My thought is- that you need to decide, on a poem-by-poem basis;Chicklet said:
Angeline said:I personally would do what I love, but a poem needs to appeal to its intended audience like any writing. So I know if I use the standard conventions of the genre--metaphorical language, imagery, rhythmic construction, and so on, I write better poems.
As a reader I want a poem to move me--I want it to evoke whatever it means to through those conventions. If I'm not doing that as a writer, I know I'm not reaching readers. And why share writing with anyone if you know it's not communicating?
One of the hardest things for me to learn as a poet--and I think this is because I've worked as an editor, always trying to make writing clear and straightforward--has been that poems need to show with poetic conventions, not explain in the conventional sense. That is very different from prose--even moody, evocative prose--because even there you mostly need to be straightforward.
Learning to write more subjectively, subtly--to convey without explaining--is what the craft of poetry is all about. And like anything, if you read about the process, read poetry, and then practice, you get better at it. This is how a person gets taken more seriously as a poet.
Feedback, I'd learn from and not worry about the nasty factor--some people have to make themselves feel good by beating on you. We all get that. Personally, I tend to ignore any feedback that isn't explained. If someone can't tell me *why* my poem is crap, they probably don't know what they're saying.
moved to its rightful place 
IChicklet said:
