Post as a group or as an individual but don't forget NAMES.
Feel free to express agreement or disagreement with the analyses of the other groups/members.
The demand for your product is 300-400 words
Tuesday 29 October 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
#Analysis #Poetry #Hashtags
ReplyDeleteListen Mr. Oxford Don - By Jon Agard
Based on our collaborate analysis of this rhythmical poem, considering the deliberately use of non-standard English, along with the choice of words with multi-layered, and often violent, connotations, one could be inclined to postulate that the intended purpose of Agards writing, is not only to describe the reception of foreign language in Great Britain, but also to substantiate the problematic consequences of discrimination of any kind.
This discrimination is proven by comically addressing the supposed ignorance of immigrants, seen by the confusion of “I didn’t graduate / I immigrate”, and the subsequent literal accusation “dem accuse me of assault”. This is followed by a warning to Mr. Oxford Don “I’m a wanted man / And a wanted man / Is a dangerous one”, thus implying that allegations of unlawfulness can transform innocent men into criminals.
However, I do believe, that the main point of this poem, is to disprove the idiom: “words are wind”.
By stating “…human breath / is a dangerous weapon” and “making de Queen’s English accessory / to my offence” he figuratively turns words into weapons.
Furthermore, by propagating through the lips of certain speakers, words can transcend conventional weapons and effectively become more world altering than nuclear warheads.
William McFeely.
Susanne
ReplyDeleteA brutal choice of words
The message of a context or the message in a piece of poetry depends on the words written in the text. The words function can be manipulating, convincing or written to scare and threat the readers, it is also a good method to deliver someone a love message even describe nature and live in general. John Agard was born in British Guyana in 1949. In 1979 he moved to England as an immigrant. In 1986, he wrote the poem, Listen Mr Oxford don. Today, twenty seven years later, John Agard, still gets to the reader. The purpose of writing the poem might be an opportunity to defend the immigrants and their mother tongue. Just because you come from another country and the fact that you have to learn a new language, it can never remove the roots from the past and make people forget where they actually came from.
John Agard’s poem, Listen Mr Oxford don, is a picture of the battle between his mother tongue and the difficulties many immigrants bumps into whenever they leave their homeland to settle down far away from home, a new country, a new culture, a new language, laws and traditions.
The verbal battle involves the English language and his mother tongue.
I have chosen some outlines of the poem as evidence, to prove this verbal war going on.
P. 15, l. 4-5:”I didn’t graduate- I immigrate”(missing the letter d) it was in his previous life.
P. 15, l. 11-12:”I ent have no gun- I ent have no knife”( the spelling is not right)
p. 15, l. 26-27:”Dem accuse me of assault- on de Oxford dictionary. (Dem, is a wrong pronoun, they, is the correct word. These lines also leave an impression that he is at war with himself, his mother tongue and the Oxford dictionary)
p. 16, l. 4-7:”I’m not a violent man Mr Oxford don, I only armed wit mih human breath, but human breath, is a dangerous weapon.” (once again we have an example of war which includes both the language, J.A’s inner rebellion and the third part, his mother tongue)
John Agard’s purpose by writing this poem is to show that the power of language lies within the words. The violence and the brutality of the message, is to be found between the lines. Furthermore, war does not have to be a physical matter when it can be verbal.
Listen Mr. Oxford Don – By Jon Agard , 1965
ReplyDeleteJohn Agard is an immigrant from Clapham common, and he criticizes the English language and their nation. He has written a rhythmical poem, with a lot of grammar errors. The way he has used so many grammar errors is demeaning. The way the rhythm is created is very interesting. Unusualness captures people’s attention and that is his purpose. He wants to be noticed and tell that he is dissatisfied. We get an impression, that he hasn’t bin treated right. This discrimination is shown with a comically tone.
He says, “I don’t need no hammer, to mash/up your grammar”. He describes his feelings violently. But, he don’t use violent or object to send his message. Words are his kind of weapons, but also his personal defense.
The most important and notable thing are the power of language. He uses imagery to display that his words are just as dangerous as much as real weapons. But basically he is making fun of the English language. He doesn’t want to be so distinguished. There is a kind of fight or battle between him and the English people. Like he writes on page 15, line 26 “Dem accuse me of assault”. There is a kind of anger, but he shows it in a comical way.
His purpose is to show, that he is tired of the “perfect language”, so he is making of it.
Debbie.
Tracy & Dennis
ReplyDeleteListen Mr. Oxford Don - By Jon Agard
In the poem, Agard is not grammatically correct and it is on purpose. When you read the poem you can see right away that he is an immigrant. He want’s to show how powerful language is.
In the poem Agard uses a lot of words that are connected to language as a system. He mentions “grammar” and “dictionary” to really make it clear that he has a problem with how the “Queen’s English” only has one correct way to be spoken. He attacks the language and uses words as weapons by using words such as “mugging”, “assault” and “armed”. He uses these aggressive words as a metaphor for how he is purposely speaking English grammatically wrong, and thinks it is okay to do so.
As an immigrant he is probably tired of people making fun of him when he is not grammatically correct, so he decides that being an immigrant is nothing to be ashamed of. He could also be using the violent words because he is angry and because people are not only making fun of immigrants but are also being physically violent against them.
Listen MR Oxford don, John Agard, 1985
ReplyDeleteWhen you read the poem, the first thing you will notice is the poor grammar. It is not a mistake, but a cleverly used tool Agard uses to make his point clear. Agard is rebelling against "de Queen's English" (p. 1, l. 12), in other words he is rebelling against the division in classes. As he mentions in his poem, he is himself an immigrant. "I didn't graduate I immigrate" (p. 1, l. 4-5) the reason he mentions this, is to make it clear who/ what he is rebelling against.
Even though he is rebelling, he doesn't want it to end in violence. "I ent have no knife but mugging de Queen's English is the story of my life" (p. 1, l. 13-15) Instead he uses his words. But to make it clear that the poem is at rebellion, he uses a lot of aggressive words such as knife, dangerous and riot. He uses these words to threaten, but instead of threatening a single group or a single person, he threatens the English Language. The reason he is threatening the English language, is to say in a clever way "the pen is mightier than the sword". He knows that with violence or an actual rebellion, he would get thrown in jail, and then his point would not get out there. But with his rebellion on paper and in a performance, it would get out and maybe do a difference.
Some will find the poem and his performance annoying; others will think that it is a clever way to get his point out there. No matter what you think of the poem, you will remember it because of the way it is written and because of the way he performs the poem.
Daniel Allermann
Emil:
ReplyDeleteIn his poem “Oxford don” John Agard puts focus on the language problem of immigrants by deliberately misspelling and using incorrect grammar. This can be seen as an opposition to the point we see in the movie "Pygmalion" where the "oxford don" is attacking the Americans and the lower classes of British society because their language is not "English"
Agard’s point is that despite the fact that it was incorrect and sounds weird people are capable of understanding the poem otherwise we would not have been able to "translate" it into "proper" English. In other words complaining about misspelling is only possible if you comprehend the sentences - which means that whoever uses this "incorrect" English has made themselves understood despite having trouble with dialect, grammar or spelling. I believe that as long as you make yourself understood you can build on the language from that point.
Agard complains that people complain about the language skills of immigrants whereas I believe the complaint is perfectly reasonable. Refugees surviving with bare minimum language skills are fine but immigrants usually chose to move and expecting proper language skills is only natural
Amir:
ReplyDeleteFirst and maybe most obvious, I notice that he doesn’t use proper English, but that I believe is intentional. For the majority of the poem he keeps each stanza to about four lines long, and each line not containing many words, with the exception of a few. I notice that there is some rhythm in it. The rhythm comes with the last lines of the stanza and has to do with the last few words in the line. This is definitely type of poem that I haven’t read much of, this is a “clever” type poem using language to cut, and shape the poem so you really have to think and analyze. But because this type of poem is not something you find everyday I like it. It’s refreshing for me to read another kind of poetry and exercise the mind.
Looking at John Agard’s use of rules, I think that he controls it well. The reason I say this is because the language isn’t perfect, but the key part is the form of the essay, which in this case is just fine, being in stanza-line form. As for the tone of the poem, I think that it is more of a “what are you going to do to me” type. The reason I say this is because I think what the poem is trying to say is that he knows the language and he can use it anyway he wants and just because he uses it differently from everyone else, he gets convicted. But that’s the beauty of the language, that you can use it in anyway you want to form, what you want to say, and no one can do a thing about it. I think this poem is talking to anyone that thinks that there is only one way to form the English language and feels anything else is a disgrace to it. He starts off telling who he is, then he tells a short story, in that story he is telling what he’s all about and what he thinks, and by the end of the poem there’s nothing more to say. He left the other side to respond.
Christian Lykke Nielsen:
ReplyDeleteLanguage is a weapon and John Agard tries to emphasize this analogy in his poem: “Listen Mr Oxford don” from 1985. He uses aggressive words like gun, knife, dangerous and riot to make his intention stronger. Because of his past, he uses incorrect grammar to point out the most significant passages in his poem. By using difficult grammatical terms, he wants the reader to see the comparisons between violent weapons and difficult terms from the Oxford Dictionary of English. He makes this comparison to proof his idea that ‘Language is a weapon’, and to proof that when something is written, you cannot fight it no matter what you do. On the other hand, if you use a weapon, people will fight back. This gives language an advantage according to John Agard.
Mie
ReplyDeleteWhen you read this poem for the first time, it might be very difficult to read, but this is not a mistake from John Agard. In this poem John Agard is using poor English language to his advantage, and makes the reader have to think and analyze every single word to be able to get the point across.
This is to put focus on the problem of immigrants English, and deliberately using poor spelling and bad grammar. He is using this poor English in a very clever way, almost saying that he can use the English language anyway he wants and no one can stop him, standing up for those immigrants who can’t stand up for themselves. This is also a way of being rebellious towards how things should be, and leaving this poem for the people with a one track mind towards the English language, to get some sort of response from them. In the poem he is using words that is associated with language fx. Grammar, present tense and syntax which really shows what this poem is about and makes it clear that he has a problem with the proper English language or the ‘’Queen’s english’’ as he refers to it.
He is using this poem to also point out that even though the language that these immigrants speak is incorrect, people can still understand it otherwise they wouldn’t be able to correct the misspelling and wrong grammar. Agard is an immigrant himself, which he points out in the poem, and this just makes his point even clearer because it is a problem that he had to deal with himself.
Rasmus B
ReplyDeleteJohn Agard is an immigrant from Clapham common and he has written a rhythmical poem to criticize the English language and the community of pre-colonized people, meaning the people who feel superior compared to immigrants, the Oxford Dons. He does this by using a lot of grammar mistakes. The way he does this is to bring words into the poem that creates hostility to the creators of the English language. The use of “new” words changes the English language to become foreign.
Due to his unusual use of various misspelled words such as ‘ent’ and ‘dem’. Most words in the poem ‘Listen Mr. Oxford Don’ by John Agard are spelled incorrect, though with an accent from the southern states they will sound identical to regular English and is not noticeable. ‘’I don’t need no hammer, to mash up yu grammar’’ (p. 1, L. 16-17) this quote is very violent but he is threatening the English language by changing the grammar. The use of grammar change makes John use it as a “weapon”. A weapon developed by their own creation. The most important thing is the power of language. He uses imagery to show us that the words as just as dangerous as any other weapon. Though John believes that language is an advantage. If you use guns in a real battle they will strike back, if it gets written down they cannot do anything. The statement he makes us see clearly in the text is that language is in fact a weapon, to support this statement he uses violent words such as knife, gun and riot. But at the same time he is mocking the English language and its nationality.
The purpose of the poem from John Agard is to tell us that he is tired of the perfect language and therefore he makes fun of it.
John Agard has a unique and very energetic way of perform his poems. He combines social observation and do it with a funny and thrilling effect. He touches issues such as cultural differences, class divisions and racial stereotypes.
ReplyDeleteHis poems are also about freedom, cultural rights and the power of being who you are. By using very dark, and ironic humor the message of his text gets through. The grammar in his poem is not correct, but it is on purpose, because he wants to make it personal. He is an immigrant, who wants to show the world how language can effect us. He kind of criticize the language, by using words such as ‘’weapon’’, ‘’mugging’’ and ‘’armed’’.
The words are metaphors, for how he feels about the ‘’queen English’’ I think he is tired of people making fun and mugging him, for being a immigrant, and by this poem he just shows that he isn’t ashamed of who he is.
Matilde og Frederik :D
Maria:
ReplyDeleteWhen you read the poem”listen mr. Oxford Don” by John Agard for the first time, you might notice that the poem isn’t written in proper English. Actually, the opposite. It’s easy to see, how misspellings and incorrectly grammar is taking place. John is using a lot of words that are connected to the word language, such as “dictionary”, “grammar” and so on. The most important and notable thing are the power of language. Agard uses imagery to display that his words are just as dangerous as much as real weapons:
“I don’t need no axe
To split/ up yu syntaxe
I don’t need no hammer
To split up your grammar”
The beginning of the poem contains a touch of violence. By the use of weapon in his poem, he sounds very violent and it’s like he is attacking the proper English language. The poem is a critic of the English people, who complains about the language skills of immigrants.
trg
ReplyDeleteMr oxford don is a good poem ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) it is something that I even read more than once. I am thanking anyone who laughs at this when they read it
ReplyDelete