When first reading the “Anthem For Doomed Youth” by Wilfred Owen I was taken aback by the introduced questions, complex vocabulary, constant metaphors, and incessant imagery. It felt as though the reader was being asked a question that the author was already prepared to answer. Why ask a question if you do not want to hear someone’s response? For example, the first stanza states “What passing-bells for those who die as cattle?” and then is immediately followed by saying that only the sound of gunfire accompanies those who die – no bells. These two stanzas also automatically gave me a sense of where the setting was taking place. Owen is talking about a situation where large groups of people die – almost as quickly as cattle do. As Owen continues to describe the significant presence of guns at the time of these people’s deaths he mentions their “hasty orisons.” I had no idea what that meant at the time. I looked up what an orison was and found that it is simply a fancy word for prayer. The way that Owen combines a word like “hasty” with the action of a prayer shows that these people only devote a quick second to those who lost their lives.
Moving along the next four stanzas is a run-on sentence that simply explains all of the traditions and rituals that these dead people do not receive. They get no prayers, bells, choirs, or candles. I took notice that these were all traditions relating to the church – or more so funerals. But one thing I could not understand was why Owen made these next four stanzas a run-on sentence. He went on and on about the cruel way these people are laid to rest. It then dawned on me that that was the whole point. Owen is listing out all of the goodbyes these people do not receive in order for us to understand the real gravity of this tragedy. Another thing that threw me off was when the author referred to what I am guessing is some sort of funeral as a mockery. He states, “No mockeries now for them,” it seems as if this whole poem is talking about the misfortunes that death brings these people but then he calls any sort of goodbye a mockery. Finally, the last paragraph is brought to a close with none other than another question that is later answered. If you’re again wondering why, I still don’t know and I don’t think Wilfred Owen does either. Maybe that’s why he’s asking.
At this point in the poem, I realize Owen is talking about war and all of the lives lost in battle. He is questioning why we do it. Why do we send our future thinkers to lose their life so quickly and unjustly? The first two stanzas of the second paragraph states, “Not in the hands of boys, but in their eyes.” Wilfred is alluding to the idea that guns don’t kill people but people kill people. Although these men’s
hands are enacting violent crimes you can see the innocence behind their eyes. Almost as if their body is acting differently than their mind. Near the last few stanzas of the poem, Owen also writes in his first mention of other people. The people who are still affected by war even though they are not fighting the physical battle. It is clear as day that Wilfred Owen is against war and he has clearly explained the tragedies that come of it. But if that is not enough to stop the reader from sending these young men to war then maybe the hurt of their families left behind will be.
The ending of any poem might be the most important part of the story. It wraps up the author’s idea and can possibly clear up any lingering questions from the audience. Owen’s poem states, “and each a slow dusk a drawing-down of blinds.” At first, I thought the blinds closing were like the lives ending on the battlefield, but the more I read the poem the more I thought about what blinds really do. Blinds block out the outside world. People are using their metaphoric blinds to block out the devastation of war. We hear about the hundreds of dead and the families crying but yet we never do anything to stop it. We devote a second of our time to show some form of discontent but then we simply go about our day or even go about our life.
Hi Jordyn! This poem is heavy; from the title all the way to the end. For me, the easiest way to structurally break down poems to apply the TPCASTT method, and from the title of the poem, the tone is immediately clear. Often times, my connotations of titles is wrong (for example, I thought “The Flea” was going to be about annoyances), but this one was straightforward. I think the most interesting thing about Owen’s poem is the issue he presents with the ceremonial displays that often accompany war, such as anthems, bells and choirs- all things mentioned in his prose. He seems to build the argument that all of these things; all of the prayers and singing, do not add up to what war really is. I think your interpretation of “cattle” in the very first line displays this theme and the concept of the wastefulness of war in that men seem to be like bred animals who are born to grow up and then brought to their slaughter. The poem does not glorify war or emphasize heroism. Like you mentioned, Owen’s paints war as it truly is- tragic, terrible, yet often so futile. This poem is definitely not one that minces it words in its painting of a dark picture, but that is Owen’s purpose, and you did a great job in your analysis and understanding of his work.