The Great Modern War Poets

Before the conflict

Newspapers illustrated the possibility of a massive economic catastrophe, creating a widespread sense of imminent destruction of property and loss of life. Edward Thomas is a well-known poet who published works about the impending war. Before beginning to write verse, he had spent the majority of his time as a critic. The majority of his work is inspired by personal experiences as well as his extensive knowledge of literature. Thomas, who was still a novelist, was persuaded to join the military by some of his colleagues. Around this time, he was involved in direct fighting and published more of his experiences. Unfortunately, his career was terminated after he was killed on the battleground in 1917. The quote “no other class of poetry (than war poetry) vanishes so rapidly, has so little chosen from it for posterity” is symbolic regarding his view of the war and the then status quo (Childs 43). This writing reflects the English literature in the dawn of the twentieth century. Edward Thomas felt that war poetry was the only wave that would pass and get replaced by other genres of poetry. He also felt that such occurrences of wars create an enormous impact on the society for just a short period and people lose their memories through generations. Without a doubt, Thomas had a solid explanation to believe that war poetry would not be relevant to successive generations.

Poetry before War

Rupert Brooke is one of the poets who produced many publications before the war. Most of his work promoted idealism regardless of the graveness of a situation (Childs 30). The poems written prior the war upheld patriotism, and for this reason, they received much approval by government and religious organizations. Youths were represented as energetic and courageous patriots willing to die for their country. Since Rupert Brooke was the initiator of the poetic genre, the collection came to be known as Brooke’s myth. Critics argue that Brooke’s poetry glorified war by endorsing a combat mood to British citizens. It as well upheld a blithe attitude to death, which overlooked the killing and viciousness. Parents were encouraged to let their children go to war in defense of their land. War fatalities and veterans were often treated as heroes and consequently received commemoration from the government.

World War One Poetic Fad

During the war, many people including Thomas questioned the reality of Brooke’s myth and whether it would be still relevant to him. His participation in the war must have exposed him to the hidden fact. The ww1 lead to the rise of another type of war poetry characterized by many inexperienced writers hastily struggling to put their point of view into words. According to Thomas, the emerging group of illiterate writers would not create any significance in the much-treasured poetry literature. Thomas had spent many years writing, and his critique was based on historical occurrences. He questioned himself on whether there were poems in Marlborough’s and Napoleonic wars and their relevance to consecutive years. This is because the contemporary sonnets narrowed their themes and solely focused on patriotism. The world war one appeared to last forever, and it was anticipated to produce many poets than any other war. Thomas also understood the basic human psychology that people learn during periods of crisis and the easiest way to express their challenges is through speech or thoughts. The poet soldiers were often referred to as trench poets because they wrote most of their poems in trenches. Nevertheless, they managed to transform the emphasis of the traditional poetry. They reflected the real life of soldiers and their endeavors in modern welfare.

A poetic craze appeared during First World War

Illustrating the regular occurrences on the battlefields. Poets utilized all aspects of their environment and emotions to develop emotional lyrics relevant to their daily encounters. Many readers were willing to go through the trending publications. The English lifestyle had adopted poetry as a principal way of communication. Natives would air their feelings and thoughts through poems regardless of sex, level of education or socioeconomic class. It often proved difficult to classify ww1 sonnets within the existing literature because the trench poets had produced a unique style only related to that particular period. Thomas may have based his argument on the fact that war would vanish soon and people would lose its memories as well as the relevance of its poetry. Along similar lines, some scholars claim that the poems created by soldiers were not poetry, but a poetic way of news coverage. British libraries were receiving extraordinary volumes of publications from individual writers. Despite the thousands of soldiers who published poems during the war, only a few remain relevant to date. Many of the writers became inactive after the war ended, and thus their poetries lost significance. Therefore, to many war poetry was just a tool of vocalization.

Unlike the publications made before the war

That were based on idealism, poems written during the war reflected the reality. The soldiers opposed the dreads of ww1 and thereby impacting the public’s conscience. While in France, Isaac Rosenberg wrote a letter to Edward Marsh informing him that the regime restricted soldiers from sending poems to their native land (Childs 44). Senior officials undermined soldiers’ feelings and thus termed the writings made during the war as unnecessary rubbish that never required any checkup. The officials as well anticipated that war poetry would end as soon as the war was over. Critics affirm that war poems were produced as a result of patriotism and the connection soldiers had with their homes. Half a century later, some war poems are still reviewed by the society. Nevertheless, the post-war literature used a different perspective in analyzing war poetry. The challenges encountered by soldiers are passed over as the literature attempts to create beauty in the poetry. Owen’s and Rosenberg’s poems came to limelight after the end of the war. Their lyrics acquired fame and popularity due to their explicit expose of the hidden facts of the battlefields. They sought to understand why soldiers went to war. Some of their work indicates that soldiers are very obsessed with their sacrifice and how they exploited themselves to serve their country.

Owen’s poetry is an apparent explanation of why war poems would not last

Unlike the works of Brooke, readers often identified much pity and sacrifice in Owen’s writings. This shifted the focus from the legend poetic martyr to war philosophy (Childs 48). Owen perturbed the facts told by previous war poets—he argued that past poets centered on rejoicing the war and never outlined its pointless goals and horrors accompanied it. Owen also felt that the war poets transformed the fears, death, and brutality into the enticing beauty of art instead of showing remorse. He asserted that poetry is an enduring literature and it does not have any impacts on the society, yet, war has implications for poetry. His poems portray soldiers as people in suffering and not as the familiar victorious fables. He writes that most were exposed to deafness, blindness, and other physical injuries. He also applies figurative language to create memories of field horrors and death. Owen acknowledges that individuals who have never been in combat zone often exalt war. In conclusion, most his poems agree with Thomas’s writing following the desperate nature of warfare.

Many people enlisted in the military because of political and socio-economic pressures

The English government had placed a demand for all male youths to sign up as fighting men, and failure to comply would lead to dire consequences. Correspondingly, some composers like Wilfred Owen never had any other occupation and thus joining the war was the easiest way to escape poverty (Childs 43). Others like Thomas attributed enlisting to a great love for their land to the extent of fighting for it. As he writes in his work, Isaac Rosenberg was very keen on the eruption of the war. He loathed the war and opposed all its justifications. His sole motivation for enlisting was to find an occupation that would shield him from poverty. Nevertheless, he proclaims that engaging in the war was a crime and inhuman. In refute of the message brought forward by Rupert Brooke’s poems, Rosenberg argues that warfare should be approached in an emotionless manner. Soldiers needed to find purpose instead of blindly moving in unison. Similarly, Ivor Gurney wrote, ‘to praise a thing for its faultlessness is to damn it with faint praise.’ (Childs 50) This is meant to instill sense to native readers and leaders on the challenges experienced by men in battle zones. Gurney and Rosenberg were considered strong due to their ability to resist public opinion.

Poetry was the most creative form of literal expression

The collections made during that start of the twentieth century serve as indicators of the then interest and reasoning that brought about the poetic fads. Owen and Thomas portrayed similar characteristics by analyzing other people’s works. For instance, Thomas read many writings done prior the war and thereby based forecast on the exploration of the changes in literature representations offered by other critics. Thomas’s chief role as an author was to examine literary works with regard to their time and purpose. Both Owen and Ivor Gurney faced criticism on their writing even from close friends and kin. Owen is at once quoted responding to criticism by saying that he does his poetry just as expert musicians compose their songs. On the other hand, Gurney applied his experience in forecasting possible encounters in the battlefields. He represents war as very agonizing since one cannot know the exact time of an attack (Childs 50). Likewise, Isaac Rosenberg equates death to a song—every song in the trench symbolized death’s nearness and its possibility of occurrence and thus causing tribulation.

Conclusion

It is evident that the poetry before the war contradicts with that written during the war. The three Great War poets endeavored to illustrate conflict as nasty while as their predecessors endorsed self-sacrifice for one’s country. Apparently, successive generations would prefer the poetry of idealism and art other than that of personal experiences. In addition, the public and government celebrate members of the armed forces who risk their lives for their country instead of those who offer the reality of situations. In light of this, they appreciate patriotism and nationalism possessed by many soldiers and civilians who encounter the ordeal of war. In conclusions, Thomas’s claim is significant because aesthetic poetry supersedes war poetry.

Works Cited

Childs, Peter. The Twentieth Century In Poetry. ‎Abingdon, Routledge, 2008.

Gurney, Ivor et al. Three Poets Of The First World War. London, Penguin, 2011.