Comments on " Dems were Bees were Dems"

Dems were Bees were Dems

Dems were Bees, Bees selected them
the best feeders seeded the bees’ nest
expelled renters kept the whey
flexed knees wheeled self-respect
speech defects depressed the rest
extend the scheme when verses rhyme

Dems were Bees the Bees helped them
Bees were Dems they then vexed them

let see, help me see

Dems were Bees then Bees were Dems

these speechless freezers deflected rejects

see the mess deep stress

when Bees leet leer Dems’ leg byes leery

ledge between Dems when Bees were Dems

we speechless

the eye-lens bent when levee level the ley
Press help repress then secede them

deflected rejects see the mess deep stress
when rebels’ legends wheedled the free press
deeds reflected the embezzlement
they resented the mere rhymes we expressed
never defend them, when leery deeds emerged them
free press smell Dems’ feet between the Bees
plenty Bees see vexed Dems
when nested Bees, never flee
Dems were Bees, Bees were Dems
Bees see themselves entrenched
when the press crested members’ senses

spent sperm less seeds between the trees

the eyes see

hewers’ hex behest between

when Dems bedded Bees they wed

creepy greed

jeez!

they set the cresset

then creeps’ speedy jeeps deflected 
jeez! they fled

This poem “Dems were Bees were Dems” is written in Free Verse with no punctuation marks or capital letters only when appropriate like names assigned to people or places. Free Verse is poetry characterized by non-conformity to established patterns of meter, rhyme and stanza. It is also referred to as “Open Form” or “Unstructured Poetry”.  This poem has utilized a technique called constraint writing where the poet is bound by some condition that forbids certain things or imposes a pattern. “Dems were Bees were Dems” is written in the constraint style called univocalic poetry. I was inspired by two univocalic poets the likes of C. C. Bombough and Christian Bok.

In 1860 C. C.Bombough wrote a univocalic poem where the only vowel used was the “o”. Here is an excerpt from his poem:

No cool monsoon bow on Oxford dons,

Orthodox, jog-trot, book-worm Solomons

The Canadian poet, Christian Bok who I suspect is bilingual speaker (of English and French) used the univocalic structure in his poetry book Eunoia, Chapter E for René Crevel where only the vowel “e” is used in words. Here is an excerpt of his work arranged in prose poetry format:

Enfettered, these sentences repress free speech the

text deletes selected words we see the revered exeget

reject metred verse; the sestet, the tercet – even les

scènes élevées en grec. He rebels. He sets new precedents.

He lets cleverness exceed decent levels He eschews the

esteemed genres, the expected themes – even les belles

letters en vers. He prefers the perverse French esthetes:

Verne, Péret, Genet, Perec – hence, he pens fervent

screeds, then enters the street, where he sells these

letterpress newsletters, three cents per sheet

He engenders perfect newness whenever we need fresh terms.

Prose poetry is characterized with rhythmic, aural and syntactic repetition; compression of thought; sustained intensity and patterned structure but is set on the page in a continuous sequence of sentences as in prose without line brakes.

Constraint poetry in the form of the Univocalic verse caught my attention. I saw it as a way to poke fun at “crossing the floor” trend in Barbadian politics by members of both parties – The Barbados Labour Party (BLP referred to the Bees) and the Democratic Labour Party (DLP known as the Dems).The univocalic poem in this regard is called “Dems were Bees were Dems” and the whole composition uses words with the vowel “e” only.

This “crossing of the floor” happened in the Barbados Labour Party as well as in the Democratic Labour Party.  “Crossing the floor” is not unique to Barbadian politics; history has shown that in the British House of Commons Sir Winston Churchill crossed the floor from the Conservative Party to the Liberal Party then crossed back to the Conservative Party. “Party-switching” is the term used in American politics and means any change in party affiliation of a partisan public figure, usually one who is currently holding elected office; and connotes a transfer of held power from one party to another.

In the United States’ dominant two-party system, records show that the switches generally occur between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, although the archives have revealed that there have also been a number of notable switches to and from third parties, and even between third parties. Documented party switches in modern era politics of the United States of America show that the majority of switches came from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party in the southern most states. In New England, the Great Lakes states, and the coastal states switched from Republican Party to the Democratic Party.

Politicians who cross the floor or switch parties would have the people believe that they did so from an ethical obligation, because they feel their views are no longer aligned with those of their current party. Some politicians cross the floor or ditch their party for an opportunistic reason but they wouldn’t say it that way. Those opportunistic politicians usually belong to a minority party and would cross the floor to join the majority party to gain the advantages of belonging to such a party. However, the most important reason why politicians switch or ditch their party is to get elected.

I tend to believe that politicians share common characteristics; they expect absolute loyalty from voters at the polls, and think ceaselessly about the next election cycle. Politicians’ hunting ground opens vehemently during the “silly-season” and their tactics are so very profound – slashing and burning; coaxing and embracing then distancing; hugging and kissing; shame finds no roots during the silly-season and for the most part the populace is hypnotized or drunk, their senses on hiatus.