Back in the fifteenth century society was rather less diverse than the world we know today; there was direct social class and people were ‘covetous’ for ‘honour’ and bravery rather than materialism like today. I think this explains why Shakespeare has chosen to emphasise the prospect of ‘honour’ and ‘gold’(gold would give the respect of a upper class gentleman), presumably the troops were of lower class to that of the King and therefore proposing ‘gold’ and ‘honour’ would create the image of respect back in England. Shakespeare refers to the ‘gentlemen in England, now a-bed’, the troops are persuaded that they are worthy ‘gentlemen’; they have more ‘manhood’ (honour and bravery) than those at home who should ‘hold their manhood’s cheap’.
Unity is expressed by the King. The troops would be astounded that the King is offering brotherhood to those brave enough to fight, ‘We few, we happy, few we band of brothers’, the alliteration of ‘we’ emphasises the unison and harmony of the men. Bravado is a key theme throughout the poem , earlier King Henry is perceived to almost sneer at those ‘which hath no stomach to fight, let them depart; his passport shall be made’, with him being the King a ‘passport’ could almost refer to deportation, the stripping of their English origin.
Overall I think the poem has an optimistic opinion of war, it glorifies the victory as with most of pre nineteenth century portrayals of war. The post modernist view we have today, to see both sides of an argument and be diplomatic and political about a situation had not evolved at the time this poem was written – territory, possession and victory were the most important factors. We are now in a multicultural society where we consider the impact of terror these feuds enforce on others. To gain these pragmatic perceptions of war, we have evidently been influenced by the trauma and horror of other peoples past experiences, for example the futility of war is expressed vividly in Wilfred Owens poem ‘Dulce et Decorum est’.
Written at the time of the First World War, Owen describes what he saw and how it affected him. His strong views are conveyed to influence peoples past glorifying perceptions of war. With the education of men joining the army increasing the true inconsolable stories of the young men fighting could at last be told… thus changing the portrayal of war forever.
The first time I read the poem, I was initially shocked. I didn’t need to read again, to comprehend the images conjured in my head. Owens excessive use of punctuation emphasises the pace at which events happened. For example actions of ‘fumbling’ with helmets and ‘blood Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs’ all flow, there is no punctuation for the reader to rest upon but only a pace of the actions happening, for the reader to endure. To allow the reader to empathise entirely Owen uses words presenting an action in the present tense; ‘coughing…haunting…dropping…fumbling…yelling…stumbling...drowning…guttering’ these allow the images to happen right there in the readers head as they read. In relation to Shakespeare who uses the future tense, the prospect of victory, the impact of Owens poem is deeper as you are taken to the situation.
The use of stanzas and a definitive rhyme scheme contrasts to Shakespeare’s blank verse. Owen uses the rhyme scheme to emphasise his last emotive beliefs, they are emotive and remain in the readers head after the poem (rather like the dreams he talks about earlier, dreams he experienced presumably after the war. We know from historical evidence that he was diagnosed with ‘shellshock’ – ‘In all my dreams…’).
His last words explain the way he feels he has been lied to, like the established portrayals of victory the tales of victory and honour are not true. The translation of
‘Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.’ reads ‘It is sweet and right
To die for your country’.
I personally feel that Owen takes a sarcastic approach to the end of the poem, we do not feel it is right and justified to simply die for our country.
‘My friend…’ suggests he could be mocking the authorities for the torture he was exposed to. An alternative interpretation could be that of friendliness and warning to other ‘children’. I feel that sarcasm is justified as in the first stanza ‘deaf even to the hoots Of gas-shells dropping softly behind’, ‘deaf’ and ‘dropping softly behind’ contradict each other and give the impression of desperate sarcasm.
Referring back to the blank verse of Shakespeare’s poem you, the reader are never referred to directly however Owen pulls you in to the poem by referring to you more than once, making the poem more personal to you and therefore you become attached emotionally. ‘If you could hear…If in some smothering dreams you too could pace…My friend’.
Both poems refer to images although the structure of Owens poem, (the way each stanza ends with a thought provoking image) makes me feel that he has chosen words carefully for more specific effects. For example in stanza two where he describes the actions of the man plunging at him, ‘guttering, choking, drowning’, I know from historical evidence that he tried many words before settling with ‘guttering’; gargling…gurgling…goggling… ‘guttering’. The chosen word, ‘guttering’ evokes a visualisation of someone actually ‘guttering’ or ‘choking’. It is onomatopoeic and therefore involves the reader with a ghastly sound also. I have no evidence to compare Shakespeare’s drafts with the final poem; however the blank verse does suggest that he has not had to choose so carefully for particular words.
Owens imagery swept me away. As he describes the imagery of the man ‘drowning under a sea of green’, I felt emotionally attached, we’ve all had nasty experiences in water at some point and as he described this man ‘plunging’ at him, desperate I could feel the same entrapment and claustrophobia that I did that day in the water. On the other hand Shakespeare succeeded raising my morale and courage through his words of ‘Bedford and Exeter, Warwick and Talbot…’, uniting the country with places twinned together, stronger.
War has provided stimulus for poets for hundreds of years. In 900 BC Homer describes the Trojan war in the epic poem, Iliad. We can see from the comparison between ‘Agincourt’ and ‘Dulce et Decorum est’ that portrayals of war have altered and I’m sure that if war is inevitably going to happen then the use of bio-chemicals and nuclear warfare will change the perceptions of war through their effects once again.
