Digging

Today we read the last poem that we’re going to: “Digging” by Seamus Heaney. This contrasts the lives of the poet’s father and grandfather with his own: they were men who earned their living by hard physical work with a spade, while he is an academic and poet who makes money by writing. We noticed the structure of the poem. It begins and ends similarly, and in between there’s the verse about his father digging up potatoes and his grandfather digging peat (turf, as he calls it).

It’s in free verse - apart from the little bit of rhyme at the beginning. If you mention this, you need to think of why Heaney might have done it. Maybe it’s to give the effect of growing enthusiasm: he starts more conventionally and then gets carried away?

You might want to write about the very vivid use of various senses: smell, sound, touch.

The main image is that of the pen as a gun – something powerful or even dangerous (in the wrong hands?). We remember the proverb “The pen is mightier than the sword” – in other words writing is powerful and can change things. The last line - “I’ll dig with it” - has connotations of digging things up, having a dig… making the world a different place by writing about it.

This could be used for a question about the world of work, nostalgia, a surprising ending, family…

We then watched the second half of the “View from a Bridge” film, which despite its crackles, unconvincing accents and old-fashioned hairstyles I thought was quite evocative. I liked the very close-up camera shots as the film went on; they gave a real feeling of the claustrophobia of being crammed together in a small flat with all that tension. I also liked the way Eddie ran after the immigration van, yelling at Marco, and then turned to see all his neighbours lined up against him.

Homework: 2008 Close Reading, passage 1, about the countryside; and a literature essay, your choice.

Next week is the last class till April 21 and then it’s all getting very close…

Various

Again, a short blog because it was a short class – the first part was taken up with the Personal Study. Congratulations on your mainly very good prelim marks, by the way – though it’s possible that your actual exam marks won’t be quite so starry (though they might – as I explained, paper 2 is a bit of an unknown quantity to us at the moment).

We then read Dylan Thomas’s “Do not go gentle into that good night”, a villanelle (Google it if you’re not sure what this is) which is open to considerable interpretation. The basic message is that we shouldn’t die without protest because there will always be regrets: wise men will regret that they didn’t light up the world with their insights; good men that they didn’t change the world; wild men that they hurt people; serious men that they didn’t have more fun. There are lots of metaphors suggesting these things, for which you may like to find other meanings, and this is fine as long as you can justify them. The word choice is very powerful: particularly words expressing anger and other emotions.

This could be used for questions on a poem which unfolds its meaning only after study (and even then isn't crystal clear) ; a poem about death; a poem with a specific poetic form (you wouldn’t have to explain what a villanelle is, but you’d write about the effect: the almost hypnotic repetition, the musical, chorus-like impression, the emphasis of the limited number of rhymes…), a poem with contrasts, a poem addressed to a person (his father)….

We then went over the 2007 Close Reading, passage 2, about the digitisation of the Bodleian

and the boy sitting in the courtyard of Cambridge University Library. This is homework – and if you didn’t do the first passage then I’d be happy to get both together next week. Or not.

Where was the popcorn?

Today we watched the first act of the rather – very – ancient, scratchy film of “A View from the Bridge”. As you will remember, it started very differently from the play but soon morphed into a fairly accurate, word-for-word version of it. If any of you can bring yourselves to comment, I’d be interested to know whether you want to watch the second half at any point. Failing that, you could just tell me, of course, or email.

Should you be enthusiastic enough to want your own copy, you could get it from http://stores.blowoutdvd1.com/-strse-23/A-View-From-The/Detail.bok

(I was quite sad to think of the actress who played Catherine – I imagine that she thought this was her big break and I don’t think I’ve ever seen her in anything else. However, I’m not much of a film buff so maybe she had a starry career that I’m just not aware of.)

Then we looked at the rather unpleasant “A Study of Reading Habits” by Philip Larkin, in case a question came up on two poems by the same poet. We considered the similarities with “Poetry of Departures” (eg colloquial language, use of rhyme/rhythm, cynical attitude, change of attitude between beginning and end, references to reading) and the differences (eg different “voices”, PD features an adult while SRH features the change from childhood to adolescence to adulthood, SRH much more colloquial, dated language).

SRH could also, of course, be used by itself, as a poem expressing dissatisfaction, unpleasant emotions, a personality…. etc

Then we read “You’re” by Sylvia Plath, a much more positive poem about a mother’s love for her unborn baby. It’s structured as a list of images describing the baby, all very sweet and loving and a bit unusual- comical at times. It could be used for a question on a poem which is happy/positive/image-filled/requiring thought/featuring a relationship – etc. Or it could be used to contrast with a gloomy/negative poem such as “Anthem for Doomed Youth” or SRH.

Homework – 2007 Close Reading, passage 1, about Glasgow University library.

Next week: Personal Study. One hour (plus extra time if relevant); bring in text and up to 2 A4 sides of notes, but not whole essay. Notes to be submitted with essay. For those who have the unit, class starts at 7.30 pm.

Obesity and ? romance

Today I got you to write a literature essay on “A Patchwork Planet” in class – in two weeks’ time, after all, it’s the start of the prelim. Remember that you have to write 2 essays in an hour and a half.

Homework is 2006 Close Reading passage 1 on obesity.

The only other thing we covered in this class was Carol Ann Duffy’s “Valentine”, a mainly very unromantic view of love. Though it’s in free verse (ie unrhymed and with irregular rhythm) it does have a structure, pivoting round the central “I am trying to be truthful”. We noticed that the first half is similar in many ways to the second half, but that the second half is extremely unromantic and indeed quite sinister, with the word “Lethal” suggesting the deadly nature of the offered love (if it’s later spurned?) and the last word lingering uneasily in the memory: “knife”. The poem’s effect depends largely on its imagery - mainly about the onion - and that balanced structure that we noticed. Do bear in mind that the “voice” isn’t necessarily that of Duffy herself – she’s not known for killing her former lovers, despite her rather gloomy appearance.

Busy busy busy

Sorry for the late appearance of the blog this week. It’s been a bit frantic (though frankly all you non-commenty people don’t make it feel very worth my while to write it anyway).

Last week was the essay reassessment (you all passed, by the way; well done) so the class proper didn’t start till 7.30 pm.

We revised the three standard Analysis questions and how to do them the SQA way: context, linking and imagery.

Then we discussed Larkin’s Poetry of Departures - a rather nasty poem but a potentially useful one for such questions as one on contrast (language, ideas, etc), one where some knowledge of the poet’s life is useful, one that gives an impression of a personality, one using rhyme in an unusual way…

Homework – yes, I realise it’s a bit late if you haven’t done it yet – 2006 question 2 on “A View from the Bridge”. I gave out an outline showing the sorts of things I’d say if I were writing this essay.

Do ask me for any handouts that you didn’t get and would like.

Prelim in two and three weeks!

In brief...

A short blog this week – life is getting away from me.

Tonight we went over the second 2005 Close Reading on comets and asteroids, reading the marking instructions and considering what we could learn from them.


We then studied the poem “Cynddyllan on a Tractor” by RS Thomas about Cynddyllan (pronounced Cun-thullan) the Welsh farmer, on his very first tractor.

We decided that this would be suitable for a question on (among other things) the world of work, modern life, technology, contrast, colloquial language, imagery, a person….

We finished reading “A View from the Bridge”, with magnificent final performances from the actors, and discussed the technical terms. I handed out notes (please ask me for these if you weren’t there).

Homework – please write a critical essay on either “Cynddllan on a Tractor” or “Hotel Room 12th Floor”, using one (or more!) of 2005 question 12 or 14, or 2006 question 12.

Remember that for poetry essays, you must quote a lot – the essays are always going to ask you to discuss the poetic techniques, which you can hardly discuss without quoting. The usual way to deal with poetry essays is to go through the poem more or less line by line – NOT by doing what the SQA calls a “guided tour” (of everything about the poem with nothing made relevant to the question) BUT by picking out things relevant to the question and making this relevance quite obvious.

NEXT WEEK - ESSAY REASSESSMENT (REFLECTIVE/ARGUMENTATIVE/PERSUASIVE ) - CLASS STARTS 7.30 FOR THOSE WHO'VE ALREADY PASSED.

Remember your tent pegs

This evening we looked at James’s “Patchwork Planet” critical essay about how the ending of a novel was prepared for earlier on. We admired the way in which he actually discussed how various earlier bits led on to the end. This compared to some of the other essays, which tended sometimes to contain information which might have been shown to lead on to the end – but never quite did.

We then looked at my version of this question and I reiterated the tent peg metaphor. It may seem like overdoing it, but a marker at this level likes to have the relevance to the question of what you’re saying made obvious. Remember that, as far as the marker is concerned, you’re 16 or 17. They’re not expecting subtlety. They want clear, relevant points in that SECT sort of way. If your tent shows signs of flying away on an enthusiastic gale, to land in some distant field, far from the question, then pin it down by adding sentences such as: “This leads on to the ending when…”.

We then discussed Norman MacCaig’s poem “Hotel Room, 12th Floor”, full of imagery which is reasonably easy to discuss in the exam. The main, extended, metaphor is that of darkness as the enemy, seen specifically as a band of Red Indians riding into town and being shot at – ineffectually – by the light. Darkness is shown to bring violence to New York, despite the trappings of civilisation: helicopters, tall buildings, tv, radio, light. As he says, “And no stockades/ can keep the midnight out”. We may imagine that we’re civilised, but we’re never far away from violence, or potential violence – it’s there in human nature.

Then we read on in “View”, finishing Act 1 and just beginning Act 2. We saw Alfieri in the dual role of narrator (reminding us of the fact that he’s telling us a story) and lawyer (advising Eddie). The two roles merge seamlessly together – he turns from the audience and is apparently mid-conversation with Eddie, who has come to consult him. Eddie wants the law to help him against Rodolpho who, he says, is “not right” – he’s implying that Rodolpho is gay. Alfieri has to tell him that even if he were, marrying Catherine would not be illegal. The only illegal thing is that the cousins are illegal immigrants and Eddie says, “I wouldn’t do nothin’ about that…”. Then Alfieri gently suggests that sometimes “there is too much love for the daughter, there is too much love for the niece”. Eddie reacts “furiously”.

Alfieri tells the audience that he “could see every step coming, step after step… I knew where he was going to end”.Then, at dinner, Catherine is clearly very excited by Rodolpho’s stories of sailing to Africa and picking oranges off the trees in Italy.

Eddie is much less impressed. He points out that American girls aren’t as “free” as Rodolpho thinks; Rodolpho protests that he has “respect” for Catherine. She and Rodolpho dance to “Paper Doll”, though he, “in deference to Eddie” (stage direction) at first demurs. She, however, is “flushed with revolt” and dances with him.

We looked at the Mills Brothers' version of "Paper Doll" - which I think is the one that Catherine and Rodolpho have bought as a record. It's at

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=n2m8VZBfRYo&feature=PlayList&p=AA3233A397B67272&playnext=1&index=13

Beatrice tries to divert his attention by talking about the cousins’ fishing expeditions, but Eddie’s worst fears are confirmed by hearing that Rodolpho is a good cook: “He sings. He cooks. He could make dresses…”. He suggests that Rodolpho would be better suited to working in a dress shop than as a longshoreman. This is not meant as a compliment.

He suggests teaching Rodolpho to box and starts to do so. He punches Rodolpho lightly and makes him stagger, alarming the others. Marco then demonstrates his superior strength by challenging Eddie to lift a chair by one leg, with one hand. Eddie can’t do it but Marco can, and the act ends with Marco holding the chair high with a “smile of triumph, and Eddie’s grin vanishes as he absorbs this look”. Here we see Marco warning Eddie off his brother.

We just started Act 2 – where Catherine and Rodolpho are in the flat alone and he says he wouldn’t marry her if they had to go to Italy because they’d starve there – but that he wouldn’t “carry on my back the rest of my life a woman I didn’t love just to be an American”. We decided that he is sincere; he does love her.

Homework - 2005 Close Reading, passage 2.

If I didn't speak to you this week about your Personal Study, then I will next week. Or email me if you want advice: pdonaldson@stevenson.ac.uk

I'm sorry there are no lines between some of my paragraphs. I put them in but Blogger removes them. It annoys me. Bad Blogger.

Where are you, missing students?

This was quite a short class since those who already have the Textual Analysis assessment left at 8 so that I could do some revision with the others for the assessment next week. Remember that the class proper doesn’t start till 7.30 next week because of the reassessment. Attendance is a bit patchy these days, which is a worry (for me). Also there have been no blog comments! I shall not go on doing this for my own entertainment only, people. I could be watching “Coronation Street”.

We talked about persuasive essays: how the purpose of them is (surprise!) to persuade the reader. They therefore DO have to display logical arguments in a structured way but DON’T (unlike argumentative essays) have to be balanced. They may, or may not, produce some arguments on the other side but if they do, they should do so only to demolish these. The language of a persuasive essay may sometimes be less formal than that of an argumentative one – you’re speaking directly to the reader, appealing with him/her to agree with you – and it may be appropriate therefore to use the word “you”.

Unlike in an argumentative essay, when you shouldn’t harangue the reader (“You shouldn’t get pregnant at eighteen” – this is not going to apply to anyone who’s likely to mark it) you may wish in your persuasive essay to make the reader feel that he/she is being addressed (“You can make a difference to global warming”).

We then looked at chapters 11 and 12 of “A Patchwork Planet”. In chapter 11, Barnaby visits Opal for her birthday, but the present (chosen by Sophia) falls flat and Opal is cold in the park in her party dress, so she goes home again. He has to wait for Sophia to give him a lift home, which gives him time to think about his marriage. He wonders if perhaps he should have stayed with Natalie and she might have “become the right person”. On the way home in the car, he and Sophia have an argument: she wants him to apply for a job at her bank and is clearly unhappy that he doesn’t earn much; especially since she has “lost” her money in her aunt’s flour bin and for some reason won’t go and retrieve it.

In chapter 12, he thinks a lot about the problems brought by old age. Then at Mrs Cartwright’s, he and Martine are turning a mattress and end up standing very close to each other. He hears the clink of her overall clasp (when did he last mention this? – p. 186) and she asks him “How do you get your mouth to turn up at the corners that way?” (How does she feel about mouths? – p. 27). He replies flippantly and changes the subject quickly to not wanting to be late for lunch with Sophia. Martine picks a fight with him on the way home and he – apparently – doesn’t know why.

Of course, Anne Tyler knows why. Never forget that this is a novel. Anne Tyler pulls all the strings.

We then discussed “Anthem for Doomed Youth” by Wilfred Owen, in which the poet compares death on the battlefield (nothing changes, the guns keep firing, but the dead soldiers’ comrades are sad) to death at home (bells, candles, a white pall cloth over the coffin).

He does this all the way through the sonnet, at first in alternate lines and then both in one line, in a very compressed way. There’s metaphor, alliteration, assonance, onomatopoeia, rhyme, regular rhythm, interesting word choice and a very clear structure.

Critical essays and Barnaby again

First of all, I gave back the Textual Analysis assessments, which most people passed. I’ve now decided to delay the reassessment for one week, so it’ll be on 2 December. Next week, therefore, I’m going to finish the class at 8 for those who passed and spend the later part of the lesson doing some intensive revision with those who didn’t quite pass. Then on 2 December, class will begin at 7.30 pm for those who don’t need to resit.

We then considered poetry as a subject for a critical ( ie literature) essay in the exam. I said – because it’s certainly true for me – that it’s easier to learn a poem and (more or less) everything there is to say about it than it is to do the same for a novel. To that extent, it’s easier to write about a poem in the exam than about a novel or a play. For novels and plays, you must – while sitting in the exam room - select extracts and aspects to write about which are relevant to the question. For poems, assuming that the poem is relevant to the question, you’re writing about the whole poem – or most of it – so the selection process is largely avoided.

The downside of this is that while the novel and play questions are usually fairly general (“Choose a novel where the main character learns something about himself” – this is the case in almost all novels), the poetry questions are much more specific (“Choose a poem about an animal” or “Choose a poem with a sinister tone”). This means that you’re very likely indeed to get a novel and play question that you can answer but you're much less likely to get a poetry question that’s appropriate to any one poem.

If you do get such a question, however, then (in my opinion) poetry questions are easier - for the above reasons.

We looked at the poem “Museé des Beaux Arts” (the Museum of Beautiful Arts) by W H Auden, which is partly about the painting of Icarus by Brueghel,/Bruegel / Breughel (variously spelt) in this museum in Paris. I then gave you an exemplar of an essay on the subject of a poem which showed contrast.

In “A Patchwork Planet”, we just had time to look at chapter 10, in which Barnaby sells the car to Len Parrish and hands over the money to his mother. He’s very reluctant in the end to let the car go, which shows us its importance to him. To his disappointment, the handover of the money falls flat: his mother is suspicious as to where he got it and his father is shocked that he has sold the Corvette.

Then the reader finds out that Mrs Glynn has found the money that she thought was stolen – she’s just misplaced it. Barnaby is very forgiving, but Sophia seems surprisingly upset. It turns out that she has withdrawn her savings and put them in the flour bin to protect Barnaby.

He immediately realises that this seems to be proof that she really thought he’d stolen the money, but he’s disarmed by Sophia’s reference to the O Henry (above) story in which a young married couple each secretly sell their most prized possessions (the girl’s long, beautiful hair and the man’s pocket watch) to buy presents for each other (a clasp for her hair and a chain for his watch). Sophia likens this to her pointless sacrifice of her savings, and Barnaby is distracted from her obvious lack of trust in him by the romantic way she puts this: “You are your gift to me, Barnaby”.

Is anybody reading this, by the way? Comments would be good, as proof!