The speaker remains unnamed throughout the poem; in the last line the speaker is just “He.” This further ridicules the speaker, by making him generic, or just a typical politician; they all ramble on about nonsense they do not even take time to fully consider. “next to of course god america i” is a poem aimed at revealing the potential of abusing patriotism to sway people’s thoughts. Patriotism can be used to manipulate people into doing things they usually wouldn’t. This implicit theme is enforced throughout the poem by allusions and other literary devices [pic] and suggests that the poem is not actually unpatriotic. The speaker is admonishing people on being wary of how patriotism is used and uses sarcasm to accent his position.
This is a typical theme which runs through Edward Thomas' poems. He also explores the civilian public's hatred of “the Kaiser” and Germans. He definitely disagrees with it, and vehemently so too. The overall tone of the poem is one of disagreement, perhaps quiet anger. But this is also coupled with a tone of lofty love as well.
2. The poet takes great care to describe, in lines 4 and 5, the ‘passions’ of Ozymandias that are ‘stamped on these lifeless things’ (line 7). What is the effect of the juxtaposition of ‘passions’ and ‘lifeless’? What is Shelley suggesting about human ambition? The passions of Ozymandias that are described in lines 4 and 5 “frown, wrinkled lip and sneer” show the type of leader he was that put fear into those he ruled and looked at his subjects as if they were unworthy.
Many have been killed in both the name of love and hate. Therefore, while these emotions are wholly different regarding the connotation that they purvey to the person experiencing the affection, the depth and breadth of these emotions are eerily similar. In the poem “America” by Claude McKay, the reader is treated to the beautiful expression of both of these emotions in a poem full of frustrating duality and an extremely strong statement about society. The piece is a standard sonnet composed of three quatrains and a couplet written in iambic pentameter featuring the traditional English rhyming scheme. Throughout the poem, McKay ferries back and forth between his intense positive and negative feelings of both America and the American societal norms of the period.
I will look into how this corrupt figure is conveyed, how the clever use of Imagery and his word choice completes the poem. The hawk is conveyed as being arrogant and very bold with how powerful it believes itself to be. Ted makes it clear to the reader that the hawk is a corrupt figure through the use of the first person narrative of the hawk. This allows the hawk to express its own thoughts and feelings to the reader on a personal level. Ted puts the hawk across in a very autocratic manner like a dictator on a pedestal giving a speech.
Different styles of writing can relay different ideas about war. Tim O’Brien writes truth mixed with fiction in an effort to try and make the reader understand war as far as he believes the reader is capable. He understands that his readers come from all walks of life and may or may not have experienced war; O’Brien writes in a tone to accommodate all of these perspectives. This paper is meant to analyze the styles and impact of Tim O’Brien’s novel The Things They Carried and how those literary devices change the reader’s perspective. The author, Tim O’Brien, a Minnesota veteran of the Vietnam War, has received numerous writing and literary awards throughout his writing career.
The most obvious irrationality in the book occurs in all of the ‘Catch-22’ situations, twisted logic and seemingly impossible situations seen as general rules. This is clearly illustrated in the major Catch-22 of the book, the situation in which "[if a soldier] was crazy…[he] could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions" (46). This irrational situation, which is accepted and upheld as a prominent truth, exemplifies the insanity of the military as it accepts confusing paradoxes. Many of the unsound contradictions of the book are clearly evident, the exaggerated irrationality plainly presenting the military as foolish.
History – 30 marks Josh Edwards Sources A and E have very opposing views. Source A shows a very negative view, criticising Churchill and his beliefs whilst source E suggest that communism was a real threat and that Churchill’s views are justified. Source A shows Churchill’s views of communism to be unjustified, even suggesting that he puts that over his fear, over his country. The source states: “his vision is haunted by little communist figures”. The use of “little” suggests that the communists are unimportant and no big worry to the British Empire, completely the opposite to source E which shows communists to be “vermin” and “diseased”.
A reason for this is possibly because of nerves or he could be so enthusiastic about expressing his patriotism he stumbles over his own words, also he does not seem to care about the structure of his sentences. This is directly noticeable in the first line of the sonnet: “next to of course god America i…” This sentence is grammatically incorrect. The tittle of the Sonnet is the same as the first line of the patriot’s speech. The way the patriot placed the words makes an anticlimax, since the order of importance is in decreasing order. However, it shows how the patriot feels about his country, first comes America then his own needs.
For example, Dulce Decorum Est has a sematic field of ill health. In comparison, Who’s for the Game has a very jolly and light hearted view on war. The main reason why this is is because Jessie Pope, in comparison to Wilfred Owen has not experienced the brutality of war. Isaac Rosenberg also writes a poem that totally contradicts the government’s image of war it is portraying to the public. The poem also contradicts Jessie Popes image of war in her poem who’s for the game.