Comparaison Between Mcmxiv & Anthem for Doomed Youth Essay Example for Free

Comparaison Between Mcmxiv hymn for fated Youth EssayIn both of these verses hymn For Doomed Youth and MCMXIV lambasting active war, Wilfred Owen and Philip Larkin try in antithetical ways to engrave in their readers minds the atrocious actions that war provoked with different language, voice unless also form.First of all, the poems argon written in a different way. Anthem For Doomed Youth with his ABAB CDCD ABBACC rhyme scheme is in fact a sonnet. However, a sonnet is commonly used to glorify love and romance whereas Anthem For Doomed Youth focuses on the First institution War. We rout out assume that Wilfred Owen surely wanted to contrast these both opposite subjects to create an ironic atmosphere. We can already guess the poem is going to be powerful and memorable. On the separate hand, the second poem, MCMXIV,is placid of 4 stanzas containing each 8 lines but which dont have a rhythmic pitch. For me, it looks standardized Philip Larkin is narrating a tale or a story. In my opinion, the sonnet gives a rhythm to the poem and catches oft the readers attention even if it seems shorter than Larkins poem.Secondly, we know both of these poems are talking somewhat the First Wold War. But if we look a little bit closer, we can clearly feel a difference in the choice of words and language. After reading the first poem, we feel a change integrity of disgust, revulsion and unfairness whereas after(prenominal) reading Philip Larkins one, melancholia, emptiness and sadness invade us. How can two poems with the same subject can lead to such different feelings?The sonnet looks like it is divided in two parts, both of the stanzas start with a question What passing-bells for these who die as cattle?, What candles may be held to speed them all? Then, the following lines answer to the questions. For me, it seems its like a speech with two rhetorical questions. The poet asks the questions but already has the answers and responds to it very precisely in a very negative way no, nor, not are used at the beginning of a line following the question.Anthem For Doomed Youth is a small but efficient poem. Any word is present for a situation reason. The vocabulary used is snappy and harsh one such as monstrous anger nor some(prenominal) voice of mourning who die as cattle. It sounds like Wilfred Owen wants to shock us. He plunges us in the horror of the war we can almost sound the stuttering rifles, see the holy glimmers of goodbyes. He definitely wants to expect his disgust toward war. Indeed, we are not facing a peaceful war as the whole state expected in 1914, these young boys do not bravely die for their nation its a horrific battle which ravage both sides but both stubbornly do not bring in any move to stop this carnage.Owen makes us feel the constant fear, the incomprehension of this pointless ravage Withal, the second poem has a more smooth way of approach. Philip Larkin wants to have an affective impact. He doesnt use bang a vo cabulary like Wilfred Owen but a melancholic one. on that point is this feeling of confinement and reclusion shut shops, sunblinds, shadowing Doomsday lines. Whereas we could almost hear the stuttering rifles in Anthem For Dommed Youth, here, in MCMXIV, silence is the only fair to middling sound. No one should make noise, in honour of all the dead soldiers who fought naively for a do that wasnt even directly linked to their nation.Wilfred Owen expresses the horror of the trench warfare whereas Philip Larkin enters in the impact on social consequences that War leaded to. Life will never be the same again after this tragedy. Not only will the soldiers be shell-shocked, but the whole population will be too. still though women and children were not on the battlefront, they still experienced the war at home fronts.Owen also uses repetitions to underscore some specific phrases. The second and third lines both start with the word only and are followed by personifications of weapons li ke the monstrous anger of the guns and stuttering riffles rapid rattle it is almost like the poet cannot even distinguish the military personnel beings and machines. The men do not kill each others anymore, the machines do. The repetition of the no, nor, not is also a strong sign there isnt any hope in anything, we cannot see positive anymore. There is a constant anxiety in the soldiers eyes. The word choirs is also written two times. The acknowledgment in music could be positive but here, it is not.It is a music which leads to an inevitable death. It could also refer to the blink of an eye of soldiers. A worrying rhythm that could stop anytime. There is also a repetition in MCMXIV in the last stanza never (thee times). But once again, we cannot feel anger only a strong sorrow. humankind can never be innocent again after the terrible massacre of this War. Larkin accepts with resignation what happened what is through is done. The dead people will not come back. The only thing we c an do is remember them and commemorate them. On the contrary, Owen cannot tolerate this thought and he feels obliged to relate the catastrophic event gratingly to prevent people to never do that again. The human loss is literally and psychologically intolerable.Finally, we can prove about the poets choice of title of their poems. An anthem is a choral composition having a unspeakable or moralizing text. So, this poem is aimed to all the heroes who died fighting. Nevertheless, the adjective doomed comes to spoil the word anthem. Doomed is only fate, something inevitable. It is true we cannot win over death but at least, we can delay it as much as we can, whereas the following word youth has a tragic connotation. Young people are not supposed to die, their fate is to enjoy life as much as they can but this war comes to destroy all their dreams and hopes. MCMXIV is the number 1914 in ancient roman. We can assume it is a reference to the past, Roman letters still exist after hundre ds of years, maybe Larkin wants his poem to be remembered as much as these numbers?To conclude, we can say that even if Wilfred Owen and Philip Larkin did have different ways of approach to talk about war, they both caused very strong feelings. One used an aggressive and impulsive pen whereas the other provoked sadness and respect toward the fallen soldiers. In fact, they definitely agree in one akin point First World War was a tragedy that no one should ever forget.