Developing Taste in Writing Before Skill: The Real Gap
Taste grows faster than skill, and the painful gap between them makes most poets quit. A contest judge explains how to build taste deliberately, test it, and survive the years while skill catches up.
Here is a test I give new poets. Two couplets, same subject, and you tell me which is better. First: "My grief is an ocean, endless and deep, / it crashes inside me even in sleep." Second: "Since the funeral, I cook for four. / The freezer is furious with soup." If you picked the second and can feel why, even if you cannot yet explain why, you have the beginnings of taste, and taste is the thing this piece is about. Developing taste in writing is the first real skill, the one that has to arrive before technique means anything, and almost nobody teaches it because almost nobody admits how it works. I have judged thousands of contest entries, and I can usually tell within six lines whether a writer has read enough good poems to know what one feels like. Craft problems are fixable in a season. Taste problems take longer, and they take reading.
Developing Taste in Writing Is Pattern Recognition
Strip the mystique away and taste is a database. Every strong poem you read with attention deposits a pattern: what a live line break feels like, how a real image behaves, what earned endings sound like as opposed to installed ones. After enough deposits, you get an alarm system. A wrong line trips it before your conscious mind can say what is wrong. That is all taste is: pattern recognition trained on quality, running faster than analysis.
This is why the freezer couplet wins the test. The ocean couplet is assembled from patterns too, but they are patterns from greeting cards and song lyrics: grief as ocean, depth as sincerity, rhyme as proof of effort. A reader whose database is stocked with strong poems registers those patterns as secondhand within a breath. The furious freezer is firsthand. Nobody's database contains it yet, and it still lands, because cooking for four after a funeral is a fact of grief no ocean metaphor has ever touched.
Taste is knowing the poem is wrong before you know why.
The Gap, and Why It Hurts So Much
Now the hard part, the part a famous radio producer once described for storytellers and every poet should hear: taste and skill improve at different speeds. Taste grows by reading, and reading is fast. Skill grows by writing and failing, and that is slow. So for years, your taste will be good enough to see exactly how bad your own poems are, while your hands remain unable to fix them. This gap is not a phase some writers go through. It is the road. Everyone whose work you admire walked the whole length of it.
Most quitting happens inside the gap, and it happens for a reason that deserves respect: the pain is real. Writing a poem you can see through is genuinely worse than writing a poem you believe in. But notice what the pain certifies. You cannot be disappointed by your own work unless your standards have outgrown it. The beginners who feel no gap are not luckier. Their taste simply has not arrived yet, and when it does, it will find years of unexamined habits already set.
The Poem That Showed Me My Own Bad Taste
My own alarm system got installed on a specific afternoon. I was twenty-three, proud of a poem that ended "and finally, I set my sorrow free." That week I read Dickinson's "After great pain, a formal feeling comes," and hit her image of the nerves sitting "ceremonious, like Tombs." I put the book down and could not look at my own ending. Nothing about my technique had changed between morning and afternoon. What changed was the database. Her line showed me what precision under pressure felt like, and my line, next to it, revealed itself as a gesture I had copied from a hundred forgettable poems without noticing I was copying.
That is how taste actually arrives: not as a lesson but as an unfavorable comparison you cannot unsee. It stung for a month. It was worth more than any course I ever took, and it is why I push every developing poet toward the dead masters early; an afternoon inside Dickinson's work will recalibrate you faster than a year of mutual praise in a beginners' circle.
A 30-Day Reading Diet That Builds Taste Deliberately
Reading builds taste, but not all reading, and not passive reading. Scrolling short verse at midnight deposits patterns too, mostly bad ones. Here is a one-month protocol I assign, tested on real mentees:
- Days 1 to 7: read one great poem per day, twice, once aloud. Use canonical work with time on its side; the classics library is stocked for exactly this. Aloud is not optional. Taste lives partly in the ear.
- Days 8 to 14: copy one poem per day by hand. Slowest reading there is. Your hand learns where the line breaks fall and your patience learns how much a master leaves out.
- Days 15 to 21: read one poem per day and write three sentences on the single best line. Not the poem, the line. Naming why a line works converts silent pattern into usable knowledge.
- Days 22 to 27: read pairs. One acknowledged masterpiece and one mediocre poem on the same subject each day. Contrast is the fastest teacher; this is the couplet test, self-administered.
- Days 28 to 30: reread your own recent poems and mark every line your new alarm flags. Do not fix anything yet. Just learn to hear the alarm on your own work, which is the entire point of the month.
Thirty days will not finish the job. It will start the compounding, and compounding is everything here.
How to Tell Taste From Mere Preference
One caution, because this word gets abused. Taste is not liking what prestigious people like, and it is not disliking rhyme, sentiment, or accessibility. Plenty of writers confuse a set of borrowed opinions with a trained ear. The differences are testable:
- Taste can point to the line. Preference can only point to the vibe.
- Taste survives blind reading. Preference needs to see the author's name first.
- Taste keeps changing your mind about specific poems. Preference decided years ago and never reopens a case.
- Taste can admire what it would never write. Preference only admires the mirror.
When I score contest entries, taste is what lets me reward a rhymed, metrical poem in a month when everything fashionable is fragmented free verse. The trained alarm responds to execution, not to style tribes. Learning the names for what you are hearing speeds this up considerably; knowing what imagery actually demands, as a term of craft rather than decoration, turns a vague good feeling into a checkable standard.
Surviving the Gap Without Lying to Yourself
So what do you do during the years when your taste can see the summit and your skill is still in the parking lot? Three things, in order of importance. First, keep the volume up: gap-years are for finishing many imperfect poems, not perfecting one. Skill only grows through completed attempts. Second, measure against your own last quarter, not against Dickinson; she is your compass, not your rival. Third, get calibration from strangers, because self-assessment inside the gap is unreliable in both directions. This is honestly the most useful thing a contest does for a developing writer, and it is why we built scoring the way we did at Writory: every entrant, all fifty-plus countries' worth, receives a breakdown across creativity, emotion, structure, language, and theme, so you can watch specific numbers move month over month instead of guessing. If you want to know where your skill actually stands relative to your taste, send a poem through and read the breakdown. The gap measured is smaller than the gap imagined. It almost always is.
Skill Catches Up With Whoever Stays
The gap has one mercy nobody mentions: it closes from both ends for the writer who keeps reading and keeps finishing. Every strong poem you read raises the standard, yes, but every poem you complete moves your hands an inch toward it, and hands remember. One year the alarm goes off mid-line instead of after, and you fix the line before it exists. That is all mastery is: taste arriving early enough to help.
Which is why the order matters and why I will keep saying it plainly. Build the taste first, on purpose, from the best work you can find, and let it hurt. The pain is the standard installing itself. The writers who fail are not the ones who cringe at their own poems. They are the ones who protected themselves from ever learning what a great poem feels like from the inside, and wrote comfortably, at a level they never learned to doubt.
By Team Writory, for Writory.
Enter a Writory poetry contest
Enter the September contest and have your own poem read and scored. That first entry makes you a Writorian.