THE HOPELESS ONES

Leaving aside the matter that you need to answer the question ""seeds of hope for what"? if you are to actually communicate what you think you are saying,  and that your title says you are going to deal with "the hopeless ones" but in your text you speak about those who are luckless,  are you really asserting that the reason that some men don't have ploughed fields is because they lack "charm", not to mention the charm necessary  to get an alluring girl to turn her attention to him?  
    
And is the cause of their lack of charm (and the reason that their fields are  not ploughed) is that they are short and not intellectually gifted?  
 
 
Moreover,  if the following lines of yours  
 
 
"But those who are deprived how can they cope  
with what they have in hands to hunt life's joy."  
   
are not only to  make sense but also to be grammatically felicitous and properly punctuated, shouldn't this unanswered question have been written:  
 
"But how can those who are deprived of charm    
cope well with life when they don't have in hand  
all that they need to hunt its joy? "  
   
For after all if -- as your awkward syntax makes you say --  they have something within their hands to hunt life's joy,  they just might be able to cope with deprivation.    
   
In any case,  what makes this submission of yours something that is beautifully written?  And more importantly, what deep meaning do you think insightful readers are sure to take away from this submission?  
 
Cue the ad hominemed or red herringed response and/or the unargued  claim that my remarks are not worth responding to.

Beautiful writing style, Joseph.

Will you please tell me what you mean by "beautiful style"  and then go on to be specific about what makes this piece comport with your definition?  
 
Since you do not give readers here any sense of what you mean by "beautiful style", let alone the criteria you use to judge whether or not a submission is "stylistically beautiful",  there is no reason for anyone (including J-Z himself) to regard your opinion of J-Z's style as valid or well informed.

Apparently, according to you, what accounts for this piece being set out in a “beautifully written style” is that it is of limited and unimaginative vocabulary and that it features

1. the repetition of words within a stanza

2.incorrect punctuation

3.  solecisms

e.g. “with what they have in hands” instead of “in hand”; “or just they look and sigh” instead of “they only look and sigh”

4.  deixis

e.g., “and sows the seeds of hope in their ploughed fields.” [hope for what?]

e.g., “But those who are deprived...”  [deprived of what?]

5. the improper truncation of phrases so that the meter of a line “fits” the meter J-Z has chosen to set his lines

“They look from far and moan their own bad luck

“They look [at her] from far AWAY and moan ABOUT their own bad luck

6. no employment of  images, concrete appeals to the senses,  metaphor or simile

7.  awkwardly worded questions such as

“But those who are deprived how can they cope
with what they have in hands to hunt life's joy.”

that should have been written

“But how can those who are deprived of charm  
cope well with life when they don't have in hand  
all that they need to hunt its joy? "

if the question was to make sense, and

8.   factually questionable and reader off-puting assertions.

Is it really the case the what causes one’s fields to be unploughed is one’s lack of charm?  And cant an alluring woman “get” men who are short and not smart?

If so, your sense of what a makes a writing set out in, or possess, a beautiful style is something shared,  so far as I can see, by you and J-Z alone.  Do you know anyone with some experience in reading and writing good poetry (i.e., not J-Z’s family members and his Syrian sycophants) who would agree with you?
         

Thank you very much, Lozzamus. Your comments, appreciation and choosing my poems for your read help me a lot, indeed.