What is The abandoned farmhouse by ted kooser about?

Answer 1

"Abandoned Farmhouse" by: Ted Kooser

Are we sure "Something went wrong?"

Clint Moseley

Most are accustomed to poetry that merrily goes about with a rhyme on every other line; Ted Kooser would rather, to our delight, tell a story.

First we notice that this poem contains three stanzas, the first two being comprised of eight lines each; however, the third consist of only seven. There is, I believe, a very good reason for this. The first two stanzas are sans rhyme. They are however, filled with evidence as we tour the "Abandoned Farmhouse." The tour, in the first two stanzas, fills our imaginations with a pictorial sight of a family once there. No accusations are made, just conclusions; in the first stanza we see the man "He was a big man… A tall man… a good, God-fearing man… But not a man for farming" (Gwynn 707).

In the second stanza we see his backdrop, "A woman lived with him…they had a child…Money was scarce…And the winters cold…It was lonely here" (Gwynn 707). The narrator works as a detective that gives the conclusion first, and then shares the evidence that drew to the conclusion. This is a perfect build up to the final stanza that clearly stands alone.

Though, as stated before, the first two stanzas contain no rhyme, they do however make great use of enjambments, which make up seven of the sixteen lines. These enjambments allow the poem to display a writing that reads more as a combination of poem and short-story.

We find a nostalgic tone in the first two stanzas. We have a large God fearing man that simply found farming was not for him. He took his family and left. No accusations, no harsh language, no reason to fear for the family. It is pure nostalgia-no rhyme, no laughter. But yet it was a close family; she cared for the house, he spent time with the child. So why is there a change in the third stanza?

As stated before the third stanza contains seven lines unlike the eight in the two previous stanzas. I believe this is an open invitation for the reader to draw his or her personal conclusion while ending the poem as they desire. If my assumption is erroneous; I apologize to Mr. Kooser.

Allowing myself the benefit of doubt, permit me to assemble a foundation for the final line.

"Something went wrong," (Gwynn 707). Upon reading this I automatically believe the accuser and eagerly forget all I learned in the first two stanzas. "Something went wrong" (Gwynn 707). I look for the accuser so that I may find out more. The accuser is "the empty house" (Gwynn 707).I find this accuser located "in the weed-choked yard" (Gwynn 707). Now instead of a "God-fearing man" (Gwynn 707), I see a man that is capable of choking the life out of someone, a dangerous man.

What of the wife, the woman who had "Bedroom wall[s] papered with lilacs and the kitchen shelves covered with oilcloth" (Gwynn 707). Though I pictured this pleasant but rugged farm-woman happily and lovingly caring for her home, I hear accusations now that tell a different tale. She was a petite lady who tried to please a man that she feared. She slaved all day in the hot cellar canning what little they gathered from the fields. Once she mentioned the small amount she had to work with to her husband and this angered the man who was capable of choking someone, and he threw stones from the empty fields at her while she slaved down in the hot cellar. Late at night as she, with tear filled eyes, read her Bible by the window in the upstairs bedroom, the man who was capable of choking someone and would throw stones from the empty fields at her, would grab The Bible in anger and throw it to the ground breaking its back. Who told me this? The "Stones in the fields [and] in the cellar [they also] say she left in a nervous haste" (Gwynn 707).

Then I come to the one question, the only question that this poem asks. "And the child" (Gwynn 707)? Why only here do we have a question? If imagination is to run it's vilest, we must have a child or animal getting killed or injured. The poor child's "Toys are strewn in the yard like branches after a storm" (Gwynn 707-708). The storm was the man who was capable of choking someone and would throw stones from the empty fields and angrily throw the Bible to the ground. The little girl died in an angry rage by the hands of the man who made the little girl dress her doll in overalls because he wanted a boy instead of a girl and was capable of choking someone and would throw stones from the empty fields at a petit women slaving in a hot cellar and then would angrily throw the Bible to the ground when she prayed looking out the upstairs window, because he thought he could plow through the large stones in the field that broke his plow, pulled by a tractor that became rusty in his leaky barn.

I believe however, that we need to first look at the accusers before condemnation sets in. We have a farm house who has only known tenants that are farmers. Our man "He was a big man… A tall man… a good, God-fearing man… But not a man for farming" (Gwynn 707). This would confuse a farmhouse, thinking everyone must be a farmer. So for them to pack up and leave it is obvious to the farmhouse that "Something went wrong," (Gwynn 707). We must also remember that at the time the yard had the house feeling all choked up.

And of the woman who "Left in a nervous haste" (Gwynn 707). The accusers were "Stones in the fields in the cellar" (Gwynn 707). The stones have only seen men that would align them along the fields so that they could watch as the farmer would sit upon his shiny tractor and plow the fields to sow then reap an abundant crop. How sad they were when the hard working man could not get the fields to produce. Surely to them it seemed that "Something went wrong," (Gwynn 707).

As for the question "And the child" (Gwynn 707)? As stated before if imagination is to run it's vilest, we must have a child or animal getting killed or injured. So, what if the child's "Toys are strewn in the yard like branches after a storm" (Gwynn 707-708)? Maybe "a rubber cow, a rusty tractor with a broken plow, a doll in overalls" (Gwynn 708) had a grudge against the father because of their plight, but most children's "Toys are strewn in the yard like branches after a storm" (Gwynn 707-708).

Now that we know who the accusers are; allow me to give another closing sentence.

"He was a big man… A tall man… a good, God-fearing man… But not a man for farming" (Gwynn 707). He had accepted this. Each night, by his bedroom window, he would read his Bible and pray for God's intervention.

One day, it was a Friday; he received word from his Uncle that a job awaited him in the city. He told his wife and child, they celebrated, a few dishes were broken. His new job started the following Monday, they were rushed. The wife, though running around in "a nervous haste" (Gwynn 707), was now giddy as a school girl.

As for the question "And the child" (Gwynn 707)? The whole yard was her domain; she dressed her doll in overalls because she wanted to be a farmer to be able to help her father. Her father loved her very much; he took the time to make her a sandbox so she could play in the fresh air. She moved to the city with her parents. They live in a nice townhouse across from her new school. She plays each day in the park with the other children. Though the tire sandbox is but a fading memory, her father reads to her each night because "He [is] a big man… A tall man… a good, God-fearing man… But not a man for farming" (Gwynn 707).