Comparing poems Essay

In this essay I am going to compare the way the theme of racism is dealt with in the poems ‘Half caste’ and ‘nothings changed’. I will analyse the poems and then compare them. The things I will be comparing are the similarities and differences, the layout and also the use of language. I will be looking at both of the authors Tatamkhula Africa (Nothings Changed) and John Agard (Half caste) intentions and then decide which one of the poems I think is most effective. I am going to begin with a comparison of the purposes of the two poems. Nothings changed is about a black man looking back at his childhood and realising that ‘nothings changed’, he is upset about this as although segregation is said to have gone, he feels as if it is the same as before. Half-caste is about a mixed race man who is asking for an explanation for why they are treated like half a person. He refuses to be called half-caste as he finds it offensive. In both of these poems, the writer is dealing with the issues of racism. The two writers are expressing their anger and want the readers to take notice of how they feel. The two writers both use repetition throughout the poem. Tatamkhula used the phrase ‘nothings changed’ as both the title and the ending of the poem, this emphasises the fact that his whole poem is based on the fact that he feels that nothing has changed in his life, mainly on the aspect of the way black people are treated. John repeats ‘explain yuslef’ a number of times throughout the poem, he says this because his main aim of the poem is for people to explain themselves. These both are examples of repetition used by the writers to emphasise on their point that they want to get out by writing their poem. The two writers have a completely different style of writing. In nothings changed the writer uses standard use of English as he is happy to write this way. On the other hand the writer of half caste writes the words in slang. Clearly he wants to show the reader that he is what he is and is not going to change for anyone.  Tatamkhula compares a black person like himself to an ‘amiable weed’, he is doing this as he feels that both black people and amiable weeds are not cared for. Also he believes they are not wanted. He then later compares a white person to the opposite, a ‘red rose’, this maybe because he thinks that a lot of care is taken into caring for a red rose and also the white people. Here Tatamkhula expresses himself through metaphors and he does so continuously throughout the poem. John’s use of language happens to be really strong. He shows straight away that he is extremely angry. An example of this is that he said could have said you can come back tomorrow and listen my other half of my story if you want, however instead he demands the reader ‘yu must come back tomorrow’. The ‘must’ emphasises that the writer is serious.  Both of these writers use different type of writing to express the way they feel. Tatamkhula effectively uses metaphors to compare what he feels like and what other people are being treated as. John’s strong use of language makes his poem more effective as he is showing exactly how he feels in the first instant. Both writers’ intentions are similar. They both want the reader to think about and understand what they are going through. They want these problems of racism to stop. Tatamkhula writes about what he sees and feels. An example of this is when writes ‘I press my nose to the dear panes’. Here he is on the other side of the glass from were the white people are sitting. This shows that he is separated from the people. He expresses that although segregation has said to be gone, it is still there. He can see the white people through the glass, however the glass is like a border where he can not pass only because of his colour. John Agard throughout the poem is writing as if he is speaking to the reader. It seems as if he is having a conversation with the reader, ‘excuse me’, I believe that this makes it more interesting, and also encourages the reader to take it more seriously.  He often uses the term ‘half-caste’ to outsmart people who use this term. Although he uses slang he shows that he is aware of the things going an around the world. He says ‘yu mean when Picasso mix red an green is a half-caste canvas’. This is an example of him having good knowledge and yet outsmarting the term ‘half-caste’. Here he is arguing that if Picasso’s paintings can be a mixture of red and green, why can’t he be a mixture of races without being treated as half of a person. Tatamkhula explains how they are treated differently with the example of their food. At the ‘whites only inn’ there is ‘crushed ice’, ‘linen falls’ these both show expense and luxury items. He then compares this with what he is used to which is ‘bunny chows’ and ‘plastic table tops’ This clearly shows that this is not an expensive place, yet more shows it is a cheap place. He then adds further ‘Wipe your fingers on your jeans’ this shows that he is used to doing this, and yet is proud of doing it. He is not ashamed to express the way he is living and feeling. Both writers express their anger continuously through out the poem. They obviously want things to change, and want to be treated equally as everyone else. They express there feelings in form of a poem which they want people to take notice of, and maybe if they are the ones who are causing or doing something to make them feel like this, they would want them to stop instantly.  In my opinion I strongly believe that ‘Nothings changed’ is far more effective. I think this because it expresses more how he feels and what he is going through. Although ‘Half-Caste’ also expresses the writers feelings it is not as effective. This may be because Tatumkhula uses many examples of what he feels like and how he is treated differently.