When do you need to define your own words in poetry?

To be honest, although sometimes inscriptions can be used to construct a poem or hint something to guide readers, usually indirectly, here I mean a great possibility, from the position of "Ferrara" robert browning's "My Last Duchess" before some famous poems, Shakespeare's channel couple Tennyson's "Marianne" or any number of poems before quotations, or others, strangers proliferate.

Indeed, this is a reasonable poem. It defines (it) to establish its own independent world in a unique way, with its own characteristics and rules-a person who suffers from violence, like an old teacher of mine, is subject to external epistemology.

This is not to say that words in poetry cannot be looked up in a dictionary. It is best to use a historical dictionary such as Oxford English Dictionary. This is actually a basic practice. However, poetry not only insists on using complex words, but also insists on amazing associative patterns, which often do not appear in daily discourse. The best poetry has the ability to re-describe the reality-familiar things-and awaken our tendency to become accustomed to the great world in a way that suddenly becomes strange, strange and novel. It stimulates words and establishes connections between words, making words difficult or even impossible, but it will not lose its implication, influence and/or effect. In fact, critics sometimes call it "the heresy of interpretation", even though they try to teach readers how to read the language of poetry. )

In short, real poetry is always in the process of (redefining) its terms. A good poem needs no preface. Even lewis carroll's Jabberwocky appeared in the anthology without context. "It's gorgeous, and there are sticky toves/Did gyre and gimble in wabe": We are forced to understand those meaningless things-those seemingly confident that it is not meaningless-and it is these behaviors that define the experience of this poem. Fairyland, after all, is a completely changed place. The distortion of a world is adjacent to our reality, making it not heimlich.

When I mentioned the above comments and "heresy of explanation", I suddenly thought of your best answer to this question. It is not the poet's job to define unusual terms. The poet's job is to create texts. Once the text is created, it is autonomous: the text has the power to surpass the author's intention, and the author is also its first reader; In this respect, language is elusive.

The work of critics, as well as the work of readers (critics are professional readers after all), defines the terms of a poem, measures the dictionary definitions of these terms in the poem, and tries to understand that the humming of meaning is a poetic language.

The poet said, here! Look at this arrow! The reader says, "Huh?"

Critics-or skilled readers-carefully study poetry and design explanations for it, including defining terms in context and accumulating the overall meaning of language artifacts as a whole symbol.