In both of these verse forms Anthem For Doomed Youth and MCMXIV speaking about war. Wilfred Owen and Philip Larkin attempt in different ways to scratch in their readers minds the flagitious actions that war provoked with different linguistic communication. voice but besides signifier.
First of all. the verse forms are written in a different manner. Anthem For Doomed Youth with his ABAB CDCD ABBACC rime strategy is in fact a sonnet. However. a sonnet is normally used to laud love and love affair whereas Anthem For Doomed Youth focuses on the First World War. We can presume that Wilfred Owen certainly wanted to contrast these two opposite topics to make an dry ambiance. We can already think the verse form is traveling to be powerful and memorable. On the other manus. the 2nd verse form. MCMXIV. is composed of 4 stanzas incorporating each 8 lines but which don’t have a rhythmic pitch. For me. it looks like Philip Larkin is narrating a narrative or a narrative. In my sentiment. the sonnet gives a beat to the verse form and gimmicks more the reader’s attending even if it seems shorter than Larkin’s verse form.
Second. we know both of these verse forms are speaking about the First Wold War. But if we look a small spot closer. we can clearly experience a difference in the pick of words and linguistic communication. After reading the first verse form. we feel a mix of disgust. repugnance and unfairness whereas after reading Philip Larkin’s one. melancholia. emptiness and unhappiness invade us. How can two verse forms with the same topic can take to such different feelings?
The sonnet looks like it is divided in two parts. both of the ‘stanzas’ start with a inquiry: “What passing-bells for these who die as cowss? ” . “What tapers may be held to rush them all? ” Then. the undermentioned lines answer to the inquiries. For me. it seems it’s like a address with two rhetorical inquiries. The poet asks the inquiries but already has the replies and responds to it really exactly in a really negative manner: ‘no’ . ‘nor’ . ‘not’ are used at the beginning of a line following the inquiry.
Anthem For Doomed Youth is a little but efficient verse form. Any word is present for a peculiar ground. The vocabulary used is snappish and rough one such as “monstrous anger” “nor any voice of mourning” “who die as cattle” . It sounds like Wilfred Owen wants to floor us. He plunges us in the horror of the war: we can about sound the “stuttering rifles” . see “the holy gleams of goodbyes” . He decidedly wants to show his disgust toward war. Indeed. we are non confronting a ‘peaceful’ war as the whole population expected in 1914. these immature male childs do non courageously decease for their state: it’s a horrific conflict which harry both sides but both pig-headedly do non do any move to halt this slaughter.
Owen makes us experience the changeless fright. the incomprehension of this unpointed depredation Withal. the 2nd verse form has a more smooth manner of attack. Philip Larkin wants to hold an affectional impact. He doesn’t usage striking a vocabulary like Wilfred Owen but a melancholy one. There is this feeling of parturiency and reclusion ; “shut shops” . “sunblinds” . “shadowing Doomsday lines” . Whereas we could about hear the ‘stuttering rifles’ in Anthem For Dommed Youth. here. in MCMXIV. silence is the lone tolerable sound. No 1 should do noise. in honor of all the dead soldiers who fought naively for a cause that wasn’t even straight linked to their state.
Wilfred Owen expresses the horror of the trench warfare whereas Philip Larkin enters in the impact on societal effects that War leaded to. Life will ne’er be the same once more after this calamity. Not merely will the soldiers be shell-shocked. but the whole population will be excessively. Even though adult females and kids were non on the front line. they still experienced the war at place foreparts.
Owen besides uses repeats to stress some specific phrases. The 2nd and 3rd lines both start with the word ‘only’ and are followed by personifications of arms like ‘the monstrous choler of the guns’ and ‘stuttering riffles’ rapid rattle’ ; it is about like the poet can non even separate the human existences and machines. The work forces do non kill each others any longer. the machines do. The repeat of the ‘no’ . ‘nor’ . ‘not’ is besides a strong mark: at that place isn’t any hope in anything. we can non see positive any longer. There is a changeless anxiousness in the soldiers’ eyes. The word ‘choirs’ is besides written two times. The mention in music could be positive but here. it is non.
It is a music which leads to an inevitable decease. It could besides mention to the pulse of soldiers. A distressing beat that could halt anytime. There is besides a repeat in MCMXIV in the last stanza: “never” ( thee times ) . But one time once more. we can non experience anger ; merely a strong sorrow. Worlds can ne’er be guiltless once more after the awful slaughter of this War. Larkin accepts with surrender what happened: what is done is done. The dead people will non come back. The lone thing we can make is retrieve them and mark them. On the contrary. Owen can non digest this idea and he feels obliged to associate the ruinous event harshly to forestall people to ne’er make that once more. The human loss is literally and psychologically unbearable.
Finally. we can discourse about the poet’s pick of rubric of their verse forms. An anthem is a choral composing holding a sacred or moralising text. So. this verse form is aimed to all the heroes who died contending. Nevertheless. the adjectival ‘doomed’ comes to botch the word anthem. Doomed is merely ‘fate’ . something inevitable. It is true we can non win over decease but at least. we can detain it every bit much as we can. whereas the undermentioned word ‘youth’ has a tragic intension. Young people are non supposed to decease. their destiny is to bask life every bit much as they can but this war comes to destruct all their dreams and hopes. MCMXIV is the figure 1914 in ancient Roman. We can presume it is a mention to the yesteryear. Roman letters still exist after 100s of old ages. possibly Larkin wants his verse form to be remembered every bit much as these Numberss?
To reason. we can state that even if Wilfred Owen and Philip Larkin did hold different ways of attack to speak about war. they both caused really strong feelings. One used an aggressive and unprompted pen whereas the other aggravated unhappiness and regard toward the fallen soldiers. In fact. they decidedly agree in one similar point: First World War was a calamity that no 1 should of all time bury.
