juxtaposing the black boy & the bullet

This poem’s power comes from what it doesn’t say. Smith careful does not state to what any description is actually referring; each description either literally or figuratively works and either for the bullet or the boy. By placing two seemingly unrelated things together and using descriptions that can apply to both and either, Smith makes a powerful political point about how society views both guns and the lives of Black boys. And in a sign of restraint, Smith does not offer any commentary about where their beliefs lie on these topics. This allows the reader to come up with their own interpretation and to subjectively absorb this poem the way they want. Smith lays out a problem and shows readers how absurd it is; by doing so, they are making a political point without explicitly stating it.

To understand how this works, it is essential to analyze the way each description is both specific and vague—how each description can apply to guns and to Black bodies. But Smith does not open the poem with this complex, confusing use of juxtaposition; instead, they slowly build from clear contrasting descriptions to descriptions that merge.

The difference between the first line and the final stanza is a great example of this. Smith writes, “one is hard & the other tried to be” (Line 1). This line opens the poem with a clear distinction between “the black boy” and “the bullet.” Since the title has already told readers what this poem will be juxtaposing, the reader enters the poem expecting to see two contrasting images of these very different things: Smith does exactly this. The bullet is literally hard. Its density and speed give it its power to kill.

This contrasts with the second part of the line, which is more figurative. Smith says the Black boy tried to be hard, meaning he tried to be tough, as “being hard” is slang for toughness, and it is often applied to young men. Immediately, the reader gets a narrative within this juxtaposition. The line implies that one of these items is stronger than the other, and since most people are familiar with how deadly guns can be, the reader immediately assumes which object has more power. Combined with the political environment surrounding gun violence and race in America, this line opens the poem with a visceral description of tragedy.

This first line is clear in its distinction between the Black boy and the bullet, as is the second line where the boy is fast, but the bullet will always be faster.

But by the time the poem reaches the final stanza, this clear distinction between the Black boy and the bullet vanishes. Smith writes, “both spark quite the debate, / some folks want to protect them/some think we should just get rid / of the damn things all together” (Lines 8-10). Here, Smith opens the stanza with a line suggesting that what will come next is a description of one thing and then the next. But the last two lines blur the distinction between the two, and Smith instead describes opposing sides of a debate about two different things. The last two lines could refer to how people feel about guns or to how people feel about Black bodies. This line offers a damning indictment of American political discourse and culture as it equates guns (inanimate objects) with Black bodies (human life).

Smith’s point here is multifaceted. On the one hand, they are pointing out the absurdity of such a contrast. On another hand, they are expressing outrage at the idea that human life is still up for debate, as if a person’s very existence is a sort of political stance to take. And on yet another hand, they are exposing a quirk in American culture: the fact that guns are so important to people that they are given similar care and concern as people give to one another. So, while Smith doesn’t tell the reader how they about specific gun laws or civil rights laws, they are criticizing American culture—particularly the perspective advocating for near limitless access to guns and that denies the widespread systemic oppression of Black people.

Smith builds to this point by slowly blurring the line between the Black boy and the bullet. They do this by gradually making the juxtapositions more difficult to differentiate. To better conceptualize this, consider a mirror held above a still pool of water. The further the mirror is from the water, the easier it is to see the difference between the real thing and the reflection. But as the mirror gets closer to the water, the distinction becomes more difficult to see. Finally, when the mirror is as close to the water as it can be without touching, it might be impossible to see where one ends and the other begins.

If the first line of the poem is the mirror far away from the pool, the last stanza is the mirror right next to it. And each line between draws the mirror closer. By the middle of the poem, that mirror has gotten so close to the water that the distinction is already blurred. The fifth line of the poem, exactly halfway through, reads, “one’s whole life is a flash” (Line 5). To what is this referring? The Black boy or the bullet? It could be both or either.

And that’s the point. Each line in the rest of the poem could refer to both entities, which shows the relationship these two things have in America. Gun violence disproportionately affects young Black men. Smith doesn’t attempt to explain why; they are simply pointing out the tragedy of such a connection.