AQA Poetry Literature Anthology

Document Sample
AQA Poetry Literature Anthology Powered By Docstoc
					                 AQA Poetry Literature Anthology : Seamus Heaney

Storm on the Island

The poem considers the ideas of isolation and living so close to nature. But mainly it
depicts the destructive powers of nature, amplified for the island-dweller. Heaney
refers to three of the elements - earth, water and air. The poem challenges the idea
that island life is idyllic - the sea is not “company” but like a cat, seemingly tame, yet apt
to turn “savage” and spit. At the end of the poem comes the irony - we are fearful of
“empty air”, or a “huge nothing”. So the poem appears to question whether our fears are
real or imaginary (of course, physicists and meteorologists know that air is not “a huge
nothing”). Heaney uses a series of military metaphors: the wind (like a fighter-bomber)
“dives and strafes” while space is a “salvo” and air bombards (a metaphor from artillery
or, more aptly here, naval gunnery).

The poem is written in iambic pentameter lines - mostly blank verse, but with half-
rhyming couplets at the beginning and end. The poem opens confidently, explaining why
the island dwellers trust in their preparations - but when the storm breaks, they can do
nothing but “sit tight”.

The poem begins by showing how the island dwellers adapt their outlook to their
situation - so the fact that there is no hay becomes an advantage (“no stacks/Or stooks
that can be lost”). But soon the disadvantages appear - the absence of trees means both
that one cannot hear the sound of wind in “leaves and branches”, nor is there any
“natural shelter”. On the other hand, the violence of nature can exceed what we expect
to happen. We might have a picturesque idea of the sea crashing against the cliffs -
spectacular, but not really threatening. But the wind is so strong that the spray hits
“the very windows” of people's houses. Heaney explains this with the simile of a cat -
much of the time one expects it to be “company” and “tame” (safe and predictable). But
in the storm it turns “savage” and “spits”.

       How in this poem does Heaney suggest the power of nature?
       Does the poem suggest that extreme weather is frightening or enjoyable for
        people (or both, perhaps)?
       What do you think is the meaning of the last line of the poem?


This seemingly simple poem shows how the perch lives up to its name - keeping its place
while the river and everything else moves past or around it. Heaney uses the metaphor
of “holding the pass” (like soldiers defending a strongpoint) to show how the perch
remain unmoved. They may seem to sleep, as they are “adoze” (=dozing; Heaney makes up
the word which is like asleep, alive and adrift in its form) but they rely on their “muscle”
to guzzle the current. We see the fish from the human viewpoint, looking down into the
clear river, but also from their own viewpoint - “under the water-roof”. The metaphor
here, like a riddle, is of a kind popular in Old English poetry; it is called a kenning (Old
English examples include “helmet-bearer” for “warrior” and “whale-road” for the sea).

Heaney says of this poem:

       “...these perch, although they are actually in the river, they are very
       much in a kind of fifty-five year old memory lake of my own...I think that
       water is immediately interesting. It's just as an element it is full of life.
       It is associated with origin, it is bright, it reflects you.”

The poem has a simple form - five couplets with half-rhyme (assonance rhyme, which
uses a different vowel sound in each rhyme word). The metre is mostly anapaestic, with
some iambic feet, especially at the ends of the lines - this works because the stress
falls on the last syllable, whether of two or three. The pattern is also varied at the
start of some lines, which open with a stressed syllable - “Perch”, “Near” and “Guzzling”.
(In terms of the metre this syllable serves as a poetic foot on its own.)

The poem is striking for the number of monosyllabic words the poet uses, and for groups
of words with the same vowel: “grunts...slubs...runty”.

Heaney also indulges in wordplay - the two senses of “perch” in the first line and the pun
on “finland” (not to be confused with the country of “Finland”) which is echoed by

Note: The Lower Bann river, which drains Lough Neagh in Northern Ireland is
celebrated for its coarse fishing, and is probably the river mentioned here.

      What is the poet's view of the perch?
      In what ways are the perch like people?
      How does the poet describe the river here?
      Explain the way the poet contrasts ideas of movement and staying still in Perch.
      How does the poet use sound effects in the poem?


This poem gives a vivid account of picking blackberries. But it is really about hope and
disappointment (how things never quite live up to our expectations) and blackberry
picking becomes a metaphor for other experiences.

      In the first half of the poem Heaney describes the picking - from the
       appearance of the first fruit to the frenzy of activity as more fruit ripens.
      The second half of the poem concerns the attempt to preserve the berries -
       always a failure, as the fungus set in and the fruit fermented. (Now that many
       people in the west have freezers, this problem is solved. But do many young
       people still go to pick blackberries?)
In the first section Heaney presents the tasting of the blackberries as a sensual
pleasure - referring to sweet “flesh”, to “summer's blood” and to “lust”. He uses many
adjectives of colour (how many can you find?) and suggests the enthusiasm of the
collectors, using every available container to hold the fruit they have picked. There is
also a hint that this picking is somehow violent - after the “blood” comes the claim that
the collectors' hands were “sticky as Bluebeard's” (whose hands were covered with the
blood of his wives).

The lusciousness of the fresh fruit contrasts with what it quickly becomes “fur” and
“rat-grey fungus”, as “lovely canfuls” smell “of rot”.

The poem is set out in iambic pentameter couplets with half rhyme. Like many of
Heaney's poems it is full of monosyllabic nouns: “clot”, “knot”, “cans”, “pots”, “blobs”,
“pricks”, “byre”, “fur”, “cache”, “bush”, “flesh” and “rot” (there are others). The poem
has a clear structure - the two sections match the two stages of the poet's thought.

This poem is ambiguous in its viewpoint, too. We see the view of a frustrated child in
“I...felt like crying” and “It wasn't fair”, but a more detached adult view in the
antithesis of “Each year I hoped they'd keep, knew they would not.” The poem looks at a
theme that is as old as poetry itself - the transitoriness of pleasure (how good things do
not last), and relates it to a familiar childhood experience.

Heaney suggests that what is true of blackberries may be true of good things generally.
But this is argument by analogy. Nowadays we can preserve our fruit by freezing it - so
does this mean that hopes are not disappointed after all?

      How far is this poem about something particular or about life in general?
      Explain how the poem contrasts ideas of expected pleasure and disappointment.
      Does this poem give the viewpoint of a child or an adult or both?
      Can you explain why Heaney, in the last line, says that he “hoped” for something,
       even though he “knew” it would not happen?

Death of a Naturalist

This poem is similar to Blackberry-Picking in its subject and structure - here, too,
Heaney explains a change in his attitude to the natural world, in a poem that falls into
two parts, a sort of before and after. But here the experience is almost like a
nightmare, as Heaney witnesses a plague of frogs like something from the Old
Testament. You do not need to know what a flax-dam is to appreciate the poem, as
Heaney describes the features that are relevant to what happened there - but you will
find a note below. Click here to see this explanation.

The poem's title is amusingly ironic - by a naturalist, we would normally mean someone
with expert scientific knowledge of living things and ecology (what we once called
natural history), someone like David Attenborough, Diane Fossey (of Gorillas in the Mist
fame) or Steve Irwin (who handles dangerous snakes). The young Seamus Heaney
certainly was beginning to know nature from direct observation - but this incident cut
short the possible scientific career before it had ever got started. We cannot imagine
real naturalists being so disgusted by a horde of croaking frogs.

The poem has a fairly simple structure. In the first section, Heaney describes how the
frogs would spawn in the lint hole, with a digression into his collecting the spawn, and
how his teacher encouraged his childish interest in the process. In the second section,
Heaney records how one day he heard a strange noise and went to investigate - and
found that the frogs, in huge numbers, had taken over the flax-dam, gathering for
revenge on him (to punish his theft of the spawn). He has an overwhelming fear that, if
he puts his hand into the spawn again, it will seize him - and who knows what might
happen then?

The poem is set out in two sections of blank verse (unrhymed iambic pentameter lines).
Heaney uses onomatopoeia more lavishly here than in any poem - and many of the sounds
are very indelicate: “gargled”, “slap and plop” and “farting”. The lexicon is full of terms
of putrefaction, ordure (excrement or faeces) and generally unpleasant things -
“festered”, “rotted”, “slobber”, “clotted water”, “rank/With cowdung” and slime kings”.

In the first section, the poet notes the festering in the flax-dam, but can cope with this
familiar scene of things rotting and spawn hatching. Perhaps, as an inquisitive child he
felt some pride in not being squeamish - he thinks of the bubbles from the process as
gargling “delicately”. He is confident in taking the frogspawn - he does it every year, and
watches the “jellied specks” become “fattening dots” then turn into tadpoles. He has an
almost scientific interest in knowing the proper names (“bullfrog” and “frogspawn”)
rather than the teacher's patronizing talk of “daddy” and “mammy”, and in the idea of
forecasting the weather with the spawn. (Not really very helpful, since you can see if it
is raining or sunny by direct observation - no need to look at the frogspawn.)

The second section appears like a punishment from offended nature for the boy's
arrogance - when he sees what nature in the raw is really like, he is terrified. This part
of the poem is ambiguous - we see the horror of the plague of frogs, “obscene” and
“gathered...for vengeance”, as it appeared to the young boy. But we can also see the
scene more objectively - as it really was. If we strip away the effect of imagination, we
are left with a swarm of croaking amphibians. This may bring out a difference between a
child in the 1940s and a child in the west today. The 21st century child knows all about
the frogs' habitat and behaviour from wildlife documentaries, but has never seen so
many frogs at close range in real life. The young Heaney was used to seeing nature close
up, but perhaps never got beyond the very simple account of “mammy” and “daddy” frogs.
The teacher presents the amphibians as if they were people.

The arrival of the frogs is like a military invasion - they are “angry” and invade the dam;
the boy ducks “through hedges” to hide from the enemy. Like firearms, they are
“cocked”, or they are “poised like mud grenades” (a grenade is a hand-bomb - the frogs,
in colour and shape, resemble the Mills Hand Bomb, used by British soldiers from the
Great War to modern times).

The poem has some echoes of Samuel Taylor Coleridge's Rime of the Ancient Mariner -
in a shorter and more comic version: the would-be naturalist is, like the mariner,
revolted by “slimy things”; the Ancient Mariner learns to love them as God's creatures.
Heaney indulges in a riotous succession of disgusting descriptions: “gross-bellied”, “slap
and plop”, “obscene threats” (suggesting swear words), “farting” and “slime kings”.

Wordsworth suggests that poets should use everyday language. In this poem, Heaney
uses terms we do not expect to see in poetry, and presents nature as the very opposite
of beautiful.

Notes on the poem

         Flax is an annual plant (it grows from seed) some one to two feet high, with blue
          flowers. A flax dam (traditionally called a lint hole), in Northern Ireland is not
          really a dam, but a pool where bundles (called “beets”) of flax are placed for
          about three weeks to soften the stems. The process is called “retting”. Those
          who used to do this work report that the smell is very strong and unpleasant.
          Heaney describes the flax as held down by “sods” (large clumps of earth or turf
          - a favourite word of the poet: count how often he uses it here and in other
          pieces). In some dams large stones would hold down the flax. Fibre from flax was
          cleaned and spun into yarn, woven into linen and bleached.
         The townland is the smallest administrative area in Northern Ireland. They
          range in size from less than an acre to well over 2,000, while the average is some
          300 acres. The boundaries between them are often streams or old roads.
         Be careful how you write naturalist - keep the “al” in it, and don't mix it up with
          naturist, which is an old name for someone who takes off his or her clothes, to
          live in a “state of nature”!

         How would you react (as a young adult or as a child) to the sight of a horde of
          frogs invading a familiar place?
         How far does this poem tell the truth about frogs and how far does it tell the
          reader about the power of imagination?
         Is this poem comic, serious or both? How far does the poet invite us to laugh at
         Heaney describes the frogs' heads as “farting”. As a boy he might have said this
          word to friends, but would not repeat it at home or write it in school work. How
          does it work in the poem?
         Is it a good idea for teachers of the young to explain how animals live by
          describing them in human terms, like “mammy” (mum or mummy) and “daddy”?
         How well does this poem fit in with your ideas of what poetry should normally be
         How truthful is the title? Did Heaney really lose his interest in, and love of,
          nature. Or does the poem record only a dramatic change of attitude, or
          something else? (Note, for example, that the poem called Perch was published in
         Does this poem have anything in common with other poems by Heaney? How far
          does it fit into a pattern of poems that show him not to be a real country person
          (like his father and grandfather) - because he can't dig, he can't plough, he gets
          upset when the blackberries start rotting and he is frightened by a lot of frogs?

This poem is like Follower, as it shows how the young Heaney looked up to his elders - in
this case both father and grandfather.

Seeing his father (now old) “straining” to dig “flowerbeds”, the poet recalls him in his
prime, digging “potato drills”. And even earlier, he remembers his grandfather, digging
peat. He cannot match “men like them” with a spade, but he sees that the pen is (for
him) mightier, and with it he will dig into his past and celebrate them.

Heaney challenges the stereotype of Paddy with a spade. The stereotype contains some
truth - Irishmen are justifiably well known for digging, but Heaney shows the skill and
dignity in their labour. We see also see their sense of the work ethic - the father still
digs in old age, the grandfather, when he was working, would barely stop to drink.

Note: the pen is “snug as a gun” because it fits his hand and is powerful. Heaney is from
County Derry (Northern Ireland) but the poem was published in 1966, before the
“troubles”, and this is not a reference to them.

This poem has a looser structure than Follower and looks at two memories - the father
digging the potato drills, the grandfather digging turf, for which he was famous as the
best digger on the peat bog. The poet celebrates not so much their strength as their
expertise. The digger's technique is exactly explained (“The coarse boot nestled on the
lug...”). Each man dug up what has real value

      food - “new potatoes”, and
      fuel - “the good turf”.

Again there are

      technical terms (“lug”, “shaft”) and
      monosyllabic (“bog”, “sods”, “curt cuts”) or
      colloquial terms: “By God, the old man could handle a spade.”

The onomatopoeia (where the sound resembles or suggests meaning) is obvious in
“rasping”, “gravelly”, “sloppily”, “squelch” and “slap”.

There is a central extended metaphor of digging and roots, which shows how the poet, in
his writing, is getting back to his own roots (his identity, and where his family comes
from). The poem begins almost as it ends, but only at the end is the writer's pen seen as
a weapon for digging.

      How does the poem explore ideas of heritage and family tradition?
      What does the poem suggest about physical labour?
      Explain in your own words the image in the last line of the poem.
Mid-Term Break

The poem is about the death of Heaney's infant brother (Christopher) and how people
(including himself) reacted to this. The poem's title suggests a holiday but this “break”
does not happen for pleasant reasons. For most of the poem Heaney writes of people's
unnatural reactions, but at the end he is able to grieve honestly.

The boredom of waiting appears in the counting of bells but “knelling” suggests a funeral
bell, rather than a bell for lessons. The modern reader may be struck by the neighbours'
driving the young Seamus home - his parents may not have a car (quite usual then -
Heaney was born in 1939, and is here at boarding school, so this is the 1950s) or, more
likely, were too busy at home, and relied on their neighbours to help.

The father, apparently always strong at other funerals, is distraught (very upset) by his
child's death, while the mother is too angry to cry. “Big Jim” (apparently a family friend)
makes an unfortunate pun - he means to speak of a metaphorical “blow”, of course. The
young Seamus is made uneasy by the baby's happiness on seeing him, by hand shaking and
euphemisms (evasions, like “Sorry for my trouble”), and by whispers about him. When
late at night the child's body is returned Heaney sees this as “the corpse” (not a

This contrasts wonderfully with the final section of the poem, where he is alone with his
brother. Note the personal pronouns “him”, “his”, “he” - as opposed to “the corpse”. The
calm mood is beautifully shown in the transferred epithet (“Snowdrops/And candles
soothed the bedside” - literally they soothed the young Heaney). The flowers are a
symbol in the poem, but also in reality for the family (a symbol of new life, after death).
The bruise is seen as not really part of the boy - he is “wearing” it (a metaphor), as if it
could come off. Heaney likens the bruise to the poppy, a flower linked with death and
soothing of pain (opiates come from poppies). The child appears as if sleeping (a simile).
We contrast the ugly “corpse, stanched and bandaged”, which becomes a sleeping child
with “no gaudy scars” - dead, but, ironically, not disfigured. The last line of the poem is
most poignant and skilful - the size of the coffin is the measure of the child's life. We
barely notice that Heaney has twice referred to a “box”, almost a jokey name for a

Overall, we note the contrast between the embarrassing scenes earlier and the final
section where, alone with his brother, Heaney can be natural.

The poem has a clear formal structure, in three line stanzas with a loose iambic metre.
There are occasional rhymes but the poem's last two lines form a rhyming couplet, and
emphasise the brevity of the child's life. Many of the lines run on - they are end
stopped only in the last line of a stanza, and in three cases the lines run on from one
stanza to the next. As in much of Heaney's poetry, there is no special vocabulary -
mostly this is the common register of spoken English.

      Contrast the reactions of the two parents - how does the reader react to this?
       With whom, do you think, is the mother angry?
      How does the poem contrast the fuss of the homecoming with the calmness of
       the scene when Seamus sees his brother's body?
      What do you think is the meaning of the poem's last line?

The title of this poem is ambiguous - it shows how the young Heaney followed his father
literally and metaphorically.

The child sees farming as simply imitating his father's actions (“close one eye, stiffen
my arm”), but later learns how skilled the work is. He recalls his admiration of his father
then; but now his father walks behind (this metaphor runs through the poem).
Effectively their positions are reversed. His father is not literally behind him, but the
poet is troubled by his memory: perhaps he feels guilt at not carrying on the tradition of
farming, or feels he cannot live up to his father's example.

The poem has several developed metaphors, such as the child's following in his father's
footsteps and wanting to be like him. The father is sturdy while the child falls - his feet
are not big enough for him to be steady on the uneven land.

There are many nautical references:

      The father's shoulders are like the billowing sail of a ship.
      The “sod” rolls over “without breaking” (like a wave).
      The child stumbles “in his wake” and dips and rises on his father's back.
      “Mapping the furrow” is like navigating a ship.

In these images the farmer is not shown as simple but highly skilled.

Heaney uses specialized terms (a special lexicon or register) from ploughing - terms
such as “wing”, “sock” and “headrig”. There are many active verbs - “rolled”, “stumbled”,
“tripping”, “falling” and “yapping”. There are lots of monosyllables and colloquial
vocabulary, frequently as the rhyme word at the end of line. Some of these terms sound
like their meaning (onomatopoeia), like “clicking”, “pluck” and “yapping”.

The metre of the poems is more or less iambic (in tetrameters - four poetic feet/eight
syllables to each line) and rhymed in quatrains (stanzas of four lines). We see a phrase
without a verb written as sentence: “An expert”. The poet uses contrast - apart from
the general contrast of past and present we note how:

      the father's control is effortless (“clicking tongue” or “single pluck/Of reins”)
       while the powerful horses (“sweating team”) strain, and how
      the young Seamus “wanted to grow up and plough.” but all he “ever did was

In thinking about the poem you might like to consider these questions:

      What does the poem show of the relationship of father and son, and how time
       has changed this?
      What does the last line of the poem mean? Does Heaney really want his father
       to “go away”?
      Is this a poem about farming specifically or is it relevant to other skills and
       occupations? How does Heaney explore the idea of family tradition here?

At a Potato Digging

In this poem Heaney looks at man's relationship with the land - the cultivation of the
potato is a way into Ireland's social history. The first and last of the four sections
depict the digging and gathering in of the potato crop today. The second section looks
more closely at the potato, and the third is an account of the great Potato Famine of
1845-1850. We sometimes associate the gathering in of food crops with offering thanks
to God (as in the Harvest Festival) but here Heaney suggests that the Irish labourers
have a superstitious or pagan fear of a nature god (the “famine god”) whom they must
appease with their offerings.

Although the farmer uses a mechanical digger to turn up the soil in which the potatoes
lie, the job of gathering in the potatoes still relies on human workers. The machine turns
up the roots and the labourers, in a line, bend down to fill their wicker creels (baskets).
As they fill their baskets, they leave the line to drop the potatoes into the pit, where
they will be stored. Though the work is hard, and makes the workers' fingers “go dead in
the cold”, they work almost automatically (“mindlessly”) made tough by their “Centuries
of/fear and homage to the famine god”. The folk memory of the great famine makes
them ready for almost any hardship, in pursuit of full stomachs.

The potatoes come in different colours (according to the variety). The second stanza
explains how they sprout and grow in their native soil. Although the great famine, caused
by blight, happened more than 150 years ago, still each year the potato harvest can be
an anxious process, as the workers smell the potatoes and feel them for firmness -
making sure they are free of the blight. (A fungus-like organism, called Phytophthora
infestans, causes the disease. This organism harms only the potato and, to a lesser
extent, the tomato, a member of the same plant family.) In this account, they come out,
exuding “good smells” and undamaged by the digger - “a clean birth”, to be “piled in pits”.
They resemble skulls, but are alive. They have eyes (sprouting points) but these are
blind - they have not yet sprouted.

In the third stanza, Heaney uses exactly the same phrases - “Live skulls, blind-eyed” -
but this time referring to the people who suffered in the great famine of 1845. Poor
people (that is most people) in Ireland at this time relied almost wholly on the potato as
their staple food. This explains why they would even eat “the blighted root” - but there
was no real crop to speak of, and the blighted potatoes could not feed the people. The
“new potato”, which seemed “sound as stone”, would rot within a few days of being
stored - and “millions rotted along with it”. The phrase is ambiguous - it means that
millions of potatoes rotted, but makes us think of the people who died. (The population
of Ireland dropped from 8 million before the famine to 5 million afterwards. Perhaps a
million died, while others left for England or the United States of America.)

Those who survived were famished - Heaney likens this to the sharp beaks of birds
snipping at people's guts. The people are shown as desperate and demoralized -
“hungering from birth” - and cursing the ground, “the bitch earth”. As this section moves
back in time at the start, so it ends by returning to the present, where the “potato
diggers are” and “you still smell the running sore” - as if the blight opened a wound that
has never healed.

In the fourth and final section, the workers take their lunch break - they no longer
depend on the potato for their own food (though they earn their pay by digging it).
Instead they have “brown bread and tea”, and their employer serves it, while there is no
shortage, and they “take their fill”. But they are not taking any chances - the earth is
not to be trusted (“faithless ground”). As they throw away the dregs of the tea and
their breadcrumbs, they make their offerings - “libations” - to this god whom they fear
and must appease.

The poem has a clear formal structure - the four sections go together rather as the
movements in a symphony. In presenting the main subject, the “Potato Digging” of the
title, Heaney makes two excursions - to inspect the marvellous food plant in close-up,
and to recall the terrible history with which it will always be associated in Irish memory.

The first and last sections have a loose iambic metre (a mix of tetrameters and
pentameters) and a clear ABAB rhyme scheme - which breaks down only in the poem's
final line. (Why might Heaney do this?). The second section has fewer rhymes in an
irregular pattern, so the effect is not very obvious to the reader. But the third section
uses rhyme in pairs: AABB and so on. Here the rhyme words are emphatic, an effect
made stronger by the trochaic metre. (The stress usually falls on the first syllable of
each pair. This metre works well for bitter political verse - Shelley uses it in his Mask of

The poem abounds in images. Heaney uses natural metaphors - of rock (“flint”, “pebbles”
and “stone”), of bodies (“skulls” and “blind-eyed”), or of animals (“bird” and “bitch”) - to
describe things. There are many images that suggest religious belief or ceremony - but
no mention of the established Christian faith: “processional”, “god” (note the small “g”),
“homage”, “altar”, “thankfully”, “fasts” and “libations” (liquid offerings, usually poured
onto the ground or an altar, in many ancient religions). Alliterative effects are
everywhere - “grubbing” and “grafted” or “pits” and “pus”. And the Anglo-Saxon
vocabulary, which is often monosyllabic, makes use of technical or dialect words, as well
as sound effects (like onomatopoeia).

Small details are very telling, for example:

      We note how the workers are able to stand upright for a moment, before
       stooping again. The image suggests the way in which people with natural dignity
       are forced to bow to their toil and humble themselves. The modern labourers
       may be free, but they may also still have something of the servile mentality.
      We see, too, that the starving people live in wicker huts - a suitable material for
       the strong but light creels, yet somehow not substantial enough for a
       comfortable and fireproof home.

As in Digging, the labourers' work is a symbol - but of what?

      Are they digging up their past, a folk memory or a grievance that will never be
       put right?
Notes on the poem

      “Drill”, in the first line, does not refer to a machine, but the row of potatoes -
       called a “drill” because the machine or person that plants the seed-potatoes (not
       really seeds, but sprouting tubers) drills a series of holes into which the seed-
       potatoes go.
      “in 'forty-five” refers to the first year of the Irish Potato Famine - 1845. The
       significance of the date may depend on the reader. English readers may think of
       1945 (the end of World War Two) and Scots may think of 1745 (the Jacobite
       uprising under Bonnie Prince Charlie). The omission of the first two digits also
       suggests the viewpoint of the people at the time (as we now talk of the Swinging
       Sixties, rather than the 1960s) who do not need to identify the century. By
       using the same form, Heaney suggests the way the memory has been passed on
       and kept alive in the oral tradition.

This poem dates from the late 1960s. Perhaps farming methods have changed in Ireland
since, but in most of the world still the work is done by human labour - and, just as in
19th century Ireland, many people's lives depend on a single crop.

      How, in this poem, does Heaney connect past and present?
      What view does the poem give of man's relationship with the earth?
      Does the poet really think (and want the reader to think) of the earth as a
       “bitch” and “faithless”?
      Modern readers in the west may no longer have a sense of where our food comes
       from - does this poem challenge us not to take things for granted?
      How does this poem explore ideas of religion, ritual and ceremony?