At
first glance, one may or may not be able to recognize immediately that this is
a poem written about the military life. At least, I know I did not realize it
at first. It was not until I went back to reread the directions that I actually
realized what the poem was about. The directions said to consider the title of
the poem and that was the major clue that helped me decipher the poem. Anyway,
let us move to bigger and more important details…
Ha-ha, see what I did there with the word details?
No? Okay, let us really move on.
To
be quite honest, it was difficult for me to find the right poetic device that
would adequately put the speaker’s attitude on display. After some thinking, I
decided that imagery would be the best device to use. While actively reading
the poem, there were many words of imagery that immediately popped out at me
such as “guzzling and gulping” (5) and “toddle safely home” (10). This lead me
to believe that the writer, Siegfried Sassoon, uses heavy imagery in “Base
Details” to show that older soldiers, such as Sergeants and Generals, generally
contradict the qualities that normal, young soldiers are supposed to have and
they ultimately allow their younger, newer soldiers to be the first to die
during a war.
The
first place where Sassoon uses imagery to show contradiction is line 1. From
the moment the poem says, “If I were fierce, and bald, and short of breath”, a
reader should be able to see that this poem is meant to be read as if the
person were a younger soldier (1). Now, as we can see, the writer uses very strong
visual words, such as fierce and bald, to describe an older soldier. This provides
contradiction within the readers mind because of what they think of when they
hear the word soldier. For example, whenever someone says that word, I usually
think of a young, broad shouldered, fit man who is timid but ready to fight their
first war. I do not think of a short, bald man who is indifferent about war
because he has fought so many. These visual words contradict the preconceived notion
that soldiers are supposed to be, well, attractive. This sentence is basically the
driving force of the poem because it kind of tricks the reader into thinking
that being an older soldier is much better than being a younger soldier.
In
the second half of the poem, around lines 9 and 10, Sassoon transitions and
uses imagery to show that the older soldiers lead their younger soldiers to their
deaths and ultimately do not have those soldiers’ best interests in mind. If
you look at line 9 where it says, “when the war is over and the youth stoned
dead,” the poem almost blatantly tells you that the younger soldiers are easy
targets and are almost immediately killed (9). Take the word “stoned” for
example. When someone is being stoned, they are purposely fully exposed which makes
it easier for them to be stoned. In translation, this means that the younger
soldiers are placed in the front line on purpose, fully exposed in order for
them to be the first to die. If one also looks at line 10, where the poem says,
“I’d toddle safely home and die – in bed,” this shows that the older soldiers
would rather let the younger soldiers die first just so they can go safely
home, unscathed to be with their families (10). The older soldiers do not have
their young soldiers’ best interests in mind, but rather, their own personal interests.
They would rather be “guzzling and gulping in the best hotels” instead of
making sure they try their hardest to save their fellow soldiers.
Overall,
Siegfried Sassoon uses heavy imagery and the sarcastic voice of a young soldier
to show that older soldiers do not really care about the well-being of their younger
soldiers. It kind of gets readers to think about what is really going on at
those military bases. We think that soldiers get everything they need and are
really cared for but in reality… is that really true?
Hey, let me start off by saying that I really like the way you tackled this blog post! You explored Sassoon’s use of a poetic device and how it connected back to meaning without forgetting that this is in fact still a blog post—not an essay. Your voice is still evident which made your writing enjoyable to read. Nonetheless, something that I would like to point out is how you did not specify which specific type of imagery the poet was using. My guess was that you were talking about visual imagery. Another thing that may have been helpful is if you quickly explained the title of the poem to your audience since you claimed that it was a major clue that helped you better understand the meaning of the poem. Other than that, I thought that your analysis was very well done. I was especially awed by your explanation of "youth stoned dead" and how it prompts people to visualize how easily exposed to death these young men are during wartime. I also felt like you grasped the meaning of the poem since I too thought that the poet was aiming to showcase his cynical attitude towards military majors who acted callous as young men lost their lives during war.
ReplyDeleteThis was such a great way to tackle both understanding Sassoon’s classic poem and writing your blog post itself. The beginning of your post really takes us into your thought process while also showing a tremendous amount of voice. One thing I always really love about your blog is how it always feels as if you are saying to us directly. Your posts always engage me without being flamboyantly colloquial. The language you use when discussing books or poems is inviting and allows reading your posts to feel like a conversation. Anyways, I also really liked you discussion of imagery. Sassoon used such great imagery in this poem; it really allows the reader to comprehend what his poem represents. I also liked that you discussed the sarcastic tone of the poem. This was something I had missed completely when I read it (ooops) so your analysis of its purpose was gravely helpful to me. The sarcasm of the young soldier really shows his frustration and anger with the war and the majors which sent himself and his friends to their deaths. For the longest time I thought that the speaker was a major himself. So, I really liked your explanation of why it was not. As always, this was a great post and I look forward to your next reading adventure.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, I am totally hooked to your first sentence. When I first read the poem war did not even come to mind. Immediately when I thought about the title it all clicked. I felt like the speaker was acting like Yossarian. This man is a soldier who does not want to be in the war at all. Starting from the very first word he says "if" and then continues on to give examples of what he would be doing if he were fierce or bald or short of breath. In line 2 when he says"I'd live with scarlet Majors at the Base" I took that as he wants to be safe. To me the base is like the basic camp. It's like base in a game of freeze tag. If you are on the base nobody can touch you or tag you, In other words, when you are at the base you are safe and that is what he wants to be. He is saying that the Majors are safe and he wants to be like them. Then the next few lines are more examples of what he would be doing and what he wants to be doing however, only if he were fierce, bald and short of breath. I think he wants to grow old and die on his death bed rather than get shot on the field while fighting in a war he does not care about which is kind of like Yossarian.
ReplyDelete