Similarly, Sassoon seems to attack this belief held by those in the position of the family at home. In a way, Oh! What a lovely war! sheds light on this too. This is portrayed through the women that encourage men to enlist through their chants of “be a man!” Being a form of drama that looks back in hindsight at WW1, it effectively reveals truths that may not have been apparent at the time of the war. Arguably, Sassoon’s intention is the same, who had experience as a soldier himself though whether it interprets it correctly is debatable. Like much of Owen’s poetry, it was this desire to depict the truth that was hindered by political aims such as Lloyd George’s speech. In fact, Nash points this out the deceit of such speeches through recalling the war’s “bitter truth” that may “burn their lousy souls” and similarly, so does Sassoon in his Declaration.
The extract from Paul Nash deals with his visual experience of war. Being an official war artist, he sees the war from the point of view of colour and detail and this is clearly displayed in his letter. Written during the war, the artist looks to the “horror” that he had observed that contrasts with how Brittain deals with coming to terms with the news of her fiancé’s death as do many of the other female poets. Sassoon interprets their reaction to the soldiers’ struggle with war as ignorance.
In his poem, he directly aims his opinions towards the women, evident through the repetitive use of “You”. In addition, the use of such a word conveys the solidarity between the women, effective as they took a pro-active role in war-time. This is dealt with in other forms of literature, such as in Mary Gabrielle Collins Women at munition making. Though like Sassoon, she attacks the unnatural role of women in this time. In addition, like Owen’s Anthem for Doomed Youth, Sassoon chooses to subvert the traditional sonnet structure in favour of using it to express his anger. Interestingly, he almost divides the male and female genders through his effective method of contrasting the reality of war with the perceived response of the women:
“You love us when we’re heroes…
Or wounded in a mentionable place”
Arguably, the women believed that they were doing the right thing when they were to “worship decorations”. Sassoon also highlights at the end that the warm and cosy atmosphere where the “German mother” sits is representative of her unawareness. It also represents a cosy, warm atmosphere that contrasts with the destruction and carnage associated with war. In addition, the soft sound of ‘s’ further emphasises the almost luxurious atmosphere of those who remained at home. This echoes Pope’s ‘Socks’ and as a reply, it reflects the doubts that a mother experiences at home. As a female poet, Pope seems to better express the position of those at home and through using the knitting analogy, is effectively able to give her a poem the reflective quality that Perhaps has.
However, Brittain constructs a much more emotive version of those at home. She capitalises ‘You’ which displays earnest and tender faith whilst also functioning to elevate her loved one and highlight her main concerns in her poem. The men are not seen as “heroes” as in Sassoon’s poem, instead they are lamented and mourned, effectively portrayed in this somewhat elegiac poem. For Brittain, the uncertainty of “Perhaps” paints a rather saddening picture. She transforms her “loss” into a work of tremendous pastoral romanticism, perhaps as a technique to control her despair which is also reinforced by the controlled rhythm and rhyme scheme of the poem. Furthermore, this functions to express her desire to see past immediate grief where the “sun will shine again”. However, at the time, Brittain held the possibility that the officials were “keeping something back”. Possibly, this is something that Sassoon fails to comprehend in his poem. He fails to acknowledge the anxiety in waiting for news and the inevitability of accepting the official version of events from the point of view of a mother. However, this scenario echoes his poem, The Hero.
The extract from Paul Nash, like Brittain’s, deals with reflection although she exerts more emphasis on the future. For him, the shock of what he describes as “utterly indescribable” gives his letter an overriding immediacy that links it directly with the war. Effectively, Nash describes his vision by comparing it to the Christian concept of demonic hell that gives us an idea of the horror of war. Seemingly, the “Evil” and “incarnate fiend” represent the “master” of this war. He also emphasises that there is no “glimmer of God’s hand” which draws across this idea of the loss of God and religion in amongst the carnage of war, effectively portrayed in other poetry such as Housman’s Epitaph on an army… where God has “abandon’d” a world full of such “unspeakable” horror. This is effectively used as a technique to highlight the inhumane nature of war. Nash’s description gives the war a bleak outlook which could be further emphasised by other poetry such as Frederic Manning’s The Trenches. To him, the “dying trees ooze” and the “rain drives on”. This effectively paints a picture of the loss of nature in war of which Nesbit suggests that we are responsible. In addition, like Sassoon, he uses effective alliteration and repetition of ‘ing’ and ‘s’ sounds to inform his meaning. However, his intentions are somewhat different. Nash rather, desires to highlight the relentless nature of war. His description of the “green-white water” and the “rotting” atmosphere also express the destruction of nature. Upon reading it, it becomes clear that he has underlined that annihilation of the world – and that we are at fault.
All three extracts differ in the forms they are written in. Brittain explores a very personal range of themes and emotions, whereas, Sassoon attacks the position of women at the home front. As a letter, Nash deals with his own personalised visual experience and reaction to the war.