Hello and welcome to today's lesson.

My name is Ms. Watson and I'm delighted that you have decided to join me today.

We are going to be analysing the poem "Jamaican British." It's a fascinating poem and I think you're really going to enjoy this lesson.

You will need a copy of the Edexcel "Belonging" Anthology.

So when you've got that and you're ready, we'll make a start.

So by the end of today's lesson, you will be able to explain how Antrobus uses language, form, and structure to present his viewpoint.

We're going to start by looking at the keywords.

There are four of them and they are really useful for unlocking your learning today.

The first one is identity.

We've met this word before in this unit, but it's always worth returning to because it's such an important part of understanding the poems in this anthology.

Your identity is the set of qualities, beliefs, personality traits, and appearance that characterise a person.

Now a ghazal is, originally, it's an Arabic verse form and it tends to deal with loss and love and it is written in rhymed couplets, two lines that rhyme.

Now if you are blunt, you say what you think directly without trying to be polite.

You say it as it is.

That might be a way of putting it.

And heritage.

That means the history, traditions, and practises of a particular country or society.

If you would like a little bit of time to familiarise yourself with the keywords, please feel free to pause the video, do that, and then rejoin the lesson when you're ready.

So there are going to be two learning cycles in today's lesson.

The first is we are going to be looking at ideas about conflict.

And then we are going to look about ideas of acceptance.

Now you might say that Antrobus' "Jamaican British" is about a speaker who experiences internal and external conflict concerning their dual heritage and identity.

And we are going to explore how that internal and external conflict is expressed through the language that Antrobus uses.

But first, I want you to have a discussion, so you become clear about what is the difference between internal and external conflict? Pause the video while you have that discussion or just make a few notes if you're working by yourself.

So welcome back, and let me share with you what Izzy said.

She said, "Internal conflict is psychological or emotional conflict that you have with yourself, whereas external conflict is conflict you have with someone else." And that is an excellent summary of the difference between the two.

Now just a reminder that Antrobus' "Jamaican British" contains references to subject matter and phrases that are outdated and discriminatory.

And many people may find the language upsetting.

It is worth thinking about why he chose to use such language, because it was his choice.

And how might his choice to use this language relate to the theme of conflict? So pause the video and have a discussion about those two questions.

Or if you're working by yourself, pause the video and just make a few notes.

So Izzy thought that "it suggests that, though society has progressed, there is still conflict around the idea of identity, particularly about dual-heritage identity." And Izzy, I think, is saying that the language, the outdated and discriminatory language reflects the fact that conflict still remains.

Okay, let's move on.

So how might the repetition of "Jamaican British" throughout the poem reflect a sense of both internal and external conflict? Remember, internal is the conflict within yourself and external conflict is that with others.

And that phrase is repeated many times throughout the poem.

How might it reflect those two types of conflict? Please, pause the video and have that discussion or pause the video and make a few notes.

Off you go.

Well done and welcome back.

And what most impressed me about that discussion was the way that you really homed in on the two words and had so much to say about them.

Being able to say a lot about a little is often the key to really good, close, perceptive analysis in English.

Let me share with you what Oak pupils said in response to those questions.

Now Laura said that "maybe it reflects how often the speaker has to define themselves for other people?" They're constantly having to do it, so that's why the phrase is repeated.

And Sofia said that it could suggest that they are constantly questioning themselves and their identity.

So whether it's both internal or external, the repetition shows that this is an important focus for the speaker.

I'd love to know if you said something similar or different.

Now let's have a check for understanding.

Is it true or false to say that the repetition of the phrase "Jamaican British" could be interpreted as being about both external and internal conflict? True or false? Make your choice.

It's true.

But why is it true? What would you say to justify the fact that that statement is true? Have a think.

Well, you might say something like this, that arguably, the repetition of "Jamaican British" implies the speaker is constantly having to define themself to other people as well as potentially suggesting that they are questioning their own identity.

Really interesting thinking there.

Let's move on.

So now I want you to think about this.

How does the speaker respond to the external conflict in the poem? The people on the outside telling him what they think about him and dual identity and what he can and can't be.

What sort of tone do you think the speaker has when he responds to them? Pause the video, have a think, or pause the video and make a few notes.

Okay.

Well, Sofia said that she thought the tone was blunt, "quite a blunt tone when responding to questions around their identity." We may say blunt means being direct, not being polite, just saying directly what you think and feel.

And that's what she thinks the tone is.

And now I would like you to think about this.

Can you see that bluntness in the poem? Go back into the poem and look for evidence that the tone is blunt.

Pause the video while you do that.

Off you go.

Well done.

Welcome back.

I'm going to share with you what Sofia said.

You may have seen different things, that's fine, but I think it's useful to compare your ideas with other people's.

So Sofia said that she thought the blunt tone was created by the short sentences and that continual use of caesuras, the pauses in the middle of lines, that's what a caesura is, because it suggests that the language is short and clipped.

The speaker is replying in a very short, clipped way to the questions he is constantly asked.

And now we're going to consider the journey through the poem, really focusing on Antrobus' use of pronouns.

So in the beginning of the poem, he begins with singular pronouns, with I.

And in the middle of the poem, he uses collective pronouns, our.

And then at the end, he returns to the singular pronouns.

Now, why is that? Well, Izzy said that she thought it might suggest that "the speaker is struggling to know where they fit in since they end on singular pronouns rather than collective pronouns." As if he's tried at the beginning to move into the group in the middle, but then has come back out from the group.

"Or," she said, "maybe he wants to stress his individuality." And what I like about that response is that she has offered two alternative readings.

Now let's have a check for understanding.

The use of short sentences might reflect which of the following? Is it A, the speaker's patience and diplomacy when dealing with questions about their identity? B, the speaker's blunt responses to those questioning their identity.

C, the speaker's uncertainty over their own identity.

Which one do you think it is? Have a think.

Make your choice.

It's B.

Yes.

He gives short answers to the people who are questioning his identity.

Now what I would like you to do is to consider the following two quotations.

"Half-caste, half mule, house slave, Jamaican British.

Light skin, straight male, privileged, Jamaican British." And then answer these questions.

How does the word half create a sense of internal conflict? How might the juxtaposition between slave and privileged suggest both internal and external conflict? And a mule is a hybrid of a donkey and a horse.

It's the offspring of a donkey and a horse.

So how might this suggest both internal and external conflict? And caste comes from the Latin castus, meaning pure.

So how might this suggest internal and external conflict? Pause the video while you answer those questions.

Off you go.

Welcome back.

What excellent focus there.

I'd like to share with you Sofia's ideas.

I'm not saying they're the only ideas or the perfect ideas.

I just would like to invite you to think about how well her ideas align with yours.

So for the first one, how does the word half create a sense of internal conflict? Half suggests that they don't feel as if they are fully something, which creates a sense of feeling empty and unfulfilled.

And question two, how might the juxtaposition between slave and privileged suggest both internal and external conflict? You might have said something like this, that the word slave and privileged are on the opposite ends of the power spectrum.

It suggests that they, and other people, struggle to know where they fit within a social hierarchy.

And for question three, which is about the mule being the offspring of a donkey and a horse, how might this suggest both internal and external conflict? As with half, a mule implies that they don't feel as if they are fully one thing or another.

But it also implies that this is also the external view of their identity.

This is about how others see them.

And finally, question four.

The word caste from the Latin castus, meaning pure.

How might that suggest external conflict? And Sofia wrote that "the phrase 'half-caste' implies that others possibly perceive them as somehow less moral and 'tainted.

' And it suggests that the dual nature of their heritage and identity is somehow seen as lesser and subject to judgement ." So lots of really interesting thinking and writing there.

Let's move on and look at the idea of acceptance.

So we've looked at conflict.

Now we will look at ideas about acceptance.

So although we see images and hear language that is to do with internal and external conflict within the poem, there are also moments of acceptance.

There is this moment when the father laughed and said, "You cannot love sugar and hate your sweetness." And I would like you to discuss what do you think the speaker's father means by this? Pause the video and have a discussion or pause the video and make a few notes if you're working by yourself.

And Izzy said, "I think it means that the speaker should love themself for all that they are, rather than trying to fight against part of themself." Interesting idea, Izzy.

What did you say in your discussion? Similar things? Different things? Now I would like you to dive back into the poem, this time looking for where else you can see moments of acceptance rather than conflict? Pause the video while you do that.

Off you go.

Well done.

Welcome back.

Let me share with you what Laura said.

She says that "the speaker's cousins say they are proud to have someone British in their family.

Not only does proud suggest acceptance, but calling him family suggests that they accept him for who he is." So that idea of pride and sweetness and loving the sweetness are all examples of moments of acceptance.

Now I would like to consider the way the poem is written.

It's written in couplets in a series of two lines.

And how might we interpret the couplet form to reflect ideas of acceptance? Pause the video where you have that discussion or just make a few notes.

Off you go.

This is what Izzy said.

She thought that "the paired lines of the poem suggests the speaker's acceptance of their dual heritage and identity.

It goes together so neatly in the paired lines." Maybe.

What did you say? Something similar or something different? And now let's think about the form of the poem.

It's a ghazal.

And that is a poem traditionally about romantic or spiritual love and the speaker expresses their loss or separation from their beloved.

However, Antrobus' "Jamaican British" does not follow the traditional ghazal form.

The couplets are unrhymed, whereas traditionally, they rhymed.

And I would like you to consider how might we interpret this? Do you think Antrobus is saying the speaker isn't experiencing love or loss? Pause the video while you have that discussion.

Off you go.

And Laura said that she thought that by not following the traditional ghazal form, Antrobus might be suggesting "the speaker doesn't have to feel separated and incomplete, that they should love and accept themselves for who they are." Interesting ideas, don't you think? Well done.

Let's move on.

Now let's have a check for understanding.

Is it true or false to say that every person in the poem has a negative perception on the concept of dual heritage and identity? True or false? It's false.

But why is it false? Can you explain why? Have a think.

Well, you might have said something like this, that the cousins suggest they are proud of the speaker's dual heritage and identity.

Well done.

Let's move on.

And Antrobus' "Jamaican British" ends on the phrase "Jamaican British." So what I want you to do is to gather up all you know about the poem and all you've read and thought about the poem and think about the ending.

Endings of poems are always really significant.

And I want you to discuss how might we interpret this, the way Antrobus chose to end their poem as the speaker's acceptance of their dual heritage and identity? Now you might consider the final words of the poem, but also I'd like you to think about how do you, the reader, feel at the end of the poem? Pause the video and off you go.

Now I'm going to invite you to consider Laura and Izzy's discussion, and to consider how well does it align with your ideas? And Laura said, "I think the fact that the duality of the speaker's identity is the final phrase of the poem suggests that there is a finality around their decision to accept their dual heritage and identity." And Izzy wanted to focus on the full-stop.

She thought that was final and there is a sense of acceptance because it shows that the poem stops there after the dual heritage.

There are no more questions for the speaker.

So if you want to take any of those ideas and add them to yours, you can do that now.

Pause the video while you do that and then join me for the end of the lesson.

So before we say goodbye, I would like to summarise what you have been learning today.

You have been learning that the repetition of "Jamaican British" throughout the poem could suggest the speaker having to constantly define themselves.

You've been learning that the use of the word half could mean that they don't feel as if they fully belong somewhere.

And you've learned that the use of shifting pronouns could reinforce the idea of feeling out of place.

You have also learned that there are moments of acceptance within the poem, and that the final phrase, "Jamaican British," could signal that the speaker has accepted their dual heritage and identity.

Thank you for your time in this lesson today for joining me and for working so hard.

I wish you a brilliant rest of the day and I look forward to seeing you in another lesson about the poetry of "Belonging." Bye for now!.