Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(104)
-
▼
December
(31)
- A Horse and Two Goats #4
- A Horse and Two Goats #3
- A Horse and Two Goats #2
- A Horse and Two Goats #1
- The Farewell Party #4
- The Farewell Party #3
- The Farewell Party #2
- The Farewell Party #1
- Class #5
- Class #4
- Class #3
- Class #2
- Class #1
- To the White Fiends #5
- To the White Fiends #4
- To the White Fiends #3
- To the White Fiends #2
- To the White Fiends #1
- The Negro Speaks of Rivers #4
- The Negro Speaks of Rivers #3
- The Negro Speaks of Rivers #2
- The Negro Speaks of Rivers #1
- Song of Ocol #3
- Song of Ocol #2
- Song of Ocol #1
- Black Woman #6
- Black Woman #5
- Black Woman #4
- Black Woman #3
- Black Woman #2
- Black Woman #1
-
▼
December
(31)
About Me
- Daniel Freeman
- trying to figure out most of what there is to know about most things.
Personally I don't think this poem is an effective medium for social change because it is indeed too abrasive. The poem's message does not yell out peace and equality. Instead it sounds more like "Let's go to war against these White fiends!" I mean in a sense you could imagine a young black male being inspired by this poem, but it is the wrong sort of inspiration. He will not get a sense of Black pride from hearing about black brothers getting burned, instead he will develop animosity towards White people. The cycle of hate would continue and the black people would be no better than the White fiends they so greatly despise.
ReplyDeleteOne other thing I'd like to point out "am I not Africa’s son." This statement shows the narrator separating himself from being an American and identifying himself as an African. How do you expect to see a positive social change for you and your people in a country that you do not even consider yourself a part of.
I agree with dtwelve89’s opinion because the poem indeed is too abrasive to even be remotely persuasive. The author’s backlash to how blacks were stereotyped by whites is honestly not much different than his argument of persuading blacks to do the reverse. Rather than advocating change for the sake of self-betterment, he instead wants blacks to break out of those stereotypes merely so the whites would no longer judge them in the same manner they previously did.
ReplyDeleteThis poem would likely gain notoriety from its eminent theme of nationalism, specifically in his reference to Africa. He states that he is “Africa’s son,” but offers nothing to differentiate himself from those who are not. However, this statement is a paradox because all people, regardless of race, are descendants of Africa, because life itself originated from there. In my opinion, this crude argument alone is the folly of this poem.
you do realize what was going on during this time period, right? Of course he identified with being black before being american because he was treated and made to feel exactly that way
Deletedtwelve89, "Let's go to war against these White fiends” I don’t seem to find any part in the poem that lead you to understand how this poem is pro-war. This poem is anti-war; McKAY’s point is, it is easy to go to war against the white fiends but that will just cause more violent and more death. McKAy is a religion man and his believe about life after death is even more important than life on earth. McKAY believes killing another human being is sin and the killer will “burn on the benighted earth”. In the other hand, the victim will rise to havens and live for eternity with out suffering. The main point is don’t solve violent with violent because we are better than that “For thee to prove thyself of higher worth”.
ReplyDeleteThis poem has nothing to do with him been proud American. Don’t forget he is probably first or second generation of African slave. We also know the story how Africans were forced to come to the United States through slavery. Yes! He is a son of Africa and proud African too.
Although it is certainly abrasive, it is persuasive. In the passage, "even thou shalt be a light", it seems that the author wanted to show that violence is not the answer for resolve despite facing cruel adversities of mankind. Moreover, he wanted to show that they are of higher worth, giving the reader a snapshot of the other layers of black men's dignity.
ReplyDeleteChaperones, "I don’t seem to find any part in the poem that lead you to understand how this poem is pro-war. This poem is anti-war..."
ReplyDeleteThe reasons why I felt that this poem was too abrasive and pro-war to be a medium for social change were because of the first four lines in the poem:
Think you I am not fiend and savage too?
Think you I could not arm me with a gun
And shoot down ten of you for every one
Of my black brothers murdered, burnt by you?
In the first line, the narrator is insinuating that he too can also be cruel and barbarous. Through lines 2-4, he threatens the white fiends by suggesting that if he too armed himself he would be able to take them down tenfold. Those sound like fighting words to me... Also, being a religious person does not prevent you from fighting or harming others. During the Crusades in the Middle Ages they did it all the time. Millions of people died under the blade in the name of Christianity.
The poem has little effect to change the thought of other about the issue at hand but it is a gateway to express their emotion through the line that was said. what we can see is that war has no meaning it is a way to charge people of that crime even though others have not commit to it.
ReplyDeleteHere's everything I know about war,
Somebody win,
Somebody loses,
And nothing is ever the same again.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think this poem is more potentially too abrasive to be persuasive. Social behaviors cannot be changed effectively only by a poem, but this poem might stimulate most people's feelings. It could active or encourage people's emotion or express to fight for their unequal situations. It is beneficial and effective to change people's minds. Like most revolutions, they were held within some atmospheres surrounding by people's new thoughts which are affected and stimulated by exciting literature and events.
ReplyDeleteDtwelve89, I see your point but in order to understand the message you have to examine the whole part of the poem not only the first four lines. Yes, the first four lines in the poem seem to indicator pro-war but it was just to give black people hope and empowerment. So, they don’t think themselves weak and accept what is happening to them. It is telling the people to stand for their rights. He is spreading the ideas that they can fight and win through violent war but it is not worth because war shouldn’t be the solution among God’s children.
ReplyDelete“But the Almighty from the darkness drew”
“My soul and said: Even thou shalt be light”
“Awhile to burn on the benighted earth,”
“Thy dusky face I set among the white”
“For thee to prove thyself of highest worth;”
“Before the world is swallowed up in night,”
“To show thy little lamp: go forth, go forth!”
The last seven lines in the poem explain why going to war against the white fiend is wrong. The poems real message is very similar to what Nelson Mandela did during apartheid in South Africa. What Nelson Mandela did was solve evils of Apartheid by peaceful protest and by doing so he inspired many people around the world.
War during the Crusades in the middle Ages was for religious reasons and the people at that time believed killing a person who believed in different religion was ok and it God’s command. By doing so they believed they are not going to “burn on the benighted earth.”
So don’t compare a religion believes of early 1900 to what it was like during the Middle Ages. In late 1900 most people in the United States were Christians. McKAY believed killing another human is not accepted in God’s house so he fought the violent with his words.
Chaperones, you said you couldn't find any part of the poem that would lead me believe that the poem was pro-war and I was simply trying to point out to you where I got that idea from. As for religion and the crusades, in my opinion, I believe that the same rationality that the crusaders used for killing could also be applied to the narrator going against the white fiends who he viewed to be just as wicked. However, these are all my opinions and I didn't intend on offending anyone, so I apologize if I offended you.
ReplyDeleteDtwelve89, please don’t apologize, I wasn’t offended at all. The point of the blog is to share our opinion and understanding of the readings. It is interesting how different people interpret the same poem differently.
ReplyDeleteRight on
ReplyDeleteThis poem reminds me a lot of the work that Martin Luther King, Jr. was doing in his early times as a civil rights leader. He recognized the brutality of a white supremacist system, and he rallied people to march and protest, but at the same time limited himself and his followers in the narrow understanding that religion offers to people. This poem is essentially saying, "You think I can't stand up and defend my self? Well I can! But I'm gonna leave it all in God's hands". It is why I think that this poem is not an effective medium for social change, because I believe that the people should defend and fight for their liberation by any means necessary. And should not be led to passivity and forgiveness of their oppressor when their lives and the lives of millions of people are at stake.
ReplyDelete