I don't like poems that invent memories, I have enough of my own.

The average political poem - especially the kind that wears this label all too proudly - is both dull and full of brow-beating triteness.

When it comes to the challenges of the actual process, I soldier on as best I can, on my own.

The real question should be: what makes a good political poem? The possible answers to that question are both obvious and yet still a little too subjective for anyone to ever fully agree on. What do I most wish to see in a political poet? Sublimated rebellion.

I can't quite see the point of poems like "Wittgenstein Goes for a Walk with A Hawk in Sherwood Forest." I know they're trying to be clever, but they're not.

To be a political poet means simply to be a poet, and any poet worth their salt will be a political animal in their own peculiar way - they have no choice: politics is one of the many fragments we thread into the tapestry of the poem.

As Trevor Noah recently quipped, the US appears ready to crown its first African dictator: Donald Trump.