Compare and differentiate between these two different pre 20th Century Poems
...swelters. Surely we have perished” is the cry from the poet as he can’t bring himself around to the reality of what he is witnessing; his friends, co-soldiers murdered in the act of war. “Sweltering” gives us this crying, pleading tone into the poets actions, he’s almost suffering as bad or worse than his dead friends and believes he’s in hell because of this. And yet, “These men whose minds the dead have ravished” describes the mental torment of the soldiers, who are haunted by memories of their dead friends and the men they have murdered. Shocked that “These are men”, the poet realises whom they really are; their form, their existence, and this amplifies the sheer reflection of what war can cause- total destruction to all. The lexical set of hell and death is vividly and widely used throughout the poem; words such as “Death” and “murderers”, which produce a sense of immortality and the destructive appearance of war. Another literal technique used here is bestialisation by using words such as “ravished”, like a demented animal, which when applied in this context of the poem sets a more deeper evil quality to the nature of war. And the “dead”, murdered at war, have come back for revenge, mentally eating the minds of the surviving victims. The poem now begins to show not just the physical aspects post-war but also the mental, psychological torture, which seems to manifest itself within the few surviving victims. And “memory fingers in their hair of murders, / multitudinous murders”- we can see the scale of the destruction caused by “hair” acting as a collective noun for the thousands dead. The poem begins to personify more intense and vivid descriptions of these dead men, “Wading sloughs of flesh these helpless wander”- the metaphor here “Sloughs of flesh” could literally mean the scene pictured of the battlefield: scattered with the “flesh” of the dead; or it could metaphorically mean the memories of the dead, as they will exist forever. And the feeling of death and its presence, “treading blood from lungs that have loved laughter” is poignant in a way that each dead soldier has lived lives with great love and experiences, filled with “laughter” yet now their existence has been treaded away in their “blood”. And the use of alliteration, “loved Laughter”- the repetition of the “L” consonant- mimics this emotion of being joyful and happy (ironic towards the poems depressed mood) and creates a more vivid and stronger impression. And again the use of figurative language, “batter of guns and shatter of flying muscles” is used to great affect here. Onomatopoeia is used to emphasise the extreme physical presence which war entails, and also personification is used, “flying of muscles”, to create this idealistic and horrific outlook to war, which almost overwhelms the reader, who is forced into this hideous mindset on war. And “sunlight seems a blood smear; night comes blood black” exemplifies the consequence of post-war; the “blood” shed on the battle field has caused the land to become stained and “smeared” amplifying the sheer destruction that war causes. The next few lines almost respond to the rhetorical questions posed earlier in the text, “who are these?” The poet answers his own question; they are “heads that wear this hilarious, hideous / awful falseness of set smiling corpses” These men are barley recognisable, dehumanised like “corpses”. These soldiers are in guilt about what they have done and committed, “thus their hands are plucking at each other”. These men have hated what has happened and so break open their wounds, “plucking”, to repent what they have done. Finally the poem was written in a first hand account, almost like a diary entry, which adds to the intenseness of the poem. It has a purpose, however. To express his disquiet and disgust about a monarchy’s authority over the thousands dead and the poem criticises them for what has been done. The poem can be seen as a metaphor for the people of the age, challenging the monarchy- the fall of the absolute monarchy and the rise of socialism and communism. William Shakespeare writes his poem fictional poem, “Before Agincourt” about Henry V rallying his troops before entering a battle to which they were outnumbered 16000 to 25000. The use of propaganda techniques that Shakespeare writes, provides the necessary persuasion needed for the troops to fight in an outnumbered battle and also persuades them that winning is a glorious and honourable achievement, a complete contradiction to Wilfred Owen’s poem, “Mental Cases”. “If we are mark’d to die, we…” “Gods will? I pray thee wish not one man more”. The first line here is very persuasive as it mentions that Henry would not choose any other soldiers to fight such a battle making them feel honoured and privileged and also by posing rhetorical questions in the face of God, “Gods will”, causes the men to think about what the consequences may be if they were to not fight. The effect the line has on the soldiers is that it causes them to stand and take notice of the speaker and concentrate on his views- the speaker is now in control and this serves as a technique of persuasion. “The greater share of honour” is said to elevate the men above their usual station and the divine phrase “God’s Will” are used to gear up the army, as if God was on their side. If God happened to be on your side, they believed you would win. There is a complete contradiction here to “Mental Cases”, which is not pre-ordained; to win would be worse than to lose, as the mental torture would permanently damage the soldier for life. The indirect saying, “… wish not one man more” is used to try and boost the soldiers’ confidence. Henry V hides the fact that he is terribly outnumbered and that the odds are against them. In the next line we begin to see Henry V ulterior motive permeate through into the speech, “By Jove I am not covetous for gold, / it yearns me … outward things dwell not in my desires”. This phrase is not true as the point of war is to gain money and land- this is the ulterior motive and its very ironic as he cares not for his men, “I pray thee wish not one man more” but rather his own self-being and “outward things”. Pro...