It is sometimes argued that poetry is inaccessible and overly abstract for entertainment. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
I mostly agree with the idea that poetry is elusive and thereby less enjoyable. Compared with novels or essays, poems express the author's emotions and associations more directly, resulting in incomplete sentences with many missing links of logical chain of thought. This esoteric delivery of words seems irrational, pretentious and neglecting the effort for communication.
On the other hand, some poems have a memorable line which has successfully verbalised a feeling that everyone understand, on a rhythmic brevity. For example, a Japanese poet, Basho, wrote "夏草や 兵どもが 夢の跡(The summer grass, that's all that's left, after the war.)", which clearly described the sadness of wasteland scenary and the transient nature of human activities. Masterpieces evoke feelings based on readers' memories and experiences. When the flow reads naturally and the voice of the author dissipates, it is finally possible to enjoy a poetic experience.
To summarise, although poetry can be entertaining, poems often seem like a series of mumbo jumbo.