Time (moved from Mild to Fun)

[Uncle Tony]

There's not much meat in the poem for the critic to digest and feed back. Suggest you employ a formal structure with a defined meter and rhyme scheme and repost it for more meaningful crit.

The poem was not meant to be "meaty," rather it was a short rhyme, whimsically written - not intended to take the reader to a "deep place," but simply to make him/her if not laugh out loud, at least smile.  No formal structure, schemes, or defined meters required when the desired response is no more than a grin. 

---

hi uncle

sounds like a nursery rhyme which doesn't mean it's bad, the last line feels a bit shaky. em is usually a short version of them, i'd think it or 'im would read better.
as for the content. for me it's not the strongest of poems as it doesn't say much.

the last line was "a bit shaky," because it was intended to be humorous, i.e. tongue in cheek, not to be taken too seriously, etc., etc. Not sure how anyone could read this and come away with any other impression.  There were several give aways, e.g. "he gonna keep tickin' the way he like to be." That line alone should make it abundantly clear that nothing there was meant to be deep, or "say much."  Lastly, 'em is ok for them (see Mark Twain).

Deep or not, you chose to post it in a workshop asking for critique, that's what you got.

Because Mr. Clock is singular them or 'em seems off, unless you're throwing rocks at some inferred plural.

Yes, that's what I got; however, in reading the critique it was quite evident that the critic took my submission literally, when it was intended to be lighthearted. Thus my reply was merely offering clarification. Surely, there's nothing in the rules which would prohibit one from replying to a critique with a clarification, now is there?