Hello there.

Thank you for joining me today.

My name is Mr. Barnsley and it's great to see you as we continue to study unseen poetry.

And today we're gonna be focusing on comparing the effects between two poems. We're gonna be looking at language, we're gonna be looking at structure, and we're gonna be looking at voice.

You're gonna need the copies of the poems that are in the additional materials.

We've got Michael Lasky's, "Nobody", and Robin Robertson's, "Donegal".

Both of these poems are in the additional materials.

Do make sure you have a copy of them before you get started.

All right, it's time to begin.

Let's dive in.

So let's have a look at today's outcome then.

By the end of today's lesson, you will be able to compare how poets use language, form, and voice for effect in unseen poetry.

So there are four key words today.

The first is transience, and that is a common idea we will see that runs throughout both poems, and it means the state, the fact of something only lasting a short amount of time.

Other words to look out for are progression, fragmented, and static.

If you want to pause the video now for a moment and just read through those definitions, either make a note of them if you wish, now's the time to do so.

Okay, let's continue with today's lesson.

So there are three learning cycles today as we think about how poets create effect.

So we're gonna think about how structure is used for effect, voice is used for effect, and language is used for effect.

So let's get started with structure.

So today we're gonna be comparing Michael Lasky's, "Nobody", and Robin Robertson's, "Donegal".

And we're gonna think about how the poets create meaning in their poem, and particularly, we're gonna think about these in relation to the concept of transience.

Now a reminder that transience is the state or fact of lasting only a short amount of time, and often referring to the transience of life.

It's this concept that everything in life is only temporary, nothing lasts forever.

It's an idea we see across many poems, okay? So it's an interesting idea to have in the back of our mind when we're reading poetry and think, could this be about the transience of life? In today's poems, we're definitely looking at this idea, this concept, the transience of life.

So the copies of both poems are in your additional materials.

I want you to now pause the video and remind yourself of these two poems. Read each of them through, and definitely more than once if this is your first time reading them.

If you've read them before, then just read them once to remind yourself.

All right, pause the video.

Over to you.

Read the poems, and press play when you are ready to continue.

Welcome back.

Some fantastic independent reading there.

Okay, over to you then for a discussion question to kick us off.

How would you summarise what each poem is about? If you've got a partner, you can work with them.

If you are working by yourself, that's absolutely fine, you can just think through or even make a note of your summaries.

Okay, so how would you summarise each poem? Pause the video, give it a go, and press play when you think you are done.

Welcome back.

I wonder if you said something similar to the summary that you can see on the screen.

Lasky's "Nobody" is about someone who didn't go out and play in the snow when they had the chance to, whereas Robertson's Donegal is about a father who looks after his daughter's possessions while she goes into the sea.

So that's what both the poems are about on the surface.

But now let's think about what happens in the poems and think about this idea of not playing in the snow or a father's relationship with his daughter.

How do these ideas reflect the transience of life? The idea that life is short, that nothing lasts forever.

How do these two ideas reflect? Sorry, these two poems reflect the idea of the transience of life? Over to you again for this one.

Pause the video, discuss with a partner, think through it yourself, and press play when you are ready to move on.

Some great ideas there, some really nice discussions.

Fantastic job.

I wanna shine a spotlight on some of the fantastic things I heard.

I heard lots of you saying, "well actually, "Nobody", Lasky's "Nobody" is inviting the reader to make the most of the opportunities in life.

Don't let life pass you by.

Don't leave the snow unplayed with.

Don't leave the snow untouched.

Whereas Robertson's Donegal is really musing, thinking about, pondering this idea of children's relationships with parents, how they grow.

As the children grow older and more independent, these relationships change, and it shows that these relationships are transient.

The way that we react to our parents, behave with our parents, changes as we grow older, and so there is an element of transience to those relationships as well.

Wonderful if you said something similar to what you can see on the screen.

Of course, you may have said something slightly different, and that is okay too.

That's absolutely fine as long as you can justify your ideas.

Great job there.

Okay, remember this learning cycle, we're focusing on structure.

So in order to compare the use of structure in unseen poems, we might ask ourselves the following questions.

We might say to ourselves, do the poems have the same number of lines/stanzas? Are they all the same length? We might say, do the poems use structural techniques such as enjambment or caesura? Do the poems have a regular pattern to their rhyme and rhythm? And what are the opening lines and the closing lines of the poem? Once we've answered those questions, then we can start to consider what the similarities and differences are in terms of the effects and how we interpret the meaning of the poem from the structure that the poet has used.

So let's go back to our poems, which, as I said, are in your additional materials.

You should've already got these, but if you haven't, now is the time to grab them.

Reread the poems for a second time in today's lesson and answer the following questions to yourself.

Do the poems have the same number of lines and stanzas? Are they the same length? Do the poems use structural techniques such as enjambment or caesura? And do the poems have a regular pattern to their rhyme and rhythm? All right, over to you for this one.

Pause the video, reread the poems, ask yourself these questions, and then press play when you're ready to move on.

Welcome back.

Some fantastic independent reading there and reflection on structure.

I'm gonna share with you one of Oak pupils, Izzy's answers.

And I want to think, did this sound similar to the thoughts that you were having as you read the poems? So do the poems have the same number of lines as stanzas? Well, Lasky's "Nobody" has three stanzas that are the same length, whereas Robertson's Donegal has one singular stanza.

Do the poems use structural techniques such as enjambment or caesura? Well, Izzy noticed that both of the poems use enjambment, but Lasky's "Nobody" employs caesuras, where Robertson's Donegal doesn't.

Do the poems have a regular pattern to their rhyme and rhythm? And Izzy spotted that both poems are irregular in their structure, in the rhyme rhythm.

So we might represent the structure of the poems like this: On the left-hand side, you can see "Nobody" split into three stanzas.

Enjambment, those arrows represent the enjambment, and the dots represent the caesura.

On the right-hand side, you can see an image that represents Donegal, one single stanza, and the enjambment running throughout.

So what are your initial thoughts about the similarities in how the poem looks? Okay, what do you notice about the similarities between the two poems? Over to you for this one.

Pause the video, discuss with your partner or think through independently, and press play when you think you have got some ideas.

Over to you.

Welcome back.

Some fantastic discussion there.

And I liked that you were seeing similarities and differences, but what I was really impressed was where some of you starting to think, okay, what's the effect of these? And I really liked, and I heard one or two people saying this, that both poems create a sense of progression and moving forward.

If we think about the arrows, kind of, it seems that the poems are moving forward, linking the enjambment that represents this almost progression across the poems, using one of our keywords there.

Well done if you've said something similar.

So now let's think about what the initial differences are in the way that the poems look.

What do you spot are the differences and why might these be? Okay, over to you to pause the video, have a think, and press play when you've got some ideas.

Some really interesting discussions there.

I heard some of you using that keyword, fragmented, they were broken up.

And you could see that more in "Nobody" because we've got the separate stanzas and we've got the caesura, and it just feels a bit more fragmented.

Whereas "Donegal", Robertson's "Donegal", feels more solid and more whole as a poem.

So now I want us to consider how the poet's structural choices can convey the concept, really link to this idea of transience in the poem.

So a discussion question for you.

Why do you think Lasky chose to use separate stanzas while Robertson chose to use one stanza? What might be the significance of that? What might he be trying to say about the transience of life? All right, pause the video, and I want to hand this over to you.

If you've got a partner, this will be a fantastic thing to discuss with them.

But don't worry if you're working by yourself, you can just think through this question independently.

All right, pause the video, over to you, and press play when you're ready to move on.

Welcome back.

A tricky question there, but I was really pleased to see you making links between structure and that key idea of transience.

I want to share a response, or a couple of Oak pupils' response, and you can think about how similar they were to yours.

So Laura said, " I think Lasky's use of separate stanzas reflects the temporary nature of life." Whereas Alex said, " Well, maybe Robertson's choice to use one stanza reflects the speaker feeling overwhelmed by the change in their relationship." They don't get a moment to stop and pause and reflect, they just feel overwhelmed by this idea, the transience of their relationship.

I wonder if you said something similar.

Well done if you did, but of course, it's okay to have different ideas as well as long as you can logically justify them.

So now let's think about why both poets chose to use enjambment.

What the significance be in each poem? Why might Lasky and Robertson have chosen to use enjambment? What do you think? Over to you for this one.

Pause the video, have a discuss, have a think, and press play when you think you've got some ideas.

Welcome back.

Some fantastic ideas flying around and they're really great to hear.

I'm gonna share some of the Oak pupils' responses, and you can think where these align with yours.

And if they're different, why? So Laura said, "Maybe the enjambment signifies how life keeps moving." Life keeps progressing, we can't stop time.

Alex says, "Yeah, it reflects how things never stay the same, things are always changing." And this really links to this idea of transience, that life, that time is really short-lasting, okay.

Things don't last forever.

So let's think about the use of caesura then.

We know that Lasky does use caesura, whereas Robertson doesn't.

What do you think the impact of that might be? What's the effect? Why? Pause the video, have a think, have a discuss, and press play when you've got some ideas that you're willing to share.

Over to you.

Welcome back.

Again, some great ideas.

Really well done for these really high-level discussions.

Fantastic to hear.

So Laura said, "I think the caesura could make the reader pause and reflect on their own life." Are we making the most of our own life? You know, are we gonna play in the snow if the opportunity arises? Whereas Alex, thinking about "Donegal", says, "Well, maybe Robertson wants to mimic this sensation, feeling as if time is running away from you." Okay, there isn't time to pause and reflect 'cause time, life move so quickly.

Some really nice ideas.

I wonder if you said something similar or maybe you said something different.

That's okay too.

All right, so I want us to think about the pattern of the poem.

And we know that both poems have an irregular rhyme and rhythm, and we might be able to represent that using the image that you can see on screen.

Irregularity.

So why do you think both poets might have chosen an irregular pattern? How does that link to the concept to reflect to the concept of transience? Again, over to you for this one.

Have a discuss with a partner or think through this independently.

Pause the video, and press play when you are ready to move on.

Again, some really, really nice ideas there.

Fantastic job, everybody.

Maybe you said something similar to Laura, who said, "I think the irregularity reflects the unpredictability of life.

It's constantly changing." Eh, that's a great idea.

When we think about the transience of life and life being short-lived, there's a real unpredictable nature to life.

We never know when our time or other people's time is up, and that can be quite terrifying, but it's a reminder potentially to make the most of life and everything that it brings.

All right, lots of fantastic discussions so far.

I want to take a moment to slow down, pause for a moment, and check to see how we're getting on.

True or false? Do both Lasky and Robertson use caesura in a similar way? Is that true or false? What do you think? Pause the video, have a think, and press play when you think you have the answer.

Yeah, great work if you said that was false.

Let's justify that then.

Is it A, arguably Lasky's use of caesura creates moments for the reader to pause and reflect on their lives? Or is it B, arguably Lasky's use of caesura reflects the feeling of time passing us by.

Which of those do you think is the most relevant and logical justification? Pause the video, make your choice, and press play when you have an answer.

Great work if you said A.

I think B feels like a logical inference if we were talking about enjambment, time running away from itself.

The caesura definitely creates moments of pause and reflectiveness in Lasky's poem.

All right, over to you now for our first task of today's lesson.

I want you to consider the opening and closing lines of the two poems. You can see them on screen now.

What I would like you to do is answer the following questions: Where can you see similarities and differences between the poems? What is the effect? And how might the decisions around the opening and closing lines relate to other structural decisions and, most importantly, this concept, this idea of transience.

All right, read those opening and closing lines carefully and then answer the questions.

Pause the video, over to you, and press play when you are done.

Welcome back.

Really impressive to see you writing with such confidence about structure and linking your ideas back to the discussions we've already had in today's lesson.

Let's take a moment to reflect on what we've written then, and we're gonna do that by comparing it to some work of one of our Oak pupils, Izzy.

So I want you to compare your ideas and then think, are any ideas maybe similar or different? And are there any of Izzy's ideas that I would like to incorporate into my own response? So Izzy wrote, "Arguably, the opening lines of the poems create a different tone.

Lasky's 'Nobody' opens by immediately asking the reader to question their actions, whereas Robertson's 'Donegal' opens with a sense of excitement and nostalgia.

In contrast, both poems close with a sense of missed opportunities which could invite the reader to reflect on the transience of their own lives and to ensure that they make the most of it." All right, pause the video, compare your response to Izzy's, and if you want, why don't you take a few of her ideas and put them in your own.

All right, pause the video, give it a go, and press play when you're ready to move on.

Okay, welcome back.

So, so far in today's lesson, we've been looking at structure.

Now we're gonna move on and think about voice.

So in order to compare the use of voice in unseen poems, you might want to ask yourself the following questions: Do the poems use the same narrative voice? Whose perspective do we see the poem from? Does this stay the same throughout the poem? So once you've answered these questions, then you can start to consider what the similarities and the differences are in terms of the effect and how these might make us change our interpretations of the poem.

So again, we're gonna go back to our poems, and I want you to read them again and answer the following questions: Do the poems use the same narrative voice? Do we see the poem from the same perspective throughout? All right, pause the video, reread the poems, and now we're focusing on voice.

Look out for those similarities and differences.

Over to you.

All right, pause the video, and press play when you are ready to move on.

Welcome back.

Let's have a look at what Sofia said then, and you can compare the thoughts you've had to her.

So do the poems use the same narrative voice? Well, Sofia noticed that Lasky's "Nobody" uses a second person narrative voice, while Robertson's "Donegal" uses a first person narrative voice.

So well done if you've spotted that difference between the two poems. Do we see the poem from the same perspective throughout? And Sofia said, "Well, Lasky's 'Nobody' begins as if the reader is outside but then ends as if the reader is looking outside through a window." So kind of our perspective changes throughout the poem.

"Whereas in Robertson's 'Donegal', it begins with a father watching his daughter, but it ends with the speaker looking at his own life from the outside." Okay, let's take a moment then to check our understanding of the use of voice in the poem.

So which of the following statements is true? Is it A, that both Lasky and Robertson use the same narrative voice? Is it B, that both Lasky and Robertson use the same perspective throughout? Or is it C, both Lasky and Robertson end with a similar perspective? Which of those do you think is the right answer? Pause the video, have a think, and press play when you've got the answer.

Great work if you said C.

Of course, we have different narrative voices, first and second.

And the perspective in both poems changes and is different at different times.

However, there is a similarity when we get to the end of each poem, which is all about an outsider kind of looking from the inside out.

So it's really interesting similarity by the end of the poem.

All right, over to you then for our second task.

We're gonna consider the significance behind the poet's choices around voice and perspective.

Why do you think Lasky chose to use a second person narrative voice while Robertson chose the first person narrative voice? What do you think the significance of that might be? And why do you think both poets end with the perspective of watching someone or something else? All right, over to you to write a short answer.

Pause the video, give it a go, and press play when you think you're done.

Welcome back.

Some fantastic work there, and a super well done to everyone who checked their spelling, punctuation, and grammar before they put their pen down.

That's great to see.

All right, we're gonna do a bit of reflecting on what we've written.

Think about the strengths, think about if there are any ideas that we want to add.

We're gonna do that by comparing our work to one of the Oak pupils.

So Sofia wrote, "I think Lasky chooses to use a second person narrative in order to invite the reader to reflect on their own lives and experience while Robertson may have used a first person narrative voice to create the sense of personal experience.

Furthermore, I think both poems end with a sense of watching someone or something because it might mimic the sensation of watching your own life pass you by and feeling like a spectator if you don't seize every opportunity." All right, pause the video, compare your response to Sofia's.

Is it similar? Is it different? And are there any of her ideas you'd like to add to your own response? All right, pause the video, a moment of reflection, and press play when you're ready to move on.

All right, welcome back.

Ready for our final learning cycle.

And in this learning cycle, we're gonna be comparing the use of language for effect.

Okay, so we are gonna read the poems one final time, and when we do that, we are gonna discuss the poet's use of language.

So I want you to see where the poets have used similar words or images in their poems, and think about what the significance of that might be.

All right, over to you.

Pause the video, read the poems, think about the language choices, and press play when you are done.

Okay, welcome back.

I want to shine a spotlight on a couple of things that my Oak pupils have said, and I want you to think, is this similar to what I said? Is this the kind of discussions I was having? So Laura noticed that there were a lot of active verbs throughout, so clench, prod, throwing, and ploughing.

And Alex said, "Well, maybe the use of such verbs reflect the ever-changing and moving nature of life." It's a really interesting point from Alex, and I wonder if you said something similar.

Of course, you might've picked up many different elements, many of the language that you thought was really interesting.

That's great.

And you might have also picked up some differences.

Of course, there'll be plenty of differences, and we can compare differences as well.

But well done if you spotted this.

The active verbs was a real kinda similarity between both poems. All right, let's pause for a moment and check our understanding.

So which of the following statements are true of the poems? Potentially, the use of active words in both poems reflect a sense of time standing still.

B, arguably the use of active words in both poems reflect a sense of life continually changing.

C, perhaps the use of active words in both poems reflect the missed opportunities of the speakers.

Which of those feels like the most logical inference? Pause the video, have a think, and press play when you've got an answer.

Great job if you said B.

I think the fact that these verbs are active or these words are active suggests change, it suggests movement.

So I don't think it's logical to say that they are standing still.

All right, well done if you said B.

All right, over to our final task of today's lesson.

We are gonna consider the image that both poems leave us with.

Lasky leaves us with this image of "untrodden" snow, whilst Robinson leaves us with the image of the father being unable to "follow" his daughter.

So arguably, we have a lot of movement in these poems, but both poems end up with a static, a still image.

Why do you think this is? All right, why might this relate to this, or how does this relate to this idea, this concept of transience in the poem? Now, if you've got a partner, I think this is a fantastic task to do as a discussion, but if you're working by yourself, you can make some notes and think about what you would say if you were having a discussion with a partner.

All right, so we're now thinking about, after using these active verbs, why end with this static image? All right, pause the video, over to you, discuss or jot some ideas down, and press play when you're done.

Okay, welcome back.

For those of you who were discussing, it was really great to hear you agreeing, building on each other's comments, and challenging sometimes if you disagreed.

Fantastic to see.

All right, let's take our last moment of reflection and think about the discussions we've had.

I'm gonna share with you on the screen, as you can see, Laura and Izzy's discussion, and we're gonna think about how we might revise it to become a comparison of the two poems. So Laura says, "I think Lasky ends with a static image to show how the reader will miss out on life opportunities if they hide behind the curtains." And Izzy said, "I think Robertson ends on a static image to show how children leave their parents behind when they begin to discover independence." So let's now try and think about how we can revise this to become a comparison, or we could edit what Laura says, "I think both poems use staticity in a similar way to reflect how life will pass you by if you let it." And Izzy adds, "I think Robinson's use of a staticity differs from Lasky's because it's reflecting how we cannot stop our relationships from changing and evolving." All right, some fantastic work in today's lesson, some wonderful discussions, and some great written work as well.

So well done.

On the screen, you can see a summary of everything that we have covered in today's lesson.

Let's quickly go through that so you can feel confident before you move on to your next lesson.

So we've learned to compare the structure, you might ask questions about the layout, use of structural techniques and the journey through the poem.

To compare the voice, you might ask questions about narrative voice and perspective.

To compare the language, you might ask questions about words and images in the poems. And arguably, in the poems that we've looked at, both poems use structure, voice, and language to consider ideas of transience in their poems. Great work today.

Thank you so much for joining me.

And I do hope to see you in one of our lessons again in the future.

Have a great day.

Bye-bye.