When looking at the mainstream tastes in literary consumption, it seems that the novel is clearly the most preferred format. Non-fiction and memoirs also earn significant space on the shelves of bookstores, but still trail behind the all-powerful novel.

Poetry, however, has not endured in mainstream literature as of late. For many, poetry is the dull and dusty subject that is force fed to every high-school student ever to take a high school English class; therefore, it is rarely approached later in life as a vessel for literary enjoyment. I believe this trend is rooted in several misconceptions the general public learns when first approaching poetry, both inside and outside an academic setting.

Any work of literature has a deeper meaning than what is communicated by the words themselves. Every semi-literate adult is at least vaguely aware of this. The most perilous pitfall of poetry is the notion that “a poem can mean anything”. One’s belief in this adage places them into two separate, yet equally wrong, lines of thought.

Yes, understanding the thematic aspects of a poem lead to a greater appreciation of it, but that deeper message is not open to infinite interpretations. The individuals who believe that poetry can mean anything take too much liberty when reading and interpreting a poem, thus extending their theme beyond the context for which the poem allows. Simply put, these readers tend to dig too deep when tackling a work of poetry, and turn it into something that it could never be.

Likewise, the individuals who are aware of poetry’s contextual limitations tend to be intimidated by the possibility of being wrong about a poem. This is, in part, due to the way poetry is taught. In high schools across the country, students are being told that poetry is an archaic form of literature that can only be deciphered and appreciated after intense study.

While not entirely wrong, this literary stereotype further pushes the common reader from poetry. Poetry itself is one of the oldest forms of literary expression, but is not so arcane that it cannot be appreciated by the masses.

Poetry was the most common literary form for millennia, and served the masses for centuries, even after the rise of written language. Its prominence as a literary form can be attributed to its independence from written language. Poetry endures and thrive in eras of historically low literacy rates.

The classical elements of poetry, such as rhyme, meter, and alliteration, initially served as pneumonic devices when telling stories. Things that sound cool are easier to remember than the things that do not. The very tradition of poetry is rooted in its accessibility, regardless of a person’s education.

Our education system has failed us in this sense. We have pushed poetry beyond its capabilities as a literary form. Poetry is sold as an ancient artifact of academia, yet it has never been such a thing.

Historically, it has been a literary form for the masses. This quality has endured through music’s own endurance as a form of artistic expression (the two forms were once indistinguishable). I believe that the fall of poetry should be attributed to the manner in which we are to approach it.

The overly formal (and inaccurate) stigma surrounding poetry is why it is not as common in mainstream literature as prose. In order to revive poetry, we must change the way it is taught.