But Doug, isn’t this “lack” of a definition just a relativistic rationalisation (not from you, I stress) to allow non-poetry the same "status" as poetry?
As Bob said to Angel earlier, surely we need definitions and classifications to talk intelligently about the subject. Of course, we shouldn’t be too stringent in our definitions, but surely an all-out relativistic taxonomy can’t be a good thing?
I suspect it's many things, & changes with whoever is making a
definition, yet, somehow or other, this sloppy set (or whatever the
term is) still has a hold on us, & we each of us thinks we know what
Every time I thought I had a definition that fit, I'd find something
that was outside the wall yet struck me, as yes, poetry.