Comparison of Mid-Term Break, The Field Mouse, and On My First Sonne
The above poems are written by 3 different people and on reading them
they seem to be about very different things. But at heart, they are
about death and the pain that appears afterwards. Seamus Heaney's
Mid-Term Break is a memory of his four-year-old brother's death.
Gillian Clarke's The Field Mouse is about death in a political
conflict compared to a death in nature. Finally On My First Sonne by
Ben Johnson is about the death of his son and the religious view of
the situation.
Both Heaney and Johnson's poems are about the death of a close loved
one and how it is dealt with emotionally and in reality. On looking at
the title of Heaney's poem, you almost immediately assume that is a
happy one, possibly about what he spends his holidays doing. This of
course is not the case.
Unlike the other two poems, you do not know immediately who has died
or even if there is a death. Throughout the poem he keeps us guessing
what is happening. He gives us a clue and we have to piece it together
like a detective putting a jigsaw puzzle together to solve a crime.
Also the fact that it is a memory and he is talking about himself as a
child shows how badly it would have affected him and his parents
emotionally. Through Heaney talks about the reaction of all his family
members to his brother's death, Johnson only talks about how his son's
death affected him.
You can see that since the deceased was his first son, that he is hit
emotionally very hard and seems to blame himself, but at the same time
consulates himself by thinking that he has gone to a better place.
Line 5 'O, could I loose all father now. For why.' seems to indicate
that he has lost a...
... middle of paper ...
...connection that the rest of
us probably would not.
I feel the poem that really explains the situation well is Seamus
Heaney's Mid-Term Break as it keeps the person in suspense over who
has died, but delivers a shock at the end when we find out who it
really is. This really mixes your emotions and unlike the other 2
makes you feel sorry for a death that happened over 20-30 years ago. I
also feel it is better because it focuses on the actually death. while
Healey does fill in these criteria.
Clarke's poem compares the killing of a field mouse to the killings in
the Bosnian War. Though this is clever, it does not show the bad
things in the Bosnian War as in reality the killing of one field mouse
cannot really be literally compared to the massive killings involving
the Muslims. The above reasons are why I think overall Seamus Heaney's
poem is the best.
The son upheld the idea that in dire situations, he must abandon everything except for the instinct to survive. Harsh and dangerous conditions can affect one's outlook on life as well as their priorities. In The Last Days, Irene Zisblatt witnesses the brutal beating of a small child as his head was bashed against the side of a truck by a SS officer until the blunt force trauma caused the young child to die (Moll). The trauma from seeing the small boy being abused to death traumatizes Irene, which prompts her into losing her faith in God. As Irene notices the cruel atrocities taking place around her, she questions whether God is really there for the innocent Jewish people if he does not try to stop such horrible events taking place.
he learns of the lies and deceit of his father, as he discovers his mother never died of a heart attack and his father
jumps around in his life, telling you things in, what I believe is, their order
Speak, Memory begins with deep, existential implications about the fleeting nature of human life, with the image of a cradle rocking over an abyss, and human existence being compared to a brief crack of light. Throughout the first chapter Nabokov makes it clear that he is against the transiency of existence by writing his autobiography; by “pinning down” his memories, he is making some image of himself immortal, much like he would with a pinned butterfly. Throughout the book, the parallels between trapping and preserving butterflies and recalling and documenting memories are undeniable, and imply that Nabokov is writing Speak, Memory to ‘preserve’ himself like he would a butterfly.
I did this passage because I can only imagine what it was like to see himself after two years, and how much he had changed since then, he really must have looked like a different person. I am sure that he must have been shocked and I am not surprised that that memory has stayed with him for so long.
is searching for him and that he is going to have to encounter him at
Repressed memories is a topic that has been an ongoing dispute among some, however ac...
...as an interest in him. He is trying to repeat the action and circumstances to reach the result and happiness that he once had in the past.
While one person lays with their wrists circumscribed to the worn leather of the gurney, another person holds two skin-piercing needles. The individual holding the needles is an inexperienced technician who obtains permission from the United States federal government to murder people. One needle is held as a precaution in case the pain is too visible to the viewers. Another dagger filled with a lethal dosage of chemicals is inserted into the vein that causes the person to stop breathing. When the cry of the heart rate monitor becomes monotone, the corrupt procedure is complete. Lying in the chair is a corpse when moments ago it was an individual who made one fatal mistake that will never get the chance to redeem (Ecenbarger). Although some people believe that the death
we know dies a tragic death which, may or may not have occurred if it
at any time and can have a great impact on us. I think both poems have
The Memory theory is insufficient evidence to support personal identity’s plausibility because of its three inconsistencies. If one imagines or simply hears a story about themselves and imagines or listens to the feelings and thoughts that are being brought to them, how can one tell the difference? If someone believes that something happened, and can resurrect sensations and thoughts from that event, how can anyone disagree? The conscious is unobservable, then how can anyone dispute that the thought is real or not? Reid also agrees that personal identity is totally undefinable, however he believes it is still possible it exists. Reid also mentions that memories may be able to explain a person’s existence but he is hesitant to attribute it to personal identity. Reid highlights the memory theory’s second inconsistency, how can one prove that their personal identity is unchanged? He presses further, “How do you know — what evidence have you — that there is such a permanent self which has a claim to all the thoughts, actions, and feelings which you call yours?” Thirdly, if one falls into a coma and regains consciousness with long-term memory loss, does that mean they are not the same person? And if that is the case, has the person before the coma in a sense, died? According to this view, they would not be
think this creates a vivid image for the reader. He goes on to say that
...corporating fiction into the concept of who they are. To resolve the issue of false memories occurring, there must be an alternate verification used to determine the validity of the chain of memory. Due to the need for an alternate form of verification, it is apparent that memory alone is not sufficient enough to determine personal identity. An example of this is a person who was born in 1964 who claims to remember sitting in the car behind John F. Kennedy when he was assassinated. Considering the assassination occurred in 1963, the person is either lying or experiencing a false memory.