What make a good/great poem or poet good/great???

What makes for a good poem and thusly a good poet? What does a good poem have to have? What is more valuable analytical artistry or emotional honesty, that is to say, is the poem's poetic artistry (i.e. how well it's written and crafted) or its emotion (the feeling behind it) more important. In your opinion what makes a poem, poet good/great??? Do you like an emotionally driven (feelings driven) or analytically driven (art driven) poem more? I personally would rather read art than emotion.

Of course, we all know, a splendid, superb, and most superlative poem is a scintillating combination of both, but in a case of a poem being more of one than the other, which would you more rather it be, Emotional or Artistic???

"Great" poetry is based on the opinion of the reader. Writing reaches people in different ways, so what may be good to some, may be blah to others. Take my poetry for instance; There are people who tell me it's good, but I know it doesn't compare to the wonderful poems I've read on this site from Zyphrex, Cyprus, and other highly rated poets.

But for me, a great poem makes me think about the artistic reasoning behind it, makes feel the emotions trying to be conveyed throught it, and it challenges me to want to write something even better.

As for a great poet, he or she writes poetry that transcends preconceived notions about life and all things associated, breaks poetic boundaries, and reaches people beyond his or her target audience.

As Ben Frank said, "Either write something worth reading, or do something worth writing."

I think poems are written better when the poet has actually experienced whatever they're writing about

i will say write anything from ur heart which can b felt by others too. bcoz people like to read wat they can relate to themselves.....

A great poem is one written by someone with sufficient mastery of the language to not only make you strongly perceive what it is that he or she is trying to convey, but who can also adhere to the particular form they have chosen.

I read so many poems that break their form (whatever that may be), and I'm sure the culprits are thinking "yeah but you're allowed to". Well, maybe, but the point of poetry is the form, not the content. If you can't express yourself in an appropriate way, wait until you can.

The most acclaimed poetry is that which accomplishes the above, and moreso if a powerful message is attached.

Seriously though, I think that if what one wants to say just wont fit into any recognisably poetical form, one should just write prose!

I would have to agree, on principal, that a good poem is defined by those reading it.

But it's funny. The better a poem is, the more people like it. Thus there must be a common base factor(s) which people like to see in poetry.

Coherence,
choice of words,
metre.

Those are three I can think of, which are more-or-less universal to poetry, except perhaps, the last.

The "emotional or art" question is a matter of opinion. As for me, I like both, it depends what sort of mood I'm in. Sometimes I come here with the explicit purpose of finding those emotional poems, and at other times, I like to marvel at the artistry of a poet's words.

I think Irrad has a point, as to what makes a great poem/poet, but would have to disagree with him over the importance of content, for I think a poem is made great partly by it's content and not just by it's structure, form, format, that is to say when reading a poem done in a specific form, I'd rather see one that's effective in it's expression and a little less effective in how well it adhered to the specific form, than one that meets all the form requirements but seems stale, stiff, and mechanical. I personally write a lot of sonnets and enjoy the form but I know and realize that my iambic pentameter, well, is usually off and that they don't adhere to the many archaic rules out there concerning the form, but I know they're good, structurally sound, and well formatted, although not perfect to every single form rule/requirement. I personally do think you're allowed a little freedom to manuever within a form, as long as you keep true to its basic format, but overall, he makes some sound, valid, and excellent points.