If your students are anything like mine, they can create simile after simile, but writing a metaphor, a good metaphor is a real struggle.
A poet friend of mine had a great idea and he did it with my class as a guest speaker, and I tweaked it to make the activity fit my students.
I took three stacks so index cards and colored a small part of the edges: one stack was green, one blue, and the other red. This was purely for organizational reasons, something I’ll get into shortly. Each student received one of color, and then I asked them what concrete nouns were. One student shouted out, “That pen you’re writing with.” Someone else hollers out, “Dog,” and then the following, “Rat. Car. Shoe. Gum.”
Then I asked them, “What are adjectives?” One of my better students said, “Anything that modifies a noun,” and I can’t be sure I would’ve given that answer in college, let alone sixth grade. Then I’m writing down all the adjectives they can come up with: Red, hairy, old, stupid, strong, ugly.
Then, the most difficult part: abstract nouns. I tell them that abstract nouns are like all other nouns, except they can’t be touched—you can touch a pencil, a concrete noun, but you can’t touch happiness, sadness, anxiety, or boredom. I call on a few people, and when they give an incorrect answer, several students say, “If you can touch it, it’s not abstract—I love it when that happens.
Once I am sure they have a handle on this, I ask them to write their adjectives on their red cards. The concrete nouns on the greens, and the abstract nouns on the blues. I put three different students in charge of each color. I ask each student to randomly draw a card, and the results were fuzzy, big screen TV and love. On my overhead I wrote, “It was the fuzzy big screen TV of love. There are a few snickers, as there should be, and I ask, “What?” One of my students, who is never quite able to restrain herself from blurting out says, “It doesn’t make sense!” I ask why, and I get some good answers: big screen TVs aren’t fuzzy; TV don’t give love.
I rewrite it as, “It was the fuzzy blanket of love.” Cheesy, yes, but I need them to make a connection here, understand how and why it works, even if it borders on the cliché. If they don’t get it, it doesn’t matter how artful the metaphor. We discuss it, they get it, and then I change it once more: it was the fuzzy blanket of discontent.
Only two students knew what discontent meant. I talked about content, then discontent. I ask them what they think. Paraphrasing here a bit, they thought it was different that I used a fuzzy blanket in comparison to discontent, their first reaction being content, but this made them think.
Underneath the “The fuzzy blanket of discontent.” I wrote, “It was the blue couch of anger. They talk about the color blue and how it is usually associated being sad, then the difference between sad and anger. I ask them what this metaphor means. One student says, “I see someone sitting on the couch squeezing a pillow to death, showing their teeth.” One boy says, “I see a couch with eyes and teeth.” And finally, one of my students says, “This is the couch you go to when you’re really mad.” Yes!
I have my card holders randomly draw five more cards each. Here is what we had.
| Concrete Noun | Adjective | Abstract Noun |
| computer | giant | wild |
| shotgun | green | hope |
| pencil | fat | hilarious |
| horse | stupid | love |
| cricket | dirty | happy |
I make a simile going straight across: It was the giant computer of wild. They laugh, I ask what’s wrong, and they tell me it doesn’t make sense. I tell them to make it make sense, but with their own—don’t go straight across. They need to make three similes, and they can repeat a word only once—no making three similes with horse just because you love horses. I need them to stretch themselves and grow as writers, and it’s not just because it’s good for them to write about different things, try new things, but also for me. Every year I get kids who write about the same things over and over—everything is a football story, or everything is a heartbreaking love story, or a story about monkeys who fling poo and bananas—and I get sick of reading the same story with a few different plot twists and changed character names. Yes, they can write them, but after a while, it’s time to move on and do something else.
I write with them, because they need a model, and after I finish each metaphor, I share it aloud. When I am done with my three, I ask for a few volunteers. They share, I give them feedback as to what I immediately like, especially when I notice their metaphors are very unconventional, and how it doesn’t just stop with the metaphor: they add on to the end of the metaphor to help put it in context, and more description.
Now I ask them to revise, change something from their metaphors: they have to write two new metaphors through revising. It could be changing love to disgust, changing the end description of their metaphor, something that changes the metaphor, not just changing a word or two. One student says, “But I really like my metaphor. I don’t want to change it.” This is a fairly common reaction when it comes to revision, but I say, “You’re not erasing your work. You’re trying something new and different, not throwing away what you had.”
I revise, they revise, and when I’ve finished revising all three, I read them. I read the first draft, then the second of each so they get a before and after feel of my work. I ask them questions as to what the notice and what they like about my writing—I need them to think like writers.
Here are my examples:
1a) It was the stupid cricket of love, sitting outside my window playing its song, and all I wanted to do was poor bleach on it.
1b) It was the stupid cricket of love, chirping its song outside my window, now knowing that at any moment, he would be eaten alive.
2a) It was the dirty horse of hope, covered in mud, limping, but never ceasing in its task.
2b) They were the dirty shoes of hope—what Ali had trudged through the mud in Louisiana to get away from one life and into another.
3a) It was the green shotgun of wild, the thing by the door, a sign that I knew my father was going to do something he shouldn’t.
3b) It was the green shotgun of mischief. It was leaning up against the wall next to the ammo belt, a sign that my father was about to something he shouldn’t.
We talked about what we were doing with our writing, what we liked, what we would change. One of my students asked me if she could use hers to start a new story—she really liked the beginning and wanted to keep running with what she created.
Then, probably the most important part, I had them pull out their short stories, read through what they’ve written and see where they can add a metaphor to their work—at least one, if not more, to their work, making sure that the metaphors aren’t thrown in: they have to share their additions with a peer and their peer has to give a response as to what they like, why they like it, and share any questions they might have. This way, there is immediate feedback, and if any revisions need to occur, they can happen right away.