Analysis by theme – Carol Ann Duffy

CHILDHOOD

Notes from “Originally”

Repeatedly returns to the metaphor of childhood as a “country” – echoes of L.P. Hartley’s “The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there. Notion of past being intimately associated with place, and that adulthood is a journey away from it.

“All childhood is an emigration.”/ “I want our own country”. Fear of being in an alien place as a child reflected in the alienation of adult life.

“I lost a river, culture, speech, sense of first space and the right place” – Duffy reflects on moving house as a child, and the way she lost her first senses of the world as the became accustomed to somewhere new.

“I stared at the eyes of a blind toy, holding its paw.” Metaphor – the past, her childhood is now lifeless but she clutches to it hopelessly.

Notes from “Captain of the 1964 Top of the Form Team”

“a fizzing hope, Gargling/ with Vimto” – Sense of excitement and sweetness conjured in the onomatopoeia of “fizzing” and imagery of “Vimto” – childhood was sensual and exciting.

“The smell of my clever satchel” evokes a particular fragrance and evokes ideas that the satchel itself is clever, that this symbol of childhood is synonymous with the intelligence he felt in 1964.

He continues lamenting the ease he felt in childhood, before the complexities and compromises of adult life. Everything seemed black and white, right or wrong: “The Nile rises in April. Blue and White./ The humming bird’s song is made by its wings…” His achievement is reflected in the image of him “salut(ing)” the answers to his teacher and the predictable tone of “Sir?... Correct.”

It is summarised by his enthusiasm for life at the time, “no hands, famous, learning…” The first of these images is suggestive of a recklessness, a sense of invincibility and assurance which is shown as hubris by the poem’s end.

Again, Duffy gives this period of life a geographic “country” but in the final stanza it is subverted from its idealised vision and aligned with Rhodesia, a country that has been “abolished” and no longer exists as a political entity (it is now known as Zimbabwe).

The bitterness of this poem is a stark contrast to the warm, sepia-tinged romance of the others, and the narrator laments his “thick kids” and “stale wife”. “Stale” forms an

interesting comparison with the “fizzing” youth and we sense the ebbing away of excitement and freshness, giving way to the flat and mundane.

POP CULTURE/ WAR/ THATCHERISM/ CAPITALISM

Notes on “Poet for Our Times”

This poem is a departure from the more personal poems concerning memory but still addresses some similar ideas.

Here, Duffy adopts the persona of a newspaper hack whose sole concern is reducing huge stories to sensationalised headlines. The narrator is odious and obsequious, trying to inveigle his way into the reader’s affections. He uses colloquial, overly-friendly language (“squire”, “cheers”, “punters”, “know what I mean”, “ta”, “Et cet.”) which does more to alienate us. The language of his work is closely associated with violence. He talks of the need to “bang” words down on paper “like they’re screaming fire”. The use of hyperbole succinctly conveys the hysterical tone of a tabloid newspaper.

The first two headlines we encounter, “CECIL-KEAYS ROW SHOCK TELLS EYETIE WAITER” and “ENGLAND FAN CALLS WHINGEING FROG A LIAR”.

The first two headlines we encounter, “CECIL-KEAYS ROW SHOCK TELLS EYETIE WAITER” and “ENGLAND FAN CALLS WHINGEING FROG A LIAR” both contain racist commentary which forms a sharp critique of the xenophobic traits of such newspapers.

The journo insists that “you’ve got to grab attention/ with just one phrase”. This is an admission that depth of reporting and factual content are not priorities to the tabloids – they need to grab attention in order to sell newspapers, and Duffy is clearly passing judgment on a news industry that considers its profit the first priority. Indeed, the narrator even confesses “I’ve made mistakes too numerous to mention” but he speeds past, proudly proclaiming that “now we print the buggers inches high”. The mistakes have not made him circumspect or reflective, he has just become increasingly frenzied. The headlines that round off this stanza are demonstrations of the use of sex to sell papers. They refer to a “PANTIE ROMP” and a “RENT BOY”. Later, we are told of other stories featuring “DIPLOMAT IN BED”, “BONKING” and a politician who is “A NIGHTCLUB TART”.

The arrogance of the narrator seems unbearable when he claims that his work makes him “a sort of poet/ for our times”. This betrays a lack of understanding of what poetry is. He laments that it is becoming harder to shock his audience and must become increasingly lurid. He wishes to have “been around when the Titanic sank” purely to write the headlines. He is bereft of compassion and entirely self-serving.

The narrator continues his idea of being a “poet” by confessing he wishes that “kids will know my headlines off by heart”, as though they were poems taught in schools. Finally, he reflects on “the poems of the decade”: “Stuff ‘em!” and “Gotcha!” In the 1980s these were defining headlines for key cultural moments, but as per the hack’s demand, they have been reduced entirely. Ironically, these have indeed become so

well known that few people, certainly of that generation, do not know what they are about. To some extent, by writing the poem, Duffy is complicit in perpetuating them in the popular memory.

The final line works as a pun, combining the phrases “tits and arse” with “the bottom line”, merging them into the “tits and bottom line of art”. Duffy is meshing her main threads together in a single line by suggesting that sexualised imagery that sells papers is the bottom line (the ultimate goal) of journalism, and exposes the narrator’s ideas as ridiculous. The final goal of his “art” is profit, whereas the bottom line of poetry and “art” is an exploration of truth.

APPEARANCES/ CLASS

Notes on “Litany”

The poem deals with the falsities of middle-class suburban life in the 1960s, and is a reflection on Duffy’s early childhood. Here, she aligns the religious litany with that of the conspicuous consumption of the era. She lists off the must-have items for a respectable household, “candlewick/ bedspread three piece suite display cabinet”. The absence of punctuation to this gives it a monotonous drone which is intended to mimic the delivery of a latin litany.

Duffy describes the women assembled for coffee in their buttoned-up and repressed couture: “stiff-haired wives balanced their red smiles”. The veneer of well-being is paramount to these women and their society and these small details act as a synecdoche for the wider world they inhabit.

By using the details of the era, Duffy is able to provide sharp images which serve dual meanings. The “terrible marriages crackled” (showing discomfort and a persistence through unhappiness) and this static is echoed by the “cellophone/ round polyester shirts”. The lounge is a picture of awkward appearances: it “bristle(s) with eyes” and “sharp hands” are “poised over biscuits”. There is a palpable sense of not wanting to break the social conventions no matter how uncomfortable the participants are. The long first sentence of the second stanza, which ramps up the escalating tension, comes abruptly to a halt with “an embarrassing word”. The false appearances cannot withstand the devastating delivery of a word of truth.

The poet goes on to explain how these rules, this “code”, were learned when her mother believed her daughter to be reading, oblivious of the actions of her friends. In this society, “no one had cancer, or sex, or debts,/ and certainly not leukaemia”. There is a sense of mischievous hyperbole in Duffy juxtaposing cancer and sex, as though either would be equally horrifying to the repressed women.

The poem is in some ways an exploration of Duffy’s childhood and her attempts to have her language heard. Her mother is afraid of the damage an unpleasant truth may cause, but her daughter strives against this. She describes her burgeoning self-awareness in the metaphor of the “butterfly (which) stammered itself in my curious hands”. There is a sense of wonder, beauty and circumspection to the image, as though Duffy is careful not to harm that which is so fragile – her own self. This contrasts with the “grave of wasps… in a jam jar”. The natural world has been tempted into the austere house and has been killed. The metaphor of Duffy’s own natural instincts and desires could not be clearer.

The desire to express herself in this cloying, overpowering atmosphere is understandable and Duffy shows her rebellion against it by retelling how a schoolmate “told me to fuck off”. The effect on the room is electric and the child is “thrilled” at the “malicious” act she has performed. She has jolted the women from their complacency. Her knowledge that her mother would administer a stiff punishment does not concern her, and she tastes the salt on her tongue of “an imminent storm”. Again, Duffy is aligning herself with the natural world while anticipating the inevitable punishment. The silence is broken by a short, pointed sentence: “Then/ uproar”. There is another sense of Duffy’s mischief here, suggesting that pandemonium has erupted over a child making a social gaffe. Such is her view of the brittle society of her mother – its veneer is so easily shattered.

Finally, Duffy lists off the names of the women present, echoing the litany once again. This time it is addressing the shame of her mother and her desire to atone for her daughter’s sin. The incident has burned the names into Duffy’s consciousness, as has her “mother’s mute shame” and “the taste of soap”, this finally sense-image making clear the old punishment for swearing: to have one’s mouth washed out with soap and water. This final idea has ideas of an artificial cleansing attached, and suggests its effect is not permanent, as the poet’s attitude as an adult testifies.