Sometimes it really is okay to take what you read at face value.
 

One of the most common comments that I've heard from genre poets who sell to literary markets as well as genre markets, is that both tend to buy similar work, but the genre markets take the speculative element literally, whereas the literary markets take that element as metaphor.

For example, take a look at this short poem:

Spellbound

Each night he cast the same dire spell,
with strands of scorn and gossamer,
which bound her to him through her tears.
Each day she walked a tangled road
of longing, twined with helplessness,
which circled back into his arms.


If one read this poem in a literary magazine one might assume it was simply a metaphor for a bad relationship.  If one read the same poem in a fantasy magazine, that metaphor would be implied, but the literal aspect would also be there, the fact that the man really was casting a spell.

Does this mean that in speculative markets each word is actually doing double duty?  I think so, but that is part of what makes writing speculative poetry more fun, and perhaps, more challenging.  It also means that speculative poetry can be read and enjoyed on multiple levels, making it, I think, more accessible to readers.