I think the implication here is that she’s reinforcing to the little girl the idea that the man chooses whether or not something as life-changing as marriage can/will occur, and that a woman is helpless to surrender to his choosing.
Based on the title, the author likely regrets reinforcing these gender norms.
That’s ridiculous. Marriage requires consent. She consents, which means it’s up to him. Older women should be teaching little girls that marriage requires consent from both parties, that’s a good lesson.
Re-read the poem. The author is trying to marry the uncle’s sibling. They refer to the young girl as “your niece,” indicating that when said niece asks if the author loves the person the poem is addressing, that person isn’t the uncle. It is, in fact, the sibling of the uncle.
In this particular case, as I don’t know anything else about the author, they reinforced the idea that conservative sexist, conservative racist, conservative classist, or conservative religious ideas are more influential to the outcomes of an individual’s life, than the individuals that are involved. IE they reinforced the idea that the good of the many outweighs the good of the one.
If you tell a child that something they want to happen is up to someone else, that child will spend the next month repeating the exact same questions in an effort to convince that adult to do the thing the child wants to happen.
The author sicced the child on the child’s uncle, leaving the uncle with no peace for at least the next whole afternoon visit with the child.
I think the implication here is that she’s reinforcing to the little girl the idea that the man chooses whether or not something as life-changing as marriage can/will occur, and that a woman is helpless to surrender to his choosing.
Based on the title, the author likely regrets reinforcing these gender norms.
I get what it’s about. I just don’t get that it’s poetry.
That’s ridiculous. Marriage requires consent. She consents, which means it’s up to him. Older women should be teaching little girls that marriage requires consent from both parties, that’s a good lesson.
Re-read the poem. The author is trying to marry the uncle’s sibling. They refer to the young girl as “your niece,” indicating that when said niece asks if the author loves the person the poem is addressing, that person isn’t the uncle. It is, in fact, the sibling of the uncle.
In this particular case, as I don’t know anything else about the author, they reinforced the idea that conservative sexist, conservative racist, conservative classist, or conservative religious ideas are more influential to the outcomes of an individual’s life, than the individuals that are involved. IE they reinforced the idea that the good of the many outweighs the good of the one.
“You” has a niece, the girl in the poem. The girl in the poem has an uncle, “you”. The author wants to marry the uncle, who is “you”
If you tell a child that something they want to happen is up to someone else, that child will spend the next month repeating the exact same questions in an effort to convince that adult to do the thing the child wants to happen.
The author sicced the child on the child’s uncle, leaving the uncle with no peace for at least the next whole afternoon visit with the child.
That’s pretty interesting, the child-psychology perspective hadn’t occurred to me. Nice!