Thread by @babytreeinacage, Why the handle @babytreeinacage? I wonder if anyone remembers where and why [...]

Why the handle @babytreeinacage? I wonder if anyone remembers where and why Harri discusses caging baby trees...

Re-read the opening 5 pages of the novel if you’re stuck!

And if you’re still stuck after reading those, I’ll be kind and tell you to look at the first sentence on page 7.

(NB: page numbers seem to be the same number in all four editions I own. Do let me know if yours differs!)

Haven’t got a copy of the text with you? Here you go...

So let’s settle in for some discussion around these 5 sentences...
If I was feeling brave, I might suggest you could answer a whole #AQALitP2 question using these quotations alone! I may challenge myself to do so. 1/?

Why are these a great place to start our analysis? Firstly, they’re not the opening sentence. ‘You could see the blood.’ is great: I could discuss it endlessly. But your teachers / classmates / you have probably done this already. 2/?

If you’re here, I’m guessing you’re seeking a broader range of ideas than the ones you’ve already heard in class or already taught. With my examiner hat on, my top tip for all texts would be to find lesser used quotations to memorise and discuss. 3/?

I read a wonderful A Christmas Carol essay in 2018 which used a quotation I’d never seen before. I actually had to quickly check the online version as I didn’t recognise it despite years of teaching the text. 4/?

The student didn’t gain extra marks for using a different quotation, but they gained my a renewed focused attention. I was excited to see what they had to say that was new! It’s worth surprising the examiner with your choice of quotations; make them sit up and pay attention. 5/?

(I wish I could remember the quotation - I’ll try and hunt it down!) 6/?

So back to Pigeon English and the line from which this account takes its name. This is a key moment where the reader sees Harri’s unique view of the world and where Kelman utilises dramatic irony.

(Unclear on dramatic irony? Look it up - now! It’s essential for your analysis.)

Harri’s ‘baby trees in a cage’ is likely referring to this kind of sight: young trees often need a support like this while growing. This is especially true in urban areas.

(I found it hard to Google for images of these - please let me know if you’ve found better ones!) 8/?

So a few questions for us to consider:

Why do young trees especially need support in urban areas, as opposed to more rural ones?

What might happen to them without the support?

How might Harri be similar to these young trees? Might he be in need of some support? Why? 9/?

Essentially we need to consider any *symbolism* that may be present in Kelman’s use of language.
There are many possible answers and ideas to these questions, and I’ll be back in a day or two to add to this thread with my own thoughts. 10/?

Okay here we go with a few more tweets on the topic of baby trees in cages. The first thing that occurs to me is the theme of vulnerability. The trees are *vulnerable* in an urban environment.
Why?
Well for 1) it’s not their natural environment and 2) the threat of humans. 11/?

Perhaps both of those statements also apply to Harri and other young boys new to London.
Could they be considered vulnerable because London is a new environment for him? Could they be seen as at risk of threat from other humans? And if so, what protections do we offer them? 12/?

I taught a brilliant Y10 class two years ago who had such insightful ideas about this quotation. One argued that the baby trees represent Harri, while others argued that they represent all young men like him. One argued the quotation establishes a theme of humans vs nature.
13/?

There are many more possibilities. The cages don’t seem to offer much visible support or protection to the trees. Perhaps this is also true of society and young men in London. Try writing a full paragraph about this line using modal verbs of possibility: may, might, could. 14/?

Before we move on to look at other parts of the novel, let’s just briefly discuss Harri’s understanding of the world and why he thinks the trees are caged. Harri’s naivety and his unique view of the world is, in my view, half the reasons he’s such a charming character. 15/?

He frequently misunderstands, overextends a meaning or completely misses the point of something. But his views are so innocent and childlike, that it’s hard not to be charmed by him.
Of course, this is a novel and Harri doesn’t really exist
so he is also more insightful
16/?

at times than an average 11yo might be. His misunderstandings tell us truths around the world around us, allowing readers to recall what life was like at the age, and enabling those who’ve lived in London a long time to remember how strange it can seem from the outside! 17/?

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, Kelman utilitises dramatic irony here as Harri questions who would try to steal a tree and, significantly, who would ‘chook somebody just to get his Chicken Joe’s?’ Structurally, this is a great end to the novel’s first section. 18/?

In many ways Pigeon English can be considered a modern ‘whodunnit’: that classic of literature where we try to solve a crime alongside the characters. Harri (and Dean) may not be our typical image of a detective but detect they do.
19/?

At the novel’s opening Kelman quickly establishes that a crime has taken place as readers are brought straight into the aftermath (note: ensure you know the term ‘in media res’ and how it applies here).
20/?

We have a crime, we have a location, we have a victim in ‘the dead boy’ BUT crucially we do not have a perpetrator or motive. Harri’s questions signal to the reader that the novel will be answering them. 21/?

It would be a rather strange book if Kelman then moved on to a different plot line and never mentioned the murder again! Instead readers finish this first section assuming that they will learn the identity and motive of the murderer in due course. 22/?

Harri’s naivety has led him to be so close and so far from the answer to his question! His shock at the murder makes him question who would kill someone just to get their dinner. Of course the answer is no one, and that should lead him to the other possible reasons. 23/?

But he’s not quite ready for that yet. He is still young, unworldly, new to the norms of London inner-city life and cannot imagine why one person would want to murder another outside a chicken shop. 24/?

But if we, as readers, have been paying any attention to the news over the last 20 years, we have likely placed this in a context we do understand. Tragically a ‘dead boy’ stabbed outside a chicken shop are a daily feature in London news. 25/?

And so another key theme is established right from the start: not only gang violence, but the tragedy of its consequences and the naivety ‘outsiders’ may have about the causes of such violence. Harri’s downfall is signalled right here: his naivety will be the death of him. 26/?

On that tragic note, I’m going to end this particular thread with a recommendation for this short documentary made by Sky News in the summer of 2018. It’s a good insight into the reality of London gang violence and the impact it has on young people. https://youtu.be/jkJ_gJQh2Xo ">https://youtu.be/jkJ_gJQh2...
27/27

Latest Threads Unrolled: