The Planners

Watch this video.

-Which parts of the poem can you identify?

-Which imageries relly have an impact on you?

-What effect does the music have on the reader?

Do you agree with this analysis of the poem?

Is there anything you would like to add?

Does the poet like what is happening in the city?

What do the last four lines of the poem, clearly central to what Boey is writing, say to you?

Is the poet more angry than sad? Or just resigned to what is happening?

Analysis of the poem.

This entry was posted in Home, Senior 1 2013, Senior 2 2013 and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to The Planners

  1. mararipoll says:

    1. yes, I agree. I think that in this analysis is more from the point of view of a Singapores. But it is okay, in part it is similar to what we did in class.

    2. Yes, in the stanza 3 i would add that the voice makes it personal, he expresses his feelings about what they are doing.
    Also i would add some tones: angry, disappointed, pessimistic, sad negative.

    3. No, the voice hates what they are doing to the city, they are destroying nature, culture, history. In a way he is trying to communicate us that what they are doing is wrong even though the new things they create are better that the other ones.

    4. That no matter what they do, he won’t let them destroy art, that would be in our minds forever. And that he would never give up until they stop destroying.

    5. For me he is more sad. But he wants to express, to show, to do something with that sadness that he has, and as he can’t he gets a little bit angry. And for me that is a reason why he wrote this poem, to let go all his sadness.

  2. Catu Grosso says:

    1. Yes, i think is very similar to the one we made in class all together.

    2. Yes, i would add some tones: Sad , negative , pessimistic, angry , remorseful ,etc except of that i think is very complete.

    3.No, the voice is trying to communicate the opposite. He definitely hate what is happening because he is a man who cares about the culture, history and art.

    4.He is trying to tell us in the four last lines that he will not let the planners destroyed art.

    5.For me he is more angry but he is resigned to what is happening to the city/culture/history/art.

  3. josefinacatani says:

    1) Yes, i agree with analysis.
    2) No, i think it is very complete.
    3) No , he hates what is happening to his city, Singnapur, he hates that his city gives the back to ART to HISTORY, etc.
    4) For me the last four lines is an explanation of waht he feels about the Planners destroing nature and art, it will remain in his memory.
    5) For me it is both, sad and angry, because he had to leave Signapur becauuse of the people destroing art, nature.

  4. tomas borda says:

    1) I agree with the analysis of the poem. but it is more distroing the world.
    2) no< there is all what it is in the poem.
    3) No, he HATES what is happening in the world there are distroing histry art and the are no realizing what they are doing.
    4) that he will not give up. He wont let thatr all the art /history is breaking out.
    5) No hge is sad about what is happening and he wants to show all what they THE PLANNERS are doing.

  5. florenciaaraya says:

    1. Yes, I agree but I also think that the prezi only talks about Singapore while there are other themes, for example, that have nothing to do with it.
    2. I would also add: another theme is progress in destroying history and nature; that by saying the word ‘they’ he’s excluding himself from the group of the planners and that it should be the man who surrenders to nature, not the other way around.
    3. No, that’s why he moved from Singapoure, because the people there didn’t give much importance to culture as they were destroying it.
    4. That humanity might me destroying culture, history and nature but we will never destroy art. That art will always remain in his poems.
    5. He is both, sad and angry, in my opinion, and I would also add that he is disappointed about humanity destroying nature and not caring so much.

  6. catalinarela says:

    1) Yes, I agree.
    2) I would add the personal information about the author. That he moved to Australia, dissapointed about how literature and culture was treated in his country (Singapore).
    3) No, he hates the idea of culture begin forgot and destroyed in his country.
    4) For me, the last four lines of the poem centralize the idea of art can’t be errased, the planners will not destroy art. Art isn’t part of modernization, the lines are quite ironic.
    5) In my point of view, he is both. He is angry because he had to left his country because of the sittuation and sad because the people living in Singapore will not no so much about history, culture and art.

  7. Bauti Olaizola says:

    1) I agree with the analysis because it said that History and Culture are disappearing
    2) I would like to add the basic things like the Tone, theme, etc, some ideas I think are incomplete
    3) No, it’s said that he like the History and Culture of his country (Singapour) but he said that the Planners are destroying his country.
    4)He is saying how he feel or how he will react when the planners destroyed every thing
    5) I think he is angry because he thinks that the planners will destroy every thing and no country will have his own Culture and History

  8. 1. Yes, basically I agree.
    2. I would like to add some themes just like: modernization/progress is destroying history/culture/nature; art resists; reducing the quality of the future. And if they put themes in the analysis, they could put some tones like: angry; sad; pessimistic; negative.
    3. The poet doesn´t like what is happening in the city and he explains it during the poem.
    4. For me it says that he will not miss poetry, he will not cry over poetry. No, because planners can take everything away from him and from history/culture but they can`t take away poetry or art.
    5. The voice is resigned for what is happening. “They build and will not stop” They will still be building but they will not stop because noone is going to do anything about it. They are all resigned.

  9. delfinamiyuranga says:

    1- I totaly agree with the analysis of the poem specific and clear to understand.

    2- I would add the tones, the message and explain the title. I think that it isn´t such information as the one that it is already in the prezi but it is important.

    3- The poet, is totally against of what is happening in the city, he thinks that they are destroying nature, history and culture without any sense, “they build and will not stop” is a line in witch he shows the negative thoughts that he have within that group of the planners.

    4- In that last stanza, he wants to depict his feelings of anger that he feels towards that group, that group that is destroying, killing the city that is very important for him. He is also saying that the planners may destroy nature, but he won´t “bleed” any single drop of poetry, any single drop of art.

    5- In my opinion, the poet had more anger than sadness, his internal feeling is anger in witch he shows through all the poem, is pessimistic and negative way to express his feelings. “They have the means”, he is expressing that if they have it, there would be nothing that stop they, they will continue destroying history, nature and culture but he won´t support that, “but my heart would not bleed poetry”.

  10. nicolasmonguzzi says:

    1)Yes I agree with the analisis.
    2)I would like to add tones: pessimistic, sad, angry and dissapointing.
    3)No because they are distroing history and culture of Singapore and he would like to conserve it.
    4)He is expressing his feelings toward what´s happening in Singapore
    5)I think it´s resigned because he doesn´t want modernization because it destroys history and culture “The history of the city is being destroyed”

  11. Tomás Anania says:

    1- Yes, I agree with the analyze of the poem.
    2- I would like to add that it has an irregular structure. It has three stanzas, nine lines in the first, fourteen in the second and four in the third.
    3- No, because he explains how Signaporeans destroy the culture and the history of the country.
    4- He explains that althought the planners destroy culture and the history of his country, he will not forget it. He writes this poem expressing his feelings.
    5- He is angry with the planners, because they destroy the city. He says that he will not stop being a poet and that his poety will continue in the history.

  12. Lucila Giambruni says:

    1) I agree with the analysis of the poem especially when it says that “modernization has empowered nature”.
    2) I would like to add the tones: negative, pessimistic, sad, angry, disappointed.
    3) He doesn´t like what is happening in his own country. He describes the architects modernizing and erasing all the imperfections of nature.
    4) He is explaining how he feels towards the planners and their actions that damage nature. He has anger inside him and he is expressing it to the reader by writing this poem.
    5) For me, Boey Kim Cheng is angry because he knows that the planners will not stop building. He indicates that though he wishes otherwise, what happens is against his wishes. Moreover, they are destroying nature and erasing history and culture. “The history of the city is being destroyed”. I agree with that.

  13. Tadeo Helou says:

    1) I partly agree with the analysis of the poem because the people who created the prezi included some information that in my opinion it was not correct. Perhaps their analysis is very good in some parts as in the analysis of the second stanza; they give information that is not completely believable. As for example, when they include data about the dentist, they say that “Singaporeans are obsessed with perfection” It is not justified. Furthermore, they always write that the people of the city are Singaporeans and they are specifying. In my opinion, the author did not want to specify because all around the world are cities “destroyed” by their governments.

    2) Yes, I would like to add the tones of the poem. In my opinion they are important. Moreover, I would like to add the narrator I think that is important, as the information about the author. In my opinion, they are analysis is partly incomplete.

    3) In my opinion, no because he liked the culture/history of his country (Signapore), but the planners destroyed the history of the place by reconstructing the city. He separates clearly “they” of him because he does not agree with what they were doing.

    4) My point of view is the same one than the doers of the prezi.
    This one says that because of some imagery as, “bleed” or “single drop” I and they realized that Boey wanted to express that the planners were killing the city.

    5) In my opinion he is sad because of what happened. He is sad because it was the history/culture of all Singaporeans including him. He really felt the destruction of his destruction/history. Also, in my opinion the poet has an angry tone. He is angry with the planners

    Hope you like it 😉

  14. Facu milhas says:

    I totaly agree with the analysis of the poem, but i would add some things, for example i would generalize when they talk about the themes, because he just talks about singapoure, but boey could be talking of the whole planet’s progress. The poet doesn’t like what is happening in the city, this is showed all along the story, and finnaly more enphasised in the last stanza. This last four lines tell us, as in the prezi is said, that the poet “wont bleed”, and he is refering to how he feels towards modenization. Also, when Boey talks about his poetry, and introduces himself in the poem he wants to say thet history will remail existing, and that anything is permanent, but ist can be remembered. I think the poem in in a more angry point of view, because of the expressions Boey uses.

  15. Candela Zufriategui says:

    • Yes, I agree with the analysis of the poem.
    • I would like to add Theme: Consequences of progress/the destructive element in human beings/nothing is permanent and Tone: Negative/serious/ironic/sad/pessimistic.
    • No, he expresses his dissatisfaction through the voice, which is excluded from the planners “they”. Throughout the poem the writer shows the bad consequences of the progress: Destruction of nature/ history and past destroyed (He doesn’t like these changes).
    • In stanza 3 (the last four lines) the writer uses negatives to state his view “bleed” (the voice is against the planners). The writer doesn’t believe in the benefits of the city progress. The voice is afraid of the consequences of manmade actions that damage the past and reduce the quality of the future. The last lines express that art will not be past of expansion.
    • He is angry because of what is happening in the city and he ironically mentions that, even if the progress continuous, his poetry will go on history.

  16. Delfina Urso says:

    1- I think that maybe the analysis should be more general, for example, when it says that the poem is about the industrialization of the city Singapore I would say that it is about the industrialization of the world.
    2- I would add that in the 2nd stanza, the result may be perferct but all the history and the past is destroyed.
    3- The poet doesn’t like what’s happening. “But my heart will not bleed poetry. Not a single drop the stain the blueprint of our past’s tomorrow.” The writer uses negatives to state his view.
    4- The writer uses negatives and imageries like “bleed”to state his view. He says that art will not be part of this expantionism. Ironically, he mentions that his poetry will go on. History is not dead.
    5- He’s resigned and sad of what is happening. He doesn’t like the fact of loosing the history of the world ang replacing it with “better” buildings. He doesn’t believe in the benefits of modernism, expansionism and city progress. He’s afraid of the consequences of man-made actions, whic damage the past and reduces the quality of the future.

  17. Mechi Anelo says:

    I think that this analysis of the poem is very specific, for example the themes. In our analysis in class we made general themes. The poet doesn’t like what is happening to the city because the history of the place had been taken away. That’s why he moved with his family to Australia. In the last four lines of the poem is the first time where the poet is mentioned. It says that the history will be in his poems. The poet is angry with the planners who are taking away all the history of Signapore. He doesn’t refuse, he is “fighting! through his poems.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.