Hello, and welcome to today's lesson.

My name is Ms. Watson, and I'm really looking forward to teaching you today about how to compare three poems, "Pot", "Homing", and "The Jewellery Maker".

Three of my favourite poems from the anthology.

So let's get started.

So the outcome of today's lesson is that you will be able to describe how poets express different ideas and concepts around identity.

As ever, we will begin with the keywords.

They are, marginalised, heritage, colonialism, identity, and repatriation.

And let's look at what they mean in more detail.

So, to be marginalised, is to be treated as if you are not important or peripheral.

Peripheral means on the edges of something, and also isolated.

Your heritage is the history, traditions, and practises of a particular country or society, or of an individual.

Colonialism is the process of one country taking control of another, and the resources of that country.

And identity refers to the qualities, beliefs, personality traits, appearances, and expressions that characterise a person.

And repatriation is the return of someone to their own country.

Now, if you would like a little bit of time to familiarise yourself with the keywords, now's the time to do it.

You can just pause the video while you do that, and then rejoin us when you're ready.

So, today's lesson has three learning cycles.

We are going to start by comparing "Pot" and "The Jewellery Maker", then we are going to compare "Pot" and "Homing", and we're gonna finish by comparing "The Jewellery Maker" and "Homing".

So you will see there that by the end of the lesson, you will have made three sets of comparisons with three poems. Let's move on.

When you're asked to compare poems from the anthology, you really only work with two at a time.

Now, it's worth noting that all the poems in the anthology have been chosen because they are all in some way, linked to ideas of belonging, social change, and identity.

But some of them form more natural partnerships than others.

And that when you get a question, it's really up to you to choose the most appropriate pairing to answer that question.

It's the first step when planning an answer, and, in many ways, one of the most important.

Which two naturally go together? Which two are most effective when compared together? Okay, let's move on.

Now, I think a really useful thing is that when you compare poems, think about the poets as if they were having a conversation with each other.

Like, we might imagine Khan and Parker are having a conversation about the process of physical creation and identity.

And if they were doing that, what would they agree on? What overall big idea do you think Khan and Parker would agree on? Have a think.

You can pause the video while you have that discussion.

I think this is a really good point, that they would probably both agree with the idea that when we physically create an object, that object then represents part of our identity.

That's the big idea they would probably agree on.

Now let's look at some quotations.

We've got some quotations from "Pot".

"Someone/somewhere made you fingernails/pressed".

And from "The Jewellery Maker", "Under deft fingers gold butterflies dance".

Now, how do these two quotations show the similarity between the two poems? Have a think.

You can pause the video while you do that.

Well, you might have said something like this.

That both quotations not only emphasise the handcrafted nature of the objects, but they also specifically reference the fingers.

So you've got fingernails there and deft fingers.

And this may allude to the idea of fingerprints as part of our identity.

And therefore, by using their fingerprints to create the objects, they are bestowing part of their identity into them.

Fantastic ideas.

Well done.

Let's move on.

Now, when comparing poems, you want to consider the similarities.

It's always good to start with similarities.

But then you want to look at the differences, in particular, the subtle differences.

Just a little thinking about poetry and how poetry comes about.

You might say that it's born out of imagination, experiences, and individuality, and therefore there will always be subtle differences in intention and message because we're all different.

And if we return to our analogy of a poetry comparison, being like a conversation between two poets, then there will likely always be subtle differences, 'cause no two people exactly agree or they don't have to exactly agree.

So think about this point, there is an underlying tension in both poems. Have a discussion about this.

Where does this tension come from? You can pause the video while you have that discussion.

Now in "Pot", it is implied that the pot was stolen from its country of origin, and the speaker believes it should be returned.

And in "The Jewellery Maker", the subject desires to give his creations to his wife, and yet sell them to rich women to display.

Now, a bit further discussion.

What wider contextual ideas does this tension relate to? Again, you can pause the video while you have that discussion.

Did you say something like this? That the theft of the pot relates to colonial acquisition and cultural repatriation, while "The Jewellery Maker" relates to the marginalisation of craftspeople.

You can see three of our key words there.

That the pot has been somehow taken away and is in the wrong place, and craftspeople are on the edges of mainstream life.

Okay, really good discussions.

Let's move on.

Quick check for understanding.

Both poets likely reference the handcrafted natures of the objects in order to.

Is the right answer, A.

show their insignificance and lack of value, B.

show their uniqueness and explain why someone would want to steal them, C.

show the personal connection between object and maker? Have a think.

Make your choice.

The answer is C.

So well done if you chose C.

Let's move on.

So, now we are going to be looking at how you write an introduction.

An introduction moves from the general to the specific.

It might look something like this.

And the general will be a sentence about both poems or poets.

And there, you will be looking at the overarching similarity.

And then in the next stage, you narrow down on the similarities in both poems in relation to big ideas.

And then you end up with your very specific thesis, what are the nuance differences within that similarity.

So, this is what I want you to do.

Here is an introduction.

I'm gonna read it to you.

"Both Kahn and Parker express the idea that objects we create are intrinsically connected to our identities.

More specifically, the poems both create a link between these objects and heritage, and argue that they should stay in the hands of their creators.

However, Khan uses the poem to expose colonial acquisition and argue for cultural repatriation, while Parker uses the poem to foreground the marginalisation of craftspeople." And your task is this, is to annotate this introduction to show where it meets the criteria for introduction.

So you need to pause the video while you do that.

Really looking forward to seeing what you annotate.

Off you go.

Okay, welcome back.

So here's the introductory paragraph, and you might have said something like this.

That it begins with a sentence about both poems exploring the overarching similarity.

There it is, that both Khan and Parker express the idea that objects we create are intrinsically connected to our identities.

That one single idea, which is the overarching similarity, and then they narrow it down.

More specifically, really good discourse marker there to show that you are focusing in.

The poems both create a link between these objects and heritage, and argue that they should stay in the hands of their creators.

That's the narrowing down.

And now we're onto the specific thesis, the nuance difference within that similarity.

That however, Kahn uses the poem to expose colonial acquisition and argue for cultural repatriation, while Parker uses the poem to foreground the marginalisation of craftspeople.

Very good.

Very well done.

Let's move on.

So we've looked at "Pot" and "The Jewellery Maker", and now we are going to look at "Pot" and "Homing".

And when we're looking at "Pot" and "Homing", we're going to consider the theme of identity.

Two words to consider, empty and rusted.

And how do those words create connection between the two poems? Please pause the video while you have a discussion.

So welcome back.

What did you say? Did you say this? That they both create the image of disuse and lack of purpose.

Let's go further in our discussion.

So how might we use them to consider a connection? By them, I mean the words, to consider a connection between the ideas in the poem.

Again, you can pause the video while you have that discussion.

You might say that both poems consider the impact of a denied or constrained identity, an identity that isn't being expressed or used.

Really good thinking.

Let's move on.

So, I'd like you to discuss this question.

What is the difference between the constrained and restricted identities in the poems? You can pause the video while you do that.

So welcome back.

Did you say something like this? That in "Pot", the pot has become empty because it has forcibly been removed from its country of origin to be put on display in a foreign museum, and therefore, it could be considered a metaphor for fears around migrant identities.

However, in "Homing", the subject has restricted their own identity by hiding it in a box because of the implied negative perception around their geographical home.

If you did, that's some really, really good thinking about the differences.

Let's move on.

Let's have a quick check for understanding.

Arguably, both poems reference a identity, a blank identity.

Is it A.

visible, B.

Forgotten, or C.

constrained? Have a think.

Make your choice.

If you said C.

Constrained, you're right.

Well done.

Let's move on.

So, now we're still looking at introductions, and there's one here, "In 'Pot' and 'Homing', both Kahn and Berry explore ideas around constraints on identity.

More specifically, both poets use objects in order to metaphorically explore the influence of outside restraints on dent identity." How might we improve this introduction? What would you add or change about it? And as a reminder, an introduction should explore overarching similarity, narrow down the similarities, and show nuance differences.

So please pause the video while you consider how you might improve that introduction.

Off you go.

So, welcome back.

Really looking forward to hearing what you said there.

Now, what you should have noticed is that the introduction was missing nuance differences.

And you might have added, see the words in green, "However, Khan arguably uses the poem as a metaphor for fears around migrant identity, while Barry uses the poem to explore perceptions of regional accents, and to argue that to deny our voice is to deny our selves." Really good work.

Well done.

Let's move on.

So, we are looking at the last pairing, "The Jewellery Maker" and "Homing".

So let's consider how those two poems approach the theme of identity.

I've given some quotations here.

Workshop, factories, forge.

What similarities can you draw between those three words? Have a discussion.

You can pause the video while you do that.

Good point.

All these places are references to where things are crafted and made.

So maybe both poems are implying that your identity can be created in a place.

Really good thinking.

Let's move on.

I want us to focus here on the ending of both poems. Now, in both poems, the final stanzas contain images of birds.

"The Jewellery Maker" refers to those purchasing the jewellery as bird-boned, while "Homing" refers to the fluttering of wings.

Now the discussion.

How might those two images represent two different tones? Tones being the mood, the impression, the kind of atmosphere of the poem.

You might have said something like this.

That the image bird-bone has connotations of hollow, emptiness, and death, because birds have hollow bones.

And fluttering, on the other hand, implies something alive and free.

Really good thinking.

Now I want you to have a further discussion.

How can we connect these images to the final messages of the poem? Have a think about that.

You can pause the video while you do that.

You might have said something like this.

That arguably, the ending of "The Jewellery Maker" feels hollow, because the final image is of a stranger purchasing the creations that the maker has poured himself into, while "Homing" ends on the idea of the accent being recreated, and therefore it remains alive.

Fantastic discussion.

Fantastic ideas.

Well done.

Let's move on.

Let's have a quick check for understanding.

Ending on the image of bird-brained, conveys a, there's a blank, onto "The Jewellery Maker".

And should the blank be filled with this? A.

sense of emptiness, B.

sense of content, or C.

sense of pride.

What do you think? Have a think.

Sense of emptiness.

Yes, that's the right answer.

Well done.

Let's move on.

Now is the time for you to show your understanding of these two poems in a little bit more detail.

The task is for you to write an introduction to the question.

How do "The Jewellery Maker" and "Homing" present ideas of identity? Remember what an introduction should do.

Explore overarching similarity, narrow down the similarities, show nuance difference.

So when you're ready, pause the video, and off you go and write that introduction.

So, let's have a look at Sofia's answer.

"The ending of both poems creates a different tone for the reader.

Ultimately, "Homing" reaffirms the innate connection between place and identity, while "The Jewellery Maker" ends with a hollow image of someone with no implied connection to the place keeping the creations.

Both poems connect ideas of place and identity.

More specifically, both poems imply that your sense of identity can be created through a sense of place and geographical location." Now, she's included all the elements of an introduction, but it's not effective, really.

And I'd like you to think about why it's not effective.

Take some time to do that.

You can pause the video while you do that.

So what did you think? Why does it not read effectively? What's wrong with it? Well, this is what Alex said.

He said it didn't read as an effective introduction because she hasn't stated the overarching similarities at the beginning of the introduction.

100%.

And therefore, the reader isn't grounded in the question and can't actually follow her reasoning.

Really good point.

Did you say something similar? Now, before we say goodbye, I'd like us to have a summary of what you have been learning today.

You've been learning that when comparing poems, it's useful to think of the poets as in conversation with each other.

That both Khan and Parker express the idea that objects we create are intrinsically connected to our identities.

That in "Pot" and "Homing", both Khan and Berry explore ideas around constraints and identity.

And both "The Jewellery Maker" and "Homing" imply that your identity can be created through place.

It's been fantastic teaching you today.

I'd like to thank you for your hard work and enthusiasm, and all those great discussions you had.

I'm wishing you the really good rest of the day, and I hope to see you again in another lesson.

Bye for now.