Poetry Analysis

at
Categories
Tags

 

This poem is intended as a springboard for an intertextual connection between it and the novel, Girl in
Translation by Jean Kwok. When we make an intertextual connection, we are looking at the varied ways that
we make meaning between texts and develop our critical thinking about the information as it relates to our self,
relates to other texts and relates to the world. Thus, re-read the poem by Chang, then answer the questions
which follows.
Saying Yes
by Diana Chang
“Are you Chinese?”
“Yes.”
“American?”
“Yes.”
“Really Chinese?”
“No . . . not quite.”
“Really American?”
“Well, actually, you see . . .”
But I would rather say
yes
Not neither-nor,
not maybe,
but both, and not only
The homes I’ve had,
the ways I am
I’d rather say it
twice,
yes
Questions for you:
What personal thoughts and/or connections does the text raise for you, particularly your feelings regarding your
family heritage? Explain whether or not you agree with Diana Chang’  s perspective (text-to-self)?
What thoughts and/or connections does the text raise for you about the characters in the book? Is there a
particular character or experience which enables you to make a connection between the two texts (text-to-text)
Be specific.
Finally, what issues, topics, or themes raised in the poem enable you to make an intertextual connection to
issues or topics that are happening in our society (text-to-world)?
2.Directions: Read the poem, “The Grammar of Silk” by Song, then respond to the questions.
“The Grammar of Silk” by Song.pdfPreview the document
First, interpret the meaning of the poem (which is a metaphor) by Song, then make a connection to the
experiences of Kimberly and Ma in the novel “Girl in Translation. Be specific when making your connection(s).
Second, imagine that you are Kimberly. Write your own poem of at least 4 stanzas where you, like Song, share
your “Grammar of Silk”. As you write, be sure to integrate at least three examples of the elements of poetry in
your poem. See handout as a reference: Elements of Poetry.pdfPreview the document

 

Sample Solution

Consequently, jus ad bellum comprises several conditions but most importantly: just cause and proportionality. This gives people a guide whether it’s lawful to enter a war or not. However, this is only one part of the theory of the just war. Nevertheless, it can be seen above that jus ad bellum can be debated throughout, showing that there is no definitive theory of a just war, as it is normatively theorised. The second section begins deciphering jus in bello or what actions can we classify as permissible in just wars (Begby et al (2006b), Page 323). First, it is never just to intentionally kill innocent people in wars, supported by Vittola’s first proposition. This is widely accepted as ‘all people have a right not to be killed’ and if a soldier does, they have violated that right and lost their right. This is further supported by “non-combatant immunity” (Frowe (2011), Page 151), which leads to the question of combatant qualification mentioned later in the essay. This is corroborated by the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, ending the Second World War, where millions were intently killed, just to secure the aim of war. However, sometimes civilians are accidentally killed through wars to achieve their goal of peace and security. This is supported by Vittola, who implies proportionality again to justify action: ‘care must be taken where evil doesn’t outweigh the possible benefits (Begby et al (2006b), Page 325).’ This is further supported by Frowe who explains it is lawful to unintentionally kill, whenever the combatant has full knowledge of his actions and seeks to complete his aim, but it would come at a cost. However, this does not hide the fact the unintended still killed innocent people, sho

This question has been answered.

Get Answer