In my earlier blog, Blasphemy, I mentioned the dynamic of the readers to this site—the largest age group of visitors is 18–24, and the audience skews 59% female. Bearing this in mind, is it time for a shift in our approach in writing and reading/assessing poetry?
I know that I have for most part of a year been bellyaching about the use/abuse of AI and the contest submissions being saturated by AI poetry. To be clear: I have no problem with poets using AI for their own use, but am of the opinion that if posted on here, it should ideally be identified as such. No, I am not reopening the old debate whereby I had called for AI to be recognised as a poetry form in its own right. The poets vetoed that idea and it was torpedoed into oblivion.
This blog is NOT about AI and its widespread use, but the poet/reader relationship. As I have said before: ‘Poetry is nothing without the readers’ participation.’ Or, is it?
Please note that it is my prerogative to use visual or other means at my disposal to enhance my poetry—something I have been doing since my first websites, dated 2012. How else am I to post my Venn Diagram poems? This is standard practice on other poetry websites where even your poetry includes a voiceover by AI to reach a larger audience, especially those with disabilities. My images do not infringe any copyright acts. At least my poetry is not AI-generated, unless clearly identified as such. The latter relates to the subject under discussion on this blog.
Red Lily, by Suzette Richards – image generated, 23 January 2024.
An Overview
Scriptwriters have voiced frustration over the trend toward over-explained plots and instant metaphor decoding. The rise of ‘movie-by-committee’ production and global market pressures (especially from streaming platforms) often push for lowest-common-denominator storytelling—where subtlety risks being misunderstood or skipped entirely.
The Readers
Studies show that non-expert readers often prefer AI-generated poems over classics by Shakespeare or Dickinson. Why?
- Clarity & Simplicity: AI poems tend to be emotionally direct, with smoother rhythm and less opacity
- Instant Resonance: They’re designed to connect quickly, often bypassing the need for layered interpretation.
- Modern Style: AI adapts to current linguistic trends, making its poetry feel fresh and relatable.
In other words: there is a shift in cognitive preference—from slow-burn reflection to immediate emotional payoff. In a world saturated with content, people often choose what’s digestible and emotionally legible. AI poetry fits that mould.
The Tension
The above factors create a beautiful tension: The classic ideals of poetry as soul-soothing and life-affirming versus the modern drift toward immediacy and surface-level clarity.
The classic purpose of poetry has been seen as emotional balm, spiritual compass, and a celebration of life. In stark contrast, the modern trends of emotional immediacy, explained metaphors, and the rise in poetry that’s algorithmically optimised for reliability, not mystery, pose unique challenges for the poets.
Nothing has changed—but everything has changed. It’s almost nostalgic to think of the sitcom era’s overt emotional cues—canned laughter, music crescendos, moral wrap-up. Nowadays, the ‘formula’ is subtler but no less prescriptive—like corn on the cob: 'de-leafed' and sold in plastic vacuum bags.
A Cultural Undercurrent
Just as poetic honour dances differently across cultural boundaries—where the defender’s gender may shape perceptions of propriety—reader preferences, too, reveal unexpected tensions. The shift from classical complexity to AI-enabled clarity isn’t merely aesthetic; it reflects deeper cultural currents. Whether in the tribal pride of a defended poem or the algorithmic logic of a generated one, poetry remains a mirror. But whose reflection do we trust?
The Challenge
But here’s the twist: this doesn’t necessarily betray the classic ideals—it reframes them. AI poetry can still soothe, elevate, and celebrate—it just does so in a language tuned to contemporary ears. The challenge is whether it can also invite depth, not just deliver it.
This is not celebrating the ‘pushbutton’ authors of slop, but to acknowledge the craft of creating something in today’s hurried life for just a glimmer of hope among the information overload we all experience.
That is why my Suzette Swan Arc form, with its embrace of oscillation over linearity, mirrors the human psyche far more truthfully than formulaic progression ever could.
Happy quills!
Su