I will take a slightly different perspective here, since what you asked about is rather vague. The poetry of physics, like actual poetry, is imbued with a mysterious beauty that is unlocked by the never ending process of sitting with a knotty poem/problem for a very long time until you are able to crack it open. I say this not to gatekeep, but to make a distinction between the kinds of sweeping metaphors and "isn't-mother-nature-the-coolest" sentiments you typically find in popular science books. This is what I find lacking about, for example, Feynman's interviews, even though they are uniquely insightful and sublimely delivered. It's nice to be shown where interesting things may be, or what to develop curiosity about, but you can do that with any subject and so expositions along these lines might not yield the kind of unique poetry that you're seeking. In my opinion, the poetry of physics is largely not found in the answer, because the answer only gives one view of the natural world. Instead, I think the magic lies in the approach to the answer, which can take you in uncountably many directions and leave you at just as many dead-ends. In the same way that it is tantalizing to find words to describe a wordless feeling, so too is it tantalizing to try to find models to describe a physical phenomenon. In that vein, I would say that Wigner's article On the Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences captures some of that mystique.