@DIFS: It depends on the reason… was it freaked-out “oh dear God this better not happen” laughter, cynical “we’re on this track as we speak” laughter, sarcastic “I can’t believe somebody actually wrote this awfulness” laughter, or something else entirely?
It was “Converse = rebellion ?!?” laughter, sorry. The semi-Shakespearean way you contract your words was useful in most places, but it seems really unnecessary in “but i’makes them heed” … doesn’t do anything for the meter there whereas the other places you used it, the contraction definitely helped the meter. Also, you have 11 syllables in verse 2 line 2, and by my count also 11 syllables in verse 3 line 2, but that depends on how you pronounce rebellion. Not that I know if you actually cared about the meter in this poem. The spirit of the work is certainly good.
Lastly, I’m no authority on poetry, not really my thing, so I can be safely ignored.
Hm. You’re right about that “i’makes” contraction; I think I wanted to make it work with some other word and forgot to edit it out (I’m more or less [in]famous for my contractions). The way I’m pronouncing “rebellion” is re-BELL-yon. I wasn’t aware there was more than one way to pronounce “rebellion”; interesting to consider, though. While I was trying to observe iambic meter, perhaps I subconsciously figured that the two lines of 11 were purposely 1 syllable too long to 1) see if people were paying attention, and 2) slightly rebel against the conventions of pentameter. I threw in converse as rebellious because, in my mind, they were one of the least ordinary & conforming footwear I could think of. Think about it: they come in who-knows how many styles, umpteen colors, & some folks may be inclined to further decorate them. Basically, everything about Converse could be a challenge to a creativity-suppressing dystopian society. That sound crazy? Probably is, considering it’s my reasoning…