Siegfried Sassoon and World War I Poetry
Siegfried Sassoon (1886-1967) was a Jewish writer from England who fought in World War I. After he was wounded by a sniper's bullet, Sassoon was forced to leave active duty during the war.1 Below is "The General," one of many poems by Sassoon that express his disenchantment with the horrors of warfare.
The General 1 "Good-morning; good-morning!" the General said |
Siegfried Sassoon, 1886-1967 |
|---|
Sassoon's "The General"
Siegfried Sassoon's "The General" exemplifies World War I poetry through the use of paradox and morose imagery as a means to express the inglorious nature of war from the perspective of a group of English soldiers.
A paradox is created within the first four lines of "The General," as Sassoon presents a contradiction between the cheerful attitude of the general and the dejected attitudes of the English soldiers. Lines one through four declare, "'Good-morning; good-morning!' the general said / When we met him last week on our way to the line. / Now the soldiers he smiled at are most of 'em dead, / And we're cursing his staff for incompetent swine." The general's tone is cheerful within the first few lines as Sassoon repeats the phrase "good-morning" and uses an exclamation mark to emphasize the general's joyfulness. Although this happy mood begins the poem, the mood quickly alters as the tone of the soldiers contrasts that of the general, creating a paradox.
The soldiers create a grim mood as they discuss how most of the soldiers the general met are now dead (Line 3). This change in mood results from Sassoon's utilization of words with negative connotations, including "dead," "cursing," "incompetent," and "swine." While the general's jolly mood is similar to that of Rupert Brooke's soldier in "The Soldier," as they both appear unaware of the harsh nature of deaths on the battlefield, the actual soldiers who are fighting in the war are unhappy that their fellow men are now dead. Since the soldiers have barely "met" the general and discuss that he provides them with his "plan of attack" in the last line of the poem, it suggests that the general is distant from the physical battle and does not directly engage in the fighting. Since the general is distant from the actual warfare, his happy mood in regard to the war as though it were glorious, quickly fades as those who are experiencing the battle do not express enthusiasm towards the deaths that surrounds them.
Sassoon not only conveys the disgracefulness of war through the paradox between the general's mood and that of the soldiers, but he also creates unpleasant imagery through his words as he compares the soldiers to pigs. Sassoon mentions "swine" within the fourth line of the poem and uses the words "grunted" and "slogged" in reference to the actions of the two soldiers, Harry and Jack. Since the soldiers of World War I commonly fought within the dirt ditches, or trenches, they dug into the ground, the comparison between the soldiers and pigs relates to the dirt trenches from which they sought protection. While soldiers are often presented as heroes, Sassoon likens them to swine as he focuses on the time they spent living within the bounds of the dirt and mud holes in the ground.
Through the character of the general, Sassoon comments on those who glorify war by presenting a contrast between his "cheery" temperament and the grunting soldiers, who are portrayed more closely to pigs in a mud bath, rather than as honorable heroes like the soldier in Brooke's "The Soldier." Sassoon demonstrates the inglorious nature of war through paradox and morose imagery as is common in World War I poetry, thus contrasting the lighthearted imagery provided by Rupert Brooke and the celebration of war in Georgian poetry.
Note: You can click on the highlighted words within "The General" to visually see the negative imagery Sassoon creates through his words.
Back to Brooke's "The Soldier"
Back to Georgian and World War I Poetry
Reference:
1. Abrams, M. H. & Stephen Greenblatt. "Voices from the First World War." The Norton Anthology of English Literature. 7th ed. Vol. 2. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1999. pg. 2054-2056.