Considering we are reading literature that discusses wartime, I want you to read:
"The Man He Killed" by Thomas Hardy
and
"Dulce Et Decorum Est" by Wilfred Owen
After doing so, I'd like you to complete the following two tasks:
I. Write a well-developed paragraph in which you use ideas from both passages to establish a controlling idea about possessions. Develop your controlling idea using specific examples and details from each passage.
II. Choose a specific literary element (e.g., theme, characterization, etc.) or literary technique (e.g., imagery, irony, figurative language, etc.) used by one of the authors. Using specific details from that passage, in a well-developed paragraph, show how the author uses that element or technique to develop the passage.
You should submit TWO full paragraphs utilizing quotations from each passage to support your point.
dulce et*
ReplyDeleteWonderful contribution. I'll fix it.
ReplyDeleteBoth poems, "Dulce Et Decorum Est" and "Man He Killed" establish a controlling idea about possessions. Both poems show that the soldiers belong to the country itself. Men are forced to fight in wars and they have no choice but to pull the trigger on their enemies. In "Man He Killed", the man in the battle does not want to actually pull the trigger, but ends up doing so because he is obligated to. He has no other choice but kill off his opponent. In the first stanza, Hardy explains that they could've been friends if they met in a different atmosphere and says, "Had her and I but met by some old ancient inn." This shows that if they did not meet in war, they could've been friends. The man doesn't feel happy about shooting him. It goes to show that there is lack of respect for human life because it seems okay to kill as long as you're in war. Basically, war can sever and dissolve friendship. It also shows us how futile war is and how people can be controlled into killing off others. "Dulce Et Decorum Est" also shows that war is futile; no matter how much soldiers deeply oppose the intervention of one nation into another, they are still forced to fight as if they're in possession of the nation. He explains in the poem that people will encourage you to fight for your country, but, in reality, it may simply be sentencing yourself to an unnecessary death. In addition, the title of the poem translates to "Sweet & Fitting it is" but the last line of the poem, "The old lie: Dulce et decorum set Pro patria mori" translates to "It is a lie: Sweet and fitting it is to die for one's country."
ReplyDeleteThe poem, "The Man He Killed" uses an ABAB rhyming scheme and in general, it sounds like a simple nursery rhyme. The author uses this rhyming/singing scheme pattern to keep his composure despite the harsh incident described in the poem. The mood of this poem is sometimes aggressive and sometimes full of anger which changes people's mood while reading this poem. Overall, the structure of the poem is set out as a simple nursery rhyme so the first thing the reader expects is a happy poem. However, as the poem goes on, it is clear that the poem is actually very depressing since it relates to war.
One would think that one is in possession of himself or herself. One would think that one's life choices and actions are one's own. Contrary to popular belief, one is helpless, and one's choices are severely limited; one's life is in possession of a force greater than himself or herself, nature. In "The Man he Killed," the protagonist is forced to kill another life to prevent his own life from being taken. In a time of war, one's decisions are restricted, he did not want to kill the other man. He said, if it weren't for the war, he might have even been sharing a drink; they could have been friends. He did not have a choice; he was forced into doing something against his own will. Also, in "Dulce et Decorum est," it is evident that one is fragile and helpless; nature is strong and powerful. In the third stanza, "In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
ReplyDeleteHe plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning," it is shown that one is helpless against nature and gas; there is nothing one can do to save oneself.
In the poem, there is the usage of repetition either to convey feeling and as a way of showing tone, in "The Man He killed," andorfor emphasis in "Dulce Et Decorum est." In the third stanza, the protagonist in "The Man he killed," tries to justify his fatal act by trying to convince himself, the death of the other man was inevitable. The protagonist continuously repeating words such as "because" and "my foe," shows his unrest with his act. Also, in "Dulce Et Decorum," the usage of repetition, such as "GAS! gas," stresses the danger and the inevitability of what is to come.
In both poems, the author conveys to us the idea that soldiers possess no free will. As shown by the lines, “I shot him dead because… he was my foe,” a soldier has no time to think about his actions or decisions during a war. If they see an enemy, they are forced to attack because any hesitation would inevitably lead to their own deaths. For them, nothing else matters. Due to their need to survive, they are unable to escape from the terrors of war. This idea of war is also illustrated in the poem, “Dulce Et Decorum Est,” where the powerless soldier is incapable of changing his circumstances. He is in the middle of a battlefield and despite terrible conditions and horrors, he is compelled to stay and fight it out. Even if a soldier is against killing or fighting, if he is dumped onto the front line, he has no choice concerning the matter. The lines, “All went lame; all blind;
ReplyDeleteDrunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of disappointed shells that dropped behind,” goes against the image most people have of war: one where heroes demonstrate their bravery by fighting for glory, beliefs, and pride.
In the poem, “Dulce Et Decorum Est,” the author establishes the theme: war is horrifying. His purpose in writing the poem was probably to discourage war and he does this by almost scaring into siding with him. He emphasizes how soldiers die meaningless deaths in the most gruesome ways imaginable and puts forth an image where a dying soldier has “white eyes writhing in his face” and “blood… gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs.” By incorporating these images into his poem, the author is able to convey to us his anti-war feellings.
The poems “The Man He Killed” and “Dulce Et Decorum Est” both illustrate the concept that men have no possession over themselves. Instead, men are possessed by ideals, as shown in “The Man He Killed.” The speaker in the poem kills his enemy for no other reason than being enemies. It is only because they are facing opposite directions of the battleground that one must kill the other. They are strangers: they don't know each others' thoughts, morals, or insights. The speaker did not have to go through a mental process before killing the enemy, saying that “'[he] shot him dead because— / Because he was [his] foe, / Just so” (9-11). The speaker belongs to the ideal of war; he is totally displaced from his own thoughts, motives, and choices. In “Dulce Et Decorum Est,” men are shown to be owned by their countries. The soldiers march, but the reason behind their marching is ambiguous, to themselves and to the reader. They are presented as aimless zombies of a larger overarching force: “All went lame; All blind; / Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots” (6-7). They follow the orders of the hovering invisible force of their country. No one has a name; no one has an identity. They are only presented as a mass of war and bloodshed.
ReplyDeleteThe author of “The Man He Killed” uses rhyme scheme and juxtaposition to develop his point. By arranging the poem in an ABAB rhyme scheme, the author makes the poem sound like a nursery rhyme—playful and carefree. The words follow a rhythm, making the reader move from one line to the next with no difficulty. This flow relates to how the speaker of the poem follows what is expected of a soldier in combat. By juxtaposing a hypothetical situation with the reality, the author is able to convey the futility of war. Had those two men met anywhere else in the world, they would have become acquaintances. Unfortunately, because they are trapped in the ideal of war, they don't have that choice. The author of “Dulce Et Decorum Est” uses imagery to develop his point. The details that he offers of the marching soldier's fatigue and the dead man's face and body present men as simply bodies. They are not people, almost comparable to a heavy mass. They trudge the path that the person in front of them trudges on and die as gory carcasses.
David Lin period 7
ReplyDeleteIn the poems “Dulce Et Decorum Est” and “The Man He Killed,”both men possessed superficial reasons for enlisting and going to war. In “The Man He Killed,”the soldier had enlisted to fight because he “ was out of work- had sold his traps. No other reason why.” He did not possess any altruistic motive for fighting the war. On the other hand, in “Dulce Et Decorum Est,” the soldier possessed the ideal to fight for his country. However, like many young men in the era of World War II, he was talked into fighting the war by his peers or his professors. This is shown in the last line, “ The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est Pro patria mori.” He found out that war was not like what he had been told. Many youths were told that war is glamorous and honorable. But the reality is, it is not. The real reason why true soldiers fight in the dirty business known as war, is because they are fighting for an altruistic purpose that they truly believe in. For example, in the American Revolution, many soldiers decided to re-enlist and fight, despite the fact that they were starving, freezing, and dying in Valley Forge. Though other soldiers deserted the army, some stayed because they still possessed faith in their purpose. They stayed true to the statement, “ give me liberty or give me death.”All those men did not fight for the sake of the sham of “glory.” They fought to pay the price for freedom.
One effective technique used by Wilfred Owen in Dulce Et Decorum Est is his uncommon use of language and characterization. He writes “Of disappointed shells,” to describe how the artillery missed their target, giving inanimate objects extra qualities that normally is possessed by living things. He also describes the soldiers’ reaction to a gas attack as an “ecstasy of fumbling” which is quite unorthodox because ecstasy means elation, which doesn’t fit into the contextual meaning. However, the unorthodox language gives adornment to the imagery of the poem. One exceptional line is “ the devil’s sick of sin.” it has three “s” sounds, which forms an alliteration, giving it auditory effect. The meaning of the words also fit together in a negative trio, since all these words carry strong negative feelings. The use of the word “sick” is also unorthodox, and it gives the reader a “nauseating” impression to the evilness of the other two words, “devil” and “sin.”While we normally think of disease or ailments as associated with the word “sick,”the use of the word triggers subconscious feelings that enhance the other two words.
“Dulce Et Decorum Est” and “The Man He Killed” are testaments to the aimlessness of war and the fragility of man, at least from the soldier’s point of view. In both poems, the protagonists mindlessly carry out orders; their lives are in the possession of some unseen Supreme Being, the very idea of death itself. In “Dulce Et Decorum Est”, the soldiers have all gone “lame, blind, deaf” and “drunk with fatigue”, essentially walking corpses. Fear of death makes them quick to defend themselves from a gas attack, but the omnipresent reaper will always have a hold on them. The very air they breathe is laced with the stench of human putrefaction and they are bathed in a deadly “green sea” of chlorine. They have already been marked by death, but they use all manner of technology to prolong what little time they have left, struggling to put on “the clumsy helmets just in time”. They may have saved themselves once, but it will catch up to them, because for these men, death is a requirement, a parallel to what the woman in the kitchen says in Slaughterhouse Five, “All the real soldiers are dead” (159). In “The Man He Killed”, Hardy is faced with a classic dilemma, kill or be killed. Death does not discriminate on the battlefield; one’s thoughts, views, and feelings are of no importance when the game is in play, because in the grand scheme of things, the death of one man is simply another point won. The soldier is merely a disposable pawn who must follow the rules of war. “I shot him dead because – because he was my foe”, that is the only consolation they can offer themselves.
ReplyDeleteWilfred Owen offers us a narrative in real-time, varying the length of his stanzas in order to convey the effects of his experience. The first stanza is chunky, rhyming perfectly yet clumsily, emphasizing the harsh monotony of trudging to their “distant rest”. The second is much the same; the act of putting on the helmet is completed in just two lines, but the rest of the poem is drawn out, fixated on the failure of one soldier to do so and his subsequent death. The third stanza is choppy, highlighting the author’s “helpless[ness]” and the suddenness of the soldier as he “plunges at [him], guttering, choking, drowning”. The author saw so much in that one moment that it has imprinted in his mind. The fourth stanza is longer than the rest, but it flows much more naturally, subtly accenting the beauty of death and actively recounting to us the horrors that have plagued him.
These poems reminded me of a video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzCu3Y8E0w8. There is a movie playing in the background and it shows Bush and Hussein playing chess. Later (starting at around 5:30) it is shown that it is the Grim Reaper who is pulling all the strings. We may answer to our leaders, and we may hold them responsible for starting war, but the truth is that our leaders are being led by a greater force. Thus it seems as if the idea of death, or fear of it, is what dictates our actions. (I’m not sure if the clip is a part of a movie or if it was made just for this show. More info about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octavo_D%C3%ADa)
Tracy Huang Pd 7
ReplyDeleteIn both “The Man He Killed” and “Dulce Et Decorum Est” there is a display of the lost of possession. The narrators of both poems have no sense of control of their war. They have to follow the flow of the war. In “The Man He Killed,” the narrator displays his feeling of killing, “I shot him dead because—Because he was my foe.” The narrator didn’t want to kill him but he has to because the war makes them enemies. The narrator emphasizes his reluctance in war when he shows us his action if he meets his “enemy” in a bar, “You'd treat, if met where any bar is, Or help to half-a-crown.” If the two soldiers had instead met in a bar, they wouldn’t attack each other but treat each others to drinks. In “Dulce Et Decorum Est,” the narrator displays his sadness that plagues him in the war. When the narrator sees his one of his friends dying, he couldn’t save him. He slowly watched him die in pain, “He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning. Every soldier fights to help their country but the narrator expresses his idea that war is not a sweet victory, “Dulce et decorum est Pro patria mori.”
In “The Man He Killed,” there is a rhyming scheme which makes the poem sound playful and childish. It feels like this poem shouldn’t be taken seriously. But as we read on, we can see that the rhyming scheme is to provide shade to the horrors of war. Just as we have emphasized in class that Vonnegut’s is making war seem less horrifying, Louis Untermeyer is doing the same to war by sounding playful in describing it. But by doing this, we can see that the author has been greatly affected by this traumatic experience.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBoth poems, “The Man He Killed” by Thomas Hardy and “Dulce Et Decorum Est” by Wilfred Owen, establish a controlling idea about possession of a will to survive. In “The Man He Killed,” the soldier tells the reader that if he had met his foe in an old ancient inn, he’d treat his “enemy” with a drink. However, he says, “But ranged as infantry, / And staring face to face, / I shot at him as he at me, / And killed him in his place.” In this scene, he states that the situation completely changes on the battlefield, a place where he would kill his foe. In this circumstance, his life is threatened and he is totally influenced by his will to survive, so he shoots his enemy before he is shot himself. In “Dulce Et Decorum Est,” a WWI scene is portrayed where poison gas is enshrouding a group of soldiers. Most of the soldiers are able to put on gas masks. However, one man wasn’t quick enough to put on his mask. “In all my dreams, before my helpless sight, / He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.” This line shows that in a life or death situation, it is up to you to do the things necessary to help yourself. The rest of the men look at the dying man helplessly because there is nothing they can do. They could have helped the person put on his mask, but then there wouldn’t be enough time to put their own masks on, leading to their own deaths. Their personal desires to live prevent them from risking their lives to help another.
ReplyDeleteThomas Hardy uses the literary technique, rhyme, in “The Man He Killed.” In each stanza, the last word of the first line rhymes with the last word of the third line and the last word of the second line rhymes with the last word of the last line. Having the endings of the lines rhyme reduces the seriousness of the tone. I think Hardy uses rhyme to develop the irony in his poem. He is poking fun at how different scenarios can completely change one’s actions.
In both poems, "Dulce Et Decorum Est" and "Man He Killed, there seems to be a contradiction of ideas about possession. Both poems refers to the aimlessness and nonsense of war. In "Man He Killed", the narrator talks about killing a man, which he would’ve otherwise befriended, if it had not for his duty and obligation to his country. He seems to have no real reason to kill him, other than they both have attachments to their country. In this sense, there seems to be the idea of a country possessing and controlling the man, relinquishing him from his rights and free will. “Had he and I but met/ by some ancient inn/ we should have sat down to wet.” The author also ridicules war: “Yes; quaint and curious war is!/ You shoot a fellow down/ You'd treat, if met where any bar is,/ Or help to half-a-crown.”
ReplyDeleteIn "Dulce Et Decorum Est", soldiers in this poem goes against the typical romantic version of the battlefield. Soldiers in this poem are sick and tired of the war but are forced to “march” because of the possessive power one’s country have over the individual man: “Bent double, like old beggars under sacks, Knock-kneed, coughing like hags.” “Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots/ But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;/Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots/ Of disappointed shells that dropped behind.” In the last line of this stanza, the author is depicting a scene where soldiers are reluctant to drop disappointing bombs. This illustrates the contradiction of the “The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est/ Pro patria mori” which translates to Sweet and fitting it is to die for one's country. The real gory of war shows the ridiculousness of war and the overwhelming power one’s country can have over a man.
In “Dulce Et Decorum Est", the author uses the technique of imagery to create a picture of how gory the war really is. “GAS! Gas! Quick, boys!-- An ecstasy of fumbling,/ Fitting/ the clumsy helmets just in time;/ But someone still was yelling out and stumbling/And floundering like a man in fire or lime.—“ creates the sense of confusion and sense of urgency. The reader gets a feeling of disorientation and horror from reading the explicit and detailed description of the war. In the last stanza, the author says: “And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,/His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;” which uses powerful imagery to evoke our senses to imagine the true horrors of war.
Both "The Man He Killed" by Thomas Hardy and "Dolce Et Decorum Est" by Wilfred Owen illustrate how soldiers do not possess morals in war. In the "Man He Killed," a soldier kills another man without any regret because he is in war. He says, "I shot him dead because -- / Because he was my foe." Hardy demonstrates how in war, one would do things that they normally would not. In any other situation the man would have treated the one he killed to a drink; however, because one cannot survive in a war with morals, the man has to shoot him instead. The other man is his enemy and that is enough to justify killing him. In "Dolce Et Decorum Est," Owen vividly describes how men kill each other with gruesome methods, such as with dangerous gases. He describes how soldiers can willingly use gases that make "the blood / Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs." Even though humans are considered as civilized off the battlefield, once they enter war, they lose their morals and brutally kill others. Soldiers lose their morals, and therefore their humanity, in wartime and become machines that can only kill.
ReplyDeleteWilfred Owen uses imagery to develop his anti-war poem "Dolce Et Decorum Est." His use of imagery is used to convey the horrors of war and why he is against it. He describes how all the soldiers are marching "Bent double, like old beggars under sacks / Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge." This description indicates how war can turn even the strongest soldiers into weak and undignified beggars. He also shows how on the battlefield, people do not die heroically. He illustrates how one man is "guttering, choking, drowning" and "the white eyes writhing in his face, / His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin." The vivid imagery discourages any idealistic people from thinking that war is glorious. Instead, Owen shows through his imagery the true nature of war. It is not sweet and right as the title suggests, but deplorable.
When one thinks of war, one can imagine honorable and courageous soldiers dying gratifyingly for their country. In both poems, "The Man he killed" by Thomas Hardy and "Dulce Et Decorum Est" by Wilfred Owen, both poets attack this glorification of war and criticizes a nation's possession over its soldiers. In "The Man He Killed" by Thomas Hardy, a soldier tries to justify his actions against an opposing soldier. He says, "I shot him dead because-/Because he was my foe,/Just so: my foe of course he was." The soldier obviously feels regret over shooting his supposed enemy by repeating the fact that the man killed was his foe. The soldier starts to think that the man he killed could have been in the same predicament that he was in: out of work with nowhere to turn to but the army. Later on, he realizes just how bizarre war is and exclaims, "Yes; quaint and curious war is!/ You shoot a fellow down/You'd treat, if met where any bar is,/Or help to half-a-crown." The man would've had a few drinks with the man he killed had his nation not proclaimed the soldier as his enemy.
ReplyDeleteIn a similar fashion, "Dulce Et Decorum Est" describes a soldier's inability to help his fellow comrades. In the quote, "In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,/He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning," the soldier describes how he is unable to save his comrade from suffocation of toxic fumes. This experience and the image of the dying soldier prompts him to ridicule the foolishness of the glorification of war. He says if others back home had seen what he had seen they would "not tell with such high zest/To children ardent for some desperate glory,/The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est/Pro patria mori." It is clear that the soldier does not believe that it is wonderful and fitting to die for one's country and that instead of the glory and recognition from war like his nation promised, he received regret, nightmares, and the inability to save his comrades. A nation's controlling possession over its soldiers through the glorification of war deludes the people of the true horrors of war.
In his poem, "The Man He Killed", Thomas Hardy uses colloquial writing to appeal to his readers. His use of words such as "nipperkin"(small drink) and "sold his traps"(sold his belongings) make the readers feel as if the soldier in the poem is having a conversation with them. This colloquial writing helps the soldier's cause by prompting readers to sympathize with his predicament. The soldier basically pleads with the readers to understand why he had to kill his enemy. In addition, colloquialism also enables readers to easily comprehend and appreciate the poem's theme: war is inconsistent and nonsensical.
I agree, in both poems it is obvious that the glamour of war is but a misconception that covers the real tragedy of war. In "The Man he Killed", the soldier is clearly trying to console himself (put himself in denial just like Billy) that he killed for the right reason: the man was his "foe". But as it started to sink in, he is faced with the possibility that this man is just as he is and he has killed a man that he would've liked to meet but will never get the chance to. He realizes that he had no reason to kill him except for the front that war had given him. The glamorous phrase would be "defending against the enemy" but the tragedy that it covers is that the guy could've been anybody that you know or meet on the street for a chat. Without the identification of "enemy"/"foe", the reason to kill has no substance. As in "Dulce Et Decorum Est", the soldier is watching his fellow soldier die in front of his eyes, in the most gruesome way and he can't do anything about it. Like you said, "This experience and the image of the dying soldier prompts him to ridicule the foolishness of the glorification of war." The concept of war has always been glorified where the men who come home are heroes, but how can a man feel like a hero when he knows that a man was dying in front of him and he could do nothing in his power to save him. The glamorous phrase is "if you die, you died for your country with honor" but the tragedy underneath the pretty words is that who can that honor when a loved one comes back so distorted that his family can't even recognize him? The words "honor" and "country" then mean nothing and all that's left is "death".
DeleteIn these two poems, both soldiers have different reasons for fighting in war, but they both share the same idea that they are the possessions of their country and have no free will. In "The Man He Killed", the speaker enlisted because he needed a job. He shoots down another soldier because they are on opposing forces, even though he says that if they met in a bar, he would treat him and be friendly. He doesn't sound guilty or regretful, just indifferent. The poet says "He thought he'd 'list, perhaps, Off-hand like—just as I—Was out of work—had sold his traps—No other reason why.", so he acknowledges the possibility that he just killed someone that might have just been stuck in the same situation as him. It feels like the soldier has sold his soul to his kingdom, because the way he speaks makes him sound like he doesn't really care about anything, he's just stating that maybe this enemy soldier he shot might have made a nice friend, but that won't happen now cause he's dead.
ReplyDeleteIn the second poem, "Dulce Et Decorum Est", the poet writes as though he's fighting for noble causes, not a pay day (fighting for the British empire in WW1). There is hardly any mention of the enemy in this poem, except that they're under a serious attack, and the scene is grotesque and terrible to watch. With all the negative detail the writer provides, he doesn't seem desensitized as much as the first poet, but the mess he's in shows that he has no personal control over the situation, and he's just another asset owned by his country. The soldiers marching with him are in the same position as him; they're just following orders.
In the second poem, Wilfred Owen uses a lot of visual imagery to describe his surroundings. None of this shows anything nice or happy; he's writing of a place where badly equipped and extremely fatigued soldiers are marching, and eventually heading straight into a surprise attack. Owen is using all of this terrible scenery to express his disgust for war, and all the horrific things that happen, but he continues to fight, because it's his duty to his country.
Both poems establish this idea that soldiers do not actually own anything, and that they're just tools of the government. The idea specifically shown is that they have no free will of their own, nor do they even have their own opinion. This is shown in the poem "The Man He Killed" when Hardy says "I shot him dead because- Because he was my foe," (10-11) showing how there is no other reason why he does what he does.. When you're told by the government to kill, you listen to them; your opinion doesn't matter. This idea is also expressed by Wilfred Owen in "Dulce Et Decorum Est". Owen shows how evil war is with descriptions that portray a very dark tone, like when he says "As under a green sea, I saw him drowning," (14) "He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning," (16) and "His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin" (20). This is then complemented by the ending, where Owen says, "The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
ReplyDeletePro patria mori," (27-28) which translates to "It is sweet and fitting to die for the fatherland." Owen is showing how soldiers go into battle and experience this hell, pain, and suffering. But why do they do it? They're told by the government that it's great to go to war and fight for your country. But what's so great about death?
Thomas Hardy uses irony in the poem "The Man He Killed" as a device to show how confusing war can be. Twice, Hardy mentions how simple everything supposedly is, when he says "my foe of course he was; \ That's clear enough," (11-12) and "He thought he'd 'list, perhaps, \ Off-hand like—just as I— \ Was out of work—had sold his traps— \ No other reason why" (13-16). However, these are clearly not simple. What's so clear about him being your enemy? What makes him your enemy? Why was he out of work? Why was he at the point where he must sell everything just to get by? Why is war the last remaining option? It's ironic that someone would think something to be so simple when it really isn't. Another example of irony was when Hardy says "You shoot a fellow down \ You'd treat, if met where any bar is, \ Or help to half-a-crown" (18-20). It's ironic in the sense that those who you kill could be friends of yours, people whom you enjoy the company of, people whom you love, etc. Why would you want to kill people like that. Ironic instances such as these confuse the reader, giving them a perplexed view of the poem, which allows them to feel a tiny perception of how confusing and stupid war truly is.
War is something that we have no control over as an individual. It is costly and may take away the most valuable possession that we have, our lives. Both poems are great examples of how men foolishly enlist into the army hoping for glory or a better situation than the one they are currently in. In "The Man He Killed ", the poet writes, "I shot him dead because— Because he was my foe,Just so: my foe of course he was." It shows how quickly life can be taken away through war, the narrator wasn't thinking of anything else but the poor situation that he was in, and he needed no other reason to kill. In "Dulce Et Decorum", the poet speaks of the death and gore of war, "If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs, Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud." The poet writes about the death and decay that war comes with. It is chaotic and death is at every corner. Both poems describe the things that happen in war but neither explains reasons of war. War just somehow happens and takes away the one possession that money can't buy.
ReplyDeleteIn Dulce Et Decorum, there is a plethora of imagery techniques being used to better portray the writer's thoughts. The first paragraph describes how poorly conditioned the soldiers are, limping, dirty, and barely able to stay alive. This is a huge contrast from the ideal soldier, one who is honorable and is ready to defend others. The poem continues on describing one of the weapons used in war made of gas. The author describes the person affected by it as drowning under a green sea. The descriptions later used in no means represent an honorable situation. There is nothing but cold death and fear everywhere. The imagery used is very convincing in portraying the author's message that there truly is no glory in war.
War can completely change a person's perception on the possessions that are important to them through hardship. Initially, at the start of the war, the unexperienced soldiers sought glory and comradeship. They believed that such traits were the greatest thing they could possess and were willing to put themselves at risk to obtain them. However, the horrors of war showed them that their most important possession was not something as intangible as glory and comradeship. Instead, the soldiers learned that they should treasure their lives above anything else, and that anything else was secondary in comparison.
ReplyDeleteIn "The Man He Killed," Hardy juxtaposes what the main character would do if he met his adversary outside the war with what he actually does during the war. If the soldier was a civilian and did not put his life in definite risk, he would have been cheerful, bright, and generous to anybody, including strangers. However, in the war, the soldier did not hesitate to kill his opponent after reasoning that it was a "kill or be killed" situation. The difference of the reaction in the two scenes clearly shows how war can change a person and his priorities.
In the first poem, the author mentions in line 6 that "I shot at him as he at me" only because "he was my foe" (line 10). The author had no control over who to kill and neither did the man he killed. They were both soldiers because they were "out of work" (line 15). The two men are not revolutionary, brave soldiers that want to fight for their country. On the contrary, they both lack money and they are even willing to lose possession of their lives because they have other option. Similarly, in the second poem the men "marched asleep" and "Many had lost their boots" (line 5). The men cannot choose what they want to do and are simply following orders. In a way, the men in both poems are a "bump on a log" because they don't have possession of anything--including their own fate and actions.
ReplyDeleteIn the first poem, the author uses alternating rhyming words to make the poem less horrifying. To someone that might not understand what war is like, this poem may actually seem like some sort of nursery chant. The rhyming words take away from how terrifying and destructive war really is in reality. It is interesting how the author starts the first stanza describing how he and the man he killed could have been friends--had they not been fighting on opposing sides in the war. Before reading the second stanza, I can foreshadow that the poem is going to lead to something darker because the author uses words such as "had" and "should" in the first stanza. The author also tries to steer away from the terrible images of war in the last stanza by describing war as "quaint and curious" (line 17).
Both "The Man He Killed" by Thomas Hardy and "Dolce Et Decorum Est" by Wilfred Owen share the controlling idea that one can only care about protecting his most important possession, his life. In, "The Man He Killed," the soldier says, "I shot at him as he at me, And killed him in his place.I shot him dead because—Because he was my foe." The soldiers shot at each other to protect their own lives. The narrator seems to show no remorse for the death of the other soldier. He accepts that he must eliminate the enemy to protect his own life. One's possessions are always more important than those of others.
ReplyDeleteIn the "Dolce Et Decorum Est" by Wilfred Owen, the same idea is present. The narrator says, "GAS! Gas! Quick, boys!-- An ecstasy of fumbling, Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time; But someone still was yelling out and stumbling, And floundering like a man in fire or lime." When the gas attack occurred, a person only cares about putting on his own gas mask. He can't bother worrying about his others when his own his life is at stake. Not caring for other may be heartless, but in times of war, survival is the most important thing.
2.
In the "Dolce Et Decorum Est" by Wilfred Owen, the author uses the literary technique of imagery to show the large contrast between the gilded impression people have of war and the actual nature of war. He speaks of "gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs" and "the white eyes writhing in his face," which puts vivid images of the horrors of war in the mind of the reader. People think war as some great event where soldiers passionately fight for their country, but in reality, it is just a bunch of young men desperately try to survive.
In times of war, soldiers become prisoners of fear and portending death as they are stripped of everything they own. They surrender their possession of free will in hope of escaping death, as shown in Thomas Hardy’s The Man He Killed and Wilfred Owen’s Dulce Et Decorum Est. Both men portray war as the absence of choice and righteous morals. Hardy’s protagonist fights in war under the constant pressure to survive. He shoots at another man simply because they are fighting on opposite sides. The protagonist expresses the idea that had he and his “foe” met “by some old ancient inn”, they would have happily “right many a nipperkin”. However, one’s death in war is a victory for another, and the protagonist tries to convince himself that to shoot at someone else is the only way to protect the soldier himself: “I shot him dead because-- / Because he was my foe, / Just so: my foe of course he was”. Despite his reluctance as a man to aim a gun at someone else and intend to kill, the soldier’s morals are cast aside as war’s ultimatum forces him to choose between killing or to be killed. Likewise, Owen’s protagonist is haunted by the fear of death. The “drunk with fatigue” soldiers have been battling death since the beginning of the war, but as Owen vividly paints the gruesome background, the soldiers seem to be trudging closer to it. The soldiers train themselves to fend off potential danger with the ultimate desire to survive. The fear of death awakens all of the soldiers and catalyzes their defense, as they do so by quickly putting on their helmets and masks when poisonous gases threaten their lives. One man in particular “drowns”, but the protagonist can only watch and cannot reach his hand out because he must protect himself before anyone else. The desire to live triumphs over righteous ethics and principles, such as providing aid to one in trouble. Both protagonists lose their free will to choose what is ideally correct for man and are pushed against the wall by the desire to survive.
ReplyDeleteThrough the use of powerful imagery, Wilfred Owen successfully depicts the gruesome horrors of war. He shows how men walk into war and stumble out disfigured and scarred by it: “Bent double, like old beggars under sacks…All went lame; all blind; / Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots…”. Owen aligns the imagery with the underlying irony of the title. He does not believe that war is “[dulce] et decorum est” or “sweet and filling it is”, but rather the complete opposite. His portrayal of war is undoubtedly like a horrifying nightmare turned reality: “To children ardent for some desperate glory, / The old lie: Dulce et decorum est / pro patri mori”. Owen builds up reality through the usage of vivid imagery only to confront and debunk a lie told to so many to enlist—in war there exists no heroic death. He ultimately tells the reader that war is not worth fighting in, for after facing such horrors, one will not be able to fight again.
When one thinks of war, bravery, glory and honor often come to mind. However, in both “The Man He Killed” by Thomas Hardy and “Dulce Et Decorum Est” by Wilfred Owen, war is depicted as a means to control the soldiers to do the country’s bidding. The soldiers fight for glory and honor, but many come to the realization that they have been controlled by those values that do not actually exist. At first, soldiers buy the lie : “Dulce et decorum est/ Pro patria mori” as said in “Dulce Et Decorum Est.” The lie means, “it is sweet and fitting to die for one’s country.” However, they come to realize that they are not really dying for glory, or a just cause.
ReplyDeleteFor example, in “The Man He Killed,” the soldier “shot him dead/ because he was my foe,/ Just so” (9-11). The soldier finds himself killing another man, who has no reason to be killed, except for being the enemy of the nation. The soldier thought that his nation’s enemy was his own, but he cannot overlook the fact that his foe had “no other reason” to die. There was no glory in killing another helpless man who was being controlled by the same values that he fell for. In addition, in “Dulce Et Decorum Est,” another soldier experiences the loss of his comrade. He is haunted by nightmares where his comrade plunges at him, “guttering, choking, drowning.” Then, his old belief in being glorious and patriotic disappear, and he warns others who are “ardent for some desperate glory” to distrust the old lie of patriotism. He has finally realized that there is no glory or a just cause in war; just unjustified killing.
“Behind the wagon that we flung him in,/And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,/His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;/If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood/Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,/Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud/Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues.”
In the quote above, Wilfred Owen uses figurative language to create a horrifying image of his comrade who was killed by toxic gas. The description tells that his comrade’s body was put in a wagon, and his white eyes still remained to haunt those who survived. The image of the comrade’s dying moments, in which his blood soared up, “gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,” creates a powerful sensation in the reader’s mind. The bitter experience, although never the same as experiencing, is nevertheless vicariously transferred to the reader through the use of vivid imagery. The descriptive words, such as “obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud,” create the sensation that the experience pervades one’s life, never going away.
In both “The Man He Killed” and “Dulce Et Decorum Est,” soldiers become possessions of the country they fight for. They are the pawns on the chessboard that nations use sacrificially in order to achieve victory and protect the “king,” or nation. Many of these “pawns” joined the army without another option or were drafted against their will. The soldier in “The Man He Killed” enlisted in the war because he “was out of work-had sold his traps- no other reason why.” And presumably, same goes for his foe whom he had just killed. In “Dulce Et Decorum Est,” the soldiers are described vividly as suffering beings who drag on the duration of the war if they had not already died. Glory is not worth the suffering that these soldiers go through: “Men marched asleep…Many had lost their boots but limped on, blood-shod… Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots…”
ReplyDeleteWilfred Owen’s use of imagery helps describe the suffering of the soldiers in the poem. In saying that the soldiers “bent double, like old beggars under sacks,” the reader begins to draw images of a bunch of dirty men hunched over with ragged clothing and walking unsteadily. All of a sudden they become aware of the impending doom of poison gas and they are now “fumbling, fitting the clumsy helmets just in time.” One can picture the soldiers tramping along and suddenly, they all start to panic and reach for their gas masks in this life or death situation. The unfortunate one who had not put his mask on in time suffers a violent death as his “white eyes [are] writhing in his face…the blood come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs.”
Erica Kwong Period 2
ReplyDelete“Dulce et Decorum Est” by Wilfred Owen and “The Man He Killed” by Thomas Hardy establish controlling ideas about possession. Both poems show how war possesses people’s actions. For example, in the first poem, the men are bootless, tired, injured, blind, and deaf. Normally, we would expect they to stop and rest to feel better. However, war forces the men to have only one option: to continue to march on for survival’s sakes. Furthermore, they are so desensitized and numb that they are “deaf even to the hoots/Of disappointed shells that dropped behind”. This poem also shows how war is full of action and reaction. An alarm “Gas! Gas! Quick, boys!” causes everyone to immediately put on their helmets. These men have no free will; war seems to dictate their lives. They are simply responding to events happening around them. In the second poem, the main character seems to be so dehumanized. The goal of war is to survive; the main character would get killed if he did not kill the man. The main character kills the man on the basis “just so my foe of course he was”. If the two men had met “by some old ancient inn”, the main character might have had a drink with him. However, war makes enemies out of people, and in this case, someone who might otherwise be seen as a friend in a different situation.
The last two lines of Dulce Et Decorum Et are “Dulce et decorum est/ Pro patria mori.” These words, which translate to “It is sweet and fitting to die for one’s country”, epitomize the meaning of the poem. Throughout his poem, Wilfred Owen uses imagery, especially similes, to show “the old Lie”, essentially how un-heroic war actually is. For example, in the beginning, there is the line: “Bent double, like old beggars under sacks”. This line is striking because this is not usually not how we see soldiers fighting in a war. The poem continues with: “Knock-kneed, coughing like hags,”. This line further shows the complete opposite; how weak these soldiers actually are. Later on, the author uses the similes: “His hanging face, like a devil’s sick of sin;”, “obscene as cancer”, and “bitter as the cud” to describe a dying man. These are the actual realities of war. With the use of rich similes, our perceptions of war may be altered and we may question: “Is war really as heroic as it seems?”
Joseph Stalin said "A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is statistics." This quote is analogous to the two works presented, "The Man he Killed" and "Dulce Et Decorum Est". While in "Man" the narrator speaks about one specific case of killing a soldier of the opposing faction it can be inferred that he is essentially talking about every time he had to kill someone because of his duty as a soldier. We can infer this because several lines in the poem are general statements. For example, when the narrator points out that "You shoot a fellow down / You'd treat, if met where any bar is" the fellow could be anyone. He doesn't know who he will see on the battlefield nor outside a bar. On the other hand, Wilfred Owen in "Dulce Et Decorum Est" paints the picture of a specific moment and makes it even more personal by using the pronoun "I". Descriptions such as "the blood coming gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs" are part of his argument to the reader that children should not be told that "it is sweet and fitting to die for one's country". Therefore, as Stalin says it, the man who suffered death by poison gas represents the one tragedy while the man who was killed by a gunshot represents the million who die, only amounting to a statistic.
ReplyDeleteThomas Hardy uses irony to create a mood of almost ambivalence. One assumption the reader has to make and accept is that the narrator would be willing to buy a drink for a stranger found outside a bar on an ordinary day. The narrator seems to make light of the fact that he shot another person who has a life and family and would probably treat him to a drink the same way. Consistent with what Stalin said about casualties in high numbers, the narrator is jaded to taking another's life. The irony is that neither person saw the other as a personal enemy, but as members of two separate armies they were automatically foes. Regardless of the narrator's lack of motive for the war other than that he "was out of work", he becomes the military's puppet and continually must fight for his life throughout his service.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThomas Hardy's "The Man He Killed" and Wilfred Owen's "Dulce Et Decorum Est" both accentuate that war is a possessive force on humanity. War is initially seen as an act of valor and glory, but as war progresses, its previous meaning becomes unsociable. In "The Man He Killed", war blindfolds the narrator causing his perspective towards war to change: "Yes; quaint and curious war is! / You shoot a fellow down / You'd treat, if met where any bar is, / Or help to half-a-crown". His loss in his sympathy to life is a result of him fighting in war and causes him to kill indiscriminately. Furthermore, war can be classified as possessive because soldiers are forced to follow rules set by the army and are basically "pawns" of a country. "Dulce Et Decorum Est" also suggests the theme that war is controlling force. The narrator of this poem establishes that war is delusional from his experience in combat. The war victim the narrator kills is a supposed example of "The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
DeletePro patria mori" or translated to "It is sweet and fitting to die for one's country". The author of the poem writes this poem as a satire making fun of war's pointlessness.
Wilfred Owen writes "Dulce Et Decorum Est" uses symbolism to highlight his idea that war is a controlling force. The soldiers are disorderly preparing for battle: "GAS! Gas! Quick, boys!-- An ecstasy of fumbling, / Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time; / But someone still was yelling out and stumbling / And floundering like a man in fire or lime.--". The chaos the soldiers face when preparing to fight symbolizes that war is simply confusion and mayhem. Moreover, the following line reads as "Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light" and demonstrates that fighting in battle restricts one's view of war. The soldiers are blinded by the gas and thus fail to see how pointless war really is until they watch the dying soldier pass away. In addition, "If in some smothering dreams you too could pace" is in reference to how war restricts one's abilities to comprehend the true deadliness and absurdity of war. Owen's symbolism in his poem attributes in his satire against war.