It's a sweeping generalisation but poetry seems to fall into one of three broad categories. Experts doubtless differ or put it more technically, but everyday observation suggests the following divide

"Inner" poems centre on the feelings of the poet. Other people or 'outside' events or person may be mentioned, but the poem majors on the poet's inner world.

"Inner-outer" poems still give prominence to the poet's reactions, responses or feeling. But people, things or events in the world outside the poet's head are also important.

"Outer" poems major on appreciating or observing something in the environment - people, places, events etc. The poet's feelings may be expressed or implied but will not be prominent.

I had a quick look at a run of blogs from a recent month and the poems feel into roughly equal thirds, along the lines above. There are plenty of each type on WOL.

It seems to me that it is harder work to make an Inner poem accessible and gripping for a reader. For an event, person or place to be so interesting that someone has bothered to write a poem about it, it probably is inherently interesting. Even a bad 'outer' poem about it will often, therefore, be of interest.

On the other hand, people are less patient or forgiving with bad poems about other people's inner worlds.

I think the best poets are versatile and do all kinds well. My own hero, Gerard Manley Hopkins, could write 'Thou Art Indeed Just Lord' about his own inner turmoil, and also the Ramblers anthem 'Inversnaid' celebrating the wild countryside.

Do people agree with the division and that it is more demanding to write good 'inner' poems?

good start to a discussion, certainly from my angle i write in all three, but on the outer one - it tends to happen more when i am taking the piss somewhat etc.. lol

in my case, possibly because i have been writing a long term, the inner stuff is usually still fairly easy to write, but making it accessible is another case defo.

Meaty one this DaveYour three kinds are about right, and it is harder to write the `inner` stuff.I`m glad to be part of a group of poets who are working at the coal face and actually turning out stuff and I`m conscious that none of us (not even me!) are Shakespeares, and I`m grateful for the mutual respect and help that those on the site give to each other.But we need to look at our `inner` stuff a bit more carefully.Poets often go off into some private world of their own and forget that poetry is literature, and that literature is about communicating. When so many of the comments are about not `getting` it then the poet needs to take another look at what he writes.I know that some poems are supposed to be about incommunicability but the poet should communicate the incommunicable by means of the communicable. (Browning`s Child Roland?)and give the reader a sporting chance. It is sad to see so many good lines and potentially good poems spoiled because the poet feels obliged to be `mysterious`some thin, short,poems seem to attract a lot af attention (rightly) because of their clarity,and they afford the opportunity to pin a personal interpretation on to them. Why can`t the longer `inner` poems do this also?

I`m glad there is so much maturity on the site (If poetry is in a mess then it got that way on our watch - so we should fix it.

I`m off to find a trench.

Dave, your terms in modern vernacular are well-considered and well-expressed, applicable to all ages and backgrounds of us poets enjoying WOL. I like variety and verity. Abstruseness or deliberate difficulty of interpretation has to be handled quite carefully, because the purpose may be in the abstraction of words and sounds to affect us in the subliminal arena with no real purpose in routine sensibility. However, after some effort, if that purpose seems too outlandish to merit credence, then dump the poem as useless - someone else's thoughts deliberately made indecipherable - and therefore pointless in the published venue. Such verse belongs in a personal diary.

oh eck!

I won the raffle at The Bards last night and chose the complete Poems of John Keats in preference to a bottle of wine (!). In the introduction it covers Keats belief in 'negative capability' - in the poet having no self but just losing their identity in something other than themselves.

It's not clear how that squares with Keats' wonderful poem 'When I have fears that I may cease to be'. The women he loves and the wider world are mentioned and, arguably, are central. But the poem is very much about his own feelings, and none the worse for that.

Tentative conclusion - even the most outer-directed poet will sometimes feel constrained to write about what's going on inside them. The challenge is to write well and make it accessible for other people.

oh eck yersel', Tommy. :)

Seriously, did I get carried away?

Deb,

Can't disagree with anything you say and I especially agree that 'inner' poetry can be a powerful medium for healing. For all sorts of reasons, one being that it is a relatively 'safe' way of opening up those dangerous truths which lurk within ourselves.

Your post reminded me of the "Apples and Snakes" project which takes performance poetry into prisons. I've heard and read very good things about that.

@CBT:- your answer is in the blogs! ;o)

Yes, this makes sense.

I tend to mainly write inner poems because I find it difficult to write interestingly about events I have physically seen - I tend to lapse into either overly boring words, or clichés. Which is iritating 'cause I've seen some pretty interesting stuff...

And yes, writing is a powerful healer. It helped me ascertain that, yes, this definitely happened. I've written so much of it now that it has just become "something that happened", rather than something very traumatic.

Also, Tommy, I find your acronym "CBT" ironic considering we're talking about therapy :')

I take it we are not talking tummy buttons here...

I found I disagreed with most of your opening statement Dave - which just goes to show, that what we all like and appreciate in poetry is different.

I like poetry that is inspired by the inner self and have as much if not more patience with it than I do poetry about the outer environment.

I suppose we have to be careful in what we are defining as outer environment though. I've occasionally dismissed reading poems about nature, thinking they are just that, when in fact they are just metaphors for an inner struggle or concept.

I can appreciate poetry about the outer environment. Have read a poem about an orange that was brilliant. That poetry has to be excellent for it to sustain my interest though whereas anything that makes me feel, doesn't have to be excellent.

I think as poets we should all try to extend ourselves. Crisis is often what gets into writing but if we are still banging on about it and nothing else further years down the line, that's not great progression.

There is a type of outer poetry that I like immensely. That is poetry not connected to us that relates to the world, the suffering of others. Poetry where we use our empathy and humanity to take that next mental step - away from the self.

Belly buttons was my first thought too!