you lose interest with writing in the future? You have to define what place writing has in your life.

If writing is a passion for you, and the creation of it comes naturally as breathing, and you feel as if it's your calling, then you have nothing to worry about. True art knows no time and spatial boundaries: what is not appreciated now will be so in the future. If you write for the sheer pleasure of the act itself and seek no rewards from it other than artistic satisfaction then your as good as made with your craft.

[mir]

about the time you learn to tell whether poetry is good or bad. until then you'll think everything you write is immortal until the next day when you'll think it's trash. i don't even know what good poetry IS. the whole fun is in writing it - for those few seconds afterwards when you feel amazing because you think you've finished something really great . . .

[Pendragon]

Good poetry, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I have had a good bit published. Does that mean I write good poetry? Of course it doesn't. It just means that on a certain day a poem of mine hit an editor the right way. A lot of published poetry I cannot stand. Does that means it's "bad poetry"? Not at all, it just means I don't like it. Write about what you know and have experienced. Make your writing a reflection of you. People will be more likely to enjoy a poem from the heart than a "try-to-be-something-I-am-not" poem. Good luck! :)

[optimisticnad]

underground, you say people will respond 'it depends'. actually no, for me its always just spontaneous, half tow in the night i have an excellent idea etc. etc. today morning on the to uni i wrote the first stanze in my head for a poem that i want to post in the ramadhan karrem forum: here it is:

O. you who fast all day and pray all night
and in your free time search for the bright light
take heed take heed take heed
a blessed month is here so do good deeds!

thats about it, and i wrote that in my head on the bus joourney. not claming its great but just giving an example that theres no such thing as a time line or whatever. of course practise makes perfects, and also knowledge: in terms of creative writing, do you know some of the rhetorical devices? etc. etc. what genre? style? when i write i like my work to be good in terms of subject and theme matter but also...have all these intricate devices etc. etc. that only the trained will spot. off i go to post my poem on the ramadhan page.

[PeterL]

i know i will get flamed for asking this, largely because the answer is obvious ("it depends"), but suppose i am now freed from every responsibility other than reading/writing poetry and talking occasional walks in the woods. and suppose i have an undiscovered grain of talent to write poetry. how long? guesstimate. ;)

You are right that it depends, and maybe you will never write good poetry. And exactly what do you mean by "good poetry"? By some definitions you may already write good poetry. Being freed of everything except poetry reading and writing probably wouldn't help you to write well.

BTW, I love semicolons.

[hitchhiker]

Here is my thought on it. Do you like the emotions you have expressed if so you are already a perfect poet. I like what I have writen weither any one alse does or not I can careless becuase they are my emotions and no one alses.

[whitetree]

life itself is a good poem
so write your life seriously first

[amanda_isabel]

in the eyes of a poet, he is never good as he always improves. as far as i know, time is the one who decides whether or not a poet will be great, because he can have great works but time decieds on its immortality.

in your own eyes, you'll never be a good poet. within the artist there is always this feeling that there is more that he could be, never satisfied. and i guess it;s this that fuels others to write, aside from passion.

hope this makes sense.

[ktd222]

i know i will get flamed for asking this, largely because the answer is obvious ("it depends"), but suppose i am now freed from every responsibility other than reading/writing poetry and talking occasional walks in the woods. and suppose i have an undiscovered grain of talent to write poetry. how long? guesstimate. ;)

Until your words feel how you truly feel.