In ‘Digging’ and ‘Follower’ Heaney tends to use a great deal of stresses. In ‘Digging’ he tends to use more of iambic pentameter, which is a rising rhythm. Where as in ‘Follower’ he tends to use roughly the same amount of stresses in each line. I can arise to a conclusion of that Heaney uses a very irregular structure in ‘Digging’ due to the inconstancy of the stresses in each line. The irregular structure in ‘Digging’ helps the poet imitate his childhood and by the use of simple language along with the irregular structure. The regular structure of ‘Follower’ portrays to us the perfect craftsmanship of Heaney’s father. The stresses in both poems tend help portray the immense skill and precise craftsmen needed for digging or ploughing. These stresses in ‘Digging’ helps the poem to match the rhythm of the digging of the spade. The stresses in ‘Follower helps the poem to stay in rhythm of the father’s strength and skill.
There are a variety of familiar poetic techniques used by Heaney in ‘Digging’ and ‘Follower.’ In ‘Digging’, Heaney does use a great deal of onomatopoeia like, “rasping, gravelly, sloppily, squelch, slap.” There is a great variety of onomatopoeia used in ‘Follower’ like, “clicking, pluck, yapping,” but there is more used in ‘Digging’ rather than Follower. Heaney decides to use a lot of onomatopoeia to make his poem stand out as well as making it seem more alive and vivid.
Both ‘Digging’ and ‘Follower’ consist of simple language. Here are some examples from ‘Digging’, “my grandfather cut more turf in a day,” and this is from ‘Follower’, “I wanted to grow up and plough.” This suggests a simplicity of language used by Heaney in both poems. Heaney tends to use simple language as there are a series of simple activities in the two poems. The context of the two poems is of childhood, which makes the simple language appropriate because it goes with the atmosphere of childhood, where children do not understand very complex language.
Both poems ‘Digging’ and ‘Follower’ also use a lot of technical and monosyllabic terms. In ‘Digging’ the description of digging Heaney gives consists of some technical terms such as, “lug, shaft.” Some of the monosyllabic terms Heaney uses are, “bog, sods, curt cuts.” Some technical terms used in ‘Follower’ are, “hob-nailed, steel-pointed sock, mapping furrow,” and some monosyllabic terms are, “eye, wing, arm.”
Another observation is that some of the vocabulary used in ‘Digging’ is also used in ‘Follower’. These words from ‘Digging’, “shaft, sods, straining,” are used in ‘Follower’ as, “shafts, sod, strained.” The significance this overlap has on the two poems is the fact that it links both poems together. Both poems have a similar theme of the countryside and farm life, which makes these terms suitable in both poems. The overlapped words also show us the specialised tools needed for being a successful farmer. There is technical vocabulary used in both poems but there is more of it in ‘Follower’. In ‘Follower’ there also some specialised terms of ploughing, “wing, sock, headrig,” and some active verbs like, “rolled, stumbled, tripping, yapping.” Whereas in ‘Digging’ there aren’t any specialised terms or active verbs, which makes it different from the ‘Follower’. The technical vocabulary used by Heaney in Follower shows us the perfect craftsmanship of the father and the skill involved in performing hard working tasks.
In ‘Digging’ there are also a few colloquial phrases like, “By God, the old man could handle a spade.” In ‘Follower’ as well there are some colloquial phrases like, “mapping the furrow exactly.” There is an extended metaphor of digging and roots, showing how the poet is getting back to his own roots. ‘Follower’ is basically literal and metaphorical since it is about the son following the father. The son grows up but does not really follow the father by working in the fields. There are a variety of metaphors used such as, “globed like a full sail.” In ‘Follower’, Heaney makes a lot of nautical references such as the father’s shoulders like the billowing of a sail of a ship, and “sod” rolls over “without breaking.” It is unfortunate that Heaney doesn’t use nautical references in ‘Digging’ partly because it wouldn’t match the poem. It would disrupt the flow of the poem as the father in ‘Digging’ isn’t one described as huge and amazingly strong. Where as in ‘Follower’ he is described using nautical references to give us a taste of his strength and size. In ‘Digging’ it’s more of the father being portrayed as a hard worker but not necessarily huge and physically powerful. It would look rather odd in ‘Digging’ if nautical references were used because it won’t fit in with the theme and context.
The title ‘Follower’ is literal and metaphorical, since it’s about the son following his father. The son also grows up but does not quite follow his father’s profession of farming. There is a similarity between the ‘Digging’ and ‘Follower’ as it is the same as ‘Follower’ except that it refers to the father and grandfather.
‘Follower’ clearly shows us that Heaney imitates his father but in ‘Digging’ it is not quite the case. In ‘Follower’ it is clearly seen he wants to “grow up and plough / close one eye, stiffen my arm.” In ‘Digging’ Heaney does imitate a bit of his father by, “scatter new potatoes…we picked / cool hardness in our hands.” He tries to imitate his father in the not so highly skilled type of work. In Follower Heaney wants to grow up like his father but feels guilty of not being able to do so like, “I was a nuisance, tripping, falling.” In ‘Digging’ Heaney does feel a bit guilty as he knows that digging isn’t for him as shown, “I’ve no spade to follow men like them // squat pen / I’ll dig with it.” In both poems it is also shown the failures of the son not living up to his father’s examples, not continuing the family root, like the “…old man could handle a spade / like his old man.” This suggests that his grandfather and father dug, which has become a family tradition, which is a metaphor as it is his family’s in touch with the land. In Follower the son failed to follow the father’s example, as said, “all I ever did was follow / nuisance, tripping.”
There is also role reversal in Follower towards the end, when it isn’t Heaney letting his father down but is in fact his father, “my father…keeps stumbling / will not go away.” This type of role reversal, where the father is growing old doesn’t happen in ‘Digging’ making it a difference between the two poems. One of the differences between ‘Digging’ and ‘Follower’ is the fact that ‘Follower’ uses a lot of figurative language like, “globed.”
` In both poems the son shows a lot of aspiration, for example, “I ever did was follow / in his broad shadow round the farm,” and in ‘Digging’, “scatter new potatoes…we picked / loving…cool hardness in our hands.” These examples from both poems tell us that he did show hope towards following his father’s life, but they simply couldn’t do it anymore. They claimed that they did not have the sort of talent their parents or grandfather did for this particular type of work. In ‘Digging’ the presence of the father is good for young Heaney. Where as in ‘Follower’ the presence of the father towards the end isn’t very good as he he’s haunting young Heaney for the rest of his life.
In ‘Follower’ we find two word sentences whereas in ‘Digging’ there are none. “An expert,” is the small phrase used by Heaney which stands out in the beginning of the second stanza and being simply two words. The period after the two short words makes them stand out as something rather important. The two word sentence is like a subtitle and gives us a hint of what the stanza is likely to be about. This one word sentence suggests to us that it is simply a fact that Heaney grew up with this idea of expertise which makes it seem important.
The last sentence of the poem begins with ‘But,’ which should be used in the middle of a sentence. The use of this word suggests to us how significant Heaney sees this word to be, showing us how big the change has been, between the time he let his father down and when his father let him down.
In ‘Digging’ the ‘squat pen rests; snug as a gun’ suggests to us that young Heaney’s hand fits into the pen smoothly and the idea of ‘snug as a gun’ suggests the security of the pen. It clearly tells us how comfortable and relaxed he feels with the pen, which fits his hand perfectly as if it was actually meant for him.
In ‘Follower’ there is a pause between the ‘single pluck’ and the explanation of what is being plucked. That helps us at the idea that such a small movement could have such a dramatic effect ‘a single pluck // of reins, the sweating team turned around / and back into the land.’ His ‘eye’ at an end of a line helps us feel the intensity and power of the gaze being described.
‘Follower’ consists of six stanzas each consisting of about four lines. On the other hand ‘Digging’ consists of nine stanzas of each containing different numbers of lines. ‘Follower’ for example with a consistent number of lines keeps the poem flowing and helps the rhythm of the poem. ‘Digging’ on the other hand doesn’t have a specific layout which disrupts the flow of the poem slightly, and also makes it slightly harder to read.
‘Follower’ consists of six stanzas each consisting of about four lines. On the other hand ‘Digging’ consists of nine stanzas of each containing different numbers of lines. ‘Follower’ for example with a consistent number of lines keeps the poem flowing and helps the rhythm of the poem. ‘Digging’ on the other hand doesn’t has a specific layout which disrupts the flow of the poem slightly, and also makes it slightly harder to read.
I would conclude that both poems clearly show a great deal of similarities and differences, and both well written pieces give us a strong sense of the pastoral side of the world. Not to forget it shows us the strongly linked relationship between the father and the son and the way the son looks up to his father as a role model.
