I always thought that poetry ought
To transcend bounds of time:
I realize I archaize —
I sometimes even rhyme.

And if my style you think is vile
Read someone else's verse;
Than Sally Clarke, or Jarman, Mark,
A critic might do worse.

Suggestion is, where I wrote ''tis'
I should have written 'it's' —
For then my style would be less vile
And satisfy the 'crits'.

That word you heard was quite absurd;
I wanted rhyme for 'it's' —
So to fulfil poetic will
For 'critics' I wrote 'crits'.

My licence poetic may not be aesthetic-
'lly pleasing to the Pastor
Who a critical note on my poetry wrote
Like unto a Great Master.

If he would take the time to scan some of my rhyme,
And my non-rhyming poems as well,
He might very well find my poetical mind
Does not always antiquity tell.

For at times I might write a colloquial light
Unembellishéd manner of speaking,
But whatever I may I endeavour to say
While I'm always for poetry seeking.

In such verses, if he would endeavour to see,
He might find many an 'it's' if he tried;
While in classical writing, postmodernism smiting,
I'll in nowise archaism hide.

(Saturday,5th November,2005.)

David Mitchell

http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/response-to-a-criticism-by-michael-shepherd-who/