Art and its interpretation
This poem is a manifesto about what art should be. Encoded in this theme is the idea of interpretation, because a poem arguably does not become art until perceived by someone. By using concrete, sensory images to explain what a poem should be like, MacLeish not only tells but shows the reader how the impression created by poetic language can be more important to the success of the poem than what the words "mean." Ironically, given that the poem is a manifesto against meaning, the ambiguous, conflicting, cryptic way the poem is written will cause different people to interpret the poem in different ways—no doubt generating lively debate around the poem's meaning.
Language
Ars Poetica, like many other poems, does not always use language in a simple, straightforward manner. There are some assertions that the author makes that simply cannot be taken literally. The most blatant example of this contradiction is when MacLeish states that a poem should be "wordless": and yet a poem must by definition include words. Some might argue that MacLeish is suggesting how the poet can render words into impressions without emphasizing their word-like quality or compelling the reader to decipher meaning. The beauty of the language used by MacLeish, both in the visual imagery and in the euphony and prosody of the words, serve to both overturn and emphasize his declarations. In one sense, words are the central aspect of poetry—speaking to the reader and transferring meaning. On the other hand, once the words meet the reader's eyes, a series of associations, images, emotions, and memories are triggered that cannot necessarily be defined or understood linguistically. In that sense, a poem is "wordless," "dumb" and "mute."
