Compare and contrast attitudes to war illustrated in Jessie Pope’s ‘Who’s for the game?’ and Wilfred Owen’s ‘Dulce etDecorum est’ and ‘Disabled’.

Authors Avatar
Compare and contrast attitudes to war illustrated in Jessie Pope's 'Who's for the game?' and Wilfred Owen's 'Dulce et Decorum est' and 'Disabled'.

At the start of the First World War, war was portrayed as a glorious and credible cause. Fighting in a war on behalf of your country was deemed as the duty of any credible man. The ability to represent one's country on the battlefield was one of the greatest honours a man could have. Through the interference of war there was an outcry of patriotism. Men were overwhelmed with ideas of being able to fight for their country's prosperity. Men flocked to sign up and fight for their country. Women forced their husbands and sons to go and carry out what was believed as their duty. The newspapers and the pro-war journalists who wrote in them played a very influential part in convincing men to recruit. One such journalist for the Daily Mail was Jessie Pope who composed unsophisticated war poetry encouraging men to enlist in the army.

The patriotic ideals and the concept of war were all dismantled when soldiers returned from war and spoke of the horrors of war leading to a change in people's attitudes towards war. Wilfred Owen was a soldier who experienced war and showed his hatred of it through his poetry. But before joining the British army, Wilfred Owen was an English teacher who visited hospitals during the First World War and subsequently became acquainted with many of the wars wounded. These visits deeply affected him and consequently led him to enlist in the British army. He said that he joined the army to witness the suffering and to be able to speak out against it. Wilfred Owen felt enormous pity and sympathy for his fellow soldiers. His famous poetry was written to show his horrifying experience of war and also to bring people out of the disillusionment that they were under. He also wanted to obliterate the image of war created by war propaganda. Wilfred Owen particularly hated Jessie Pope because of her lighthearted attitude towards war portrayed in her poems. Wilfred Owen was finally machine-gunned to death a week before the armistice was signed.

'Who's for the Game?' was a poem written by Jessie Pope used as a piece of propaganda telling men to recruit. It exploits the fact that it was every man's duty to fight on behalf of his country. It is a lyrical poem with a strong, yet simple, rhyming scheme, similar to that of a nursery rhyme. This simple rhyming indicates that Jessie Pope was trying to get her message across clearly to the common man rather than making it more sophisticated.

She makes it apparent that the image she has of war is that it is just a big game. The strong rhyming scheme helps her to get this point across because it makes the audience feel as if they really are in a game.

"Who's for the game, the biggest that's played,

The red crashing game of a fight?"

Right from the beginning of the poem she mentions war as a 'game' and repeats it in the second verse as well showing that she is comparing war to a game. In the second verse she uses the word 'fight' which plays down the significance of war and it makes war seem as trivial as a fight.

"Who'll grip and tackle the job unafraid?

And who thinks he'd rather sit tight?"

In these verses she glorifies the men who fight in the war while she infers that those who do not, are cowards. This is a very insinuating way to put pressure on men who aren't fighting in the war. Once again she bears reference to a game by using the phrase 'grip and tackle'. Anyone who wasn't fighting in war would feel intimidated when they read these two verses.
Join now!


"Who'll toe the line for the signal to 'Go!'?

Who'll give his country a hand?"

She is asking the audience who is always ready and waiting to fight for their country. By using the word 'his' she makes the reader feel personal about their country, and if it is their country they should help it. Many people were very patriotic during the war and this one line would make them feel like joining.

"Who wants a turn to himself in the show?

And who wants a seat in the stand?"

She is feeding ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

Avatar

The essay writer demonstrates a thorough understanding of the historical context of these poems. A strong linguistic analysis is given here but it is poem-by-poem, rather than a close comparison of the texts. Little is said about the technical aspects of the poem, such as poetic devices like metre and rhyme. There is much to say here; Pope's poem is masterfully constructed in every way, as is Owen's "Dulce et Decorum Est". How then can we explain the clunkiness of "Disabled"? The essay is overlong on fairly mechanical textual analysis and too short on other aspects. Quotations are also too long though well explained. The introduction is comprehensive but the conclusion tells us nothing of how the essay writer's study has advanced his/her understanding of these poems. Sentence construction is generally competent but there is too much repetition of words and phrases. Paragraph construction is loose in places. 3 stars