the passing of 'should'

the way the experience of 'should' eventually dies 

in the mind of the beholder.

'should' started out so very upstanding,

a command 

of supposed consensual alignment,

an agreement to an invisible force sustained,

a Machiavellian of principle 

coming into play,

almost a birthmark of dignity as presumed. 

'should' as a standout 

in a crowd of things to do,

the eventual monotony 

of 'should' as reappearance,

so many faceless 'should's 

as if commanding,

to discover the facelessness implored, 

as 'should's demanding army of others,

as if courtesy has it

or caring for others 

has the demanding-ness 

of the unspoken behind it.

'should' becomes the process of discovery,

the inferred command 

of others has vacancy.

yet the amass 

of others is a few and far between.

the significance of 'should' 

appeals to an ignorance

for the lack of self in intent

or the apprehension of the unknown 

is at play.

everyone on the bus 

is not the mentality of the driver.

the expression of self existed 

before an explanation comes. 

one is channeling their existence,

not living to appease 

an audience's approval.

'should' with all rights reserved,

comes to rest in peace,

as a lesson learned,

a perspective gained,

a right of passage achieved. 

'should' is a perspective 

in the rights of passage.

where in, as experience travels 

that road of learning,

one 'should' revel in the double-entendre

and not live in the gloom 

of its mockery . . .