A recent poem concerning Paedophilia generated a lot of commentary from members on the blog section.

Some time ago, around the death and subsequent funeral of Margaret Thatcher, a similar level of commentary was also garnered.

However, in almost all cases, the comments were either invective or strongly opinionated attacks about the subject matter and not about the quality, attributes, balance, form etc of the actual poem itself.

So as the discussion title asks

"Can subject matter, overwhelm a poem's worth?" and perhaps a subsidiary question,

"If so do most people shy away for such subjects?"

Yes and yes.

You're probably expecting more of an answer than that so here goes - even though it's making me late for my hair appointment.

Personally, I find some subjects too vile to want to read or listen to poetry about them. I can read about it in newspapers. I can hear about it on the news. I don't want to think that someone has wasted hours and minutes crafting language about it. I don't want to read it - no matter how much alliteration, rhyme or imagery it's got in it!

Is that stroppy enough?

Can subject matter drown a poems worth? Yes, it can! No, not in all cases!! Part of what makes poetry beautiful is no one man/ woman thinks the same.. what do I know? I made it to 10th grade.. yet I've seen greatness with an uncontrolled brain!!

My response to this was a bit emotive and rash in reaction to something I'd recently heard that turned my stomach.

I'd agree with David and Shawn - people can write whatever they want and whether or not the subject matter drowns the content is subjective.

By and large, personally, I can accept raw or unpleasant subject matters if the poet had direct experience of the subject themselves or is getting some kind of catharsis from the exercise. I baulk at a poet with no experience of it whatsoever, just exploiting sad scenarios for 'artistic' value.

The key word in all that is personally. I have strong likes and dislikes but accept that not everyone's the same.

It's the reason I can't enjoy political poetry.
If you're predisposed to agree with the "message" - it's a good poem; if you're not - it isn't.
Check out the blogs on here where someone has said they really liked the poem despite strongly disagreeing with the content.

There are two approaches to subject matter in poetry. Either you start off with something to say and find the best or the most direct way of saying it, or you discover what you're writing about during the writing of it. Most poets are doing different amounts of both.

The problems with the first approach is that it can mean that you force the expression of the poem into shapes it won't go into, or you're so concerned that the message is right it becomes distorted out of shape.

The problem with the latter is that you might actually discover anything to say and just end up with a muddle...

I prefer the latter but I think if you prefer the former you need to ask, in what way is this better than writing a letter to the papers, an article, or even a telephone call? A poem isn't just a message, it's also a work of art.

Well said Steve.

Yes, and especially if it's political in tone, like John says above.

A subject like paedophilia is the same as writing about, say abortion. It's a massively sensitive topic and not something I'd personally choose to confront poetry-wise. You need to be really informed, as with any political poetry worth its salt, but even then it can seem forced and this can subtract artistic value.