why did the father place the child on the grass and leave in the tractor? (2 Viewers)

[FezsAreCool]

I thought the child was dead. I thought he ran him over with the tractor (as it was still warm).
It was a tough text because he kept on saying how the hug was not significant, so you really couldn't say that in the response. But I was taking the poem being read from a narration point of view as the father is trying to convince himself that none of this is significant, when it actually is. He's just killed his son. (Nothing out of the ordinary..)

 

[Rawf]

I thought the child was dead. I thought he ran him over with the tractor (as it was still warm).
It was a tough text because he kept on saying how the hug was not significant, so you really couldn't say that in the response. But I was taking the poem being read from a narration point of view as the father is trying to convince himself that none of this is significant, when it actually is. He's just killed his son. (Nothing out of the ordinary..)

How would they eat dinner together then?
I just talked about a fathers unconditional love for their child, so much that they can just have like.. a hug for no particular reason except out of pure love.
Maybe he just injured the boy but not to the extent that he killed him?.. and the boy is not angry at his dad because he loves him so much that he realises its an accident o_o

 

[Timske]

cause he was placed on the grass and left there

Nice interpretation lols

 

[lpower3]

the child is growing up and the inseperable bond between the child and father and son is beginning to break (the inevitable sadness of the future).. the son moving away from the father in opposite directions is a metaphor for the future - the child and father pursuing different opportunities.

note the imagery of the farm/field to suggest how big a world it is that the boy is moving away into

no matter how strong a bond between two individuals, it is always breakable..

 

[WesternSky]

I thought the tractor was the child...

 

[UpAndAtThem]

the child is growing up and the inseperable bond between the child and father and son is beginning to break (the inevitable sadness of the future).. the son moving away from the father in opposite directions is a metaphor for the future - the child and father pursuing different opportunities.

note the imagery of the farm/field to suggest how big a world it is that the boy is moving away into

no matter how strong a bond between two individuals, it is always breakable..

 

[hsc2012la]

wut.. i just thought they were hugging because they loved each other and then he leaves and drives the tractor to do some work or whatever then returns when "the day is ending" so they have dinner
if the child is dead for some reason such as a tractor accident then explain this "there has been no family tragedy, no accident" etc and he is not hugging the child out of guilt or regret or sadness?

 

[esu_chan]

the child is growing up and the inseperable bond between the child and father and son is beginning to break (the inevitable sadness of the future).. the son moving away from the father in opposite directions is a metaphor for the future - the child and father pursuing different opportunities.

note the imagery of the farm/field to suggest how big a world it is that the boy is moving away into

no matter how strong a bond between two individuals, it is always breakable..

Wow.

I never thought of it like that. o-o

how did I miss that

all I said was that he was a farmer and he loved his son and stuff but work got in the way

 

[skrillex_x]

ah fuck. i read it as someone bought/took their tractor and drove it away -.-

 

[Study-study]

did anyone interpret that the child was a farm animal? lololol bump

:O oh wow...now that i think about it it could have been an animal
thats deep man deep!

 

[NinaChapps]

A friend of mine told me that a portion of their school thought that the son was dead...

Yeah, same here. One guy wrote that the father ran over his son with the tractor.

 

[Remzii94]

they hugged, the dad went to work, then they had dinner (Y)

 

[Keelan134]

Coz the theme was time, I thought the father was embracing his youth, innocence and dependency thus a strong connection, however the boy was set to grow up the inevitable change of the nothing not normal thang. The dinner thing would be that although the kid moves away their connection is maintained but not as much, transitory nature of belonging? Then again i had 20 mins to do section one so i just came up with that

 

[Keelan134]

the child is growing up and the inseperable bond between the child and father and son is beginning to break (the inevitable sadness of the future).. the son moving away from the father in opposite directions is a metaphor for the future - the child and father pursuing different opportunities.

note the imagery of the farm/field to suggest how big a world it is that the boy is moving away into

no matter how strong a bond between two individuals, it is always breakable..

^^What I wrote on the face of it. I hope that was a 3 marker hahaha need all the marks I can for that section

 

[Zenox]

^^What I wrote on the face of it. I hope that was a 3 marker hahaha need all the marks I can for that section

Same,

 

[Rawf]

^^What I wrote on the face of it. I hope that was a 3 marker hahaha need all the marks I can for that section

The poem was a 2 marker. I'm pretty sure you didn't have to go that in depth to get it.
If you used it for the 5 marker you probably needed to though.

 

[ifraijaz]

:O oh wow...now that i think about it it could have been an animal
thats deep man deep!

he had dinner with his farm animal... hmmmm

 

[venerable]

Does it matter why he left... Didn't the question only specify "what these lines reveal...", which ended at "no indecision or unease between them"? So you would had have to have kept your analysis pertaining only to the specified lines, no?

 

[Dedication_]

Does it matter why he left... Didn't the question only specify "what these lines reveal...", which ended at "no indecision or unease between them"? So you would had have to have kept your analysis pertaining only to the specified lines, no?

Agreed, I thought abut this. I think I disadvantaged myself by going back to it and reading the whole thing, cause then I really got thinking. If I stuck to the proposed lines it probably would've been faster, and easier.

 

[Zenox]

Does it matter why he left... Didn't the question only specify "what these lines reveal...", which ended at "no indecision or unease between them"? So you would had have to have kept your analysis pertaining only to the specified lines, no?

Whilst the question did specify "..." you can use other parts of the poem to analyse this and reinforce your interpretation...