“The Black Walnut Tree” Analysis

Throughout Mary Oliver’s “The Black Walnut Tree,” Oliver employs figurative language and literary techniques such as diction and imagery to establish the tree’s role in the family as a symbol of both the adversities and the rewards that arise from their endeavor to preserve their family  history.

In the beginning of the poem, the narrator and her mother discuss selling the tree to pay off the mortgage, noting that the “dark boughs” might one day “[smash] the house” in a storm anyway (Oliver 7-8). The word choice that Oliver implements in these lines suggest that the effort to maintain the upkeep of the tree is becoming too heavy a task and that it might be easier to be rid of it, much in the way that many households may feel that family traditions, customs, or ancestral stories are cumbersome, outdated, and unnecessary to uphold or pass down. Likewise, this sentiment is expressed again in the poem when the mother mentions that “the leaves [of the tree] are getting heavier…and the fruit harder to gather away” (Oliver 13-15). The diction Oliver employs here reveals a lot about the family’s attitude towards the tree, indicating that they view it as a burden to bear.

However, as much as diction is used to convey how the family regards the tree as a difficult responsibility to manage, the vivid imagery found throughout the piece also illustrates the significance of the tree to the family’s history. Although the narrator’s comment that there are “roots in the cellar drains” may appear as simply another reason why the tree is not worth the hassle, the image that these words evoke imply that the tree’s very existence is deeply entwined with the family’s past and even its daily, basic functioning (Oliver 11). Furthermore, when the narrator describes her dream about her “fathers out of Bohemia” planting trees and filling the land “with leaves and vines and orchards,” the lush images conjured in the reader’s mind emphasize the idea that the black walnut tree is the foundation on which the narrator’s entire family was built (Oliver 26). The livelihood of her forefathers depended on these trees, and thus, it is to these trees that the family owes its lineage. To cut down the walnut tree, then, is to erase their own past.

In addition to diction and imagery, Oliver also employs figurative language in order to convey the idea that, despite being a burden, the tree offers gifts that are truly invaluable, just as preserving one’s family history is a weighty yet worthwhile endeavor. For instance, while the narrator and her mother list several reasons to cut and sell the tree, the narrator also acknowledges that “something brighter than money moves in [their] blood,” compelling them not to cut down the tree, but to plant more (Oliver 16-17). By using figurative language to express the feeling that overtake the two as “brighter than money,” and something which “moves in [their] blood,” it is clear to the reader that the tree possesses more value to the family than riches and that  its relationship to the family is not a shallow one (Oliver 16-17). This idea is reinforced in the last lines of the poem, when the tree is personified as “swing[ing] through another year,” for describing the tree performing a human-like action implies that the tree is just as much a living, breathing member of the family as anyone else (Oliver 32).

 

 

The Use of Juxtaposition in Gary Soto’s “Mexicans Begin Jogging”

In Gary Soto’s poem, “Mexicans Begin Jogging,” Soto conveys the narrator’s conflicting sense of identity by juxtaposing several contrasting ideas, tones, and themes with one another.

The poem, which details the thoughts of one man as he runs from border patrol, employs the use of juxtaposition throughout several parts of the piece, the title being one of them.  For instance, the connotation implied with the word “jogging” suggests leisure, composure, and calmness. The use of this word rather than “running” or “escaping,” is a subtle way in which Soto manages to exhibit the way many immigrants feel when they are not completely assimilated into the culture of their nationality or ethnicity, but are always a part of two different worlds. Additionally, the narrator’s identity crisis is further illustrated when, despite being a legal U.S citizen, he begins to run from border patrol anyway. His actions in this moment suggest his torn dedication between two aspects of himself: the American and the Mexican, for if he was firm in his identity as an American, he would have resisted his boss’s insistence that he run with more conviction. Furthermore, Soto continues to exhibit the narrator’s conflicting sense of identity by contrasting the “industrial road” that the narrator passes with the “soft houses,” for this highlights the difference between the lifestyles of immigrants and natural born, white Americans. Although he is, in fact, a natural born citizen, his appearance suggests he is not, at least to his boss. Also, when the narrator salutes all the characteristic symbols that define the America he knows (“baseball, milkshakes, and those sociologists”), he does so by yelling “vivas,” or “long live” in his native tongue, making the disparity between two aspects of his self-identity all the more distinct. Another major way Soto displays the narrator’s issues with his identity is by contrasting a serious and unpleasant situation with a humorous tone. In the beginning of the poem, he describes the hot, uncomfortable working conditions the narrator must endure, yet at the end of the piece, the narrator is smiling a “great, silly grin.” While the narrator recognizes that he is being stereotyped and reduced to a one-dimensional image that is usually drawn of Mexicans, he finds amusement in it, and his unexpected reaction perhaps alludes to the unpredictable ways in which minorities find a sense of belonging in a predominantly white country.

An Analysis of John Updike’s “A&P” – The Portrayal of Sammy

In John Updike’s short story, “A&P,” Updike employs the first person point of view to convey Sammy as a foolish character, for this technique allows the reader to understand the true thoughts and intentions behind Sammy’s actions.

Throughout the story, it is evident that Sammy’s decision to leave his job at the A&P is not a decision made out of bravery, but rather impetuousness and lack of forethought. For an example, it is clear that Sammy does not think of the girls as people that he must stand up for and defend, but rather, as objects and people to impress. This is exhibited when Sammy lustfully observes the girls and notes that one “never know[s] for sure how girls’ minds work,” questioning whether there is actually “a mind in there or just a little buzz” (Updike). Because he does not understand the girls, he assumes that there is nothing to understand and suggests that they are simple, brainless creatures. His actions at the end of the piece, therefore, cannot be considered courageous because it is clear he does not actually want to protect them against the judgement of Lengel, but instead wants to gain their attention. Furthermore, when he hears Queenie’s voice and imagines her decadent, wealthy lifestyle compared to his, he realizes that she and her friends must view him as he views his co-workers and the other customers in the store: as lowly, pathetic people unworthy of acknowledging. Sammy continuously refers to the customers as “sheep” and “house-slaves,” ridicules Stokesie for believing he will “be manager some sunny day,” and calls Lengel “dreary” (Updike). However, after Queenie speaks up after being reprimanded by Lengel, Sammy realizes she must think that “the crowd that runs the A&P,” which includes him, “must look pretty crummy” (Updike). Once he is aware that he is no different from these other people in the girls’ eyes, it is clear that his subsequent actions are meant to set himself apart rather than to genuinely support the girls out of nobleness of heart. Additionally, when Sammy tells Lengel that he quits, he tells him this “quick enough for [the girls] to hear” in the hopes that they will recognize him as “their unsuspected hero” (Updike). Because Updike makes the reader aware of Sammy’s true motivations- to impress the girls- it is doubtless that he intends to depict Sammy’s resignation as a careless move. Moreover, this is made evident once more when Sammy agrees in his mind with Lengel’s statement that he “[doesn’t] want to do this to [his] Mom and Dad” (Updike). Here, Sammy admits that he only continues with his decision because he thinks it looks poor not to “go through with it” (Updike). If Sammy were actually brave and valiant, he would have seen his resignation through to the end not because of pride, but because he sincerely believed in what he was standing up for and thought it worth the sacrifice. Finally, Updike’s use of the first person perspective convinces the reader of Sammy’s foolishness again at the end of the story when Sammy feels a sense of dread at realizing “how hard the world [i]s going to be to [him]” after quitting (Updike). Sammy’s regret allows the reader to understand that he realizes that his choice to quit the job that supported his family was made out of rashness and that if continued to act like this in the future, he would have to suffer for it.

Hello world!

This is your very first post. Click the Edit link to modify or delete it, or start a new post. If you like, use this post to tell readers why you started this blog and what you plan to do with it.

Happy blogging!