Blackberry Eating Explication

In the poem Blackberry Eating, Kinnell uses certain sounds to capture the sense of eating blackberries. The poem begins and ends with late September because it shows the cycle of blackberry-eating, which is a habitual event that he looks forward to every year. He uses phonetic intensives when he describes the stalks as "prickly" and a "penalty". These words are associated with the ideas of pricking your finger. Also, they are cacophonous because they have the harsh sound of a hard consonant alliteration, which reinforces the harsh feeling of pain when your hand is pierced by a thorn. The words "strengths" and "squinched" are a comparison for the blackberries. They are "many-lettered" because the berries are ripe and bursting with juice. The "one syllable lumps" represent each section that makes up the whole blackberry. Additionally, these two words bring to mind the sound of eating the berries when the juice squirts into your mouth. He further use of alliteration of "squeeze,""squinch," and "splurge" describe the feeling of the berries popping in your mouth.

Kinnell repeats black and blackberries throughout his poem, which emphasizes the dark color of the fruit. He personifies the berries because they know a "black art." They practice the mysterious art that makes them taste so delicious. Also, they figuratively create their own black language because it is a tradition for the speaker to eat the blackberries every year. They literally form a black language because the juice turns your tongue a deep black-purple color. In the beginning of the poem, Kinnell describes the blackberries with a majority of cacophonous words, such as "fat," "overripe," and "black." They have harsh consonant sounds because he has to pick the berries, which can be dangerous because of their thorns. Then, in the end, he uses more euphonious words, including "silent," "startled," and "icy." They all have a soft "s" sounds because he has happily finished eating the blackberries.

The Aim Was Song Explication

Robert Frost wrote the poem in iambic tetrameter. There are four stanzas, each with four lines. The first and third lines rhyme in a stanza and the second and fourth lines rhyme. He uses a regular rhyme and meter to show the how man has created a structure for the wind and poetry. Frost personifies the wind because it has a goal to make song and learns a lesson from man. He calls it "untaught" because it is uncontrollable at first. It blows wildly and loudly, until man arrives to form it into poetry. Man teaches the wind how to blow correctly with less force. He takes only a little wind when he blows it, so it is no longer too strong. The wind has a habit of blowing hard and has to become gentler to transform into song. Man changes the wind from north to south because it becomes the opposite of its rough former self. Frost begins to repeat words in the last stanza, such as "by measure" and "wind," so the lines flow more smoothly, similar to the sound of the now tamed wind.

Frost uses the poem to show the relationship between nature and man or poetry. He implies that man tries to control nature, which he adjusts to fit his own standards. He thinks that he is superior to the wind, even thought it has existed for much longer than him. He believes that the wind would be grateful to receive help from him because he is improving it by transforming the blowing into poetry. However, the wind remains powerful because man can only control a little wind at a time which can fit in his mouth. Also, Frost explains that poetry comes from nature. Although man uses a small amount of wind for creating song, the poetry still contains some of the wind's original power. There is a small untamed part of the wind that can still found in poetry, despite man's control, which is the creativity and unpredictability of a poem.

Rite of Passage Explication

In the poem, Olds describes the rite of passage of her son as she imagines him becoming a man. The little boys compete with each other, so they seem older and more mature. However, she uses consonance of the s sound throughout the poem because the soft sound reminds the reader that they are still young children. Also, it unifies the poem with the repetition of the same sound. After beginning with the s sound, Olds uses assonance in pockets, jostling, and jockeying as the boys transition into adults in her mind. Then, she uses consonance in the first and last of these three words in addition to breaking because they form harsher k sounds because the boys are trying to act like men. Olds repeats the alliteration of six and seven in two lines because the soft s shows the contrast between their age and what they are saying. When the seven say that he is older, the six replies with so because he wants to act unimpressed and tougher. Olds uses consonance of the hard k sound again with dark cake. It continues in freckles, specks, and cheeks, which describe the young son, who shockingly boasts that they could kill a two-year-old because of his harsh words.  Olds uses less musicality in the last five lines of the poem to show that it is sad that little boys think they must be violent to prove their strength as a man.

Also, Olds uses many comparisons to create an image of men from these boys. At first, she uses a metaphor to compare them to bankers because they act like small businessmen, who are skeptical of each other. In the end, she changes her comparison and calls them general because of their violent impulses. She uses similes, which compare the cake to a turret and her son's chest to a boat keel, and create images of war. It is ironic that the other boys relax when they are playing war and they celebrate the son for saying that they could kill a boy. Olds laments the violent tendencies of boys, which she sees in her own son as he loses his innocence, as they try to act like men and later develop when they become men.

The Selfish Giant

Wilde personifies nature, which is an important theme. He mentions pink and pearl again to describe the blossoms on the trees, which decorated the Infanta's fan. The Giant is punished for being selfish by the Snow and Frost who live in his garden all year. Wilde calls them people as if they are actually human. When the Giant realizes that it is his own fault for the Spring not coming and opens his garden to the children, only one little boy is not afraid and accepts him. Also, Wilde shows that people should not judge others based on their external appearances because even though the Giant in large and intimidating, he has become kind. He learns that it is better to share with others than to only think about himself.

Wilde uses a strong biblical allusion, where the tiny boy represents Jesus. He is separated from the other children because he is different and tries to make Spring come to the last corner of the garden. He helps the Giant realize his mistake and fix it. He forgives the Giant for his sin and shows him love. The Giant's selfishness is replaced by love for all of the children, especially the tiny boy. He no longer feels hatred towards the winter because he knows that the Spring will come again. He has the prints of nails in his hands and feet. The Giant wants to punish whoever hurt him, but the boy teaches him that violence or acts of hatred will not solve his problems. The Giant does not meet him again, until he is old and feeble. He leads the Giant to his garden of Paradise, which refers to Heaven. In the end, he is covered with white blossoms to show the innocence and purity of his death. This is a more optimistic and simpler story than The Birthday of Infanta because the Giant demonstrates that there is a possibility of redemption for people who have sinned.

The Birthday of the Infanta

Wilde criticizes the lives of the wealthy, who do not help the poor. He juxtaposes the happiness in a wealthy fantasy to the of harshness in reality. When the king is getting married, hundreds of heretics being burned at the stake at the same time on his wedding day. Also, during the festivities of the Infanta's birthday, Wilde shows that even the children's thoughts are corrupted. The have fun watching the violence of sham bullfight as one boy cuts of the bull's head. Then, when they are older, they will watch real bullfights for amusement, where live animals are tortured and killed. Both the children and the adults cry over the situation of the wooden puppets, but are spending money on one child for her birthday rather than helping their real subjects. The last line of the Infanta is shockingly heartless and insensitive because she hopes that people have no hearts, so she can get what she wants.

Although the king and the dwarf seem like opposite characters, they share similar emotions in their pursuits of love. The king loves his wife and wants to please her, but she dies and his love ruins state affairs, such as alliances with other countries. He could be considered dead because he is consumed by his sorrow and stays in the castle. The Infanta thinks the sun shines brightly on her, but from the king's perspective the sun is pitiless and mocks him. Similar to the king, the dwarf is completely infatuated with is love for the Infanta. He desperately wants to please her by taking her to the forest. In the end, he dies because of his broken heart.

Wilde focuses on nature throughout the fairytale, especially flowers. The Infanta has a white rose, and white symbolizes innocence and purity. From the beginning of the story, the Infanta as a dislikable character. Yet, she is arrogant and selfish, which at first could be dismissed because she is just a young child. She throws the rose to the dwarf because she is actually not innocent, while he is ignorant of his ugliness and hatred in the world. The flowers represent the wealthy, who are beautiful in appearance, but cruelly judge and want to harm the dwarf. Although the birds and lizards see his inner beauty, they are still not much better than the flowers. They do not understand him and do not try to, but rather pretend to know what he is saying by looking wise. Even the philosophical lizards say he is not so bad when they close heir eyes. The dwarf does not know their thought, so he is happily ignorant and believes everything is wonderful. Then, he tears the white rose to pieces because he loses his innocence. He dies of his own realization of reality.

Since there's no help Explication

In this poem, Drayton describes the different emotions experienced by the narrator when he ends a relationship. At first, he seems to handle leaving the woman very well. He tries to convince himself that there is no hope of staying happily together, so it is better that they go their separate ways. He claims that he even feels glad and freed from the restrictions of being in the relationship. He creates a confident tone that he is making the right decision. He says that they should shake hands for the last time and forget their marriage vows. He exaggerates his happiness to hide his true feelings of regret for the loss of their relationship. He acts as if he is fine after breaking up, so the woman also pretends to forget the love they shared together. If they meet again, neither of them would express their former endearing feelings towards one another. In the third quatrain, Drayton personifies the parts of a relationship with Love, Passion, Faith, and Innocence. He reveals his true emotions about ending the relationship in his tone of hopelessness. Love is dying because his pulse is failing, while the others do nothing to help him. They are all weak and near death, instead of their usual strength found in a relationship. Passion is speechless, Faith sits by his side, and Innocence also closes his eyes in death. In the last couplet of the sonnet, the tone shifts again. He changes the point of view by speaking to the woman. He says that she still has a chance of saving Love and bringing him back to life when everyone else has given up. There is hope that they can mend their relationship or find happiness in a new relationship. They should not feel hopeless because of their grief after losing a person in a relationship, but keep their faith in finding love again.

Hunt Hawkins

In his article, Hunt Hawkins opposes Chinua Achebe's views that Joseph Conrad is racist. One of the strengths of his argument is he uses direct textual evidence to support his claims. When he argues that Conrad opposed European expansion and imperialism, he quotes Marlow who says the ivory trading company is run for profit rather than civilizing the natives. Hawkins justifies that Conrad condemns Europe for its exploitation of the Congo by using parodies of the firemen with the leaking bucket and the pilgrims shooting from the steamship. Also, he acknowledges Achebe's criticism of Heart of Darkness and then provides evidence against it. Throughout the essay, Hawkins refers back to Achebe's counterargument in the beginning, and responds with specific examples to show its inaccuracy. One of Achebe's reasons for calling Conrad a racist is because he frequently compares the natives to animals. Yet, Hawkins argues that Conrad also shows that Europeans are animalistic, so he is not singling out the Africans. I like that Hawkins references other writings by Conrad, where he attacks white racism because one novella does not completely represent his opinions. Hawkins's argument seems creditable because he uses logical evidence from the novella.

However, sometimes Hawkins makes a counterargument, but agrees agrees with it, which weakens his own essay. After arguing that Conrad criticizes both the Europeans and Africans, he says that the author could be considered racist because the Africans are still on the low end of the scale. He ends his opinions about imperialism by supporting Achebe's claim about racism in the novella before he moves on to his next topic about Kurtz's corruption. This structure is a weakness in his argument because the reader has final thoughts about Achebe instead of Hawkins. Also, he goes on tangents about other works criticizing Heart of Darkness or written during the same time period. They can be distracting from his main argument. I agree with Hawkins that the focus of the novella is on the Europeans and not the Africans. I do not think Conrad is a racist because his views are separate from Marlow's opinions of the natives. I think describes Marlow as racist to expose the similar views of many Europeans at the time, so he raises awareness to change them.

Paired Poems Explication

"My Number" and "I had heard it's a fight" present different attitudes about death. Collins personifies Death, who travels around the world to end people's lives. The narrator in the first poem wants to avoid Death. He hopes that Death is too busy with other people, so he is able to continue his life without being noticed. He acts cowardly because he would rather Death takes another person's life to save himself. He is constantly thinking about Death, whose name he repeats throughout the poem. He tries to hide from his fate because he fears getting a visit from Death. He imagine that Death is making arrangements for when people should die and always calculating evil plots, such as spreading cancer cells and breaking roller coasters. When he must face Death, he will use insincere politeness by asking whether Death had trouble finding him to convince it to spare his life. He seems helpless to the will of Death and spends so much time contemplating it that he forgets to live his life.

In the second poem, Denby also considers his experience with Death, but he has an opposing view. He believes that he should confront Death and fight for his life. He personifies Death as an opponent, who will be defeated. Rather than fearing his death, he looks forward to the thrill of being triumphant over Death and controlling his own life. His poem is more light-hearted because Death seems less intimidating. The narrator acts stronger than the first speaker because he is prepared to wrestle with Death when he arrives to take his life. He thinks about living instead of when his life will end. He he does not consider Death to be planning, but it will sneak up on people when they do not expect it. He uses two meanings of "hell." It is an exclamation for when he first encounters Death and when he realizes that he must change his lifestyle if he wants to live. Also, he uses hell to refer to the place where immoral people will go after they die, which is where Death will send him if he does not stop drinking and get exercise. He compares himself to a schoolkid who has learned his lesson.  His quick experience with Death actually benefits him because he will improve as well as elongate his life. 

Apocalypse Now

The themes in the movie Apocalypse Now are influenced by the novel Heart of Darkness, but the main narrators are changed because they have different purposes for finding Kurtz. The movie opens with the scene where Captain Willard is having a mental breakdown because of his memories of fighting in the Vietnam War when he returns to Saigon. He screams and his hands are bloodied after breaking objects in his room. In the novel, Marlow is introduced as meditative because he is sitting calmly on the boat when he begins his story. They have opposite reactions to their experiences with war, which shows that Marlow is better at controlling his emotions. Also, when the natives shoot at the ship with arrows and the helmsman is speared, Willard does not get blood on his shoes, which is significant to Marlow's character traits. Marlow is focused more on changing his shoes than his dead crew member because he is self-absorbed. However, the movie reveals that Willard also cares about himself and his own mission when he shoots the innocent woman with the puppy, so he will not be further delayed from retrieving Kurtz. Willard's crew members are still young and have little experience with war. He has a weaker relationship with them than Marlow does because his helmsman tries to strangle him before he dies. Marlow's The crew includes the manager, pilgrims, and cannibals whose strength he admires. Willard is more aggressive because he is determined to confront Kurtz when he murders him, while Marlow longs to talk to Kurtz. The novel concludes with Marlow speaking with Kurtz's wife and lies to her about his last words. The movie ends when the natives look to Captain Williard as the new leader and he leaves with the last crew member on the boat. Marlow is a calmer and less violent characher.

The movie makes direct references to the book and Kurtz is a similar character. They describe the river as a snake, which seems foreboding and dangerous. Both of the narrators are traveling through a war torn country to find Kurtz and promise to carry on the memory of him and his reputation. They are allured by Kurtz's mystery and his well regarded career. In both stories, Kurtz becomes insane and leaves his military orders. He takes control over the natives, who he mercilessly kills, but now he suffers from illness. Captain Willard has a different mission than Marlow. He follows orders to arrest Kurtz for murder and finally terminate his control. Kurtz seems stronger in the movie because he captures Willard as prisoner, so he can explain his actions for his son. Then, he waits for Willard to kill him with a sword. In the novel, Marlow wants to bring Kurtz back to Europe. Rather than facing Marlow, he tries to escape and then dies from illness on the ship before he returns home. In both works, Kurtz's last words are "The horror, the horror." The movie also quotes the book when the American says people do not talk to Kurtz but listen to him and Kurtz has enlarged his mind. Kurtz threatens to kill the Russian because he wanted his ivory and the American because he takes his picture. He claims to be in Cambodia for humanitarian projects and in the Congo to trade ivory, but he actually exploits the natives. The movie's Kurtz leaves severed heads and bodies on the ground and steps of his house, while the novel's Kurtz puts heads up on stakes as symbols. There was more action and death in the movie than described in the book, and it does not focus on women's roles in society.

Yet Do I Marvel Explication

In this poem Cullen questions the marvels about the relationship between God and humanity. He begins by clearly asserting his belief in God's will to portray his unfaltering faith. Although he does not understand God's reasons for creating hardship in the world, he does not doubt Him. He wonders why moles, which already live in darkness underground, are also blind. He questions the fact that humans share a similar appearance to God, yet they are mortal and must die. He uses allusions to Greek mythology to question destiny. Both Tantalus and Sisyphus were punished eternally by the gods. Tantalus stood in a pool of water under a fruit tree, which receded before he could reach them, and Sisyphus had to repeat pushing a boulder up a hill after it rolled down again. However, Cullen believes that God's word is inscrutable and people are not able to understand Him. He is confused by fate, but he knows that God has His own reasons.

Cullen laces irony in his poem to emphasize his point about fate. He states that he has faith in God, which he then questions. It is ironic that he later again says God is almighty. Each of his questions is a comparison for the oppression of African Americans during the time period. They are segregated in society, like moles that live alone in the dirt, and people think lowly of them. They face discrimination, despite the fact that all humans are created equally by God and die. Similar to Tantalus and Sisyphus, it seems like blacks forever struggle with unjust punishment because of the color of their skin. He calls fate awful because of the evil God released in the world. The last two lines of the poem display irony with his most important inquiry about God. He is a black poet who has suffered from racism, yet God is kind because he is fortunate for his poetic abilities. 

The Secret Sharer Part 2

The narrator has changed by spending time with the secret sharer because he becomes more like Leggatt. He is not fully focused on commanding the ship as the captain because he is constantly thinking about Leggatt. His attention is split because he feels like he is missing a part of himself when they are not together. The narrator solely confides in Leggatt and they whisper in his cabin about making decisions for the ship. The narrator becomes more assertive in giving strict orders to his crew, which expects to follow them without question. He acts with new authority partly because it is a quality which he assumes from Leggatt, but also because he does not want his secret sharer to be discovered by the crew. He takes direct action with little thought to its dangers when he orders the crew to change course towards land. He is not concerned about the difficulties of seeing the land in the night and getting the ship stuck on shore. Also, he gains Leggatt's short temper and is quickly agitated by the steward who tries to clean his room while he is hiding Leggatt. When a mate despairs that the ship is lost and unable to catch a wind so close to the land, the narrator firmly grips and shakes his arm. He shouts for him to be quiet and continues to violently shake him, which is similar to when Leggatt grabs the neck of the man who is being insolent. The narrator takes full control of his ship, which he prevents from hitting land, like when Laggatt saves the Sephora with the reefed foresail. The narrator gains the strength, which seems to be draining from Leggatt. When they are planning to maroon Leggatt, they switch roles because the narrator commands him to take the gold pieces and tells him when to leave, unlike when Leggatt gives the narrator orders as he first boards the ship. In the end, the narrator states that Leggatt is a free man with a new destiny, but since he is his second self, the narrator is also free. He is no longer tentative and has confidence to control his ship.

Metamorphosis Part II

After living as a cockroach for months, Gregor begins to lose his human personality. He yearns to hold on to his connection to human life, yet he more frequently finds himself thinking like a bug. On page 34, he describes that he has been living without "direct human communication" and the "monotonous life" in his family, but these conditions are similar to his past life. Although he is a salesman, people do not usually want to talk with him and his family life has always been dreary because he must work to support them. Thus, his life living conditions have not changed drastically since he became a cockroach, which makes it easier for him to slip into the thoughts of a bug. He does not want his room to become a cave, but he is excited about being able to freely crawl everywhere. The furniture, especially his picture of the woman in the fur coat, serve as his remaining ties to humanity, which he must keep in order to prevent his full transformation mentally into a cockroach. If his sister takes the picture, he will forget his sexual desire, which is a human emotion. Also, at first he has the urge to crawl around. Then, he chides himself for subconsciously wishing to remove all of the furniture from his room when he is reminded of being human by his mother's voice. He depends on the furniture to prevent him from succumbing to his new desires as a cockroach. He has conflicting opinions because he cannot live without the "beneficent effect of the furniture," but also he cannot help thinking of crawling as "no disadvantage, but a great asset." He quickly changes his opinion about crawling within the same sentence as he develops the perspective of a bug. He is beginning to lose control of his human mind, which is gradually transforming into that of a cockroach.

Poetry Out Loud: Mediation on a Grapefruit

I chose "Mediation on a Grapefruit" by Craig Arnold because I like his vivid description of peeling a grapefruit and the message behind it. He finds the beauty in such a seemingly trivial task, and appeals to all of the senses. Grapefruits are special to me because I usually do not have them as often as other fruits, since they take more time and work to eat. They are sweet as well as have a subtle bitterness. I appreciate the beginning of the poem, where Arnold states a universal truth that mornings are always a fresh start to the day. They are not yet marred by agitations or worries. He compares the grapefruit to a basketball, so the act of peeling it seems like a game. When I have eaten a grapefruit for breakfast, I do not realize I think about it, but his poem reminds me that I share many of his same considerations. I like the initial slight mist followed by the sweet scent when I peel open the grapefruit. It is also fun to carefully try to not pierce the delicate pulp when I break apart one of the fruit's sections. He describes the juice pooling into the bowl, which I did not used like. My mom would drink it for me, until I realized it is the same as the fruit. Arnold makes me view a grapefruit differently by using unlikely comparisons. When I think of a grapefruit, I am not reminded of pepper, but this description portrays the refreshing taste well. The simplicity of enjoying a grapefruit mimics the simplicity of the poem. It shows that one should take pleasure in the even the simplest acts in life. However, Arnold also gives the grapefruit deeper meaning about life, and I especially like his final lines. He acknowledges the fact that each year becomes more difficult to live and work, but it is worth it. The poem is pensive and creates a sense of calmness.