The poems “I Looked Up From My Writing,” “My Boy Jack,” “The Messages,” “August 1914,” and “For a Girl” all emphasize the distance and disconnect from the war. In reality, I think you could argue that most of these poems emphasize that, but I feel that these provide particular important perspectives. How do you begin to characterize the feelings towards the war in these poems? How does this distance change the way these poets relate to the war and to the people fighting in it?
Charlotte Mew’s poem “May 1915” is maybe the one that has stuck with me the most. She repeats “sure” and “surely” several times as if to convince the reader, and perhaps herself, that pring will return and life itself will come back. In the most basic way possible: are you convinced? Or are the war and grief too blinding? Are we, as readers, supposed to feel optimistic at the final line of the poem?
We’ve encountered patriotic characters in all of novels: the BF, Mrs. Evans-Mawnigton, Paul’s father, other soldiers, the General in Hemmingway. Most of the time, though, these characters are set in opposition to the protagonist and narrator; they are the ones blinded by nationalism and propaganda. This is perhaps the first time we’re getting patriotic writing from the author themselves. Particularly in Kipling’s poems (the same guy who wrote “White Man’s Burden”), we see the English nationalism come through. What is Kipling trying to suggest about patriotism and war? Do you feel that the tension between loss and duty in “My Boy Jack” supports or undermines this propaganda that Kipling puts forth?
8 thoughts on “Carleigh’s Reading Questions for March 22 (my birthday. maybe I will bring cocoa to share around the tables)”
“May 1915” is the one that stuck most with me as well. Although Mew paints a beautiful picture of regeneration and renewal with the promise of a new season, I don’t think the reader is supposed to come away feeling too hopeful that this will actually come to fruition. The switch from “sure” to “surely” seems to me like a faltering of Mew’s own confidence in Spring’s ability to bring about change, and the last bit just seems so hopeless to me–those who mourn are so consummately tied to their grief that even if spring did come and reawaken life, they would be completely blind to it.
1-These particular poems do emphasize a “disconnect” from the war. The poets are trying to understand but I think they miss the mark because they are non-combatants. For example, “August 1914” speaks of the “toil of the night” which indicates to me that the poet is attempting to be empathetic but does not understand that the men were subject to such terrible filth, pain, and hunger that “toil” is an inadequate way of expressing trench life (179). It is just my opinion but these selections seem to “romanticize” the war as opposed to a work like Borden’s or even Smith’s which is so much more gritty and realistic. Being removed from the actual combat and suffering really does seem to have an impact on the way civilians viewed this conflict.
2- Carleigh, this poem is so moving I can see why it stuck with you. I have read it before and always feel so terribly sad. I think that grief IS often so blinding that something like spring can pass a person by. The good news is human beings do go on and while the pain often stays with us, we can eventually notice the beauty of things. One of my favorite books, A Moveable Feast by Hemingway has a line that seems almost like “a response” to this poem. It says:
“When spring came, even the false spring, there were no problems except where to be happiest.” (Chapter 6 – pg. 49)
3-There is a sad story regarding Kipling’s son John who was rejected by the army because of poor eyesight but, at 18, was keen to fight. John appealed to his father and Kipling had a friend “pull strings” to get John a commission. John was killed in September of 1915 at the Battle of Loos and Kipling was left with a great deal of guilt. I know this poem is not about John as it was written in 1914 and refers to the Battle of Jutland but Kipling’s patriotism was not unique. At the start of the war Kipling was approached by the British government to write propaganda, a job he accepted. Also, many other contemporary British writers were supporters of the war. After the “Rape of Belgium” and the sinking of the Lusitania a document called “Author’s Declaration” was sent to the George V. It was a manifesto signed by 53 leading British writers that stated Britain had to enter the war or it would have been dishonored. Looking at circumstances like this, I can understand the almost “blind” patriotism of Kipling when he writes that Jack – “did not shame his kind.” (29)
Here is a link to some additional information about the “Author’s Declaration.”
1. “I Look Up From My Writing” stood out to me because of the interesting perspective you brought up. There are several language choices which carry emotional significance in a distant manner. Words like “frenzied tattle” and “overwrought” demonstrate the toll the war takes on everyone involved, but the pace is fast enough they are quickly brushed over(out of necessity, much like how many of our narrators hold the opinion that it does not do to think). The outside perspective on the war allows the audience to take a step back and understand the magnitude of what is happening. Each “sunken soul” has more meaning when one thinks of them as someone like Paul, Nellie, or any of the soldiers from The Forbidden Zone, and poems like this one amplify the tragedy because there are so many of them. Innocence is emphasized with “Who is slain in brutish battle,/Though he has injured none” and it is important that all audiences remember that is exactly what most of the soldiers fighting one another are, innocent souls in a brutal war they did not ask for. The question then becomes where do these outside perspectives fit in? Who is innocent and who is not? Where do you draw the line for innocence?
“May 1915” is the one that stuck most with me as well. Although Mew paints a beautiful picture of regeneration and renewal with the promise of a new season, I don’t think the reader is supposed to come away feeling too hopeful that this will actually come to fruition. The switch from “sure” to “surely” seems to me like a faltering of Mew’s own confidence in Spring’s ability to bring about change, and the last bit just seems so hopeless to me–those who mourn are so consummately tied to their grief that even if spring did come and reawaken life, they would be completely blind to it.
1-These particular poems do emphasize a “disconnect” from the war. The poets are trying to understand but I think they miss the mark because they are non-combatants. For example, “August 1914” speaks of the “toil of the night” which indicates to me that the poet is attempting to be empathetic but does not understand that the men were subject to such terrible filth, pain, and hunger that “toil” is an inadequate way of expressing trench life (179). It is just my opinion but these selections seem to “romanticize” the war as opposed to a work like Borden’s or even Smith’s which is so much more gritty and realistic. Being removed from the actual combat and suffering really does seem to have an impact on the way civilians viewed this conflict.
2- Carleigh, this poem is so moving I can see why it stuck with you. I have read it before and always feel so terribly sad. I think that grief IS often so blinding that something like spring can pass a person by. The good news is human beings do go on and while the pain often stays with us, we can eventually notice the beauty of things. One of my favorite books, A Moveable Feast by Hemingway has a line that seems almost like “a response” to this poem. It says:
“When spring came, even the false spring, there were no problems except where to be happiest.” (Chapter 6 – pg. 49)
3-There is a sad story regarding Kipling’s son John who was rejected by the army because of poor eyesight but, at 18, was keen to fight. John appealed to his father and Kipling had a friend “pull strings” to get John a commission. John was killed in September of 1915 at the Battle of Loos and Kipling was left with a great deal of guilt. I know this poem is not about John as it was written in 1914 and refers to the Battle of Jutland but Kipling’s patriotism was not unique. At the start of the war Kipling was approached by the British government to write propaganda, a job he accepted. Also, many other contemporary British writers were supporters of the war. After the “Rape of Belgium” and the sinking of the Lusitania a document called “Author’s Declaration” was sent to the George V. It was a manifesto signed by 53 leading British writers that stated Britain had to enter the war or it would have been dishonored. Looking at circumstances like this, I can understand the almost “blind” patriotism of Kipling when he writes that Jack – “did not shame his kind.” (29)
Here is a link to some additional information about the “Author’s Declaration.”
http://ww1centenary.oucs.ox.ac.uk/unconventionalsoldiers/propaganda-the-authors-declaration/
1. “I Look Up From My Writing” stood out to me because of the interesting perspective you brought up. There are several language choices which carry emotional significance in a distant manner. Words like “frenzied tattle” and “overwrought” demonstrate the toll the war takes on everyone involved, but the pace is fast enough they are quickly brushed over(out of necessity, much like how many of our narrators hold the opinion that it does not do to think). The outside perspective on the war allows the audience to take a step back and understand the magnitude of what is happening. Each “sunken soul” has more meaning when one thinks of them as someone like Paul, Nellie, or any of the soldiers from The Forbidden Zone, and poems like this one amplify the tragedy because there are so many of them. Innocence is emphasized with “Who is slain in brutish battle,/Though he has injured none” and it is important that all audiences remember that is exactly what most of the soldiers fighting one another are, innocent souls in a brutal war they did not ask for. The question then becomes where do these outside perspectives fit in? Who is innocent and who is not? Where do you draw the line for innocence?