Unfamiliar Texts

We are the tenants

With close reference to the text discuss the poets use of imagery to describe the north.

In the poem "We are the tenants" Kapka Kassabova describes her experience of immigrating to New Zealand. Throughout the poem Kassabova uses imagery to describe the North, allowing the reader to visualise the authors point of view. 

In the first stanza Kassabova writes "The seagulls glide, inordinately large and slow, over the vigilant stone, hungry for lost souls." These lines are a metaphor. The seagulls are the residents of New Zealand. New Zealanders are like seagulls in the way we group together around a person in need. We have this sense of duty that other peoples problems are our own. Describing the seagulls as large is a reflection on how an immigrant eats. They do not have the wealth to eat a sufficient amount of food, where as New Zealand has an obesity problem. We are well fed. The Norths lifestyle is relaxed, it is much slower than other countries, Kassabova is exclaiming her surprise of how relaxed a lifestyle can be. As well as reflecting on the people around her, Kassabova reflects on herself. Her soul is lost, she doesn't have a home and is unsettled wherever she goes. She states that the residents of the North are hungry for her lost soul. They want to repair her life, but Kassabova knows all to well it is not that simple. Lost souls is an allusion to the devil, immigrants see people as their enemies, they feel neglected by everyone.

After these lines in the first stanza Kassabova continues to create a painting in the readers mind by writing "The hills are packed like cement, the cemeteries lush with centuries of flesh." Kassabova longs for what the hills have. It is odd to wish for a lifestyle like that of something natural. The hills are packed tightly together, forever. They have a home that is not disrupted, that can't change, this is all Kassabova wishes for. The reader envisions a group huddled together, this makes us feel warm yet sympathetic as we know Kassabova doesn't have this. Using cemeteries and lush within the same sentence is an odd diction. The two words have opposing connotations. When thinking of cemeteries we think of sadness, grief and death, when thinking of something that is lush we picture glamorous extravagant things. The two juxtapose each other, it seems as though Kassabova admires the fact that we have a vast population of elderly and generations of deceased.  New Zealand is able to tell the history of their people, of their family. We are very in touch with our Maori roots and embrace our ethnic heritage. Immigrant are not really able to appreciate their history as mos often their people don't have a home, they are just generations of travellers.

In the third stanza Kassabova brings back the imagery of the hills and seagulls. "and the hills answer back with seagull cries, and the chimneys prop up the sky like exclamation marks in sentences that we must write in order to be real." The hills answering back with seagull cries puts in the readers mind that the hills are occupied by residents. There are so many people calling New Zealand home that houses have been built on the hills to provide shelter for all residents. Kassabova feels ripped off, whilst she constantly walks on "imaginary floors" people are living on every possible inch of the country. Exclamation points have an intense, strong connotation. Chimneys puff out smoke from fires, fire is the sign of life. The residents of New Zealand build up as well as out, our lives occupy so much of this land leaving little space for people like Kassabova. This makes me feel negatively towards the author, why should we provide homes from foreigners before homes of our own. The North Island has a large homeless population, the governments focus should be this population before the immigrant population. The ending of this poem screams self pity. The author seems to be wallowing in self-sorrow. They should be thankful they have somewhere to stay. Other people don't have anywhere to stay after they have been forced from their country.

Limestone

Explain how contrast of ideas are important in the passage. Give details from the text to support your answer.

Fiona Farrell writes about her experience travelling home to New Zealand from Belfast, where she lives now. Throughout the text Farrell describes the contrast in lifestyle between New Zealand and Ireland, as well as the contrast in New Zealand before she left and what it is now. 

In the second paragraph her longing to return home becomes apparent due to her frustration of her non-stop business lifestyle. She describes the commuters by writing "vigour and dash, with their blackberries and little pull on cases and polished shoes." We envision a group of smartly dressed business people, all on their phones with only business on their minds. If this is the non-stop lifestyle we as New Zealand readers share Farrell's annoyance with the European lifestyle. In New Zealand life is more relaxed than other places, we are not a major business hub in the world so do not have much of this lifestyle.

In the third paragraph Farrell writes a home hitting contrast in ideas. "that dream of primeval beaches scattered with driftwood, and dark forests, and plains burned to a tawny hide in late summer." Every kiwi knows of those summer walks along beautiful beaches and the view of sun kissed hills. This imagery makes us feel at home, and feel that love of the beauty our country has. Farrell then writes "reality: the beach is already threatened with subdivision and the trees with clear-felling, and the tawny plains are bordered by the dry beds of intricate vanished trees." The readers beautiful images they have created in their minds have been squandered into oblivion. We now envision our beautiful childhood memories as current nightmares. The immediate switch from positive connotation to negative connotation has a long lasting effect on the reader. The juxtaposition makes the reader realise that our country's environment is changing, and not for the better. New Zealand builds its pride on its gorgeous scenery and incredible nature, yet we are destroying what we once were.

The situation of change happens to everyone, you cannot expect things to not change especially when travelling through different "centuries". I feel as though I am nodding in agreeance with the author whilst reading this prose. I too see the negative changes on the country's environment. Looking at past photos of my family I am able to see how rich New Zealand's nature was before technology and overpopulation. If the country continues down this drastic path then I too would not be overly excited to return home after a trip away.

Compare & Contrast

Both authors have a negative attitude towards their movements. In the poem Kassabova feels like she is unwanted by all, "being nowhere forever" has really had a heartbreaking impact on Kassabova's mentality. Kassabova doesn't see her lifestyle changing any time soon, not settlement just constant departure and arrival. She has gone as far as to describe herself and other immigrants being controlled by  "some pied piper who will sound, one day, the horn of departure".  Kassabova referring to herself as an unwanted rat being flushed out by country natives. This isn't very fair on country natives or on immigrants. Most New Zealanders do not see immigrants as a group infesting our country. Yes these people may move a lot but Kassabova is wallowing in self pity trying to shove the blame onto someone. 

Farrell feels excited of leaving a business hub to return to a more relaxed lifestyle in her home New Zealand. However she is not feeling overly excited of returning to a home that has changed since the last time she was there. Farrell feels opposite to Kassabova in the way that she is not blaming anyone. The constant change of the country is no ones fault in Farrell's eyes. She feels as though every idea of "perfection" has been jumbled together to create a big mess. However she understand that everyone is "just trying for happiness".