What makes great poetry such?

[IceM]

Clearly there is no textbook defining how to discover the innovativeness or achieve the brilliance of poets from history. But I find myself in a predicament.

I am an Urban Word poetry writer (for those of you who don't know what that is, look up Anis Mojgani, Miles Hodges, or a slew of others on Youtube). Of course, I don't want my rhetoric and morals to be stale and mundane; I want it to mean something. I want my poetry to transcend itself and engage the audience because, when I write poetry, I don't discuss minor issues or whimsical wants; I address morals and major concerns. I want my poetry to mean something.

So how do I do it? What noticable features set Baudelaire's lines and Shakespeare's sonnets apart from everybody else?

Of course, I can't achieve greatness instantly. Sustainable brilliance, I assume, takes years of practice, trial and error, and extensive research of other poets to see and understand great writing. But you also need poetic know-how. I'm engaging in the first three aspects; hopefully you can help me with the fourth. All recommendations, guidances towards other poets, or online sources would be appreciated.

Thank you,
IceM

(P.S. I realize it's difficult to offer recommendations with no poem to compare it to. The issue with Spoken Word poetry is that, because it emphasizes emotion and body language more than conventions of formalized poetry, it loses its essence when read. Thanks nonetheless).

[JBI]

It's in an illusion. Somehow great poetry lies well, to the point where you believe it, meanwhile knowing it is lying.

Like Wordsworth's Ode, as a philosophical text it is complete stupidity, but somehow, in the way he presents things, it is convincing, and one feels as if one too has fallen from the innocent state, despite the whole allegory he creates of the fall being a rather flimsy sophism without any real grounding.

Why is it that we believe? If I knew the answer, I would be famous already.

[Alexander III]

I think it is something which comes natural, as Keats said like leaves to a tree.

I do know what makes it great and knowing in details would somehow degrade the sublime in it.

A great poem is one you read or hear and you are left with that feeling after, once again I do not know how to describe said feeling but I am sure we all know what I am talking about.

As to creating greatness, that cannot be done, it comes innate. Now Imo not saying that means it is visible from the start, it may take years for a poet to mature unto greatness or he may have already found his peak in adolescence.

What I do know is that it cannot be taught, only a bad poet can learn from his peers. By his peers I mean contemporaries, naturally he shall learn from the past. Now that does not mean he cannot pick thing up here and there from his peers but only a bad poet can directly improve his aesthetic by learning from his peers. He can learn philosophy, maturity ect from his peers but never aestethic.

This is only my opinion, don't shoot me.

[Gregory Samsa]

Lord Baron said that to become a poet you must be in love, or miserable. :)

To be honest with you I don't think there are any easy shortcuts to write good poetry. It's like everything else all about practise. I mean Emily Dickinson wrote nearly eighteen hundred poems and only eight of them were published during her lifetime.

[miyako73]

If you want to be a poet, publish a good novel first, then write a mediocre poetry collection. Like Maya Angelou.

[Seasider]

Lord Baron said that to become a poet you must be in love, or miserable. :)

.
Wasn't that Lord Byron? Or have I missed a genius.
Here's some advice from one of the greatest English poets, IMHO, Alexander Pope. From Essay on Criticism


True ease in writing comes by art not chance,
As they move easiest who have learned to dance.

[LMK]

The issue with Spoken Word poetry is that, because it emphasizes emotion and body language more than conventions of formalized poetry, it loses its essence when read. Thanks nonetheless.

I am reminded of the Opening Ceremony of the 2010 Winter Olympics in Canada and Shane Koyczan reciting his poem "We Are More." Listening to the author (found by accident on YouTube according to the commentator)speak his own words I probably felt more of what he intended to project than if I had read it.

Is 'Slam' poetry the same as 'Spoken Word' poetry? I live under a rock where this is concerned.

[Aragorn Elessar]

Well, I suppose it's just like writing any story; there is no particular method. For many people, it just comes. As Seasider said: True ease in writing comes by art not chance,
As they move easiest who have learned to dance.

Art is spontaneous. Poetry, as well as any art, comes 90% from the heart, 10% from the head, as I like to say. Of course, scientifically that's not true because all the heart does it pump blood... But you get the idea.

[stlukesguild]

Well, I suppose it's just like writing any story; there is no particular method. For many people, it just comes. As Seasider said:

True ease in writing comes by art not chance,
As they move easiest who have learned to dance.

Art is spontaneous. Poetry, as well as any art, comes 90% from the heart, 10% from the head, as I like to say. Of course, scientifically that's not true because all the heart does it pump blood... But you get the idea.

Ummm... I think you completely missed what exactly Alexander Pope was saying in that little quote. If anything, he was of the opposite view of art... suggesting that art is not a spontaneous gushing of emotions but rather the creation of someone who has spent endless hours in long study and practice and mastered the skills and techniques to such a point that ease and spontaneity of creation are a possibility. But the spontaneity and ease are an illusion. Creativity of any sort is closer to the old adage: "one percent inspiration, ninety-nine percent perspiration." Picasso had similar thoughts, declaring, "Inspiration exists, but it has got to find you working."