The questions located in the comments below will give IB Year 1 students the opportunity to develop their thoughts and ideas about the individual poems a little further than our time in class permits. HL students, please choose three poems / questions to answer with an original response; SL students, please choose two. Please do not choose the question about the poem you presented to class. Only two original responses per poem will be counted toward students’ required posts; this is intended to distribute the answers more or less evenly. In addition to your 3 / 2 original answers, you should also post brief, informal responses to some of your classmates’ answers about poems other than the ones you responded to. Your score for standard 1 will depend on how many of these responses you complete, as detailed below.
To claim a question while you are answering it, just post your name as a reply to the question. Your responses should be from 200 – 500 words, and should be posted as replies to the comment containing the question. Please do not turn these discussion question answers into lengthy essays.
To post your comments about your classmates’ responses, click “reply” directly below the response you wish to reply to. Make sure your comments respond to the specifics of your classmates’ remarks, rather than vaguely agreeing or disagreeing without concrete reasons. These responses may be as short as one sentence, and will not be graded for conventions, but will only count if they refer to specific content of the answers they respond to.
Your three responses to the questions are due by midnight on Thursday, 25 September (this means that we will not yet have covered three of the poems, but I strongly encourage you to risk responding to these!); comments on your classmates’ posts are due by the following Monday, 29 September, and if you remind me, I will give you some time in class to complete them.
This assignment has a weight of 3:
– Standard 1 for your replies to classmates’ posts (you will receive a score of ‘7’ for seven replies; score of ‘6’ for six replies; etc.)
– Standards 3 and 6 for the quality of your original responses to the discussion questions
“I give you an onion.”
Jess Barga
ECA English with Ms. Barga 
Question 1: “Little Red Cap”
The depiction of the relationship in “Little Red Cap” is that of a young, virginal girl who takes up with an older, experienced wolf—however, this Red Riding Hood is not as naïve or innocent as the one from the fairy tale. What elements of the poem clarify to the reader that the speaker is not a victim? In modern romantic relationships, do you believe this image of the shrewd yet inexperienced woman is realistic?
I don’t think that only women are shrewd and inexperienced. There are people like that all over the place. Rather, I would say that in our present time, marriages have become so flexible that sexual experimentation and casual relationships have become the norm. For example, I’m product of my dad’s second marriage. I’m not product of an affair or am i a bastard. Simply, my dad, when he was younger got married, things didn’t work out, and he got a divorce. Before, marriages were more like chains that forcefully bound people together. Sometimes it worked out, like it still does, but sometimes it didn’t. As casual relationships become less taboo then people are allowed more freedom. This is the case with Little Red in this poem. She didn’t envision herself tied to the wolf for ever. The image in in which Red see’s her grandma’s bones in the wolf’s belly refers to this. Her grandmother is tied to a past world in which one would spend ones entire life under the same person. The grandma was also from a time when men had more power over women concerning marriage.
Concerning the whole victim complex explored in the poem, I believe that none of the characters form the poem is victimized. Red makes it very clear that she was interested in the wolf from the start and she wasn’t utilized by him. She was interested in not only gaining sexual experience but also learning and reading his poetry. Additionally she doesn’t quite lose her virginity, rather, she exchanged it for knowledge. She wasn’t brutally raped, she knew well what she was going into. When she wandered into the “Dark woods” she was very aware that the wolf was sexually interested. Another line that reveals her intention “I made quite sure he spotted me, sweet sixteen, never been, babe, waif, and bought me a drink”. Red was very interested in adult behavior.
I completely agree to your proposal on how in present time, marriages have become so flexible that sexual experimentation and casual relationships have become something common. I liked how you connected your opinion to a life experience because it further emphasized and supported the discussion question.
While I agree with most of your sentiments, I also believe that the metaphorical wolf received the shorter end of the stick. Despite his moral ambiguity and ulterior motives, he ended the relationship on a much sourer note than his supposed peer–Little Red Cap. After all, he did undergo a figurative death after his partner deemed it fit to dispose of him.
As you say, both knew exactly what they were walking into. The wolf wanted a non-serious relationship based on sex, and he got that. Red wanted some knowledge of poetry and words, and she got that. They both walk away, if not happy then at least content.
Although I believe that both of the people getting into the relationship knew exactly their role in it (The wolf wanting sex and Little Red Cap knowledge) I don’t agree that both of them were happy at what was obtained at the end. Scientists have concluded that any relationship that lasts more than three years is based on true love and so I believe that even though the wolf’s initial wish was a relationship based on sex, he fell in love. Seeing as Little Red Cap simply “metaphorically” killed the wolf and strolled out of the woods she obtained what she wanted and broke up. Love never reaches a maximum and so the potential “depression” that the wolf enters after the relationship is terminated leads me to think that the wolf ended up worse than Little Red Cap.
I wonder why you all assume that, in the initial encounter, the wolf was primarily motivated by sex and Little Red Cap was not. Why wouldn’t it be a variety of features that attract them to each other, including sexual attraction on both sides? The other points you make are all relevant and convincing.
While several people would associate Little Red Riding Hood (LRRH) to an innocent, naïve girl, Duffy, in the poem “Little Red Cap”, portrays LRRH as an astute and confident young woman. In the fairytale, LRRH is interpreted as the victim of the story. In the poem, however, LRRH is a decisive and confident character who is presented as the victorious champion at the end of the poem. At the beginning of the poem, readers are already aware that Duffy’s interpretation of LRRH is unalike the traditional portrayal of an innocent, naïve girl. She is not afraid of the wolf’s “big ears”, “big eyes” or “big teeth”. She is conscious of the troubles she’s getting into by approaching the wolf and even “made quite sure that the wolf spotted [her]” even though she knows he would “lead [her] deep into the woods, away from home, to a dark tangled thorny place,” symbolizing the danger and threat LRRH is welcoming. Readers clearly understand that LRRH isn’t the innocent girl they associate her to, suggesting that she did not fall victim to the Wolf’s tricks, but rather welcomed them.
Furthermore, when reflecting on her loss of virginity and symbolical innocence, LRRH adopts a very playful and comical attitude. The poem’s playful rhyme scheme makes the event seem almost insignificant. Certain comical remarks, such as “I lost both shoes”, “better beware” and “for / what little girl doesn’t dearly love a wolf” suggest little attachment or importance towards her virginity or innocence. She seems almost indifferent, emphasizing that LRRH is not a victim to the wolf. Instead, she is is as responsible for the loss of her virginity as the wolf is. This idea is supported when LRRD holds the “white dove” and allows it to “fl[y], straight, [into the wolf’s] open mouth.” In these lines, LRRD willingly loses her virginity, clearly not a victim to the wolf in any way.
Finally, at the conclusion of the poem, LRRD kills the wolf and came “out of the forest… with [her] flowers, singing, all alone.” LRRD leaves victorious at the end of the relationship, having gained the insight and knowledge she wished to obtain and leaving content and pleased. There is no indication that LRRD is a victim in this poem and it is the wolf that suffers in the end.
In modern romantic relationships, I do believe that the image of the shrewd yet inexperienced woman is realistic. It is simply natural for people to be attracted to others, even if they don’t have experience with romance or relationships. Women do not need to be knowledgeable in romantic relationships to justify for a certain attraction they might feel towards someone else. Duffy clearly portrays this idea in her poem and highlights the evolution of women and their roles in relationships.
I absolutely agree with the fact that the LRRH in “Little Red Cap” is not a victim and I found the examples to support this idea very effective. Also, I liked your perspective about how women nowadays do not need to be knowledgeable in order to be involved in romantic relationships.
The fact that Red (as armando has called her, and I find it a cool name) does not care much for her innocence feels to me as if she values more being smart and knowledgeable than being innocent is, for me, apparent. Women, once not allowed to think, are now able to use their cunning and smarts to the utmost. This “neo-woman” is Red’s character, and she manages to get what she wants without any trouble at all, manipulating men as easily as breathing comes.
Question 2: “Standing Female Nude”
In “Standing Female Nude,” the model speaks of both “Art” (line 7) and “arts” (line 20). To what do you attribute the spelling difference? What statement do you believe the poem makes on art (or Art) in general? Specific references to the poem are appreciated.
In “Standing Female Nude” there is one significant word that has different meanings according to the character’s perspective in the poem. Through the use of this diction Duffy highlights the disconnection between the the painter and the model. Firstly, for me art has many definitions and the one that is most applicable is art being “a way to express individual’s feeling through the use of creative skill. It can be represented as a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.”
Readers in line 7 are immediately attracted to the use of of “Art” and with it the capitalised letter at the beginning. By highlighting this letter, Duffy portrays the first perspective of “Art”. This one comes from the painter itself who is tracing the prostitute. The use of capitalised letter suggest that his work as an artist is meaningful and significant. Likewise, using the definition of art, the painter through the use of the model is able to express his talent and with that be appreciated by society when the paint is on galleries. On the other hand, when “arts” comes in line 20, Duffy refers to the prostitute’s perspective of art itself. The main difference of diction between the painter’s “Art” and the model’s “arts” is the uncapitalised “a” at the beginning. Here, Duffy presents the model’s work worthless since she is unable to posses her own body. Instead of this she sells herself, giving the painter the power of controlling her body image which makes her weaker and vulnerable.
Overall, Duffy does a great job in terms of illustrating the disconnections between the painter and the model by using the word “art” and its definition to represent the role of both characters in the poem.
I agree with your concluding point, the comparison between “Art” and “arts” really help clarify the disconnections and differences between the painter and the model. I can clearly understand the differences between the two words and how they reflect the differences between the two characters. Additionally, I love how one single alteration in a word can create two completely different perceptions.
I totally missed this point in my presentation, (ARGGGH) but even so, this is an excellent point. The differences that are created between Art, and art are very importing, especially because juxtaposition is so very important in this poem. It is very interesting how Duffy looks at art in different forms, from a practice or a profession to an actual art (painting in this case) and how both are seen differently by society.
Although I agree that the comparison between “Art” and “art” is important at pointing out the distinct differences and complete disconnection between the artist and the model, I believe that it represents more than just that. In fact I believe that the capital A in “Art” is a representation of the potential fame and glory that the artist may receive, as well as the overall perception of an artist in society. On the other hand, a prostitute has always been negatively viewed and there is no option for fame or a rise in the hierarchical pyramid of society, thus the usage of “a.” Regardless, I agree with what you stated above.
Note that in the model’s version, she talks about how the painter can’t afford “the arts I sell,” referring to prostitution, or the physical “arts” she sells to her sexual patrons. However, I think this is more of a stand-in for the “arts” available to a woman of her social and economic status at the time rather than a reference to strictly sex. And I think that society, though not necessarily Duffy, degrades such “arts” with the lowercase ‘a’.
In the poem “Standing Female Nude” Carol Ann Duffy intelligently incorporates the same word yet with a different meaning to both. Both meanings are based on the different perspectives taken by the characters in the poem, since one uses the word “art” and the other “Art” with a capital “A”.
The first use of the word “art” is mentioned by the female nude. Its purpose and significance reflects what most people would refer to and understand in regards to art itself; the expression of ones feelings and emotions through creative means. From the woman’s perspective, the art being created by the artist isn’t much of her concern due to her situation. She is posing nude to earn money to get along, and the product of the painter’s hard work doesn’t affect her deeply. As long as she can get paid for her contribution, she will be satisfied. Due to this, there isn’t that clear glorification of the word “art” from the woman unlike the artist’s rendition himself.
The artist in this poem has a completely different view of the meaning of art, which is why Carol Ann Duffy capitalized, therefore glorified, the word. This capitalization represents how the artist views art to be fulfilling and purely remarkable in a way that the female nude cannot understand and fully appreciate. Unlike the woman, there is hope of gaining recognition for the artist, hence improving his social status and fame, and that is portrayed through the use of diction.
There is also a deeper meaning to the use of diction and capitalization of the word, which can support the theme of disempowerment of women. Since the artist is the one painting the woman, he is the one in power and with the responsibility of the final product. In a way, he does her a favor for letting her pose, then giving her the money she earned from posing for six hours. This illustrates how vulnerable the woman truly is, and through this use of diction and capitalization of the word “art” used by Duffy, this can serve to support that theme.
Overall, I thought your analysis to show the model’s vulnerability and disempowerment of was very accurate. I like how you supported this fact with the use of art itself being the expression of ones feelings and emotions through creativity which the artist possesses but the model does not. Likewise, I like how you mention art being a way of living, therefore the glorified and capitalised “A” goes to the artist, whereas the insignificant and vulnerable “a” goes to the model.
Your concluding statements really address the core of the issue. Regardless of the effort and humiliation the prostitute undergoes in order to aid the creation of the painting, her contributions are always diminished in comparison to her male counterpart. Since women are objectified to an astonishing degree in this poem, the prostitute is considered a simple artistic tool and creates “art”, whereas the painter is supposedly able to gracefully incorporate her into his painting and produces “Art”.
Great points here, Natasha, especially at the end of your response. See, also, my notes above about the reference to ‘arts’ as sex, from the model/prostitute’s perspective.
Question 3: “Cuba”
Duffy ends her sonnet “Cuba” with the enigmatic two word phrase, “No Cuba.” Making direct reference to the poem’s ideas and/or specific content, indicate exactly what you believe Cuba represents to the poem’s speaker. Do you find the symbolic selection effective? Why?
I think that the speaker portrays Cuba as a symbol of blindness towards reality. Since Cuba is a communist country, citizens believe that living in isolation from the rest of the world and ignorant to what is around them is the best way to live a enjoyable life. This fact sounds unusual and odd to most people outside of Cuba because people in general like to be informed and aware of what is happening around them. However, in Duffy’s perspective Cuba illustrate a kind of “paradise” because at some point, individuals want to live in oblivion and be unconcern by reality. Cubans live without frustration or worries whatsoever. In the same way that citizens live in Cuba, the speaker represents the experience of love as an isolation from reality, stating that being in love makes you an ignorant of your surrounding and you only focus about the relationship. Therefore, when the speaker says “No Cuba” it portrays the finale of their loving relationship and the loss the “paradise”, where the couple are isolated from reality. I definitely found the symbolic selection very effective because of the two perspectives that Duffy expresses about experiencing love. The first perspective focuses on love being odd, unusual or rare feeling and the second perspective focuses is a “peaceful” setting where there is no frustration or hardship.
I agree with your suggestion of how the poem is linked to the actual situation in Cuba. Not only does it apply to the poem at a deeper level, but it is an original and interesting take on what the poem is about.
I think your idea about Cuba representing the protagonist’s self-imposed isolationism might be even better than Duffy’s portrayal of the country as an exotic paradise. In fact, your point may even represent Duffy’s views concerning outsiders’ perspective on an relationship. While many would consider the island (or relationship) to be a paradise, few are able to see past the veneer of happiness and realize the sorrow the nation’s inhabitants (or the members of a relationship) are suffering.
Although I agree with Cuba representing paradise for the couple that ended up not going, I disagree with “Cuba representing a symbol towards the blindness of reality.” Seeing as Carol Ann Duffy is a poet of the United Kingdom and that her goal is to sell, I believe that the poem relates further with the public as a representation of paradise. The poem’s main goal is the depiction of a faulty relationship and the undergoing of a depression from the narrator. Although I don’t agree with you it doesn’t mean I don’t respect your opinion. In fact looking at the comments below, you seem to have gathered a majority consensus with your statement, so good job.
Sergio, I totally agree with your perspective on the use of Cuba in the poem. However, I think your idea that a poet’s “goal is to sell” is hard for me to buy (no pun intended!). No person in their right mind whose foremost goals are economic would choose poetry as a career. On the other hand, a poet may very well wish to communicate an understandable, accessible idea to his or her public: isn’t that what Duffy does when she chooses a location for her thwarted paradise that many British people would immediately understand? What causes you to make the automatic leap from that desire to communicate an idea to capitalist aims? Believe it or not, teachers are not the only adults who derive most of their motivation from things other than money.
Camila, your comments about love are very convincing and, I think, in many cases accurate. However—this is not true of Cuban citizens, not at all. The people of that country are anything but blissfully ignorant. Life in Cuba for the average Cuban is incredibly difficult, and this fact is on the minds and tongues of most Cubans all the time. Of course, some people there, as in many economically depressed and restrictive societies, find ways to make the most of things and derive some enjoyment from their lives, but this is not representative of a desire to live in oblivion.
For the record, I really don’t think that Duffy intended to evoke the political situation in Cuba with this poem.
Throughout the poem, the narrator reflects on a passionate and loving relationship which either gradually deteriorated or ended. There are several images and symbols within the poem that connote death. These symbols, such as “grave”, “shroud”, “hearse” and “black cab”, mostly refer to funerals and symbolize the relationship’s end. These examples of harsh and grim imagery juxtapose with certain romantic images such as “roses”, “work of art”, “champagne” and “heart”, which symbolize the love and affection that once existed in the relationship. The disparity between these symbols contrasts the passion and affection that once existed in the relationship with the recent death or deterioration of the relationship. Furthermore, the relationship’s gradual decline is reflected by the bubbles in the champagne that are “left / to go flat.” This is an indirect metaphor that compares the relationship’s deterioration to a champagne bottle’s progression into “flatness”. Both the relationship and the champagne are losing the “spark” that once made them so distinctive and stimulating.
In a way, the narrator wishes to escape the imminent end of his/her relationship, similar to the way people tend to escape to Cuba. The poem’s speaker, therefore, compares a retreat to Cuba to an escape from all the difficulties that the narrator’s relationship may be enduring. However, the narrator knows that his/her relationship is unrepairable and that he/she cannot escape from the issues it is facing. As indicated by the repetitive use of the word “no”, there can be no escape from the reality the narrator is facing. There will be “no getting up from… the bed … and getting dressed, like a work of art, rubbing itself out,” and “no soft soap rubbed between four hands.” These sexual references refer to the end of the love and passion that once drove the relationship. Finally, the narrator realizes that there can be “no getting away from” all the troubles and issues facing the relationship. There will be “no Cuba”, meaning that there will be no escape from the hardships the relationship is facing. The relationship will, ultimately, end, as suggested by the strong use of death related images and references.
At first, I found the poem’s symbolic reference of Cuba fairly hard to grasp, thus making the poem’s central theme difficult to identify. I personally associate Cuba to political oppression and isolation, not to an exciting and thrilling escape from reality. However, once I understood the general Eastern perception of Cuba, which Duffy adopts for this poem, I did find the poem’s reference to Cuba very effective. Overall, the association between the narrator’s desire to escape from his/her relationship’s issues to the safe haven that Cuba embodies supports the poem’s general theme and message.
I thought that your analysis on the bubbles of champagne “left to go flat” was one of the strongest supporters of the theme. It provided a deeper look into the essence of the relationship between the speaker their partner as well as its gradual deterioration.
I agree with Natasha, Clara—this is top-notch analysis, especially your work with the death motif and the champagne metaphor.
In the poem “Cuba” there are numerous literary devices that support the poems literal meaning of a couple going on a romantic vacation together to Cuba. However, these loving actions and details are shot down throughout the poem through the use of death references. These cases of juxtaposition serve to express the death or breaking apart of the relationship the speaker was part of. Throughout the poem, the speaker is reflecting on the “what ifs” of their relationship status, or in other words, what if they were still together and went on that trip to Cuba.
Throughout the poem, there are great amounts of death references connected with literary devices that narrate the juxtaposition between the fantasy of a perfect honeymoon vs. reality and heartbreak. Words such as “shroud”, “black cab”, and “grave” are all symbolizing the relationship’s end through its references towards death and funerals. Throughout the poem, it is obvious that there once was love, yet it has burned out and the speaker of the poem has fallen into depression over the things that will not be. This idea is portrayed through the metaphor reading ““Glass of champagne, left to go flat”. The relationship has deteriorated over time until it has become “flat”, without love or passion.
In this case, Cuba represents a popular tourist location, especially for Europeans, and serves as a very romantic place. Of course, living in Venezuela and experiencing the relations between those two countries, it’s hard to come to that conclusion, yet it is what Carol Ann Duffy wants to communicate to the readers. The deeper figurative meaning of the poem represents the speaker’s paradise. It serves as a place of oblivion towards reality, which connects to the communist ideals of Cuba itself. Since it is a country where most of the population lives in isolation towards the outside world, the speaker finds that place as a safe haven from the harsh reality of her life.
Overall, through the use of the phrase “No Cuba”, the speaker is referring to the ending of the relationship and future together. It also serves as a moment of realization where the speaker finally realizes that there will be “No Cuba” or no paradise that will serve as an escape from the troubles and hardships of the relationship.
I thought that the speaker’s thoughts on the “what ifs” towards their relationship was the most interesting and accurate description about the poem. Also, I agree with picturing Cuba in a different perspective rather than the negative views from Venezuela.
I feel that your analysis on the juxtaposition between the death references and idealistic and romantic honeymoon images is very convincing and helpful. The contrasts between these two sets of words does help highlight the end of the narrator’s relationship that was once passionate and loving. Your explanation and analysis on the champagne imagery also help emphasize the relationship’s death.
Natasha, I think the idea of the poem as a form of “realization” or negative epiphany is very strong. It is almost as if the poetic voice is using the poem as a means of coming to terms with the fact that the relationship is really, once and for all, dead and gone.
Question 4: “Litany”
At the end of “Litany,” the speaker shocks her mother and her mother’s friends by dropping the most obscene word she knows into their sterile, prudish conversation. Although she is punished, she looks back on this moment with enjoyment, and describes the thrill of her transgression. Is taking pleasure in this type of defiance natural and healthy? Why or why not? Do you have memories of similar events in your own (or your siblings’ or friends’) childhoods?
I personally think that the protagonist from the poem, the little girl, felt she had trumped her mother along with her friends. For a girl, she was very observatory, and quite sharp for her age. She notices her mother is talking about things that are superficial and don’t matter, and in order to surprise her, she throws in this obscenity. The girl’s thrill comes out of perhaps feeling more adult than her own mother. She has gone into territory no adult present dares venture to (the taboo). I think that for a child, this sort of rebellion in some sense is very natural and healthy. The child has spotted something in her mother’s world order that bothers her. She rebels because she doesn’t think that adult women should be avoiding themes proper for their age. It’s a natural cycle in which the young take over the old, and it appears this young girl is growing up and taking up the reigns of adulthood. I was a perfect child though and never did this, probably because my parents never hid anything from me, so I had few reasons to question things.
I agree with you Armando. I do feel that rebelling, or speaking up against societal demands is a very natural and healthy thing to do. Perhaps its a child’s curiosity, mixed with his/her desire to shock or trick adults, that drives children to challenge their parents. I, too, rarely acted like the narrator in the poem as a child. But perhaps its because we feel that we have grown up in a more realistic and down to Earth society than that of the 60’s.
Your perspective on the girl’s rebellion as a sign of maturity is rather intriguing. I previously had viewed her brash defiance as an indication of childishness as possibly immaturity.
I agree that children are quite often not as aware of or willing to comply by social conventions, and even gain a great deal of satisfaction from opposing what they consider to be arbitrary. “Litany” just displays this commonplace desire amongst children through the perspective of young Duffy and describes her outlet for the said defiance.
Armando, I appreciate the succinctness with which you explain something very important about the poem—the rebellion as a response to frustration over the meaningless communication that seems to characterize the mother and her friends here.
Inherently, the desire to shock and rebel is arguably as present in any child as the one portrayed during the poem. Some may express their desire as profanely as the one in the poem or in more subtle ways. Nonetheless, the yearning to challenge authority appears to be something innate to all people. That being said, it is not always nourishing to defy authority. Most social convections and states’ laws are set up to preserve stability and prevent society from falling into a state of anarchy. The tendency of children to the ones resisting all norms and convections might suggest that defiance in itself is something juvenile rather than astute or noteworthy.
On the other hand, arguably the single most important instance during the poem was the child’s use of profanity. The shocking of the adults with the use of vulgarity provides a sharp contrast between the puritanical mentality of the adults with the more natural one relished by the child. The upsetting of conventions is possibly one of the only means by which society can evolve throughout the ages. Essentially, defiance is what prevents society from become nothing more than a static element in our lives.
Gonzalo, you make a very valid point here: there’s no sense in calling all children’s rebellion healthy or unhealthy—it can work both ways. However, I agree with Armando (and you, I think) that in this case the rebellion seems rooted in healthy urges.
I believe that at some point a child will rebel against their parents either in a cunning or brassy manner. In “Litany”, the speaker revolted against her mother in a cunning way by saying the most obscene word she knows. Compare to her mother and her mother’s friends, the girl portrays a more mature persona because of the way she addresses and recognises the overall issues in the corrupt society. On the other hand, these women were repulsive towards reality. Therefore, they created their own artificial world where they can be preserved and be safe from the truth. In my opinion, I think that taking pleasure in this type of defiance is natural, specially if you are dealing with parents which are similar to Litany’s. I think that Duffy portrays this revolt act as a healthy and natural one because it represent the inevitable transition between childhood and adulthood, which I consider it to be bitter but at the same time is exciting. For me, this experience is odd because my parents did address society’s problem and accepted the fact that life is complex. Therefore, they allow me to express myself but honestly I didn’t have the need to rebel towards them.
I agree with your opinion on how at one point in time, a child will rebel against their parents. However, the extent of this rebellion is different for every child depending on other factors involved. In the case of this poem, the rebellion involves the girl cursing in front of her mother and her friends, while other types of rebellion in modern times could be watching TV for five minutes into bed time.
I agree with the statement that a child will rebel against his parents. Any kind of repression of a human to another will one day go overboard. Especially now that liberal society lets children be more free than ever before, the taste of freedom will make kids (I call anyone from 2 to 17 years old kid, it’s funny) want more and more free will and thought, and if they ever feel slight repression they will feel the need to rebel. Whether it is in a hidden, sneaky manner, or in an overt, loud manner, people constantly feel the need to feel free, if not be free. The extent of this rebellion is, of course, dependent on the kid’s own ways of thinking, personality, things like that.
Rebellion is a form of curiosity and seeing as curiosity is an intact part of human nature, rebellion is impossible to avoid at some point in a child’s life. However, I want to point out that even though rebellion is inevitable, your parents will always be ready. Any adult has passed through childhood (something we almost always forget) and although its hard to imagine, your parents and adults have been through the same things you have. In modern society however, us children believe we know far more than our parents (very untrue) and think our cunningness is superior. As to why we feel pleasure when we do rebellious acts can be easily explained through science. As we commit an act against the rules the thought of getting caught makes us nervous and releases what is known as adrenaline (something our body craves for and enjoys). I agree with what you stated above Camila.
Yes, exactly: “bitter but at the same time… exciting.” I think Duffy loves this two-sided perspective on growing up, and it makes sense to me, too.
While insulting my parents (especially through profanity) was an unimaginable and almost physically impossible transgression for me as a child, I still reveled in my ability to swear and indulged in it as one would in a hobby. My friends and I spent many an hour in the schoolyard stringing together the most vulgar sentences, and proceeded to yell them out loud quite conspicuously, lulled into a sense of security by the sense of infallibility common amongst children. While the prospect of children swearing like sailors is hardly appealing and perhaps even an indicator of our society’s degeneracy, seeking pleasure from small acts of rebellion is hardly unnatural or unhealthy. Curiosity is an essential component of human nature, and rebellion is merely a manner through which children express the said emotion. Kids are merely straying from the societal norms in order to test the extent of their boundaries and gauge their own power over their surroundings. As children, my best friend and I often blatantly displayed our disregard for classroom etiquette and cordiality, solely for the purpose of discovering the extent of our influence. Many adults tend to believe that children’s misbehavior represent their cry for attention; however, this not always the case. Rather than feeling discouraged when others attempted to ignore our actions, my friend and I experienced an overwhelming sense of triumph—we’d forced the “enemy” that is authority into submission through cunning and attrition. Whatever the reason for defiance may be, as long as the transgressions are petty and the child develops no (lasting) behavioral issues, all forms of rebellion are healthy outlets of curiosity.
The only thing I strongly disagree with here is that “the prospect of children swearing like sailors is hardly appealing.” I actually find the image of elementary school Santusht swearing like a sailor on the playground to be utterly enjoyable.
Question 5: “Valentine”
In “Valentine,” the speaker suggests that an onion is a more appropriate gift for a lover than the established clichés (“kissograms,” “satin hearts,” etc.). In your view, does this make Duffy’s attitude toward love cynical? Hypothetically, would you welcome the speaker’s attitude in a love interest, or prefer a more conventional one? Explain.
Although Carol Ann Duffy establishes common valentine day gifts as cliches, her view of love is far from cynical in my opinion. In fact she describes her interest in the onion as a symbol of pure love. She tells you that she would give you an onion as a “moon wrapped in brown paper” and that its “fierce kiss will stay on your lips.” What she tries to get across is that “kissograms” and “satin hearts” have become so common they have led to a misconception of the true meaning of love. By trying to represent love as it actually is, Duffy is being direct but far from cynical. This is supported when she states that the onion is “Lethal” and that “Its scent will cling to your fingers, cling to your knife.” Here she is trying to highlight that in a relationship nothing is perfect. You will have arguments and tough times to get through, which is the reason she prefers the onion as a depiction of love. Although it may appear as she is being negative towards love, she is merely putting everything into a perspective.
True as it may be that I sided with Carol Ann Duffy above, I wouldn’t welcome her attitude in love. To me Valentines is a day to express the love you feel with your partner and although there seems to be an added pressure to impress, the gifts are not supposed to be over analysed. She seems like a very complicated person and because of that I would not be attracted to her attitude.
I agree with your opinion when it comes to the attitude expressed in regards to love. Even though the gift, if over analyzed, does have a certain significance related to love, I doubt someone would take their time to analyze a Valentine gift like that of an onion. I think a portion of the world’s population would just prefer to get normal valentine gifts with simple and understandable meanings.
Plus, fancy chocolates just taste better than raw onions! And leave your breath a little fresher, too…
I have to disagree with you and Natasha. Sure, an onion is a fairly strange gift to give someone on Valentines day, but I would much rather receive an honest and heartful gift than a cheesy kissogram or CVS valentines card. As we’ve often heard, “it’s the thought that counts,” and I feel that a present needs to have meaning and significance behind it, even if it is a simple an onion. I do agree with you two that gifts should not be over analyzed, but I would prefer receiving a gift that had some thinking or emotional connection behind it than a traditional valentines day gift.
Maybe the ideal Valentine is something as thoughtful and meaningful as an onion, but a little more delectable in terms of taste or appearance. My vote is for a dark and disturbing painting by Hieronymus Bosch… but failing that, a sushi dinner is always nice!
I agree with your perspective when it comes to love not being cynical just because of the use of onion. However, I agree with the Clara. I much rather have a true and meaningful gift than a simple and plain one that all couples give. Also, in my opinion, these cheesy gifts are perfect at the beginning of a relationship, since the couple are new and naive knowing love. But afterwards, the couple will realize the complexity of their relationship and at this moment, the metaphorical onion is a perfect gift.
The dread of receiving something people may perceive as common seem to have denoted “kissograms” and “satin hearts” as superficial gifts to both Duffy and a portion of the general public. While I agree that gifts are sometimes over analyzed, its essential to notice that even the most common of gifts can be bestowed with as much affection as Duffy’s onion. Thus, giving a much greater value than people credit them for.
This is a great point. Valentine’s Day would be full of breakups if people started getting indignant when they received their kissograms. Plus, StuCo would have a much harder time turning a profit!
I think Natasha’s spot on. Even though I understand that love is a complex emotion with multiple facets etc… etc…, I’d honestly prefer a conventional token of appreciation. I tend to avoid unnecessary displays of emotion and remain an indifferent stance towards gifts, so my only real criteria for such things is satisfaction. As materialistic as it may sound, I’d rather receive a box of chocolates (which I can eat) than an onion (which I cannot) regardless of the symbolism.
Its that time of the day in which I say you are WRONG! Sorry. You are right in saying that Duffy isn’t cynical but more dimensional. You are also right in saying that on valentines day, love is the only thing that wants to be commemorated, not the hate you feel for that person. But truly, I feel Duffy’s perspective isn’t negative or pessimistic rather, it is realistic, and serves as a warning. The word lethal is key here. She tells all us young lovers that love isn’t just some card or a box of chocolates, it is beyond material. Love is not to be toyed with because there are good sides to it and also darker ones. It is such a complex emotion that it has to used correctly. I think her point of view is very wise, and not pessimistic at all. The point of the poem is to be satirical.
Armando, you make the very valid point that Duffy is not literally advocating raw vegetables as Valentin’s Day gifts here—she’s making a point, which you have interpreted very convincingly.
I agree completely about the lack of cynicism here: the view of love as complex seems anything but cynical to me.
As to your second paragraph, I hope that someday when you have a poet girlfriend you can show it to her. Sometimes those complicated people turn out to be kind of irresistible, for better or for worse! Although I don’t have any reason to believe that real-life Carol Ann Duffy is overanalytic, I do agree that excessive analysis in love does not tend to contribute to happy relationships.
Question 6: “Mrs. Faust”
The tone in “Mrs. Faust” is ironic and mocking. In addition to materialism, what do you believe is being ridiculed or criticized in this poem? Do you agree with what you perceive to be Duffy’s critique?
Apart from criticizing the Fausts’ seemingly insatiable lust for material goods, Duffy’s poem also diminishes many of the previous century’s greatest accomplishments and ridicules the ambition which caused them. Tremendous achievements such as space exploration, atomic fission and cloning are swept aside in a torrent of words, just as Buddhism, meditation and other practices generally perceived positively by society are reduced to the same status as colonic irrigation. Furthermore, positions of considerable power and influence (generally held in high esteem and sought after by many) are belittled as well, as the supposed honor and dignity required to acquire titles such as “Pope” and “Right Hon.” are repeatedly sullied by Faust’s immoral exploits.
While ambition and materialism can potentially cause harm, and practices such as meditation and Feng-Shui are occasionally employed as facades of intelligence by the shallow-minded, all these concepts are an essential characteristic of human nature and often highlight our race’s noblest traits and ideals. The inventions and philosophies which Duffy carelessly dismisses in her poem have the potential to (and in many cases already have) profoundly influence the future. While the said inventions and concepts may be misused in order to fulfill the wishes of petty tyrants, they can also usher forth an era of enlightenment
Duffy’s criticiscm of some of mankind’s greatest ‘accomplishments’ and her critique of ambition definitely appears to be one of the main themes of “Mrs. Faust”. Nonetheless, I do believe Duffy’s portrayal of Feng-Shui as traits of the shallow minded somewhat accurate if in the context of ‘western’ culture. Other than that I do concur with you on your approval of the inventions listed and the profound impact they might or will have across the globe.
I, too, believe that Duffy does a good job of diminishing several of mankind’s accomplishments in this poem. Her use of this enumeration helps to remove significance and meaning to some of the accomplishments listed, thus diminishing their status or importance. I also agree that meditation, Feng-Shui and other positively perceived practices reflect some of the better qualities of mankind.
The great steps of humanity are brought down into the mundane with this poem. I find myself conflicted between your logic and my own thinking, as yes, these accomplishments are very important and able to create golden eras for society, but also that they are mostly used for the creation of money. The way I feel is, whenever greed steps into the picture, a great accomplishment will become something to be warded against. The way of Faust to become the ultimate capitalist is something of an anathema to my own way of thinking, as I’ve always had a more socialist mindset. Everyone should be able to benefit from something and not have to pay for it, as Tesla’s dream of free electricity was.
I completely concur with the response above Santusht. Man’s greatest human achievements are diminished and serve to prove something of the upmost importance in this poem. Have you ever wanted something real bad, until you got it? What I believe Duffy is trying to portray in ‘Mrs. Faust’ is that she didn’t enjoy all of the materialistic things she obtained after her husband traded his soul with the devil. At the end of the day, the human instinct for human touch and love are things that can’t be bought. Although she had a boat, and a house on the beach, she couldn’t physically deal with the fact that her husband was cheating on her, regardless of the fact that the relationship was purely materialistic. You can only gain so much with money, and so the criticism of the ambition is a close parallel to Mr Faust’s need to gain knowledge above anything else. That was just a point I wanted to add; I do agree with everything stated in your response though.
I’m with you here, but I don’t really think that a critique of these things is a serious aim of the poem. Duffy uses a misuse of power and a misinterpretation of spiritual enlightenment to satirize a particular demographic—the aggressively affluent, deeply materialistic, and persistently upwardly mobile—rather than to take down mankind’s achievements in one fell swoop.
I believe the irony of human progress being just another person’s money-making idea is criticized. Normally, something will be discovered by the military of a country, and then very slowly passed on to the normal citizens. Countries do this so that they will be better at fighting wars, and so they will always be searching for new things to create. Duct Tape, Walkie-Talkie, and even internet has been created in the race to be better than the others. But we must remember people like Nikola Tesla (creator of the AC electricity, X-ray, and the first wireless-controller), who believed in free electricity for all, completely self-less. As we know, though, Tesla was cheated out of his fame by Edison, who is now known for creating electricity and the light bulb (which he did not create, just manage to sell). We can see that greed and ambition is valued more than sincere want for a better world. Humanity is interesting, huh?
Another point being criticized is society’s encouragement of looking out for oneself instead of trying to make the world itself a better place. We are taught to be mistrustful of people and not share our creations, calling them our copy-right. This has made humanity what it is today, for better or worse. More worse than better, I believe, as there are millions if not a couple billion people living in poverty today. Human greed seems to have been hard-coded into us, so every time we see a person be selfless and work to help others, many will say “He’s stupid, he will die of sickness”, or “I wouldn’t do this even if I was paid”.
I agree with your suggestion of how society now a days encourages one to look out for oneself and basically teaches individuals to not care about helping others and making the world a better place in the process. I do believe that even though society has created this mindset, there are some who have the courage to stand out and help those around them despite the greed and power surrounding them.
I think your point in today’s humanity and society is very valid and interesting. I agree with your perspective about society basically seeking ambition and to only care for one-self. However, I think your just looking at the negative side of humanity in general. In my perspective there are good and bad in everything, including at human nature.
Humanity’s selfishness and ceaseless greed for money may very well be what Duffy intended to criticize. With regards to ambition, I do believe it is not always something to be seen as maliciously intended. Had Tesla been completely void of ambition it is likely he would have never developed his system of alternating currents.
I’m totally with you dude, or at least the first paragraph, not the rest communist agitation of the second. I have reads tons about the world wars, and human ambition has been spearheaded by that lust for glory and greed and domination. If you look at Hitler for example, his lust for power managed to get Germany out of the ashes of the first world war and make it into a world super potency. During his reign there were numerous atrocities, but also a great deal of scientific progress all for the end goal of world domination. Rocketery, jets, assault rifles, all these crazy weapons were created tanks to a couple of men’s ambition. These things are used for destruction today, but some have also helped spur on human prosperity. Scary isn’t it?
This is an interesting perspective, and I think you make a good case for these being relevant features of the poem. There is certainly a relationship between capitalist greed (or perhaps better put, profit margins) and innovation, evident to me especially in the pharmaceutical industry and the lag time in inventing drugs that only benefit extremely poor populations such as, say, sub-Saharan Africa.
Question 7: “Queen Herod”
The poem describes a queen from biblical times who orders the slaughter of baby boys to protect her daughter from damaging future entanglements with men. While we can probably agree that Queen Herod’s punishment exceeds the potential crimes she envisioned the infant males committing, the rest of the poem makes a case for the detrimental effects of marriage on a woman’s identity in her day and age. In modern times, is a woman’s identity likely to be effaced in any way by marriage, or is this entirely a thing of the past?
Unlike their predecessors, modern women boast significantly more rights and are capable of pursuing their own futures in many countries. However, misogynistic philosophy and gender bias still plague a considerable number of cultures and religions, and even persist in the supposedly civilized Western world. Fortunately though, globalization and an increasingly influential feminist movement has raised awareness regarding the plight of oppressed women and even aided in initiating a liberation campaign in certain countries. Furthermore, the rise of secularism (and atheism during the twentieth century) has promoted open-mindedness and freed women from the shackles of certain religious stereotypes and expectations. This effect though, is quite limited in scope and many countries still persecute women due to religious ideologies. The same notions render marriage a “dream-killer” in these biased countries, as women are forced to surrender their hopes for the future in order to handle domestic chores and bear children. In order to foster complacency amongst women (regarding their fates), they are denied proper education and restricted at every turn. While marriage is nowhere near as debilitating in Western society, women who choose to undergo the union often experience a noticeable reduction in employment opportunities since employers are reluctant to offer maternal leaves and are unwilling to suffer any loss of productivity. While some Scandinavian nations have managed to (almost) completely eliminate gender bias, a majority of women worldwide continue to suffer restrictions due to marriage, albeit to a much lesser extent than their medieval counterparts.
Your depiction of women in much of the modern globe as bound to “shackles” by various religions, cultures and views appears to be precise. However, if women arose the globe are to gain gender equality I do believe atheism might not be an effective means as opposed to providing women proper education and guaranteeing decent job opportunities for all.
Gonzalo, of course you are right about atheism. The trouble is, there seem to be some religions (or at least radical forms of religion) that don’t tolerate proper education or even work outside the home for women. It’s in places where those radical views predominate that women struggle against horrendous odds to gain a voice, or the opportunities that those of us in more secular societies have come to take for granted.
Women of western countries in our modern times, as you say, are much more free than a Renaissant or even Victorian civilization’s women would have been. Both genders should be just seen as equal, I believe. Not in body or perspective, of course, as biologically we do different things altogether. But women and men should be considered as human, with laws, rights and no discrimination at all. Women in other, non-western civilizations, fight against the idea of “man is leader, woman is housewife”. Or at least some of them do. I believe/hope this century will bring about the end of gender inequality, thanks to the ease of communication and the expansion of western culture. No person should be forced to be with someone that treats them badly or denies them things, just because they are married.
I could not agree more with what you stated above Santusht. I want to highlight that the reference to religion is perhaps the strongest example in the answer above. A large percentage of the world (23 % ) to be exact are muslims. I do not mean to pinpoint any religion; however, Islamic believes have been known to radicalise and with it decrease the value of the role of the woman in society. If I am honest, I don’t agree with Gonzalo’s answer. Whether atheism is the effective solution towards gender equality I don’t know; what I do know however, is that your statement about providing women a better education is faulty. Currently there is a ratio of 100 women to 93 men being taught proper education and so increasing the number of women would discourage gender equality as the gap would simply rise. That being said I completely agree with the statement that religion is one of the primary reasons for gender inequality and an issue of the upmost sensitivity.
Sergio, do be careful about singling out particular religions: Islam is not the only religion with powerful fundamentalist factions that restrict the rights of women; and what’s more, there are many progressive, moderate Muslims worldwide that do no such thing (I may be mistaken, but I’m pretty sure that ‘moderate’ describes the vast majority of Muslims). Tragically, in the west the louder and more threatening voices of the jihadis drown out those of their reasonable counterparts.
(Warning, ignorant rant)
Okay, I’m going to get flak from the more reasonable people in class but, thought experiment. Over the years, because of the gender inequality that has been created by society men tend to have several advantages over women, (more pay, more jobs, preference). In our modern day there are more men with jobs than women. I know this next comment is dumb, but, some one has to do it. Some one has to take care of the kids. It is much easier for women to do this, they tend to have more loving relationships with children and what not. I am a feminist, and I believe in equal treatment for women and men, but honestly, currently it is very difficult to change the atomic family. We have made it so it is easier for a women to be a housewife and there are so many complications when it comes to have equal families. If both parents have jobs, who will care for the kids, if they switch positions momentarily there will be an unbalanced family economy. Only few and rich families have the comfort to do this, but many people don’t have the option. Maybe, and unfortunately women have to take one for the team and have to sacrifice their identities in order to bear the brunt of family life.
Funny, I was just reading some of the research on working mothers and their effect on families, since I happen to be one. I won’t post the findings here, because I think they might seem like an affront to the children of stay-at-home mothers (I myself am the very grateful child of such a mother, so I sympathize). But suffice it to say that the “mom home with kids” model is neither the only nor in any tangible sense the best one for happy moms, successful kids, or productive economies and societies. Regions like Scandinavia have figured this out, but most of the world lags behind. I will go ahead and say that, in my belief, the only reason you think that women “tend to have more loving relationships with children” or serve as better homemakers / care providers is because this is a view and a practice that is actively promoted by the society (or societies) that you are a product of. I will add that it is a big slap in the face to many devoted and just-as-loving fathers out there.
Women who want to stay home with their children are probably better off when they can do so, and their children are likely better off, too. But the many legions of women like myself who are just as averse to that prospect as our male counterparts do both themselves and their children a disservice by staying home. The trouble arises when a lack of high-quality, affordable childcare forces the hand of such women, and these are more often than not the poorer women who can’t find and hold jobs due to a low level of education. An interesting side note to this discussion is the fact that the single strongest determining factor in the academic performance (and, correspondingly, qualifications for jobs in male-dominated industries), and self-confidence of young girls is whether or not their mothers work. I’ll leave you to guess which girls tend to come out ahead.
I’m a little disappointed that no one else rose to the bait on this one, Armando!
I knew I was going to get flak for this one…
Not Mrs. Barga that at some point I do say that there are families were both parents work and it is achievable to have completely functional relationship between children and parents. I just personally believe that because of how society has set up itself and has created the “perfect” vision of the house wife this isn’t always achievable to everyone. I’m pretty sure you are a great example of the working woman Mrs. Barga and you do a great job at it, but like we both agreed at some point, there are many nations where support services for child care are affordable and high functioning. Funny enough, I remember reading an article that said that our posthumous friend Soviet Union as well as East Germany had great child care services available.
I think this response is quite accurate, but then again I am biased as a non-religious and politically liberal female. I also recognize Gonzalo’s point below about atheism not being a prerequisite (or even an especially effective channel) for women’s liberation. However, while I would never protest religion in and of itself, I have to admit that fundamentalism in religion strikes fear into my heart (especially as a woman), and especially frightening are the rising numbers of fundamentalists even in bastions of “the free world” such as the United States.
Unenviably, most women will undergo through some degree of change in varying extents after marrying. Regardless, if referencing women in a historical context or modern women in marriages within ‘developed’ nations across the world. Nonetheless, that does not necessarily mean that their identities will in turn be effaced in the process. In contrast to marriages in the past and those of more traditional societies across the globe, modern marriages arguably endorse the preservation of personal identity.
In the modern world gender equality has not transcended fully across all societies and nations. Yet, nowadays most women in marriages are arguably not subject to the same detrimental treatment that some were given in the past. Vast progress has been made in the field and modern women enjoy a greater sense of individualism that was inexistent to previous generations. That being said, it would be unrealistic to claim that women will retain their exact sense of identity during marriage. In its essence, marriage tends to change people either for better or worse. More so after the couple has had a child. Despite some women may loose certain aspects of their individuality, new traits previously unknown to them may transpire in the process.
Question 8: “Thetis”
At the end of “Thetis,” the goddess stops shape-shifting, succumbs to the mortal Peleus’ pursuit, and marries him (“I changed, I learned”), then bears his son, Achilles (“turned inside out — or that’s / how it felt when the child burst out”). How do you interpret Duffy’s choice of words to describe her marriage and subsequent experience of childbirth? Is any of it depicted positively? Negatively? Ambiguously? Why?
In the poem “Thetis” by Carol Ann Duffy, the diction portrayed in the specific quotation that interprets marriage and childbirth is straight forward. It is also expressed in a negative way and lacks the emotion usually seen in new mothers. In the poem, there is a lot of description based on how Thetis tries to escape Peleus as well as how she tries to be free of him and his presence. After so much fighting for independence, she gives up and mentions how she “changed, I learned, turned inside out – or that’s how it felt when the child burst out.” Through those simple lines, a tone of complete defeat and surrender is depicted. In that one sentence, she mentions how she not only marries Peleus, but she has a baby with him against her will. The depiction of childbirth is portrayed through a violent transition since it is obvious that Thetis did not want this fate for herself. The actual act of having the child is shown in a completely different perspective than that which a new mother would have. Thetis describes Achilles, her child, as “bursting out”. The diction in the word “”burst” illustrates a violent and rapid birth, one without any real emotional connection from the mother towards the son. Through these events, she experiences a loss of identity, which is a major theme in the poem.
Since the theme of loss of identity is depicted in a negative way, it is obvious that Thetis is opposed to these events that occur to her, but after so much fighting and fleeing, she has no other choice but to give in to Peleus. The reason of why she feels a loss of identity is because her son is Achilles. Achilles is one of Greek mythologies greatest and most well-known heroes. Since his fame is so extensive, Thetis feels shadowed by it, causing her to question herself and who she really is.
I thought that your analysis of diction when Thetis gives birth to Achilles is very accurate, specially when you mentioned that it was a rapid action as well as lacking emotion. Also, I like how you considered that Thetis looses her identity in two ways. The first one is getting married and the second one is having an unwanted child that later on becomes more famous and recognised than her.
Your analysis on the diction used in the last couple of sentences of the poem is very convincing and accurate. I also feel that Thetis lacks a certain emotional connection to the birth of her son. Perhaps, the sudden “flash forward” to her giving birth made the marriage and birth seem too rapid and out of control. Furthermore, the pain and anguish behind it made the birth of Achilles seem premature and perhaps not wished for. She is losing her identity and is welcoming a new lifestyle almost too quickly. She is scared of what she will encounter, which might make her seem indifferent, or pessimistic, towards the birth of her son. I also find your analysis on Thetis and the effects of her son’s fame very convincing.
I think Duffy is too overzealous with her feminist ideals in criticizing the process of childbirth and motherhood. Despite the pain it involves and the time it consumes, many women engage in it willingly and are often extremely satisfied. Even Thetis herself is an apt example. Despite her initial reluctance, she grew very fond of her son and willingly attempted to prolong Achilles’ life despite the toll he took on her life.
I agree with the statement that Thetis becomes resigned to her womanly/motherly fate. But I believe that when she says “I learned, I changed”, she means she understands that a sacrifice needs to be made in order to bring life into the world. Her importance is huge in the greek myths, as she is the creator of Achilles. To create Achilles, though, she must bring herself down to the level of Peleus, a mortal. She loses her god-powers to have a son. I believe she understands that it needs to be done.
Similarly to many of the ideas presented on the comments of the poem, I also concur with the fact that she completely contrasts the idea of having a child. Although physically painful, the physiological gain usually overpowers the pain, and so becomes a pleasant experience with many mothers stating that it was their best day. However, Thetis describes the child birth as “bursting out” which completely downgrades the special and uniqueness of the moment. However, although she didn’t want to conceive a child, it is hers, she created it and so we can tell that she loves him so very much. Your analysis is very strong Nati.
Natasha, I agree with your classmates that you interpret the poem very clearly and convincingly. And while I agree with Santusht that Thetis as an indifferent mother runs counter to her portrayal in Greek myth (after all, most of the roles in The World’s Wife are substantially revised from their original form), I don’t think he’s aware of the many women (even mortals in voluntary relationships!) who struggle with the toll that motherhood takes on their identity.
Ily Park
Question 9: “In Mrs. Tilscher’s Class”
“In Mrs. Tilscher’s Class” marks the speaker’s transition from childhood to adolescence through contrasting recollections of classroom and real-world learning. What memories do you have of your own childhood from these two sides of the educational spectrum? Include both an in-school and a real-life anecdote, preferably with contrasting elements like those Duffy uses.
In Mrs. Tilscher’s Class: (Sexual language used, parental consent is adviced! 😉 )
Even though I have very fond memories of school as an infant, I distinctly remember one class that changed everything and may even have contributed towards the transition to adulthood. We were all very exited and physically prepared for what was next. She had warned us. Today we were about to understand the importance of the reproductive system. I wanted to impress and boast so I had engaged attentively in a conversation at the dinner table with my parents. As class started tensions began to rise and when the diagrams and big words started appearing we were all left in a state of shock. My nerves rose as she approached me to ask a question. She leaned over and in a voice that was more of a scream than anything else she asked, “Sergio, do you know what the female ‘private parts’ are called?” Oh good! I breathed and with confidence answered “Chuminichi!” The class started laughing like never before. I didn’t understand. She pointed out my mistake with a smug look upon her face and told me the right answer was “ la vagina.” I argued. My parents had told me the answer last night and I trusted them over anything, surely I was right. My head lay low all day and when I ran towards the main entrance of the school I quickly pulled my mom away from her friends and asked her to go back home. As I started to tell her the events of the day, she giggled and told me she had used ‘cute words’ instead of the real ones to make it less rude. Parents huh?
With this though the class started gaining a deeper understanding of the reproductive system and finally learned what a relationship was. At first I must admit that girls and boys were more prudent around each other, and that the class started to look like a girls vs boys battle. However, the conversation in which I have felt most embarrassed led to my first ‘girlfriend’. I married her in the playground and for 6 year old me this was a big deal. Looking back at this today I believe that the conversation that left everyone surprised and alarmed is also the one that led to my discovery of a relationship (A key component in the transition to adulthood).
First off, the hell are six year olds being taught about the reproductive system? 2, this is a really good connection to the poem that i think all of us can relate to. We have all had the “talk” and what not, the birds and the bees, and its funny how things just kind of fit together. All of these “dirty” things that we shouldn’t talk about and are considerably taboo are totally natural things that form part of our health developing lives. Imma be the first to say this but I can’t wait to have sex. I mean, its part of the natural life cycle, but it is another of those beautiful things in life that goes beyond emotions and experience. I think that classrooms and parents sometimes objectify these things and talk about them in too a scientific light or try to shy away from them. Sex and loving is a part of life, and learning about the reproductive system certainly is not quite enough.
Sergio, I’ve mentioned this to you already, but I love this post! What a vivid and relevant childhood memory. I do think this particular poem is one of the most universally effective of our Duffy collection, because who among us doesn’t remember the awkwardness of sex ed classes? I almost wish my teacher had “smiled / then turned away” instead of exposing us to that . . .
Question 10: “The Diet”
“The Diet” includes a veritable flood of substances (for instance, “sugar, / salt, dairy, fat, protein, starch . . . alcohol”; “skimmed milk”; “air, / water”; “beer . . . / dregs”; “a tear”; “flesh and blood”; “fat”; etc.), which seem to overwhelm the protagonist in one form or another. Consider a few of these specific substances, commenting on their effect in the poem and their role in the dieter’s vicious cycle.
Question 11: “Originally”
In “Originally,” Duffy compares the abrupt leaving of a childhood home for a new one with the more gradual process of leaving childhood to “reside” in adolescence or adulthood. What specific experiences from your youth represented a transition from one stage to the next? How do these compare and contrast with your experiences of moving or emigration, or with the ideas and images used in Duffy’s poem?
Every country I’ve lived in has created a new “part” of me. In Brazil I acquired my love for reading, especially fantasy, thanks to the abundance of great Brazilian authors at the time. Italy changed me as well, as it was where I became guarded of people for five years to come. I spoke little or at all, for people would make fun of my accent, of what I liked. So I started heavily playing games (though I played them before), especially Roleplaying games, such as Fallout 3 and The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. It was a boring country to live in, and as people didn’t like me, I was happy when we left for France. There, I actually had friends. Two to be exact. Thanks to them I got the weird humour and some confidence in talking to people, long story being shortened. Germany showed me how to be friendly to people, and that I did not actually need to care about what people said or thought, making me most of what I am now. To summarize, every time I move I make a great change in how I am or live.
Duffy says the same, but she only changed once, into a culture not too different to hers, comparatively. Of course, she changed, as people will always adapt to new environments and ways of being. She understands spot-on just how much a person will change in new places, and she’s only moved one time (that I know of). I have evolved, just as she says, from all these experiences. I stay the same at core, an introvert who likes books and games and knows the internet back and forth. But the changes to behaviour and thought are there, easy to see looking back. In a way I could say I’m 40% travel, and 60% gaming.
I can see the clear connections between Duffy’s experiences from her migration, to your changes during all of yours. You both changed, depending on where you moved to. All the different cultures and people that you encountered on your migrations shaped you to be the person you are today. Every migration changed you at least a little, and although Duffy only moved once, she also experienced personal changes like you did. Your response supports Duffy’s claims on the changes in migrations and provides a real life example (you) of how several migrations can change someone.
I really put thought into your statement because I honestly didn’t think that being an international student has affected you so much. Few times you have alluded to the fact that had you not moved from Mexico in the first place you would have had more friends and how you have become a closed person because of all the moving around. I feel you. All my life I have been in this school, but all this time people have moved. Friends that i had hoped would graduate with me have left. I am a lonely traveler too. In that sense we are quote similar, and I can understand why you are strange sometimes. How people treat you, how many friends you have had, all these things affect one, and I think that of Duffy’s poems this is perhaps one of the most significant ones for people in our school in particular.
This is a great point, and in fact for the reason you cite, the poem has been one of most warmly received by the past two groups of students—this is why Sergio’s and Santusht’s rejection of Duffy’s description was so interesting to me.
Lino, this is really interesting, and kind of defines why I’ve felt vaguely jealous of my international students since moving abroad: even if some of your experiences have been negative, you have sort of a colorful layer of contributions from your foreign homes to set on top of your unchanging core. At the very least, it enables you to understand where your different facets come from, whereas for those of us who stayed in the same place as children, the warring influences of nature and nurture seem more inextricably interwoven and impossible to examine individually (if that even makes sense).
At any rate, in her description of “all childhood” as “an emigration,” Duffy opens this experience up to those of us who only figuratively “moved” when we were young, which I appreciate.
Compared to the response from my friend Lino, I haven’t moved around the globe as much. However, the two changes I underwent were both very significant to my transition into adolescence. The biggest change without a doubt was my emigration from Spain to Egypt. The culture of both countries are complete opposites and as a child that was never exposed to different arts and civilisations, it was a very different and difficult to accustom to. My family lived in Spain for all their lives and so the only influence of other cultures were through the television, but never a one to one experience. It is as a consequence of the insight I gained into other religions and way of life that I grew as a person.
Another experience that led to a substantial increase of maturity was with the death of my grand-dad. Until then, I had lived in an environment that could be considered utopian. There was no trouble in this world and the only things I could process were those of a fairytale. When my grand-dad died, it was a metaphoric slap in the face. He meant so much to me and loosing him made me realise that the world I lived in wasn’t reality. This represented a big change in how I viewed the world and consequently my transition into adolescence.
If we are comparing my two anecdotes with the poem “Originally”, I think that the transition from Spain to Egypt is the one that most closely parallels the poem. She describes the emigration from Scotland to England and how everything she knew changed. Although this may seem like a cliche, every transition from a place to another represents a change in culture, customs and everyday life which increases your spectrum and ability to accept differences.
Compared to the two friendos on top of my comment, I haven’t moved at all during my life. I have eternally lived in Caracas, city of love and wonder. So, why am i talking about life changes. Well, cause I can, that’s why. As i shortly alluded to in class, Santusht is wrong (heck yes) and small changes in childhood are actually significant. Like I mentioned, i used to live in the west of the city. This is a poorer sector of the city, and I used to live in an apartment around the size of my current living room. I went to a school that was filled with other low middle class kids. Where I currently live, that past seems like some obscure reality. The friends in my building in my past school have all become by wisps of memories. Currently I couldn’t hang out with any of them, the social divide would be too big, I wouldn’t be able to understand them, or so I think.
That first paragraph was discussing the changes that occur through physical movement. But as I sort of said in the very beginning, this isn’t actually very relevant towards me. Rather, I want to discuss another change in my life. Teenagehood. I think that this theme is talked about in Mrs. Tilscher’s Classroom and Litany some more, but I kind of like this poem more so here it is. (Warning, the following will sound really corny). A) Parties, alcohol, girls, social skills have all become a significant part of my life. They seem like secondary things, and they are, but these 4 words (5?) have created such enormous change in the way I view others and the way other’s view me. First off, Parties and alcohol, again, as secondary as they appear have been a big impact on me. I have had my times, usually bad times with both of these combined, but it’s just I fee since I entered High School these two things do not disappear from my life. I am not a heavy drinker or anything, but I just reflect on how alcohol has changed the beahviour of a lot of my class mates. It’s rather scary now that I look back. People that i know from childhood, and the thought of them all drinking. It is a bit hypocritical for me to say this, but it just disgusts me at times. As for girls and social skills…well…
I have always been an odd character, and my interest in girls and what not has always been stunted by this. It’s funny to think that some years ago i would have thought as girls as odd ugly creatures (they still are). But now, this attraction has brought upon me a strange new perspective. I am simply not the little kid i used to be…
Armando, as traumatizing as changing apartments may have been, I don’t think that moving can really erase or deeply influence your cultural identity. Despite having moved multiple times, I’ve remained essentially same over this period of time and still consider myself an Indian (and even a bit of a patriot). On the other hand, your social skills and other external aspects of one’s personality can undergo great growth (or stunting) due to local preferences and norms. However, in the end, humans, while easily influenced and adaptable do tend to cling to at least a kernel of their original culture and ideals.
Santusht, I think this is too broad of a generalization. There are many of us—perhaps more so in the U.S.; I’m not sure—who are not raised to have a clear or distinct “cultural identity,” at least not one that we are consciously aware of. I don’t mean this to say that there’s no such thing as culture in the U.S. (although others have made this argument semi-convincingly), but that those of us whose forebears emigrated to the New World many generations back and did not attempt to maintain any connection to their European roots AND whose families are not particularly engaged with any shared community- or nationwide wide idea of being American don’t always know who they are in a cultural sense. Of course, people who grow up in a certain place often share core traits (individualism would be the most commonly cited example from my own country, I think), and these are hard to shake off as an adult, but I don’t think the same is true for young children. If I had moved from the U.S. to a country with more of a collectivist than individualist mentality (say, China or Mexico) as a six year old, unless my parents had placed a conscious emphasis on the trait of individualism, I don’t think I would have maintained it. Couldn’t it be that your sense of self and what it means to be Indian is derived from a conscious choice your parents made to foster those values in you, and/or the fact that you have lived in other places where the sheer contrast in cultures caused you to be aware of your own “Indianness”?
Sergio, I like how you pose a literal move against a figurative “emigration” in terms of a traumatic or life-changing event (this was especially interesting for me having read about your grandfather from Cindi’s perspective last year). I think this matches well with Duffy’s idea that things other than physical relocations can force us abruptly into new phases of maturity—funny how those things usually tend to be negative or traumatic, though.
Question 12: “War Photographer”
In “War Photographer” there is a tension between order and chaos. This is evident in the rhyme scheme with one unrhymed line between two sets of rhyming couplets. Where else in the poem do you find this tension or juxtaposition? What does it suggest about the poem’s subject or themes?
“In his darkroom he is finally alone, with spools of suffering set out in ordered rows.” is the most impacting juxtaposition moment for me. The pervasive silence is such a contrast to a war-zone that we can feel the photographer’s feeling of surprise and of relief. A war photographer’s job is to take photographs and record a conflict. He is an observer, not allowed to help either side, and he watches as people are shot, blown up, carrying only a camera. The pictures he has taken are of suffering people, bleeding, all of them irreparably forged into his mind, and so he is cursed with the inability to forget and the thoughts of “I could have saved that person”. A war photographer’s job is extremely painful, so much so that they will go into a kind of trance, taking photos without realizing the horror of the pictures, without questioning their inability to help. They tread the fine line between life and death with every picture taken, earned. A furious battle, with shells and bullets whizzing by, a war photographer will, with such bravery as to seem idiotic, keep doing his job, no matter the stakes. And, the poem says, the people of his country will not care a day or two later. The war photographer, knowing the pain and suffering of people just some hours of flight away, is left speechless by the general public’s uncaring attitude. He seems to get flashbacks from the war, looking at British fields and thinking of the explosions he saw before, the mines incinerating humans. And all he does is watch and report.
I concur with your remark of the darkroom imagery as being one of the focal examples of tension during the poem. Despite the carnage that embodies war itself, I do believe there must be something that keeps a war photographer from going back to conflict, other than to report to an uncaring public.
You’ve expressed this quite well, especially with the remark “such bravery as to seem idiotic.” I’ve been thinking about this because I just read a novel in which a character quite similar to the photographer of the poem deals with a sort of addiction to his work, causing him to feel unhappy and worthless when he stops traveling to war zones and repatriates to England full-time. The novel, the poem and your quotation all highlight the impossibility for those from either setting—the orderly peacetime nation or the chaotic, hellish wartime one—to truly understand those living in the other.
Throughout “War Photographer” there are numerous examples depicting the tension and contrast between chaos and order within war. Perhaps one of the most intriguing contrasts during the poem is that of rural England to minefields, which “explode beneath the feet of running children”. Both places prove to be central to the war photographer during the poem. Rural England is not only home to the photographer but could also embody that sense of harmony and order that is lacking in war. On the other hand, the image of minefields in “a nightmare heat” might allude to the chaotic ambient of war particularly the Cambodian civil war which was notorious for the excessive use of landmines. The image of the editor of “Sunday’s supplement” picking out which of the photographs are adequate for publication also proves to be one of the most profound during the poem. The images, which illustrate “a hundred agonies”, are glimpses into the anarchic character of war and potentially exemplify that hectic element themselves. They’re placing into a newspaper, an icon of civilization and order, provides a shard contrast between both dichotomies present throughout the poem. Furthermore, the very choosing of which images are adequate for publication depicts the manner in which societies in developed and stable nations view foreign conflicts in a rather superficial and detached fashion.
I wish I had chosen this poem, because the stark contrast between the images in this poem is astounding. You do a great synthesis Gonch, and I think all of your comments are extremely on point. I too agree that the newspaper symbol is a very important motif of this poem. I can picture a middle aged man in a cafe sitting and enjoying coffee and cakes while reading the paper. I can see the bitter irony in that difference between comfort and luxury and the horror of human misery. To think that stories of death, images of suffering are but a page away, and we people look at these images as if nothing and don’t quite understand the evocative suffering and helplessness of it all.
Gonzalo, your work here with the careful choosing and the motif of the newspaper in general is excellent. Laying out the photos in rows and having the editor choose them based on their aesthetic appeal are perfect contrasts—antitheses, even—to war.
Question 13: “Shooting Stars”
On two occasions in “Shooting Stars,” Duffy lists proper names. What is the meaning and effect of this enumeration? (Look at their specific placement in the poem before answering the question.) Do you believe it is effective? Why or why not?
There are two examples of enumeration in Carol Ann Duffy’s poem “Shooting Stars”. The first one can be found in the lines “Rebecca Rachel Ruth / Aaron Emmanuel David,” Duffy lists several iconic Jewish names. The use of enumeration in these lines mainly reflect the immense number of deaths during the Holocaust and the loss of identity and individuality experienced by the victims during this tragic time. The use of enumeration speeds up the poem’s pace, emphasizing the insurmountable number of Jewish victims that were brutally killed during the Holocaust. Furthermore, the lack of punctuation groups all the names together, seemingly packaging them into one, uniform structure. This reflects the stereotyping that took place during the Holocaust, where all Jews were categorized by their religion and associated with nothing more than their beliefs. Jews were even forced to wear symbols of the Star of David on their clothing, as the lines “stars on all our brows.” remind us. This stereotyping stripped the victims of their identities and removed any sense of individuality from them.
The second use of enumeration can be found in the lines “Sara Ezra”. The use of enumeration in this instance aids to humanize the victims of the Holocaust and highlight the narrator’s attempts to recuperate the identities the victims lost during this terrible period. In the concentration camps, Jews were associated with nothing more than tattooed numbers on their arms. They were not considered humans and were completely stripped of their identities and individualities. By listing the names of some of the victims, the narrator restores an important part of their identity. The victims are identified by their names, not their tattooed numbers. This is a reminder that they are actual human beings. Furthermore, by listing the names of some victims of the Holocaust, Duffy brings them to life, making the Holocaust a more tangible and fathomable event. As time progresses, people tend to forget the brutality or horror of events that once profoundly shocked the entire world. “After immense suffering someone takes tea on the lawn” reflects the loss of importance or attention that the Holocaust receives after time has made this brutal event seem less real. Children are taught about the Holocaust, but “after the history lesson[s] children run to their toys,” unable to understand the pain and suffering experienced during this period. Duffy, by naming some of the Jewish victims, wishes to add severity and significance to the Holocaust and make the historical event more real and impactful.
Overall, Duffy’s use of enumeration successfully reflects the stripping of individuality and identity the Holocaust victims had to suffer during the Holocaust. I believe that the incorporation of enumeration is very effective. Not only does it relate to the poem’s theme on individuality and identity, but it also has an impactful effect on readers, making them more aware of the brutality of the Holocaust.
I thought your analysis was very accurate in terms of the using enumeration in order to highlight the immense number of deaths as well as regain the victim’s identity lost in the Holocaust. Also, unlike most of Carol Ann Duffy’s poem, this enumeration does not mock ordinary concepts or the male gender like “Valentine” or “Queen Herod” instead Duffy portrays a very significant message to the readers about individuality.
Great point, Camila! This poem definitely subverts the effects we usually associate with enumeration.
I found your analysis extremely well-made and (very) verbose. The idea that the millions of dead were to the nazis just a lot of names on ledgers is very close to the truth, as the masses of executed people were seen as nothing more than beasts. I also agree with the telling that children of modern times will not understand the pain of the others. It is hard to understand such monumental tragedies unless you were there.
Clara, Camila and Lino are right; this is superb analysis. In fact I can think of nothing to add here—these are the same effects I see in the two series of names.
To me, this list of names is like the chanting of a crazed survivor. The protagonist of this poem is recalling names from the past, maybe family members and close friends. In her lonely survival she can only look back, perhaps guiltily, at her lost close ones. If one notices, in the last appearance of the name lists, the names appear rather abruptly and are listed in a grammatically incorrect fashion.This can be noticed when Duffy talks about burying the bodies by stating they “turn in its sleep the spades shovel soil” but then immediately switches to talking about “Sara Ezra …” This sudden break not only manages to catch the readers attention, but the enumeration, because it is badly formatted appears to come from a person that is slightly insane. Another possible explanation to the use of this broken enumeration is to give the impression of a death list read by an SS Officer. The way the list rabbles on gives the impression that there is little care for the contents of the list. The names without the accompanying last names appear to be like the marking of some large mass grave. There is little differentiation between the names, and in a grave they would be almost pointless in order to identify family members. When Duffy talks about “Rebecca Rachel Ruth Aaron Emmanuel David, stars on all our brows” and how they are all stars, there again appears that motif of the unidentifiable. At the end of the second world war, and when the concentration camps were being liberated, the allies found mounds of skeleton like corpses, all bald, all pale, all dead. All of these people listed in such a flurry seem to demonstrate the fact that they are all lost souls.
I found it interesting how your opinion towards the use of enumeration in the poem portrayed a different perspective than that one would usually have. While I thought the enumeration served to reflect on the huge number of casualties in the Holocaust, you depict the speaker as a crazed survivor reflecting on her past, specifically her family members. This was a really creative way of looking at the quotation and I was really impressed by it.
The memories of death and torture from that time, so close-fitting and painful, would probably drive any survivor over the edge of sanity. As you say, the survivor, feeling inexplicable guilt, called “survivor’s guilt”, now feels as if he/she/he/she needs to give some explanation to their friends’ death. And, not managing to reach the explanation, they only manage to repeat the names like a mantra, hoping they are in a better place.
Armando, I like your point about the transition from “sleep . . . spades shovel soil Sara . . ,” because I believe this to be a very intentional and effective moment in the poem. The soothing ‘s’ alliteration (sibilance) begins to put the dead to sleep, but the speaker wants to awaken their ghosts by reminding us of who they are. On the other hand, I don’t see the “slightly insane” angle here: it seems to me that the speaker is emotionally devastated, as just about anyone would be in her circumstances. Her attempt to attach names and identities to corpses seems like a sane and rational response to the horrors she is witnessing.
Question 14: “Anne Hathaway”
In the poem, Duffy portrays William Shakespeare as a sensitive and passionate man in his relationship with his wife. Do you believe that a writer’s sensitivity to love and other emotions in his or her work is likely to be indicative of personal sensitivity?