Cecil and the Brave

[Badatpoetry101]

Hi there I would appreciate any comments on the below.  Best Wishes, Deakin

**
 
People remember where they were when Kennedy was shot.
But, what of your whereabouts when Cecil was slain?
We know where the Dentist was:
Crouched in a bush, clutching his cross-bow and hunting permit.
 
And we know where he went afterwards too:
The front pages, the news’ headlines, the radio waves.
And we know too where you didn’t go:
His surgery in America closed, he was forced to hide.
 
And now, in turn, he was hunted:
The battery of photo lenses as sharp as his weapon.
The world’s reaction was a surprise to him,
and his surprise was a surprise to the world.
Everyone was surprised, it seemed.
 
His former life routine:
A check-up, a denture, rinse and spit out.
‘Open wide,’ he said to his patients:
Close enough to survey their teeth and feel their breath on his face.
He did not get quite so close to Cecil.
 
The arguments are well-rehearsed:
Conservation, tourism, man’s historic compulsion to shoot things.
Perhaps there is some truth in that, perhaps not.
 
Perhaps he sought excitement?
Perhaps he believed himself brave?
Perhaps, if the world will ever leave him alone, he would do it again.
 
OK, Dentist, let us say for a moment you were brave:
Just like your junior patients, eh?
Here is your dentist’s reward:
An “I was brave” sticker,
That you can keep for life.

Hi, welcome, best wishes to you as well.

As a rhetorical piece perhaps it might have some merit if further developed. As a poem it is asking a lot from the reader; mostly forming your arguments and framing the issue. First drawing a parallel between Kennedy and Cecil. But you do not take it anywhere, so it begs the question; why is it included? It forces the reader to compare the two why invite the comparison at all. I don't understand why you are forcing that comparison. I can see that it is being used as mostly a segway to get to the dentist and you are using metynomy(?) associating the lion and kennedy, but I don't think it works as it is obvious. I would suggest if you want to criticise someone maybe consider a limerick. Poetry is usually not really meant to single out a person for wrongness. If you are going to criticise I say go broader, like condemning hunting in general or juxtaposing man vs animal. That way your poem can be more receptive and multi-faceted. Instead of just being about "the event" ft. Potshots at the dentist. I think I will stop here better poets than me can examine the grammar and structure. As a final thought this poem would be more successful if you got the audience upset with the dentist. If you are gonna criticise someone just go all out. No sense in being coy. Subtle sure, nuanced always, clever? Of course, but coy is just bleh to me.