On A Portrait Of A Deaf Man – John Betjeman

The kind old face, the egg-shaped head,
The tie, discreetly loud,
The loosely fitting shooting clothes,
A closely fitting shroud.

He liked old city dining rooms,
Potatoes in their skin,
But now his mouth is wide to let
The London clay come in.

He took me on long silent walks
In country lanes when young.
He knew the names of ev’ry bird
But not the song it sung.

And when he could not hear me speak
He smiled and looked so wise
That now I do not like to think
Of maggots in his eyes.

He liked the rain-washed Cornish air
And smell of ploughed-up soil,
He liked a landscape big and bare
And painted it in oil.

But least of all he liked that place
Which hangs on Highgate Hill
Of soaked Carrara-covered earth
For Londoners to fill.

He would have liked to say goodbye,
Shake hands with many friends,
In Highgate now his finger-bones
Stick through his finger-ends.

You, God, who treat him thus and thus,
Say “Save his soul and pray.”
You ask me to believe You and
I only see decay.

Analysis

Sometimes there are poems that simply knock you for six and this, for me, is one of those. John Betjeman poems do this for me. If unsure what I mean, read “Slough” by the same poet. There is a sense in his poems that a hint of sarcasm, or angst, comes through in every single line and as much as “Slough” asks for “friendly bombs” to fall on the town because he does not like the new town of Slough [when it was built], so too do we see here that same rhyming style and use of language that evokes, in this case, a sense of sadness, but also angst at God.

It is as if the poet himself is relating how much an elderly gentleman means to him, like his is looking at him down in the coffin now that he has gone. He sees the “kind old face, the egg-shaped head, the tie, discreetly loud” and remembers how this man used to be. It is a memory of something good. This was a unique man, the sort of man who led his life like he wanted to and unlike the majority of others. He was a man in his life who liked “loosely fitting shooting clothes,” which suggests a country gentleman of sorts, someone who preferred the country lifestyle. This is compounded when we see the word “Cornish” later in the poem. But now, in death, his clothes are not rich and luxurious, but more like a “closely fitting shroud” around him as he lays buried.

In the next verse, we see more of the man when he was alive, a man who liked “old city dining rooms” that served “potatoes in their skin,” or Jacket Potatoes as we know them. It is as if the poet is remembering the old man like he was rather than is and shows something that we as humans do. When someone we love dies, we tend to like to remember them in their glory years, when they were fit and healthy. This is what the poet is doing here, rather than thinking about how now, “his mouth is wide [open in death] to let the London clay come in.” This latter image is one that disgusts, one that makes us shudder and is one we tend to avoid at all costs.

In the next verse this idea is repeated with similar language, where we see the poet remembering the man who used to take him “on long silent walks in country lanes” when he was younger. This was a man who “knew the names of ev’ry bird” which is impressive and shows a knowledge of the natural environment, but then, the next line where it says “but not the song it sung” makes us see a man who although knowledgeable about birds, is someone who is bereft of feeling for them. He was a man who “smiled and looked so wise” and this is how he is remembered rather than thinking of him lying in the ground with “maggots in his eyes.” It is at this point that the reader sees the meaning of the title for we are told that the man at some point was unable to hear him speaking.

And in his silent and insular self at that point, the poet still remembers someone who “liked the rain-washed Cornish air and smell of ploughed-up soil,” showing someone with a love of the countryside, someone who maybe was from Cornwall, a friend of the family or maybe even, someone closer. This is someone who saw the beauty in “a landscape big and bare” enough to paint it with oil paints. So we see a man who had a love of the soil, the earth, the very ground he is to be put in after he dies. And as much as he loved the earth in all its natural magnificence, there was one place on earth he detested and this is painted so well by the poet, who says “least of all he liked that place which hangs on Highgate Hill.” Now, Highgate Hill is a cemetery where the dead are buried. The poet describes it as being something where “soaked Carrara-covered earth” fills the ground. Suddenly, we see someone who both loves and hates, someone who sees both good and bad in the natural world, but the loathing of the place is simply because everything there is dead and decaying. It is a place “for Londoners to fill,” somewhere where negativity resides in slumber.

In the following verses, the attention is taken away from the man and his likes, to the fact that even when he knew he was dying, there were some regrets in his life. We see how “he would have liked to say goodbye,” or “shake hands with many friends,” but maybe because his death was sudden and unexpected, he never got the chance. Now, in the ground, “his finger-bones stick through his finger-ends.” This is a particularly grim image being painted here by the poet who wants to see the man as he remembers him, fit and well, not decaying in the ground. It is a defence mechanism at work in the normal human being, the thing we do with those we love and admire.

Now, if these memories were good enough for the man, as he remembers his friend and the tone is friendly, there comes a sudden change, for the man remembering his friend share his thoughts to someone [or thing] in a different direction. So far it has been fond memories, a warmth towards the man, a sense of fondness, but now, towards his concept of “God,” the man aims an insult, which again, is understandable, but nevertheless a natural response. It is so easy for us when we are faced with something negative, to ask “where is God in all of this?” This is what the poet, or man remembering, does here as he directs the final verse, saying “you, God, who treat him thus and thus, say “Save his soul and pray.””

The tone is very different in this last verse. There is an antagonism as he thinks about how God, in whatever form, asks him “to believe” when the only thing he can see in his vision is “decay.” Tonally there is anger here where there was fondness before. There is a sense of annoyance directed at whoever or whatever is in charge of life. The poet is saying that life is so unfair, so wrong that it can take someone as good as this man being remembered. And in a sense, he would be right in thinking this, for life is, invariably, unfair at times. We see sickness and decay all around us each day. We see parents ageing and decay setting in, waiting for God in their homes, waiting for death to take them and we despair. This is what the poet is trying to say here, that in the end, all we can see “is decay!” That is what makes this poem a sad and melancholic one to read but also a brilliant poem to read because of the dichotomy between what is remembered and what is fact.

Case History: Alison (Head Injury)
UA Fanthorpe

(She looks at her photograph)

I would like to have known
My husband’s wife, my mother’s only daughter.
A bright girl she was.

Enmeshed in comforting
Fat, I wonder at her delicate angles.
Her autocratic knee

Like a Degas dancer’s
Adjusts to the observer with an airy poise
That now lugs me upstairs

Hardly. Her face, broken
By nothing sharper than smiles, holds in its smiles
What I have forgotten.

She knows my father’s dead
And grieves for it, and smiles. she has digested
Mourning. Her smile shows it.

I, who need reminding
Every morning, shall never get over what
I do not remember.

Consistency matters.
I should like to keep faith with her lack of faith,
But forget her reasons.

Proud of this younger self,
I assert her achievements, her A levels,
Her job with a future.

Poor clever girl! I know,
For all my damaged brain , something she doesn’t:
I am her future.

A bright girl she was.

Analysis

The first thing I am noticing when I view this poem for the first time is the title. This is something you need to consider with every poem in the anthology. Some have real meaning, like the Agard poem, where he is checking out his identity. Others, like Shelley’s Ozymandias, tell you very little. Others lead you on into the poem expecting a certain something to happen. Therefore, the title of a poem is extremely worth writing about and is something that a lot of students fail to do in exams [I have marked them don’t forget] to the detriment of their marks. Sometimes the 2 marks missing where a comment could have been made can be the difference between the C and the D grade.

This poem has one of those titles where you think to yourself, okay, now that is a little weird for a title. It is more like a title for a description of a patient, or an essay on the clinical needs and dependencies of a patient. So the first thing to note is that from the very beginning, the poem has the reader at somewhat of a disadvantage [but do not read it quickly like I did first time]. This is continued as we read the words in parenthesis, or, in brackets. We see that one person is looking at a photograph that she owns and is then thinking, out loud when read as a poem. So these words are the thoughts of that person, as she considers the photograph in her hands. She says “I would like to have known my husband’s wife, my mother’s only daughter,” which sounds a little odd and in line with the oddities of the title we looked at earlier. “My husband’s wife” is a statement that sounds wrong, unless the person she was married to was married before their marriage, or even if it was a bigamous marriage on the man’s part [see the comment at the end of this description as the light bulb moment hit me]. Either way, the woman considers how she would like to get to know her because she was “a bright girl,” which shows affection for the woman in question in the first verse. This theme of wondering about this other woman is developed in the next three lines as she considers how the other wife was “enmeshed in comforting fat,” which alas, does suggest she was of the more Matronly figure.

She is looking at a photograph here in this poem, which has just set alarm bells in my head because we recently read another poem where something like this was happening. If you remember the context of My Last Duchess, by Robert Browning, you see here a major similarity and one that you may consider when writing in the exam. If your exam question says something like write about My Last Duchess and one other poem of your choice you have one here that you could use to compare and contrast well. Both have a character looking at an image of a wife. Both have a person considering her beauty, her pose, the way she looks on the image in front of them. In this one, the woman considers the lady’s “delicate angles” and “autocratic knee.” Autocratic means a ruler who has absolute power, so she has the power over her husband, a power to control him, to make him love her, to change the direction of his gaze if needs be. This is one good looking woman, even given her statuesque figure.

She has legs “like a Degas dancer,” and “adjusts to the observer with an airy poise.” She is the epitome of perfection to the man in her life and has the ability to hold in her smile what a person forgets. She is impressive in every way. The woman thinks and knows that the woman in the photo “knows [that her] father’s dead” and as such, she has mourned and grieved for that person. She is a person who has the ability to share her emotions with the world. She is so alike to the Duchess in the Browning poem. The rather beautiful comment that “she has digested mourning” is one that in essence, shows a compassionate and understanding woman who is able to have sympathy and empathy with others around her. She is the sort of person you want in your life, or was! There is that sense of one-ship in her smile, her radiating smile. Not only is she bright and lovely to know, but the lady observing the photo is someone who needs “reminding every morning” because she “shall never get over what [she does] not remember.”

Now we begin to see something different happening in the poem because “consistency matters” in this person’s life. Suddenly, there is a lightbulb moment in this ageing head of mine [oh boy, did it come as a surprise to me when it hit] as I see the truth of the poem and the truth of the situation this lady finds herself in. There are times when I need to sit down and look through some old photographs. As I do so, I begin to remember again the memories I thought I had forgotten, memories of my time before my car crash in 2010 when I passed into unconsciousness and ‘died’ at the scene only to be revived by the paramedics. I have no idea how long I was wherever I ‘went’ in those moments but when I was lurched back into reality, the twelve different head injuries began to exhibit their pain on me, a pain I can remember to this day. So, when I now see this woman and I consider the title once again and how it has the words “head injury” in brackets, I see a woman who is staring at a photo of herself when she was younger, married to the man of her life and seeing her “husband’s wife, [her] mother’s only daughter” and she considers just how much of a “bright girl she was” before the brain injury.

Now, she is a woman who would “like to keep faith with her lack of faith” back in those days of happiness, but she cannot remember “her reasons” or the pride she once had as she achieved glory in her exams and landed the “job with a future.” She looks back and can see only a faded image in her mind, a shady old photograph in her memory that is full of gaps that were brought on by the head injury. My memory sometimes plays tricks on me as well, so I share her despair here at not being able to reach out and make contact with that person of old. After such a head injury, you become a different person, good or bad. You have to make adjustments. You have to operate in a different way. Life becomes something you have to learn how to do all over again, rather like learning to walk all over again with false legs.

“For all [her] damaged brain,” she is all too aware that the future holds something different for her. From “bright girl” and having passed her “A Levels,” she now has to look forward to a life bereft of achievement, or one that she simply does not want to lead. Now here, I see myself in this poem looking back at my old photographs and I sense the heartache and despair of this woman as she looks forward without a sense of hope. “I am her future,” she says but then, using what could be termed an oxymoron, she adds again the repeated words “a bright girl she was.” It is that use of the past tense that for me, makes this such a heart rending poem. It shows and shares a feeling of woe after an accident of some kind leading to a brain injury that has left this once active and very clever woman in a situation that no-one would ever wish on their worst enemy. This is why this is such a good poem because it makes the reader consider just how they would live in such circumstances!

The Language of Advertising – Printed Adverts & Images

There are a number of things you have to concentrate on when looking at an image, or an advert, either in class or in the exam.

1. Content. In other words, you need to open with a sentence or two about the advert or image. You need to treat it like a poem, in the sense that when you see it in the classroom or exam, the thing is there, in the present, so it is present tense only. For example, “The advert for Vosene Junior has two pictures of Dennis the Menace in the centre of the page, with text above and below…..” Briefly, in one paragraph, state what you see. You do not need to use PEE chains yet.
2. Audience. In this second paragraph, you need to think about and write about the audience being aimed at with the advert. For example, a Vosene Junior advert using Dennis the Menace would not be aimed at children, for they do not buy the product. No, it would be aimed at the parents of that child. Think in terms of age, gender, social grouping, why a certain audience would buy that kind of product. Is the advert successfully aiming at the target audience? Here is where the PEE chains begin.
3. Images. You then move onto the next paragraph by mentioning the pictures that are included, however small. This may involve things like company logos so look at every image. I saw one once, a couple of years ago, for a mobile phone tariff where couples have a phone each but only one bill. The images were of two mobile phones with cartoon faces and arms and legs, running towards each other ready to embrace. The idea is that you would do so too if you shared a tariff. State what you see and give ideas as to why the advertiser may have chosen to use such an image. Is it aimed at a certain audience? If it is a baby pink ipod being advertised, why is it aimed more at the female audience?
4. Text/Font. Here you need to look at the language used; the words and the fonts chosen by the creator of the advert. Is it successful or not? Is it child-like? If so, why so? Now this is advert dependent, in the fact that words used for selling shampoo, like “aqua,” [meaning water], tend not to be used when selling or advertising Jim Beam whiskey, for obvious reasons. This is where the word register comes into play [look it up on Google]. There are a group of words associated with certain things. Baby wipes have their set of words just as much as Top Gear Magazine has word sets, or a lexical group of words that are used. [Look up semantic fields as well]. You can also refer to how successful you think they are but without using the words “I” or “My” in your writing.
5. Your Ideas. Here is where you get the chance to really criticise if necessary, the advert in question. Simply state whether the advert is any good at advertising the product in question. Your opinion is vital for success, but again, do it without using the personal pronouns mentioned above.

There are several ways to approach a non-literature task either for coursework, or for the exam. I tend to use a 5 point plan of Content, Audience, Pictures, Text and Opinion and look at how each affects the audience – are they successful or not? It is a simple way to approach 5 areas of thought in your essay answer.

There are other ways, other forms of thinking through a Language task. Below is just one of them. In order to sell a product, advertisers have to create the necessary illusion of superiority, so  they usually resort to one or more of the following ten basic techniques.

Each is common and easy to identify but how do they work? Make some notes of your own.

1. THE WEASEL CLAIM

A weasel word is a modifier that practically negates the claim that follows. Words or claims that appear substantial upon first look but disintegrate into hollow meaninglessness on analysis are weasels. Commonly used weasel words include “helps” (the champion weasel); “like” (used in a comparative sense); “virtual” or “virtually”; “acts” or “works”; “can be”; “up to”; “as much as”; “refreshes”; “comforts”; “tackles”; “fights”; “come on”; “the feel of”; “the look of”; “looks like”; “fortified”; “enriched”; and “strengthened.”

2. THE UNFINISHED CLAIM

The unfinished claim is one in which the ad claims the product is better, or has more of something, but does not finish the comparison. Samples of Unfinished Claims are “Magnavox gives you more.” More what? “Anacin: Twice as much of the pain reliever doctors recommend most.” This claim fits in a number of categories but it does not say twice as much of what pain reliever. “Supergloss does it with more color, more shine, more sizzle, more!” “Coffee-mate gives coffee more body, more flavor.” Also note that “body” and “flavor” are weasels.

3. THE “WE’RE DIFFERENT AND UNIQUE” CLAIM

This kind of claim states that there is nothing else quite like the product being advertised. For example, if Schlitz would add pink food coloring to its beer they could say, “There’s nothing like new pink Schlitz.” The uniqueness claim is supposed to be interpreted by readers as a claim to superiority. Samples of the “We’re Different and Unique” Claim” There’s no other mascara like it.” “Only Doral has this unique filter system.” “Cougar is like nobody else’s car.”

4. THE “WATER IS WET” CLAIM

“Water is wet” claims say something about the product that is true for any brand in that product category, (for example, “Schrank’s water is really wet.”) The claim is usually a statement of fact, but not a real advantage over the competition. Samples of the “Water is Wet” Claim are “Mobil: the Detergent Gasoline.” Any gasoline acts as a cleaning agent. “Great Lash greatly increases the diameter of every lash.”

5. THE “SO WHAT” CLAIM

This is the kind of claim to which the careful reader will react by saying “So What?” A claim is made which is true but which gives no real advantage to the product. This is similar to the “water is wet” claim except that it claims an advantage which is not shared by most of the other brands in the product category. Samples of the “So What” Claim are “Geritol has more than twice the iron of ordinary supplements.” But is twice as much beneficial to the body? “Campbell’s gives you tasty pieces of chicken and not one but two chicken stocks.” Does the presence of two stocks improve the taste? “Strong enough for a man but made for a woman.” This deodorant claims says only that the product is aimed at the female market.

6. THE VAGUE CLAIM

The vague claim is simply not clear. This category often overlaps with others. The key to the vague claim is the use of words that are colorful but meaningless, as well as the use of subjective and emotional opinions that defy verification. Most contain weasels.  Samples of the Vague Claim are “Lips have never looked so luscious.” Can you imagine trying to either prove or disprove such a claim? “Take a bite and you’ll think you’re eating on the Champs Elysées.” “Winston tastes good like a cigarette should.”

7. THE ENDORSEMENT OR TESTIMONIAL

A celebrity or authority appears in an ad to lend his or her stellar qualities to the product. Sometimes the people will actually claim to use the product, but very often they don’t. There are agencies surviving on providing products with testimonials. Samples of Endorsements or Testimonials are “Joan Fontaine throws a shot-in-the-dark party and her friends learn a thing or two.” “Darling, have you discovered Masterpiece? The most exciting men I know are smoking it.” (Eva Gabor) “Vega is the best handling car in the U.S.” This claim was challenged by the FTC, but GM answered that the claim is only a direct quote from Road and Track magazine.

8. THE SCIENTIFIC OR STATISTICAL CLAIM

This kind of ad uses some sort of scientific proof or experiment, very specific numbers, or an impressive sounding mystery ingredient. Samples of Scientific or Statistical Claims are “Wonder Break helps build strong bodies 12 ways.” “Easy-Off has 33% more cleaning power than another popular brand.” “Another popular brand” often translates as some other kind of oven cleaner sold somewhere. Also the claim does not say Easy-Off works 33% better. “Special Morning–33% more nutrition.” Also an unfinished claim.

9. THE “COMPLIMENT THE CONSUMER” CLAIM

This kind of claim butters up the consumer by some form of flattery. Samples of the “Compliment the Consumer” Claim are “We think a cigar smoker is someone special.” “If what you do is right for you, no matter what others do, then RC Cola is right for you.” “You pride yourself on your good home cooking….” and “The lady has taste.”

10. THE RHETORICAL QUESTION

This technique demands a response from the audience. A question is asked and the viewer or listener is supposed to answer in such a way as to affirm the product’s goodness.

Samples of the Rhetorical Question are “Plymouth–isn’t that the kind of car America wants?” “Shouldn’t your family be drinking Hawaiian Punch?” “What do you want most from coffee? That’s what you get most from Hills.” “Touch of Sweden: could your hands use a small miracle?”

Each are an example of language use. Each have an effect on the reader. So you should never forget that old three word mnemonic of AUDIENCE, FORM and PURPOSE! Keep these close to your heart and memory and you should do well.

NB. Each of the above ten ideas were generated from another website. They are useful to know, but as secondary ideas to the main ones specified in the first paragraph. I thank the other webmaster for adding the thoughts contained herein.

The Ruined Maid

Thomas Hardy

“O ‘Melia, my dear, this does everything crown!
Who could have supposed I should meet you in Town?
And whence such fair garments, such prosperi-ty?” —
“O didn’t you know I’d been ruined?” said she.

— “You left us in tatters, without shoes or socks,
Tired of digging potatoes, and spudding up docks;
And now you’ve gay bracelets and bright feathers three!” —
“Yes: that’s how we dress when we’re ruined,” said she.

— “At home in the barton you said thee’ and thou,’
And thik oon,’ and theäs oon,’ and t’other’; but now
Your talking quite fits ‘ee for high compa-ny!” —
“Some polish is gained with one’s ruin,” said she.

— “Your hands were like paws then, your face blue and bleak
But now I’m bewitched by your delicate cheek,
And your little gloves fit as on any la-dy!” —
“We never do work when we’re ruined,” said she.

— “You used to call home-life a hag-ridden dream,
And you’d sigh, and you’d sock; but at present you seem
To know not of megrims or melancho-ly!” —
“True. One’s pretty lively when ruined,” said she.

— “I wish I had feathers, a fine sweeping gown,
And a delicate face, and could strut about Town!” —
“My dear — a raw country girl, such as you be,
Cannot quite expect that. You ain’t ruined,” said she.

Analysis

I have read Hardy poems for some time now and they all seem to have a similar earthy feel to them, being about life and relationships in a Wessex countryside setting. Now the first thing to remember is there is no such place as Wessex, even if there is an Earl of Wessex in the British Royal Family. That aside, before you read this may I suggest you read Woman Much Missed as well, to get a flavour of his poems. Then read some more. They are simply glorious in places. And then read this so it is not your first Hardy poem.

Okay, so what is this one about? Well, one person is speaking of another, someone called “Melia,” or more likely, “Amelia” and that person speaking, we assume, is female because of the ending. She says “O ‘Melia, my dear, this does everything crown! Who could have supposed I should meet you in Town?” This is a surprise meeting between the two in the town but we see from the tone of the language used that meeting in town is unexpected.  The words “who would have thought” lead us to that assumption. Then we get something that you need to be aware of; the use of archaisms, or archaic language. This is when someone uses language that is so old and ancient it is considered to be archaic in its use and the word “whence” is one such word. She asks “whence such fair garments, such prosperity?” and is saying where did you come by, or how did you come to own such garments, or clothes that are so expensive?

The next line is therefore slightly confusing. Is she saying it ironically, when she responds with “O didn’t you know I’d been ruined?” She has been ruined financially by someone or something and the reader is left wondering if the person in the poem is at any fault. The girl continues by adding “You left us in tatters, without shoes or socks, tired of digging potatoes, and spudding up docks.” Because the speaker has caused this to happen, the woman in this poem has gone from affluence to poverty and the speaker is to blame.

Or so it seems!

Did she promise to keep her and then go back on her word? Maybe, but she says “now you’ve gay bracelets and bright feathers three,” hinting at the fact that this is a woman well dressed and well looked after, a woman of refinement and style, the style that only lots of money can buy. This is then confirmed rather sarcastically by the words “Yes: that’s how we dress when we’re ruined,” said she.” At this point, if you are not reading this with the right amount of exactness and accuracy, you can be misled. It is one of those poems. Ask yourself, how many are speaking here? The first three lines are a woman [most likely] speaking or talking to another woman and the last line is the woman replying. The woman then continues with “At home in the barton you said thee’ and thou,” using archaisms once again, as if she thinks she is from a higher class than the other. Couple this with the next line where she adds: “thik oon,’ and theäs oon,’ and t’other’; but now your talking quite fits ‘ee for high company” and you get the impression that she thinks the world of her. She is the epitome of perfection especially because her speech is that which is not pure and perfect. Her language used is colloquial and local to that Wessex area that exists in Hardy’s work, based in the south west of England.

But her response is sarcastic, sardonic even as she retorts with “some polish is gained with one’s ruin.” It is as if she is playing with emotions. The person is “bewitched by [her] delicate cheek,” as if everything in her leads to one conclusion, that she is the image of perfection. To some this might sound a little odd but ask yourself this; when you meet that person of your dreams, you just ‘know.’ That is the myth of love at first sight and when that happens you see your partner as the epitome of perfection. This is what is happening here; one person infatuated with this woman so much that he is unable to see past any imperfections. Her response once again is sarcastic, with “we never do work when we’re ruined.” She does not see herself in the same way. She sees a flawed person, not something that is perfect, but the other is different in assumptions, such is the extent of the love for this woman.

There is also a negativity to this woman as she sees that she has been ruined. “You used to call home-life a hag-ridden dream,” does suggest she at some point in their relationship, was not happy with her life, or lifestyle. She would insult where she was and what she had got. She would “sigh” and “sock,” which presumably is a term of negativity towards something, but in this present time she does not seem to know the boundaries of being “melancholy” or sad. The use of language here is interesting because although sarcastic, it shows the difference between how a man views a woman and how a woman sees a woman. “True,” says she, “One’s pretty lively when ruined.”

At this point the narrative of this poem has dealt with the past and the present in their relationship, but in the last verse it takes the reader into the future. The speaker says “I wish I had feathers, a fine sweeping gown, and a delicate face, and could strut about Town!” Clearly, this is something she has the ability to do. It is also something that some of the others are able to do as well. “My dear,” she asks, “a raw country girl, such as you be, cannot quite expect that.” In her eyes, she cannot claim to be on the receiving end of negativity, her being a country girl, as perfect as she sees her.

But this response is interesting in that she simply adds back “You ain’t ruined.” Being ruined makes it so that you feel as if you can do nothing. Her use of non-standard English, even as basic as it is, coupled with her sarcasm, makes for an interesting person being created in this poem. She has everything compared to the other’s very little. She is the epitome of Tess of the D’Urbevilles [give it a read – you’ll love it] and she is the simple country girl. There is a chasm between the two and she knows it, but she sees someone that has the ability to see beyond class boundaries and into the heart of a relationship. But she feels she has been ruined; by life, by another man maybe, or even by the narrator himself, who is trying desperately to redeem himself in the sight of her inability to forgive. This is why this is such a good poem to unlock.

The Hunchback In The Park – Dylan Thomas

A solitary mister
Propped between trees and water
From the opening of the garden lock
That lets the trees and water enter
Until the Sunday sombre bell at dark
Eating bread from a newspaper
Drinking water from the chained cup
That the children filled with gravel
In the fountain basin where I sailed my ship
Slept at night in a dog kennel
But nobody chained him up.
Like the park birds he came early
Like the water he sat down
And Mister they called Hey mister
The truant boys from the town
Running when he had heard them clearly
On out of sound
Past lake and rockery
Laughing when he shook his paper
Hunchbacked in mockery
Through the loud zoo of the willow groves
Dodging the park keeper
With his stick that picked up leaves.
And the old dog sleeper
Alone between nurses and swans
While the boys among willows
Made the tigers jump out of their eyes
To roar on the rockery stones
And the groves were blue with sailors
Made all day until bell time
A woman figure without fault
Straight as a young elm
Straight and tall from his crooked bones
That she might stand in the night
After the locks and chains
All night in the unmade park
After the railings and shrubberies
The birds the grass the trees the lake
And the wild boys innocent as strawberries
Had followed the hunchback
To his kennel in the dark.

Analysis

I remember seeing this poem for the first time a couple of years ago as I was teaching the poetry section in the anthology and was required to teach this, along with three or four more, to my classes to get them to write a Controlled Assessment on them. So it comes as no surprise to see it here in this section, because it is about a character that I can relate to so well and it shows how we take away the voice of one so lowly at times because of our horrible actions and attitudes towards such people.

There is a saying in the UK that “it does what it says on the tin” and this poem is no different. Simply entitled “The Hunchback in the Park” and written by Dylan Thomas, from his Collected Poems 1934 – 1953, we see a tale of a man who is living on the streets. As I type this, there is a reminder in my head, as should be in yours if you are following this blog, that there is another poem in this section that could be linked with this, to be able to write a response in the exam. Can you figure it out? Have you got the same idea as I have? This is what you need to do as you study these poems, assuming your teacher, like me, would let you read ALL of them one after another, so as to be able to let you have the choice in the exam.

This then, is the story of someone who lives not in a house or home, but in the park! This is the story of a “solitary mister,” a term we use to show respect to our elders in the UK, or at least we used to, but this one is not so well off as we are, not so fortunate, for we see him “propped between trees and water” in a situation more than likely, not of his choosing. We know from the title that he is a “hunchback,” that he has a disability and so, we are being asked to consider just how we treat people with disability here. This man is to be found in the “garden lock that lets the trees and water enter,” a space of land that through the day may be busy with people seeking their place of peace and tranquillity, but at night would be isolated and relatively safe to bed down under the stars.

As a reader, we are left to assume whether it is his choice or not to be there. Some choose to walk away from the pressures of life and live different lifestyles. To these people comes derision and contempt from those who have homes, mortgages etc. Comments like “get a job” when they are begging on the streets are common, but this man is different to those because of his disability. He can be found in this place in the park “until the Sunday sombre bell at dark,” which suggests he then moves on from “eating bread from a newspaper” and “drinking water from the chained cup that the children filled with gravel in the fountain basin” to somewhere quieter.

It is a sad existence he lives, one that is filled with pain. And the voice of the narrator in the poem comes through now as he says that where this man is seen is where he “sailed [his] ship.” To the man [or boy] in question, he is associating the place with the man, in a way saying that the two always seem to go together. But then we get the next line where suddenly, the tone changes in the poem for we see that the hunchback man sleeps “at night in a dog kennel.” This darkening of tone is meant to have an effect on the reader. It is meant to make us feel sorry for this man, for the fact that the only place he has where he feels safe is in a dog kennel. It is quite a statement that the poet is making about how we treat people near us in our society. And even though it was written approximately 70 years ago, the same still rings true today.

But there is a difference with this man, for “nobody chained him up,” showing that this is by choice that he lives like this. In a way, this is his ‘normal.’” Once again the reader should respond in support of the man. This is a man who, “like the park birds [he] came early” into the park, who “like the water [he] sat down” to take in the beauty of the day in the park. People call him “Mister” as a sign of respect for him, but those who are cruel, and it is aimed at children on purpose for they can be so cruel at times, aim insults at him. It is the “truant boys from the town,” the ones who are sent to school by their parents and then choose to walk out of school and get up to all sorts of antics, many illegal, that hurl their abuse at him and treat him harshly.

These boys from the town mock him and then run when he is “out of sound,” and laugh when he shakes his paper. They make fun of him, mocking him for his disability. In truth, they should be ashamed of themselves, but they are children who know no better because they do not understand disability yet. At this point the reader must be asking themselves the question: has the poet been in a park one day, seen something like this happening in front of his eyes and then penned the poem? When we talk of ‘intentional fallacy,’ we need to ask these questions. [There is an explanation of this on a previous post]

The use of the rhyme with the words “rockery” and “mockery” is a particularly good one, showing the mockery from the boys but also how the man is realistically and metaphorically “hunchbacked in mockery.” It is as if the mockery from the boys makes him stoop all the more, such is the pain inflicted by these boys. All this happens until the “bell time,” or the time when there is a sound that tells all in the park it is time to leave. The park is about to be closed. This is when we see the picture being painted of a “woman figure without fault, straight as a young elm,” seeing this man before her, seeing his plight, standing there “in the night after the locks and chains,” watching what happens next. Whether the poet intended us to take this in this way is uncertain, but one can see this from this reading and it becomes a man watching a woman watching a hunchback. It is a vignette [a short impressionistic scene] that is being shared here.

It is at night when we as readers see the extent of this hunchback’s plight and we feel for him, because after all that he has seen and put up with through the day; “the railings and shrubberies, the birds the grass the trees the lake and the wild boys innocent as strawberries,” we see him followed until he gets to his “kennel in the dark.” At the end, the reader should be feeling that feeling you get when you know someone is being treated harshly and there is little you can do about it. This is because that is the intention of the poet, to make you think about such people in society, who are forced to live life in a certain way that is not necessarily the same as ours.

This theme of ‘difference’ and how we deal with it is something that can and indeed must be written about in any exam setting. There are all sorts of differences here; the difference between the narrator and the hunchback, the difference between the woman and the hunchback and then the difference between each of us who reads this poem. All will have different experiences of people with disabilities [never ever write the words ‘disabled person’ in an exam!!!] and therefore will react to the themes of this poem in differing ways. It is true therefore, that when writing about literature, like this, there is no wrong answer, so long as your comments can be backed up with evidence from the poem.

This then, is a very effective poem, that shares a story about a man who lives in the park. It also shares a theme for us to consider; that of disability and how we deal with it. It depicts young, innocent children who hurt the feelings of the man, mocking him and running away from him when he reacts. It shows the reader just how not to treat someone who is different and is therefore, a polemic [look it up if not sure] in its style and content.

The River God – Stevie Smith

I may be smelly, and I may be old,
Rough in my pebbles, reedy in my pools,
But where my fish float by I bless their swimming
And I like the people to bathe in me, especially women.
But I can drown the fools
Who bathe too close to the weir, contrary to rules.
And they take their time drowning
As I throw them up now and then in a spirit of clowning.
Hi yih, yippity-yap, merrily I flow,
O I may be an old foul river but I have plenty of go.
Once there was a lady who was too bold
She bathed in me by the tall black cliff where the water runs cold,
So I brought her down here
To be my beautiful dear.
Oh will she stay with me will she stay
This beautiful lady, or will she go away?
She lies in my beautiful deep river bed with many a weed
To hold her, and many a waving reed.
Oh who would guess what a beautiful white face lies there
Waiting for me to smooth and wash away the fear
She looks at me with. Hi yih, do not let her
Go. There is no one on earth who does not forget her
Now. They say I am a foolish old smelly river
But they do not know of my wide original bed
Where the lady waits, with her golden sleepy head.
If she wishes to go I will not forgive her.

Analysis

Once again we come to a second poem by Stevie Smith. I can remember when doing my GCSEs that we looked at a Stevie Smith poem back then and I was left with that sinking feeling you get in the pit of the stomach after reading it for the first time.

Let’s see if this one has the same effect.

It begins in the first person, using the term “I” instead of third person which would be about a person, like her poem in the conflict section. But this “I” is reflecting, saying “I may be smelly, and I may be old,” which immediately should have an effect on the reader, making them feel empathy towards the character speaking. If anything it is meant to be said in such a way as to get that effect from the reader.

So this person, or thing, for the title says “river God,” feels as if it is smelly and old, but then we see a further description in that it is seeing itself as “rough in my pebbles, reedy in my pools,” which is slightly odd as a way of describing itself, unless we keep to the idea of a god being described, but what form does that ‘god’ take? If it is in a river, is it the biggest fish or predator in there? The answer is given in the next line where it says “but where my fish float by I bless their swimming,” so this is no fish, but rather, something that ‘allows’ the swimming fish to take their place amongst the other life in the river.

This god then adds “I like the people to bathe in me, especially women.” Once again, who or what is the river god? What form of creature or being is it that likes to have people bathe in it, unless it is the river itself speaking. At least in that way, we can see the personification at work here as it adds “but I can drown the fools who bathe too close to the weir, contrary to rules.” In this way, the poet uses personification to bring the river to life. We speak of a river as a living thing normally. We might say to children to be very careful for a river is a dangerous thing indeed. And we would be right to do so, but we forget at our peril what we are doing with language at that point as we bring life into the river as though it is alive [which it indeed is].

There is a feeling of disdain in this poem from the river [god] to the people as well. Just as much as it rejoices in the swimmers who know what they are doing, it makes snide comments about the ones who do not follow the rules as they “take their time drowning” and dying within its grasp. This is a reference to the power that water has. A river has currents that can be tricky to swimmers if they do not know what they are doing. Indeed, where I live, there has been three deaths in the river [Ouse] in this last twelve months because drunken revellers have ended up in the water and been caught out by the strength of the water beneath them. One such body was not found for weeks.

Stevie Smith then has the river [god] mention that it throws them up “now and then in a spirit of clowning.” It is a strange comment or line to make even from this god of wrath, but one that shows the fickle nature of the creation it exists within. The words “Hi yih, yippity-yap, merrily I flow, O I may be an old foul river but I have plenty of go” show the reader that this is something that does not care, does not have feelings or compassion, but rather, is something that exists and should be taken great care with. It shows the danger and it shows the power that a river has at its disposal. Our concept of God [with a capital G] may be one thing or another. Our concept of a god [with small g] may be something else. But what is true is that this personified being is a mighty one indeed.

This is reflected in the next line where the river [god] tells the story of one of its victims. We are told that “once there was a lady who was too bold.” Immediately, we are led into thinking that this is another victim that is being described here, as “she bathed in me by the tall black cliff where the water runs cold,” itself a description meant to make the reader think certain things. Coldness is a symbol, or even metaphor, for death or dying and one is immediately aware here that Smith’s other poem, in the conflict section, is also about the onset of death. Is there a parallel here? Is she pre-occupied with death as a writer? Or if not death, with suffering and pain?

The river itself gives us the answer to that question as it adds “so I brought her down here to be my beautiful dear.” It is as if the river god needs to have its victims from time to time, needs to have a partner of some description, as if it yearns for the next person to not take enough care so it can gobble down its prey. It is personified therefore, as a predator in the wild, just like any other wild animal. The river god asks “oh will she stay with me will she stay, ,this beautiful lady, or will she go away? It is as if the question is being asked of someone or something else. It is like she [the river god-dess now?]  needs to have permission to take this victim down to her depths? Is this an all powerful God then? I think not because an all powerful, omnipotent God does not need permission to do things.

And as this dramatic monologue continues we then begin to see how much the river god wants to keep her prey. We see the words “she lies in my beautiful deep river bed with many a weed,” deep and safe [in a morose sense] so as to never be found. This is not a god then who is loving in the normal sense but one who loves the ones that end up at the bottom on the river bed with “many a waving reed” to hold them in place.

The river god tells us from her depths that she has capabilities of reassuring and calming the victim/lover that exists within her depths. She says “Oh who would guess what a beautiful white face lies there waiting for me to smooth and wash away the fear she looks at me with.” She has the ability therefore with time and decay, to wipe away any fear, to make good on her promises and to keep the person there for all eternity. In that way, she is like the God she suggests she is. Once again we see the sing song style made up words of “Hi yih,” followed by “do not let her go.” She is imploring us to look after the ones we love, to not let them get into danger, to make sure that they are safe, otherwise, she will take them given half the chance. She is after all, a jealous God and one that will take what she can.

So, we humans who exist above her depths need to be aware of each other, to love each other and care for each other; to not make it so that “there is no one on earth who does not forget” to do this and then lose someone close. The river god describes herself as a “foolish old smelly river” and one who has a “wide original bed where the lady waits, with her golden sleepy head.” It is as if an animal exists down there inside the water, an animal that is the river itself, something that wants its prey, a hunter if you like, who seeks out and keeps those wayward strays that come from above into the murky waters.

And she is a jealous God too because in the last line we hear her say “if she wishes to go I will not forgive her.” This is a reference to the woman in the previous lines but it shows an entity that will not be forgiving should the lady in question be rescued by those who want to save her, in the god’s view, a woman who “wishes to go” back to dry land.

This therefore, is a very classy poem. It uses personification to bring the river god to life. It tells us how effective she is at securing and keeping her prey, her victims who have drowned and it shows a range of emotions as if a river could have them; calmness, gentility, rage, jealousy to name but a few. If I had the chance to write about this in the exam, I would choose this one because it is, I think, easier than some of the others to get into and unpack!

‘My Last Duchess’

Robert Browning

FERRARA

That’s my last Duchess painted on the wall,
Looking as if she were alive. I call
That piece a wonder, now; Fra Pandolf’s hands
Worked busily a day, and there she stands.
Will’t please you sit and look at her? I said
“Fra Pandolf” by design, for never read
Strangers like you that pictured countenance,
The depth and passion of its earnest glance,
But to myself they turned (since none puts by
The curtain I have drawn for you, but I)
And seemed as they would ask me, if they durst,
How such a glance came there; so, not the first
Are you to turn and ask thus. Sir, ’twas not
Her husband’s presence only, called that spot
Of joy into the Duchess’ cheek; perhaps
Fra Pandolf chanced to say, “Her mantle laps
Over my lady’s wrist too much,” or “Paint
Must never hope to reproduce the faint
Half-flush that dies along her throat.” Such stuff
Was courtesy, she thought, and cause enough
For calling up that spot of joy. She had
A heart—how shall I say?— too soon made glad,
Too easily impressed; she liked whate’er
She looked on, and her looks went everywhere.
Sir, ’twas all one! My favour at her breast,
The dropping of the daylight in the West,
The bough of cherries some officious fool
Broke in the orchard for her, the white mule
She rode with round the terrace—all and each
Would draw from her alike the approving speech,
Or blush, at least. She thanked men—good! but thanked
Somehow—I know not how—as if she ranked
My gift of a nine-hundred-years-old name
With anybody’s gift. Who’d stoop to blame
This sort of trifling? Even had you skill
In speech—which I have not—to make your will
Quite clear to such an one, and say, “Just this
Or that in you disgusts me; here you miss,
Or there exceed the mark”—and if she let
Herself be lessoned so, nor plainly set
Her wits to yours, forsooth, and made excuse—
E’en then would be some stooping; and I choose
Never to stoop. Oh, sir, she smiled, no doubt,
Whene’er I passed her; but who passed without
Much the same smile? This grew; I gave commands;
Then all smiles stopped together. There she stands
As if alive. Will’t please you rise? We’ll meet
The company below, then. I repeat,
The Count your master’s known munificence
Is ample warrant that no just pretense
Of mine for dowry will be disallowed;
Though his fair daughter’s self, as I avowed
At starting, is my object. Nay, we’ll go
Together down, sir. Notice Neptune, though,
Taming a sea-horse, thought a rarity,
Which Claus of Innsbruck cast in bronze for me!

Analysis 

Have you ever told a story to someone about something else someone has done? If so, then you have done something similar to the person in this poem. Have a second look and see. It begins with the Duke talking to a man who is with him in his home and he is saying that the picture on the wall is the depiction of the last Duchess, or woman he was married to. He expresses an opinion, as well as his love for her, in the words “looking as if she were alive.”

It is as if he can remember her because of that painting and recall to his memory her features, as if she was alive. Clearly, this is a man in love with this woman. His love for her knows no end. He even calls the piece of art “a Wonder” because of the unerring accuracy of the painting. He is, in a word, besotted but grieving.

He remarks how the painter was at work on this for some time and his completion is wonderful to behold. When he adds “there she stands” he is using the same words he would if she was actually standing in front of him in person. He asks the visitor if he would mind sitting and looking at her, at the “depth and passion” contained within the painting.

So far, this is a poem that shows extreme love and passion from one man to his wife, now dead. But is there something else? Those who have read enough of this blog will know how much I mention that there is conflict usually in any piece of Literature, so what are we expecting here I wonder? When will it turn nasty? As we read on, we will see this happen in front of our very eyes. This special visitor has been given special consideration for he has a “curtain ….. drawn for [him]” so he can view the artwork in privacy. And as he does so he is asked a question: “how [did] such a glance” appear in the face of the woman on the canvas? She has a look on her face that is making the two people viewing wonder just what was in her mind as she was being painted by the artist. This should make the reader sit up and think!

We then see that there is a “spot of joy” on the cheek of the Duchess but it was not there because of the Duke. The visitor says that consideration has been given to the Duchess when modelling for the piece because “paint must never hope to reproduce the faint half-flush that dies along her throat.” There is an admiration for the Duchess in the heart of both men and a passion shared by them for this deceased woman in the painting. It is in one way, such a wonderful poem up until this point. It depicts a picture in the mind that one can almost see as if it was a scene from a film.

But then, we see that the Duchess “had a heart” when she was alive that was “too soon made glad,” which should make the reader stop and think. What does that mean, “a heart too soon made glad?” In one sense it could mean that she was too happy all of the time, which could become annoying to people. Yet again, it could mean something else. It could suggest to the reader that the Duke was not too keen on this aspect of her lifestyle. She was “too easily impressed” and favoured whatever she looked at. Was this a person who saw the good in others more than most of us do? Was her husband able to cope with this?

This is developed further into the poem as we see a woman who would ride a “white mule” and everyone would be grateful of her presence in their lives. She was the epitome of the perfect wife from the sounds of it, but this possibly annoyed the Duke, who could not see why she would be like that. Here comes the conflict I hear you thinking.

The Duke says that his late wife “ranked [his] gift of a nine-hundred-years-old name with anybody’s gift.” In other words, she put him on a level with everyone else, which for a Duke, would be a difficult thing to stomach. It is like the Duke is saying that because of the way his wife was, her end came as a shock, which then makes the reader, the 21st Century reader, think in terms of conspiracy, whereby the Duchess was killed by persons unknown and for whatever reason.

With this being the case we then have to ask who would kill her and for what reason. If we read on, we see words that point towards a person of interest. The Duke says to the visitor “even had you skill in speech—which I have not—to make your will quite clear to such an one, and say, “Just this or that in you disgusts me; here you miss, or there exceed the mark.” From these words we can deduce that the Duke is not too good with words abd that the Duchess, when alive, “let herself be lessoned,” or tutored so as to be able to “plainly set her wits” to anything she wanted or any person. The Duke on the other hand, is more reserved, more noble and royal, a typical symbol of everything controlled. Therefore, we as readers ask is their marriage a good match?

The chances are that it was an arranged marriage. Indeed, some readers have taken this Duke to be advancing in years whilst his dead wife remains in the painting as a young or younger woman. If this is the case and what Browning imagined then we see something else in there in the middle of this poem; the mind of an elderly Duke remembering someone who may have died some time beforehand and as he reminisces, he lets us know more about this wife he was married to. He is the sort of person who chooses “never to stoop” or bow to any kind of pressure. His lifestyle is strict and disciplined. Hers was not when she was alive. But at some point in their relationship, things changed. We read that “all smiles stopped together. “ This is saying that sadness entered where joy and fondness ended. Does this mean that their relationship turned sour? The answer to that is up to you.

And so, the Duke, maybe advancing in years, now looks at the painting and says “there she stands as if alive” before asking his visitor “will’t please you rise? We’ll meet the company below, then.” He is asking the visitor to join him in another room where the rest of a gathering are meeting, so this is not a single pairing seeing this painting but two men looking at the portrait of the Duchess before gathering together for a party, perhaps even, to remember her. As the two men descend towards their meal and drink, there is a mention of a “dowry,” which is something that used to happen in previous times [and indeed, still happens in some cultures around the world]. A man would marry, have a daughter and then as she met someone [or if it was an organized marriage] he would be required to pay the family of the groom a sum of money for the right to marry the young lady. That is a dowry!

Why is a dowry being mentioned here? It seems rather odd to me. It seems as if there has been something happening before this, that he expected to see the dowry but now, because of her death, there is a question about keeping the money. It is all conjecture from the Duke and we are left to wonder at the truth about the death of the last Duchess. As the two men descend towards the party the Duke tells the visitor to “notice Neptune, who is set in a stone carving and is “taming a sea-horse” which could also be symbolic of him having to tame his wife in the past, a fact he wants to keep quiet.

The reader at the end of this poem is left asking certain questions; what happened to the Duchess? Was she killed? If so then who by? Why is the Duke saying what he is? Is this a scene showing guilt? Is he responsible for her demise? Where in all of this, is the truth? And more importantly, is this meant as a poem to criticize a certain royal at the time it was written by Browning? If so, then we need to Google the man and find who he may have been writing about. It is like me now writing a poem about Diana, Princess of Wales and writing it in a similar fashion. I would then publish and be making a comment for people to discuss. This is why this is such a good, deep poem.

NB. When I taught this poem to Year 10 students last, we were required to let them act out the death scene, showing how they thought she had died. If you get the chance, ask your teacher if you can do the same thing. It will be most illuminating indeed on your reading of the poem.

RJ

In what ways are the effects of fear presented in at least two poems about the First World War?

This is a title taken from the AQA teacher booklet, so is a title your teacher can give you as a warm up for the exam. I would certainly give it to my students, but the question is how do we answer it? What do we put in there to answer such a question as this?

Well, I believe the answer lies in the question. Imagine that you choose Futility, by Wilfred Owen and The Falling Leaves by M P Cole. How would you approach it? Would you write about the first poem in full and then the second one? That would be a good idea and if I was marking the exam paper, may get a C or possibly a B, but not much higher due to the complexity of the essay itself and how you have not approached the essay writing task fully.

You see, although the title does not actually say compare and contrast it wants you to do just that. Your mission, should you choose to accept [as the saying goes] is to write a structured and well written analysis of both poems. So, I ask again, how would you do it? There are probably several ways; take one idea that applies to both and one that are different and write about them both together. That would gain a decent mark and grade, if written correctly.

I believe I have a method for you that will destroy any A* markers set for you. It is one that I was taught before I did my GCSEs, way back when Noah was a lad, but still applies to this day. It is simple, effective and easy to follow. If you want, you can call it the 5 Point Plan. It goes something like this:

Introduction
Point 1
Point 2
Point 3
Conclusion

At the side of each one, add some ideas. Point 1 could be the difference between the two regarding the fear aspect. Point 2 might be the ways both poems are similar in showing fear etc. Point 3 might then be whether or not each one is successful, especially regarding the effect of fear on the reader. Then the conclusion would be which, in your opinion, is the better of the two [again, stick to the title here – see last comments in this piece regarding derailing].

When all that is done, write it and complete it. It will have been easier to write because of the planning and is easier than just waffling on from one idea into the next. With that in mind, here are a few notes on each section for you.

Introduction

In this very short, five lines of writing, stick to the question, introducing the two poems and their poet’s names, in full. Just say what they are about in brief and keep to present tense all the way through……Owen writes……not Owen wrote! And never ever put “I” or “my” in there. There is no need whatsoever to make it personal. Your introduction is what it says, a way of introducing the aims of the essay without actually stating them. Example below:

The poetry of Wilfred Owen and Margaret Cole at the time of the First World War share some similarities because of their styles of writing and the fact that the themes contained within are anti-war by today’s standards. ‘Futility’ and ‘The Falling Leaves’ show a sense of fear throughout and the effects that fear then has on the soldiers who fought, as well as the reader.

That is all you need really. You have mentioned the poet’s name in each case and the poems being covered without writing that horrible “today I am going to write about….” style of introduction, which tends to make the teacher/marker want to hurl to be honest. It is such an immature form of writing but the one above is so much clearer and better.

Point 1

Here you could write about the difference between the two regarding the fear aspect. Your writing has to be in present tense throughout and those horrible PEE chains need to be bang on from now on. Your planning will aid you here. The more annotation on your poem, the better, before you write on.

Point 2

Here the idea would be to write about the ways both poems are similar in showing fear. Again, PEE chains throughout [see other blog item on this] and in equal amount of detail as Point 1.

Point 3

This third point is where you write about whether or not each one is successful, especially regarding the effect of fear on the reader. Once again, PEE chains throughout this section. You may only have an hour for the whole thing, so 2 PEE chains in each section [P1, P2 and P3] would be enough, giving you 6 bits of evidence used and commented on, or explained in detail, by you.

Conclusion

Finally, there is a conclusion to do, without PEE chains, making comment from you as to which, in your opinion, is the better of the two [again, stick to the title here]. In this section do not write with “I think that…..” because once again, its immaturity will let you down. It is your opinion we want to see, so do it like this:

… it can be said therefore that Owen’s poem is the most effective because of the very nature of the language he uses, which is first hand after being in the trenches. Cole did not share in the horror of the Somme, so her poem is not as effective as that of Owen.

Now if you can do this, like this, and well, then you are in for an A* or an A, providing you can keep to the task in hand. The question is whether you will derail or not.

You are possibly thinking what is he saying now. Well, it is very easy to lose sight of the exam task/title. It asks you to consider certain things. If you do, then do not worry. But it is easy to waffle on, to have a brainwave of an idea on the spot, add it in and then find you are moving away from the exam title. I usually use the analogy of the train journey to explain this. Imagine you are going from one place to the next on a train. You get on at Point A and you expect to get off at Point B, but if there is a problem somewhere in the middle and the tracks have to be changed, you end up at Point C and are lost.

Writing an essay can be rather like this. Be very careful. Think!

Have a go now at planning and writing an answer to this task title at the top. You choose your poems to write about. Then by all means, post it on the Facebook page for this site.

RJ

Okay, this is a made up title so please do not go looking anywhere else for this in the AQA or indeed, any board data.

The idea for this post came about from reading one of those stories we see on Facebook every now and then. You know the sort, I am sure.

But, imagine being asked in an exam, to write something that is a story, recounting something from your past, something that helps another person in their life. It would be writing to inform and describe. The title may be different, but the style of writing will be the same. The idea will be to get the story down in such a way that you tell the story, but also, paint a picture in the mind of the reader; if you like, giving a moral to the story somewhere near the end.  The following story does this so well. Have a read and see what effect it has on you at the end.

Then try to write on of your own, from your life, to have a similar effect on the reader. When done, send it to here or to the Facebook page for this site where we can all share in your published work.

THE OLD PHONE ON THE WALL

When I was a young boy, my father had one of the first telephones in our neighbourhood. I remember the polished, old case fastened to the wall. The shiny receiver hung on the side of the box. I was too little to reach the telephone, but used to listen with fascination when my mother talked to it.

Then I discovered that somewhere inside the wonderful device lived an amazing person. Her name was “Information Please” and there was nothing she did not know. Information Please could supply anyone’s number and the correct time.

My personal experience with the genie-in-a-bottle came one day while my mother was visiting a neighbour. Amusing myself at the tool bench in the basement, I whacked my finger with a hammer, the pain was terrible, but there seemed no point in crying because there was no one home to give sympathy.

I walked around the house sucking my throbbing finger, finally arriving at the stairway. The telephone! Quickly, I ran for the footstool in the parlor and dragged it to the landing. Climbing up, I unhooked the receiver in the parlor and held it to my ear. “Information, please” I said into the mouthpiece just above my head. A click or two and a small clear voice spoke into my ear. “Information.”

“I hurt my finger..” I wailed into the phone, the tears came readily enough now that I had an audience.
“Isn’t your mother home?” came the question.
“Nobody’s home but me,” I blubbered.
“Are you bleeding?” the voice asked.
“No,”
I replied. “I hit my finger with the hammer and it hurts.”
“Can you open the icebox?” she asked.
I said I could.
“Then chip off a little bit of ice and hold it to your finger,” said the voice.

After that, I called “Information Please” for everything. I asked her for help with my geography, and she told me where Philadelphia was. She helped me with my mathematics. She told me my pet possum that I had caught in the park just the day before, would eat fruit and nuts.

Then, there was the time Petey, our pet canary, died. I called, “Information Please,” and told her the sad story. She listened, and then said things grown-ups say to soothe a child. But I was not consoled. I asked her, “Why is it that birds should sing so beautifully and bring joy to all the families, only to end up as a heap of feathers on the bottom of a cage?” She must have sensed my deep concern, for she said quietly, ” Wayne , always remember that there are other worlds to sing in.” Somehow I felt better.

Another day I was on the telephone, “Information Please.” “Information,” said in the now familiar voice. “How do I spell fix?”, I asked. All this took place in a small town in the Blue Mountains. When I was nine years old, we moved across to Perth. I missed my friend very much. “Information Please” belonged in that old wooden box back home and I somehow never thought of trying the shiny new phone that sat on the table in the hall.

As I grew into my teens, the memories of those childhood conversations never really left me. Often, in moments of doubt and perplexity I would recall the serene sense of security I had then. I appreciated now how patient, understanding, and kind she was to have spent her time on a little boy.

A few years later, on my way to college, my plane touched down in Sydney, New South Wales. I had about a half-hour or so between planes. I spent 15 minutes or so on the phone with my sister, who lived there now. Then without thinking what I was doing, I dialled my home town operator and said, “Information Please.” Miraculously, I heard the small, clear voice I knew so well. “Information.”

I hadn’t planned this, but I heard myself saying, “Could you please tell me how to spell fix?” There was a long pause. Then came the soft spoken answer, “I guess your finger must have healed by now.” I laughed, “So it’s really you,” I said. “I wonder if you have any idea how much you meant to me during that time?” I wonder,” she said, “if you know how much your calls meant to me. I never had any children and I used to look forward to your calls.” I told her how often I had thought of her over the years and I asked if I could call her again when I came back to visit my sister. “Please do”, she said. “Just ask for Sally.”

Three months later I was back in the Blue Mountains. A different voice answered, “Information.” I asked for Sally.
“Are you a friend?” she said. “Yes, a very old friend,” I answered.
“I’m sorry to have to tell you this,” she said, “Sally had been working part time the last few years because she was sick. She died five weeks ago.”
Before I could hang up, she said, “Wait a minute, did you say your name was Wayne ?” “Yes.” I answered. “Well, Sally left a message for you. She wrote it down in case you called. Let me read it to you.” The note said,”Tell him there are other worlds to sing in. He’ll know what I mean.” I thanked her and hung up. I knew what Sally meant.

The moral of this story is to never underestimate the impression you make on others and those whose life you have touched today.