Poetic Licence?

Is poetry the highest form of creative writing? There are those who will so lay claim but of course this is debatable. For me, poetry is the essence of creative writing but more important is the fact that all writing requires, no, demands that the writer strive for excellence.

Please people, I agree that poets possess poetic licence to break conventional rules of writing but at least one should be aware of the rules that are being broken and why (e.g. local or Caribbean dialectal constructs); rules should not be broken 'vikey vie' i.e. thoughtlessly and erratically without any deliberation.

Poetic licence certainly does not give one the right to arbitrarily write bad grammar (e.g. tense, subject/verb singular/plural agreement, etc), bad punctuation, bad spelling, typos and generally sloppy writing. Please proof read or edit your poems before posting or publishing.

And while we are at it, let's dispel the sorry myth about getting inspiration, writing a poem and not daring to touch it afterwards even if it is full of crap. If you recognize an error or something that can be improved, give it some thought and make corrections; and please, correct the typos picked up, even after posting, cause if you don't readers will recognize them.

Althea Romeo-Mark says "...a freshly composed poem is like a block of marble or a large piece of wood that must be chiseled and carved until it reaches a shape of perfection that pleases the eye. Similar with a raw poem, you chisel away excess words until you reach a form that is concise, concrete and conveys meaning in brief, vivid phrases that evoke a response in the reader."

Let's take some pride in our work. If we don't we are doing a disservice to both ourselves and other poets who would like readers to take poetry seriously.

Of Camels, Zebras and Jackasses

Say 'hump' anywhere in the world and one automatically thinks of roads and camels; in my country, say 'hump' and I think of roads, camels, zebras and jackasses.

There are no camels or zebras here but the people who place on our roads, steep, sometimes narrow, sometimes malformed, ugly, vicious humps without painting them with white stripes have got to be jackasses. Maybe they could use the paint to paint themselves with white stripes, then they could be mistaken for zebras.

I understand the need for humps as much as I understand the need for speed (no pun intended) but should not the humps be painted to be clearly visible and to indicate that a hump is ahead?

But then again, they could be part of a conspiracy with the pot-hole people, spare-part dealers and auto mechanics to mash up your vehicle so that you have to purchase parts and fix every day.

Sound like another jackass conspiracy theory?

And oh! I forgot about the other 'hump'; like in "the people who place on our roads, steep, sometimes narrow, sometimes malformed, ugly, vicious humps without painting them with white stripes..." have got to be enjoying humping us all.