To those who care both for poetry and for rational argument, the De rerum natura is indeed, as David West boldly declared, ‘the greatest poem in Latin’. His elegant and indispensable book The imagery and poetry of Lucretius, described by its author as ‘an attempt to challenge the vulgar error that the De Rerum Natura consists of oases of poetry in deserts of philosophy’ brilliantly demonstrates that

But vulgar error is persistent, as Lucretius knew better than anyone; quare etiam atque etiam dicendum est.

At 1.931–4 (= 4.6–9), with characteristic clarity, Lucretius defines the nature of his work. He has earned the Muses' crown, he says,

The first reason is the importance of his subject, which frees the mind from the bonds of religion; the second is the illuminating effect of his poetry, which touches everything with the Muses' charm. And there's a reason for it, as he immediately explains in the great simile of the honeyed cup (1.935–50 = 4.10–25).

It is, of course, a multiple-correspondence simile: the doctors are Lucretius, the sick children are the public (uulgus), the honey is the poetry, the unpleasant medicine is the saving message of Epicurus.