On the surface, Harry Chapin’s song The Rock appears to be a very simplistic story. Upon closer reading and examination of the specific language use by Chapin, quite the opposite is true.
I initially approached the song by highlighting, underlining and making notes of the specific language use by Chapin to represent the rock. He uses such denotative terms as “tumble”, “ground”, “falling”, “hill”, street”, “mountain”, “giant”, “stone”, “ledge”, “crushed”, “crumbling” and “dust” which give the reader very concrete images of the rock. Chapin also incorporates various connotative terms such as “dark”, “hundred thousand years”, “braces”, “prop”, “stop” and “still” to suggest to the reader that there is a deeper meaning to “the rock”. Examining the language in this way opened up many ideas about the song, but I was still unable to organize one focused interpretation. That is until I kept returning to a certain couplet in the song, one which I refer to throughout as the “central couplet”.
In my opinion, the couplet
Everybody knows the rock leans over the town
Everybody knows that it won’t tumble to the ground
is key to understanding Chapin’s message. As much as I would analyze the words and expressions in the song, I was always drawn back to this “simple” couplet. In the first verse, the central couplet is followed by
Remember Chicken Little said the sky was falling down
Well nothing ever came of that, the world still whirls around.
Chapin compares the central couplet to a children’s story, thus giving us an approximate age of the main character. In the first verse, he is labelled “Silly child”. In the second verse, the central couplet is followed by
We’ve more important studies than your fantasies and fears
You know that rock’s been perched up there for a hundred thousand years.
Chapin compares the central couplet to a school geography lesson, pointing out the age of the rock and using the term “studies”. This gives us an approximate age of the main character. In the second verse, he is labelled “Crazy boy”. In the third verse, the central couplet is followed by
Everybody knows of those who say the end is near
Everybody knows that life goes on as usual round here.
In this couplet, Chapin makes no comparison but comes out and states the meaning of his central couplet. Such an approach is adult, and thus gives us an approximate age of the main character. In this case, the main character is labelled “madman”.
Chapin uses language effectively to present metaphor in his song The Rock. Chapin’s “rock” is actually a symbol of death. The concept of death looming over us is presented as a rock perched dangerously over the town, ready to fall at any time. This is an excellent image as the term “rock” carries such connotations as “lifeless”, “unmoveable”, and “hard”. Such descriptions are also representative of death. Chapin makes a very profound connection between the rock and death when he describes the moving rock as “crumbling all to dust”. Another dark image of death is seen in the line “The people ran into the street but by then all was still”. The use of the word “still” again implies lifelessness or unmoving as death itself would suggest.
Again, I return to the central couplet in the song to provide a thoughtful metaphor of death and our perceptions of death.
Everybody knows the rock leans over the town
Everybody knows that it won’t tumble to the ground
In this couplet, Chapin’s message is that we are all aware that death is an eventuality, a rock which “leans over the town”, but that we have a sense of immortality that it will not happen to us, that “it won’t tumble to the ground”. In the first two verses, the message is the same but compared to a children’s story and school work to give us an approximate age of the main character. Chapin repeats his message in the third verse, but much more concretely as he states that “life goes an as usual”, that even adults do not believe that death is looming over them.
Chapin also uses his song to present the idea of personal sacrifice. The song reaches a climax when, just as the rock is about to fall and take a life (or lives), the main character sacrifices himself for others.
He ran under it with one last hope that he could add a prop
And as he disappeared the rock came to a stop.
These lines suggest that the main character feels that if death is to take somebody, then it should be him. Thus, he uses himself as a “prop”. As a result, “the rock came to a stop” and death is satisfied for the time being. Chapin’s use of the word “prop” suggests that the main character “props” (denotative) up the rock to stop it, but is himself a “prop” (symbol) in his life.
Another interesting use of language in the song is in others’ perceptions of the main character. His idea of impending doom or death is met with opposition and he is labelled “silly”, “crazy”, “madman”, “insane”, “fool” and “daft”. The main character’s death is implied when he is described as “gone” and the people refer to him in the past tense “Oh he was daft.” In this way, the people is his life can also be symbolized by the rock as they are as “unfeeling” as a rock as they label him and laugh, unaware of the sacrifice he has made. The image of the people laughing and moving on again suggest that, for these people, “life goes on as usual around here” and death is not something to think about yet, even as “The rock slips a little bit.”
I intentionally referred to the song earlier as a “simplistic story” and, on the surface, it is. Chapin does an extraordinary job combining the elements of the language levels – denotation, connotation, image/simile/metaphor, and symbol to transform his story into one with a very powerful message.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Dead Poets Society and the Ontario Senior English Curriculum (Final Draft)
Dead Poets Society and the Ontario Senior English Curriculum
The film Dead Poets Society is impressive in its portrayal of contrasting pedagogies and invites serious discussion of the Ontario Curriculum for Senior English. The film pits the overly structured approach of Welton Academy’s established educators against the more liberal teaching style of John Keating. On the surface, it appears as though we are to choose one teaching approach that works best; we may choose a structured, conservative strategy in the classroom or an open, liberal approach. However, success is found through incorporating elements of both the conservative and liberal teaching approaches. This is evident in Ontario’s Senior English Curriculum 2007.
One of the principles underlying the English curriculum is that successful learners “make meaningful connections between themselves, what they encounter in texts, and the world around them”. In Dead Poets Society we see much prescribed, structured lessons and instructions evident during the science and trigonometry classes. The instruction of Latin relies on repetition and rote learning. As such, students are not engaged and making meaningful connections. Such an approach is representative of a pedagogy that relies on traditional teacher-directed instruction and highly prescribed lessons and instructional strategies. In contrast, the students of John Keating are instantly drawn into the poetry lesson because he makes it meaningful and relevant to them. Keating’s bizarre introduction with a quote from Walt Whitman, his discussion and consideration of the photos of past students and his mantra of “Carpe Diem!” peaks the students’ curiosity and interest. Keating's approach is representative of a liberal pedagogy which encourages students to "think outside the box" and become free, independent and critical thinkers. The expectations in Ontario’s Senior English Curriculum are quite explicit that students are active, contributing members of their learning.
Another important principle underlying the English curriculum is that learners “understand that all texts advance a particular point of view that must be recognized, questioned, assessed and evaluated”. This principle is crucial to developing independent and critical thinkers. In the film, Dead Poets Society, the headmaster and teachers laud the success of the school’s academic achievements, citing the numbers who go on to complete university educations. Strict academic numbers appears to be the goal of Welton Academy and not the development of independent and critical thinkers. John Keating strives to instill in his students a passion and appreciation of poetry, and of learning in general. Keating invites his students to stand atop his desk and view a different perspective of the class. Although eccentric, this simple lesson is quite valuable in that students appreciate that there is more than one way to view a particular point. Students are free and welcome to express opinions and thoughts in the classroom, even when they go against the norm.
Though Keating’s approach is effective and valuable, it is by no means free of hypocrisy. Despite efforts to have students welcome, discuss and evaluate different viewpoints, Keating himself misses a teachable moment when he criticizes Pritchard’s essay “Understanding Poetry” and orders his class to rip the entire introduction from the textbook and throw the “excrement” in the garbage. In this way, Keating himself appears to fall into the traditional, conservative pedagogy of directing rather than guiding the students' thoughts and/or actions. Ontario’s Senior English Curriculum also states that “instructional strategies and resources that recognize and reflect the diversity in the classroom and that suit individual strengths and needs are therefore critical to student success.” It is important to note that students each have different learning styles, strengths and needs and we are to account for these differing styles, build on their strengths and guide them in times of need. Although climactic and successful in the film, Keating’s centering out and pushing of a quiet student to loudly deliver an original poem in front of the class does not take into consideration the student’s individual learning style, strengths or needs. Such a strategy of centering out and pressuring to perform is representative of the conservative pedagogy of the past.
The Ontario Senior English Curriculum incorporates the differing pedagogies with the goal of developing thoughtful, successful world citizens. The expectations encourage educators to utilize a variety of approaches to keep students engaged and interested. Students are safe to offer different perspectives and offer alternative ways of thinking. Students’ learning styles, strengths and needs are carefully considered as the curriculum requires students to select some of the texts they read and to decide on the topic, purpose and audience for some of the works they produce. John Keating would be proud! The curriculum, however, does not devalue the traditional approaches nor write them off entirely. There are times when a prescribed, structured approach is necessary. Students have opportunities to choose materials and topics, yet much of the curriculum is prescribed. In addition, students are assessed and evaluated in a formulaic manner based on achievement of the prescribed curriculum expectations. This is very reminiscent of the teachers’ stern instructions on course expectations and evaluation early in the film Dead Poets Society. Success for both the learner and the teacher comes from a careful balance of both conservative and liberal teaching methodologies. In essence, we are both Headmaster and Keating to our students.
The film Dead Poets Society is impressive in its portrayal of contrasting pedagogies and invites serious discussion of the Ontario Curriculum for Senior English. The film pits the overly structured approach of Welton Academy’s established educators against the more liberal teaching style of John Keating. On the surface, it appears as though we are to choose one teaching approach that works best; we may choose a structured, conservative strategy in the classroom or an open, liberal approach. However, success is found through incorporating elements of both the conservative and liberal teaching approaches. This is evident in Ontario’s Senior English Curriculum 2007.
One of the principles underlying the English curriculum is that successful learners “make meaningful connections between themselves, what they encounter in texts, and the world around them”. In Dead Poets Society we see much prescribed, structured lessons and instructions evident during the science and trigonometry classes. The instruction of Latin relies on repetition and rote learning. As such, students are not engaged and making meaningful connections. Such an approach is representative of a pedagogy that relies on traditional teacher-directed instruction and highly prescribed lessons and instructional strategies. In contrast, the students of John Keating are instantly drawn into the poetry lesson because he makes it meaningful and relevant to them. Keating’s bizarre introduction with a quote from Walt Whitman, his discussion and consideration of the photos of past students and his mantra of “Carpe Diem!” peaks the students’ curiosity and interest. Keating's approach is representative of a liberal pedagogy which encourages students to "think outside the box" and become free, independent and critical thinkers. The expectations in Ontario’s Senior English Curriculum are quite explicit that students are active, contributing members of their learning.
Another important principle underlying the English curriculum is that learners “understand that all texts advance a particular point of view that must be recognized, questioned, assessed and evaluated”. This principle is crucial to developing independent and critical thinkers. In the film, Dead Poets Society, the headmaster and teachers laud the success of the school’s academic achievements, citing the numbers who go on to complete university educations. Strict academic numbers appears to be the goal of Welton Academy and not the development of independent and critical thinkers. John Keating strives to instill in his students a passion and appreciation of poetry, and of learning in general. Keating invites his students to stand atop his desk and view a different perspective of the class. Although eccentric, this simple lesson is quite valuable in that students appreciate that there is more than one way to view a particular point. Students are free and welcome to express opinions and thoughts in the classroom, even when they go against the norm.
Though Keating’s approach is effective and valuable, it is by no means free of hypocrisy. Despite efforts to have students welcome, discuss and evaluate different viewpoints, Keating himself misses a teachable moment when he criticizes Pritchard’s essay “Understanding Poetry” and orders his class to rip the entire introduction from the textbook and throw the “excrement” in the garbage. In this way, Keating himself appears to fall into the traditional, conservative pedagogy of directing rather than guiding the students' thoughts and/or actions. Ontario’s Senior English Curriculum also states that “instructional strategies and resources that recognize and reflect the diversity in the classroom and that suit individual strengths and needs are therefore critical to student success.” It is important to note that students each have different learning styles, strengths and needs and we are to account for these differing styles, build on their strengths and guide them in times of need. Although climactic and successful in the film, Keating’s centering out and pushing of a quiet student to loudly deliver an original poem in front of the class does not take into consideration the student’s individual learning style, strengths or needs. Such a strategy of centering out and pressuring to perform is representative of the conservative pedagogy of the past.
The Ontario Senior English Curriculum incorporates the differing pedagogies with the goal of developing thoughtful, successful world citizens. The expectations encourage educators to utilize a variety of approaches to keep students engaged and interested. Students are safe to offer different perspectives and offer alternative ways of thinking. Students’ learning styles, strengths and needs are carefully considered as the curriculum requires students to select some of the texts they read and to decide on the topic, purpose and audience for some of the works they produce. John Keating would be proud! The curriculum, however, does not devalue the traditional approaches nor write them off entirely. There are times when a prescribed, structured approach is necessary. Students have opportunities to choose materials and topics, yet much of the curriculum is prescribed. In addition, students are assessed and evaluated in a formulaic manner based on achievement of the prescribed curriculum expectations. This is very reminiscent of the teachers’ stern instructions on course expectations and evaluation early in the film Dead Poets Society. Success for both the learner and the teacher comes from a careful balance of both conservative and liberal teaching methodologies. In essence, we are both Headmaster and Keating to our students.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Dead Poets Society and the Ontario Senior English Curriculum
Tony Janes
EDUC 9M20
Robert McLaughlin
June 23, 2009
Dead Poets Society and the Ontario Senior English Curriculum
The film Dead Poets Society is impressive in its portrayal of contrasting pedagogies and invites serious discussion of the Ontario Curriculum for Senior English. The film pits the overly structured approach of Welton Academy’s established educators against the more liberal teaching style of John Keating. On the surface, it appears as though we are to choose one teaching approach that works best; however, success is found through incorporating elements of both the conservative and liberal teaching approaches. This is evident in Ontario’s Senior English Curriculum 2007.
One of the principles underlying the English curriculum is that successful learners “make meaningful connections between themselves, what they encounter in texts, and the world around them”. In Dead Poets Society we see much prescribed, structured lessons and instructions evident during the science and trigonometry classes. The instruction of Latin relies on repetition and rote learning. As such, students are not engaged and making meaningful connections. In contrast, the students of John Keating are instantly drawn into the poetry lesson because he makes it meaningful and relevant to them. Keating’s bizarre introduction with a quote from Walt Whitman, his discussion and consideration of the photos of past students and his mantra of “Carpe Diem!” peaks the students’ curiosity and interest. The expectations in Ontario’s Senior English Curriculum are quite explicit that students are active, contributing members of their learning.
Another important principle underlying the English curriculum is that learners “understand that all texts advance a particular point of view that must be recognized, questioned, assessed and evaluated”. This principle is crucial to developing independent and critical thinkers. In the film, Dead Poets Society, the headmaster and teachers laud the success of the school’s academic achievements, citing the numbers who go on to complete university educations. Strict academic numbers appears to be the goal of Welton Academy and not the development of independent and critical thinkers. John Keating strives to instil in his students a passion and appreciation of poetry, and of learning in general. Keating invites his students to stand atop his desk and view a different perspective of the class. Although eccentric, this simple lesson is quite valuable in that students appreciate that there is more than one way to view a particular point. Students are free and welcome to express opinions and thoughts in the classroom, even when they go against the norm.
Though Keating’s approach is effective and valuable, it is by no means free of hypocrisy. Despite efforts to have students welcome, discuss and evaluate different viewpoints, Keating himself misses a teachable moment when he criticizes Pritchard’s essay “Understanding Poetry” and orders his class to rip the entire introduction from the textbook and throw the “excrement” in the garbage. Ontario’s Senior English Curriculum also states that “instructional strategies and resources that recognize and reflect the diversity in the classroom and that suit individual strengths and needs are therefore critical to student success.” It is important to note that students each have different learning styles, strengths and needs and we are to account for these differing styles, build on their strengths and guide them in times of need. Although climactic and successful in the film, Keating’s centering out and pushing of a quiet student to loudly deliver an original poem in front of the class does not take into consideration the student’s individual learning style, strengths or needs.
The Ontario Senior English Curriculum incorporates the differing pedagogies with the goal of developing thoughtful, successful world citizens. The expectations encourage educators to utilize a variety of approaches to keep students engaged and interested. Students are safe to offer different perspectives and offer alternative ways of thinking. Students’ learning styles, strengths and needs are carefully considered as the curriculum requires students to select some of the texts they read and to decide on the topic, purpose and audience for some of the works they produce. John Keating would be proud! The curriculum, however, does not devalue the traditional approaches nor write them off entirely. There are times when a prescribed, structured approach is necessary. Students have opportunities to choose materials and topics, yet much of the curriculum is prescribed. In addition, students are assessed and evaluated in a formulaic manner based on achievement of the prescribed curriculum expectations. This is very reminiscent of the teachers’ stern instructions on course expectations and evaluation early in the film Dead Poets Society. Success for both the learner and the teacher comes from a careful balance of both conservative and liberal teaching methodologies. In essence, we are both Headmaster and Keating to our students.
EDUC 9M20
Robert McLaughlin
June 23, 2009
Dead Poets Society and the Ontario Senior English Curriculum
The film Dead Poets Society is impressive in its portrayal of contrasting pedagogies and invites serious discussion of the Ontario Curriculum for Senior English. The film pits the overly structured approach of Welton Academy’s established educators against the more liberal teaching style of John Keating. On the surface, it appears as though we are to choose one teaching approach that works best; however, success is found through incorporating elements of both the conservative and liberal teaching approaches. This is evident in Ontario’s Senior English Curriculum 2007.
One of the principles underlying the English curriculum is that successful learners “make meaningful connections between themselves, what they encounter in texts, and the world around them”. In Dead Poets Society we see much prescribed, structured lessons and instructions evident during the science and trigonometry classes. The instruction of Latin relies on repetition and rote learning. As such, students are not engaged and making meaningful connections. In contrast, the students of John Keating are instantly drawn into the poetry lesson because he makes it meaningful and relevant to them. Keating’s bizarre introduction with a quote from Walt Whitman, his discussion and consideration of the photos of past students and his mantra of “Carpe Diem!” peaks the students’ curiosity and interest. The expectations in Ontario’s Senior English Curriculum are quite explicit that students are active, contributing members of their learning.
Another important principle underlying the English curriculum is that learners “understand that all texts advance a particular point of view that must be recognized, questioned, assessed and evaluated”. This principle is crucial to developing independent and critical thinkers. In the film, Dead Poets Society, the headmaster and teachers laud the success of the school’s academic achievements, citing the numbers who go on to complete university educations. Strict academic numbers appears to be the goal of Welton Academy and not the development of independent and critical thinkers. John Keating strives to instil in his students a passion and appreciation of poetry, and of learning in general. Keating invites his students to stand atop his desk and view a different perspective of the class. Although eccentric, this simple lesson is quite valuable in that students appreciate that there is more than one way to view a particular point. Students are free and welcome to express opinions and thoughts in the classroom, even when they go against the norm.
Though Keating’s approach is effective and valuable, it is by no means free of hypocrisy. Despite efforts to have students welcome, discuss and evaluate different viewpoints, Keating himself misses a teachable moment when he criticizes Pritchard’s essay “Understanding Poetry” and orders his class to rip the entire introduction from the textbook and throw the “excrement” in the garbage. Ontario’s Senior English Curriculum also states that “instructional strategies and resources that recognize and reflect the diversity in the classroom and that suit individual strengths and needs are therefore critical to student success.” It is important to note that students each have different learning styles, strengths and needs and we are to account for these differing styles, build on their strengths and guide them in times of need. Although climactic and successful in the film, Keating’s centering out and pushing of a quiet student to loudly deliver an original poem in front of the class does not take into consideration the student’s individual learning style, strengths or needs.
The Ontario Senior English Curriculum incorporates the differing pedagogies with the goal of developing thoughtful, successful world citizens. The expectations encourage educators to utilize a variety of approaches to keep students engaged and interested. Students are safe to offer different perspectives and offer alternative ways of thinking. Students’ learning styles, strengths and needs are carefully considered as the curriculum requires students to select some of the texts they read and to decide on the topic, purpose and audience for some of the works they produce. John Keating would be proud! The curriculum, however, does not devalue the traditional approaches nor write them off entirely. There are times when a prescribed, structured approach is necessary. Students have opportunities to choose materials and topics, yet much of the curriculum is prescribed. In addition, students are assessed and evaluated in a formulaic manner based on achievement of the prescribed curriculum expectations. This is very reminiscent of the teachers’ stern instructions on course expectations and evaluation early in the film Dead Poets Society. Success for both the learner and the teacher comes from a careful balance of both conservative and liberal teaching methodologies. In essence, we are both Headmaster and Keating to our students.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
My profile
My name is Tony Janes and I currently teach French at St. George-German Public School in St. George, ON. My qualifications are in the Intermediate & Senior Divisions with majors in both English and French. I have also followed courses in Linguistics throughout my university program. I am originally from Newfoundland and have been living in Cambridge for about 12 years. The irony of a Newfoundlander with an English major and enrolled in a course to teach English to Ontario's youth is not lost on me! I love English (both Literature and Language); however, when you are qualified to teach French you usually get roped in pretty quickly and can remain so for some time. Thus, I am a Core French teacher at a great elementary school with aspirations of someday teaching English at the secondary level.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)