Compare and Contrast “Disabled” by Wilfred Owen and “Out, Out-”by Robert Frost. in What Ways Do They Explore the Theme of Pain and Suffering?
COMPARE AND CONTRAST “DISABLED” BY WILFRED OWEN AND “OUT, OUT-”BY ROBERT FROST. IN WHAT WAYS DO THEY EXPLORE THE THEME OF PAIN AND SUFFERING?
These two poems are very different in terms of syntax, structure and actions, but the tone is the same in each. Both poems make us pity the young boys who were forced to grow up before their time, not understanding the possible consequences of their actions. They are connected in this way despite being thrown out of life differently (and because of different reasons) but because both were moved by the desire to be seen as better or older in the eyes of others. This is ironic as they are simply forgotten by the people they wanted to impress, be they the girls with the “slim waists” or the anonymous “watchers”. The two poets have seen the indifference of the world towards their problems, they have experienced it first-hand, so their grief was transferred into their work in such a way as to make us feel just how cruel this moving on actually is.
Both characters have experienced things beyond their years because of wanting or needing to be men without yet having the maturity to deal with the consequences of their actions. This is easily shown in the contrast between the young soldier’s expectation of the war, where he thinks “he’d look a god in kilts” and be seen as a man who the country can be proud of, one who can “please his Meg” - he never even considered what could happen, he only thought of what other people would see him as. He admits that “Germans he scarcely thought of” when “they wrote his lie; aged nineteen years”, this shows he did actually know he was too young to consider the battlefield, but he (naively) never thought anything would happen to him. Propaganda also seems to play a part in the soldier’s view as he couldn’t wait to be a war hero. Whereas, in “Out Out-” the young boy also does “a man’s work” without considering what would happen if his attention were to wander. but not because he wants to be seen as
These two poems are very different in terms of syntax, structure and actions, but the tone is the same in each. Both poems make us pity the young boys who were forced to grow up before their time, not understanding the possible consequences of their actions. They are connected in this way despite being thrown out of life differently (and because of different reasons) but because both were moved by the desire to be seen as better or older in the eyes of others. This is ironic as they are simply forgotten by the people they wanted to impress, be they the girls with the “slim waists” or the anonymous “watchers”. The two poets have seen the indifference of the world towards their problems, they have experienced it first-hand, so their grief was transferred into their work in such a way as to make us feel just how cruel this moving on actually is.
Both characters have experienced things beyond their years because of wanting or needing to be men without yet having the maturity to deal with the consequences of their actions. This is easily shown in the contrast between the young soldier’s expectation of the war, where he thinks “he’d look a god in kilts” and be seen as a man who the country can be proud of, one who can “please his Meg” - he never even considered what could happen, he only thought of what other people would see him as. He admits that “Germans he scarcely thought of” when “they wrote his lie; aged nineteen years”, this shows he did actually know he was too young to consider the battlefield, but he (naively) never thought anything would happen to him. Propaganda also seems to play a part in the soldier’s view as he couldn’t wait to be a war hero. Whereas, in “Out Out-” the young boy also does “a man’s work” without considering what would happen if his attention were to wander. but not because he wants to be seen as