Sturgeon's Law

I have to disagree. If it just looks easy, you sucker more people into writing poetry. And that leads to reading poetry and, eventually, to dancing!

(Thanks for linking to that post. Interesting stuff.)
 

I couldn't agree more with your second sentence. Problem is, the poetry that they write is done without effort, resulting in more bad poetry and less respect for the real work we do. And I'd strenuously argue that it doesn't naturally lead to more reading of poetry--I get dozens of alleged poetry submissions from people who clearly don't really read poetry, contemporary or otherwise.

Good poetry, whatever else it does, doesn't make you think "Jeez, I could do that!"
 

I don't know. I think lots of good poetry has the illusion of ease. Maybe I'm just defensive because I've been told so many times that I "make it look easy" when it comes to rhymed/metered poetry. So, if I accept your conclusion, I have to go cry. :D
 

I should say that I think there's a big difference between people who are obviously so good they make it look easy and people who just look like they're not trying because they really aren't. To use a baseball analogy: it's like vintage Ken Griffey Jr. versus some crappy malcontent like Jose Guillen.
 

what about a poem that confirms a lazy reader's conviction that poetry is better than short stories, plays and novels because its quicker to read?
 

Well, that seems like it could apply to almost any short poem, so it may be a little broad.
 

I was at a reading once where a guy stood up and said, "I write poems in like, five minutes. I wrote this one on the way over here in the car." I thought, "Oh brother, let me outta here." Unfortunately, writing attracts this sort of "anybody can do it easily and without training or effort" attitude. Everyone thinks he's a poet but no one wants to read poetry!