For me, parody arises as I read a poet and then begin to think in phrases that are reminiscent of that poet's style. Then the next poem that occurs to me will fall into that particular cadence. The humor will be secondary, a product of the distance between my imitation and the object being imitated. I can play up this distance, for more comic effect, or simply let this distance be what it is. There is nothing disrespectful about parody, in the way I practice it. I love Bronk's work, and have been reading it since the late 1980s, I would guess. Even the things I recognize as being not conventionally good as poems elicit my appreciation--for example the excessive use of abstraction or the flatness of tone. What I like is his ability to get away with it, or to play by his own rules.
I also don't mind being derivative. Why not take all the world offers to you?
I see cardinal visit backyard feeder
or in the field, a flash of red among other wild birds.
One sighting is not better than another.
These poems are derivative--
imitations of another's work,
more or less good at being that, but nothing more.
Why not take all the world offers you?