Poetry Hour

My mom faxed me some poetry that I wrote when I was little boy – 10 or younger maybe? I’ve reproduced it here for your pleasure, with teacher comments in red below each poem.

Marsh
by
Jason Carter

The marsh is blowing in the breeze
And I feel so much at ease.
As I sit on the dock,
And take off my socks,
And rest without looking at any clocks,
I have learned to relax
By watching the grass
What a great life this is at last!

This poem says so much. You’re lucky you have found a beautiful piece of this earth where you feel peace.

Fishing
by
Jason Carter

Near the shore lived a man
He’d lay on the sand to get a tan.
The water would rise; the water would fall.
The man would stay there until nightfall.
He entered his house at night
Until the morning when the fish would bite.
The sun would rise in the east,
He would get on his knees and pray for a feast –
He’d bait his hook to get something to cook.
He’d fill his boat with all he could eat,
And leave the rest for some else to eat.

Good rhyming pattern

Frog
by
Jason Carter

The frog jumps
on all four feet.

It sits down
Overlooking the pond
On small webbed feet
It then jumps away

What a great picture

Eggs
by
Jason Carter

Eggs
White
Oval
Speckled
Many-colored
Fragile
Protected
Mysterious
Potential
A new life.

Very nice. The picture adds an interesting dimension.

A Boy
by
Jason Carter

A boy who has a toy
Feels great indeed!
His new racing car
Has great speed.
He’d race them down the track;
And beat them before they got back.
A boy with a toy has great joy!

Very true.

A History of China’s Economy

During my senior year at Cornell, I thought it would be a great idea to take an upper-level Econ course about the history of China’s economy. Let me just say that taking this course pass-fail was one of the best decisions I made that year.
This is a little dry, but give it a shot. It’s not as bad as some of the other crap I’ve put on this site,
and there’s a reasonable chance you might learn a little bit.

Jason Carter
Economics 469
December 4, 1997
Topic #2

During the period from 1984 to today, the development of the Chinese economy can be split into two different stages of reform: the new economic model and the socialist market economy. Although both types of reform sought to change the economic structure from planning to markets, the nature and success of the reforms that were implemented varies significantly between the two periods. In general, the reforms of the new economic model failed on many fronts because of difficulties with implementation. The socialist market economy turned these failures into successes through a more complete package of reform based on price rationalization and marketization.

The intent to develop the new economic model was expressed in the Chinese Communist Party document of 1984. The new program called for a wide range of reforms in the agricultural and industrial sectors. In the industrial sector, the state sought to implement similar reforms used in agricultural reform. In order to reduce the level of government control over industrial enterprises, the state allowed the enterprises to retain a greater amount of profit. During the new economic model, this took the form of the tax-for-profit system. This system eliminated firm profit remission to the state and focused on taxation instead. The state also sought to move from mandatory planning to guidance planning during this period. This change meant that the state would give the firms recommended output goals and encourage the firms to adhere to these goals by manipulating the price and tax levels.

Out of the 1989-1991 retrenchment period came another push for reform through the implementation of the socialist market economy. The most important aspect of this period of reform is that the markets are the primary means of resource allocation. The government no longer uses guidance planning or price manipulation to influence the economy. Through major reforms of the price and tax systems, the state lets the markets determine the price levels and establishes a level playing field for all enterprises.

One of the most striking differences between these two periods is the degree of success of price and tax reforms. During the new economic model, the government attempted to implement a wide range of reforms to reduce the state-s control over enterprises. These reforms failed to live up to their potential because the government did not simultaneously reform the price structure. During the socialist market economy, the government made a complete transition to market determination of prices, which enabled other reforms that depended on a rational price system to take effect (such as reform of tax system).

In the new economic model, a majority of the firms fall under the category of guidance planning, not the free market. The government attempted to control the activities of the firms by manipulating prices and taxes. Under the tax-for-profit scheme, the state attempted to move away from profit remittance towards a system of taxation in order to influence the actions of enterprise managers. However, this level of control was implemented without first reforming the price system. During the new economic model, the economy took the form of a dual-track system, with planned and market sectors, and different prices for each sector. This pricing system would cause huge variations in profit rates between firms. These differences in profit rates would result in some firms retaining a huge amount of profit while others would be left with zero profit. In order to decrease the amount of profit retained by certain firms, the state implemented an adjustment tax, which was more or less arbitrary and subject to negotiation. Therefore, the government’s goal to produce a level playing field had failed because the faulty price system created an arbitrary tax system.

During the socialist market economy reform, the government again attempted to reform the tax system. However, the government first set out to change the price system through full implementation of market determined prices. This helped eliminate the dual-track system, which used market prices for outside-plan production and state influenced prices for inside-plan production. The end of the dual-track system led to reforms in the tax system by eliminating wide variations in firm profitability. As a result, tax rates are applied more consistently between firms, and the degree of taxation is no longer subject to negotiation. This reform levels the playing field for all types of firms because taxes are applied evenly to all ownership systems.

Another key difference between the two systems is the varying level of control of the central and local governments. During the tax-for-profit program of the new economic model, taxation authority and tax revenue were divided into central and local portions. Frequently, local governments would have complete control over tax collection and remit a certain amount to the central government. The main goal of this system was to provide incentives for the local governments to improve revenue collection and take a more active role in promoting firm profitability, and therefore increased tax revenue. In contrast to this system, the tax collection system during the socialist market economy is much more centralized, with the central government collecting a majority of the taxes. To accomplish this re-centralization, socialist market economy reformers have to provide incentives to the local government to relinquish their taxation authority. These incentives are often in the form of decreased interference by the central government and increased tax revenue due to a more efficient collection system.

Another key difference between the two reform periods is the level of importance of markets. During the new economic model, markets are only incorporated into certain segments of the economy. Enterprise managers were actually opposed to the reforms because they were used to the planned economy system. The new economic model is a period of transition from a planned system to a market system. As a result, the two economic systems often overlap and conflict with each other, as is the case with the dual-track system. This incomplete switch to a market economy is the main cause of the irrational price structure and arbitrary tax system. The goals of the new economic model failed to be realized because of these problems.

In contrast, the period of the socialist market economy is characterized by a complete switch to a market system. The government first allowed prices to be determined by the market, and as a consequence, reforms in the tax system and an overall leveling of the playing field took place.

The new economic model and socialist market economy reform periods both sought to decrease government intervention through a transition to a market economy. However, a partial transition combined with inadequate reforms of the price and tax structure caused the new economic model to fail and lead to economic retrenchment. The reform efforts of the socialist market economy were more successful because marketization and rationalization of the price system occurred before other reforms were undertaken.

Holy Thursday

The fun stuff’s over. Now we get into the real dreck.

Click here to read the first “Holy Thursday” poem
Click here to read the second “Holy Thursday” poem

Holy Thursday

In the poems “Holy Thursday,” by William Blake, one can see two completely different ideas. In the first poem, Blake tries to express an optimistic and hopeful image of innocent children singing to Christ on the day of ascension. The poem’s rhythm is playful and childish and effectively carries out Blake’s image. In contrast, the second poem is negative and pessimistic and it questions the nature or existence of a God. The children are rejected and abused by society and they are exactly the opposite of the children in the first poem.

In the first “Holy Thursday,” colorful children are marching into St Paul’s cathedral for the celebration of the ascension of Christ. From the footnote, one learns that these children are from the charity schools in London, meaning that they are very poor and probably don’t have a family. Despite their hardships, the children are still described in a joyful, harmonic way in the first stanza:

‘Twas on a Holy Thursday, their innocent faces clean,
The children walking two & two, in red & blue & green;
Grey headed beadles walkd before with wands as white as snow,
Till into the high dome of Paul’s they like Thames’ waters flow.

With an ABAB rhyming pattern, the poem starts with a bouncing, nursery rhyme quality. The children’s problems are not an issue; they are still cute, innocent, and alive, like a river. The beadles that must keep the kids in order are portrayed as old and lifeless men who have lost their childhood innocence. Even though these children are poor and homeless, they are showing hopefulness and optimism when they go to sing the Lord’s praises.

In the next stanza, the children are again portrayed as sweet and innocent, and there is no mention of the hardships they must face every other day in their life. There are a few different images that Blake gives the reader to express his idea that children are pure and free-flowing characters:

O what a multitude they seemd, these flowers of London town!
Seated in companies they sit with radiance all their own.
The hum of multitudes was there, but multitudes of lambs,
Thousands of little boys & girls raising their innocent hands.

Here, the children are a beautiful and vital part of the London society. They are “flowers” that give pleasure to all men and women. Blake fails to mention that these children are a blight and burden to mankind. They are victims of a cruel and harsh world, and as a result, they reflect images of misery and poverty. However, in this stanza, the children are innocent lambs who have a “radiance all their own.” They are beautiful flowers and are pleasing to the entire world.

In the final stanza, the children are singing to the heavens with songs of joy. They are singing the praises of the Lord to heaven on this glorious day:

Now like a mighty wind they raise to heaven the voice of song,
Or like harmonious thunderings the seats of heaven among.
Beneath them sit the aged men, wise guardians of the poor;
Then cherish pity, lest you drive an angel from your door.

Here, the children are powerful and mighty and are capable of communicating with the heavens above. They believe that God truly loves them in spite of the fact that they are really the wretched of the earth. Even though they are penniless and homeless, the children raise their hands and sing their praise and thanks to Jesus.

In the second “Holy Thursday,” the tone of the poem changes completely. In this poem, Blake says that the children are poor and miserable in an otherwise prosperous environment. He concludes that God must not care about these children since they are forced to live under these conditions.

In the first stanza, the reader can obviously see the changes in tone. The lines aren’t long and cheerful with a silly, childish rhyme. These lines are blunt and to the point, and their meaning is very harsh:

Is this a holy thing to see,
In a rich and fruitful land,
Babes reduced to misery,
Fed with cold and usurous hand?

This procession into the cathedral has religious intentions, but the speaker wonders how holy it is to have so many pitiful and miserable children in a world that is so rich and prosperous. It doesn’t seem possible to him that these children are singing to the Lord out of pure happiness and thanksgiving:

Is that trembling cry a song?
Can it be a song of joy?
And so many children poor?
It is a land of poverty!

The speaker finds it hard to believe that these children are actually singing out praises of the Lord. He sees them so unhappy and so poor, and yet they are thanking Jesus for all that he has done for them. The series of questions by the speaker in this stanza implies a tone of disbelief and amazement that heightens throughout the poem.

In the last two stanzas, the speaker offers an explanation as to why these children are so poor and pitiful:

And their sun does never shine,
And their fields are bleak & bare,
And their ways are fill’d with thorns;
It is eternal winter there.

For where-e’er the sun does shine,
And where-e’er the rain does fall,
Babe can never hunger there,
Nor poverty the mind appall.

The speaker believes that the life of the children is always dark, bleak, and bare. It will always be difficult, cold, and barren. He believes that the children are poor because they never have any sunshine or any rain. In other words, these kids don’t have the wonderful and plentiful eye of the Lord upon them. Blake believes that man could not decline into such a pitiful state if God is constantly watching over him. Throughout the ceremony, the children are praising God and all of His works. This praise now seems very ironic since these children are not under the watchful eye of the Lord.

In these two poems, William Blake expresses two totally different ideas. In the first poem, he portrays unfortunate children as blessings to society and shows their gratitude towards God for all that he has done. In the second poem, Blake shows the reader the image of wretched children praying to a God who does not care for them or their condition. These two examples show the different ideas that Blake had towards the nature of God.

A Virtuous Hippo

The writing here is not particularly funny or enlightening. What I do find interesting though is my use of words like “epistle” and “Laodiceans”. Very uncharacteristic for this stage of my writing career.

Click here to read “The Hippopotamus”

A Virtuous Hippo
Jason Carter
English 400-1

In T.S. Eliot’s “The Hippopotamus,” the reader can see Eliot’s contempt for the church and all of its corruption. He compared the church and its people with a lazy Hippopotamus. By the end of the poem, the Hippo is raised up to heaven with choirs of angels by its side while the church remains on earth amidst a dense fog. By using symbols, Eliot show the reader that even the lowliest creature on earth has more merit than the church with all of its corrupt leaders.

The epistle of the poem first expresses Eliot’s disgust with the apathy that the church exhibits. He makes it known from the very beginning that this poem is directed towards the church members who are indifferent and lazy, such as the Laodiceans. This group of people was described by St. John as “lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot.” Apparently, these people had no emotion towards religion, and Eliot wrote this poem to let them know what they can expect in the future.

In the first six lines of the poem, we are given the description of a hippopotamus. This Hippo is much like the human race because, like it, we are simply made out of “flesh and blood.” The image that we receive of the Hippo is of a fat, lazy, beast sleeping in the mud. This animal represents the lowest person in society, who is worthless in relation to the rest of the world. Eliot attempts to contrast this image with that of a solid church founded upon a rock. This comparison seems almost satirical when one considers that the rock in question is actually a human being. How stable is the church when it is built upon something that is often as worthless as an animal sleeping in some mud? Thus, we wonder how serious Eliot is with this comparison.

In the next two stanzas, Eliot continues to contrast the church with the hippo. Eliot goes on to say that the Hippopotamus often has problems collecting items necessary for survival because it does not take the proper steps essential for acquiring all that it needs. Here, we see that the Hippo is too lazy and unmotivated to better its position in life. Eliot contrasts this with the church, but once again, his comparisons seem to be deliberately wrong. He states that the church never needs to act in order to receive money from its members. At face value, this may appear to be good, but in actuality, the church is just as lazy and worthless as the Hippo. It does absolutely nothing to acquire money, and it does nothing for society in return. Unlike the Hippo, who can’t even take a mango from a tree, the church takes all that it can from society. Its outstretched arms are capable of collecting dues and contributions from members around the world.

In the last three stanzas of the poem, the reader can see that the Hippo has been taken into heaven with a lot of praise and glory despite its apathy and laziness:

I saw the ‘potamus take wing…
And quiring angels round him sing
The praise of God, in loud hosannas…
Among the saints he shall be seen
Performing on a harp of gold.
He shall be washed as white as snow,…

In spite of the Hippopotamus’ lack of ambition and worthlessness, God has forgiven him and has taken him into heaven. The Hippo is a symbol of the most inactive and lazy being on this planet, and yet, it makes it to heaven while the church must remain on earth. Eliot is showing the reader here his belief that the church is extremely corrupt; so bad that it does not deserve to enter heaven.

It is in this way that T. S. Eliot shows the reader his idea that the church is so awful that its leaders don’t even deserve to enter heaven. By comparing the church to a Hippopotamus, we can see that the church is even more unscrupulous than the lowest and most worthless creature on earth. If a hippopotamus-like person can make it into heaven but a church member cannot, we can see how wretched and sordid the church really is.

Civil Disobedience

C
Jason Carter
English 400–1

In Percy Shelley’s “A Song: ’Men of England,’” one can see Shelly’s call for a revolution to reform the social injustice that is taking place all across England. The ideas expressed in this poem are very similar to those in Shelley’s “England in 1819.” Both poems attempt to convince the readers to rise up from their pitiful condition and overthrow the tyrants who are causing them so much grief.

In “’Men of England,’”, Shelley is addressing the working class of England; those who were farmers and who worked the land for their rich landowners. In the first three stanzas, he asks these men why they bother to work for tyrants and ungrateful lords:

Wherefore weave with toil and care
The rich robes your tyrants wear?…
Wherefore feed and clothe and save…
Those ungrateful drones who would
Drain your sweat–nay, drink your blood?

Shelley is asking them why they work so hard all of their lives to please lords who do not care for them; who would not hesitate to drain their sweat or drink their blood. He is asking the “worker bees of England” why they make weapons and chains that the landowners simply use to destroy all they have accomplished. Shelley is presenting an argument in support of a worker revolution, and he is listing all of the reasons for such a revolt in the beginning of this poem. England is in the midst of civil unrest and economic depression after the Napoleonic Wars, and Shelley hopes that this poem will inspire the middle class of England to rise up and change the social conditions of the time.

In the next three stanzas of the poem, Shelley asks the workers what they receive for all of their hard work, and he proposes a solution that might bring them out of their wretched state. He wants to know if these workers have “leisure, comfort, calm, shelter, food, or any love,” from their masters as a reward for all of their hard work. If thy don’t receive any good benefits from the job, then Shelley wants to know what they could possibly buy or receive from all of their pain and suffering.

Shelley then proceeds to show the men of England examples of how they are robbed of everything that they make for their lords:

The seed ye sow, another reaps;
The wealth ye find, another keeps;
The robes ye weave, another wears;
The arms ye forge, another bears.

Everything that these men make, someone else takes and uses it for their own benefit. In return, the workers get pain and fear, and Shelley is urging them with these examples to rise up and change their condition.

In the next stanza, Shelley begins to offer solutions to the problems of the working class. He tells everyone that whenever they make something or find something profitable, he tells them to keep it away from the tyrant, impostor, and idle lord. He wants everyone to hold on to what they have and not give it to those who are too lazy to work for it themselves. In the last line of the third stanza, Shelley tells the men to “Forge arms–in your defence to bear.” Here, he is calling for some sort of retaliation or attack against those who have made life miserable for others. Shelley is officially calling for a revolt against the aristocracy by the hordes of working english men across the land. The blue–collar crowd is tired of being treated like dirt and this poem is their anthem, their cause, and their motivation to fight the Euro–trash who are driving their lives into the ground. This was Shelley’s purpose from the beginning, to convince the average Joe that there is a perfectly good reason to start a revolution and fight those who treat you poorly.

In “England in 1819,” Shelley calls for another revolt against those who drain the life blood out of every working man and woman in society. He uses the same method as in the first poem to try and convince the working man that this the correct and necessary thing to do. Shelley presents the readers with images of the insane King leading his army against a group of peaceful protesters. He shows the people the image of a country that is dying because of aristocratic leeches who attack their own people and rob them of their freedom. By using powerful and meaningful adjectives, similes, and metaphors, Shelley convinces his people that the only solution is to start a revolution against those blind and insensitive despots who are dragging England through the mud and kicking the pathetic and wretched citizens into the ground:

From which a glorious Phantom may
Burst, to illumine our tempestuous day.

Shelley says that their only hope is to revive a “Phantom” that will come from nowhere and overthrow the insolent and life–depriving government. Only after this happens will the true glory of England and its working class shine above all the rest.

This is how Shelley uses his poetry to convince the people of England to rise above its government and to change the conditions that they live in. Through the use of powerful language and meaningful arguments, Shelley convinces them that it is the right thing to do.

Deceit and Deception

It’s getting pretty bad when the third word of the essay is misspelled. And it’s the name of the author, no less.

Deceit and Deception
Jason Carter
English 400-1

In William Shakespear’s Measure for Measure and Othello, one can see the effects of deceit and trickery on the characters and on their actions. In each play, people are tested by those who are not what they appear to be. If they can overcome these deceptions, their problems will be solved and there will be a happy ending. If not, then their problems will not be resolved and they will suffer a tragic ending.

In Othello, the reader can see examples of deceit and misconceptions that remain hidden until the very end. In this play, Iago plays with Othello’s emotions and convinces him that Desdemona is not being faithful to him. He tells Othello that Desdemona is secretly having an affair with Cassio and tries to make Othello believe that she is not a true wife. Iago is attempting to seek revenge against Othello because he was not chosen to be his lieutenant. Throughout the entire play, he hints to Othello that she might be seeing Cassio and that Cassio is not a loyal soldier. He tells Othello:

O, beware, my lord, of jealousy!
It is the green-eyed monster, which doth mock
The meat it feeds on.
III:3 191-193

Look to your wife; observe her well with Cassio;
Wear your eye thus, not jealous nor secure.
III:3 224-225

Iago plans to further convince Othello of Desdemona’s disloyalty by planting the handkerchief among Cassio’s belongings:

I will in Cassio’s lodging lose this napkin
and let him find it…
The moor already changes with my poison.
Dangerous conceits are in their natures poisons
Which at the first are scarce found to distaste,
But with a little act upon the blood
Burn like the mines of sulphur.
III:3 363, 367-371

Iago already sees his lies taking affect on Othello, but he plans to amplify Othello’s jealous feelings by stealing his handkerchief from Desdemona and giving it to Cassio. Othello is so blinded by Iago’s deception that he truly believes Desdemona is unfaithful, and he kills her in her sleep for her treachery. He is not able to see through Iago’s trickery, and, therefore, he really believes that Desdemona has been unfaithful to him. Only when Emilia reveals Iago’s lying and illusions does Othello understand his mistake. The conflict can be resolved only when the masks come off and the truth is finally revealed. If this revelation happens too late, the story will have a tragic ending.

The duke also deceives his people in Measure for Measure. In this play, the duke has gone to Poland and has left Angelo and Escalus in charge of the city. Actually, the duke disguises himself as a friar and walks among the streets listening to his people and their problems. He realizes that there are problems, but he doesn’t know how to solve them, and he is stepping back and trying to find a solution. Claudio has gotten Juliet pregnant and is going to marry her but is thrown in jail by Angelo. Isabella pleads for his release, which Angelo will grant if she will sleep with him. She refuses and goes to the duke in disguise and tells him her predicament.

The Duke doesn’t throw off his mask and pardon Claudio or punish Angelo. Instead, he forms a plan that will solve everyone’s problems and make most of the people happy. He tells Mariana to sleep with Angelo so that they will have to marry by the end of the play. Meanwhile, Lucio is insulting the duke in front of the “friar,” calling him “A very superficial, ignorant, unweighing fellow.” He believes that Angelo makes a much better duke, and he says this, unknowingly, to the duke in disguise. Lucio can’t recognize the duke beneath the friar’s costume, and he will pay for his words in the end.

By the end of the play, the duke returns, and Isabella begs for him to punish Angelo for his wickedness. Then the “friar” is asked to appear before the court to defend himself against Lucio’s claims that he had insulted the duke. At this point, Lucio removes the Duke’s disguise and realizes his mistake. The duke punishes Lucio to death for his words and pardons everyone else. He frees Claudio, makes Angelo and Mariana get married, and asks Isabella to be his wife. By putting on a disguise and separating himself, the duke solves everyone’s problems and gets rid of the bad in society.

This is how Shakespeare uses deception and disguises to develop a story. If the characters can’t see through the illusions to what is real, they will suffer. If the disguises are removed and the truth is exposed before it is too late, the problems will be solved and the characters will be happy.