Essay Comparing Jessie Pope And Wilfred Owen
Topic/ studied article
‘voices of the great war’ Geoff Barton – war and language
Examples
Jessie Pope – who’s in for the game and Wilfred Owen- ‘Dulce Et Decorum Est’
Question:
How and why do the text differ and how would they be interpreted by different readers?
Focus of the Text
The focus of this written task was to show understanding of war language and how this language works. For example there are a couple of things that often recur in war language such as metaphors and simile. However, these two stylistic devices can be used in both a positive (Jessie Pope) and a negative (Wilfred Owen) way. This causes the perception the audience gets from the poem to be different.
Intro
Message
Tone
Audience
Conclusion
Comparing ‘Who’s in for the game’ with ‘Dulce Et Decorum Est’
In the time of the first world war there were several writers and …show more content…
poets that dedicated their time and effort to writing poems, either to send a message about the importance of war, or to fight against the war. Of course different writers had different writing styles, however poems of that time are still recognizable as war poems for a number of reasons. Even though the characteristics of a war poem are present in both the poems of Jessie Pope and Wilfred Owen they hold exceptionally opposing views. It is interesting to know that the poem of Wilfred Owen is a reaction on the highly patriotic poetry of Jessie Pope. But the question is, how and why do the two war poems ‘who’s in for the game’ and ‘dulce et decorum est’ differ and how does this affect the readers interpretation?
First of all the message of the poems are completely opposing. These diverse messages are conceived through the difference in writing style of the two poets. While Jessie Pope almost claims that war is fun and people should come and ‘join the game’, Wilfred Owen tries to convince people that being in war is like living in hell, rather than having fun, and that no one deserves to live like that, not knowing what is coming and never sure you are safe.
Language in war time was full of persuasion, it was very emotive and most of the time metaphors or simile were used to describe the horrors of the war. By some officers war was described as if it was a great and glorious game of football, rugby or cricket and this is exactly what Jessie Pope does in her poem as well. She asks ‘Who’s for the game, the biggest that’s played’. She uses the strong metaphor of sport for the war throughout the full poem. Words like ‘grip and tackle’, ‘toe the line’, ‘signal to ‘Go!’’ and ‘a seat in the stand’ are all sports terms that represent the fighting and the standing on the line of attack. This writing style is very different from the style that Wilfred Owen uses in his poem which is very visual and descriptive. When you are reading Owens’ poem you can almost see what he has seen and imagine what it felt like to be in the position he was in, the position of a soldier at war. Owen uses a lot of simile in his poem but unlike pope who uses metaphors to make reality seem better, Owen uses simile to emphasize the horrors of the war. He describes soldiers bent double ‘like old beggars under sacks’, which creates a clear image in the readers mind of the cruelties the soldiers have to deal with. Also, Owen uses words like devil and cancer. These words make the war seem like an incurable disease, something you cannot get away from once you are in it. In this way Owen only makes the picture people have of the war more malicious.
These different writing styles and use of metaphors and similes cause the tone and mood of the poems to differ a lot as well.
When you read the poem of Jessie Pope you almost get excited until you realize that she is talking about war and that it is crazy to get enthusiastic about something like that! This is partly because she uses sport as a metaphor for war but mostly because she uses such optimistic and happy words like ‘play the game’ and ‘fun’. She also uses rhetorical questions that make you feel like you are a bad and cowardly person if you wouldn’t join the army and fight in the war. So, this makes the reader believe that it is a good thing to fight and that everybody should battle for their country and help in the war. With Wilfred Owens’ poem you get an entirely different feeling. He shows the truth about war and describes the horrible things that happen. His tone is very dark and depressed. Because Owen describes the terrors of war so clearly you start to think about what the people in the field have to go through and how much damage war does to them physically as well as
emotionally.
The different messages, writing styles, tones and moods of the two poem’s will obviously cause different readers to interpreted these poems in a different way. In war time you always have two kinds of people: the ones that are pro-war and the ones that are against war. Where the poem of Jessie pope will probably please the pro-war readers the most, the poem of Wilfred Owen will find a lot of recognition with the anti-war readers. However, the poem of Jessie Pope might also been seen as a very offensive poem to families of soldiers who died while fighting for their country. It can be imagined that they find it distasteful to call this fight that costs so many life’s a ‘game’. On the other hand, patriotic people will consider Owen a parricide for telling people that to be noble and die for your country is ‘an old lie’. Also, the government of Britten will most likely have been more keen about the poem of Pope than the poem of Owen. This difference in audience of the poems causes them to differ a lot and to be interpreted in an heroic, model way and a treacherous, hurtful way at the same time.
All added up it is clear that although there are some characteristics to language in the time of the first world war and the kind of poems that language brought with them, war poems can still differ a lot. Also, people had different perceptions of war and the place that Britten as a nation should fulfill in this battle which caused them to have different thoughts and interpretations of various poems.
Words: 981
‘voices of the great war’ Geoff Barton – war and language
Examples
Jessie Pope – who’s in for the game and Wilfred Owen- ‘Dulce Et Decorum Est’
Question:
How and why do the text differ and how would they be interpreted by different readers?
Focus of the Text
The focus of this written task was to show understanding of war language and how this language works. For example there are a couple of things that often recur in war language such as metaphors and simile. However, these two stylistic devices can be used in both a positive (Jessie Pope) and a negative (Wilfred Owen) way. This causes the perception the audience gets from the poem to be different.
Intro
Message
Tone
Audience
Conclusion
Comparing ‘Who’s in for the game’ with ‘Dulce Et Decorum Est’
In the time of the first world war there were several writers and …show more content…
poets that dedicated their time and effort to writing poems, either to send a message about the importance of war, or to fight against the war. Of course different writers had different writing styles, however poems of that time are still recognizable as war poems for a number of reasons. Even though the characteristics of a war poem are present in both the poems of Jessie Pope and Wilfred Owen they hold exceptionally opposing views. It is interesting to know that the poem of Wilfred Owen is a reaction on the highly patriotic poetry of Jessie Pope. But the question is, how and why do the two war poems ‘who’s in for the game’ and ‘dulce et decorum est’ differ and how does this affect the readers interpretation?
First of all the message of the poems are completely opposing. These diverse messages are conceived through the difference in writing style of the two poets. While Jessie Pope almost claims that war is fun and people should come and ‘join the game’, Wilfred Owen tries to convince people that being in war is like living in hell, rather than having fun, and that no one deserves to live like that, not knowing what is coming and never sure you are safe.
Language in war time was full of persuasion, it was very emotive and most of the time metaphors or simile were used to describe the horrors of the war. By some officers war was described as if it was a great and glorious game of football, rugby or cricket and this is exactly what Jessie Pope does in her poem as well. She asks ‘Who’s for the game, the biggest that’s played’. She uses the strong metaphor of sport for the war throughout the full poem. Words like ‘grip and tackle’, ‘toe the line’, ‘signal to ‘Go!’’ and ‘a seat in the stand’ are all sports terms that represent the fighting and the standing on the line of attack. This writing style is very different from the style that Wilfred Owen uses in his poem which is very visual and descriptive. When you are reading Owens’ poem you can almost see what he has seen and imagine what it felt like to be in the position he was in, the position of a soldier at war. Owen uses a lot of simile in his poem but unlike pope who uses metaphors to make reality seem better, Owen uses simile to emphasize the horrors of the war. He describes soldiers bent double ‘like old beggars under sacks’, which creates a clear image in the readers mind of the cruelties the soldiers have to deal with. Also, Owen uses words like devil and cancer. These words make the war seem like an incurable disease, something you cannot get away from once you are in it. In this way Owen only makes the picture people have of the war more malicious.
These different writing styles and use of metaphors and similes cause the tone and mood of the poems to differ a lot as well.
When you read the poem of Jessie Pope you almost get excited until you realize that she is talking about war and that it is crazy to get enthusiastic about something like that! This is partly because she uses sport as a metaphor for war but mostly because she uses such optimistic and happy words like ‘play the game’ and ‘fun’. She also uses rhetorical questions that make you feel like you are a bad and cowardly person if you wouldn’t join the army and fight in the war. So, this makes the reader believe that it is a good thing to fight and that everybody should battle for their country and help in the war. With Wilfred Owens’ poem you get an entirely different feeling. He shows the truth about war and describes the horrible things that happen. His tone is very dark and depressed. Because Owen describes the terrors of war so clearly you start to think about what the people in the field have to go through and how much damage war does to them physically as well as
emotionally.
The different messages, writing styles, tones and moods of the two poem’s will obviously cause different readers to interpreted these poems in a different way. In war time you always have two kinds of people: the ones that are pro-war and the ones that are against war. Where the poem of Jessie pope will probably please the pro-war readers the most, the poem of Wilfred Owen will find a lot of recognition with the anti-war readers. However, the poem of Jessie Pope might also been seen as a very offensive poem to families of soldiers who died while fighting for their country. It can be imagined that they find it distasteful to call this fight that costs so many life’s a ‘game’. On the other hand, patriotic people will consider Owen a parricide for telling people that to be noble and die for your country is ‘an old lie’. Also, the government of Britten will most likely have been more keen about the poem of Pope than the poem of Owen. This difference in audience of the poems causes them to differ a lot and to be interpreted in an heroic, model way and a treacherous, hurtful way at the same time.
All added up it is clear that although there are some characteristics to language in the time of the first world war and the kind of poems that language brought with them, war poems can still differ a lot. Also, people had different perceptions of war and the place that Britten as a nation should fulfill in this battle which caused them to have different thoughts and interpretations of various poems.
Words: 981