The poem "My Papa's Waltz" created quite a spark in my class, more so then any other poem we had read. Practically everyone was shouting out their ideas and opinions about what they thought the poem meant. My group and I debated for quite a bit about the authors purpose for writing the poem. The argument lasted almost the entire period of class, but by the end we still had not reached an agreement about the authors purpose. I found this to be unsatisfactory, so when I got home I looked over the the poem again, and by doing so my opinion about the meaning changed.
At first, I was sure that the poem was not about abuse, which was the side of the disagreement I was defending. On the other end of the argument was Peter and Anna. They thought that the poem was about how the writer was being beaten, and the waltz was a symbol for abuse rather then an actual moment. The evidence they used to back up their story was the line in the poem "The whiskey on your breath/ Could make a small boy dizzy". Another line they used to back up the poem was "At every step you missed/ My right ear scraped a buckle". They inferred that these lines meant that the father was drunk and the boy was being abused as they did the waltz. Being hit by a buckle is a classic symbol for abuse, so the line indicating his ear being scraped by a buckle especially caused Ana and Peter to assume that that it was the poem was about.
When I first read the poem, I thought of it differently. I thought that Peter and Anna were reading into the poem too much, and maybe it really was just about a simple moment that this boy shared with his father. I tried to show that just because he had whiskey on his breath did not mean he was drunk, and even if he was, it does not necessarily mean he was abusing his child. Also, if the young boy was small, then perhaps when the father slipped his ear bumped against the fathers buckle. Overall, the feeling I got from the poem was not a negative one, I simply thought it was a poem about a moment shared between a father and a son.
However, when I got home, I took a closer look at the poem and began to understand what Peter and Anna were saying. If you look at the poem, the words that the author chose to use were not ones that sounded particularly cheery. For example "You beat time on my hear/ With a palm caked hard by dirt" and "But I hung on like death: Such waltzing was not easy". When reading the poem again, I realized that it did not sound like a poem about a fun and enjoyable dance, but more about something slightly darker. Like in the line "We romped until the pans/Slid from the kitchen shelf". I don't think the waltz would be referred to as a 'romp' or be so forceful that it made the pans slide from the shelves. Usually, poets choose the way they phrase things very carefully, so if the author chose those words it must have been intentional. I began to think that if the poem really was about a sweet and simple moment, the author would have used a different tone and been more careful with his word choice. And so, my opinion about the poem changed. However, unlike Anna and Peter, I don't think it was about a dance at all. I think that was more of a symbol. I think the poem may have been more about the relationship the boy had with his father, and how he felt there was a certain gruffness it, a lack of love and affection. There is an implyed distance from the father and clingyness from the boy throughout the poem. Like in the line, 'Then waltzed me off to bed/ Still clinging to your shirt'. The way the poet used the word 'clingning' led me to think about how the child seems to cling to his father in the poem, hanging onto every moment he has with him. But, then again, I could be wrong. Who knows what the poet meant, maybe it was about something totally separate. I guess we'll never really know for sure, its all up for interpertation.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
"My Papas Waltz" Revised
The poem "My Papa's Waltz" created quite a spark in my class, my group and I debated for quite a bit about the authors purpose for writing the poem. The argument lasted almost the entire period of class, but by the end we still had not reached an agreement about the authors purpose. This was very unsatisfactory for me, so when I got home I looked over the the poem again, and by doing so my opinion about the meaning behind it changed.
At first, I was sure that the poem was not about abuse, this was the side I was defending. On the other end of the argument was Peter and Anna. They thought that the poem was about how the writer was being beaten, and the waltz was a symbol for abuse rather then an actual moment. The evidence they used to back up their story was the line in the poem "The whiskey on your breath/ Could make a small boy dizzy". Another line they used to back up the poem was "At every step you missed/ My right ear scraped a buckle". They inferred that these lines meant that the father was drunk and the boy was being abused as they did the waltz. Being hit by a buckle is a classic symbol for abuse, so the line indicating his ear being scraped by a buckle especially caused Ana and Peter to assume that the poem was about abuse.
When I first read the poem, I thought of it differently. I thought that Peter and Anna were reading into the poem too much, and maybe it really was just about a simple moment that this boy shared with his father. I tried to show that just because he had whiskey on his breath did not mean he was drunk, and even if he was, it does not necessarily mean he was abusing his child. Also, if the young boy was small, then perhaps when the father slipped his ear bumped against the fathers buckle. Overall, the feeling I got from the poem was not a negative one, I simply thought it was a poem about a moment shared between a father and a son.
However, when I got home, I took a closer look at the poem and began to understand what Peter and Anna were saying. If you look at the poem, the words that the author chose to use were not ones that sounded particularly cheery. For example "You beat time on my hear/ With a palm caked hard by dirt" and "But I hung on like death: Such waltzing was not easy". When reading the poem again, I realized that it did not sound like a poem about a fun and enjoyable dance, but more about something deeper. Like in the line "We romped until the pans/Slid from the kitchen shelf". I don't think the waltz would be referred to as a 'romp' or be so forceful that it made the pans slide from the shelves. Usually, poets choose the way they phrase things very carefully, so if the author chose those words it must have been intentional. I began to think that if the poem really was about a light hearted moment, the author would have used a different tone and been more careful with his word choice. And so, my opinion about the poem changed. However, unlike Anna and Peter, I don't think it was about a dance at all, I think that was more of a symbol. I think the poem may have been more about the relationship the boy had with his father, and how he felt there was a certain gruffness to their relationship, a lack of love and affection. But, then again, I could be wrong. Who knows what the poet meant, maybe it was about something totally separate. I guess we'll never really know for sure, its all up for interpertation.
At first, I was sure that the poem was not about abuse, this was the side I was defending. On the other end of the argument was Peter and Anna. They thought that the poem was about how the writer was being beaten, and the waltz was a symbol for abuse rather then an actual moment. The evidence they used to back up their story was the line in the poem "The whiskey on your breath/ Could make a small boy dizzy". Another line they used to back up the poem was "At every step you missed/ My right ear scraped a buckle". They inferred that these lines meant that the father was drunk and the boy was being abused as they did the waltz. Being hit by a buckle is a classic symbol for abuse, so the line indicating his ear being scraped by a buckle especially caused Ana and Peter to assume that the poem was about abuse.
When I first read the poem, I thought of it differently. I thought that Peter and Anna were reading into the poem too much, and maybe it really was just about a simple moment that this boy shared with his father. I tried to show that just because he had whiskey on his breath did not mean he was drunk, and even if he was, it does not necessarily mean he was abusing his child. Also, if the young boy was small, then perhaps when the father slipped his ear bumped against the fathers buckle. Overall, the feeling I got from the poem was not a negative one, I simply thought it was a poem about a moment shared between a father and a son.
However, when I got home, I took a closer look at the poem and began to understand what Peter and Anna were saying. If you look at the poem, the words that the author chose to use were not ones that sounded particularly cheery. For example "You beat time on my hear/ With a palm caked hard by dirt" and "But I hung on like death: Such waltzing was not easy". When reading the poem again, I realized that it did not sound like a poem about a fun and enjoyable dance, but more about something deeper. Like in the line "We romped until the pans/Slid from the kitchen shelf". I don't think the waltz would be referred to as a 'romp' or be so forceful that it made the pans slide from the shelves. Usually, poets choose the way they phrase things very carefully, so if the author chose those words it must have been intentional. I began to think that if the poem really was about a light hearted moment, the author would have used a different tone and been more careful with his word choice. And so, my opinion about the poem changed. However, unlike Anna and Peter, I don't think it was about a dance at all, I think that was more of a symbol. I think the poem may have been more about the relationship the boy had with his father, and how he felt there was a certain gruffness to their relationship, a lack of love and affection. But, then again, I could be wrong. Who knows what the poet meant, maybe it was about something totally separate. I guess we'll never really know for sure, its all up for interpertation.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Three Noteworthy Student Blogs
Although I thought that many of the students in my class have done really great work on their blogs, these are a few people who's blogs stood out to me;
1. Sammy Jo- I thought the way hat Sammy Jo expressed the two different perspectives of the poem was very interesting. In the beginning of the response, she wrote about her original opinions towards the poem, that the father was abusing the narrator of the poem. However, later in the response, she writes about how her opinion changed after reading the poem carefully again, and she began to think that the boy was not being abused and it wasn't as dark of a poem as she had originally thought. I thought the way Sammy Jo illustrated the way her opinions changed was very well done.
2. Hillary- Hillary's blog post was one of my favorite responses. The first thing I liked about her post was that she used evidence to back up her opinions. Every time she made a new point, she would elaborate on it by supporting her idea with details from the poem. This fascinated me, and even inspired me to use a similar technique next time I write a response. My favorite thing about Hillary's poem was how much of herself she put into it. The response had a very clear voice and tone, making it enjoyable to read!
3. Sarah- Sarah's response to 'My Papa's Waltz' was amazing! I could not get over how well written it was! Sarah- if your reading this- well done, you truly are a great writer. The thing I liked the most about Sarah's response was how gracefully she expressed her thoughts and ideas. The piece was fluent, not at all choppy, and she got her point across perfectly. Great job Sarah!
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Reading Response: The Hunger Games
Ever since a young age, I've loved reading. Fantasy, realistic fiction, poetry, historical fiction, I love it all. However, there has always been one genre that I've never been particularly fond of. That genre is science fiction. I know that it sounds strange, but I hate thinking about the future, it really scares me that no one knows what is going to happen next. Unfortuneatly, in science fiction there is often is an alternate universe usually set in the future. So, as you might expect, science fiction has always freaked me out. I've read classic books like "A Wrinkle in Time" and "Enders Game", but none have interested me. Even "The Giver" couldn't make me like sci-fi! I thought I was going to hate it forever, that is, until last Friday.
Last week, I began to read a book called "The Hunger Games". Different people have been recommending it to me for years, but I never touched it. Now after reading only the first seven chapters I've changed my mind about science fiction all together!
"The Hunger Games" is a book about a young girl, Katniss Everdeen, who heroically takes place in the annul Hunger Games so that her sister does not have to compete. The Hunger Games is a fight to the death on live television between twenty four children, all between the ages of twelve and eighteen. Whoever is the last person alive wins the game. The game is a reminder from the controlling 'Capitol' not to rebel, as they did about a century ago. The game is challenging and horrific, only one of the 24 children chosen survives.
At first, I was skeptical about reading the book, but after reading the first chapter or so I couldn't put it down. What I like about 'The Hunger Games' is that, even though it is science fiction and set in an alternate universe, the characters and plot line all seem realistic. The main character still experiences fears and emotions that everyone feels today while also having different struggles and fears. She is relatable, making the book easier to get into. This balance between her familiar and relatable side and the side of her that describes new feelings that most people have never experienced is what makes the book so interesting. For example, Katniss feels protective of her young sister because she loves her so much. This is an emotion that most people can relate to, feeling protective of someone they love. But, she also often feels starvation and fear of going hungry, a feeling not to many people are familiar with. It is fascinating to read about her experiences, as the writer describes them in such great detail I myself almost feel as if I can understand the feeling.
For me, Katniss is what makes the book so interesting, and what has made me enjoy science fiction.
Last week, I began to read a book called "The Hunger Games". Different people have been recommending it to me for years, but I never touched it. Now after reading only the first seven chapters I've changed my mind about science fiction all together!
"The Hunger Games" is a book about a young girl, Katniss Everdeen, who heroically takes place in the annul Hunger Games so that her sister does not have to compete. The Hunger Games is a fight to the death on live television between twenty four children, all between the ages of twelve and eighteen. Whoever is the last person alive wins the game. The game is a reminder from the controlling 'Capitol' not to rebel, as they did about a century ago. The game is challenging and horrific, only one of the 24 children chosen survives.
At first, I was skeptical about reading the book, but after reading the first chapter or so I couldn't put it down. What I like about 'The Hunger Games' is that, even though it is science fiction and set in an alternate universe, the characters and plot line all seem realistic. The main character still experiences fears and emotions that everyone feels today while also having different struggles and fears. She is relatable, making the book easier to get into. This balance between her familiar and relatable side and the side of her that describes new feelings that most people have never experienced is what makes the book so interesting. For example, Katniss feels protective of her young sister because she loves her so much. This is an emotion that most people can relate to, feeling protective of someone they love. But, she also often feels starvation and fear of going hungry, a feeling not to many people are familiar with. It is fascinating to read about her experiences, as the writer describes them in such great detail I myself almost feel as if I can understand the feeling.
For me, Katniss is what makes the book so interesting, and what has made me enjoy science fiction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)