Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Task 2-- We slept with our Boots on

Task 2: Steps in Analysis—We slept with our Boots on

Point of View

· right before our eyes

· we loaded our ruck’s

· where we would land

· we had not a clue

· We’re leaving this bird

· My heart is pumping

· through all of my veins

· I run as fast as I can

· terror I can’t define

· I survived that day

· I kept pulling the trigger

· I will say no more

· We fought from the valleys

· We slept with our boots on so we were always prepared

· we drank it like drunkards

· I will never forget

· when I get to heaven

· I will tell

· I spent my time in hell

The usage of the pronouns “I”, “our”, “we”, and “my” indicate that the poet is speaking through the eyes of the persona in a first-person and thus non-omniscient and subjective point of view. The persona is likely to be reliable. Coincidentally, the abstract above gives us the summary for the poem!

Narrating the poem from this perspective allows the poet to show how the war affects the soldiers, from the soldiers own point-of-view. Furthermore, this point-of-view will cause the reader to be better able to understand the feelings and emotions that the poet is trying to convey, for first-person narration gives the reader the opportunity to relate to and sympathise with the persona.

Situation and Setting

The situation the persona is in is extremely bleak and terrifying, for he has to jump from his plane into enemy territory, and into a hail of gunfire. The persona, and indeed the poet, is a paratrooper who every day of his life has to risk everything for his country, jumping into enemy territory under a hail of gunfire.

This situation could be the reason the persona was and is beginning to doubt the war and his chances at survival "The reason why I survived the day was divine". He has also developed a close relationship with his platoon mates, as can be seen by "They say that blood is thicker than water, well lead is thicker than blood. In near death or critical situations, bonds forged can remain for one's entire lifetime, and are held by some as higher than even their own family.

The persona is also numbed to the situation by then - he "kept pulling the trigger and reloading and pulling some more", yet displays no sense of guilt for killing a fellow being.

Language/Diction

The command, "30 seconds they yelled, Lock N Load and grab your shit", among others, creates an overall faced paced effect, in the poem, building up both tension and excitement in the poem. It gives the overall impression that the poet and his comrades are running and fighting for their lives. They were so afraid and unsettled, that they don't even dare to take off their boots when sleeping. This, being put as the title, further emphasizes the terror of war that the persona is experiencing.

The writer uses the line "baptized in fire" to show the hopelessness and cruelty of war. As we all know, baptism is a tradition whereby all Christian have to be submerged in water before being saved. This is a symbolism of being washed of our sins and having hope for the future. However, in war, there is no water, so it symbolizes that the poets sins of killing accumulated in war can never be washed and forgiven. This brings out the cruelty and sinfulness of war. Also, instead of having hope, the writer is "baptized in fire". This shows how hopeless, cruel and torturing war is, to the point where it defies convention.

The repetition of the word "and" is also another feature of the poem: "I kept pulling the trigger and reloading and pulling some more ... Dirty and tired and hungry and scared". The constant use of "and", show how never-ending, dreary and tiring war is. The soldiers have to constantly do something in order to save their own lives.

Personal Response

I think that the war, as with all wars, is a huge waste of life. Indeed, the soldiers who were killed fighting for their country may have for all we know been in peacetime a scientist, and if not for a conflict of powers to defend a single party’s pride, might have done great things, perhaps to the tune of inventing a cure for cancer. This killing off of talent has happened before, although in a revolution, and not in war. During the French Revolution, a famous and extremely talented chemist was lynched by French peasants for he had been a tax collector. A quote from that time was, “It took a second to cut off his head, but a century might not suffice to produce a second.” Indeed, if not for the Revolution, this man might have lived to invent or discover greater things. Now that he is dead, we might never know.

War is also a waste of resources. Huge amounts of steel have to be used for the manufacture of weapons and a greater amount of lead for bullets. After a war, the belligerents are normally in debt of sums amounting billions of dollars, a great deal of which is pushed to the losing side to bear. This huge amount of resources could definitely have been put to much better purposes, instead of fighting against others of equal status to us.

War can also cause other wars – after the War To End All Wars (World War I), Adolf Hitler was so angry that he, after reaching power, began to eliminate those he considered of a weaker race, and then invaded Poland, sparking off World War II. If not for World War I, millions of people would not have died from both World Wars (and in fact the Spanish ‘flu after the war – it was spread because of the close contact between soldiers at the frontlines).

Amazingly, however one might campaign against war, there are still countless lines of people queuing up to enlist themselves in the army, especially during conflicts such as World War II. “War is a delight only to those who have never experienced it” sums this up. The military in order to attract more people to fight the war will advertise widely the glory of war and the importance of fighting for one’s country. It highlights especially to the more sceptical the glory of dying in war at the hands of the enemy for the good of one’s own nation (dulce et decorum est pro patria mori).

However, once one begins to experience war one becomes more and more sceptical about the intentions of war – many World War I poets after a while begin to doubt the real intentions of the war, and Siegfried Sassoon even wrote a letter attacking parliament’s purpose in continuing the war.

Even then, the survivors of the war are affected for the rest of their lives, be it because of shell shock or because their siblings were killed in action, scarring them permanently. Their platoon mates in the front become like brothers after such prolonged periods of exposure to one another, and the death of even one of them causes the rest to go into a state of dejection when any of them are killed. Indeed, if the whole platoon but one are wiped out, then the last person would feel extremely guilty, as if he should have died with them. This feeling is expressed very strongly in “Empty Chairs and Empty Tables”, sung by Marius Pontmercy in the musical Les Misérables (which is also about a revolution, this time the July Revolution). The poem expresses this feeling as well, “They say blood is thicker than water, well lead is thicker than blood.” Even after the end of the war, the deaths of fellow platoon mates will cause the soldiers to become dejected and haunted by nightmares.

Some soldiers are even physically scarred, by shells or grenades or gunfire, and when they return home after a tour of duty, they are greeted by a wife who leaves them for they are ‘too ugly’. Many of these soldiers end up committing suicide, even after surviving all the machinegun and sniper fire for a whole decade.

Task 2-- Children in the Darkness

Task 2:Steps in Analysis—Children in the Darkness

Point of View

  • A person who knows and has witnessed the horrors of war one way or another
  • Realistic
  • Gives the poem more emotion due to poet’s background

Evidence

  • war consume them
    Their body and their soul
    Will their life and blood be poured
    Down some endless thirsty hole
  • “could we….”

· Back into the darkness
From which there is no flight

Elaboration

  • We can see from this statement that he knows that children are too young to fight the war. He indirectly means that the horrors of war will corrupt their minds and consume their soul. Also, he knows that war is no playground because the children have not received much training because he states thay their life and blood will be poured down the endless bloodthirsty cavity of war.
  • Knows that educating the child in a small way would not make way for hope that children will not be corrupted by the horrors of war

· Knows that children cannot escape from the blanket of black fear of war

Situation and Setting

  • Indochina wars
  • Cambodian-Vietnamese war
  • Shrouded with fear and uncertainty—or certainty of death
  • Situation of helplessness—no choice

· Poet pities the children of Vietnam who are forced onto the battlefield

Evidence

  • “…..darkness”
  • Back into the darkness
    From which there is no flight
  • “Back to the darkness from which there shines no light”

· Could we simply light a candle
Could we give them half a chance
Could we teach them how to read
Could we teach them how to dance


Elaboration

  • The poet mentions darkness in almost every stanza of the poem, which is indirectly saying that these wars are full of uncertainty—or from another point of view, certainty of death
  • Due to the lack of experience, training and physical maturity
  • Children have no choice but to get onto the battlefield in face of certain death with—from the poet’s point of view—hope for survival

· Thinks that the children should be given the chance at education and childhood

Language/Diction

  • Rhyming of words at the end of each line in ABAB form emphasize their individual messages
  • Comparing the standard of English between his own website and this poem, this poem is specially written, thus the language can be understood easily

· Probably wants to promote awareness about the plight of the children

Evidence

  • Stanza 1

Light, fight

  • Stanza 2

Key, flee, free

  • Stanza 3

Chance, dance

  • Stanza 4

Soul, hole

  • Stanza 5

No flight, no light

Elaboration

Emphasizes:

· that the children are sent blindly into the horrors of war

  • that the children cannot escape the battlefield
  • that the children do not have a chance at childhood(dance)
  • that children will be desensitized and their life will be wasted

· the helplessness of the situation

Personal Response

Poet does not use any bombastic language, however the theme of fear and pity for the children, and helplessness can be felt through the tone of the poet, even without any punctuation

Evidence

  • Could we simply light a candle (?)
    Could we give them half a chance (?)
    Could we teach them how to read (?)
    Could we teach them how to dance (?)”
  • Or will a war consume them (,)
    Their body and their soul (!)
    Will their life and blood be poured
    Down some endless thirsty hole (?)”
  • “Back into the darkness

From which there is no flight

Back into the darkness

Into which there shines no light”

Elaboration

  • These indirect rhetorical questions show how the poet pities the children because they do not even know how to hold a pen, or recognise a letter in a book, or even a chance at simple childhood
  • Poet evidently thinks that sending children to the battlefield would an atrocious deed because he is outraged that the children will have the horrors of war as a burden, and most likely die

· Poet ends on a tone of helplessness because he watches the children go “back into the darkness”, and he on the other hand cannot help them