This article argues for the advantage of applying the analytical perspective of “visual iconicity in poetry,” rather than trying to delimit the problematic category of “visual poetry,” which has been understood to be a type of poetry that deviates from normal poetry in and through its visual characteristics (for instance, poems looking like physical objects). However, visuality is actually an irrelevant feature for the specific character of “visual poetry”; it is iconicity that makes the difference. Whereas visuality is a sensory trait, iconicity is a semiotic trait consisting of meaning created by way of resemblance, and these two qualities must not be conflated.In order to illustrate the line of reasoning, two rather different poems are analyzed. No scholars refer to Sylvia Plath's “I Am Vertical” as “visual,” but in addition to being visual this poem possesses a certain level of iconicity. Eugen Gomringer's “Wind,” on the other hand, is a standard example of “visual poetry.” Also this poem is certainly visual, even though it is not visuality but a high degree of iconicity that sets it apart from poetry such as Plath's. In fact, what is generally but misleadingly referred to as “visual poetry” is characterized by extensive iconicity.