How can you tell what class I’m from?
I can talk posh like some, With an ‘Olly in me mouth, Down me nose, wear an ‘at not a scarf, With me second hand clothes. So why do you always wince when you hear Me say “Tara" to me Ma instead of “Bye Mummy dear”? How can you tell what class I’m from? ‘Cos we live in a corpy, not like some, In a pretty little semi, out Wirral way, And commute into Liverpool by train each day. Or did I drop my unemployment card, Sitting on your patio (we have a yard)? How can you tell what class I’m from? Have I a label on me head, and another on me bum? Or is it because my hands are stained with toil, Instead of soft lily-white with perfume and oil? Don’t I crook me little finger when I drink me tea, Say toilet instead of bog when I want to pee? Why do you care what class I’m from? Does it stick in your gullet, like a sour plum? Well mate! A cleaner is me mother, A docker is me brother, Bread pudding is wet nelly, And me stomach is me belly And I’m proud of the class that I come from. What's it all about? The Class Game is a poem about prejudice and the way that we treat others dependent on their social status. It covers class and the attitudes we have towards it. What's the point of view? I think it's fair to say that the narrator of this poem, whether it is Mary Casey or not, is a proud 'Scouser' (what we call somebody from Liverpool). A proud and poor Scouser, at that. Think about the structure This is an interesting poem that uses simple repetition in its confrontation "how can you tell what class I'm from?" This repetition emphasises the fact that the narrator is hacked off at being judged based on her social class - this is then supported by her repeated, confrontational questions - "why do you always wince..?" and "Did I drop my unemployment card..?" The poet doesn't make the poem easy to read. There's a plethora of half-rhymes, the odd internal rhyme, and also some strange compositions (see the 'mouth/scarf' half-rhyme) that mean the poem is tough to read out loud, especially if you're not a Scouser yourself. You have to make an effort to read it - suggesting that the poet wants you to suffer! Perhaps she wants you to see the efforts she needs to make herself to be accepted, and does this by making you work hard to see her message. The use of rhyming couplets, in comparison, is very simplistic. This could be a reflection of how basic and simple the differences between people are, and to emphasise the fact that it's quite infantile to judge someone based on their class. And the language too The most obvious point I can make here is that the narrator uses colloquial language. She spells phonetically when referring to herself "me mother/me brother", and uses dialect forms - "corpy" and "wet nelly". This could be for two reasons:
The narrator also refers to specifically Liverpudlian things and ideas - "round Wirral way" and "commute into Liverpool by train" - these are things that will only really make true sense to you if you are from Liverpool yourself, especially the reference to the Wirral, which is often seen as the "posh half" of Merseyside. This "inside joke" reference excludes many from the narrative, and again reinforces that the narrator is happy in her bubble and has no interest in impressing anyone who simply judges her based on her class. The tone of the poem is confrontational throughout, even defiant at times - especially in the last line, where the narrator underlines her arguments with a bold statement "I'm proud of the class that I come from". Her constant questioning of the reader is similar to Agard's Half Caste where he constantly demands answers. Like Agard, Casey doesn't get the response she wants and so she is forced to repeat herself. Imagine other methods There is use of juxtaposition in this poem - the juxtaposing of "toilet" and "bog", or "bread pudding" and "wet nelly" - this use of contrast emphasises the class divide, especially as the colloquial forms seem to sound so much more vulgar or crude. There is a sense of sarcasm in the poem, too - the narrator seems to want to ridicule the people addressing her. There is sarcasm behind the confrontation, which suggests that she has simply just had enough of the way people judge her to the point that she's not even prepared to engage sensibly any more. Other poems for comparison
0 Comments
Why did my little girl have to grow up?
This is the key thought behind Gillian Clarke's poem about the struggles that exist between a mother and a daughter, and the bond that is formed at the moment that a mother births a child into the world. I can remember you, child, As I stood in a hot, white Room at the window watching The people and cars taking Turn at the traffic lights. I can remember you, our first Fierce confrontation, the tight Red rope of love which we both Fought over. It was square Environmental blank, disinfected Of paintings or toys. I wrote All over the walls with my Words, coloured the clean squares With the wild, tender circles Of our struggle to become Separate. We want, we shouted, To be two, to be ourselves. Neither won nor lost the struggle In the glass tank clouded with feelings Which changed us both. Still I am fighting You off, as you stand there With your straight, strong, long Brown hair and your rosy Defiant glare, bringing up From the heart's pool that old rope, Tightening about my life, Trailing love and conflict, As you ask may you skate In the dark, for one more hour. What's it all about? In Gillian Clarke's own words, this is a poem that ponders the question "why did my beautiful baby have to grow up and become a teenager?" Thematically, this is a poem about bonds, connections and the mother-daughter (or parent-child) relationship. What's the point of view? This is an autobiographical poem; Gillian Clarke's own daughter is called Catrin, although Catrin herself is never mentioned by name in the poem. Therefore, this could be a poem from any mother to her daughter. Think about the structure The poem is divided into two stanzas. The first stanza focuses on the process of birth; Clarke describes the experience of labour and delivering Catrin into the world. The second focuses on a present-day conflict between mother and daughter, as Catrin asks to stay out a little later. However, we mustn't leave it here - we must examine why she does this. We discussed the break between the stanzas, and what this might represent - might the 'gap' in the poem represent the gap that exists in the story? What can we assume went on here? We are forced to ponder what went on in the 'space between'. There is also a shift in tense - the first stanza is in the past tense; the second is in the present. This suggests that at the time of the skating incident, Clarke is remembering that moment when they first 'struggled' with differing ideas. The form of the poem is free verse, which could reflect the unstable nature of birth, life and motherhood - after all, life is not rhythmic and patterned; it is messy and chaotic. There is also enjambement in the poem - the lines flow quite nicely, although notice the line of our struggle to become separate. Some of the line breaks reflect actual breaks in the events. And the language too The language of Catrin is very simple. It isn't flashy, but there are lots of metaphors here - I wrote / all over the walls with my / words The tight red rope The wild, tender circles / of our struggle to become / separate The metaphors here are intense, which, when combined with the simplicity of the words, could suggest the intense and yet simple nature of the love a parent has for their child. Calling the birth a struggle shows that she puts the current 'struggles' she has with her child on a par with that first encounter. Birth was simply the first argument the two were to have, but it doesn't mean she loves her daughter any less. Note the use of the word still in the second stanza. The tight, red rope clearly represents the umbilical cord, but again brings up the idea of a struggle - a 'tug of war' between the two, thus continuing the semantic field of fights, battles and struggling. Interestingly, in a tug-of-war, your aim is to pull your opponent towards you - but when you cut the umbilical cord, you actually separate yourself from your child. There is conflict here, in this line - the desire to be free, but also to be close together. Another interesting idea is that of the description in the opening stanza - the traffic lights, which could reflect a simple, everyday sight but on a metaphorical level represents the current crossroads that the soon-to-be-mother is waiting at. She's about to give birth. Life is about to change. Imagine other methods A main point you could make about this poem is Clarke's use of alliteration. There is much to be said about the use of fricative and sibilant phonemes - the /f/ and /s/ sounds could represent Clarke's heavy breathing during labour, whereas the more plosive /st/ and /g/ sounds could represent her strength (and that of her daughter). The rhythm of the poem is quite gentle. This is not a poem with a regular, strident metre - it ebbs and flows, kind of like birth itself. The calm nature of the poem reflects Clarke's calm views of the birthing process. That Clarke chooses skating in the dark is interesting - it's such a non-event that it seems anti-climactic. We wonder why she didn't choose a huge event, like a wedding, or a grandchild. However, this is important in itself - the mundane request is something that most mothers will be asked, and most mothers will refuse - allowing all of us to relate to that feeling of being told 'no', whether we were the ones saying it or the ones being told it! The theme of tension occurs throughout this poem - literal tension (the tight red rope) and more metaphorical tension (struggle to become / separate). However, the tension is not aggressive; it is intertwined with love, just as the struggles and fights referenced throughout are, too. Poems for comparison
You can see the presentation for this lesson here: "Had he and I but met By some old ancient inn, We should have sat us down to wet Right many a nipperkin! "But ranged as infantry, And staring face to face, I shot at him as he at me, And killed him in his place. "I shot him dead because — Because he was my foe, Just so: my foe of course he was; That's clear enough; although "He thought he'd 'list, perhaps, Off-hand like — just as I — Was out of work — had sold his traps — No other reason why. "Yes; quaint and curious war is! You shoot a fellow down You'd treat if met where any bar is, Or help to half-a-crown." What's it all about? In the form of a dramatic monologue, this poem is about the perils of acting in war without truly considering the consequences of your actions. It focuses on the reasons why soldiers kill each other, and questions the nature of war. What's the point of view? The narrator of this poem is easy to see - a soldier who has returned from war with a brand-new experience - killing a fellow soldier. He is discussing the man he killed, who, incidentally, is never named. It's worth mentioning that this poem was written following the Boer Wars - which were incredibly violent, angry and resulted in a lot of deaths. Strangely, the narrator mentions none of this... Why? Think about the structure The poem is written in quatrains, with a clear ABAB rhyme scheme, and a regular rhythm of trimeters and tetrameters, with an iambic rhythm. This evokes childishness, immaturity - almost like a nursery rhyme or children's poem. This could reflect the soldier himself - how old may he have been? Remember, many soldiers went to war having lied about their age. The tone of the poem is interesting - stanza one focuses on what the man could have done, had the circumstances were different; number two explains what happened in reality. Stanza 3 sees our narrator attempting to justify his actions. Stanza 4 has him debating the similarities between himself and the soldier; the final stanza sees him almost give up trying to understand the situation, writing war off as something "quaint and curious". This could reflect the thought process of the narrator - after all, the poem is written almost like a stream of consciousness that sees him debating almost with himself. Hardy's use of punctuation is key, too. Notice his use of hyphens - along with the repetition, they create a sense of hesitation and confusion: "He thought he'd 'list, perhaps, Off-hand like — just as I — Was out of work — had sold his traps — No other reason why. The hyphens aren't needed, but they add some real tension to the poem as we see the narrator battling with his own thoughts. There are two levels of conflict here, aren't there?
And the language too Interestingly, as mentioned earlier, the Boer Wars were incredibly violent, but the narrator mentions nothing of this. Instead, the language is clearly focused on the soldier that was killed; there is actually no real mention of war. Instead, the language is simple, wistful and memory-led - the man is reflecting on the human side of war. Take this from Bitesize: The language of the poem is very simple, fitting the character of the speaker and creating a powerful anti-war message. It is written in the first person and the vocabulary suggests a local Dorset man – the word nipperkin, for example, was most widely used in the West Country. This increases the sense of the common man being the speaker, and the connection to the text for the reader. Imagine other methods This poem is all about simplicity. This is the important thing! It's not an all-singing, all-dancing anti-war poem; instead, it draws you into a relationship with the narrator, only forcing you to focus on war at the very end. Some notes on imagery and alliteration from Bitesize: In keeping with the simple form of the poem, there are no similes or metaphors. Instead the speaker imagines having met his enemy at the pub instead of on the battlefield. The image of the "ancient inn" gives the sense of a traditional British setting, and of a cosy drink, which contrasts with the reality of the shooting. The dramatic monologue form shows the speaker imagining the back story for the man he killed. The use of the hesitant "perhaps" and the effect of the multiple dashes is to create a vivid picture of the speaker thinking and imagining without having any direct description at all. The poem uses a lot of repetition and parallel sentence structures to emphasise the pairings of the speaker and the man he has killed, such as "face to face" and "I shot at him as he at me". This is particularly true in the third stanza, where the repetition of the words "foe" and "because" add to the internal rhyme of "just so" to create the impression that the speaker is trying to convince himself. Poems for comparison
You can access the presentation for the lesson here: A Poison Tree is the first poem of the anthology and it's a great one to start with. It's about conflict, but not obvious conflict, like war - instead, its key focus is on how internal conflict can ruin a person. I was angry with my friend: I told my wrath, my wrath did end. I was angry with my foe: I told it not, my wrath did grow. And I water’d it in fears, Night and morning with my tears; And I sunned it with smiles, And with soft deceitful wiles. And it grew both day and night, Till it bore an apple bright; And my foe beheld it shine, And he knew that it was mine, And into my garden stole When the night had veil’d the pole: In the morning glad I see My foe outstretch’d beneath the tree. -- William Blake What's It All About? Ultimately, this is a short and simple poem about anger. More specifically, it's a poem about repressing anger - bottling it up - and the consequences of doing this. What's the Point of View? The narrator seems to be a wise person who has learned the hard way what bottling up anger can do to a person. They speak of how they didn't communicate their anger and frustration, and how it then grew until it was out of control. Think About the Structure The poem is written in quatrains - four-line stanzas. Each stanza is made up of two rhyming couplets. What could this represent?
The poem's opening stanza also has a clear shift in tone - the writer opens the poem by comparing the two different ways in which they deal with a situation, dependant on who they are talking to. There is also a sense of reflection/symmetry at the end of the poem, where we come back to the poet's feelings towards their enemy. The poem is written in troachaic tetrameter - like the Witches in Macbeth - why? Perhaps the sing-song nature of the rhythm juxtaposes the severe nature of the consequences of the writer's actions. Also, what about the ending? 'My foe outstretched beneath the tree' - what does this represent? Is he dead? Is it a metaphor? Why end it here? And the Language Too The language of the poem is very simple - it's a very clear and easy-to-read poem. Many of the words only have one syllable - increasing the level of ease with which one reads it. Could this be to send a message that bottling up anger is something that we all do - regardless of age or ability? The opening lines of the poem all begin with 'I'. This reinforces the idea that the poem is a first-person perspective, and increases the intensity - this is clearly something the writer feels passionately about. As we know, it didn't end well for them... There is a repetition of 'and', which again builds intensity. Perhaps the writer wants us to see how bottling something up can 'snowball' into something worse... Imagine Other Methods Quite clearly, this poem is an extended metaphor. The writer compares his anger to a tree, one which he nourishes: 'I water'd it with fears'. Think about:
Give a Personal Response When discussing poetry, it's always important to give your opinion - evaluate the poem. You can read more on evaluation here. Using evaluative language will help you to explore the poet's intentions as opposed to just looking at the words. This is what will get you into the upper bands. When comparing poems, I like to pick out the poem I think is more effective at putting its message across, and explaining why. I think this shows that I am able to discriminate between two poems and their messages. Linked Poems
Ciaran Carson was born in Belfast, Ireland, and wrote Belfast Confetti in response to the bombings committed by both the Irish Republican Army (the IRA) and British Nationalists during The Troubles (a time of conflict between Britain and Ireland running through history up to 1996, when the Peace Agreement was triggered).
The poem focuses on what happens when a bomb goes off close to home - and how it affects your ability to communicate. Belfast Confetti Suddenly as the riot squad moved in, it was raining exclamation marks, Nuts, bolts, nails, car-keys. A fount of broken type. And the explosion. Itself - an askerisk on the map. This hyphenated line, a burst of rapid fire... I was trying to complete a sentence in my head but it kept stuttering, All the alleyways and side streets blocked with stops and colons. I know this labyrinth so well - Balaclava, Raglan, Inkerman, Odessa Street - Why can’t I escape? Every move is punctuated. Crimea Street. Dead end again. A Saracen, Kremlin-2 mesh. Makrolon face-shields. Walkie- talkies. What is My name? Where am I coming from? Where am I going? A fusillade of question- marks. What's it all about? As stated above, it is an account of a bomb attack in Belfast - most likely, the Shankill Road bombing of 1993: What's the point of view? We can assume that the first-person narrative is through the eyes of somebody on the road, during the time of the bombing. This poem is clearly focused on the effect the bomb has on an 'every man'; it doesn't seem to be the voice of someone who is directly involved in the attack. Think about the structure This is an interesting poem. Consider the opening line Suddenly as the riot squad moved in it was raining exclamation marks By opening the poem with the word "suddenly", we get a sense of the urgency of the situation. We can almost assume that before this, the narrator was just going about his normal life - we come in almost halfway through a sentence. Notice also the lack of punctuation; normally, we would see a comma after "suddenly" and "in", but we don't - which adds to the lack of chaos. Also consider this response from BBC Bitesize: The poem's form is immediately striking. Instead of neat, compact stanzas, the lines are over-long and the stanzas stretched. On closer inspection, you can see there are two stanzas, the first with five lines, the second with four. Each line, however, spills over so there are additional lines of one or two words. By presenting the poem like this, Carson is expressing the confusion caused by the riot and bomb. For example, with the phrase "And/the explosion/Itself" (lines 3-5), we even end up reading backwards as our eyes have to move from right to left across and down the page... However, through the confusion of the form and the language, we can see a narrative structure (an organised story). A demonstration has got out of hand and riot police have moved in to control it. The rioters start throwing things and there's an explosion (it is possible the nuts and bolts come from the explosion itself – time may also be confused in the poet's head). The poet runs for safety, trying to make sense of what is happening, but cannot escape. The place he knows so well becomes a trap and he runs into a check-point where he is held up and questioned by the police. And the language too This is an interesting poem in that the language we would expect to see is instead replaced by hard, cold, punctuation, perhaps suggesting that the blast was so sudden and so unexpected that it has knocked out the narrator's ability to use words. Swap "exclamation marks" for "screams" and "stops and colons" with police and debris. Carson could describe the scene if he wanted to, but he doesn't. This is very clearly a poem that focuses on the psychological confusion of being caught in a bomb - the blast takes away your ability to focus, reflect, take in information. Ironically, Carson is stuck with punctuation marks, with no words to punctuate. The language itself is harsh and unpoetic, almost primitive - take the line Nuts, bolts, nails, car-keys All simple household objects, yet when put together can produce tragedy. The language is cold, simple and forceful. Note also the car keys - a touch of humanity amongst the industrial mess. An interesting point from Bitesize focuses on the use of street names: Carson also lists the street names in lines 11-13. These work both on a literal level (they describe where he lives and how well he knows these streets) but also the metaphoric level. The streets are named after generals and battles and places from the Crimea War, a war the British fought in Victorian times against the Russians. He therefore likens the riot to a battle in a bigger war. Imagine other methods Alliteration is a big part of this poem. The poem is unstable, and lacks any real form due to its confusing nature and the state of the narrator, but what stands out is the use of the fricative consonant /f/ juxtaposed by the plosives /b/ and /k/. Most lines have these sounds - the gentle calm followed by the sudden 'crack' or 'pop' of the bomb. The use of questions at the end forces the reader to think - is the narrator asking himself these questions, or is he being interrogated? It isn't really clear, and again adds to the confusion. Consider also the juxtaposition of the weapons used by each side - the police have "makrolon face-shields" and "saracens" and "walkie-talkies", whereas the bombers have "nuts, bolts, nails and car-keys". There is an inherent divide here; the battle itself is already unequal. Poems for comparison
You can access the presentation for this lesson here:
You can learn more about The Troubles here:
|
An OverviewWe are studying the Conflict cluster from the Edexcel anthology. This exam is closed-book, so you will need to familiarise yourself with each poem's form, structure and language, in addition to how each poem is related, before the exam. ArchivesCategories
All
|