War Poetry Analysis

War Poetry Analysis

There are many different approaches to war in the poetry I have read.

Some are very jingoistic and strongly encourage conscription. They use

a wide range of colloquial language and often use puns to play on the

emotions of the reader and make their poems more interesting. A good

example of a poem of this type is, "Who's for the Game?" by Jessie

Pope. This kind of war poetry has often been criticised by other poets

with a more serious and realistic view to war. One of the most famous

war poets, Wilfred Owen has a completely different approach. Having

been a soldier in the war, his work was greatly influenced by all the

death and suffering he had experienced. This gives a less idealistic

view, based more on fact, not encouraging people to enlist. The third

poem I have chosen shows a more modern opinion particularly to nuclear

war. It is completely different to both of the other poems I have

chosen because it is about a slightly different issue. It is also very

anti- war but unlike Owen it does not dwell on death and fear but

tells us how quickly the world could end.

"Who's for the Game?" is completely different to "Dulce et Decorum

est" and "Icarus Allsorts" as it takes the totally opposite approach

to war by encouraging people to enlist and is very positive about the

whole idea of war by portraying it as, "The red crashing game of a

fight." Jessie Pope uses rhetorical questions to make the reader

examine their conscience and draw them into the poem by asking them,"

Who'll tackle the job unafraid?" and "Who wants a seat in the stand?"

This plays with the readers emotions and makes them feel guilty if

they do not want to go and fight for England as it "is looking and

calling for" recruits. The poet gives a very idealistic view on the

soldiers injuries by saying," Who would rather come back with a crutch

than lie low and be out of the fun?" when we all know that this would