In my earlier days of writing poetry I had a very fixed view on when a poem was finished or not and once I had 'let it fly' so to speak, I would never change it.

Many years later I have recently found myself re-looking at old work and re-writing it and (to my mind) significantly improving it.

This led me to think whether this was typical practice or not amongst poets? Does anyone have a view?

A very good subject for discussion, Graham. WH Auden, apparently paraphrasing the French poet Paul Valery, said: 'A poem is never finished, only abandoned.' At the beginning of the year we reviewed a book called The Process of Poetry, where a number of leading poets discussed in interviews their different drafting and re-drafting methods https://www.writeoutloud.net/public/blogentry.php?blogentryid=133371

An interesting point, Graham. I tend to make changes to poems in the days and weeks after I write them, although once they have been posted or published, I usually refrain from further editing. Having said that, I'm sure that my old work (going back to 2003) could benefit from revising; it's just having the time to get round to it!

I see my earlier work as a style in development and now seem to significantly reduce the wordiness of poems written fifteen years ago or so. I think every word need to say something if possible.

Auden was right. 'A poem is never finished merely abandoned.' One could argue that all art of any worth is unfinished. Just as stories do not end, they become other stories. Don't they?

I am looking back at earlier poetry these days. Even though I have hopefully grown and changed, I like to keep the old stuff as is as a reminder of the journey.