Cartoon Physics, Part 1

Cartoon Physics, Part 1

By Nick Flynn

            In this poem, the speaker compares the real world of physics and science to the cartoon animation world that children see.   The speaker uses his opinion as the augmenting fact that children should be focused more on the fun, cartoon way of life than what’s actually going on in the real world.  I think the speaker’s tone in this poem is a mix of things, from whimsical and contemplative to possible hints of sarcasm and satire.  You can tell that the speaker knows the carefree imagination of cartoons; however, the speaker also brings the reader to think more about his point.

But what is his point?

For the first twelve stanzas of this poem, I thought the speaker was being sarcastic.  He pointed out that children shouldn’t have to burden themselves with the fact that the world is out all alone in a black space.  But then he goes on to list all of the things children should be focused on in cartoons: things that are “earthbound disasters” and influence the heroic effect on children.  I fell like the speaker is trying to satirize the way society raises their kids, saying that society hides the bad things in life, yet portrays violence through ‘harmless’ cartoons.

But then I reread the poem, and a different point of view came into my perspective.  Maybe, I thought, the author is trying to show how children are not influenced by the dark things in life, like the “galaxies swallowed by galaxies, whole solar systems collapsing”.  Rather, the speaker is demonstrating the way kids think, the way ten year-olds can feel special and great about themselves, and the way they can become confident heroes because of their imaginative outlook on life.

And as I was writing those first two theories of the speaker’s point, I came up with a third.  What if the speaker wrote this poem to compare the differences between the way a child will deal with a problem and an adult will deal with a problem?  In other words, maybe the speaker is showing the real life problems of a conscious adult’s world, while also showing the way children deal with those same circumstances.  Take the stanzas six to ten, for example:

“Ten-year-olds

 should stick with burning houses, car wrecks,  

ships going down—earthbound, tangible

disasters, arenas

where they can be heroes. You can run

back into a burning house, sinking ships

have lifeboats, the trucks will come

with their ladders, if you jump

you will be saved.”

It characterizes the same things adults deal with every day, but it uses different (more imaginative?) actions to solve the problems.

So does that mean the speaker’s point is to encourage children?   To encourage society to look from a child’s point of view at what the world is?

I’m still not sure.  Honestly, the mixed tones I got from the poem continue to throw me off as to what the speaker is exactly trying to say.  My opinion leans more toward the fact that the speaker is comparing the two worlds. I think he wants others to see the relatability both of the worlds have.  Like the poems’ title, maybe the speaker is trying to connect a child’s cartoon world to the real life world, combining them into some new form.