zumpoems

Our world certainly has many examples of extremes — here’s one: very evil people and very good people. Such extremes bookend their specific spectrums or continuums. For example:

Liberal to Conservative
Tall to Short
Dark to Light
Good to Evil
Farsightedness to Nearsightedness
Concrete-Visual to Abstract-Conceptual

Lots of people identify as liberal or conservative, but some are less liberal or less conservative than others, and the majority of people identify as neither — or acknowledge that they have traits of both.

In Søren Kierkegaard’s Either/Or, the nineteenth-century philosopher challenges his reader to make the necessary choice between two posited extremes: the Aesthetic Life (living for the moment without commitment) or the Ethical Life (living by duty and commitment). But if we step outside his strict existential framework and use these terms as we understand them today, life is truly incomplete if we make an either/or choice between the aesthetic and the ethical. We can pursue both! These are not opposite ends of a single spectrum, but categories that are spectrums of their own. And each functions somewhat independently of the other: just because one is unethical doesn’t make that person aesthetic, and one can truly appreciate aesthetics and be one of the most ethical people we will ever encounter. Granted, as Kierkegaard correctly asserts, they are also intertwined — a better appreciation of aesthetics should help one be more ethical.

As we progress through the pages of Either/Or, Kierkegaard discusses the extremes of the aesthetic spectrum: the Immediate Person, who sees the world as it appears on the surface, and the Reflective Person, who sees things primarily in relation to other things. If a poem references “a slithering snake on a pathway,” the Immediate Person will think about a slithering snake on a pathway and the Reflective Person will consider what the snake and the path imply or symbolize. So we have another spectrum, with most people falling somewhere in the middle.

I find this particularly interesting in terms of which type of poetry appeals to an individual depending on where they are on this spectrum, or even if poetry appeals that much to the Immediate person. Or does that person favor poetry that is more direct and is less representative? I suspect that anyone on this spectrum could enjoy poetry, and that even image-laden poetry works nicely for the Immediate person, providing the images describe the real world and don’t represent abstract concepts or function metaphorically for other objects.

Either/Or was written in 1843, and we have some more current observations on personality types. In this case, my interest is the personality spectrum that ranges from Concrete-Visual to Abstract-Conceptual. What is this spectrum or continuum of Concrete-Visual to Abstract-Conceptual?

Let’s jump to around 1943 during the middle of World War II: Katharine Cook Briggs, along with her daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers, developed an early version of a questionnaire to assist the many women entering the workforce to determine the most appropriate jobs for their specific personalities and natural strengths. A couple of decades later, an updated version would be released to a wider audience, and then in 1977, a commercial version, known as Form G, was made available as a diagnostic tool used by schools for vocational planning. Soon, Corporate America and government agencies took an interest, with over 80% of Fortune 500 companies using an updated version of Form G, known as the “Myers-Briggs Type Indicator” (MBTI), to improve communication and teamwork among employees. While modern psychology is rather skeptical of MBTI, it serves as a great team-building tool, and I believe it does have some merit in terms of how individuals process information, including poetry.

The test has four spectrums or continuums, called parameters, and questions score each participant on these four parameters, ultimately assigning them one of two letters for each parameter. This is an Either/Or proposition, but thankfully most versions of MBTI provide a “preference clarity” or “preference score” — a percentage or bar graph showing how strongly one leans toward one end versus the other. For example, a person might score 85% Introverted and 15% Extroverted, or 55% Thinking and 45% Feeling. I remember when I took the test, I scored close to the midpoint on all four parameters. But no matter how close one is to the exact middle, they end up being assigned a letter representing one of the extremes for each of these four parameters.

The Four MBTI Parameters (The “Letters”)

MBTI measures four independent parameters. Each is a spectrum, and a person’s “type” is a four-letter code indicating where they fall on each:

Parameter	One End	The Other End
1. Energy / Attention	Extraversion (outer world, people, action)	Introversion (inner world, reflection, solitude)
2. Information Processing	Sensing (concrete, factual, here-and-now, details)	Intuition (abstract, big-picture, future possibilities, patterns)
3. Decision-Making	Thinking (logic, objective criteria, consistency)	Feeling (values, empathy, harmony, subjective impact)
4. Lifestyle / Structure	Judging (planned, organized, decisive, closure)	Perceiving (flexible, spontaneous, open-ended, adaptable)

---

Mapping Our Spectrums to MBTI

Now here is the beautiful part: the two spectrums touched on earlier, Kierkegaard’s Immediate/ Reflective spectrum and the Concrete-Visual/Abstract-Conceptual spectrum, map directly onto specific MBTI parameters.

Our Spectrum	The MBTI Parameter	Why
Concrete-Visual ↔ Abstract-Conceptual	Sensing (S) ↔ Intuition (N)	This is how MBTI defines S vs. N. Sensing types trust their five senses and prefer tangible, specific, factual information (they want concrete images in their poetry). Intuitive types trust patterns, meanings, and possibilities (they prefer poetry that addresses topics like freedom, desire, identity, and alienation through concepts or even abstractions rather than concrete imagery). This is a perceptual preference: how one processes information.
Immediate ↔ Reflective	Extraversion (E) ↔ Introversion (I) — partially	This one is a harder case to make, but hear me out. Extraverts tend to process externally and react to stimuli in real-time (Immediate). Introverts tend to process internally, stepping back to mull things over before acting (Reflective). However, this is not a perfect match, because Kierkegaard’s “Immediate vs. Reflective” is more about time and commitment than about social energy. But in MBTI terms, the I/E axis is the closest proxy for whether you set up shop in the moment (reacting to the outer world) or live in your head (deliberating before acting). In terms of poetry preferences, it seems likely to me that the Immediate type will be much less attracted to poems that require considerable reflection to determine their meaning or set of meanings.

---

Quick Recap Table

Concept	MBTI Parameter	What it measures
Concrete-Visual ↔ Abstract-Conceptual	Sensing (S) ↔ Intuition (N)	How one perceives and takes in information
Immediate ↔ Reflective	Extraversion (E) ↔ Introversion (I) (roughly)	Whether one processes in real-time or steps back
Aesthetic ↔ Ethical	None directly (as discussed, this is a false continuum.)	Can one measure something with two disparate continuums collapsed together?

---

So What Is Your MBTI Type, and How Does It Relate?

If you know your four-letter MBTI type, we can look at it and see:

1. Where you naturally fall on the Concrete-Visual ↔ Abstract-Conceptual spectrum (your S/N preference).
2. Where you naturally fall on the Immediate ↔ Reflective spectrum (your E/I preference, roughly).
3. Possibly which Kierkegaardian trap you are most susceptible to (based on your T/F and J/P preferences)?

For example:

• An ISTJ (Introverted, Sensing, Thinking, Judging) is naturally Concrete-Visual (S), Reflective (I), and Ethical-leaning (J). Their Kierkegaard trap? Becoming so rigid and duty-bound that they lose all aesthetic joy and spontaneity.
• An ENFP (Extraverted, Intuitive, Feeling, Perceiving) is naturally Abstract-Conceptual (N), Immediate (E), and Aesthetic-leaning (P). Their Kierkegaard trap? Flitting from one beautiful idea to the next, never committing to anything long enough to build a life.

---

Spectrum Mapping Reference Table

Spectrum	MBTI Parameter	What it measures
Concrete-Visual ↔ Abstract-Conceptual	Sensing (S) ↔ Intuition (N)	How you perceive and take in information
Immediate ↔ Reflective	Extraversion (E) ↔ Introversion (I) (roughly)	Whether you process in real-time or step back
Kierkegaard’s Aesthetic ↔ Ethical	None directly	Your relationship to commitment, duty, and meaning—a choice, not a preference

For what I consider to be the highly suspect Aesthetic ↔ Ethical spectrum, Kierkegaard would say: Your MBTI type describes your starting point, but it does not determine your destiny. The “Either/Or” is not about being true to your type — it is about transcending your type through a conscious, passionate choice to become a full, integrated human being. The reality, of course, is that this is not a spectrum and one can excel at both Aesthetic pursuits and Ethical pursuits.

For the Immediate ↔ Reflective Spectrum, one placement here comes down to mostly natural inclination, though I have observed that one can develop skills to excel at both ends of the spectrum: one can improve their ability for real-time decision making, as you do in playing a sport or in a high-stakes conference meeting, and improve their ability to carefully think through all outcomes and possibilities.

Now, here is the part I find the most interesting and that I believe relates the most to poetry preferences — the Concrete-Visual ↔ Abstract-Conceptual Spectrum: how we perceive and absorb information — how we process not only information, but also what are our inherent data preferences. Do we prefer concrete images in our poetry, or do we prefer abstract and/or conceptual language? Are we more attracted to Emily Dickinson lines with concrete images like

The Grass divides as with a Comb —
A spotted shaft is seen —
And then it closes at your feet
And opens further on —

or lines that deal with concepts

Pain — has an Element of Blank —
It cannot recollect
When it begun — or if there were
A time when it was not —

(Please note the “—” are Emily’s own, and used long before the invention of AI)

Do we prefer Wallace Stevens’ concrete lines:
…
The pears are not viols,
nudes or bottles.
They resemble nothing else.

They are yellow forms
Composed of curves
Bulging toward the base.
They are touched red.

or his more conceptual work:

The poem of the mind in the act of finding
What will suffice. It has not always had
To find: the scene was set; it repeated what
Was in the script.

The handling of concrete images is pretty straightforward and is well taught in every MFA program on the globe. Perhaps less in vogue today are the conceptual tools of poetry:

Abstract Images / Abstract Imagery: Language that evokes ideas or qualities that cannot be directly perceived by the five senses (e.g., words like truth, freedom, sorrow, infinity rather than some physical object).

Conceptual Language / Conceptual Imagery: Language focused on theories or intellectual ideas rather than observable reality.

Discursive Language: Poetry or lines that rely on logical argument or explanation rather than sensory presentation. In literary criticism, “discursive poetry” is often contrasted with “imagistic poetry.”

Generalities / General Language: Nebulousness or overarching statements lacking the distinctness of concrete details.

Intangible or Immaterial Imagery: Descriptions or expressions concerning things that lack physical substance, weight, or sensory properties.

We find that our often featured poet Zumwalt tends to lean towards the conceptual, but we can find plenty of examples where he goes “concrete” on us:

Some shirtsleeve transient
Sporting scrimshaw arms
Scans a racing form
His shoe leather face focused more
On Santa Anita
Than the saints
Shouted, proclaimed
By an antique black
Whose white wisps of whiskers
Cling to his accusing chin
Clouds about a crag
That trembles with every thundered damnation
As the old man makes the park
His pulpit
(From Afternoon Off, ca. 1977)

Smooth and sepia
Spirals down the throat, wet, warm
For a moment attention drifts
From the bleary graveyard denizens
        the three-day growth denim jacket derelict
        the greasy ember of a cook
        the scrubbed behemoth cop
        A granite waitress
(From Black with Sugar, 1977)

And an example of concrete audio imagery:
The radio unloads
Heavy metal
High volume, howling
Then
Upturned chairs
            the busboy plays counterpoint
            on a Kirby
(From Solo, 1979)

Compare this to his more conceptual work:

Reams and reams
              The black-ink symbols inundate
              Flooding consciousness with printed words
                                           that possess
              Definitions but know no meaning
(From They’ve Stripped the Forest for Babble, originally published in the first issue of GHLM Newsletter in 1974)

or

On a Mobius strip
Crazy coordinates on a hellish helix
        With nowhere to go
        And no way home
Not to worry
Once more around and
Once you grab that brass ring
You will realize
        It’s mostly air.
(From Full Circle (A rumination in 3 strokes), 1982)

Recently, on a phone call with Zumwalt, he recited a draft of a poem where he plans to either avoid all concrete images or heavily use concrete images — or maybe a mixture of both, once the poem turns;

You spend the day outdoors,
won’t come in at night
back to the home you were born in
instead you sleep under
the shelter of trees
I never learned the name of.

I won’t reveal the surprising turn this poem takes, and I look forward to how it is finally implemented. Can Zumwalt create a final version without a single concrete image — even less than the few weak ones it already has? It sounds easy enough, but the poem has to work within that constraint — not so easy.

But I digress. If we are an extreme S (sensing) reader or editor, we will prefer poetry rich in concrete images; if we are an extreme I (intuition) reader or editor, we will prefer more conceptual passages. Most of us are in the middle. A poet can be at either extreme or in the middle, and produce high-quality work — work that resonates with their particular set of readers. If a reader is in the middle of the spectrum, will they be able to appreciate the extremes of concrete poetry as much as a high percentage S reader? If the reader is all the way over to one extreme, will they have issues with the poetry that primarily uses data and information that appeal to the other side of that spectrum?

Now, remember the Myers-Briggs Test ultimately assigns one of two values for each of the four parameters, including Information Processing. Here is the distribution for Information Processing for people taking the test according to thinkimpact.com.

Intuition (N): Roughly 26.7% of the population.

Sensing (S): Roughly 73.3% of the population.

Even considering that the actual distribution is like a bell curve, with the majority nearer the middle than the extremes, we can better understand why poetry instructors emphasize the importance of concrete images — I am guessing that about 85 to 90 percent of readers will be fine with highly concrete poetry, where perhaps only 60 to 70 percent of readers will comfortably handle heavily conceptual poetry.

We also have the factor (Energy/Attention) of whether the poem is easily understood, or requires more work on the reader’s part to get to its inherent meaning. This reminds me of Zumwalt’s implied preference: “It’s much better if poetry is direct and simple, although the poem now has the liability of being readily understood” — a preference he often disregards, often employing both abstruse concrete and conceptual passages.

For example, instead of opening with:
Our world certainly has extremes, but they are extremes on spectrums or continuums:

Liberal to Conservative
Tall to Short
Dark to Light
Good to Evil
Farsightedness to Nearsightedness

I could have used concrete images in place of my more conceptual introduction, but would you know what I mean? I wouldn’t; during a phone conversation with Zumwalt yesterday, he improvised the following conversion of my original:

Perilously on a spinning globe of cold saltwater and internal rivers of magma, we straddle a studio soundboard slider that skates from silent ponds to ear-shattering dance halls:

From speeding rivers to steadfast mountains
From towering skyscrapers to worn-down speed bumps
From inside a trunk in an underground closet in the center of an asteroid nine-tenths of the way between the Sun and the red dwarf Barnard’s Star to standing on an open observational platform, without quality sunglasses or protective goggles, three feet from the perimeter of Sirius.
From helping ladies cross the street to tripping them and kicking them until their lungs collapse and their blood pools on the warm pavement.
From perceiving the drifting nitrogen-ice blocks on Pluto to discerning the cilia on the outer cells of a dust mite

As almost three-quarters of people would apparently prefer image-rich poetry to conceptually dense poetry, I looked for submission guidelines in various journals to see if any explicitly stated this.

And I hit pay dirt! Twenty-four carat gold! Guidelines that leave no doubt about what the journal will accept.

The journal is Third Wednesday Magazine, a website with slightly fewer monthly visitors and WordPress subscribers than zumpoems.com, but showing a healthy monthly increase, and containing a wealth of excellent poems, available for free, including downloadable PDFs. Here is one for the current issue.

Below are some highlights of their guidelines with full text HERE.

We’re drawn to poems and prose that trust concrete images over abstraction — a name, a gesture, an object doing the work a sentence about “feeling” would otherwise do. We publish across forms, so our most important issues are voice, craft, and image control. Endings that land on something specific and physical interest us more than ones that resolve into reflection or moral. We see a lot of work about loss, and we welcome it, but it should arrive through a scene or an object, not as raw statement.

Isn’t that great? And they go on to say: We’re not opposed to the occasional risk, but risk should earn its place through control, not indulgence. Humor is welcome when it’s dry and plainspoken rather than broad. Above all: we’re a generous, big-tent magazine that welcomes all voices.

They also indicate one of the important points of Zumwalt’s view on poetry, that the form and structure of the poem support the message, with the message never subordinate to the fulfillment or the restrictions of the form: Is the form doing something, or just being followed for its own sake?

I am not sure about this guideline: Does the ending land on something specific and physical, rather than summarizing or moralizing?

How would that work with Emily Dickinson’s ending to one of my favorite poems, Tell All the Truth?

As Lightning to the Children eased
With explanation kind
The Truth must dazzle gradually
Or every man be blind –

I am guessing that Kipling’s If (And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son!) and Longfellow’s A Psalm of Life (Learn to labor and to wait.) would also violate this constraint.

But whether I agree with each and every guideline, I have to acknowledge and commend the site for providing these guidelines transparently, and I certainly recognize that journals curate poems around one or more themes, one or more constraints, and/or towards a given audience. There is nothing wrong with a journal like The Society of Classical Poets requiring rhyme and meter, or Light requiring humorous rhyming poems or New Verse News requiring topical poems — and all three journals provide clear guidelines on what their requirements are.

Written Tales, a journal with a smaller audience than Third Wednesday Magazine, provides similar, though much briefer, “show don’t tell” guidelines:

We look for work grounded in specific, concrete imagery: pieces that show rather than tell, bringing the reader into a particular moment through vivid, tangible detail. Abstract or purely emotional work is not a good fit for us.

On the other side, every once in a while one sees guidelines that do welcome “tell, don’t show,” as with Storm Cellar, which includes this umbrella statement: it’s all good. (Even anti-affect “conceptual poetry.”) Or as the Madrigal did a while back with the Discursion Issue call: we are looking for poems that are at play with reasoning and the sounds that facts and logic make even when divorced from any actual grounding.

For me, it’s all good. I am in the middle of the Myers-Briggs Information Processing Spectrum, and love poems brimming with concrete images as well as those providing challenging conceptual explorations. This is why I love visiting these various journals and reading WordPress blogs — blogs where the author is free from all constraints except for the ones they impose upon themselves.

Please visit these journals, read at least a few of their published poems, and post some comments about your thoughts. Please also spend some time discovering poems on WordPress: Free Verse, Poetry, Poems, etc.