Example Essay (1000 words)

How does Atwood criticise modern living in her

poem, The City Planners?
Margaret Atwood uses poetry as a means by which to express her concerns and criticism of modern living.
She conveys the idea that the way we live is bland and overly controlled, and is having a detrimental effect
on our environment. She wants reform when it comes to urban planning and has hopes of humanity living
more harmoniously with nature. She expresses her ideas through a range of metaphorical ideas and
imagery, conveying a haunting image of the suburbs. We leave the poem with a renewed sense of
awareness of the problems of urbanisation. The poem might be read as a method of enlightenment, but
also as a warning to us all about our destructive relationship with nature.

Atwood conveys an image of desolation and vapidity in her depiction of a modern suburban landscape as
she takes us for a ride around the neighbourhood. She write that “what offends” her are the “sanities”, by
which she is referring to identical rows of houses and gardens. Her use of psychological language is notable,
and we may interpret her point as ironic: she is referring to what we regularly deem a sane way of living,
and subverting this to present it as madness. She criticises the man-made world, referring to houses as
“pedantic”, and “planted” trees as “sanitary”. She is offended by the way we have carved up the natural
landscape for our own individual gain. This is further reinforced through her use of imagery as she creates
an eerie and haunting tone: there is, “no shouting here, or shatter…nothing abrupt” suggesting we have
created a deluded version of normality, one that is individualistic and lacking in community spirit. The only
noise is the “rational whine” of a lawn mower. Again she uses the language of sanity, personifying the
machinery that is used to control the growing grass, which is “discouraged” from growing. Overall, the
opening stanza paints a picture of emptiness. The planned world we have created in suburban living is not
one of progress, but one of delusion that forgets our inherent connection with nature. Atwood makes us
question our plans for future housing developments in this opening scene.

Atwood later uses symbolism to expresses her opinion that, due to the harm inflicted upon the Earth, living
in this way is unsustainable, and even encourages ignorance. The second stanza starts with a contrasting
conjunction in “but though…” as Atwood begins to notice cracks in the “sanities” around the suburban
landscape. The sensory imagery in the “smell of spilled oil – a sickness” could allude to our obsession with
burning fossil fuels, and the simile in the “splash of paint surprising as a bruise” acts as a flash of
imperfection in this controlled world. Later she goes on to describe this decay as being “gradual as glaciers
that right now nobody notices”. There is a sense of inevitability in the impermanence of this place as she
states that “the houses will capsize and slide” suggestive of destruction and chaos. The image of the
“plastic” hose pipe “coiled and vicious” suggests a snake, perhaps an allusion to evil. Atwood’s message
seems clear: plastic, petrol and toxic chemicals have helped build this world, but they will also accelerate
our global ecological doom if we are not careful. The most important line, for me, is that the houses have
“the same slant in avoidance of the hot sky”, perhaps symbolic of our willingness to shelter, ignore and hide
from the reality of our acts upon the world, even when the rising temperatures are plain to see and feel.
We would rather cower in our homes and turn our backs. The tone here shifts to one of despair, and
Atwood then takes aim at the culprits of these crimes.

Atwood blames the eponymous City Planners, and therefore government, for the cause of suburban
development. Her perspective is fully conveyed, describing the designers of this land as “insane.” The City
Planners are presented as objects, being “scattered” by their local governments to carve up new land when
old lands fall apart or become uninhabitable. The poem at this stage becomes much more dispersed and
less organised, which mirrors the content of Atwood’s message. There is also a sense of blindness that is
conveyed as the City Planners act in “their own private blizzard”. They are not working together for the sake
of the community and land, but competing against one another to get contracts signed and make profit, so
this could be read as a criticism of our individualistic, and capitalist, lifestyle. The “blizzard” metaphor is
continued into the final lines of building “a wall in the white vanishing air” which, again, alludes to our
blinkered approach to developing spaces for humans to live in. The oxymoron at the end of the poem
where Atwood describes the builders “tracing the panic of suburb order in the bland madness of snows” is,
for me, quite surreal and ominous. There is a “panic” to rebuild the “madness” of “suburb order” which
really conveys the whole poem’s message – will we wake up to our actions’ detrimental effects on the
environment, even if ecological meltdown materialises? Probably not, Atwood pessimistically suggests.

Although quite a despairing end to the poem, we might interpret Atwood’s message as one of guidance. A
lot needs to change in order for us to combat the impending ecological meltdown that so many scientists
have proven is on the horizon. One such thing is the way we use land – cities, suburbs and rural spaces. In
Atwood’s view, and I think I agree with her, the suburban, individualistic, carving-up-of-nature-for-profit
method that governments and private developers have been harnessing since the 50s to build suburban
towns does more to encourage ignorance and separation than build sustainable communities with shared
common goals. Atwood concisely uses her art to contribute to the global debate surrounding climate
change, enlightening us to the dangers of mad city planning.