Carl Smith

Wild Weekend

Intro to Lit.

11/20/09

Poem Comparison: Logic over Emotion

The Topic of war has always been a hot button for people since the beginning
of human

civilization. During deep analysis of two war related poems, “The man he Killed” By
Thomas

Hardy, and “Dulce Et Decorum Est” By Wilfred Owen, it is clear that one addresses
the more emotional

view and one suggests a more logical point. In Owens’ work, the vivid imagery is
much more prevalent

than in the Hardy piece. The Thomas Hardy poem speaks of killing in war as more of
a duty and

obligation; it is your job as a solider. The Irony in ‘’Dulce Et Decorum Est’’ is very
outspoken and starts

immediately in the title of the poem, The translation of the title means ‘How
honorable and sweet it is

to die for the fatherland’. In comparing the two poems "The man he killed" By
Thomas Hardy and

"Dulce et Decorum Est" by Wilfred Owen, it is clear to see that the Hardy poem
appeals to the more

logical position of war and the Owens poem evokes the emotional points of war.

In “Dulce Et Decorum Est” the imagery is almost scary, you can imagine the
terror that the

solider must have felt just by reading such descriptive and precise language. Owens
clearly wanted the
reader to be disturbed and shocked when reading this work. The word choice in this
work is rather

perturbing, the reader can not help but feeling disgusted with the actions involved
in war. “The blood

come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs, Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
of vile, Incurable

sores on innocent tongues.”(Owens 831). Owens uses this sentence to make the
reader shake with

repulsion. Most of the connotation in this poem has a negative emotional response,
but it reinforces an

attitude the author wants the reader to feel. The details Owens uses to describe the
man choking on

his last breath are intentional, The author wants the reader to visualize this man
dying right before your

eyes in the name of war. The author makes it a point to describe the mood to the
fullest with extreme

detail and vivid language. The words the author uses evoke such an intense feeling
it can literally make

the reader sick and change an entire outlook on the honor that some suggest come
with dying at war for

your homeland.

Thomas Hardy’s work is almost opposite to Owens’ when it comes to the

imagery he uses, his

word choice is rather plain and does not show much emotion at all, but refers to a
more logical sense of

war. The narrators’ enemy was slain by him with no other reason than that he was
his “foe”. Merriam-

Webster defines “Foe” as an enemy in war, so if one looks at the actual definition it
is apparent that the

word does not necessarily have an emotional attachment but in this case is more of
a literal term. One

of the only emotional techniques Hardy uses is when he deliberately stutters. “I

shot him dead because-
because he was my foe.”(Hardy 673). It is obvious that the narrator uses this
stuttering to describe an

emotion the narrator has. Perhaps the narrator was sorry for killing the man;
perhaps he felt he needed

to explain himself after such an incident? The narrator seems to remain calm, but
he may not all

together agree with his actions. The solider even goes on to say that if he had met
this man at a bar he

would have had a beer with him, but he met this man on the battlefield. Thomas
Hardy’s “The man he

Killed” clearly states the soldiers’ duty to meet the foe and destroy him on the
battlefield in the name of

his cause, it is not as personal as it is logical.

In “Dulce Et Decorum Est” the irony of the situation in war is outstanding. The
paradox starts in

at the very beginning of this poem, in the title. The title when translated literally
means “It is sweet and

honorable to die for the fatherland” but the actual text is not sweet or admirable by
any means. The

words even go so far as to refer to the title as “the old lie”. “My friend, you would
not tell with such high

zest to children ardent for some desperate glory, The old lie: Dulce et decorum esta
pro patria

mori.”(Owen 831). Culture portrays death in war as an honorable cause, Movies

glorify death at war, but

there is no grandeur in death, only loss. Many men sign up for military duty because
of the honor they

feel in involved when battling for one’s country, but never expect the horrors that
come with war.

Throughout history war has been glorified by the leaders but it is never the leaders
who have to fight.

The irony is very clear, the admiration that one hopes to succeed in dying for your
country will never be
satisfied for after death there is nothing else.

By Comparing the two poems by Thomas Hardy and Wilfred Owen it is plain
to see that Hardy’s

poem is more rational and appeals to the rules of war. In “The man he killed” the
solider sees his enemy

and shoots him dead, no questions asked. The solider killed his enemy for that was
the way war was

intended to be. Thomas Hardy without a doubt appeals to a logical perspective of

war. In battle, one is

to the eliminate the foe by any means, so the solider did this with the tools he was
given for his job. The

character in Hardy’s poem killed his enemy because it was his duty, it was the only
reasonable thing to

do. In Owen’' work “Dulce Et Decorum Est” the more emotional side of war comes
into play. The

character describes in full detail the horrors of war and the bogus claim of honor in
death during war.

Owen went out of his way to portray war as an evil, almost to insist we can not
glorify such a horrible

circumstance.
 Work Cited

1. Owen, Wilfred. Dulce Et Decorum Esta. 1920. 831. Print.

2. Hardy, Thomas. The Man he Killed. 1902. 673. Print.