World War I was one of the bloodiest and most gruesome periods in the history of human civilization. Over the course of four tumultuous years, millions of soldiers and civilians lost their lives and countless more faced injury, disease, or displacement. The Great War encapsulated entire continents and countries and produced two drastically different views on war and what it means to die for your country. Two poems written by British poets around the time of the war represent the different opinions developed out of World War I. “The Soldier” written by Rupert Brooke focusses on the inherit honor of going to war and dying for your country. However, “Dulce Et Decorum Est” written by Wilfred Owen shows the horrors of war and argues it is not honorable to die for your country. “The Soldier” portrays war and dying for your country as honorable and heroic but “Dulce Et Decorum Est” presents the realistic suffering soldiers face in war and maintains there is no honor associated with such a vile institution like war. 

Context played a major role in influencing each poets’ opinion about war and honor. Since both poets were British and writing around World War I, each attempted to represent the views shared by other British people. Rupert Brookes poem “The Soldier” was written in 1914, which was the very beginning of World War I and Wilfred Owen’s “Dulce Et Decorum Est” was published in 1920, two years after World War 1 ended. British citizens’ opinion of the war changed as World War I continued. Early in the war, volunteer numbers were exceeding government expectations and, “by January 1915 more than 1 million had joined the armed forcesn voluntarily” (WW1 Facts).  But, as millions of soldiers died, people heard about the awful living conditions, and the war continued, volunteer numbers dropped. In order to increase their army, the British government decided to implement conscription, even though, “both the government and the British public had been against conscription” (WW1 Facts).  Conscription was the British version of the draft and went on to target men aged 18-56 for military service. Once the soldiers arrived on the battlefield, they witnessed and lived through the nightmares describe in “Dulce Et Decorum Est”, like poison gas battle wounds. The poem offers the real image of war because Wilfred Owen was a soldier who fought in World War I. The defining aspect of World War I was the introduction of trench warfare. The trenches were on the front lines of the battlefield and soldiers defended these trenches with their lives. Life in the trenches was absolutely miserable and posed health risks along with the threats of an ongoing war. Health risks included, “exposure, frostbite, trench foot (a wasting disease of the flesh caused by the foot being wet and cold, constrained into boots and puttees, for days on end, that would cripple a man), and many diseases” (Baker). Along with these awful living conditions came harsh winters and constant fighting. Wilfred Owen knew first-hand the suffering soldiers faced in World War I.

“The Soldier” and “Dulce Et Decorum Est” offer different views on a soldier’s experience in war from two different perspectives. Rupert Brooke never experienced first-hand the toils of war, unlike Wilfred Owen. Rupert Brooke writes from the perspective of respecting and honoring soldiers, but Wilfred Owen writes about the true representation of war. “The Soldier” never mentions any of the suffering soldiers face in the war and only focusses on all the positives soldiers can gain from fighting and dying for their country. However, “Dulce Et Decorum Est” portrays war as tremendous suffering for soldiers and does not say anything positive about war. “The Soldier” mentions positive feelings and emotions like, “laughter, learnt  of friends; and gentleness” (Brooke line 13). However, “Dulce Et Decorum Est” offers disgusting but real images of war like, “the blood / Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs, / obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud” (Owen 21-23) and, “Gas! Gas! Quick boys! – An ecstasy of fumbling, / Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time; / But someone still was yelling out and stumbling / And flound’ring like a man in fire or lime…” (Owen 9-12). “The Soldier” offers a majestic interpretation of war but “Dulce Et Decorum Est” describes was as hell on earth. 

The tone and setting of each poem differ greatly even though they both are referring to war and soldiers. The tone of honor and respect in Brooke’s poem represents the feelings of the one-million volunteers the British Army received months after the war began. The tone of horror and human suffering in Owen’s poem embody the emotions of British soldiers fighting in the war and the men who decided not to volunteer for the war and forced the government to institute conscription. In “The Soldier”, a soldier who dies for England will have their, “hearts at peace, under an English heaven” (Brooke 14). But, the soldiers in “Dulce Et Decorum Est” are, “Bent double, like old beggars under sacks, / Knock-kneed, coughing like hags” (Owen 1-2). Brooke’s poem presents a soldier experiencing peace and happiness and on their way to heaven. But, the soldiers in “Dulce Et Decorum Est” suffer through miserable conditions and face extreme hardship. 

The poem “The Soldier” could serve as a recruiting tool or inspiration for those one million volunteers by showing they could achieve the highest honor by fighting and dying for their beloved England. The poem appeals to a person’s nationalism and strong pride for their country and offers the reward of eternal honor and respect.  But, “Dulce Et Decorum Est” would persuade people to avoid joining the army or fighting in a war by showing the reader the true nature of war and discrediting this idea of honor associated with dying for your country.

The poems differ greatly on whether a soldier receives honor for fighting and dying for their country. “The Soldier” argues a soldier does indeed gain eternal honor by dying for their country, but “Dulce Et Decorum Est” believes war only produces suffering, pain, and death. “The Soldier” argues that when an English soldier dies in battle, “there’s some corner of a foreign field / That is forever England. There shall be / In that earth a richer dust concealed” (Brooke 2-4). A soldier who dies for England not only conquers that land for England, but is also remembered as a better person. Also, a soldier who dies for England gains, “this heart, all evil shed away, / A pulse in the eternal mind” (Brooke 9-10). A soldier who dies for their country will also be honored as hero by their country and be remember for eternity. The opportunity to gain honor and be remember as a hero is enticing and more than enough to inspire people to join the army. However, “The Soldier” misleads people by not offering the other aspect of war, the physical and mental pain. The poem does not offer images of soldiers being poisoned by gas, choking on blood, and living in the hellish conditions of the trenches. Instead, it focusses on all the potential accolades a soldier gains by fighting and dying for their country. 

Owen’s poem, “Dulce Et Decorum Est”, offers the reader a realistic version of war and the life of a soldier. Owen argues that a soldier never attains honor or glory by dying for their country. War only forces soldiers to experience severe pain, like poison gas, bullet wounds, and watching a comrade die right in front of you. Owen believes, “you would not tell with such high zest / To children ardent for some desperate glory, / The old Lie: et decorum est / Pro patria mori” (Owen 25-28). ‘Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori’ translates to ‘it is sweet and proper to die for one’s country.’ Owen argues that it is criminal for people like Rupert Brooke to lie to people by claiming it is honorable to fight and die for your country in war. Owen fought in the war and he only felt pain and suffering, never honor. Owen wants his readers to know what war truly is and what it entails. 

“The Soldier” portrays war as an excellent opportunity for men and women to achieve eternal honor by dying for their country, but “Dulce Et Decorum Est” argues war only induces suffering and there is no reward of eternal honor, even if you die. Overall, the poems represent two opinions that were held by British people during World War I. “The Soldier” was written to inspire people to join the army and fight for your country in World War I, but “Dulce Et Decorum Est” was written in inform people that there is no honor, only suffering, associated with war and expose the lie the government and people like Rupert Brooke were spreading.  
