Duffy's testing reply to critics
You've probably read the flurry of press coverage the followed our earlier blog post and the subsequent article in BBC News Online. To recap, exam board AQA removed a poem, Education for Leisure, from a GCSE anthology because of concerns over knife crime.
The Guardian moves the story on with a good scoop. A poem writen by Carol Ann Duffy in reply to those who called for Education for Leisure to be removed from the AQA GCSE Anthology. In Mrs Schofield's GCSE (Invigilator Pat Schofield's complaint triggered the poem's removal), Duffy opens with, "You must prepare your bosom for his knife, said Portia to Antonio in which of Shakespeare's Comedies? ", and continues with a series of questions inviting the reader to remember that there are stabbings and murders aplenty in Shakespeare's work (which remains part of the curriculum).
As a special treat for iPM blog readers, some post-GCSE students from Southwark College kindly agreed to act out scenes from Shakespeare containing elements of what I suppose we can call "knife crime". We recorded these on Thursday, and because of time constraints we weren't able to feature them on the show, but the scenes, first from MacBeth, then Romeo and Juliet, do answer some of the questions posed in Duffy's second poem.
| Add IPM Radio4's channel to your page |
In iPM tonight, for context, you'll hear Education for Leisure, the original poem by Carol Ann Duffy at the centre of the row, beautifully read by iPM'er Ruby Wright. If you miss the broadcast you can read it below:
Education for Leisure
Today I am going to kill something. Anything.
I have had enough of being ignored and today
I am going to play God. It is an ordinary day,
a sort of grey with boredom stirring in the streets
I squash a fly against the window with my thumb.
We did that at school. Shakespeare. It was in
another language and now the fly is in another language.
I breathe out talent on the glass to write my name.
I am a genius. I could be anything at all, with half
the chance. But today I am going to change the world.
Something's world. The cat avoids me. The cat
knows I am a genius, and has hidden itself.
I pour the goldfish down the bog. I pull the chain.
I see that it is good. The budgie is panicking.
Once a fortnight, I walk the two miles into town
For signing on. They don't appreciate my autograph.
There is nothing left to kill. I dial the radio
and tell the man he's talking to a superstar.
He cuts me off. I get our bread-knife and go out.
The pavements glitter suddenly. I touch your arm.
`Education for Leisure' is taken from `Standing Female Nude' by Carol Ann Duffy published by Anvil Press Poetry in 1985
We covered the story thanks to an email from English teacher Becky Silver. In the player below you can hear her talk about her reaction to the news in the player below.
| Add IPM Radio4's channel to your page |
On the programme tonight you'll hear the views of Andrew Motion the Poet Laureate, Pat Schofield,and reactions from some young people in South London.
Email us
Our Twitter
Join our Facebook group
Listen to iPM
Technorati
Google
Ice Rocket
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~15~RS~)
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
I am sure I won't be alone in teaching Education for Leisure as a stand-alone poem to my GCSE students anyway.
In fact, I'm going a stage further and photocopying the page of the Anthology, blowing it up, and fixing it to my wall - with exemplar annotations identifying the poetic techniques and critical approaches it offers.
I rather think that this will be my 'way in' to poetry with my Year 10 students - replacing my current 'way in' text, Larkin's This Be the Verse..!
Complain about this comment
Arguments about knife fights in Macbeth are irrelevant. This is too much of a justification of anti social behaviour. The exam boards' anthologies are very little about quality writing and very much about propaganda for multiculturalism and feminism. They've always expected students to adopt their views and there's no reason why this poem should be any different.
Complain about this comment
As an English teacher I am very depressed that the critics of this poem obviously believe that the way we teach such a poem is to stick it in front of the poor students and just expect them to understand it. Actually most of them do actually "get" this poem with only a little help, but to those who complain that teenagers need guidance in understanding it - what do you think the teachers are for, for goodness' sake? Surely now teenagers will be deprived of the opportunity to discuss this poem in class with appropriate guidance, but may still come across it by chance without the support of their teacher. How is that better?
Complain about this comment
I am absolutely appalled by the failure of so many so-called critics to actually understand Duffy's powerful and extremely simple message. The whole point of the piece is that the failure of the education system to cater for the disadvantaged or disaffected so dismissed by one of your speakers may lead to violence. How can any human being be so short-sighted as to dismiss a clearly intelligent but non-conformist victim of standardised, Victorian-style education as having too much self-esteem? As someone just out of my A Levels, I know just how stultifying and limiting our Literature curriculum is, particularly with regards to discussing topics relevant to GCSE-level students. Yes, My Last Duchess is a beautiful and challenging poem, but it is hardly the best route to engage disaffected 15-year-olds trapped in an oppressive system that they have no desire to attend. Education For Leisure was a brief beacon of hope in my GCSE group that provided an opportunity for a sophisticated and honest discussion between individuals of vastly different interests and backgrounds about a subject they could actually engage with; do critics of the poem really think that the best way to get people involved in literature is to force them to discuss the decadence of the French aristocracy (The Laboratory). Besides, if we are to find EFL offensive and encouraging violence, where do we stop? Why is this worse than, say, Armitage's November which I also studied, which is a horrific portrayal of the elderly? Surely this must encourage disrespect for our elders! Oh wait! No it doesn't! Why? Because the poem illustrates the atrocity of such attitudes, just as EFL highlights the absurdity of a culture wherein the capable are failed by governmental systems. Besides, if we're going to censor violent crime, you'd better take off every Shakespeare play ever written, Of Mice And Men, Jane Eyre...good luck with creating such a syllabus, AQA. I am 18 years old from a failing comprehensive and it is high time that middle-aged conservatives stop trying to dictate what our sensitive ears can be exposed to and start treating GCSE students as the young adults they are seen as in society and try talking to us about our experiences. As noted in the poem itself, the one sure way to encourage anti-establishment violence is to turn off vulnerable students and isolate them from discussion. If a 16-year-old witnessed a stabbing, they'd be expected to report it, so why shouldn't they be entitled to discuss the origins of such crime? Stopping crime comes from understanding it and the best way to keep young people engaged isn't to oppress their ideas and emotions, it's to help them understand how such personalities develop and what they can do to stay safe.
Complain about this comment
I completely agree with Andrew Motion. As the parent of a student who took the AQA English Literature GCSE this year, it seemed to me that the anthology was one of the few really excellent parts of the syllabus, where at least the kids get to read whole poems, rather than doing one scene from Romeo and Juliet - ironically, the fight scene where Mercutio is stabbed. There has also been the recent example of a publisher reprinting Jacqueline Wilson's new book to remove a single word. As far as I know, just one person complained, as in the AQA case. It seems that complaints demanding censorship or those based on someone being 'offended' get much too much attention, while those of us who want openness and freedom of expression are ignored. Publishers, exam boards and retailers need to have a bit more backbone in the face of these ridiculous moral panics.
Complain about this comment
Can anyone tell me who AQA report to? I'd like to know how pressure can be applied to get this decision reversed.
Complain about this comment
I agree with Andrew Motion. I'm sorry to say that your other guest simply refuses to see the underlying truth to the poem. As for knife crimes -- before MacBeth there was the Old Testament, full of miserable and bloody violence. This current poem is brining the issues to a contemporary audience, and encourages debate and self analysis. And daffoldils?! Ha!
Complain about this comment
This poem is NOT glorifying knife crime. It is a chilling poem which is designed to make the reader consider more than him/herself and discuss the limits of personal freedom. This is exactly what the young people should be considering and is more likely to make them less selfish and more likely to think about the consequences of their actions.
To ban it is counter-productive to a course designed to make people think. poetry is NOT just supposed to be uplifting; it is designed to make people think.
I was so annoyed by your speakers blinkered political correctness I have join this blog!! Would he rather we just read 'nice' poems, 'nice' plays (thats shakespeare out then) and 'nice' books?
Complain about this comment
The students interviewed seem to have a better understanding of the poem than the invigilator - presumambly because they have had the benefit of good English teaching. The discussion on PM seemed to suggest that poems are just put in front of students and only the bright ones will be able to access their deeper meanings. The reality is very different. Good education is about opening minds, not just taking things at face value.
Complain about this comment
This is a very powerful poem which is why it could be very dangerous if read by a disaffected teenager suffering a particularly emotional low.
To compare this with scenes from Shakespeare (written in an outdated version of English) is like comparing Rembrandt?s sculpture of Cupid an Psyche with a modern soft porn picture
Complain about this comment
A retired teacher writes: so much modern poetry is comprehensible only to its practitioners and fellow insiders. This is an excellent poem, ideal for a class of bored teenagers, to whose frustration it bears eloquent witness, and invites discussion.
Complain about this comment
I recieved the letter from AQA last week re removing 'Education for Leisure' from the anthology. I've been teaching this poem since the new anthology was issued 5 years ago so I am not only very familiar with the poem, but also very familiar with young people's reactions to it. Like any great literature, of any era, it is meant to inspire a response but it has never inspired any of the young people I have taught to go out and commit a violent crime, any more than Macbeth, 'The Laboratory' by Browning or 'Hitcher' by Simon Armitage - all of which can be taught at GCSE. When we consider the violence our youngsters are exposed to through games, TV, music, movies and the news, why are we getting all upset about a poem that does nothing but raise intelligent and relevant debates about human nature and education? It is a thought-provoking poem, not a poem about mindless violence. It also raises questions about why there is such violence out there. I think this is a poignant issue for our youngsters to be addressing in the safe and supportive environment of the classroom rather than through the remote medium of media. What are we here for if not to support and educate our youngsters about the issues that face our society today? I think we show our young people a lack of faith by assuming that they are not able to deal with this material in an intelligent and mature way and I am even more concerned that we are setting a precedent here. While I agree that we need to be careful about what we expose our youngsters to, I am never comfortable with the idea of censorship. I am also very concerned that this has happened through the complaint of 1 person. Is this is consensus of all teachers? I would have liked to have been asked what I think, as someone who actually teaches.
I teach AQA because I think, of all the exam boards, it understands what young people are interested in. The poems in the anthology inspire and turn on students, boys and girls. Before we start filddling with it and listening to the conservative views of the minority, lets talk to the young people and teachers who are inspiring them with this literature, not take the easy way out. Bad call, AQA.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Re post 10 - This is typical of the confused responses to the poem which have emerged from the 'ban it' camp: how can you say it is 'very powerful' and then dismiss it as the literary equivalent of soft porn? Because it *is* a powerful poem is precisely why it should be taught. In five years of teaching this poem - that'd be to around 200 kids - I've not had one student respond with anything other than an understanding that the narrator is disturbed and pathetic in equal measure.
And what of the other poems in the anthology? Hitcher has mindless violence; Those Bastards seems to suggest violent revolution (with an explicit mention of using a gun); We Remember Your Childhood Well hints at possible child abuse accusations; The Laboratory presents a vengeful poisoner; My Last Duchess has a confessional from a wife-killer; Stealing appears superficially to sympathise with a joy-riding petty thief; Sonnet 130 is six-sevenths misogynist in tone; Anne Hathaway contains barely-concealed sexual references: should we ban the entire text? Of the many hundreds of thousands of children who have studied this collection of poems over the last few years, how many have gone on to batter hitch-hikers to death, poison their partner's mistress, kill their wife, launch a revolution... What a ridiculous position the reactionaries are arguing from!!
Complain about this comment
The decision by AQA is disgraceful and provides a parable for our time: the true value of education is being woefully reduced by the ignorance and smallmindedness of those in charge of its evaluation. An intersting and provocative poem has been withdrawn from classroom discussion because of the moral zeal of an administrator who, like the subject in the poem, has understood nothing of what he has read.
Andrew Motion's initial response was invigorating, but I was a bit disappointed that he chose to state that judgement rested entirely with the reader and did not mention that the poem is structured around two main quotations, one drawn from Genesis, the other from King Lear - both of which contribute to the poems meaning.
The first is the repeated refrain from Genesis, where after creating various parts of the universe God steps back and "saw that it was good"
The second reference is a little more implicit. It is that famous quote from King Lear, when Gloucester speaking, if I remember correctly, to his son immediately after he has had his eyes gouged out declares: "We are to the gods, as flies to wanton boys, they kill us for their sport."
The poem carries its own implicit judgement of its main characters destructiveness: like the ignorant adminstrator who lodged her complaint - he has understood nothing of what he has learnt in school. He cannot put his energies to anything constructive or creative and can only destroy things.
Does this remind you of anyone?
To say that these references are beyond school children fails to acknowledge the guiding role of the teacher in discussing this poem. In fact it seems that no English teacher was consulted before this decision was reached.
I certainly hope this decision is reversed.
I must add that the comments of the A level student above show that despite the efforts of functionaries and the short sightedness of exam boards education is alive and well in English classes these days!
Complain about this comment
I am a tutor for GCSE English Literature- Education For Leisure is a great poem which my students love reading. They always include it of they can as part of an answer in the Literature exam. I find it appeals to all levels -I have never seen it as a violent poem- just one which says so much about our society and the frustration within young unemployed people. If 'Education' is going to be banned, then what about Hitcher and The Laboratory- where will this stop. Students taking GCSE English Literature are more than capable of forming their own opinions.
Complain about this comment
Earlier I quoted King Lear from memory and inverted the line. The actual quotation reads:
As flies to wanton boys are we to th' gods, They kill us for their sport.
(King Lear Act 4, scene 1, 32?37)
This line has served as a reference for many artists, authors and poets, not least of course, William Golding - for his book "Lord of the Flies" (no doubt a novel which would be in line for the same kind of censorship were it to be on the syllabus).
Complain about this comment
Post 17 - LOTF is indeed on the syllabus, with the same exam board: fortunately they have clearly yet to receive even one complaint about the implied bestiality, violence or abandonment of children and so have not decreed its banning as yet!
Complain about this comment
Post 18 - Presumably the lack of complaints about the content of some of the novels on the syllabus is because it would be necessary to read beyond the first couple of lines to get to any "offensive" content!
Complain about this comment
A Leisurely Education
Today I am going to kill something. A poem.
I have had enough of being ignored and today
I am going to play God. I complained when it
first came out and I have complained ever since.
I'm not in favour of censorship, but when we've got
so much magnificent poetry in the English language
it seems wrong that this poem should be included.
We have to take a responsible attitude.
I am a genius. I could be anything at all, with half
the chance. But today I am going to change the world.
Education should be about lifting spirits, but
I can well imagine the poem will appeal to baser instincts.
I would normally encourage and facilitate
young people to think critically about difficult
but important topics, but we live in violent times.
It is a very powerful poem - but we do not want blood on our hands.
It needs to be taken out. I tell the local paper
and tell the board it is absolutely horrendous.
I would tear the page from the anthology
if I had to. That way, I save you all from harm.
Complain about this comment
I understand why Andrew Motion was asked to comment on Saturday's IPM: he's the Poet Laureate, Chair of the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council and an academic at a UK university. It's transparent how much of his activities are publicly funded and how that might affect his opinions, which were knowledgeable and considered.
Why was Nick Seaton invited onto the programme? He's from the Campaign for Real Education, but who are they and how are they funded? They have an agenda regarding education and Mr Seaton showed no understanding and little knowledge of poetry. Citing Wordsworth as a modern poet, and referring vaguely to daffodils rather than the hope and terror of the French Revolution.
I can understand there's a need to hear from different points of view but we should know where the point of view is coming from.
Michael Martin
Complain about this comment
I am disgusted to hear that Carol Ann Duffy's poem has been removed from GCSE anthologies.
It is patronising to students everywhere, and it's callous to think that society believes teenagers will stab anyone because of 'education for leisure'. Removing it is wrong. it provides thoughtful debating issues for all GCSE students and gives them the chance to express their views and opinions, after all, isnt that what bieng a teenager is all about? Extracting the poem makes them feel that they are bieng treated like children and thats the worst possible thing to do. The public say that they should grow up but how do the AQA expect them to do so by removing a poem that discusses the core issues which are the bane of our community.I believe the AQA should reinstate the poem quickly and expeditiously to meet the students needs. if not for them, but for thier GCSE grades:something that controls every adults working life.
Complain about this comment
Violence is seen all around us. We cant even turn on the television without the news reminding us of the disaster going on in the world or the newest violent video game being splattered across our screens. Eventhough the adolencents of today have their minds pumped,daily, with these reminders of violence and crime a simple and thought provoking poem has been banished from ever being read by GCSE students. "Eduaction for leisure" is an interesting and captivating read which has been included in the GCSE AQA athology for years, yet one complaint has removed it. The poem was removed for its violent content and supposedly horrific connotations; how is this probable when our 15 year olds are watching films which are jampacked with murder,crime and dreadful violence? If you remove a poem which merely dables in the unknown why aren't we obolishing all movies, adverts and games which could influence our children. The removal of Duffy's poem is patronizing to the youth of today. The AQA really have dropped the ball on this one and with it a fantastic poem.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS