Search This Blog

Friday, November 05, 2010

APers only.... No Kitty for You!

Jacob's 180....

http://www.loc.gov/poetry/180/038.html

8 comments:

Jake said...

Thank you for having mercy on my soul lol.

katie said...

This poem was very…intriguing. It gave me some sense of nostalgia, only because now I know that cartoons aren’t real. I don’t necessarily think the tone is nostalgic; I find this poem very intellectual and related to Physics, not really cartoons. Although the poem is about cartoons and how children appreciate them so much, I think it is kind of about trial and error in the science world. The end of the poem says, “He will not fall until he notices his mistake”. This is very dramatic. It kind of represents the countless failures in science. Although Albert Einstein is one of the most intelligent physicists in history, he had countless failures before he reached his theories. There are many instances of irony in the poem. When Flynn talks about children and their cartoons he says, “Ten year olds should stick with burning houses, car wrecks, ships going down”. I thought this was ironic because Flynn is saying this is what children should be doing. Usually, this is what children want to avoid, actually anyone would want to avoid this. I think that Flynn says this though to further strengthen his anger at his countless failures in science. The beginning of the poem is very casual, Flynn says, “Children under, say, ten”. He then goes into describing the universe in a very negative way, a way that ten year olds should be afraid of. What I would like to know is if Flynn is scared that if these ten year olds get so much knowledge as children, they could become smarter than him and figure out theories that he has been studying for much longer than them. I think the whole poem has diction that concerns cartoons and innocence, but it really is about physics. The main literary devices are diction, imagery, and syntax.
-KATIE HARRIS

Vickie Ha said...

To me the poem was incredibly sarcastic because cartoons can be so ridiculous. By beginnign the poem in a colloquial and conversational tone ("Children under, say, ten...")creates a casual atmosphere. The author is just throwing out an age in the beginning and as he delves deeper into the argument, is more concrete about the age ("ten-year-olds should stick to...") He argues to the point that he believes what he says is ultimately true.

The author seems bitter about the naivete of children. The only way I can support this is through the juxtaposition of the first stanza and the rest of the poem. Children "shouldn't know" that the universe is ever expanding and so on, which has scientific backing but they should believe that "if a man runs off the edge of a cliff he will not fall until he notices his mistake". It's like saying that by the time children realize that cartoons only exist in a fantasy world, their hopes and dreams will be completely crushed. They can't run back into burning buildings or be heroes like in cartoons. It's like finding out that Santa isn't real.

Amy Pistone said...

I think this poem is really about how the world tries to protect children, but the children in society are no longer naive and sheltered, so they know much more than their parents want them to. The diction supports this theme, like in the line "Children under, say, ten, shouldn't know", which signifies that someone (parents) don't want children to know the truth, but they know it anyway. "Shouldn't" is a negative word, which gives an idea of the truth being a bad thing when it comes to children. Parents shelter their children everyday, telling them Santa Clause is real, that they can be a movie star when they grow up, and they want to protect them from knowing that the world is "ever-expanding". This suggests that parents feel the world is too big for a child to really understand. All the following descriptions of the cartoon "physics" suggest how they were created as a funny form of entertainment but with cartoons, children understand the true darkness in humanity, how death works, and all the other things they have been sheltered from. I feel like the tone is kinda matter-of-fact, like there are cold hard truths behind each line, rather than actual emotions. I hope this helps Jacob.

Alex Pearson said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alex Pearson said...

i hope that we were serious about adopting a whale:
https://whaleadoption.org/adopt-east.aspx

But anyways...I felt that the poem was about a loss of innocence. The end of the poem reminded me of Catcher in the Rye. "That if a man runs off the edge of a cliff he will not fall" In Catcher in the Rye, Holden wants to protect other children from falling off the cliff of childhood into adulthood. I felt as if the whole poem was written by Holden himself. The tone of the poem itself is pessimistic.

The speaker does not want children to have to face the hardships of adulthood. Flynn feels that many children are not prepared for the drastic change and "he will not fall until he notices his mistake." He thinks that since children have their parents to turn to they cannot be harmed. He talks about how children watch cartoon about "burning houses, car wrecks,ships going down -- earthbound, tangible disasters, arenas." When children watch cartoons like this, they do not realize the true dangers these things hold. In a cartoon, the character always comes out unscathed. In reality, if someone had to experience any of these things, they could be seriously injured.

Flynn thinks that when children have to face the real world, they will not know what to do with themselves. They have become so accustomed to living life without fear and worry that they go out and do reckless things without thinking of the consequences.

Rebecca said...

I think this poem is about the innocence of childhood. Ideally children grow up sheltered, harbor carefree thoughts, and watch silly cartoons."Galaxies swallowed by galaxies" initially reminded me of the phrase "it's a dog eat dog world", meaning that people look out for themselves and hurt other people. The speaker is ironic when he tell kids "You can", "You will", do dangerous things that people shouldn't because they "will be saved", pointing out that they are naive. The speaker believes that they "shouldn't know" about the real world yet (but they do) and should stay in their fantasy world as long as they can, and stay innocent for as long as they can because "you will be saved" every time. The speaker indicates that "She knows" about the real world and "She will learn" about the consequences of being reckless and carefree, and this relates cartoons which show "a man draws a door on a rock" but "Anyone else who tries will crash into the rock". In physics, any action has an equal or opposite reaction, like people's rash decisions always have consequences. Figurative language, diction, and syntax are used.

lindsaykeith said...

I thought this poem was kind of depressing. The speaker reminded me of Holden Caulfield by saying what 10 year olds should and shouldn't know/think about. As if he wanted to preserve their youth and innocence, and never let them have to worry about complex things in life. Also, the speaker pointed out that in cartoons, someone can always save the day, "sinking ships have lifeboats," which juxtaposes the reality of life that people do get hurt.