Likes:

[billy]

what kind of poetry do you like to read?

[Indie]

A diverse range, from the classic writers like Dickinson, Poe, Coleridge, Sexton, Plath etc, to more modern contemporary poets, both known and unknown.

---

Genre-wise, I've no particular genre I like above all others, though there are a few I dislike

[addy]

I do like the relatability of contemporary poems-- plus I tend to find quirkiness endearing . No real genre preference though I do tend to skip love poetry (sorry ) and the more cliche goth ones.

[billy]

tecktak did a father dies poem and that's the style of stuff i enjoy. i enjoy clever nonsense poetry that can be interpreted by all in a similar fashion. some nonsense poems are too far gone for anyone to understand em.
i'm also eclectic. while most of the poets i like come from the 1st three quarters of the last century. like addy there are certain types i skip over, which could be seen as a bad thing. i'm not keen on Dickinson enough to skip over her, unless it's a poem of the day; i read all those. some of the classics by Shakespeare, Milton etc also get skipped over i'm not sure why, as i like a lot of they wrote. maybe the question should have been; Why do you like the poetry you like?

[Philatone]

Relatable content is helpful for me. I like things I can understand, which I'm sure limits me to a degree, but I can't escape my preferences. Heavy abstractions draw me away. I don't necessarily need a linear progression in a piece, provided enough context is given so jumps aren't confusing.

Specifically, I enjoy Renaissance poetry (though I haven't looked at it in some time now), Modernist, some Romantic, and more contemporary work--do have a hard time with nonsense pieces though.

[Leanne]

I like poetry that does what it sets out to do, then goes a little bit further. I don't really care what genre, form or era as long as I can find some context for it, though I do tend to demand a great deal more from love poetry because it's so overdone and difficult to find a new angle (and so many "poets" don't even bother to try). Same with war poems, actually.

[abu nuwas]

No sort; all sorts. But the question is peculiar. I might like a particular vase, for its shape, its glazes, who knows? Do I like vases in general, or of that maker? No reason why I should. And down the ages with verse, and other art-forms, it has often been so, that one or two works make the poet's or artist's name, and rightly so. Critics may want to puff up some other dire turgid pieces, as they are obsessed with ''middle-class, middle-brow'', and must earn their keep. What chance of keeping their jobs if the taste of Joe Public is good?

I like anything which has something --usually creativity really-- and it doesn't matter whether it is tear-jerking Victorian parlour poetry (''Rattle his bones over the stones/He's only a pauper whom no-body owns''), old Chaucer, who I fancy I see fussing about in Smithfield, Herrick, Blake, a good South London man, a lot of Shakespeare, ( I see him knocking around the Globe, too, getting pissed with Ben Jonson and the gang) many of the Romantics, Tennyson, in smallish doses, then the Hardys, Brookes and so many: the well-known WW1 poets, Chesterton, Belloc, even a bit of Eliot recently. So many, too many. But in every case I can think of, they wrote a few reams of balderdash as well.

There would be some American chappies......but as to Aussie, I have only become acquainted with them courtesy of The Schoolmarm.....

[billy]

i think it has (as geoff said) to be relatable in some way. and well crafted as far as it genre goes.