We recognise in the finished art, which is the result of these
We recognise in the finished art, which is the result of these conditions, the best words in the best order - poetry; and to put this essential poetry into different classes is impossible.
"We recognise in the finished art, which is the result of these conditions, the best words in the best order - poetry; and to put this essential poetry into different classes is impossible." John Drinkwater’s words reveal a timeless truth about poetry: it is a form of art that exists beyond the bounds of categorization, beyond the reach of rigid definitions. Poetry, in its truest form, is not a product to be classified or reduced to a set of rules—it is the essence of language itself, where the best words meet in perfect harmony to evoke the deepest truths of the human experience. Drinkwater speaks to the mystery of poetry, the inexplicable force that transcends boundaries and refuses to be confined to any one category. To try to classify poetry is to miss the very soul of the art—its freedom, its universality, and its power to speak to the heart in a way that cannot be neatly categorized.
In the ancient world, poetry was regarded not simply as a form of entertainment or a means of storytelling, but as a divine art—a bridge between the human and the divine, the physical and the spiritual. Homer, in his epic poems, did not seek to classify his stories or reduce them to simple categories of action or morality. The Iliad and the Odyssey are not just stories of war and adventure; they are rich tapestries that explore the human condition in all its facets—love, loss, honor, fate. To divide these works into distinct, isolated categories would be to strip them of their essence. Instead, Homer’s poetry resonates with us across centuries because it exists in a space that cannot be captured by mere definitions. It is not about classifying his work but about feeling it, experiencing the emotions that rise from the depths of the language.
The same is true of Shakespeare—his works, though often categorized as tragedies, comedies, or histories, transcend these boundaries. The language in Hamlet, for example, cannot be confined to the category of tragedy alone, for its exploration of the human soul, its philosophical depth, and its emotional breadth reach far beyond the confines of a single genre. Shakespeare's best words in the best order speak not only to the context of his time but to the universal truths that have always been part of the human experience. Just as with Homer, it is not the category of his plays that matters most, but the power of the language he uses to express the depths of human emotion. Poetry cannot be confined to neat categories—it is the essence of what it means to be human.
The ancient philosophers also understood this truth. Plato, though he believed in the importance of art and poetry, also cautioned against the idea of reducing art to rules and classification. In his work, The Republic, he discusses how the true power of poetry lies in its ability to transcend the mere technicalities of form and instead connect directly to the soul. He sees poetry as a vehicle for truth, one that cannot be reduced to a simple formula or broken into categories that strip it of its power. In this, we see that the essence of poetry, like the essence of life itself, defies classification. It is not about fitting poetry into a box but about feeling its pulse, hearing its rhythm, and allowing it to move you.
The lesson Drinkwater imparts is clear: Poetry is more than an art form—it is the life of language. To attempt to classify it into neat categories is to rob it of its mystery and power. Poetry cannot be reduced to formulae, nor should it be confined to narrow definitions of what it "should" be. The beauty of poetry lies in its universality, its ability to speak to us in ways that are both personal and eternal. The great poets of history did not create for the sake of classification, but to express something greater than themselves, to channel truth through language, to communicate the deepest human experiences. In this way, poetry becomes a shared language, a common thread that binds us all together in our shared understanding of the world.
In our own lives, let us remember that the power of poetry lies in its ability to connect us—not just to the poet’s world, but to our own. As creators, we must resist the temptation to confine our work to predefined categories or to write only to meet expectations. Instead, let us write with honesty, with courage, and with a willingness to explore the depths of our own experiences. Let our words flow naturally, without the constraints of needing them to fit into any particular mold. In doing so, we will create work that speaks to the soul, work that resonates with the timelessness and universality of true poetry.
So, let us embrace the spirit of poetry as it was meant to be: a free expression of the heart, not bound by rules but shaped by the truths it seeks to express. Let us not worry about classification but instead focus on creating something that is alive, something that moves us, something that connects us to our shared humanity. Whether we are poets or not, we can all be creators in our own way, channeling the best words in the best order, and in doing so, speaking to the deepest parts of ourselves and others. In this, we find the true power of poetry—the ability to transcend and to unite us all.
TPTai Phan
I’m intrigued by the assertion that categorization is impossible. Does Drinkwater suggest that every poem must be judged on its own merits rather than as part of a class or movement? I also wonder how this perspective influences reading practices: should readers focus more on the interplay of language and rhythm than on whether a poem fits into a particular genre or school of thought?
HHannah
This statement raises questions about the role of form versus content. If poetry is recognized by the best words in the best order, is it the careful selection and arrangement that matters most, rather than theme or subject? I wonder whether this perspective implies that different forms—sonnet, free verse, narrative—are equally capable of achieving essential poetry, provided the language itself achieves this ideal order.
DHle duc huy
I find this perspective both liberating and challenging. It suggests that poetry defies strict classification, emphasizing aesthetic and linguistic perfection over genre. I’m curious whether Drinkwater thinks this makes evaluation more subjective—if the essence of poetry is felt rather than defined, can we agree on what constitutes excellence, or is it inherently personal and contextual?
NTMI NGUYEN TRA
This makes me reflect on the idea of poetry as an ultimate synthesis of language. If the best words in the best order define poetry, does this mean that analysis or categorization misses the point? I wonder whether Drinkwater believes that each poem is a unique, unclassifiable entity, resisting labels such as lyric, epic, or narrative. How does this perspective affect literary criticism and the way we teach poetry?